Mother enraged that her child was taught gun safety

Liberals prefer being outraged and offended to be educated

Duval County Public Schools superintendent Dr. Nikolai Vitti has agreed to review other options for a gun safety program in schools after a local mother raised concerns.

Action News Jax first reported Wednesday that a local mother contacted Vitti after her son was taught about gun safety without her permission.

The district acknowledged that the school didn’t send out an “opt out” letter like it’s supposed to. Now, that mother is pushing for a new program altogether because of its affiliation with the National Rifle Association.

It all started after her son brought home a pamphlet promoting gun safety. Not only was she caught off-guard, but she questioned the program’s NRA affiliation.

The NRA’s Eddie Eagle program teaches kids what to do if they find a gun, similar to stop, drop and roll for a fire. Eddie Eagle says stop, don’t touch, run away and tell a grown up.

But a Mandarin Oaks Elementary mother, who doesn’t want to be identified, thinks gun safety shouldn’t be taught by an organization with what she calls “special interests,” and she emailed that concern to Dr. Vitti.

The Eddie Eagle program is as non-partisan as it gets. It is a safety program, period! The fact is, the Eddie Eagle program as the superintendent makes clear is not about any agenda but safety

It is true that the National Rifle Association is part of the consortium that developed the Eddie Eagle program through its outreach office, but its development was guided by specialists in education, public safety, public health, and child development.  This curriculum is not intended to assume your authority to guide your child’s moral development.  Please know that I take nothing more seriously than keeping students safe when they are with us at school, and I hope the messages we provide will help keep them safe when they are away from our classrooms. The program is about gun safety. Information that many students are unaware of and could save their lives.

This mother has a legitimate gripe about an opt-out letter not being sent, but what really bugs her is that the NRA is involved in any way. That is the bottom line. The superintendent makes clear that this is the first complaint he has heard about in his four years at his position.

“I also believe that it is important to note that relying on my memory only, I have never received a complaint from a parent, teacher, SRO, or principal about this program or its expansion since being superintendent (four years). This means that thousands of students each year have been exposed to the program with no issues being raised at my level”

Go read his entire letter, it is good and makes clear that this woman is the only parent to raise any concern. That should be all there is to it, but, sadly, the superintendent loses his guts at the end of his letter

“With all of that said, I am willing to review other options regarding the programming or activities that could be used to promote gun safety because I do believe that its current connection to the NRA could mislead parents. However, to be clear, you are the first parent without digging into the matter who has raised this issue to my level.”

I do not grasp why he would be so very clear about the effectiveness of the program and that he has never received any complaints, and then cave at the end? Our society truly has a hang up about appeasing the loud mouths, and the fringe at times. I have always used common sense in addressing complaints at restaurants I have managed. If, for example, your bar sells thousands of margaritas every month, and you get one complaint, why would you worry about that one outlier? It makes no sense. The same rule applies here, yet, so many people in positions of authority lose their minds over one malcontent. 

Remember when stories about college students and ball pits would have been at least rated NC-17?

You would think any story about college kids and trampolines, ball pits, bounce houses, or other playground equipment would include alcohol, and sex. I must confess, a former girlfriend who may or may not have been Salma Hayek and I did some inappropriate, and by inappropriate I mean fun, things on a trampoline once when I was 19. And not once did we discuss “Social Justice” or bash Capitalism, or fight the “Patriarchy”. And no, my girlfriend wasn’t Salma Hayek, but can’t a guy dream?

Boy have times changed, here is another story of coddled college kids who need to be told to grow up

Saint Mary’s College of California will bring a ball pit to campus on Oct. 3, as part of its Mental Health Awareness and Campus of Caring Week.

Other universities have also found ball pits a perfect “safe space” to talk about feelings and other really important and serious stuff.

Last semester, the University of Central Florida included a ball pit as part of its Social Justice Week. “The campus community will have an opportunity to enter a ball pit with another person and have an engaging conversation about a variety of social justice topics,” the event page said.

California State University-Northridge featured a ball pit as part of its speech-policing “Inclusive Language” campaign, which warned students how some words and phrases, including “crazy” and “man up,” are offensive.
When, exactly, did college kids stop being bold? When did they start being snowflakes, and fearing their own shadow? Of course, most college kids are not hypersensitive, and most are still doing the things college kids have been doing for a long time. But the number of agitators, and whiners who seem to be trying to ruin college for everyone else is growing. And that is not OK. The open indoctrination is not OK. The sad fact is sending your son or daughter off to college now means they will likely be assaulted by leftist ideology, and will have to endure America bashing curriculums, taught by professors who put their agenda ahead of educating students.

