Connect with us

News

ICYMI: San Francisco to Spend Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars Erasing Washington Mural

California has its priorities in order, don’t they!?

John Salvatore

Published

on

$600,000 to paint over a mural of George Washington, huh?

Boy, does San Francisco have their priorities in order or what?

Once a liberal is offended, it’s game over. Everything has to change immediately.

Trending: Revealed: Trump Would’ve Won Five More States In 2016 Landslide If Not For McMullin & Johnson

Here’s the deal, per AP News:

take our poll - story continues below

Will Hillary Clinton enter the 2020 race for president?

  • Will Hillary Clinton enter the 2020 race for president?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — San Francisco will spend up to $600,000 to paint over historical artwork at a public school depicting the life of George Washington, a mural once seen as educational and innovative but now criticized as racist and degrading for its depiction of black and Native American people.

The “Life of Washington” was painted by Victor Arnautoff, one of the foremost muralists in the San Francisco area during the Depression. The San Francisco School Board’s decision to paint over the 83-year-old mural is prompting some to worry that other artwork from the so-called New Deal era could face a similar fate because of changing sensitivities.

In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains images of white pioneers standing over the body of a Native American and slaves working at Washington’s Mount Vernon estate in Virginia.

After spending decades in a private collection, a resurfaced letter written by America’s first president praises God for the ratification of the United States Constitution.

It is over 230 years old, dating back to 1788.

The price tag?

A cool $140,000.

From Fox News:

The letter to Richard Peters, speaker of the Pennsylvania House, is signed Sept. 7, 1788, and praises God for the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.

Written a week after Washington told Alexander Hamilton that he would likely accept calls to assume the presidency, the letter came at a time when the Constitution was under attack. Some states wanted to hold a second Convention that may have undermined the Constitution.

Zoom in to read:

New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D) is the mayor of gaffe city.

Noting that the age to run for president is 35 and Alexandria is only 29, a photographer said: “You can’t even run for president for another six years.

Ocasio-Cortez: “No, not for a long time. Thank God. Although we’ve been joking that because the Equal Rights Amendment hasn’t been passed yet, the Constitution technically says he cannot run unless he’s 35. … So what we’ll do is we’ll force the Republican Party to pass the Equal Rights Amendment by threatening to run for president.

Uh, Alexandria? The constitution does not say “he.”

As Playbook notes, the Constitution does not say “he” cannot run — it says “any person.”

According to Article II Section I of the Constitution:

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

The mayor of gaffe city, the governor D’oh!-ville strikes again – with a vengeance!

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

News

Biden Condemns Trump for Using the Word ‘Lynching,’ But Said the Same Thing In 1998

Ain’t that something?

John Salvatore

Published

on

Democrats can literally quote themselves from decades past and then argue they didn’t say what they said. Doesn’t even matter if their words are on record. If that sounds funny to you, it’s because it is. They are ridiculous. President Trump for example, if he wanted to, could pull a word-for-word sentence from Joe Biden’s past, blast Biden for using it, then Biden would claim he never said it. That’s how Democrats operate. It’s just lie after lie. On Tuesday, Trump used the word “lynching” to describe how he’s being treated by Congressional liberals. Naturally, the left blew a gasket. Biden, himself, wasn’t pleased with 45’s words. But Biden is pretty much a comedian at this point. From Daily Wire: Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden was quick to attack President Donald Trump on Tuesday after Trump referred to impeachment as a “lynching,” which is the same term that Biden used in 1998 to describe the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton. “So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights,” Trump tweeted. “All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here – a lynching. But we will WIN!” So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights. All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here – a lynching. But we will WIN! https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1186611272231636992 Impeachment is not “lynching,” it is part of our Constitution. Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent. It’s despicable. https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1186691273870233601?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186691273870233601&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2F1998-remarks-from-biden-surface-after-he-attacks-trumps-lynching-remarks WATCH: While Biden has called Trump’s lynching…

Continue Reading

News

Dem Lawmaker’s Bill Would Put Citizens In Jail for Six Months for Using the B-Word Out of Context

In what world??

John Salvatore

Published

on

Democrats not only want to regulate the 2nd Amendment but they figure it’s time to go after the 1st, also. Because who needs freedom of speech? After all, even Rhodes Scholar Lebron James said there are negatives that come with freedom of speech – and he’s someone to be listened to! Check out this Democrat lawmaker from the same state as Elizabeth Warren. He wants the word “bitch” to be taxed but he’s going about it in a way only a Democrat would go about it. If you use the word in a wrong way, you’d be fined $200 or sent to jail for six months. Seems just a tad bit excessive for using…a word, doesn’t it? Oh, those silly Dems. From Reason: Massachusetts is taking the fight against nasty words to the next level with a new state bill that would ban the use of the word bitch in certain contexts. State Rep. Daniel Hunt (D–Boston) has put forward H. 3719 that would prohibit the use of the big, bad b-word when deployed to “to accost, annoy, degrade or demean” another person. Anyone who did so would be considered a “disorderly person” under state law. Penalties could include fines of up to $200 or six months in jail. Hunt’s bill specifies that either the person called a bitch or a witness to the bitch-calling could report the crime to the police. Reactions: Thanks a lot Massachusetts! California, the center of the universe when it comes to stupid, stupid laws, will see this and not only copy it but one up it somehow. https://twitter.com/Arqahn/status/1186764482611236864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186764482611236864&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F10%2F22%2Fmassachusetts-democrats-bill-would-make-it-a-crime-to-say-the-b-word%2F What will we do with all the dogs https://twitter.com/SorryNotaBot/status/1186786524991389696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186786524991389696&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F10%2F22%2Fmassachusetts-democrats-bill-would-make-it-a-crime-to-say-the-b-word%2F “Don’t mess with my first amendment, bitch.”- Jesse Pinkman (probably) https://twitter.com/presidentshemp/status/1186776934958665733?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186776934958665733&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F10%2F22%2Fmassachusetts-democrats-bill-would-make-it-a-crime-to-say-the-b-word%2F Free speech unless some bitch gets feelings hurt. https://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy/status/1186766905442537474?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186766905442537474&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F10%2F22%2Fmassachusetts-democrats-bill-would-make-it-a-crime-to-say-the-b-word%2F Daniel J. Hunt is too big for…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend