Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Morgan Mayhew

Morgan Mayhew
316 POSTS 0 COMMENTS
Morgan is a freelance writer for a variety of publications covering popular culture, societal behavior and the political influences of each.

by -
It's fair game for one TV host to question another isn't it?

Former host of ‘Dirty Jobs,’ Mike Rowe, showed concern regarding Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” policy. He expressed his doubts over the policy that Trump so loves, in a segment with Tucker Carlson on Fox News this Monday.

When Carlson asked Rowe if he was shocked to see how popular Trump’s policy was turning out to be, he said no, however he did show a little nervousness about it for a couple of reasons.

“First of all, I’m not sure I really understand it, to be honest, I mean I’m not a lawyer and it’s an Executive Order and it’s full of a lot of fine print. Secondly, and more importantly, it feels like it might be a shortcut. And as my pop used to say, ‘shortcuts lead to long delays.’ I don’t know if it is or if it isn’t.”

“If the executive order makes things more fair,” he continued, “if it does something to clamp down on uh, currency manipulation and whole lot of other things I also really don’t understand, it feels like happen in the global economy that disadvantages our country then I’m all for it.”

“But if it’s one of these things that is going to ultimately bring about some unintended consequences, I get nervous,” Rowe added.

“Look, I’m nervous about the minimum wage because I think when we raise it to hurry up to get to an endpoint,” he explained. “It’s like that wack-a-mole game. Something else pops up somewhere else and it’s like rent control. And I want an environment where the companies who are most responsible for hiring are dramatically encouraged by the market to keep the business here. And if we get ahead of ourselves, and make it by fiat, or some kind of mandate, I just figure that mole is gonna pop out of another hole and we’re gonna have to wack it.”

Rowe further elaborated that his doubts were the result of his understanding about what American consumers prefer to buy, even if they say they want to buy and hire American.

“Look, once upon a time, in another life, I had a deal with the blue jean company,” Rowe said. “And part of what I wanted to do was give the consumer a really clear choice between jeans that were made in America, and jeans that were made overseas. And they were identical, these jeans. I mean I could show you the research one day if you’re into it.”

“But it was remarkable how the price difference was everything,” he continued. “Until those two jeans, the American-made and the overseas were the identical same price, there was absolutely no push, no incentive for the consumer to buy American.”

“So it’s not just the worker, and it’s not just the boss, it’s us,” he concluded.

Rowe is a popular advocate of hard work, a virtue that he believes has been forgotten in the modern American society. He recently also spoke to Carlson about how modern American culture subtly scorns and undermines the value and dignity of hard work.

by -
And how is this acceptable in America?

A controversial supporter of Palestine and the Sharia law has been designated as the commencement speaker of the City University of New York’s Graduate School of Public Health.

WCBS-TV reported that CUNY’s public health graduate school has appointed Linda Sarsour to give the commencement speech on June 01.

Dov Hikind, Democratic Party state Assemblyman for Brooklyn, thinks “it’s nuts” that a radical such as Sarsour would be featured by a taxpayer-funded college.

“I mean, it’s just nuts. It makes no sense. It’s crazy to have this woman be the person who’s going to speak to the students,” Hikind said to WCBS.

Hikind believes Sarsour also supports “radical Islamists.”

“She is someone who associates with radical Islamists; supports them; shows support for them. She is someone who has said, clearly, she thinks throwing rocks at cars in Israel is a good thing,” Hikind said.

Sarsour is a harsh critic of the State of Israel and has also called Sharia law “reasonable,” saying “it makes a lot of sense.”

[email protected] shariah law [sic] is reasonable and once u read into the details it makes a lot of sense. People just know the basics,” wrote Sarsour on Twitter in 2011.

“Sharia Law is misunderstood & has been pushed as some evil Muslim agenda. Some Muslims r [sic] oppressors for sure,” wrote Sarsour in 2016.

This Saturday, Sarsour posted an article, she called an “important read,” on Twitter. The article accuses the Trump administration of being extremely “anti-Muslim.”

The article, titled “White Hate in the White House: Anti-Muslim Buzz Words that Swept Trump to Power,” claims that “We can expect a war-mongering administration with a desire to drop bombs on Iran (to the rejoicing of weapons companies), the continued targeting, dehumanising, [sic] and othering of Muslims, coupled with a deep and all-encompassing surveillance of the community.”

