Your 2 hourly digest for Red Alert Politics

Oude Media Nieuwe Media
Red Alert Politics
An online publication by young conservatives, for young conservatives 

Liberty grads return diplomas because Falwell still supports President Trump

Aug 21st 2017, 21:42, by Aubree Poole

Obtaining a college diploma is viewed as a monumental achievement, but graduates of Liberty University (LU) are returning their diplomas and calling on other alumni to do the same.

Liberty University’s President, Jerry Falwell Jr., has been a devoted supporter of Donald Trump since early in the 2016 presidential campaign, much to the chagrin of many LU graduates.

Following Trump’s comments on the violence in Charlottesville, Falwell was quick to make his support of the president known once again. He tweeted his approval of Trump’s “bold truthful” statement, saying there was “finally a leader in WH.”

This tweet served as the last straw for LU grads who called his alignment a source of “shame and anger” in a Facebook post last week.

LU alumna have started a Facebook group entitled “Return your diplomas to LU” which currently boasts 294 members and outlines plans to send diplomas back to LU by September 5th. The returned diplomas will be accompanied by letters explaining their reasoning to Falwell’s office and the office of the president of the Board of Trustees.

Chris Gaumer, a 2006 graduate and the former Student Government Association president, told CNN that the goal is to “send a message that some alumni are unhappy.”

“Many reasons to return LU degree, like a class called Creation Studies, but no reason more important than Falwell Jr. backing Trump backing white supremacists,” Gaumer posted on Instagram.

Graduates are prepared to make their disappointment clear concerning this perceived moral failure, and want it to be known that Falwell’s stance does not represent all students.

A group letter prepared for university officials called Falwell’s alignment with Trump “incompatible with Liberty University’s stated values, and incompatible with a Christian witness,” NPR reported.

Not all graduates agree with this passionate display against President Trump and Falwell. Phil Wagner, who received his bachelor’s and master’s degree from LU, and plans on keeping his diplomas, despite the fact that he does not support Trump’s statements.

“I do not plan to return my degree,” Wagner told CNN. “I earned it. I worked hard for it.”

Falwell doesn’t appear to be concerned.

“I understand how some people could misunderstand his words,” Falwell said. “Yes, he could be more polished and politically correct but that’s the reason I supported him, because he’s not.”

Therefore, graduates preparing to seal envelopes enclosing their degrees must consider the effectiveness of their actions. Perhaps it would be more beneficial to take action to better the nation with their current achievements, rather than seeking to revoke their previous ones.

The post Liberty grads return diplomas because Falwell still supports President Trump appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Mizzou suffering brutal long-term impacts of 2015 social justice protests

Aug 21st 2017, 19:56, by Siraj Hashmi

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/10/Safe-Space-Missouri-Mizzou-Jeff-Roberson-Associated-Press-640×480-300×225.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/10/Safe-Space-Missouri-Mizzou-Jeff-Roberson-Associated-Press-640×480-533×400.jpg 533w” sizes=”(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px” />

(Jeff Roberson / Associated Press)

By Emily Jashinsky, Washington Examiner,

It’s been almost two years since radical student activists at the University of Missouri cast their campus into chaos, staging melodramatic protests that lead to the resignation of their president and chancellor and made national news for weeks. But the real legacy of these protests appears to be a dramatic dip in enrollment and consequential staffing cuts at Mizzou, a pattern even the school itself concedes can be traced back to the turmoil of 2015.

In a Sunday op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, Jillian Melchior charted the school’s decline:

As classes begin this week, freshmen enrollment is down 35% since the protests, according to the latest numbers the university has publicly released. Mizzou is beginning the year with the smallest incoming class since 1999. Overall enrollment is down by more than 2,000 students, to 33,200. The campus has taken seven dormitories out of service.

This steep dip in enrollment, Melchior notes, has lead the school to make significant staffing cuts. “The plummeting support has also cost jobs,” she wrote. “In May, Mizzou announced it would lay off as many as 100 people and eliminate 300 more positions through retirement and attrition. Last year the university reduced its library staff and cut 50 cleaning and maintenance jobs.”

Read more on the Washington Examiner.

The post Mizzou suffering brutal long-term impacts of 2015 social justice protests appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

“Millennial Day” at Georgetown University: Where everyone gets participation trophies

Aug 21st 2017, 19:53, by Lauren Cooley

The Athletics Department at Georgetown is having a bit of self-deprecating fun. Coming next month, Georgetown will celebrate “Millennial Day” complete with an event at a men’s soccer game.

Omg- legit soooo #pumped 🙏🙌🏼 for #MillennialDay w/ @GUHoyasMSoccer it's gonna be #lit🔥🔥🔥https://t.co/slbzw87xP7 pic.twitter.com/jSw1zYFx2z

— Georgetown Hoyas (@GeorgetownHoyas) August 15, 2017

#MillennialDay was announced in a hilariously sarcastic press release.

“At #MillennialDay, you can expect only the most #awesome giveaways (because millennials expect everything to be free) and the most hella cool activities. So that everyone feels welcome at Shaw Field, a #dabbing safe space will be roped off, as well as a halftime naptime break if you ~can’t even~ stay awake for the whole game.

If you’re #thirsty, enter the raffle for a DC area juice gift card. As long as you’re like, basically on time for the game, you will be greeted with not only words of praise but also a PARTICIPATION TROPHY because all #millennials are #special. And for all your social media needs, our mascot, Jack the Bulldog, will be available to take some #Kardashianworthy pregame selfies that you can take and post for either during the game or for a hype #tbt.”

Dabbing, safe spaces, nap time, and participation trophies? Sounds like a millennials dream day!

This event is brought to the Georgetown community from the same folks who hosted “Dad Bod Day” a few years back.

Join @GUHoyasMSoccer at DAD BOD DAY! The elimination of the #dadbod sensation! A healthy end to the new trend!🏃⚽️ pic.twitter.com/IOXBmkmFEK

— Georgetown Hoyas (@GeorgetownHoyas) July 29, 2015

Georgetown Athletics’ noble attempt to fight off the dad bod is admirable, but this flat-out mocking of millennial culture, and in particular snowflake mentality, is awesome. A little bit of satire can go a long way, so let’s hope the outrage bandits don’t latch on to this as another thing to be offended by.  

The post “Millennial Day” at Georgetown University: Where everyone gets participation trophies appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

States crack down on doctors’ and pharmaceutical companies’ role in opioid crisis

Aug 21st 2017, 18:13, by Charyssa Parent

Substance abuse has long carried a negative stereotype on the abuser. However, research shows that doctors and pharmaceutical companies bear a lot of responsibility in the opioid epidemic.

More than a 1,000 people every day are treated in emergency departments for misusing prescription opioids like Percocet, OxyContin, Vicodin, and Methadone. Doctors continue to overprescribe these lethal drugs. According to the Center for Disease Control in 2014, almost 2 million Americans abused or were dependent on prescription opioids. The CDC says opioid prescribing continues to fuel the epidemic that kills nearly 200 Americans a day.

States have started cracking down on doctors who prescribe nearly 300 million opioids a year. In the latest effort to monitor overprescribing, states started using a database made by Appriss Inc. that keeps track of patients’ and doctors’ opioid prescriptions history. Currently, 40 states and Washington, D.C. submit prescriber records for physicians to monitor the patients’ opioid prescription history. They also act as a watchdog of doctors who overprescribe the highly addictive opiates. Since buying this software, the state of Michigan has fired over 20 doctors they found who were overprescribing opioids.

In addition to cracking down on doctors, states are now beginning to criticize pharmaceutical companies for their role in the crisis. Nationwide attorneys are making the argument that pharmaceutical companies are equally at fault in this crisis by falsely advertising the effects and addictiveness of their products to increase profit. Just last week, South Carolina sued the largest opioid manufacturer, Purdue Pharma, which makes the highly addictive pain narcotic OxyContin. South Carolina’s Attorney General Alan Wilson said the company uses unfair and deceptive marketing of their opioid painkillers. The lawsuit states that, since 2007, Purdue “significantly downplayed how addictive its opioids are and also overstated the benefits of opioids compared to other forms of pain management in order to increase its market share and profits.”

The Attorney General’s statement accuses Purdue of taking many unethical measures to sell its products by telling doctors that patients, receiving opioid prescriptions for pain, will generally not become addicted. The lawsuit says that Purdue told doctors that patients who seem addicted to their drug, are just “pseudoaddicted” or under-treated for their pain, encouraging doctors to prescribe more opioids. The company also told doctors their painkillers worked better when used long-term, which has not been studied or proven for the drug.

South Carolina was ranked ninth in the nation for high opioid prescription rates, with deaths by heroin and prescription opioids surpassing homicide deaths. The Palmetto State has also seen their number of infants born addicted to opioids quadruple since 2000.

“This suit seeks to hold Purdue accountable for creating this crisis and seeks remedies to stop its misleading, deceptive, and dangerous marketing tactics. While there is a time and place for patients to receive opioids, Purdue prevented doctors and patients from receiving complete and accurate information about opioids in order to make informed choices about their treatment options,” Attorney General Wilson said in a statement on the lawsuit.

South Carolina is not the only state to sue an opioid manufacturer. As this crisis continues to escalate, more than 25 states, cities, and counties have filed cases against opioid manufacturers for the same types of misleading marketing tactics. Officials at the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration have also proposed to cut the amount of opioid production by 20 percent in 2018.

Every three weeks, opioids kill more people than the victims of the September 11th terror attacks. Monthly, substance abuse disorder is killing over 4,000 people and rising. On August 10th, President Trump declared the opioid crisis a national emergency giving substance abuse disorder national attention.

The post States crack down on doctors’ and pharmaceutical companies’ role in opioid crisis appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Broadway show canceled after liberals attack recasting a black actor for a white actor

Aug 21st 2017, 17:48, by Lauren Cooley

A popular Broadway show is the latest victim of a racial controversy, and it’s led to the show’s cancellation.

Natasha, Pierre and The Great Comet of 1812, a 12 time Tony award nominated Broadway musical, has been cancelled.

The issue? Replacing a black actor with a white actor.

Okieriete “Oak” Onaodowan, known for his work on the Broadway mega-hit Hamilton was initially brought on to replace singer-songwriter Josh Groban in the lead role of Pierre in Great Comet, after Groban had to depart the role in May. White actor replaced by a black actor? Everything is fine.

Without the star power of Groban, the show began to struggle financially and eventually, Onaodowan stepped aside and was replaced by Mandy Patinkin, most famously known for playing Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride, to give the show some more star power.

Black actor, replaced by a white actor? All hell breaks loose.

The controversy forced Patinkin to withdraw from the role, leading to the full cancellation of the show.

In classic identity politics fashion, racial optics became more important than the enjoyment of the art being presented. And now, a whole bunch of people are out of jobs because people got upset that a white guy replaced a black guy who had originally replaced a white guy. Absolutely remarkable.

The post Broadway show canceled after liberals attack recasting a black actor for a white actor appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

The change you wish to see is within ourselves, not Donald Trump

Aug 21st 2017, 16:31, by Lauren Cooley

Over the last few days, the ability of the President to command the moral authority and conscience of America has been put into question. The backlash that has come from the mainstream media, including Fox News and Republican and Democrat politicians alike, over President Trump’s wild, unplanned press conference has caused Trump’s defenders to back into a corner. Rather than make “what-about” arguments regarding Antifa, here’s one fact Americans need to accept if we’ll ever truly unite:

It is an impossible task for one man, even as President and especially a president as flawed as Donald Trump, to ever wave a magic wand and heal all wounds.

A very frustrated Charles Krauthammer called Trump’s inaction a moral disgrace. Gianno Caldwell appeared on Fox and Friends, and through tears pleaded that the President “literally betrayed the conscience of our country” and that anyone defending Trump has “the potential to be morally bankrupt.”

Spme could say these reactions are over the top, especially considering that by September, we’ll be talking about another tweet of a different subject — possibly another Russian smoking gun, possibly increasing tensions with North Korea.

I personally consider Trump’s comments in the Access Hollywood tapes more morally disturbing than pointing out the actual fact that there was violence on both sides in Charlottesville, Va.

Let’s get back to the idea though, that some prominent and visible Americans feel the President no longer has any mandate to lecture hate groups about their evil ways. When Trump ran for president, Americans had a choice to make: okie-doke, gladhand politics as usual or a new, more brutally honest, in your face brand that Trump provided.

Elections do indeed have consequences and we elected a 71-year-old real estate developer and reality TV star. Common sense dictates that he will not drastically change overnight just because of his new role. Instead, we as patriotic, diverse, and welcoming Americans have to be the change we wish to see, not Donald Trump; I hope this becomes be a huge lesson that the country can learn during this tumultuous presidency.

The President is not infallible; we’ve had 44 men, all with different character flaws, take the Oath of Office. Yes, there have been those TV moments  — the Challenger, Oklahoma City, 9/11, Sandy Hook — where the President says certain words that stand out throughout history.

In times of crisis, some like to harken back to previous eras, the ones where we were more neighborly, like the societies you watch on TV Land in black-and-white. There’s still potential for that attitude today, however; one great example is the candlelit memorial at the University of Virginia, which stayed off of social media, was privately organized, and came together peacefully.

If college students, the young generation, didn’t need a Gettysburg address to pray and sing together then I’m confident all Americans, of all stripes and creeds, have the ability to reach out and be the change they want to see — without direction from a president.

The post The change you wish to see is within ourselves, not Donald Trump appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Confederates at the Capitol: ‘Those statues are right where Nancy Pelosi left them’ [VIDEO]

Aug 21st 2017, 15:21, by Editorial Staff

Former Speaker of the House and current Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has called for all the Confederate statues housed in the Capitol Building to be removed. Under current law and precedent, including while Pelosi was Speaker, the states decide which two statues to send to the Capitol.

Ron Meyer, Editor of Red Alert Politics, responded this morning on a debate for Fox and Friends First:

“Those statues are right where Nancy Pelosi left them when she was Speaker of the House…

“The truth is, the Democrats have a pretty poor history on Civil Rights, including Nancy Pelosi’s own father who was the Mayor of Baltimore — and was one of the people who dedicated statues to Robert E. Lee and ‘Stonewall’ Jackson, and in his speech said that they defended ‘sacred institutions.’ What are those ‘sacred institutions’? One of them is slavery. 

“And the truth is, the Democrat Party has a history of opposing Civil Rights, favoring Jim Crow laws, and also defended slavery back when the Civil War happened.”

Pelosi has yet to denounce her father or the history of her Party.

Here’s the clip:

Poll: 62% of Americans think statues honoring leaders of the Confederacy should remain as a historic symbol… @Ron4VA joins us to debate pic.twitter.com/tVc9jaEI9d

— Fox & Friends First (@FoxFriendsFirst) August 21, 2017

The post Confederates at the Capitol: ‘Those statues are right where Nancy Pelosi left them’ [VIDEO] appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

UC Berkeley charges College Republicans $15,000 for security to host Ben Shapiro

Aug 21st 2017, 15:07, by Lauren Cooley

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2015/11/shapiro-e1456516549853-300×199.png 300w” sizes=”(max-width: 579px) 100vw, 579px” />

Image via Twitter screenshot.

After tumultuous ups and downs, conservative author and pundit Ben Shapiro is once again confirmed to speak at UC Berkeley this September. Unfortunately for the UC Berkeley College Republicans, hosting the high profile conservative is a financial and logistical nightmare.

According to The Daily Californian, the Berkeley’s College Republicans (BCR), have reluctantly agreed to pay $15,738 in order compensate for “basic security costs.”  

UC Berkeley, the home of the free speech movement, has done and about-face, becoming one of the main campus embroiled in the free speech debate surrounding higher education. In the recent past, UC Berkeley has done its best to prevent conservative speakers from appearing on its campus, including Milo Yiannopoulos, Ann Coulter and Shapiro.

The Young America’s Foundation, in collaboration with BCR, invited the Daily Wire editor-in-chief to speak last July.

