Anybody else sick of the constant bickering going on in the public forum? In 2016, we had a national election where we were at each other’s throats. We expected, based on history, things would calm down in 2017. They just got worse. My resolution for all of us in 2018: let’s take a deep breath and start to learn how to speak to each other again.
There is plenty of blame to go around with our national media being a prime example. Where the main purpose of the media was to inform and educate us on the issues of the day, it now seems their driving principle is to agitate. We know many in the media have a distaste for our president; but many forget that their jobs are not to drip disdain daily.
On the day the tax bill was introduced as well as Donna Brazile’s column disclosing some serious issues in her upcoming book, both CNN and MSNBC focused their evening broadcasts on their favorite narrative – the Russia investigation. Even two huge stories could not deter them from their “Take Down Trump Train.”
My God, the media has such antipathy for this administration they questioned the validity of the press secretary’s ability to make a pecan pie. Is that really what our country has come to?
It is not just the media doing the elevating, our elected officials must likewise tone it down a few notches. A client sent me an email he received from a local Congressman. Ted Lieu (D-CA) took over Henry Waxman’s seat. There are probably few safer Congressional seats in this country. It covers the Westside of Los Angeles. Yet, Mr. Lieu seems to think the only way for him to secure any national recognition from his moneyed district is with inflammatory rhetoric. I have yet to see him make a commentary where he was not on the attack. Some should tell him it is very unbecoming and not befitting his esteemed position.
Mr. Lieu assailed the Republican tax plan in the email. He called it horrible and stupid. He went on to call it a scam that will devastate California. This is all unnecessary and over-the-top language that scares his constituents instead of educating them about potential issues about which they should be concerned. Not exactly stellar leadership.
There are two ways to stop this. One is that we have a tumultuous event that so turns the stomach of all of us that we have a revelation.
The other way is that we one-by-one mimic Howard Beale (“Network”): “I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore.” In our own lives we demand that we live by a higher principle. I am not saying I am an angel or perfect, but here are some things I do as someone who has learned to cope with being a Jewish Republican in a very liberal city (Los Angeles) amongst many people who are far more liberal than I am:
1. Never bring up politics unless you absolutely know the person’s positions and you can converse with them.
2. If someone else brings up politics and you don’t agree with them, don’t launch into an argument with them. Ask first why they believe what they have just told you. Hear them out. Ask them where they read and gathered their facts from. Ask if they can forward to you what they read to obtain their position. Listen to their points and maybe you might learn something. It will open you up to listening to the opposition and maybe they will start to open themselves up to what you say.
3. Stick to the facts. No ad-hominem attacks. When someone starts calling their political opponents names or making derogatory comments about them then you know the policy points are weak. I may have slipped, but I rarely if ever said anything bad about President Obama. I just attacked him on policy points. I always said he was a devoted husband and father, thus he was a good man.
4. Read or watch the opposition. In my car, I am always listening to the Bruce channel. Having 3,000 CDs, I always have something old or new to listen to, but in my wife’s car she has satellite radio. I almost always turn to progressive radio. I find it a gas. Very entertaining and enlightening. I don’t agree and I think they are way off base, but I listen. Which is the point: we all need to do more of that, LISTEN.
5. If you find someone gets you wound up, then don’t watch them. If you are not learning from what you are reading or watching – lose it. I miss Hugh Hewitt’s radio show that used to be on in the afternoons in Los Angeles until he moved back East. He is a partisan Republican, but I always learned from his show.
6. Don’t always question someone’s motives or character if they disagree with you. Most often, we just disagree. Barack Obama was someone with whom I almost always disagreed; I thought his policies were wrong.
I have no illusion that everyone reading this column will have an epiphany and change their behavior and that will ripple throughout the country. But we must start somewhere. We are blessed to live in the most wonderful country, where people from everywhere on this planet are welcome and accepted as long as they follow the rule of law and desire to become Americans.
We must be a little bit more civil toward each other. That is my New Year’s resolution for us all in 2018.
Happy New Year!
There is a national mental health disease pandemic.
