Connect with us

News

Minnesota College Students Demand Campus Cops Be Disarmed, Hold Sit-In At School

This isn’t a great idea…

John Salvatore

Published

on

It’s because of Hollywood and the mainstream media that today’s youth is so uninformed.

Tomorrow’s leaders are too blind to see what their actions today will lead to down the line.

If you’re calling for campus security to be disarmed, how much longer until you’re calling on street cops to be disarmed. And then, where does it end?

Trending: BLM Goes Into Target, Demands the Store Stop Calling Police On Black Shoplifters (Videos)

Check it, via College Fix:

take our poll - story continues below

Trump or Biden, who will win?

  • Why wait until November 3? Show all of America who you're voting for in 2020  

  • 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.

A whopping eight University of Minnesota students held a sit-in at President Joan Gabel’s office on Friday to demand the disarmament of campus police.

They also demanded an “increase [in] the diversity of the student population,” for what it’s worth.

The protest by the Students for a Democratic Society kept alive the (former) issue from over a year ago, when almost double the number of Friday’s total demonstrated outside of UMPD headquarters.

Barack Obama’s legacy will continue to haunt the nation for a good while to come.

This will be the case until Obamacare is repealed and replaced, as well as until former Obama administration aides are no longer saying silly things in defense of quite arguably the worst president America has ever seen.

Check out how a former Obama admin. appointee who later became a college president feels about free speech on campus…

From his essay, David R. Harris writes:

Free speech, in its purest form, is an exercise in what is achieved when a person yells a view and then leaves, after which someone with an opposing perspective does the same. The speakers do not grow as a result of the experience, and the audience has no opportunity to probe the opposing points of view. Such an exercise is guaranteed by the Constitution, and I wholeheartedly support the exercise of free speech in public spaces.

On campuses, however, we must strive for something more than free speech. Our mission requires that we seek what I refer to as constructive engagement. It is not enough for individuals to speak freely. We must also find myriad ways to put a range of views into conversation with one another. It is what we do in classrooms every day. It is what we do on debate teams. It is what happens across every campus, far more than critics appreciate. It is what happens in the lives of college students much more frequently than in the lives of most adults, in part because college campuses and social networks tend to be more diverse than “real world” neighborhoods and social clubs.

This sounds like exactly what someone from the Obama administration would say.

Save conservative media!

News

Minority Owners Of Washington Redskins Looking To Sell Stake In Team

Published

on

Three individual minority owners of the Washington Redskins professional football team are looking to sell off their shares in the team amid controversy over the team’s name. Again. Yes, it seems the Redskins are forever caught in a loop of having to defend their team name from the gaggle of social justice warriors running around the nation screaming and crying about faux systemic racism and crusading for causes like renaming sports teams in order to make themselves feel important and like they have a purpose. Here’s more on this from The Washington Examiner: Businessmen Robert Rothman, Dwight Schar, and Frederick Smith have hired an investment banking firm to conduct the search for potential buyers, which, according to one unnamed source, was happening because they are “not happy being a partner” of majority owner Daniel Snyder, the Washington Post reported. ProFootballTalk first reported that Schar and Smith were trying to sell their share of the team on Sunday. Rothman is chairman and CEO of Black Diamond Capital, a private investment company; Schar is chairman of NVR Inc., one of the largest homebuilder companies in the country; and Smith is the chairman, president, and CEO of FedEx, which has a long-standing partnership with the football franchise. Together, they account for about 40% of the team’s ownership. The remaining stake rests with Snyder, his mother, and his sister. The organization said on Friday that it will conduct a “thorough review” of the team’s name amid new demands that it stops referring to the team as the Redskins, which critics view as being racist and insensitive to Native Americans. Snyder released a statement last Friday saying, “This process allows the team to take into account not only the proud tradition and history of the franchise but also input from our alumni, the organization, sponsors,…

Continue Reading

News

Good News For Trump: SCOTUS Issues Ruling Against ‘Faithless’ Electors

Published

on

The Supreme Court ruled against “faithless electors,” allowing states to require presidential electors to vote for the candidates they are committed to, which is good news for President Trump just ahead of what is sure to be a very tight contest come November. Essentially, this means that electors can’t rebel and refuse to cast their votes for the candidate who won the state, therefore, if Trump wins a state, he gets all of the votes without worrying about losing any. The ruling strips a tool of dissension out of the hands of the left who aren’t above using any and every strategy at their disposal to stop him from having a second term. Here’s more on this from The Washington Examiner: The 538 members of the Electoral College are chosen based on the presidential vote in each state, and they, in turn, elect the president of the United States. States can require these electors to vote for the statewide winner or otherwise follow state laws, the court ruled. Justices decided against four 2016 Electoral College electors seeking to overturn state laws binding them to the presidential nominee to whom they are pledged. In that race, a record seven electors didn’t back the candidate to which they were pledged. A total of 10 electors rebelled last cycle, and seven of those votes counted toward the final tally. The overall results were 304 for Donald Trump, 227 for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, and others seven, instead of Trump 306 to Clinton 232. Four “faithless electors,” one from Colorado and another three from Washington, presented their oral arguments to the Supreme Court last month challenging the laws in 32 states and the District of Columbia. This is a good thing. Whoever wins a state should be entitled to those Electoral College votes. Period.…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

 
Send this to a friend