FL college recommends termination of professor in Obama vote pledge scandal

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Florida Today reports on a college’s recommendation to terminate an algebra professor who forced students to sign pledges to vote for President Obama last year (hat tip: Daily Caller by way of Memeorandum):

An algebra instructor at Brevard Community College faces termination after an investigation by college officials found that she urged — and forced in some cases — students to sign pledge cards promising to vote for President Barack Obama in November.

College officials made the recommendation Friday following a three-month-long investigation into complaints Associate Professor Sharon Sweet, a registered Democrat, distributed partisan campaign materials in her five math classes and promoted presidential politics. BCC officials did not comment on the case beyond a prepared statement listing the investigation’s findings.

Sweet violated BCC’s code of conduct prohibiting employees from soliciting political support for candidates and creating a hostile academic environment, according to the college’s statement.

“Sweet’s actions caused students to feel considerable discomfort, to believe their privacy was being invaded, to fear their grade could be negatively impacted if they refused to sign the pledge cards, and to feel intimidated,” the statement issued Friday read.

[…]

The investigation began with a parent’s complaint. Sweet also continues to be listed as a senator with the United Faculty of Florida-Brevard Chapter, a collective bargaining group representing instructors at the school. Judi Schatte, president of the chapter and who has an office at the college’s Cocoa campus, could not be reached for comment. The college is closed on Fridays.

Sweet has 10 working days to respond to the investigation’s findings. The recommendation will then be forwarded to the college’s Board of Trustees, who will review the information before making a final decision at a hearing. No hearing date has been set.

Here’s the official report of the investigation’s findings.

I know this goes without saying, but if we could just stop liberal college professors who use much more subtle tactics than this gal did to indoctrinate students, the country would be a much better place – pretty much guaranteed. Lots more free thinkers, less victim mentality types, more proponents of individual liberty, etc.

As a sidenote, why do I get the feeling if this had been a registered Republican professor, this story would have made national headlines and been endlessly discussed on all the news nets for several days? #RhetoricalQuestion

#Israel: Anniversary of a jihad mass-murder

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

Two years ago this week, five members the Fogel family of the West Bank village of Itamar were murdered — stabbed and their throats slit by Muslims waging jihad fi sabil Allah: “war for the sake of Allah.”

Udi Fogel and his family: victims of jihad

Udi Fogel and his family: victims of jihad

Only three children survived; they’re now living with their grandparents:

…14-year-old Tamar, 10-year-old Roi and four-year-old Yishai and have been taken in by Rabbi Yehuda and Tali Ben-Yishai, the parents of Ruth Fogel. In an interview published Friday in Israel Hayom, Rabbi Ben-Yishai said of his daughter, son-in-law and three slain grandchildren, “They’re always with us.”

“What happened was so inhuman that we have gained superhuman strength,” grandmother Tali said. “We know these children will be great people. They will be all right. They will not be damaged. They’re not in trauma anymore. Some children are afraid of what happens around them, but they’re not like that. They’re not the sort who don’t want to go to school or don’t want to get out of bed and spend the day crying.”

For that, we can be glad.

Sadly, the murderers are also alive, serving their sentences in an Israeli jail. It’s a shame and a denial of justice for there to have been no death penalty for this case.

RELATED: Earlier posts on the massacre of the Fogel family.

via The Jawa Report

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

So, I get the impression Michael Rubin isn’t too happy with John McCain…

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

Background: On “Meet the Press,” Senator McCain (R-AZ) said he would no longer hold up the confirmation of former Senator Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense, even though he doesn’t believe Hagel is qualified.

That lead to Rubin’s rant:

What McCain is, in effect, saying is that he has no personal or professional problem with putting an incompetent man in charge not only of America’s defense but also—because of what falls under the Pentagon’s umbrella—most of America’s intelligence assets as well.

McCain prides himself on being a maverick. How sad it is that in the twilight of his great career, McCain now is so willing to knowingly undercut U.S. national security. How reassuring it must be to Kim Jong-un in North Korea, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon, and Ali Khamenei in Iran that McCain is so willing to help install an unqualified Defense Secretary. The only questions now is not whether the will test the United States, but when and how many U.S. serviceman will die because of it.

Ouch! That one will leave a mark on Senator Prickly McCain. smiley black eye

Senators often fall back on the principle of “comity,” a principle of “getting along for the good of the nation” that includes granting a very broad deference to the President in his cabinet choices. But lately it seems that, particularly under Obama, “getting along” really means “Republicans should shut up and take it.”