The Social and Behavioral Sciences Team (SBST), and why it should scare you

Welcome to your re-education America

The Obama administration quietly hired 20 social and behavioral research experts to help expand the use of government programs at dozens of agencies by, among other things, simplifying federal forms, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. The controversial group of experts is collectively known as the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team (SBST) and it functions under the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).

In 2015 Obama signed an executive order directing federal agencies to use behavioral science to sell their programs to the public, the records obtained by Judicial Watch reveal. By then the government had contracted “20 leading social and behavioral research experts” that at that point had already been involved in “more than 75 agency collaborations,” the records state. A memo sent from SBST chair Maya Shankar, a neuroscientist, to OSTP Director John Holdren offers agencies guidance and information about available government support for using behavioral insights to improve federal forms. Sent electronically, the memo is titled “Behavioral Science Insights and Federal Forms.”

The records, obtained from the OSTP under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), also include a delivery by Holdren in which he insists that the social and behavioral sciences “are real science, with immensely valuable practical applications—the views of a few members of Congress to the contrary notwithstanding—and that these sciences abundantly warrant continuing support in the Federal science and technology budget.” Holdren, a Stanford and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate is a peculiar character who worked as an environmental professor at Harvard and the University of California Berkeley before becoming Obama’s science advisor. In the late 70s he co-authored a book with doomsayer Paul Ehrlichadvocating for mandatory sterilization of the American people and forced abortions in order to depopulate the country. A head of the OSTP Holdren technically oversees the SBST.

Information about this absurd behavioral team remains sketchy because the administration, which claims to be the most transparent in history, withheld nearly 100 pages of records that could have shed light on the taxpayer-funded group’s secret operations. The Obama administration cited an exemption—officially known as B5—that applies to deliberative process, which allows government officials to discuss policy without the discussions being made public, or attorney client privilege. In this case it appears that the administration used the deliberative process exemption to withhold the records since it’s unlikely that attorney client privilege applies. B5 is the most abused of the FOIA exemptions and is regularly used to hide material that may embarrass the government.

Hey, what could possibly go wrong? Just move along, nothing to see……..

And the destruction of our education system rolls on

Just another way to make our schools into re-education camps that will turn out good little Leftist non-thinkers!

The coming dark age: The Baltimore school system this week revealed that it is ordering its teachers to ignore student behavior and not count homework in determining school grades. And what could be worse?

The school system also now recommends that teachers do not factor homework into overall grades or give students marks below 50%. Community Superintendent for Zone 2 George Roberts says low marks can damage a student’s feeling of self-potential. “The power of the zero is extremely powerful and frankly hurtful to a student,” Roberts said. “If a child gets a zero on an assignment, it’s that much harder for the child to come out of.”

The truth is, of course, that competition always has, and always will breed greatness. Even those who do not finish at the top scholastically, will be smarter and better educated if their natural desire to compete is encouraged. The efforts to eradicate our inherent desire to compete are designed to create people who are incapable of critical thought, and who ultimately see themselves as wards of the state. This has been the goal of the Left since our federal government became so involved in education. 

University of Chicago to perpetually offended whiners, Suck it up Buttercup!

Finally! Via Moonbattery

Finally, a respite from collegiate moonbattery:

The University of Chicago, one of America’s most prestigious and selective universities, is warning incoming students starting this fall not to expect safe spaces and a trigger-free existence during their four-year journey through academia.

In a letter sent to the class of 2020, Dean of Students John (Jay) Ellison said one of the defining characteristics of the school was its unwavering commitment to freedom of inquiry and expression. Civility and mutual respect are vital to the campus culture, the letter states, but not at the expense of shielding students from unpopular opinions or ideas.

“Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called “trigger warnings,” we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual “safe spaces” where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own,” the letter states.