These lofty security costs come as no shock at all. Berkeley is said to have dedicated to paying for “the rental and staffing costs.”

Berkeley spokesperson Dan Mogulof spoke to The Daily Cal in regards to how the costs are determined:

“The formula (for security costs) is based on neutral criteria and is applied in a completely consistent fashion without regard for the identity of the student organization or the speaker.”

Mogulof also stated that the fee required for security are estimated by the UC Police Department, not UC Berkeley as some may misconceive. According to Mogulof, they derive their evaluations in accordance to “the safety and wellbeing” of not only Berkeley students but also residents in the vicinity of campus.

Naweed Tahmas, the BCR Executive Vice President, has announced that all 1,984 seats at UC Berkeley’s Zellerbach Hall have been reserved for the Shapiro event, putting it at maximum capacity.  

Tahmas stated in an email, directed to the campus, that the Berkeley College Republicans are “disappointed the university would charge our student organization such a high security fee.”

Nevertheless, the students have committed to moving on with the planned event in order to advocate for, as they state, “diversity of thought” at their university.

Sadly, free speech is not free. At UC Berkeley it costs nearly sixteen grand.

The post UC Berkeley charges College Republicans $15,000 for security to host Ben Shapiro appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Evil incarnate: The systematic abortion of Down syndrome children

Aug 21st 2017, 14:17, by Lauren Cooley

About a year and a half ago I was at an all-day event with friends and their social acquaintances, all fellow millennials. It consisted of a lot of sitting around in lawn chairs, chatting, and eating too much food. In addition to all the fun stories and silly jokes, our conversation eventually landed on a topic of conversation that many would consider divisive: abortion.

One individual brought up his recent trip to Northern Europe and how he thought it was (I’m paraphrasing) “so amazing that you never see anyone there with a disability. They must be doing something right!”

Those a bit more educated on the issue shot back: Europeans haven’t somehow magically ended the occurrence of disabilities in the next generation, they’ve ended their births.

“Terminating their pregnancies,” as they like to call it. To make it clear, they’re aborting them.

And they’re doing it because a test showed that those children weren’t quite “perfect.” (A test that can be wrong, by the way.)

More simply put, they’re murdering their children.

Now, I know many people disagree that abortion is murder. I know, I know, the laws of those countries don’t call it murder. But the Bible calls intentionally killing a human being in any circumstance other than self-defense, capital punishment, and just warfare murder. I’ll take the Bible’s authority over that of any nation’s laws. After all, German law made killing Jews in concentration camps legal during Nazi rule.

 

Seventy-two years after our grandparents fought and died to stop evil incarnate from murdering Jews, Roma (Gypsies), those with Down syndrome and other disabilities, and everyone else they thought inferior including Slavic and African people groups, we’re having to fight the same fight in a different form.

This is a fight we’ve clearly been losing for some time as, according to CBS News.

The United States has an estimated termination rate for Down syndrome of 67 percent (1995–2011); in France it’s 77 percent (2015); and Denmark, 98 percent (2015). The law in Iceland permits abortion after 16 weeks if the fetus has a deformity — and Down Syndrome is considered a deformity.

CBS’s twitter account lauded these statistics by advertising its article with this tweet:

Iceland is on pace to virtually eliminate Down syndrome through abortion. #CBSNOA learns more, tonight at 10pm ET/PT https://t.co/EB6BKgQFN3 pic.twitter.com/SOKU7oe6a3

— CBS News (@CBSNews) August 15, 2017

What has our world come to? Look at that precious girl!

Now, in all fairness to CBS, their article did present an opposing viewpoint to the murder of those with Down syndrome, but it is still heavily weighted towards support.

Christians must absolutely take a stand against this madness.

Genesis 1:26–28 states:

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Every human being is made in the image of God — including those with Down syndrome.

The post Evil incarnate: The systematic abortion of Down syndrome children appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

“Inclusive learning environment”: University of Texas removes Confederate statues overnight

Aug 21st 2017, 13:56, by Siraj Hashmi

Under the cover of darkness, the University of Texas swiftly removed the statues of Confederate leaders late Sunday night and early on Monday morning. The move came 10 days before fall semester classes begin. The country continues to be mired in the debate over whether Confederate statues should remain standing or removed.

The four statues that were removed on campus included two Confederate generals, Robert E. Lee and Albert Sidney Johnston, Confederate cabinet member John Reagan, and Texas’ 20th Governor James Stephen Hogg. Interestingly enough, Hogg wasn’t part of the Confederacy and was actually a follower of the conservative New South Creed that rejected the old social and economic traditions of the Old South like slavery.

University of Texas President Greg Fenves ordered the removal of the four statues after the violence that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia, that killed Heather Heyer and left dozens of others injured. Fenves said that the statues have become “symbols of modern white supremacy and neo-Nazism.”

Instead of just removing the statues, however, Fenves will move the three statues of Confederate leaders to the Briscoe Center for “scholarly study,” while the statue of Hogg will be considered for re-installation at another campus site.

“The University of Texas at Austin has a duty to preserve and study history. But our duty also compels us to acknowledge that those parts of our history that run counter to the university’s core values, the values of our state and the enduring values of our nation do not belong on pedestals in the heart of the Forty Acres,” Fenves wrote in his email. “We do not choose our history, but we choose what we honor and celebrate on our campus. As UT students return in the coming week, I look forward to welcoming them here for a new academic year with a recommitment to an open, positive and inclusive learning environment for all.”

The post “Inclusive learning environment”: University of Texas removes Confederate statues overnight appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Eclipse: Will sky gazing really cost the U.S. economy $700 million?

Aug 21st 2017, 13:52, by Lauren Cooley

Today’s forecast calls for a total eclipse of the… American economy? Human resources firm Challenger, Gray, & Christmas, Inc. predicts that the eclipse will cause $694 million in lost productivity.

The company arrives at that estimate by supposing each and every American worker takes 20 minutes away from work to watch the Great American Eclipse. Individual experiences will vary widely. Some people will take time off from work to travel to the path of totality, while others might just look out their windows for a couple minutes and then get back to work.

While millions of us will certainly grab our eclipse glasses and head outside for the big event, not everyone will be able to do so. Will our nation’s surgeons drop their scalpels, pop outside the hospital for a few minutes, then come back in and keep operating? I sure hope not.

Factories may choose not to shut down production lines, meaning that manufacturing workers will need to stay at their stations during the event. Ideally, people would be able to take at least a few minutes to watch the eclipse pass over, but we know that not everyone is so fortunate.

Let’s say we all go eclipse-crazy and even those who don’t watch it eventually do spend time reading about it, talking about it, and (let’s be real here) checking Instagram to see photos from around the country. If there were no eclipse, would we spend all that time working? Probably not.

Recode notes that, without the eclipse, we’d probably fritter away that “lost” productivity on something else. Companies lose productivity when people shop online or read non-work-related articles (like this one! Caught you!) No employee is 100 percent productive, 100 percent of the time; the human brain needs breaks to keep itself in tip-top shape. Instead of spending those 20 minutes discussing Game of Thrones or shopping online per usual, you’ll spend them on the eclipse today.

In addition, the hefty price tag for the eclipse fails to take into account that a celestial event also boosts certain parts of the economy. Hotels and restaurants in the path of totality will be swamped with visitors – visitors who are solely there for the eclipse and wouldn’t have spent money there otherwise.

Even if the estimate is correct, a $694 million loss is far from disastrous. The Super Bowl caused around $1 billion in lost productivity. That’s significantly more than what we’ll lose from the eclipse, but it doesn’t hold a candle to the Comey hearings, which caused $3.3 billion in lost productivity.

The eclipse will draw millions of Americans outside of their offices and into a rare experience that we can share together. The last time this happened, there was no social media; now, we’ll get to see the eclipse through the eyes of our fellow citizens from Seattle to Charleston and everywhere in between. We’ll get to marvel at something that makes us feel small, and we’ll get to do it together. In a time when our nation is so divided, something for us to all come together and enjoy is very welcomed. $694 million for all of that goodness? Sounds like a bargain to me.

The post Eclipse: Will sky gazing really cost the U.S. economy $700 million? appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Facebook and Twitter tolerate ‘Boston Antifa,’ which is calling for terrorism

Aug 21st 2017, 11:43, by Ron Meyer

While Facebook, Twitter, and Silicon Valley have no trouble banning or censoring edgy/radical conservatives on their platforms, apparently they also tolerate terrorist rhetoric from ‘Boston Antifa,’ a now viral group which was key in organizing the demonstrations in Boston.

A cursory scan of their latest Facebook and Twitter posts reveal violent political rhetoric and should be seen as encouraging terrorism.

At 12:57 a.m. on Sunday, the group posted, “There is no room for capitalists, conservatives, libertarians, “classical liberals” or supporters of the US constitution in our city. You MUST leave. #BostonResist”

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-21-at-6.35.45-AM-e1503315731715-300×285.png 300w” sizes=”(max-width: 509px) 100vw, 509px” />

(via Screenshot)

This group seeks the destruction of the U.S. Constitution and the exclusion of millions of Americans from Boston, unquestionably by using violent means. How else could they do this?

At 12:26 a.m. on Sunday, the group posted, “Solidarity to all those suppressing fascist thought and ideology in their communities. Take time to remember those we’ve lost under this 6 months of fascist takeover. Martyrs are immortal!”

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-21-at-6.36.07-AM-e1503315759299-286×300.png 286w” sizes=”(max-width: 515px) 100vw, 515px” />

(via Screenshot)

Yes, they are encouraging martyrdom, a word frequently used by terrorist groups to promote causing violence as ‘self-sacrifice.’ The picture is a fist choking a symbol of human liberty used during the American Revolutionary War.

A post from August 19 depicts a face-covering member burning a sign that reads “FreeSpeech” and uses the hashtag “#F-kYourFreeSpeech.”

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-21-at-6.46.54-AM-e1503315780371-300×261.png 300w” sizes=”(max-width: 511px) 100vw, 511px” />

(via Screenshot)

On August 15, they also encouraged the further destruction of property, calling the forceful removal of a confederate statue in North Carolina “an absolute Antifa victory.” No matter where you stand on the statue debate, everyone should agree that we should use our legal process to make these decisions.

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-21-at-6.50.35-AM-275×300.png 275w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-21-at-6.50.35-AM-458×500.png 458w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-21-at-6.50.35-AM-367×400.png 367w” sizes=”(max-width: 505px) 100vw, 505px” />

(via Screenshot)

A petition on WhiteHouse.gov has reached the necessary 100,000 signatures to warrant an official response from the Trump administration to label Antifa as a terrorist organization. New Jersey has already taken this step, and it would be wise from President Trump to consider it as tensions continue to mount nationwide.

Facebook and Twitter would never tolerate white supremacists calling for violence or to remove an entire class of people from a city. They should keep their standards consistent and apply the same standard to Antifa groups on Facebook.

Silicon Valley should do their part to stop ISIS, white supremacists, Antifa, and anyone trying to create violence in America. Selective censorship isn’t just biased, it’s potentially dangerous. If Antifa hurts a libertarian walking down the street in a Ron Paul shirt, this post could be the cause. To this group, anyone who believes in limited government — instead of anarcho-communism (which someone should explain to them is an oxymoron) — is considered a Nazi.

Certainly, there are real neo-Nazis out there, as we saw in Charlottesville with the white supremacist terrorist murder of Heather Heyer. They should also be stopped from spreading their hateful and murderous ideology. There is no need for equivocating; radical nationalist socialists (neo-Nazis) and radical anarcho socialists (Antifa) should both be condemned for their own uniquely grotesque reasons.

When will social media organizations step up to the plate?

The post Facebook and Twitter tolerate ‘Boston Antifa,’ which is calling for terrorism appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Boston’s “white supremacist” rally was not white supremacist at all [VIDEO]

Aug 19th 2017, 23:11, by Siraj Hashmi

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17231655067776-300×189.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17231655067776-768×483.jpg 768w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17231655067776-680×427.jpg 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17231655067776-700×440.jpg 700w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17231655067776-600×377.jpg 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px” />

Organizers stand on the bandstand on Boston Common during a “Free Speech” rally staged by conservative activists, Saturday, Aug. 19, 2017, in Boston. Counterprotesters stand along barricades ringing the bandstand. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

Tens of thousands of people converged on the city of Boston to protest a group of less than a hundred gathered at the Boston Common to promote free speech.The media, liberals, progressives, and Antifa immediately labeled them as “white supremacists” and “Nazis.”

Counter-protesters were chanting slogans like “Whose streets? Our streets!” and “No Trump, No KKK, No Fascist USA.” They even held signs like “Resist,” “Black Lives Matter,” and “Get the hell off my lawn, you bigots.”

Tensions were high as Antifa clashed with police officers who attempted to protect the rally. Antifa threw rocks and bottles of urine at Trump supporters and police officers.

#BPD is asking individuals to refrain from throwing urine, bottles and other harmful projectiles at our officers.

— Boston Police Dept. (@bostonpolice) August 19, 2017

#UPDATE: #BPD confirming rocks being thrown at officers on Tremont at West.

— Boston Police Dept. (@bostonpolice) August 19, 2017

It was relatively peaceful until the Trump supporters attempted to leave the rally when it ended with a police escort. They were mobbed by counter-protesters where they got hit with water bottles, glitter, and spray paint.

12:45pm gets wild.@realDonaldTrump supporters getting hit with water bottles, glitter, spray paint. Boston, we're better than this. Common! pic.twitter.com/ERP8ZTl50A

— Jonathan Choe (@choenbcboston) August 19, 2017

One woman holding an American flag was assaulted by a member of Antifa.

WATCH: ANTIFA bravely stands against Nazis in Boston..
Just Kidding, they assault an elderly woman holding an American Flag #freespeechrally pic.twitter.com/IWlYLA8kvH

— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) August 19, 2017

While counter-protesters thought they were fighting against Nazis, the KKK, and white supremacists, they were actually fighting against a Republican Massachusetts Senatorial candidate who was born in India, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai. He gave a 12-13 minute talk over a megaphone about the importance of free speech. Supporters of every color were standing behind him with signs that read “Black Lives DO Matter” and “Real Jobs, Real Health, Real Education.”

To all FAKE NEWS, this was the "White Supremacist" FREE SPEECH RALLY I just spoke at. #BostonFreeSpeech pic.twitter.com/vDU6NWYAds

— Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai (@va_shiva) August 19, 2017

“They tried to stop us today, didn’t they?” Ayyadurai, who’s running for Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) seat, said to the crowd. “But we weren’t cowed down.”

Ayyadurai then pointed out the real racists were in the Democratic party, accusing former Vice President Joe Biden, former Sen. Harry Reid, and former President Jimmy Carter of making racist comments throughout their time in office.

“The Establishment is what’s infested with racists. I don’t see any racists here.”

Boston police have reported over 33 people have been arrested during today’s protests.

Watch Ayyadurai’s entire speech below:

The post Boston’s “white supremacist” rally was not white supremacist at all [VIDEO] appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

The nation’s biggest liberal university system underpaid their employees by $1.3 million

Aug 19th 2017, 02:09, by Lauren Cooley

A recent discrepancy regarding payroll compensation has landed the University of California (UC) system in hot water. Thousands of UC employees, past and present, were underpaid slight quantities in each paycheck, totaling more than a million dollars in unpaid income.

According to the Sacramento Bee, the duration of under-compensation was between the years of 2014 and 2016. None of the affected employees were employed in academic positions but this failure to fully compensate employees affected all 10 of the UC system’s campuses.

In December of 2015, the UC system inquired the Department of Labor to investigate this matter, which occurred during a problematic transition to a new payroll setup. This consequently led to strain in computing workers for their overtime pay.

The UC made a resolution with the Labor Department in May with an official settlement of $1.3 million dollars.

More than 13,700 of the UC employees affected, who were undercompensated by at least $20 each, will obtain approximately $616,000 in damages, as well as $746,000 in back wages which will be compensated in order to cover for the three year loss. As The Sac Bee informs, this will average about $100 per individual.