“We will most likely see some sort of Muslim registry system, deportations and arrests,” the article continues. “The administration and its media wing will slander any and all who dare criticise [sic] it.”

The author concludes, “Far-right nationalism has found a friend in Donald Trump and, with Bannon and company at the controls, the administration will continue to lock and load the guns of white supremacy.”

In 2015, Sarsour shared a picture on Twitter, showing a boy getting ready to throw stones at Israeli soldiers, calling it the “definition of courage.”

by -
Sarah Palin, Kid Rock and Ted Nugent rock out the White House and use Hillary as an involuntary photo bomb.

In an interview that aired on CNN on Thursday, former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin was asked by Jake Tapper, about the recent “upheaval” at Fox News over Bill O’Reilly’s sexual harassment accusations. The interaction between the two has raised some eyebrows.

“I have to ask you a question and it’s kind of sensitive,” Tapper said, “but you are in a unique role being a strong woman who worked at Fox News channel as a contributor. Uhm, and I normally don’t cover a lot of media stories, but obviously the upheaval going on there with the CEO and its biggest star ousted because of sexual harassment, not just an issue at Fox News channel, but an issue across the country. And it seems to be, with what happened with Bill O’Reilly, really a change in corporate culture in terms of what is tolerated. What do you make of it?”

“Well I think the key there is, you said I used to be with Fox,” Palin emphasized, “I used to be with Fox. Corporate culture there obviously has to change, y’know, women don’t deserve, they should not ever have to put up with any kind of intimidating work space.”

“At the same time if a women believes that she is being intimidated and harassed,” she continued, “she needs to stand up and do something about it and not stick around for a paycheck for years and years and years. And then after the fact complain about what she went through. As a strong woman, I say we should be feel more empowered than that. And we should take a stand and get out of the place, or blow the whistle on whoever is the perpetrator doing the bad stuff so that the culture will change.”

“So yeah, obviously things are changing quickly at Fox News,” Palin added. “There are some great great people who are there, though. And I appreciate what Fox News does, as CNN, you know, adding to the discourse and to the debate, which is a healthy thing for the society. You know, more power to the good things that Fox News is doing.”

“But yep, culture had to change there,” Palin concluded.

“Did you ever witness or experience, God forbid, anything like that at Fox?” Tapper asked.

“I, wouldn’t put up with anything that would be perceived as intimidating or harassing,” Palin replied.

“But you said your ‘former,’ so was that part of the reason you left?” Tapper pressed.

“Uhm,” she paused, “you can ask them why I’m no longer with Fox, uhm, y’know I’m not gonna speak for them. My contract wasn’t renewed, that’s um, that’s the line.”

“I don’t want to be a jerk,” Tapper continued, “but it sounds like you experienced something.”

“I just, y’know it was just time to part ways and, and, y’know, get out there, in a, I guess, a more diverse arena to express views and to speak for the public, and that’s what I’ve been to do now.”

“Alright, well I’m not going to push any further,” Tapper concluded.

Just this week, news surfaced that Bill O’Reilly was let go from Fox News after a series of sexual harassment allegations and reports about million dollar settlements in the past.

by -
Did . . . you . . . just . . . ASSUME . . . my GENDER!

Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.V.) was compelled to apologize at a town hall meeting in Parkersburg, West Virginia, on Wednesday, after he called a female attendee “honey.”

Manchin was talking about Planned Parenthood and the Hyde Amendment, as both relate to the distribution of federal funds allotted to health care services rather than abortion services. After Manchin defined the Hyde Amendment, he was interrupted by a female attendee.

“It doesn’t, it doesn’t. It pays for their health care,” the woman yelled, referring to the money going to Planned Parenthood.

“I know, honey. I know. I understand,” Manchin replied.

While it is unclear what the attendees said following that response, unsettled murmuring could be heard among the crowd. This prompted Manchin to retract his comment. He tried to apologize, but was, once again interrupted by the same attendee.

“You said that to a pussy hat,” she said, as laughter broke out amongst the crowd.

Manchin apologized once more, and said that his grandfather had a habit of calling everyone “honey.”

“So I’m sorry. I don’t mean that in a derogatory way,” he added.