It turns out that people hate living in blue states, where lax drug laws, tight gun control, socialist taxation, and liberal social circles make the place uninhabitable. According to The Daily Caller, three major blue states lost a record number of citizens in 2016-2017.
New York lost about 190,000 residents from July 1, 2016 to July 1, 2017, according to U.S. Census Bureau data released last week.
President Obama’s home state of Illinois has now dropped from the fifth to the sixth-most populous state in 2017.
Liberals in Sacramento have made it so difficult for businesses to make money they are leaving the state in droves. Those same liberals are giving away the money that is left, and those that want something for free are replacing them.
Large swaths of California look like a Third World country. They have ramshackle buildings, junky cars and trash strewn everywhere. The state even has outbreaks of Hepatitis A, just like a Third World country.
Most experts believe California has passed the point of no return for the financial disaster liberals have caused because as quickly as the producers are moving out, the takers are moving in!
A state cannot chase away the producers and attract the takers year after year without economic consequences. That doesn’t end well so there’s little doubt California is headed toward economic disaster.
California has over 250 agencies that intrude into every aspect of its citizens’ lives. Sacramento spending is completely out of control. California political writer Steve Frank estimates that the real state government debt is $2.8 trillion.
California is crashing folks, and there is no return! I am so thankful we moved to Texas!
Any logic centered person understands where that road leads. If you do not, this well done cartoon should help:
At the AMC Universal CityWalk 19 in Los Angeles – the AMC Theaters location that’s closest to where I live – a single ticket to see a non-matinee screening tonight currently costs $17.75 (plus a $1.75 convenience fee for ordering the ticket online, bringing the total to $19.50). Now we’ve learned that AMC is looking into the possibility of charging different prices for different seats within the same theater. Is there any upside here?
We received an e-mail from a reader who’s a member of the AMC Stubs reward program informing us of a survey that AMC Theaters is sending out to some of its members. The survey essentially asks members where they like to sit in the theater and if they’d be willing to pay more or less money for more desirable seats or less desirable seats. The contents of that survey have been confirmed by another person on Twitter:
Just got a survey from AMC. Basically, they’re going to start charging for sitting in different sections of the same theatre screen.
— Disneyland Doc (@DLdocumentary) December 28, 2017
And while that Twitter user may be jumping the gun a bit by assuming AMC is unequivocally going to turn the results of this survey into a new policy, it’s telling that the world’s largest theater chain is searching for outside-the-box ways to potentially charge audiences, even more, money to go to the movies. (The number of overall movie tickets sold in the United States has been on a downward slide for the past two years, which has to be something that haunts your dreams if you’re an AMC executive.)
My first thought was that maybe the theater wants to offer discount prices for seats in the front row in order to attract people who might have otherwise brushed off the idea of going to the movies at all because the prices were too steep. But almost immediately, I realized that AMC isn’t going to leave money on the table here; if this situation does, in fact, come to pass, they’ll almost certainly charge more than the ticket price to sit in prime seats. My guess is the middle of every row will be pricier to offset cheaper seats on the aisles or in the very front.
Seeing a movie in a theater can be magical or godawful, depending on a host of factors. (Seriously, is it STILL too much to ask for them to institute some consequences for cell phone usage?) But it seems to me that theater chains could be innovating new or better ways to actively convince people to spend their time and money at the movies, rather than theorizing about ways to make sure they don’t lose out on any more revenue. Evolve or die, right? As much as we rag on big theaters for their seeming lack of standards, it’d still be a sad day if they died off completely. Here’s hoping they can come up with something a little better than this to stave off extinction.
Or not. Depending on your Homo Superior Liberalis status.
A professor recently encouraged students to break the law in order to “destroy” the system of “white democracy,” saying the American flag doesn’t even represent about half of them.
Video footage obtained by The Red Elephants purports to show Diablo Valley College professor Albert Ponce lecturing on “white supremacy in the USA,” at one point suggesting that not all students should get up for the Pledge of Allegiance.
“Abolition means we must destroy it, not reform it. No voting is going to help. No writing your congressperson. We need to smash white supremacy.”