Reimbursement is slated to start next month.

Kathryn Lybarger, President of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 3299, the largest employee union of the University of California, addressed this matter in a statement last week.

“Working people living check to check have been waiting nearly three years for UC to pay back these stolen overtime wages,” Lybarger stated. “The University has deep pockets when it comes to bloated executive bureaucracy, but suddenly has tight pockets when it comes to paying front-line workers the wages they’ve earned.”

This incident comes after a months-long audit into the University of California, reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, which revealed that UC President Janet Napolitano stockpiled $175 million in a secret reserve fund while simultaneously keeping it undisclosed from the public. She did so, as the audit reports, “by overestimating how much it needed to run the 10-campus university system — and then spending less than budgeted.”

The university system is moving to a single payroll system known as UCPath, which will be available for all employees. The University states this system change will lessen malfunctions embedded in the previous system. It also will utilize software that, as the university states, “pays in accordance with federal standards.”

The state of California ranks among the highest in the country in terms of tax burdens. Californians have the highest state-level sales tax, being at 7.5 percent and their state government has also established the highest marginal tax-rate in the country at 13.3 percent. The last thing that employees of the UC system needed was less money in their paycheck on behalf of an already dysfunctional, tax-payer funded educational system.

The post The nation’s biggest liberal university system underpaid their employees by $1.3 million appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Seattle mayor: Remove Communist and Confederate statues

Aug 19th 2017, 01:55, by Siraj Hashmi

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Lenin-Statue-Flickr-300×179.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Lenin-Statue-Flickr-288×173.jpg 288w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Lenin-Statue-Flickr-600×358.jpg 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 620px) 100vw, 620px” />

(Photo via Flickr)

In a continued push by lawmakers throughout the country in the wake of the violence in Charlottesville, statues and monuments paying tribute and honoring Confederate leaders and generals are being taken down one-by-one. However, in Seattle, the chief executive is calling for Confederate statues to be removed as well as a statue paying tribute to the former Soviet premier and communist revolutionary Vladimir Lenin.

Like many lawmakers, Seattle Mayor Ed Murray calling for the removal of Confederate statues is expected. However, for a city as far to the left of the political spectrum as Seattle, it’s puzzling that a statue of Lenin was erected in the first place, and that the political leader of the city from the Democratic party is calling for its removal.

In a statement on Thursday, Murray said, “In the last few days, Seattleites have expressed concerns and frustration over symbols of hate, racism and violence that exist in our city. Not only do these kinds of symbols represent historic injustices, their existence causes pain among those who themselves or whose family members have been impacted by these atrocities.”

He continued. “We should remove all these symbols, no matter what political affiliation may have been assigned to them in the decades since they were erected. This includes both confederate memorials and statues idolizing the founder of the authoritarian soviet regime.”

The Confederate memorial is located at Lake View Cemetery near Capitol Hill, while the Lenin statue is in the heart of Fremont. Both are standing on private property.

“We should never forget our history, but we also should not idolize figures who have committed violent atrocities and sought to divide us based on who we are or where we came from,” Murray concluded.

According to KIRO7, some view the statue of Lenin as a joke, while others believe it’s a work of art. The 16-foot bronze statue was created by Emil Venkov, a Bulgarian sculptor, created the statue in the city of Poprad in the former Czechoslovakia in 1988. Poprad is now Slovakia.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, the statue was removed from its original location in 1989. Lewis Carpenter, a native of the Seattle suburb, Issaquah, found the statue in a Poprad scrap yard in 1993 and paid $40,000 to have it transported to the Pacific Northwest. Carpenter had to mortgage his house in order to get it done.

After Carpenter died in 1994, Peter Bevis, founder of Fremont Fine Arts Foundry, had it installed in 1995 after initial plans to place it in public were scrapped. It now stands in the heart of Fremont today.

When asked about the statue, Murray said, “You can look at the statue in two ways. It is a statue of a man who killed hundreds of millions of people. It’s also considered a joke. So is it a statue honoring him, or is it a statue actually making him into a joke? There are several different ways to look at it. I can see how some folks in the city, particularly from eastern Europe might find that Lenin statue not a joke, but perhaps something that should be removed.”

A recent NPR/PBS Newshour/Marist poll found that 60 percent of millennials do not want to have Confederate statues removed. So far, there is little polling on whether they also want statues paying tribute to communist leaders removed, too.

The post Seattle mayor: Remove Communist and Confederate statues appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

George Washington University Dean: President Trump is “Nazi-in-chief”

Aug 18th 2017, 20:47, by Lauren Cooley

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Brigety-300×188.png 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Brigety-768×482.png 768w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Brigety-680×426.png 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Brigety-700×439.png 700w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Brigety-600×376.png 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 960px) 100vw, 960px” />

via Elliott School of International Affairs | Facebook

Donald Trump is a nazi sympathizer, according to an op-ed by George Washington University’s (GWU) Dean of the Elliott School of International Affairs.

In an article published by Foreign Policy and promoted by the GWU on Thursday, Reuben Brigety — a former U.S. ambassador and State Department official — called President Donald Trump “America’s first Nazi-supporting president” and “Nazi-in-chief.”

“The unprecedented situation that we currently face, however, is that the elected government of the day is now led by a Nazi- and white-nationalist sympathizer. Unlike the unfortunate former White House spokesman, Sean Spicer, there is no way for senior Trump political appointees to evade this grim reality by hiding in the bushes to escape the moral weight of the choice that confronts them,” Brigety penned.

“How, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, can you convince the world that American values are a force for good in the world, and convince your own workforce who hail from every corner of our country to confidently project America’s image in the world, if you fail to publicly challenge a president who embraces the latter-day Nazi spawn of the greatest evil the world has ever seen?”

Brigety’s 1,439 word diatribe against the “visceral racist utterances of the commander-in-chief” was promoted on The Elliott School’s Twitter and Facebook accounts.

Responses were mixed.

“This makes me very proud to be a graduate of the Elliott School of International Affairs. Thank you for this statement,” posted Shelley Wagner Booth.

“I’d say what a POS this school has become, but then again it just wasn’t that great when I went there,” posted Matthew LeFande.

Brigety concluded, “In light of the president’s exposed racist character, only three choices remain:

“1. Condemn the president’s words directly and categorically, and risk the professional wrath of a man who prides loyalty to himself above all other virtues.

“2. Resign in protest, thereby refusing to abet the unreconstructed racist in the Oval Office but preserving your own personal honor. 

“3. Continue to serve this fundamentally flawed man, and have to explain to your personal progeny and our national posterity why you chose to silently serve America’s first Nazi-in-chief.”

The post George Washington University Dean: President Trump is “Nazi-in-chief” appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Blocking economic empowerment: It takes 6 years to get an Interior Design license from some states

Aug 18th 2017, 20:38, by Lauren Cooley

When one thinks of occupational licensing boards, a number of images may come to mind: white coated medical students working long intern hours, over-taxed law students hunched over bar prep books in the wee hours of the morning and of course, the grueling six year certification process of interior designers.

Oh, you hadn’t heard about that last one?

As ridiculous as it may seem, in three states (Nevada, Louisiana, and Florida) and two territories (District of Columbia and Puerto Rico,) this is the reality that aspiring entrepreneurs face when trying to enter the seemingly inoffensive market of interior design.

According to the Institute for Justice, interior design, where it is regulated by licensing boards, has the highest education burden of lower-income occupations to enter, requiring a staggering 2,190 days of education on average. In addition, these states also require a test known as “the NCIDQ” (National Council for Interior Design Qualification,) which is notoriously difficult and also cost-prohibitive, costing as much as $675 to apply and register for the test.

One of rationales for this seemingly absurd standard comes from the “consumer protection” angle. In a 2011 Florida House hearing, an interior designer was quoted as saying that interior design “sounds like this simple hanging curtains on a wall… [but] it only takes a couple things to go wrong for people to lose their lives.”

While this may seem like a somewhat legitimate concern, it is immediately exposed as fraudulent and self-serving when one examines the licensing requirements for another high risk job — Emergency Medical Technician (EMT.) EMTs, who can do everything right and still lose a life, require an average of 33 days of education and training, or roughly 1.5 percent of the training time of an interior designer. This exposes this sinister nature of this process; the current members of occupational licensing boards don’t want new competitors, and will make an applicant jump through as many bureaucratic hoops as possible to ensure the least number of new competitors enter the market.

Of course, these barriers to entry presumably placed in the name of “consumer protection” and “professional standards” do not affect the upper class citizen who has the time and capital to more easily navigate these hurdles. Instead, they hurt the people and groups that need economic empowerment the most, such as families of military personnel, who move often and would have to re-certify in different states, or low-income, multi-job workers looking to improve their circumstances but cannot make time for the education standards despite having talent in an industry.

The simple fact is that middle and lower class Americans do not have the time or money to invest in entering this or similarly regulated markets, and will thus are denied opportunities for economic mobility.

Luckily, there is hope. It would appear that the issue of overregulation in licensing boards has finally caught the eye of a number of legislators on Capitol Hill. Senators  Mike Lee, Ted Cruz and Ben Sasse, as well as Representative Darrell Issa have introduced the Restoring Board Immunity Act, which is aimed at helping states reform occupational boards. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission, fresh off of a 2015 Supreme Court victory over the Board of North Carolina Dental Examiners, has introduced an Economic Liberty Task Force to help educate and advocate on the issue. If these measures succeed, Americans of all walks of life will soon be able to seek better employment and opportunity without the burden of anti-competitive licensing boards.

The post Blocking economic empowerment: It takes 6 years to get an Interior Design license from some states appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Eventbrite bans Milo Yiannopoulos events: Milo responds — Exclusive

Aug 18th 2017, 19:03, by Siraj Hashmi

Conservatives have always had a target on their back when it comes to spreading their ideas on college campuses, but, now, they have to deal with a new reality of being silenced by the tech giants of Silicon Valley.

On Friday, conservative provocateur and commentator Milo Yiannopoulos posted to Facebook an email he received from the digital event organizing platform Eventbrite on Thursday showing that his upcoming event, and any event in the future, would be canceled.

The email stated, “Following further review, we have determined that Milo Yiannopoulos is no longer authorized to benefit from the Eventbrite platform due to a violation of our Community Guidelines and/or Terms of Service.”

The email indicated that his book-signing event, “MILO Takes Orlando (Dangerous Book Signing Party),” with a subject that included the words “Trust and Safety.”

“While you may continue to use Eventbrite for other events, please be aware that we reserve the right to remove any future events in your account pertaining to Milo Yiannopoulos and listing such an event could result in your account being closed,” the email read.

In a caption of the photo, Yiannopoulos wrote, “Now Eventbrite has banned me entirely from its platform. Silicon Valley is declaring war on conservatives.”

Responding to a request for comment, Yiannopoulos wrote in an email to Red Alert Politics:

“I am a New York Times bestselling author. Eventbrite agreed at first to provide ticketing for a book signing and then without any explanation cancelled the event and banned me from using their website’s services entirely. Silicon Valley is silencing any conservative, libertarian, or right-winger based on their own bias and discrimination even if no wrongdoing has occurred. If Eventbrite thinks that this will silence me they’re as boneheaded as Antifa.

“Eventbrite’s censorship of my book signing and its apparent total ban on me from its platform is part of what I call ‘the great shuttering’. Libertarians and conservatives are seeing their access to all kinds of online products and services revoked with no reasons offered by Orwellian-sounding ‘trust and safety’ teams — which is code for the far-left activists who run the tech industry’s customer service departments. It isn’t just the neo-Nazis: Silicon Valley is using Charlottesville as a pretext to hurt even moderate conservatives like me and to prevent us from doing business. Next it could be you.”

Yiannopoulos was infamously banned from Twitter in 2016 permanently and has been shut down from speaking at a number of college campuses. In February, UC-Berkeley had to cancel his speech because Antifa began to riot just outside his scheduled talk.

Eventbrite is just the latest tech giant to silence conservatives and remove access to allow them to peacefully assemble. Earlier in August, James Damore, a former engineer at Google, was fired for sending a company-wide memo criticizing the tech giant’s diversity policies and accusing them of alienating conservatives. The reason Google gave Damore for his termination was for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.”

The post Eventbrite bans Milo Yiannopoulos events: Milo responds — Exclusive appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

College Republicans flip script, demand the Muslim Student Association denounce Islamic terrorism

Aug 18th 2017, 18:58, by Lauren Cooley

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/SDSU-300×200.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/SDSU-680×454.jpg 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/SDSU-700×468.jpg 700w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/SDSU-600×400.jpg 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 720px) 100vw, 720px” />

via Facebook

College Republicans at San Diego State University (SDSU) are calling on the Muslim Student Association to condemn acts of radical Islamic terrorism.

“This statement is a formal request to the Muslim Student Association of San Diego State University, from the College Republicans at San Diego State University, to stick to their mission statement that reads: ‘The Muslim Student Association is an organization dedicated to creating a sense of community and an inclusive environment for ALL students on campus…’ Unfortunately, until radical Islamic terrorism is disavowed by the Muslim Student Organization at SDSU, we can not move forward in creating an inclusive environment for all students on campus,” the statement posted to Facebook yesterday reads in part.

The SDSU College Republicans are asking for the president of the SDSU Muslim Student Association and others on their Executive board to resign immediately if they do not “publicly condemn… acts of radical Islamic terrorism in Spain and those acts similar in nature.”

In the wake of the white supremacist terror attack in Charlottesville, liberals made a deafening call for conservatives to denounce the fringe alt-right. The SDSU College Republicans posted a statement which read we “denounce the ‘Unite the Right’ demonstrations… The hateful views of white supremacists do not represent Republicans or the Republican party as a whole.”

Now, as conservatives ask mainstream Muslims to denounce fringe, Islamic terror organizations, there seems to be a double standard; the request by the campus College Republicans has ruffled feathers in the American Muslim community.

One Facebook reply, posted by the Arab American Institute’s executive director Omar Baddar, says “It’s hard to tell whether you’re just trolling Muslim students because you think this type of bullying is fun & edgy, or whether you seriously believe your fellow Muslim students might be supporters of terrorism. The former possibility puts you beneath contempt, while the latter highlights how embarrassingly ignorant you are, so I’m not sure which you’d prefer.”

The College Republicans are not backing down, however.

“I just want to make it abundantly clear for all of the social justice warriors losing their minds over this, we’re not claiming they are terrorists. We are simply asking that they denounce the radicalism that is taking place throughout the world,” Brandon Jones, president of the SDSU College Republicans, told Red Alert Politics.

The SDSU Muslims Student Association has been involved in a whirlwind of controversy on campus. One of the most notable incidents was when they “trapped” the University president in a police cruiser for over two hours while chanting and praying because he upheld free speech rights of pro-Israeli students.

The SDSU Muslim Student Association did not return Red Alert Politics’ request for comment.

The post College Republicans flip script, demand the Muslim Student Association denounce Islamic terrorism appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Media praises Iceland for “eradicating” Down syndrome through abortions

Aug 18th 2017, 16:11, by Lauren Cooley

A recent CBS report exclaims that Iceland is “close to eradicating Down syndrome” via abortion. Almost all Icelandic mothers whose babies are diagnosed with Down syndrome ultimately choose to terminate the pregnancy.

Laws in the small island nation require doctors to offer prenatal testing to all pregnant women. Over 80 percent of expecting moms choose to have the testing done and Icelandic women whose unborn babies test positive for Down syndrome end up choosing abortion at nearly a 100 percent rate.

The CBS story implies that screening tests have ended Down Syndrome in Iceland, but the tests themselves only identify the condition. Abortions are responsible for so few children being born with Down syndrome.

Actress and pro-life advocate Patricia Heaton summed up the issue on Twitter.

Iceland isn't actually eliminating Down Syndrome. They're just killing everybody that has it. Big difference. #Downsyndrome #abortion https://t.co/gAONIzqRXW

— Patricia Heaton (@PatriciaHeaton) August 15, 2017

The country has not figured out how to prevent Down syndrome, or how to cure it. The entire reduction in the Down syndrome population in Iceland is due to abortion.