BRAVO! A win for sanity. This fellow has done what every single college dean should have been doing for the last few years. That is standing up to these bullies and their calls for hypersensitivity, safe spaces and their incessant carping about “trigger warnings”. sadly, most college deans have caved in to these miscreants, or simply coddled these overgrown brats. Enough of that foolish strategy. It is well past time all of us realized that students like this do not want to get along, or be understood, or respected. they want to bully, intimidate and silence anyone who dares express differing views. That cannot be tolerated. Being a Liberal, and being outspoken on college campuses is fine, as is being Conservative, Libertarian, etc. Bullying, however, and preventing an open discourse on issues and ideals is not!

Angela Rye, a case study in Racial Obsession Syndrome

First the story

Appearing as a guest on Tuesday’s CNN Newsroom with Carol Costello, liberal CNN political commentator Angela Rye hyperbolically asserted that Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan reminds her of slavery and the days when black Americans were assaulted with dogs and water hoses.

Even though the Republican presidential candidate has stated that the 1980s is an era that he believes America was “great,” and has focused on jobs lost by what he believes are unfair trade deals as factors in America not being as “great” as in the past, the CNN commentator linked his slogan to the days of extreme racism against the black population: “I also think when you start your campaign with a slogan like ‘Make America Great Again,’ when some of us hear shackles in our minds or we hear dogs and see fire hoses, that’s not an era we want to go back to.”

Now, Rye’s response, no matter how idiotic, should be no surprise. After all, anyone who has ever listened to her understands she would find something racist in ordering a hot dog at a baseball game. For Angela Rye, and people like her everything involves race, everything. Thus my term Racial Obsession Syndrome. If she hears something she disagrees with, RAAAAACISM! If a police officer shoots an armed Black criminal, RAAAAACISM! If someone says that the absence of fathers in inner city communities is a massive cause of the disproportionate rate of Black crime, RAAAAACISM! America, itself? RAAAAACIST!

This comes as a sad result of two things. First is the growth of racial grievance mongering as a source of income. The monetary success of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and other race pimps has led many others, from politicians like the member of the Congressional Black caucus, to news commentators like Rye, to columnists like Charles Blow to go full race baiting all the time. It has also led some newcomers like Shaun King and Deray McKesson to emulate these race baiters. Racism sells well and the media, is all too happy to help carry the often false narrative of racist police, racist America, racist Republicans, racist everything.

The other factor in the growth of Racial Obsession Syndrome is identity politics. The Left is responsible for the brainwashing and embittering of Black Americans. Through education, which teaches that America is a hotbed of racism and bigotry, and through the media which again re-enforces this largely false narrative. The fact is many Black kids grow up hearing, from parents, “community” leaders, the media, and of course self-serving politicians that anything and everything in their life is centered on their skin color. Blacks are told they must vote a certain, way, and support certain issues or they are “traitors” “Uncle Toms” or “not really Black”. 

Of course there is nothing more racist than pigeon holing people based solely on their skin color, but the Left wants power, and they get it by dividing Americans. They do it by convincing s many people as possible that they are completely defined by their “identity” be it race, gender, their income, sexual orientation, or their religion. Once the Left has labelled everyone, then they continue the indoctrination by telling these groups they are victims, and their only hope to overcome discrimination is to vote for Leftist candidates. The focus is to segregate groups by “identity”, then to “victimize” them, and of course to release any member of any victim group of any responsibility for any choices they make or actions they take. After all, these are victims, and everything that goes wrong for them is because of America, and bigotry, and Conservatives.

All of these factors have made race relations worse, not better, and it will continue to be this way as long as the narrative of victimhood can continue unchallenged. This is why anyone who dares to push back against this narrative is savaged as racist/Homophobic/anti-women/anti-immigrant/Islamophobic, etc. Taking on the Left is dangerous because the Left does not value the truth. They value winning, and yes, by any means necessary. To the Left destroying someone’s career, or reputation by falsely calling them a racist is not morally objectionable in any way. This is why we see so many college students fighting to not allow Conservative speakers on campus, or the formation of clubs that deviate from the Leftist narrative. Free speech, open dialogues, and debate?, No, they are not allowed. You either agree and march in lock step with the Left or you will be intimidated into silence, or see your good name ruined.

Naturally, this is why we will see, should Hillary Clinton win in November renewed assaults on speech that dares challenge the Left’s lies. The Fairness Doctrine, and renewed calls for the FCC, and FEC to clamp down on blogs will be on top of the Left’s agenda. After all, free speech gets in the way of the re-education of America, and that cannot be allowed to happen if we are to build a Collectivist Utopia now can it?