The “pussy hat” the lady was wearing, has become a popular accessory among a lot of women participating in anti-Trump movements.

Launched over Thanksgiving, the Pussyhat Project, is the creation of two friends and recreational knitters, architect Jayna Zweiman and screenwriter Krista Suh.

While it is unclear how anti-Trump movement supporters plan on taking this movement forward, what’s gotten quite clear in the last few weeks is that the surge in the number of Americans supporting Trump, especially after the missile strikes in Syria last week, is not going down very nicely in the left camp. Movements such as the Pussyhat Project have managed to gain absolutely no traction amongst the general public, and the frustration is now quite visible.

With regards to the healthcare reform package that the Trump administration now plans to introduce once again, it is now quite clear to analysts and experts that he had been right all along and Obamacare will in fact collapse under its own weight, sooner or later. Of course, this is, once again, not going down very well with the leftists.

by -
Hey boss, come look at this!

With workers who reportedly drink, watch porn, and smoke marijuana at work, the Environmental Protection Agency has been perforated with employee misconduct.

For EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who is now looking forward to layoff at least 25 percent of the 15,000 employees at the government agency, inspector general reports from the past few years detailing the employee misconduct could serve as ammunition.

According to the US government’s own calculations, when it was on the verge of a shutdown back in 2013, only 6.5 percent of the Environmental Protection Agency’s employees are “essential.”

The most infamous case regarding misconduct at the EPA was of an official who earned up to $120,000 excluding performance bonuses after being caught watching porn at work, for almost six hours a day.

EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation reportedly had a geologist who admitted to downloading over 7,000 porn files on an agency server. He even admitted to masturbating at work. However, in return, he received paid leave for nearly two years after being caught red-handed.

The inspector general reported to Congress last year that this was not the only such incident at the agency. Another employee was suspended days after confessing that he had “watched pornography regularly at work for the past several years.” The inspector elaborated that this employee’s punishment was that he could no longer telework or “attach any unauthorized external drive devices to a government computer.”

EPA has also been found to employ convicted child molesters. This includes an employee who was paid $55,000 by the EPA, to retire, because his employers could not fire him.

Several other EPA employees have been caught drinking and growing marijuana at work. In 2015, an employee was arrested for attempting to bring “three grams of marijuana and two marijuana pipes through the security checkpoint at an Internal Revenue Service facility in Denver, Colorado.” The inspector general further said that the employee only received a conviction of 20 hours of community service, a $2,500 fine and a 21-day suspension.

After discovering that another EPA employee had a “marijuana growing operation in her residence,” she was only placed on a seven-month administrative leave before retiring in 2014.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration’s mission is to curtail EPA’s workforce by 25 percent and cut its budget down to $5.7 billion.

by -
Crime

Spurring heated debates all over, California’s law enforcement policies, which have led to decreasing arrest rates and early prison releases, are being blamed for the sharp surge in crime rates.

In a recent report, Fox News stated that a large majority are now blaming the liberal law enforcement policies for the surge in crime. The program was designed to decrease the number of individuals imprisoned while ensuring the safety of the people; however, critics are pointing to the numbers to show that the program is ineffective at keeping people safe and quite effective at reducing the number of inmates.

“The most recent statistics from the U.S. Department of Justice show violent crime rates in some California cities has increased by over 50 percent,” said Michele Hanisee, president of the Association of Los Angeles Deputy District Attorneys.  “If you look at the national data, our violent crime rates are going up faster than the rest of the nation. So why?”

Police officials and prosecutors have an explanation though; a number of prison reform measures, which reduce the state prison population by 20,000 inmates, by making certain felonies misdemeanors and liberating non-violent offenders earlier than usual. Assembly Bill 109, which saved California around $100 million, saw the transfer of 60,000 felony parole violators a year from state prison to county control. However, some believe that it did cause a lot of trouble.

The number of arrests has also fallen drastically in California, but the cause is believed to be much murkier than the one for plummeting imprisonments.

The Los Angeles Times reported that arrests by the LAPD fell by 25% in two years from 2013 to 2015. Although the reason behind the trend is still unclear, similar decreases were observed throughout the state. What is considered to be the lowest arrests recorded in about 50 years, the California attorney general’s office reported that arrests fell to 1.1 million in 2015 from 1.5 million in 2006.