Heaton continued, “I find it impossible to subscribe to a philosophy that believes that the destruction of human life is a legitimate solution to a problem that is mostly social, economic and psychological.”

Pro-life Republicans echoed Heaton’s statement.

Truly sad. News celebrating Iceland's "100% termination rate" for children w/ Downs Syndrome. Downs children should be cherished, not ended. https://t.co/GEJGPcFLQg

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) August 15, 2017

Sarah Palin appeared on Fox News, where she said, “the intolerance for people who may not look like you is so wrong, it’s so evil.”

She even compared the Icelandic abortion phenomenon to eugenics. Palin’s youngest son, Trig, has Down syndrome.

Testing for Down syndrome is only around 85 percent accurate, and some of the parents of Iceland’s children with Down syndrome received a false negative on their prenatal test results. The implication is that if they had received the Down syndrome diagnosis, they might have chosen to terminate the pregnancy.

Helga Sol Olafsdottir, a counselor who works at a hospital in Iceland, explains her guiding philosophy on the abortion of Down syndrome children.

“We ended a possible life that may have had a huge complication…preventing suffering for the child and the family.”

However, the CBS report acknowledges that “Many people born with Down syndrome can live full, healthy lives, with an average lifespan of around 60 years.”

Is Down syndrome —  or any disorder, for that matter – so complicated that the lives it touches aren’t worth living? The question has horrifying ethical ramifications, and we are seeing in Iceland what can happen when people answer “yes.”

The post Media praises Iceland for “eradicating” Down syndrome through abortions appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Millennial poll: Trump has stronger convictions than Dems & GOP

Aug 18th 2017, 13:57, by Siraj Hashmi

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/04/trumpbros1-300×168.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/04/trumpbros1-157×88.jpg 157w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/04/trumpbros1-600×337.jpg 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 650px) 100vw, 650px” />

Associated Press

Mainstream media might think President Trump just had one of his roughest weeks in office yet, however, there is light at the end of the tunnel.

According to a new Quinnipiac University poll, more millennials aged 18 to 34 (35 percent) believe that Donald Trump bases his policies on a set of core values than Republicans (18 percent) and Democrats (22 percent). Comparatively, 59 percent of millennials believe that Trump does whatever is politically convenient. 79 percent of millennials believe that Republicans do whatever is politically convenient, while 76 percent believe the same of Democrats.

While Trump has the lowest approval rating among millennials in his handling of the economy (38 percent), a majority of them (52 percent) believe that the state of the economy is “good” to “excellent.” In fact, 34 percent of millennials think the economy is getting better, 40 percent say it’s about the same, and 22 percent think it’s getting worse. However, a whopping seven in ten millennials think that their personal financial situation is “good” (61 percent) to “excellent” (9 percent). Yet, those numbers are still lower than from those surveyed in older generations.

Despite being in office for almost seven months, more millennials (53 percent) believe that former President Barack Obama is more responsible for the current state of the economy than Trump (34 percent).

 

The post Millennial poll: Trump has stronger convictions than Dems & GOP appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Trump signs bill expanding college access for veterans

Aug 18th 2017, 01:19, by Scott McClallen

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump signed into law a bill expanding college assistance for veterans. The “Forever GI Act” removed a 15-year limit on using educational benefits, increased financial services for those serving in the National Guard and Reserves, and expanded program eligibility.

It also restores credits lost to veterans who enrolled in for-profit colleges and institutions, such as ITT Technical Institute and Corinthian College, which lost their accreditation and shut down mid-semester.

Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin, who joined Trump for the signing in New Jersey, said that the bill expands full benefits to those who received a Purple Heart. Benefits can also be transferred to eligible dependents of deceased service members. Previously, members who actively served for less than 36 months or were forced to leave the service due to an injury only received partial benefits.

Starting in August of 2019, veterans can also receive nine additional months and up to $30,000 funding to complete science, technology, engineering, and mathematic degrees. This scholarship is also available to family members of deceased service members.

“This is expanding our ability to support our veterans in getting [an] education,” Shulkin told reporters at Trump’s golf course in New Jersey.

The bill expands Yellow Ribbon Program eligibility, which splits education cost not covered by the GI bill between the U.S Department of Veteran Affairs and the college to family members of deceased service members.

It also gives a 10 percent pay raise to service members who served for less than one year of active duty.

The Student Veterans of America estimate that only 50 percent of the 200,000 veterans leaving the military to enroll in college. Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Phil Roe (R-Tenn) said that this bill will give veterans more options for education.

“This legislation will enable veterans to use the education benefits they’ve earned through the GI Bill when and how it suits them best, setting them up for future success in whatever career they pursue,” Roe said in a statement.

The expanded benefits are planned to be paid through a one percent decrease in housing stipends over a five-year period.

The post Trump signs bill expanding college access for veterans appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Cory Booker is drafting a bill to remove Confederate statues from the U.S. Capitol

Aug 18th 2017, 01:17, by Charyssa Parent

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/06/Guns-Congress_Keen-300×200.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/06/Guns-Congress_Keen-680×453.jpg 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/06/Guns-Congress_Keen-600×400.jpg 600w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/06/Guns-Congress_Keen-800×533.jpg 800w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2016/06/Guns-Congress_Keen-700×467.jpg 700w” sizes=”(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px” />

(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

On Thursday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) vocalized her support for Sen. Cory Booker’s (D-NJ) latest call to remove all Confederate statues from the United States Capitol building.

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-1.34.34-PM-300×125.png 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-1.34.34-PM-600×249.png 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 457px) 100vw, 457px” />

Booker announced on Twitter Wednesday that he is drafting a bill to remove all Confederate statues from the Capitol. The New Jersey Senator continued by saying that this would just be one step in the right direction before indicating that “we have much work to do.”

Pelosi seconded Booker’s plan in a statement following the President’s series of tweets Thursday morning where he called the idea of removing Confederate statues “so foolish.”

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-11.11.30-AM-1-300×171.png 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-11.11.30-AM-1-157×88.png 157w” sizes=”(max-width: 573px) 100vw, 573px” />

“There is no room for celebrating the violent bigotry of the men of the Confederacy in the hallowed halls of the United States Capitol or in places of honor across the country,” the House Minority Leader said in a statement.

She has urged her Republican colleagues, specifically calling out House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) to join in support of the statue’s removal.

“The Confederate statues in the halls of Congress have always been reprehensible. If Republicans are serious about rejecting white supremacy, I call upon Speaker Ryan to join Democrats to remove the Confederate statues from the Capitol immediately,” Pelosi said.

Pelosi challenged Republicans that their support would prove that they are truly against racism and white supremacy, even though GOP lawmakers have vocally condemned the white supremacist and their racially motivated hate groups. Speaker Ryan’s office responded promptly to Pelosi’s comments, saying “These are decisions for those states to make.”

The Capitol’s Statuary Hall, a chamber filled with sculptures of prominent historical Americans, currently houses 10 statues honoring former Confederate soldiers, Confederate politicians, and slavery supporters.

Booker has yet to lay out a timeline for his bill or give any further details. Red Alert Politics has reached out to the senator for specifics with no response yet.

Confederate statues and memorials have become a national focal point after Saturday’s deadly riots in Charlottesville, VA. White supremacy groups protested the removal of Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s statue in the city violently against anti-fascist counter protestors. The riot killed three people and injured over 30 others. In outrage, people have been vandalizing, destroying, and dismantling Confederate statues around the country.

The president’s initial response to the violent demonstrations fell short of both Republicans’ and Democrats’ expectations when he blamed both sides for the violence without denouncing the white supremacists. Trump later issued a second statement disavowing the white supremacists, but slammed the media in the following press conference. Trump asked reporters if the country has to now take down all prominent historical figures who once owned slaves, naming Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.

The post Cory Booker is drafting a bill to remove Confederate statues from the U.S. Capitol appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Tech companies to Supreme Court: Warrantless phone tracking is unconstitutional

Aug 17th 2017, 19:31, by Scott McClallen

14 major U.S tech companies filed an amicus legal brief Augu 14 asking the U.S Supreme Court to heighten cell phone data protections from government officials.

The companies filed a 44-page brief concerning Carpenter v. United States, which disputes whether government agencies can acquire cell phone location information without a warrant.

Google, Facebook, Verizon Wireless, and others argued for stronger privacy protections because of the trust between consumers and companies.

“That users rely on technology companies to process their data for limited purposes does not mean that they expect their intimate data to be monitored by the government without a warrant,” the brief said.

The case stems from a 2011 robbery investigation in which police obtained 127 days worth of cell phone location data (12,898 separate location points) of Timothy Carpenter from wireless carriers without a warrant.

Federal prosecutors used the data to show Carpenter was near the locations at the time. He was then convicted of six robberies and sentenced to 116 years in prison.

Carpenter argued his Fourth Amendment right was violated because police required a warrant to access personal information. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Carpenter because the records were held by third-parties, not himself.

Carpenter v. United States is set for the Supreme Court’s October term.

While supporting neither side, the companies argued the Court should update the application of the Fourth Amendment to “better reflect the realities of today’s digital technologies and accommodate the technologies of the future.”

This case will be ruled in a time of heightened scrutiny of law enforcement and government agency surveillance programs in a world where technology collects more personal data than ever before.

Nathan Freed Wessler, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who is representing Carpenter, said that “the tech firms are sending a very clear message that the law needs to catch up with the technology that is now an integral part of our everyday lives.”

Wessler said that Verizon’s involvement stands out because they possess consumer location information.

The brief said that law enforcement last year obtained around 40,000 warrants requiring Verizon to turn over cell phone location information services.

Carpenter v. United States is “one of the most important Fourth Amendment cases in recent memory,” Craig Silliman, Verizon’s executive vice president for public policy and general counsel, wrote on Monday.

He continued. “Although the specific issue presented to the Court is about location information, the case presents a broader issue about a customer’s reasonable expectation of privacy for other types of sensitive data she shares with any third party.”

“This key issue rests at the intersection between privacy (our desire to be free from government intrusion) and security (our need for law enforcement to investigate crime). Our hope is that when it decides this case, the Court will help us better apply old Fourth Amendment doctrines to an evolving digital era.”

The post Tech companies to Supreme Court: Warrantless phone tracking is unconstitutional appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Professor: Students who don’t denounce Trump are ‘complicit’ with racism and neo-Nazism

Aug 17th 2017, 18:47, by Lauren Cooley

It is a “matter of conscience” for students to denounce President Trump, according to a class-wide memo written by a history professor at Cal State San Marcos.

“In this class, we have tried to reimagine the rise of fascism in Germany and its consequences, primarily through the stories of ordinary people living in the Germany of the 1920s, 30s and 40s,” Professor Patty Seleski wrote in an email dated August 16th and obtained by Red Alert Politics.

“It is time that people with consciences speak out. I, you, we run no risks by denouncing a President who encourages neo-Nazis, white supremacists and people who support the KKK, a president who thinks that championing equality and social justice and opposing racism & anti-Semitism & white supremacy, is equally to blame for what happened in Charlottesville.”

Anyone who fails to say that President Trump is “not fit to be President of the United States” is morally complicit and a tacit support of American neo-Nazis and white supremacists, drawing comparisons to individuals who failed to resist the rise of Adolf Hitler in Nazi Germany, according to Dr. Seleski.

Several students who received the email called it “offensive” and “extremely insulting.”

Angel Torres, a student in Seleski’s class, found it “unethical for the professor to take advantage of her position to push her ideology.”

While Torres supported Rand Paul in the primaries and ended up voting for Gary Johnson, he believes that President Trump deserves a fair shot and that professors like Dr. Seleski are doing the opposite.

“Her claim that Trump endorses neo-Nazis and white supremacists is nothing but a smear. President Donald Trump has condemned racism and disavowed hate groups several times,” Torres told Red Alert Politics. “People making statements that our president is illegitimate or not fit for office undermine our democracy… Republicans are saddened and upset by what occurred in Charlottesville. We do not tolerate any form of political violence, yet leftists continue to turn a blind eye to political violence that is committed within their political spectrum,” Torres continued.

After comparing her students to Sophie Scholl, a “university student of conscience who lost her life because of her commitment to resisting the Nazi regime,” Seleski told them that, “you don’t have to have the bravery of Sophie Scholl and her friends to state unequivocally that President Trump is not fit to be president of the United States, that a man without a moral compass ought not to be our nation’s executive. In fact, you don’t have to be brave at all. If you do not or cannot state this, even in the absence of any threat, then you will embody the meaning of the complicity we talked about in this class.”

Another student in the class, who wished to stay anonymous due to fear of retribution from Seleski, told Red Alert Politics, “It it one thing to have such an outlandish opinion, but to command that we all denounce the President of the United States as being unfit for office is absolutely astonishing. For her to call on us to speak up for our consciences and then tell us what our consciences must say is ridiculous. White supremacist ideology is complete garbage and almost all of us can agree on that, but I found it extremely insulting that she insinuated that by us not condemning President Trump as being unfit for office, we are thereby moral equivalents with those who allowed Hitler to come to power.”

“Professor Seleski is too deep in her own echo chamber to be able to comprehend that people can have legitimate differences of opinion that aren’t driven by hatred, racism, or bigotry. I was utterly shocked to see this concept written as fact and sent to the entire class,” the student continued.

Seleski ended the email with a request to students who disagree with her.

“If you find yourself in any way sympathetic to or supportive of the groups and/or ideas [of the Charlottesville organizers] please don’t enroll in any class of mine ever again. I can’t stop you from doing so, but please know that I really would prefer you to stay away. The only way to root out these evils is to stop tolerating them and the people who embrace them. Our rejection of these evils must be unequivocal,” Seleski concluded.

Alan Leuthe, another student in the class, was most baffled by Seleski’s warning to students of differing opinions.

“It’s just incredible how somebody who is supposed to educate students wants nothing to do with students who she thinks have improper education. If you want to change someone’s mind, you don’t ostracize them further, allowing their ideas to fester, you confront them with facts to try to change their mind,” Leuthe told Red Alert Politics.

This is not the first time Dr. Seleski has purported opinion in the classroom, according to comments on the popular website RateMyProfessors.com

“Do not take her as a professor. You learn things based on her opinion and if you don’t agree with her on your papers, your doomed to a low grade. Many times people had no idea what she wanted answered in her essay questions and she wasn’t always clear on what you could use and what you couldn’t. Very irritable woman, would never recommend her class,” one review states.

Another review reads, “Not open to other ideas, very Nazi like in the way she grades. Has favs in the class, if you are not on her good side you are doomed…”

Neither officials at Cal State San Marcos nor Dr. Seleski returned Red Alert Politics’ request for comment in time for publication.

The post Professor: Students who don’t denounce Trump are ‘complicit’ with racism and neo-Nazism appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

The conservative Republican argument for moving confederate statues

Aug 17th 2017, 18:23, by Ron Meyer

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP_17227767777003-300×200.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP_17227767777003-768×512.jpg 768w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP_17227767777003-1024×683.jpg 1024w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP_17227767777003-680×453.jpg 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP_17227767777003-700×467.jpg 700w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP_17227767777003-600×400.jpg 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 4633px) 100vw, 4633px” />

President Donald Trump speaks in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York, Tuesday, Aug. 15, 2017. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

My Republican Party is still the party of Lincoln, that led the Civil Rights movement, and defends the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. The confederacy opposed the values of all four.

It is these conservative Republican principles I believe deeply in my core that lead me to support moving the statue of a generic confederate soldier in Leesburg, Virginia, where I serve as an elected official on the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors.

American conservatism seeks to conserve the Constitution and the values that continue to make America great. A monument erected by Jim Crow Democrats in 1908 doesn’t need to be honored in our town square and doesn’t reflect our values.  