“And there were people here, the indigenous people, who were part—who paid a price, a very heavy price, for this project that is unfolding of white supremacy,” the professor said in one part of the lecture.
Ponce argued that Americans “exist in a white supremacist, patriarchal, heteronormative, capitalist system,” and that citizens should be violating laws that they believe perpetuate those conditions.
“That’s the beauty of the law—if you write it, you can convince all of us to follow it,” he said. “Just like all of us do today. When you shouldn’t. Many of the laws existing—we should be violating those laws.”
Laws only apply to Homo Superior Liberalis when they say so. 🙂
“We are taught to get up and to pledge allegiance to the flag every single day,” the professor continued. “The flag is not really representative of everybody who is standing up in that room. Maybe that’s the way it should be taught. All those who this flag represents stand up, and maybe 50 percent of this room, you remain seated down because this is not for you.”
So not everyone in America, is American, so the flag doesn’t represent America?
In other portions of his lecture, Ponce also suggested that the Constitution “should be called a white man’s constitution,” and that Karl Marx was “one of the most profound thinkers in the history of Western philosophy.”
“So it is fitting that a white supremacist of old with a white supremacist of today exists and sit—they are smiling in the White House,” the professor said, pointing to a picture of President Trump alongside Attorney General Jeff Sessions in a slide titled “the abolition of white democracy.”
He then elaborated on the meaning of abolition in that context, declaring that normal democratic processes are insufficient for dealing with the “white supremacy” he attributes to Trump and Sessions.
“What does abolition mean? Abolition means we must destroy it, not reform it,” he continued. “No voting is going to help. No writing your congressperson. We need to smash white supremacy.”
According to The Red Elephants, the video was recorded by a student who described Ponce’s lecture as representative of the “Neo Marxist” attitudes that pervade campus, fueled by “Anti White and Anti American teachers” like Ponce.
The student also claimed that Ponce “grades students down and fails them if they don’t agree with him,” and even threatened to send a student to the dean’s office for nodding “no” during one lecture, but did not provide evidence to substantiate either assertion.
“It was a seminar he decided to hold and he requires students to go to 2 of his so-called lecture speech events outside of class,” the student explained. “This is where he indoctrinates them with lies.”
Ponce’s RateMyProfessor page has been deluged with negative evaluations since the video of his lecture was made public on December 22, but several previous entries do allude to him as an outspoken liberal—and even a “Marxist”—who frequently incorporates his political views into class discussions.
“Ponce wasted Class time Attacking Trump and Cis Genders Males,” one user alleged on November 25. “It’s scary DVC would allow him to promote ANTIFA VIOLENCE DURING CLASS TIME. This man will send those who disagree out of class.”
Other users similarly alleged that he “puts down and bullies conservative students whenever he can” and “tries to brainwash you with pure liberal propaganda,” saying he “seems to teach from a extremely liberal point of view and belittles those who disagree.”
Even some students who rated Ponce highly acknowledged that his personal views often seep into the classroom.
“I will say his class is more preferable for the left winged perspective, so I do not recommend for conservatives,” one user wrote in May, while a previous comment noted that “the class has strong liberal undertones so if you’re not open to hearing about liberal views, I wouldn’t recommend.”
Neither Diablo Valley College nor Ponce responded to Campus Reform’s requests for comment.
Last week, Democrats and many in the mainstream media became highly perturbed by the Trump administration’s suggestion that the United States might tie continued foreign aid to support for its agenda abroad. Foreign dictators agreed. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who spent the last year arresting dissidents, announced, “Mr. Trump, you cannot buy Turkey’s democratic free will with your dollars, our decision is clear.”
Herein lies the great irony of the United Nations: While it’s the Mos Eisley of international politics — a hive of scum and villainy — and it votes repeatedly to condemn the United States and Israel, the tyrannies that constitute the body continue to oppress their own peoples. Among those who voted last week to condemn the U.S. for recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving its embassy to Jerusalem were North Korea, Iran, Yemen and Venezuela. Why exactly should the United States ever take advice from those nations seriously?