Some give credit to the latest police policies that focus on preventing crime rather than waiting for it to happen then arrest perpetrators. Meanwhile, others believe that officers’ morale is considerably low as a result of liberal law enforcement policies and the national debate on police tactics.

However, despite the promise to decrease the cycle of crime through liberal law enforcement policies, crime is on the rise in the state. A 2015 report from the Public Policy Institute of California indicates that property crime rose by 6.6% while violent crime was up by 6.6%. This surge in crime rates was noted for a large number of counties.

by -
outrage

At least two minority student organizations have issued apologies after fake news regarding deportation circulated on campus scared students.

Notices from the imaginary “Harvard Special Investigations Unit” warned students that a student, residing in their dorm had been apprehended to be detained indefinitely. According to The Harvard Crimson, the notices were posted by the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee and cosigned by Harvard Concilio Latino, the Harvard Islamic Society, and the Harvard Black Students Association.

“This is not a real notice,” the notice said on the back. “However, we hope that the unsettling nature of this notice allows Harvard community members to reflect on the reality of people who face these kinds of unwarranted disruptions of life in unexplained suspicious circumstances before a state power that can hold ‘suspects’ indefinitely.”

Reportedly, numerous students were outraged with the way the notices were distributed and how they deceived some students into believing the news was true. The outrage prompted the Palestine Solidarity Committee and Concilio Latino, to issue apologies.

Co-president of the Palestine Solidarity Committee, Fatima M. Bishtawi, wrote in her email that she “would like to unequivocally apologize for any trauma and pain provoked by the seriousness of this notice,” The Harvard Crimson said.

In a joint statement Monday evening, the board of Concilio Latino wrote: “[The fliers] are fake, but the effects they may have had on any of you are beyond real and represent something entirely antithetical to what Concilio stands for.”

Concilio Latino further elaborated that it did not have complete knowledge of the exact contents of the fliers before they were distributed on campus.

Members of the Black Students Association and Islamic Society did not respond to The Harvard Crimson’s requests for comments.

Notably, this is the second time the Palestine Solidarity Committee has evoked outrage for fake notices. According to the College Fix, the student association also stirred controversy in 2013, by posting mock eviction notices to rebuke Israel’s settlement policies and actions in the West Bank.

by -
Heeellllooo??? Is this the march against Trump?

Chanting strong pro-illegal immigrant, pro-amnesty, and open border slogans at a so-called “mega march,” protestors marched through downtown Dallas on Sunday. However, the “mega march” failed to attract the expected numbers.

Called an interfaith “family, unity, and empowerment” march, the 2017 Dallas Mega March pushed for “real immigration reform, an end to aggressive deportation efforts that have separated families, targeted DACA students, and left our communities in fear” and “an end to executive orders that discriminated against our Muslim brothers and sisters based on their faith.”

While the organizers had boasted of an expected turnout of 100,000 supporters, after almost half a million had showed up at a similar protest 11 years ago, they trimmed their estimate down to 20,000 participants later. However, after all was said and done, the Dallas Police Department, which had a heavy contingent ready in case of any mishap, accounted for only around 3,200 supporters.

The Dallas Police Department tweeted:

“The #MegaMarch2017 is winding down. The crowd estimate was about 3,200 and there were no reported incidents or arrests.”

11 years ago, in the 2006 Mega March, hundreds of Latino mega marchers carried Mexican and American flags. However, participants were instructed to “wear white, red, and blue” in a show of solidarity and were also told “only USA flags allowed.”

Protestors were however allowed to hold homemade signs. One sign read: “No ban, no wall.” Another said: “Rise Up!” indicating support for the “Unite, Rise up and Defend” campaign launched by the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) in February. The Hispanic activist group is a staunch critic of Trump’s anti-immigration policies and supports DREAMer and DACA programs.

LULAC’s National President Roger Rocha, Jr. spoke at the Dallas Mega March: “There are times you have to march to get your point across. This is one of those times.” He said the mega march was quite similar to the women’s march held in Washington DC. “Same thing here but for immigration reform and to start getting families together again,” he said.

by -
Wait, I didn't do anything!

Caitlin Jeffers, a Northern Arizona University English major is reportedly facing academic repercussions for the use of word “mankind,” instead of the more gender neutral “humanity” in an essay.