As a conservative, I stand for the liberty of all Americans — no one can argue that is what the confederacy stood for. Indeed, that’s exactly what they feared and what they fought against. For many Americans, these statues are a reminder that parts of our nation celebrated and continues to honor those who sought to keep them enslaved forever. Remembering the good and the evil in our history is important, but that doesn’t mean we need to honor or celebrate evil in our public squares. History can be properly remembered in history books, in museums, and at sites where the history happened and where it can be put in proper context.  

Instead of destroying the Leesburg statue and the gross history attached to it, our statue should be moved a couple miles away to the Ball’s Bluff Battlefield. There, at a Civil War battlefield, it can serve to educate and as a memorial for those families who seek to remember their ancestors as American veterans.

Among the hysteria surrounding this issue, many Republicans including President Trump think memorials to the Founding Fathers will be moved and targeted next. Trump said, “I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after?” The premise underlying Trump’s argument is that the founders are morally equivalent to confederates. He argues that the people who created the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence are morally the same as those who sought to destroy the values enshrined in all three.

This argument is intellectually lazy and based on false logic. Yes, a small fraction of the American Left want to remove memorials to the founders because many of them owned slaves; few mainstream or progressive Democrats subscribe to this view. The vast majority see the clear difference between living in the evil cultural norms of the times and fighting a war to preserve those evil cultural norms. The unrivaled accomplishments of the founders also clearly outweigh their personal faults; the values and processes in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights led to the most free and prosperous society in human history.

And, they also led to the abolition of slavery.  

Those who have a more advanced view of history and the Constitution know that its crafters put in place a political system that minimized the long-term power of the south and would force abolition. One of the causes of the Civil War was the political and economic pressure the north was putting on the south using their political power given to them in our founding documents. America was not yet ready for abolition in 1789, but the founders’ writings and comments on the process to amend the Constitution show it was constructed to advance civil rights.

The founders, despite their personal flaws, advanced ideas and created a nation that delivered individual liberty and economic prosperity to arguably billions of people worldwide.

If you ignore the personal flaws of confederates, what values were they fighting for? The Articles of Secession from the southern states all prominently included slavery. The “Constitution of the Confederate States of America” also expressly protected it as a “right”: “Article 1, Section 9 (4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.”

Are those values that anyone should want to honor? As anyone can see, there is no equivalence between those who are arguably the biggest promoters of liberty of all time and those who fought to jettison our founding values in favor of keeping slavery.  

Now, will some radicals like Al Sharpton and those in academia still argue against our founders? Yes, but fear of a few wrong-headed people is no reason to further perpetuate these tributes to evil. Localities, not national figures, should decide and lead this debate.

After all, last time I checked, conservatives still support the constitutional principle of federalism, which empowers local governments to make decisions not given to the federal government in the Constitution. This principle would dictate that each community should decide the fate of these statues, not the federal or state governments.

And when localities take up this debate, maybe they should heed Robert E. Lee’s advice on confederate monuments, when he said after the war, “I think it wiser, moreover, not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered.”

The post The conservative Republican argument for moving confederate statues appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

They aren’t killing everything: Millennials are helping make golf great again

Aug 17th 2017, 16:25, by Lauren Cooley

Millennials have been blamed for the decline of everything from fast-food to beer, but now they’re driving up interest in one sport: golf.

The popularity of golf amongst millennials is in part due to the trendy driving range TopGolf and the abundance of successful young golfers like Jordan Spieth, Rickie Fowler, and Dustin Johnson.

According the National Golf Foundation’s annual study, 36 percent of golfers are between the ages of 18 to 39. The number of individuals taking up golf for the first time rose 14 percent from 2015 to 2016, and soon this young age block will hold the largest market share in all of golf, experts say. Overall, the number of people who are “very interested” in taking up golf has doubled in the past five years.

Helping to shore up popularity is NBA all-star and MVP Steph Curry. A newcomer to the professional side of golf, Curry has found sponsorship for his new endeavor with Under Armour, whose golf category has grown 25 percent in just three years.

It’s speculated that Curry and other youthful faces on the PGA tour have helped golf reach record numbers of newcomers in 2016, with more than 2.5 million taking up the sport for the first time.

Where millennials differ from older golfers is their willingness to tough out a full 18 holes. Almost 70 percent of all golf rounds played in 2016 were by those over the age of 50.

TopGolf, a driving range built to entertain,  helps fill this void. It boasts 33 locations and serves food and alcohol while players compete and track their drives. The set up is similar to that of a bowling alley, eliminating the travel between holes.

Off-course participation is up more than 11 percent as four million millennials have only experienced golf outside of traditional play, at driving ranges or entertainment facilities like TopGolf.

While millennials are experiencing the game differently, they’re playing at record numbers. For once, older generations can smile upon millennials, knowing that their interest in the sport coupled with innovation is keeping the pastime alive.

The post They aren’t killing everything: Millennials are helping make golf great again appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Trump’s FDA nixes Obama’s regulations demonizing e-cigarettes

Aug 17th 2017, 16:18, by Lauren Cooley

Last month, Food and Drug Association Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb announced that the agency was adopting a new approach to regulating e-cigarettes in the United States. The commissioner deserves much praise for his willingness to address this controversial topic, because his approach will ensure that individuals who use nicotine products will have access to forms of the drug that are significantly less toxic to the body.

In his plan, Dr. Gottlieb acknowledged the toxic effects that smoking tobacco cigarettes has on the body, but rightfully noted that most individuals who smoke tobacco do so because of the effects of nicotine on the body.

“I know all too well that it’s cigarettes that are the primary cause of tobacco-related disease and death,” said Gottlieb. “What’s now clear is that FDA is at a unique moment in history, with profound new tools to address this devastating impact.”

E-cigarettes are a new form of smoking technology that enable users to inhale vaporized nicotine from an electronic cigarette, providing the benefits of nicotine without the toxic properties of tobacco cigarettes. While the long-term effects of nicotine usage can vary, most experts agree that the products drastically reduce the toxic effects obtained from smoking tobacco on a regular basis.

Unfortunately for Americans, President Obama’s FDA had different plans for the e-cigarette technology. In 2009, Obama signed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which gave the FDA complete control over regulation of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products. Despite the fact that e-cigarettes were not mentioned in the bill because they were a relatively new technology, the FDA asserted control over the industry in late 2016 and immediately began issuing red tape.

Under Obama’s FDA, the process of getting an electronic tobacco product approved became so tedious that even the FDA’s own experts predicted that 99 percent of electronic nicotine products would become illegal in the United States by 2018. Additionally, the administration also implemented a time limit for companies to submit new products for approval, which completely stifled innovation in the electronic nicotine industry.

Last month, Gottlieb began reversing these regulations by extending the submission deadline for new electronic tobacco products by four years. Additionally, Gottlieb broke with previous FDA Commissioners by indicating that nicotine would be a priority in finding less-unhealthy alternatives for smokers who rely on the drug.

“Nicotine lives at the core of both the problem and, ultimately, the solution to the question of addiction, and the harm caused by combustible forms of tobacco,” explained Gottlieb.

While there is still much work to be done in the area of finding less-toxic alternatives for the current 40 million Americans who smoke tobacco and contribute to rising health-care costs, Commissioner Gottlieb’s willingness to address these problems without demonizing less-unhealthy forms of nicotine usage will greatly improve the health and lives of the millions of Americans who are trying to quit smoking tobacco cigarettes.

The post Trump’s FDA nixes Obama’s regulations demonizing e-cigarettes appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Obamacare failure: The uninsured are turning to over-the-counter animal drugs

Aug 17th 2017, 16:08, by Lauren Cooley

As Obamacare costs continue to spiral out of control, some cash-strapped Americans are skipping the doctor’s office and heading to the pet store for relief (and no, we’re not talking about therapy dogs). Unbeknownst to them, Petco, PetSmart and other veterinary supply stores are now serving an entirely new clientele — one without fur or fins.

Insurance premiums rose by an average of 22 percent last year, and according to a Gallup-Healthways poll, 11.3 percent of U.S. adults didn’t have health insurance during the first quarter of the year. As such, it’s no surprise that desperate Americans are seeking alternatives to conventional medical care.

While drugs like antibiotics aren’t incredibly expensive, a simple doctor’s visit can be costly for those without insurance. On the other hand, many pet drugs are available over-the-counter, and prices are fairly reasonable.

Although uninsured people have been taking pet meds for years, Obamacare has made it more mainstream, so to speak. Mashable found several online forums offering advice to desperate, uninsured self-healers.

Posts reveal that people without insurance have been using everything from horse liniment to over-the-counter pet antibiotics to treat themselves. Some stores have caught onto this trend and made the drugs difficult for humans to consume, but online stores have only increased access to them. Comical online reviews about fish antibiotics helping “fish” with their “wisdom teeth coming in” or “sinus infections” only shed light on this growing healthcare crisis.

Carrera Howie, who couldn’t afford a visit to the doctor even with her insurance, resorted to fish antibiotics from Walmart to treat her urinary tract infection.

“Urgent care and doctors’ copays are so expensive and it sometimes feels like I have to make a choice between having a provider and having groceries,” she explained.

Daniel Freedberg, an assistant professor of medicine at Columbia University, warns that self-medicating with pet meds can be risky due to the differences in size and weight between humans and fish. He argues that even as a doctor, he would have no idea how to determine the correct dosage, and that overuse could be dangerous to the body.

Maria Brömme, a veterinarian at Pacific Animal Clinic in Santa Monica, California, adds that the difference in species’ metabolisms could lead to accidental overdoses when taking animal antibiotics, and calls fish antibiotic use “silly and dangerous.”

Undeterred, Americans will continue to get their paws on pet meds as long as our healthcare system remains on life support. 

The post Obamacare failure: The uninsured are turning to over-the-counter animal drugs appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Confederate soldier statue vandalized overnight in D.C. suburbs

Aug 17th 2017, 15:58, by Charyssa Parent

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-11.57.04-AM-300×180.png 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-11.57.04-AM-288×173.png 288w” sizes=”(max-width: 481px) 100vw, 481px” />

(via Twitter/screenshot)

Law enforcement is investigating vandalism of a Confederate statue just an hour outside of Washington, DC.

Early on Thursday morning, the 20-foot statue of a Confederate soldier in uniform bearing a rifle was spray painted with ‘obscene language,’ according to police. The damage was reported Thursday morning, and the statue has since been restored sustaining no permanent damages.

Since 1908, the statue has stood in Loudon County, Virginia just outside of the county’s court house, which was once used as a place to buy and sell slaves. This assault is part of a series of vandalism on Confederate statues across the country following the deadly protest in Charlottesville, Virginia over the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue.

President Trump denounced the destruction of the nation’s monuments Thursday morning with a series of tweets. The president said that by removing these monuments, the history and culture of the United States are being ripped apart.

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-11.11.30-AM-300×171.png 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-11.11.30-AM-157×88.png 157w” sizes=”(max-width: 500px) 100vw, 500px” />

The Confederate soldier statue remains in place, but a number of county officials have called for its removal. On Wednesday, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe proposed, instead of removing the Confederate statues, relocating them to local museums. The governor said for as long as they continue to stand in public spaces they will be a “barrier to progress, inclusion, and equality in Virginia.”

The post Confederate soldier statue vandalized overnight in D.C. suburbs appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

60% of millennials don’t want to tear down Confederate statues: Poll

Aug 17th 2017, 15:52, by Siraj Hashmi

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2015/06/Confederate-Symbols-D_Dobs-300×217.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2015/06/Confederate-Symbols-D_Dobs-680×491.jpg 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2015/06/Confederate-Symbols-D_Dobs-554×400.jpg 554w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2015/06/Confederate-Symbols-D_Dobs-800×578.jpg 800w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2015/06/Confederate-Symbols-D_Dobs-692×500.jpg 692w” sizes=”(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px” />

(Dborah Cannon/Austin American-Statesman via AP)

The debate over whether Confederate statues should remain where they are throughout the United States have taken a backseat to whether or not President Donald Trump’s response the violence in Charlottesville was strong enough. However, the conversation is shifting.

According to a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll, 60 percent of millennials (18-29 years old) believe that Trump’s response was not strong enough to the Charlottesville violence.

Despite their views of President Trump, a supermajority (60 percent) of millennials believe that statues honoring leaders of the Confederacy should remain as a historical symbol. Almost a third (30 percent) believe that they should be removed because they are offensive to some people. 11 percent were unsure.

What the poll left out was whether those surveyed believe the statues that pay tribute to leaders of the Confederacy should be moved versus whether they should be destroyed. For those who want to preserve history while also not honoring Confederate leaders, moving the statues to a different location (i.e. cemeteries, museums, etc.) is a viable option that some haven’t considered.

Earlier this week, the city of Baltimore, Maryland quietly removed the statues of four Confederate leaders overnight to avoid the potential for conflict. Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh has refused to disclose the location of the statues in order to avoid further violence.

Meanwhile, in Durham, North Carolina, four people were arrested for taking part in tearing down a Confederate statue in front of the old Durham County Courthouse.

The post 60% of millennials don’t want to tear down Confederate statues: Poll appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

No, Tucker, Google should not be regulated by the government

Aug 17th 2017, 14:08, by Siraj Hashmi

Following the firing of James Damore by Google for sending a 10-page company-wide memo critical of the company’s politics and diversity policies, some are thinking about ways of fighting back against the tech giant, even if that means the federal government step in.

This week, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, before interviewing Damore on his primetime show, made the case for why the federal government should step in and regulate Google as a utility because of their ability to silence speech and curate content to their liking.

“Considering that the overwhelming majority of social sciences, media and Google lean left, we should critically examine these prejudices,” Carlson said, explaining that the search engine changed its algorithms so that “what it calls misleading or offensive [right of center] news doesn’t even show up in searches.”

He continued. “It’s now obvious that Google cannot be trusted to do any of this. Why should a company that shuts down free speech for political reasons have the power to dictate what the world knows and thinks? Well, of course, it shouldn’t have that power. Google’s long time motto was, ‘don’t be evil.’ Today it uses, ‘do the right thing.’ We should have seen this coming. Those are super villain slogans if there was ever such a thing. None of this can continue.”

Carlson then suggested that because Google was hit with a $3 million fine in Europe for violating anti-trust laws that the Trump administration and Congress should go further than that.

“Since it has the power to censor the internet, Google should be regulated like the public utility it is to make sure it doesn’t further distort the free flow of information. To the rest of us, that needs to happen immediately. Too bad it’s come to this. A lot of us trusted Google not to be evil. Silly us.”

While Carlson’s sentiments and intentions are pure in this regard, the government has no place in policing a private or even a publicly traded company like Google in how they run their business. It’s up to the free market to decide if what Google is doing is morally right. Since Google is not the only search engine used on the internet, it’s hard to make a case that they’re violating antitrust laws, unless they’re a true monopoly.

However, you can make the case that the government should not pick winners and losers. And, lately, they’ve been picking Google as a winner. How should they respond to the multibillion dollar tech company? They can either pull government subsidies or even cancel government contracts. In 2014, it was reported that Google received over $630 million in government subsidies for property taxes and training reimbursements. In 2016, Google received over $254 million from North Carolina in subsidies in exchange for creating just 210 jobs. That’s $1.2 million per job.

Google was threatened earlier this year with the cancellation of all of its government contracts, but not for silencing right of center speech or promoting liberal views over them. They refused to provide the U.S. Labor Department with employee compensation records and other documents as part of an audit to ensure the company wasn’t discriminating against their employees on the basis of gender and race.

While Google may not be discriminating against their employees based on their gender or race, there’s definitely thought discrimination. There’s no denying that. But if the shoe were on the other foot and Democrats were calling for Google to be regulated as a public utility for silencing left of center views and content, conservatives would be front and center condemning their pleas. This should be no different.

The post No, Tucker, Google should not be regulated by the government appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Loyal Trump aide (and millennial) Hope Hicks: Youngest White House Communications Director ever

Aug 17th 2017, 02:48, by Charyssa Parent

At just 28 years old, Hope Hicks has accomplished more than most career politicos, and she’s only been involved in politics for two years. On Wednesday, Hicks received a promotion from the President from Senior Communications Advisor to interim Communications Director — making her the youngest White House Communications Director in the nation’s history.