Now, I’m all for getting along in a genuine sense: mutual compromise in which majority and minority each give on something, and the legislature and the executive show a willingness to deal. Our form of government needs that. Hence, while I despise John Kerry, he is arguably qualified to serve as Secretary of State, where he or any other SoS would be implementing Obama’s policies. So, I had little problem with the senators who voted to confirm him, even if I wouldn’t have.

But that assumes basic competence, and Senator McCain said flatly that Hagel is unqualified. In that case, voting to confirm him (or, at least, not block him) isn’t “comity,” it’s not courteous deference in the face of policy disagreement. To accede to the appointment of someone unqualified for the office is a dereliction of one’s duty as a senator to advise and consent. Before any obligation to “get along” is one’s duty to one’s constitutional obligations and the welfare of the nation.

As Senator Ted Cruz said,

“Of course comity is important, but comity does not mean avoiding the truth concerning a nominee’s policy record…”

So why, Senator McCain, are you giving consent to Senator Hagel as Defense Secretary when you think he is incompetent?

PS: To those who think not staging a filibuster or not otherwise holding up Hagel’s nomination is somehow different from voting to confirm him, I answer “don’t be naive.” The Democrats have enough votes to carry the nomination, particularly if a national security hawk like McCain will no longer try to block it. In this case, dropping opposition is the same as voting to confirm.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

#GunControl – Colorado ammo magazine maker promises to leave state if bill passes

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

Here’s another development in the slowly growing manufacturers’ backlash against states that pass repressive bills that violate the Second Amendment. If the Democrat-controlled state government in Denver follows New York’s lead, ammunition magazine-maker Magpul has promised to take its jobs and tax revenues elsewhere (via Michelle Malkin):

Colorado’s largest and most profitable manufacturer of high-capacity ammunition magazines has vowed to leave the state if lawmakers pass a measure banning the devices — a move officials with the company say could cost hundreds of jobs and upward of $85 million in potential spending this year.

Magpul’s threat has Democratic lawmakers scrambling to strike a balance that remains true to their goal of limiting the number of rounds a magazine can hold without frightening off businesses.

“If we’re able to stay in Colorado and manufacture a product, but law-abiding citizens of the state were unable to purchase the product, customers around the state and the nation would boycott us for remaining here,” said Doug Smith, Magpul’s chief operating officer. “Staying here would hurt our business.”

…in addition to a wide array of gun-magazine products, the privately-held Magpul makes many other products, including cases for mobile phones and tactical sights for firearms. This year, the company says it expects to spend upward of $85 million in Colorado alone on employee payroll, manufacturing subcontractors, suppliers and service providers.

Smith said much of Magpul’s business comes from out-of-state sales, contracts with the U.S. military, and with local and national law enforcement.

(Emphases added)

Read the rest of Malkin’s article for further details. To summarize, Colorado has taken the first steps toward enacting legislation that would, among other things, limit magazine capacity and ban concealed weapons from state colleges. It is a step toward creating, as in California, a de facto ban via repressive regulation.

Colorado’s proposed law, similar to New York’s, would do nothing but economically harm the state, punish law-abiding citizens, make a futile gesture toward “doing something, anything,” and denying the right of self-defense to people attending or working at their state colleges, in spite of all evidence that armed defenders save lives. (See also…) One wonders whether the state’s Democratic leaders care more about gestures that make them look good in the press, rather than about potentially effective measures, such as dealing with poor state of mental health care in this country. Or even about their citizens’ jobs.

In other words, Colorado Democrats, don’t be stuck on stupid.  Concentrate on the shooter, not the tool he uses.

PS: For the education of Colorado’s leaders, here are five facts about guns and gun violence.

Correction: That’s what I get for typing too fast. Magpul makes magazines, not ammunition. Fixed in the title and first paragraph.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

Heh: Sale of water bottles by Rubio PAC raises over $100,000

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

I love it:

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has raised more than $100,000 thanks to his water break moment during last week’s GOP response to the State of the Union, according to a report.

Rubio’s political action committee began selling water bottles branded with the Tea Party favorite’s name for contributions of $25 or more. Buzzfeed reports that after a week the effort has sold more than 3,100 water bottles.

The water bottles were an attempt to capitalize on Rubio’s swig of water while delivering the GOP response live last Tuesday.

While speaking to the camera, Rubio paused at one point and grabbed an off-camera water bottle to take a sip. The water break attracted widespread attention on Twitter and on late-night television.

Rubio’s PAC, Reclaim America, quickly put up a “Marco Rubio Water Bottle” for sale.

“Send the liberal detractors a message that not only does Marco Rubio inspire you… he hydrates you too,” said the website selling the bottle.

And his Twitter follower count continues to rise.

Talk about turning lemons into lemonade! Way to go, Team Rubio!