While most dictionaries define “mankind” as “the human race,” which is considered to be gender inclusive, Professor Anne Scott at the Northern Arizona University is sending a message to the student, for having used the word Scott believes is sexist, and “has a history of holding women down.”

“I would be negligent, as a professor who is running a class about the human condition and the assumptions we make about being ‘human,’ if I did not also raise this issue of gendered language and ask my students to respect the need for gender-neutral language,” Scott wrote in an email to the Caitlin Jeffers about her grade. “The words we use matter very much, or else teachers would not be making an issue of this at all, and the MLA would not be making recommendations for gender-neutral language at the national level.”

Professor Scott cites the use of “mankind” as the reason why Jeffers lost a mark out of 50 on her recent English essay in her “Critical Reading and Writing in the University Community” course. She also said that the Modern Language Association (MLA) is working to get gender-neutral guidelines implemented on a national level.

Miss Jeffers claimed that Professor Scott asked students to not use gender-specific terms at the beginning of the semester. However, Jeffers says that she wanted to test the policy to see if Professor Scott would actually penalize her for the use of gender specific language.

After receiving the grade on her essay, Miss Jeffers claims she requested a meeting with Professor Scott to discuss her decision regarding docking a mark off her grade for not abiding by the gender-neutral language guidelines set.

“She told me that ‘mankind’ does not refer to all people, only males. I refuted, stating that it does refer to all people, [but] she proceeded to tell me that I was wrong; ‘mankind’ is sexist, and I should make an effort to look beyond my preset positions and ideologies, as is the focus of the class,” Jeffers claimed.

Professor Scott, however, offered Jeffers the chance to correct her essay to increase her grade, specifically asking Jeffers to remove the word “mankind.”

“I will respect your choice to leave your diction choices ‘as is’ and to make whatever political and linguistic statement you want to make by doing so,” the professor wrote. “By the same token, I will still need to subtract a point because your choice will not be made in the letter or spirit of this particular class, which is all about having you and other students looking beneath your assumptions and understanding that ‘mankind’ does not mean ‘all people’ to all people. It positively does not.”

Reportedly, Scott also sent an email to her class, informing that she will continue to dock marks off students’ essays if they use gender-specific terms.

by -
missile attack

US forces launched a missile strike in Syria Thursday night, responding to a chemical attack earlier this week. Officials believe the use of chemical weapons on a rebel-controlled village in northern Syria was perpetrated by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The missile strike on airfields, which reportedly killed seven people, was ordered by President Trump, a day after he said that his view of President Assad had changed vastly because of the use of chemical weapons.

“Tonight, I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched,” Trump told reporters at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

“It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons,” the president said. “There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons.”

American warships launched at least 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles, targeting the Shayrat airfield, near the city of Homs, where the chemical attack is believed to have originated from, the Pentagon reported. Targeting aircrafts, petroleum and logistical storage, shelters, ammunition bunkers, radars and air defense systems at the airfield, the missiles were launched at 8:40 PM Washington time, which was early Friday morning in Syria, the Pentagon announced in a statement.

The missile strike marks a dramatic intensification of US involvement in Syria. Being the first direct American assault on Assad’s forces, it is the most significant military action of the new administration under Trump’s presidency.

The Pentagon further said that initial reports suggest that the missile strike “severely damaged or destroyed Syrian aircraft and support infrastructure and equipment at Shayrat Airfield, reducing the Syrian Government’s ability to deliver chemical weapons.”

Russia was quick to condemn the strike as an “act of aggression.” Russian officials claimed that the attacks could endanger anti-terrorist military cooperation with the US in Syria.

However, the Pentagon clarified; saying it had been in contact with Russia, allowing to protect its forces in Syria.

“Russian forces were notified in advance of the strike using the established deconfliction line,” Pentagon spokesman Jeff Davis said in a statement. “U.S. military planners took precautions to minimize risk to Russian or Syrian personnel located at the airfield.”

According to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Russian President Vladimir Putin was not directly notified.

Syrian armed forces said on state television, that seven people were killed in the missile attack and nine others were wounded.

TRENDING STORIES

Listening to liberal college administrators waxing poetic from their ivory towers, one might conclude the greatest threat to higher education is not helicopter parents...