And while the White House is keeping her title temporary, the argument has been made that she would be a great long-term fit for the position.

With just a little more than two years under her belt, Hicks and Trump entered the White House with the same amount of political experience. As President Trumps longest serving aide, Hicks has remained loyal to the president and his agenda. Trump is known for being off the cuff and hiring cabinet members that are often outspoken, but Hick’s style is much different. Hicks has intentionally dodged the spotlight. Soft-spoken and patient with the president, she has purposefully remained behind the scenes and away from the media. Though often not seen, the President has done nothing but sing her praises for her hard work and commitment to the White House.

In a White House with rapid turnover, Hicks has remained a constant force. This new role has people skeptical, since the president who coined the term, ‘you’re fired,’ has dismissed multiple Comms Directors prior to Hicks promotion. Most recently, he fired Anthony Scaramucci after just 10 days for being ‘divisive.’ But others say that her calm demeanor and relationship with Trump has already proven to work well and that she may be the perfect fit.

Before joining the political sphere, Hicks was working at a New York public relations firm; there she was offered to work on Ivanka Trump’s fashion line. Despite the criticism millennials receive for being ‘unmotivated’ compared to other generations, Ivanka Trump saw something admirable in the young consultant. Valuing her work ethic, Ivanka referred Hicks to her father when he decided to run for president.

Then-candidate Trump offered Hicks, who was 26 at the time, to join his campaign as a press secretary. Hicks, who had no prior campaign experience, accepted the billionaire’s offer, since joining she has gained the respect from her senior peers. Known as a hustler for the president, she has been referred to as one of Trump’s closest allies.

Despite her age, she now tacks on a tremendous responsibility for the White House.

The post Loyal Trump aide (and millennial) Hope Hicks: Youngest White House Communications Director ever appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Farmer fined $1 million for plowing his own field

Aug 16th 2017, 21:15, by Scott McClallen

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Wheat-300×168.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Wheat-768×431.jpg 768w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Wheat-157×88.jpg 157w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Wheat-680×382.jpg 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Wheat-700×393.jpg 700w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Wheat-600×337.jpg 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 780px) 100vw, 780px” />

Photo credit: Daniel Bockwoldt/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images.

A California farmer agreed Tuesday to pay $1.1 million for plowing federally protected wetlands on his wheat field, according to the Department of Justice. This ends a five-year legal battle over the reach of the Clean Water Act.

His crime for bringing the fine? Plowing his own field without the permission of the U.S Army Corps of Engineers.

The settlement required Duarte to pay $330,000 in civil penalties, to purchase $770,000 of “mitigation credits,” and to restore his 22 acres disturbed to original condition. Duarte would then “admit no liability.”

It all started when Duarte, a fourth-generation farmer, bought 450 acres in Tehama County to grow wheat in 2012 that he knew included vernal pools. These shallow depressions collect rainwater classified as “Waters of the United States” under the Obama administration’s extension of the Clean Water Act. But the act exempts “Established (ongoing) farming… activities,” including plowing and seeding. So, Duarte hired a contractor to plow the land and plant wheat.

In 2013, the Army Corps of Engineers sent Duarte a cease-and-desist order alleging he had violated the Clean Water Act by “deep ripping” federally protected wetlands. The Corps claimed the exemption did not apply to him because the land had not been farmed for more than 20 years. Hence, it was not defined as a “normal farming” practice, and required a government permit. He was not allowed to harvest his $50,000 wheat crop.

Duarte sued the Corps for due process right violations because the letter was sent without conducting a trial. However, a federal judge ruled against him in 2016. The government countersued because Duarte did not obtain a permit to discharge dredged or fill material into wetlands. The prosecution sought up to $45 million in fines.

Duarte settled in court on Aug. 15.

“This has been a difficult decision for me, my family, and the entire company, and we have come to it reluctantly,”  Duarte said in a statement.

“But given the risks posed by further trial on the government’s request for up to $45 million in penalties, and the catastrophic impact that any significant fraction of that would have on our business, our hundreds of employees, our customers and suppliers, and all the members of my family, this was the best action I could take to protect those for whom I am responsible.”

Tony Francois, senior attorney for the Pacific Legal Institute who represented the farmer pro bono, said that Duarte would have preferred to appeal the ruling “which holds that plowing a field requires federal permission — despite the clear text of the Clean Water Act and regulations to the contrary.”

“John and his counsel remain concerned that legal liability for farming without federal permission undermines the clear protections that the Clean Water Act affords to farming and poses a significant ongoing threat to farmers across the nation,” Francois said.

President Trump signed an executive order Feb. 28 targeting the Clean Water Act, calling it a “massive power grab.”

“The Clean Water Act says that the EPA can regulate ‘navigable waters,’ meaning waters that truly affect interstate commerce,” Trump said at the signing. “But a few years ago, the EPA decided that ‘navigable waters’ can mean nearly every puddle or every ditch on a farmer’s land, or anyplace else that they decide, right?”

“You have to worry about getting hit with a huge fine if you fill in as much as a puddle—just a puddle—on your lot,” he added. “I’ve seen it. In fact, when it was first shown to me, I said, ‘No, you’re kidding, aren’t you?’ But they weren’t kidding.”

EPA administrator Scott Pruitt began to formally rescind the rule in July– but not soon enough for Duarte.

The post Farmer fined $1 million for plowing his own field appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Corporate activism: Millennials want companies to engage in politics

Aug 16th 2017, 19:43, by Lauren Cooley

When millennials spend four years living on college campuses that cater to every whim, they graduate and find themselves wondering, “Why doesn’t our office have beanbag chairs, cafeterias, and gyms?”

Some companies, like Power Design, an electrical contracting company in Florida, have answered the call to be a more “woke” office. Gone are the days of musty cube walls and burnt coffee. They’ve installed a full-fledged fitness center, stocked cafeteria, and a car wash amongst other amenities. Power Design even hosts fun promotions and events for its employees, like a BBQ contest and an end of the year event with nearly $100,000 worth of prizes and giveaways.

All this seems to have paid off for the nearly 30-year-old organization, where millennials make up 34 percent of its workforce. In fact, they were ranked 45th on Fortune’s “100 Best Workplaces for Millennials” list.

Of course, they’re not the only company to turn the office into a campus. Remember the movie The Internship? While a comedy, Google’s real campus is what many would call millennial-focused. 

Besides all the cute perks, like lattes and bike paths, there’s something else millennials really want from their employers: activism.

The standard for many years was that politics and religion weren’t discussed at the dinner table or around the office. Sure, companies have made donations for years, but the discussion never trickled down to floor employees. Today, the dialogue has reached a boiling point where one side finds the other intolerable.

According to a new survey from Weber and Shandwick and KRC Research, the numbers are favoring a direct global workforce where everyone gets involved in the political discussion. An astounding 56 percent of millennials feel that their CEOs have an obligation to enter into social issues and discussions. A shocking 47 percent say that silent CEOs risk criticism, and another 21 percent say that they expect sales from a non-political company to decline.

These statistics are consistent with the art form of the vocal minority: outrage, outrage, outrage. CNBC noted that Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz attempted to fuse racial identity politics with grande lattes by mandating baristas write slogans like “Race Together” on cups. Some older critics, like the late Gwen Ifill of PBS, tweeted “Honest to God, if you start to engage me in a race conversation before I’ve had my morning coffee, it will not end well.” However, as the market shows, Starbucks has only grown stronger since the New York Times profiled the company’s politics in 2015. Shares traded up another 20 points that year.

Liberal employees and customers have given companies an extra drive to enter politics, but there is even greater potential in which employees and customers on the other side of the aisle are alienated. One recent example is the high-profile firing of Google engineer James Damore after his internal memo regarding the equal treatment of employees by gender went viral.

While there’s no exact number of students in the hard sciences who vote Republican, this ostracizing act will undoubtedly dissuade a conservative prospect from wanting to even enter into the tech field. As more Americans become unapologetically open and forceful about their identities and politics, whether it be Antifa rioting on college campuses, executives shutting out right leaning thoughts in the workplace, or blue check mark SJWs demanding websites be kicked off their domains for speech they disagree with, conservatives are finding out that a world where leftists hold a megaphone can be quite uncomfortable to live in.

Millennials thrive on diversity, so they say. Let’s encourage workplaces to truly be diverse, incorporating policies that allow free-flow of thought, or go the other route completely and prohibit political thoughts within the 9-to-5 walls. Anything in between gives way to divisiveness and scenarios where execs pick the winners and losers of employee political debates.

The post Corporate activism: Millennials want companies to engage in politics appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Stop comparing Republicans to Nazis: It only helps the alt-right

Aug 16th 2017, 17:47, by Lauren Cooley

The events that unfolded in Charlottesville are unquestionably acts of terror committed by white supremacists and neo-Nazis. The beliefs of the alt-right are truly deplorable and antithetical to traditional conservative beliefs of limited government and maximum freedoms.

Any true conservative will be quick to identify the difference between principled conservatism and the alt-right’s unabashed tribalism. However, the mainstream media (MSM) has relentlessly pushed the narrative that any principled conservative is “Alt-right.”

Even Ben Shapiro, one of the harshest critics of the “alt-right” and the alt-right’s number one target on social media according to the Anti-Defamation League, has been lumped in with the “alt-right” by the mainstream media.

This has two troublesome results.

First, some conservatives do not understand that the “alt-right” is more than just an extreme reaction in response to the expansion of political correctness. When the beliefs of the alt-right are continually misconstrued by a biased media, conservatives incidentally end up defending or associating with members of the alt-right.

The second is much more problematic. Hyper-liberal college campuses and cities hardly ever hear the political viewpoints of the right, except for those espoused by the mainstream media. When the media lumps middle-of-the-road political thinkers into the camps of the extreme, constituencies become convinced that evil Nazis have a much larger presence than they actually do.

As the media projects the narrative of a “growing threat,” those who disavow Nazism must polarize their local discourse to combat the uprising. This is happening in real time, at places most sheltered from conservative thought – the colleges and universities across the country.

Students have turned to the alt-right’s social media tactics by creating vile memes and propagating vehement hatred towards conservatives on college campuses.

The memes on a Berkeley Facebook page called ‘UC Berkeley Memes for Edgy Teens’ characterized principled conservative students as the vile white supremacists in Charlottesville.

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/berkely-meme-1-253×300.png 253w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/berkely-meme-1-338×400.png 338w” sizes=”(max-width: 408px) 100vw, 408px” />

via Facebook

 

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/berkeley-meme-2-300×250.png 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/berkeley-meme-2-75×63.png 75w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/berkeley-meme-2-480×400.png 480w” sizes=”(max-width: 587px) 100vw, 587px” />

via Facebook

While some might say these memes are overblown and that the students creating them simply don’t know any better, that is precisely the problem.

The First Amendment grants the right to post this and similar content. However, given the recent history of intense political violence and Antifa targeting conservatives on campus, it doesn’t make it any less troubling.

Students, administrators, and municipal governments of these college towns need to understand the nature of political violence and how these radical groups on the right and the left will twist reality in order to justify their horrendous beliefs.

This type of polarization on chat rooms and college Facebook pages across the country emboldens the radical left to attack individuals painted as alt-right when that couldn’t be further from their identity. This misinformation campaign cultivates a polarized environment and increases the likelihood of politically motivated violence.

The process is cyclical. Acts of political violence are considered reactionary by experts, and an emboldened Antifa only invigorates and grows the alt-right.

The result is more conflict, less discourse, and victimization of moderates.

College communities should respond to these thugs that destroy university property and threaten peers by calling for the return of law and order. This will protect America’s great institutions of higher education and encourage the intellectual discourse we use to have before micro-aggression culture took hold.

The post Stop comparing Republicans to Nazis: It only helps the alt-right appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Arkansas professor in hiding after Twitter misidentifies him as a white nationalist

Aug 16th 2017, 17:29, by Lauren Cooley

Twitter users have begun a campaign to publicly identify and shame individuals who participated in the white supremacist rally that turned violent in Charlottesville over the past weekend.

While a number of photos from the event were blurry and hard to see, a bearded man with a University of Arkansas Engineering shirt stood out amongst the rest of the marchers – likely to due to his distinct shirt referencing the school.

Despite only having a poor quality photograph as their evidence, thousands of Twitter users spent Friday night scouring the University of Arkansas’ faculty pages in the hopes of identifying the individual. By Saturday morning, Twitter detectives believed they had found their man: a bearded white male named Kyle Quinn, who is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering at the University of Arkansas.

The real Kyle Quinn had spent most of Friday working in his research lab, where he specializes in wound care. Following work, he had spent a pleasant Friday evening with his wife and a friend, where they toured a local art museum and had dinner together.

When Quinn woke up on Saturday morning, he had received thousands of threatening messages through Twitter and Instagram accusing him of racism. They demanded that he be fired by the University. Twitter sleuths had even posted his home address for tens of millions of Twitter users to see. Due to the intensity of the threats, Quinn and his wife were forced to leave their home and hide with a colleague for the remainder of the weekend.

The University of Arkansas quickly issued a statement that none of their faculty had been present at the march, but the damage was already done for Quinn, an Ivy League graduate who had devoted his life to helping others through medical research.

“You have celebrities and hundreds of people doing no research online, not checking facts,” Quinn told the New York Times. “I’ve dedicated my life to helping all people, trying to improve health care and train the next generation of scientists, and this is potentially throwing a wrench in that.”

The post Arkansas professor in hiding after Twitter misidentifies him as a white nationalist appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Blame identity politics for the Charlottesville riots

Aug 16th 2017, 16:53, by Lauren Cooley

We can all agree that the events in Charlottesville, Virginia were unacceptable from every possible perspective. White supremacists and racists must always be condemned for their actions. So, too, should alt-left extremists who participate in violence. However, the events in Charlottesville bring to light a much darker problem we face in the U.S  that nearly every single media outlet got wrong.

There isn’t a “sudden rise in racism.” The real problem our nation faces is simple: the rise of identity politics.

Many people wish to blame President Trump for the rise of the alt-right, but the reality is that this has been coming for a long time and the American Left holds most of the blame.

For generations, the left has taught racial and ethnic minorities that they must live, act, and vote a certain way on the basis of their race and ethnicity. If an individual refused to behave this way, they were attacked, isolated, and had their racial identity called into question with terms like Uncle Tom, Oreo, or Uncle Juan.

It starts off simple enough. You’ve probably heard of these ideas:

“We should support affirmative action because we don’t have enough (x) in (y) institution.”

“We should offer business loans to (x) group because there aren’t enough (x) owned businesses.”

“We should vote for (y) policies because it’s good for our (x) people.”

“We need to create the (x) chamber of commerce” or “We should make a (y) student union.”

The problem with these ideas is that it’s a zero sum game.

The moment you pass a policy to provide an institutional advantage or preference for one group, you immediately isolate others. For every policy that we pass designed to benefit one group, such as providing black preference loans, we isolate and remove an opportunity for those not of that group to benefit from such a policy. This is a dangerous game to play, and the left plays it well.

Liberals push this dream of racial or ethnic diversity for no other outcome than the sake of diversity alone. In pushing diversity, they destroy the individual. In every corner of modern life, we are labeled as African American, Asian American, Hispanic American, or (X) American. And with that, we are expected to act and vote on the basis of such labels.

Have we somehow forgotten about the largest racial group in the country, white Americans? Have we somehow lost an understanding of the past 200 years when one group passed laws that favored their race alone?

White Americans seem to be the only group in the country today that don’t vote on the basis of racial identity. They will even go as far as to vote for policies that provide clear advantages to non-whites and even disadvantages to whites.

How long do we think this benevolent attitude in the form of white guilt will last before white Americans begin to realize that such policies make it harder for them to get loans, get into school, or get jobs?

This realization is now happening and whites aren’t engaging in anything different from what other racial groups in the U.S. are already doing.

The real danger to this nation isn’t a rise in white nationalism, the KKK, or Neo-Nazis — they’ve always been around. The real danger, found in the alt-right and alt-left, is collectivist groupthink in the form of racial identity politics.

The rise of the alt-right is simple: disenfranchised white Americans, who for the first time in a long time, want to advocate for policies that help promote their own identity.

Can we blame them for feeling this way when every day they are constantly blamed as the source of problems by minorities? Charlottesville is just the beginning, and things will get worse as more people fall victim to the cancer of identity politics.

If we as a nation want to get beyond the conversation of race and move past racism as a whole, we need to get to the heart of the issue and call it for what it is. We need to rid ourselves of identity politics.

You are not defined by your race or your ethnicity. You do not need to vote, act, or live a certain way of life simply because of the color of your skin or the heritage of your ancestors. We are each unique individuals defined by our life experiences that shape who we are. If we want our nation to heal, then it’s time we return to good ol’ fashioned American individualism. We must remember that we are Americans first, united by common ideas, not divided by different races.

The post Blame identity politics for the Charlottesville riots appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

University of Florida president says “No” to Richard Spencer

Aug 16th 2017, 15:25, by Lauren Cooley

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/UF-field-300×200.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/UF-field-768×512.jpg 768w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/UF-field-680×453.jpg 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/UF-field-700×467.jpg 700w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/UF-field-600×400.jpg 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 960px) 100vw, 960px” />

(UF Facebook page)

After declaring a commitment to free speech just four days ago, University of Florida (UF) President Kent Fuchs announced that infamous white supremacist Richard Spencer will not be coming to the Swamp after all.

The decision to deny the National Policy Institute’s request for space cited security concerns in the wake of the Charlottesville riots.

While President Fuchs stated that Spencer’s white supremacist views are antithetical to those of UF, he made it clear that the event was being turned down for other reasons.

“[T]he First Amendment does not require a public institution to risk imminent violence to students and others,” Fuchs’ statement read in part.

“The likelihood of violence and potential injury – not the words or ideas – has caused us to take this action,” he concluded.

A quick scan online or on social media shows several calls for violence which factored into the university’s decision to deny the proposed September 12th event. One such online post, which Fuchs mentioned in his statement, was a proclamation that “The Next Battlefield is in Florida.”

While UF has a duty to keep its students safe on campus, the university is caving to what many call a heckler’s veto. A heckler’s veto is the suppression of speech by the government, because of the possibility of a violent reaction by hecklers.

“The First Amendment means allowing people to speak freely even when we disagree. This Spencer fellow and I do not agree on much at all but the First Amendment is a sacred Constitutional right. Governor Scott handled the situation correctly, calling the National Guard ahead of time, and the University of Florida should allow him to speak,” Florida State Rep. Jay Fant (R), a graduate of UF and candidate for Florida Attorney General, told Red Alert Politics.

This is the second denial that the National Policy Institute has received this week. A “White Lives Matter” rally was scheduled for September 11 at Texas A&M University, but was ultimately canceled, also due to safety concerns.

Spencer’s National Policy Institute plans to sue both universities, per online reporting.

UPDATE: Just spoke with the exec director of Richard Spencer's National Policy Institute. Like at Auburn, he says, they plan to sue @UF.

— Claire McNeill (@clairemcneill) August 16, 2017

The post University of Florida president says “No” to Richard Spencer appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Bernie blames Trump for Charlottesville, yet no one blamed Bernie for GOP baseball shooting

Aug 16th 2017, 15:10, by Siraj Hashmi

Liberals and progressives have been quick to condemn the violence in Charlottesville on Republicans, conservatives, the alt-right, the KKK, neo-Nazis, and white supremacists. However, the richest of condemnations came from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) when he personally blamed President Donald Trump.

According to the Burlington Free Press, Sanders was asked about who shared responsibility for the violence that left one woman dead and dozens others injured when a car driven by a white nationalist, James Alex Fields, Jr., plowed into a crowd of counter-protesters on Saturday.

“How much, if any responsibility do you think that the Trump administration has for conjuring that behavior?” one reporter asked.

Sanders responded, “Look, I think it is — when you have a president who doesn’t have the guts to say what the vast majority of the people understand to be true, that white supremacy and neo-Nazism have got to be condemned, he can’t even do that! The message he is sending out to racists and neo-Nazis all over the country is, ‘It’s OK.’ In fact, you heard some language to that. ‘The president hasn’t condemned us. Why don’t we do more rallies? Why don’t we spread the word of white supremacy and racism and neo-Nazism?’ So do I think the president bears some responsibility for that? Absolutely, yes.”

Back in June, James T. Hodgkinson, a Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer and supporter, opened fire on a Republican congressional baseball practice that wounded House Majority Whip Steve Scalise and three others. While Sanders was quick to condemn Hodgkinson’s actions, politicians and pundits from both sides of the aisle made sure that he wasn’t blamed for the attack.

It’s important to note here that all of this flack that Trump is receiving could have been avoided if he denounced the white supremacists, KKK, and neo-Nazis the first time around. However, Sanders is reaffirming liberal talking points that conflate white supremacy with Trump and by extension the Republican party, despite the fact that both Trump and virtually every Republican have condemned those groups.

Watch the full clip below:

The post Bernie blames Trump for Charlottesville, yet no one blamed Bernie for GOP baseball shooting appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

NCAA’s new sexual violence policy: All athletic personnel will be trained in prevention

Aug 16th 2017, 01:45, by Lauren Cooley

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has been making incremental reforms to their sexual violence policies for the last decade, but they believe they might have just made their greatest leap yet: a sexual violence prevention education requirement.

The NCAA Board of Governors has approved a policy that requires campus executives to “attest annually that coaches, athletics administrators and student-athletes were educated in sexual violence prevention.” In addition, the NCAA has decreed that the athletics department should be “knowledgeable about, integrated in, and compliant with” the new protocol and that policies regarding sexual violence “prevention and adjudication” are openly accessible to student athletes.

In an official press release on the NCAA website, the organization also claims that they will publish a public report on the colleges that have integrated the new policies into their curriculum. This assertion seems to purport a welcome transparency between colleges and the NCAA regarding incorporation of sexual assault prevention classes. At the same time, it leaves the door open for public ridicule of the colleges that don’t follow through.

The NCAA, in charge of monitoring over a thousand individual institutions, has been working overtime on sexual violence policies as of late. The last few years have brought a deluge of sexual misconduct cases for the NCAA to handle.

In 2016, Baylor University’s football team was notoriously embroiled in a major scandal that resulted in multiple oustings and resignations from their head coach, athletic director, and university president as well as convictions for two of the team’s players. These events along with sharp public backlash prompted the NCAA to develop various sexual violence prevention organizations, most prominent of which was the Commission to Combat Campus Sexual Violence.

According to the NCAA’s official press release, the same commission advocated this newest reform. Brenda Tracy, who initially proposed the committee on Change.org and is now a member of the committee, publicly thanked the Board of Governors on Twitter and asserted that “this is how we begin the process of shifting culture.”

Thank you to the @NCAA Board of Governors for passing this very important policy. This is how we begin the process of shifting culture. https://t.co/QHnxbE1vc3

— Brenda Tracy (@brendatracy24) August 10, 2017

Despite the overall positive purpose and response, the new policy is not free from criticism. Some suggest the new policy will not have any effect at all. In fact, the very press release about the new policy references previous reforms from throughout the years.

Looking back at one such referenced resolution in 2014, the NCAA previously decreed that athletic departments should “educate all student-athletes, coaches and staff about sexual violence prevention, intervention and response.” In the same 2014 policy, the NCAA also encouraged the athletic departments to be compliant and maintain a “hostile-free environment,” a dictum eerily similar to the supplementary ideals appended to the recent policy.

The 2016 incident at Baylor seems to contradict the core ideals of the 2014 NCAA resolution, raising doubtfulness amongst critics.

It is clear that something needs to be done to combat sexual assault and violence and the NCAA is certainly making a lot of necessary moves. The big question is whether the rhetoric built up over the years can now amount to a much needed positive cultural change across college campuses.

The post NCAA’s new sexual violence policy: All athletic personnel will be trained in prevention appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Students complain a picture of ‘oppressor’ Mike Pence makes them feel ‘unsafe’

Aug 16th 2017, 01:37, by Scott McClallen

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-15-at-2.22.59-PM-300×239.png 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-15-at-2.22.59-PM-627×500.png 627w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-15-at-2.22.59-PM-502×400.png 502w” sizes=”(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px” />

Deutsche’s Facebook picture

Scripps College students said they feel “unsafe” after another student posted a picture with Vice President Mike Pence on Facebook. The reason behind these complaints is that Pence “has shown himself so willing to commit institutional violence.”

McKenzie Deutsch, a rising junior at the women’s branch of the five-school Claremont Consortium, spent this summer interning in the office of Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers’ (R-Wa) office. She posted a picture with Pence and Rodgers captioned, “The places you’ll go, the things you’ll see, the people you’ll meet… What a day it was in DC!”

Deutsch’s peers did not take the photo well.

“I don’t know if you understand that Pence want me and the people I love to be erased by any means possible,” one student wrote. “I don’t know how to express to you how it feels to see a fellow Scrippsie in this photo with someone who has shown himself so willing to commit institutional violence.”

Another student said the picture made her feel “unsafe.”

“Posing next to someone who is a direct threat to LGBT+ groups and other marginalized communities and posting this photo with a pleasant caption is not a politically neutral act,” the student wrote. “It shows you as a person who smiles with our oppressors for the sake of a photo op.”

Another student resorted to dark humor.

“How many LBGTQ folks do you need to help send to conversion therapy in exchange for reproductive rights from Pence?” the student joked.

Deutsche described her experience in a Claremont Independent column on Sunday and criticized the state of public discourse.

“How did we get to the point where taking a photo with someone is an act of violence?” she asked. “How will we ever be able to have adult conversations if no one is ever willing to listen to those who have opposing philosophies?”

Deutsche concluded her essay calling for civility in disagreements.

“Apparently, when it comes to those with whom they disagree, many of my peers are only capable of disrespectful engagement…However, you will not persuade anyone by being the loudest to yell, or condemning others because their views do not align with yours,” Deutsche wrote. “Instead, we should engage in civil discourse and allow respect and reason to prevail.”

The post Students complain a picture of ‘oppressor’ Mike Pence makes them feel ‘unsafe’ appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

It won’t “erase racism”: Largely black group organizes to stop removal of confederate statues

Aug 15th 2017, 23:23, by Siraj Hashmi

After the violence that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia over the weekend, there’s been a new push from liberals and progressives around the country to remove statues and tributes to the Confederacy. However, a predominantly black group in Dallas, Texas are fighting back to keep the Confederate monuments standing.

Former Dallas city council member Sandra Crenshaw, who’s African American, told CBS News that removing statues that pay tribute to the Confederacy won’t help.

“I’m not intimidated by Robert E. Lee’s statue. I’m not intimidated by it. It doesn’t scare me,” Crenshaw said. “We don’t want America to think that all African Americans are supportive of this.”

She continued. “Some people think that by taking a statue down, that’s going to erase racism. It’s misguided.”

Saturday’s rally in Charlottesville was intended to protest the decision of the city council to remove the statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee from Emancipation Park (formerly known as Lee Park).

On Monday, protesters in Durham, North Carolina, in response to the violence in Charlottesville, toppled a bronze Confederate statue outside the old Durham County Court House by strapping a rope around the statue’s neck.

Crenshaw is part of a group that includes some Buffalo Soldier historians and Sons of Confederate Veterans to put a stop to the movement. And she brings up a good point about erasing racism.

One can make an argument against the Confederacy getting participation trophies in a war that they lost. However, to borrow a quote from George Santayana, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

In 2015, when former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley signed a bill to remove the Confederate flag from the grounds of the state capitol in light of the Charleston massacre at the Mother Emanuel AME Church by a white supremacist, it was praised from all sides. However, it didn’t do anything to heal the wounds created by Dylann Roof.

According to a Gallup poll conducted in March, worries about race relations among Americans is at an all-time high. In 2014, only 17 percent of Americans worried a “great deal” about race relations. In 2017, 42 percent of Americans now feel that same sentiment.

Confederate statues may be a symbol of a time when racism was more integrated into our society, but those days are over. Confederate monuments have next to no power and influence today.

Former President Barack Obama tweeted a quote from the late Nelson Mandela in reaction to the violence in Charlottesville in which he said, “No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin, or his background, or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love, for love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.”

Americans need to be more worried about their own behavior and what they teach their children about the racial hatred that exists in this country (e.g. slavery, Jim Crow laws, segregation, etc.). By keeping Confederate statues and monuments standing, we can teach our children about the very real evil that exists in this country. And by learning how evil some people are from our history, we can teach our children how to love and respect their fellow human being, so that they’re not doomed to repeat it.

The post It won’t “erase racism”: Largely black group organizes to stop removal of confederate statues appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

The craziest college classes being offered this fall (and why they’re worthless)

Aug 15th 2017, 20:19, by Lauren Cooley

As summer comes to a close and college students head back to campus life, the indoctrination of young minds will continue this Fall. It’s no secret that over the last few decades, colleges and universities have become vehemently biased toward the left. As a result, instead of producing college graduates mature enough to enter the workforce, many require safe spaces and therapy to overcome the simple stresses of life such as opinions, bad grades, or the election of a new president.

Forget teaching students about topics they will need to function in the real world, the concept of social justice, which encompasses identity politics ranging from class warfare to race relations, is the new liberal arts.

Let’s take a look at a few courses scheduled for this fall:

At Grinnell College in Iowa, feminist professor Karla Erickson, whose background is in American and Women’s Studies, is scheduled to teach a course called “American Whiteness.” This course is meant to teach about “whiteness as a specific racial formation with a distinct history, proactive and defensive politics, and institutional and personal investments,” and explores formal and informal advantages of whiteness.

Another example comes from Vassar College, where every incoming freshman must attend a mandatory two-week orientation that “emphasizes social justice and ‘belongingness’ should disabuse them of that notion.” These incoming freshmen will also be required to complete a series of three diversity-themed workshops.

Stanford University is scheduled to offer an anthropology course called “White Identity Politics,” focused solely on studying whiteness and ways to abolish it or come to terms with “white identity.” Interestingly, Stanford’s anthropology department is so shameless, they didn’t even try to hide its indoctrination methods by calling the course a more subtle name.

Red Alert Politics recently reported that Brown University of Rhode Island is offering a course called “Feminist Theory for a Heated Planet.” This course will focus on the notion that feminists have been critical of the idea that man is supposed to rule over nature. It is poised to teach that humankind is not the most significant entity in the universe.

Multiple schools including  Princeton University and Oregon State University are offering courses regarding “Fat Studies.” Oregon State’s course is a three-credit class designed to explore “forms of activism used to counter weightism perpetuated throughout various societal institutions.” Princeton’s course will use performance art and dance to “examine the changing history, aesthetics, politics, and meanings of fatness.”

Lastly, the University of Madison-Wisconsin is offering a graduate course entitled, “Class, State, and Ideology: An Introduction to Social Science in the Marxist Tradition,” which will explore the “harms and forms of injustice associated with capitalism.”

This class, while promoted as an academic study, is clearly a propaganda course. Dr. Erik Olin Wright, the Berkeley-born and educated sociologist teaching the course, lists his own work, “Envisioning Real Utopias,” on the class syllabus. A 2012 biography from the American Sociology Association states that Wright thinks real utopias are “participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre, Brazil; the production cooperatives of Mondragon, Spain; and even the collective self-organization of Wikipedia.”

If none of these upcoming Fall courses are convincing enough to confidently claim liberal bias, consider the Harvard “Resistance School” offered earlier this year. The four week course was taught by former Clinton, Sanders, and Obama campaign staff and taught “practical skills for taking back America.”

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, there are close to 5,000 postsecondary Title IV institutions. Even if each school only had one such left-leaning class (in most cases there are many more than one per campus) this would result in countless experiments to indoctrinate students so that they come out of college worse off than they came in. Instead of growing and maturing enough to be ready for the workforce, they become dependent liberals that either cringe or riot when they hear another viewpoint.

Immaturity has become the prototype of higher education today; institutions that were originally meant to teach students how to think, now teach students what to think.

That is the biggest disservice for students, their futures, and the future of this nation.

The post The craziest college classes being offered this fall (and why they’re worthless) appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Conservatives are dominating the podcast game

Aug 15th 2017, 20:17, by Lauren Cooley

It’s long been said that talk radio is for conservatives; now it seems that conservatives are dominating the podcast arena as well. Of course, that wasn’t always the case.

Historically, podcasting and other types of entertainment like it have been dominated by people who are generally left leaning. It was not until a few years ago that conservative podcasts started making their way onto the iTunes charts.

The Ben Shapiro Show, the podcast of conservative commentator, attorney, and writer Ben Shapiro, reached the second overall spot on iTunes for podcasts just this month. This surge in listenership came after Shapiro joined Joe Rogan on his podcast, the Joe Rogan Experience, for a guest episode.

While Shapiro is the best known for his speeches on colleges campuses, where he has been escorted out by police due to leftists devolving into riots and creating safety concerns, his podcast is growing in influence as his publication the Daily Wire gains more traction. It’s an amazing feat to be one spot below the great TV and media mogul Oprah Winfrey, and that’s exactly where Shapiro is ranking.

Shapiro, the conservative wunderkind, is not an outlier either. Besides the Ben Shapiro Show, productions like the Adam Carolla Show and Mark Levin Show also have a large following. Other media services like YouTube have seen a large uptick in conservative podcasters upload content. A few like Louder With Crowder and Prager University have millions of viewers each month.

With studies from highly respected pollers like Pew Research Center and evidence from the audience demographics of podcasts like Shapiro’s (which are mostly listened to by Millennials and Generation Z) there is more evidence than ever that there is a growing movement of conservatives in younger generations. As conservative tech and new media arise, so will a younger conservative generation.

The post Conservatives are dominating the podcast game appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

KKK expert: A ‘lack of policing,’ not politics, is main cause for rise of white supremacists

Aug 15th 2017, 18:50, by Charyssa Parent

Charlottesville, Virginia is a small quiet city that houses nearly 50,000 people. Home to the University of Virginia, one of the top universities in the country that was founded by Thomas Jefferson in 1819. However, despite the strong reputation that both the city and school have, racism and white supremacist groups have lived in the shadows of Charlottesville for decades.

On Saturday, the entire country had their eyes on the city, where white supremacy groups gathered in record numbers to protest the removal of the General Robert E. Lee statue. In February, the Charlottesville City Council had voted 3-2 to remove the statue from the Emancipation Park, which was formerly Lee Park.

This was not the first time that the KKK has protested in Charlottesville. There was a march as recently as July regarding the statue’s removal. To protest in a community, a person or group of people must get a permit signed by city officials. This permit requires the location, amount of people, and cause. The Ku Klux Klan’s “Unite the Right” group got this permit and was within their rights to peacefully demonstrate against the decision to remove the statue. Antifascist groups also applied and were granted permits disclosing their footprint and location to protest against the white supremacists.

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17226585619437-300×186.jpg 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17226585619437-768×477.jpg 768w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17226585619437-1024×636.jpg 1024w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17226585619437-312×192.jpg 312w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17226585619437-680×422.jpg 680w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17226585619437-700×435.jpg 700w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/AP17226585619437-600×373.jpg 600w” sizes=”(max-width: 413px) 100vw, 413px” />

A counter demonstrator uses a lighted spray can against a white nationalist demonstrator at the entrance to Lee Park in Charlottesville, Va., Saturday, Aug. 12, 2017. (AP Photo/Steve Helbe)

Violence erupted between the two groups, and the protest was anything but peaceful. Police ended up using tear gas to break it up. People were using sticks and fire torches to fight. One woman, Heather Hayer, was killed and dozens more were injured after a white supremacist, James Alex Fields, Jr., drove through the crowd of counter-protesters. The scene looked much like it did back in the 1960s and 70s when violence broke out during protests scattered throughout the country after Jim Crow laws were abolished and segregation formally ended.

Have we not learned from our history?

Sociology professor David Cunningham at the Washington University in St. Louis has extensively studied the Ku Klux Klan and the group’s tendencies. In an interview with Red Alert Politics, he pinpointed why he thinks racially-charged violence is back in the headlines.

“I think it would have been unheard of to say that you could mobilize a thousand people before this year,” Cunningham said.

What he is noticing is racially-charged groups, like white supremacists, are organizing and mobilizing together more so than we’ve seen in the past 30 years. In part, he blames the climate of the country, saying that for the first time in a while these groups feel the nation is more supportive of protests and the collective action.

“I think a lot of these groups emerged because they felt threatened under the Obama Administration, but I think the type of response by President Trump or lack of response that he’s given in terms of condemning these groups has really provided them a license to act in new ways,” Cunningham explained.

President Trump has faced widespread criticism from both Republicans and Democrats after he failed to denounce the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and white nationalists, by name, in his statements following the riots. He later made a second statement, correcting his initial mistake. Some people have criticized the president by arguing that Trump has created a more polarizing climate in the United States that allows racist groups to capitalize. However, Cunningham said this rise from the radical right started mobilizing under the Obama Administration.

“Under President Obama, what we saw was the sharp rise in the number of groups on the radical right that were formed. These are groups that perceive that their way of life is under threat by the Obama administration,” Cunningham said.

The difference the country is seeing in the past year, Cunningham says, is the mobilization of these radical groups.

“I did a lot of work looking at the KKK in the 1960s and that was a gathering you would see very commonly through the South during the mid-60s. But from the 70s onward, it’s really difficult to see them be able to turn out any group like that in those kinds of numbers,” he said.

Cunningham doesn’t pin the rise of the racially charged groups on politics as much as he does the police.

“When I looked at the data and what you really see is starting around 1966, there was a sharp uptick in the policing of organized white supremacy and through that policing it made it much more difficult for these groups to organize and mobilize.” Cunningham continued, “This is largely a policing story or a lack thereof.”

Starting around the 1960s, Cunningham said police in southern states would proactively inhibit the ability of these groups to gather. The police would make extensive requirements and refuse to grant permits not allowing them to mobilize.

“Certainly you could challenge some of those measures on constitutional grounds that they were interfering with their freedom of assembly, but that is what happened in the later 60s, and it was quite effective,” Cunningham said.

Cunningham’s call to action is to the police force. He argues that law enforcement should be proactive rather than reactive when it comes to these massive rallies and protests.

The police granted permits for these groups to protest and knew the size of both groups attending. Critics from both sides argued that law enforcement could have done more to manage the violence, saying they ‘stood on the sidelines.’ These racially charged hate groups, while morally wrong, do get the rights to assemble and do so often. But their rights to assembly only go so far, the demonstration must be peaceful, Saturday was far from it.

The post KKK expert: A ‘lack of policing,’ not politics, is main cause for rise of white supremacists appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

Viral and fake: Reporter tweets photoshopped image of Trump posing with white supremacist

Aug 15th 2017, 18:42, by Scott McClallen

A fake photograph showing President Donald Trump with an alt-right leader known as “Millennial Matt” went viral on Friday after it was tweeted by a Telegraph reporter.

“Millennial Matt” is a leader of the “Proud Boys,” a far-right men’s rights group founded by Gavin McInnes. He attended the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia that resulted in three deaths and 35 injuries.

“Here’s a photo of @Millennial_Matt with Trump and carrying a burning torch in Charlottesville,” Middle East correspondent Raf Sanchez tweeted. “This isn’t complicated.”

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-14-at-4.09.31-PM-224×300.png 224w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-14-at-4.09.31-PM-373×500.png 373w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-14-at-4.09.31-PM-298×400.png 298w” sizes=”(max-width: 633px) 100vw, 633px” />

Twitter screenshot of Millennial_Matt tweet

Sanchez tweeted “Millennial Matt’s” profile picture, failing to realize that it was photoshopped. It received almost 23,000 retweets.

Sanchez realized his mistake Sunday morning and tweeted the original image. The correction failed to reach 1,000 retweets.

It appears @millenial_matt's profile picture is photoshopped. Here's the original Trump picture. pic.twitter.com/OClcOFbZ2w

— Raf Sanchez (@rafsanchez) August 13, 2017

It's right to correct. It's also right that a great many of the Nazis in Charlottesville were Trump supporters. Ask David Duke.

— Raf Sanchez (@rafsanchez) August 13, 2017

The post Viral and fake: Reporter tweets photoshopped image of Trump posing with white supremacist appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

“Abolishing Whiteness” to become a new course at Stanford

Aug 15th 2017, 18:36, by Lauren Cooley

Progressive absurdity has found its way into the syllabus of a brand new course at Palo Alto’s prestigious Stanford University. This new anthropology course, entitled White Identity Politics,  taught by Professor John Patrick Moran this upcoming fall, is set to solve the racial animosity in our country by educating (or indoctrinating) students into left-wing identity politics and virtue signaling.

According to the course description, one of the main points addressed in the course’s syllabus will be how the concept of white identity can correlate with racist ideologies. These ideologies include white nationalism, white supremacy, white privilege, and whiteness.

Stanford University students will not only be afforded the opportunity to examine whether or not these specific politics exist, but also learn practices that include “abolishing whiteness or coming to terms with white identity.”

Ernest Miranda, Senior Director of University Media Relations for Stanford’s Communications department, as well as university spokesperson, spoke to The College Fix regarding an exact definition of the premise of “abolishing whiteness.” Miranda explained that the notion was first established in the 1990s and was done so by liberal-minded, white historians.

Apparently, the catalyst that lead Stanford to create such a course was none other than the recent Presidential election.

Pundits proclaim that the 2016 Presidential election marks the rise of white identity politics in the United States,” the course description reads.

Unbeknownst to Professor Moran, solving racial racial tensions and ethnological animosity doesn’t begin with pinpointing an entire group of individuals and demonizing them. That strategy won’t succeed in coalescing Americans together, unifying communities, or in providing a decent and reputable education worth over $40,000 a year.

The course outline continues its folly.

“We will survey the field of whiteness studies, scholarship on the intersection of race, class, and geography, and writings on whiteness in the United States by contemporary public thinkers, to critically interrogate the terms used to describe whiteness and white identities.”

It is unclear how this course will aid Stanford students in preparing for life after college as it has not been proven that condemning white identity helps in the job market or in interaction between co-workers.

The post “Abolishing Whiteness” to become a new course at Stanford appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

The free market is combatting racism in response to Charlottesville

Aug 15th 2017, 18:32, by Lauren Cooley

cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/tiki-brand-300×266.png 300w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/tiki-brand-564×500.png 564w, cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2017/08/tiki-brand-451×400.png 451w” sizes=”(max-width: 624px) 100vw, 624px” />

TIKI brand website

In the wake of an influx of white supremacist for the ‘Unite the Right’ rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, vendors are scrambling to ensure that their products and services cannot be used by as a resource for hate groups any longer.

GoDaddy announced that it will boot the Nazi web site The Daily Stormer from its hosting platform. The “publication” — which is really more like one man’s hateful, racist blog — published a vile piece on the counter-protester killed by a domestic terrorist. Her name was Heather Heyer. The Daily Stormer called her a wide range of slurs that do not bear repeating. When it was brought to the attention of GoDaddy that The Daily Stormer was inciting violence, which violates its terms of service, they kicked it off their platform.

Andrew Anglin, the neo-Nazi behind The Daily Stormer, tried to register its domain through Google, but the tech company canceled the registration within hours, citing a terms of service violation.

When Airbnb found out that white supremacists were booking accommodations in Charlottesville through their site, the company canceled the reservations. A company that is all about connecting people for authentic, welcoming local experiences certainly had no interest in sheltering bigots.

Tiki Brand, an American small business that makes backyard tiki torches, was horrified to see its torches used by marchers. The company said it was “deeply saddened and disappointed,” and that “We do not support their message or the use of our products in this way.” Because Tiki Brand sells goods, and not services, it’s harder for the company to control what customers do with its products. Once that torch is sold, it’s out of Tiki Brand’s hands. Something like a web domain or lodging reservation is a service that can be canceled quite simply; snatching back a purchased torch is significantly more difficult.

Employers of the marchers face the challenge of what to do with employees who are known white supremacists. Managers of Top Dog, a hot dog vendor in Berkeley, California, spotted one of their employees in a photo of the march. Upon conversation with the marcher, named Cole White, he resigned from the hot dog store. Good dog!

Is this a violation of these marchers’ first amendment rights? No. Free speech is a right; consequence-free speech is not.

If and when companies start denying service to the alt-right, some fear that the practice would be the start of a slippery slope, leading to companies denying service to anyone with whom they disagree. That’s unlikely to happen. For starters, companies want customers. A customer has to behave in a way that is truly vile (for example, marching in a white supremacist rally) before that customer becomes a liability for the company.

Furthermore, any individual or company in America has the right to free association. No one can be required to enter into a contractual relationship against their will. When no one is willing to host racism either in rental accommodations or on the web, those evil views have fewer resources with which to organize domestic terror events.

The post The free market is combatting racism in response to Charlottesville appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

NY Times glorifies communism: Sex was better in the USSR

Aug 15th 2017, 16:58, by Ryan Girdusky

The New York Times wants everyone to know that the Soviet Union was just a better place for women than America is today. They received free childcare, the wage gap was reduced, and they had the best sex in the world — as long as they didn’t starve to death or get sent to die in a work camp.

Kristen Ghodsee, a professor of Russian and East European studies at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote that women in the USSR had privileges that western women did not have, specifically free education, maternity leave, child care, and great sex.

Of course, when they were done with all that great free education, they didn’t have the freedom to pursue their desired career. Like virtually everyone else, they would end up on the bread lines.

Still, Ghodsee said that a 1990 study comparing the sex lives of East and West Germans found that those who had been living under the USSR orgasmed twice as much as those who had been living in the Western democracies.

“Researchers marveled at this disparity in reported sexual satisfaction, especially since East German women suffered from the notorious double burden of formal employment and housework,” Ghodsee wrote. “In contrast, postwar West German women had stayed home and enjoyed all the labor-saving devices produced by the roaring capitalist economy. But they had less sex, and less satisfying sex, than women who had to line up for toilet paper.”

A pair of older German women who lived under the USSR exalted how wonderful it was for women because they could put their child in daycare, stay at home, and get frisky with their husbands.

“Although gender wage disparities and labor segregation persisted, and although the Communists never fully reformed domestic patriarchy, Communist women enjoyed a degree of self-sufficiency that few Western women could have imagined,” she continued. “Eastern bloc women did not need to marry, or have sex, for money. The socialist state met their basic needs and countries such as Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and East Germany committed extra resources to support single mothers, divorcées and widows.”

Ghodsee is correct that there was ample opportunity in her romanticized version of the Soviet Union because everyone was equally poor. However, the average American male lived seven years longer than the average Soviet male, and women in the U.S. outlived women in the USSR by five years. According to the United Nations, GDP per capita in the USSR was just a mere $2,684, which is almost 10 times as less as the US at $22,716.

As far as the nonsensical study on sex, Ghodsee should commission a newly updated study. There are unemployed people in America who collect benefits and don’t have the burden of a job, how much satisfying sex are they having? The professor or the university she works for could also look at North and South Koreans, one nation country is dancing to “Gangnam Style” while the other is perfecting the bowl haircut. Which one has more sex?

While multiple studies have confirmed that Republicans have sex more often than Democrats and are more adventurous, Ghodsee’s article isn’t really about bumping naughties. It’s about romanticizing an evil empire that killed tens-of-millions of people and oppressed hundreds-of-millions more.

The post NY Times glorifies communism: Sex was better in the USSR appeared first on Red Alert Politics.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. By using Blogtrottr, you agree to our polices, terms and conditions.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions.


Geef een reactie