We shouldn’t. And we should stop sending cash to an organization that operates as a front for immoral agenda items.
The United Nations spends the vast majority of its time condemning Israel: According to UN Watch, the U.N. Human Rights Council issued 135 resolutions from June 2006 to June 2016, 68 of which were against Israel; the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization only passes resolutions against Israel; and the U.N. General Assembly issued 97 resolutions from 2012 through 2015, 83 of which targeted Israel.
Meanwhile, the U.N. has done nearly nothing with regard to Syria. It has instead suggested that Israel turn over the Golan Heights to the Syrian regime. The U.N. can’t even successfully prevent the slaughter of the Rohingya in Myanmar. But they certainly have something say about whether the United States ought to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
One of the great lies of the Obama administration was that diplomacy is a foreign policy. We often heard from it that the only two alternatives were diplomacy and war. That was the stated reason for pursuing a one-sided nuclear deal with Iran that left Iran with burgeoning regional power and legitimacy. “What? Do you want a war or something?” it asked.
But the moment that the Trump administration uses tools of diplomacy, including financial pressure, to achieve American ends, the left complains. Would it prefer war? Diplomacy is a tool, not a foreign policy, and the use of diplomacy to pressure other nations to follow our lead is not only smart but also necessary. That is why the Trump administration was exactly right to negotiate a $285 million cut to the U.N.’s budget. Now we ought to slash our contributions to the counterproductive organization, since we pay one-fifth of the total bill.
The U.N. has always been a foolish fantasy, a League of Nations knockoff that’s been about as productive and twice as irritating. It’s an outmoded organization that’s outlived whatever small usefulness it once had. There’s no reason for us to continue cutting checks to prop up regimes that condemn us publicly for exercising the most basic standards of morality. (Ben Shapiro)
You just can’t make this stuff up. Progressives do it to themselves way better than an cynic or critic can.
The narcissistic generation that came up with selfies in the first place is now ragging on them. The irony so delicious it’s borders on hilarious.
A group of feminist professors recently discovered that Instagram selfies taken by women in college can reinforce “traditional gender roles.”
In a study led by Mardi Schmeichel, a University of Georgia (UGA) professor specializing in “feminist theory,” a team of professors analyzed 233 selfies that were posted in 2013 within 24 hours of the first UGA football home game of the semester.
“[T]he southern lady images that circulate in these selfies reinscribe a traditional femininity organized around/on a binary.”
Schmeichel and her team analyzed these selfies to see if they represented “the idealized symbol of the southern lady,” which they note is an aesthetic trope that “has had significant and enduring consequences on notions of femininity in the South.”
This symbol of the southern lady, they argue, is typified by students’ formal wear, soft and flowy dresses, a significant amount of jewelry, and clothes that emphasize “feminine curves without revealing what might be considered ‘too much’ skin.”
Bright red lipstick and white teeth are also considered emblematic of this southern aesthetic, Schmeichel argues.
After analyzing selfies posted in the time surrounding the first 2013 UGA home game, Schmeichel found that 25 percent of women who posted photos embody this harmful aesthetic.
“The clothing, makeup, posing and editing used in the southern lady images work together to achieve a hyperfeminine gender performance that differs significantly from the images of women in the other selfies,” Schmeichel laments.
“In the southern lady images, attention to a traditionally gendered performance has been emphasized,” Schmeichel writes, lamenting that “the southern lady images that circulate in these selfies reinscribe a traditional femininity organized around/on a binary.”
She also notes that students’ embodiment of femininity can be troubling.
“The celebration of traditional femininity has been is [sic] a vexing concern for some feminists, who have interpreted it as a rolling back of hard-won progress to eliminate women’s association with these rigidly gendered and often marginalized subject positions.”
“If we are committed to destabilizing gender binaries and working toward a world in which bodies, and images of them, are not traded as capital, then there must be some attention paid to ways in which women’s [Instagram] practices and behaviors can get in the way of these goals,” Schmeichel concludes.
Campus Reform reached out to Schmeichel and her team for comment, but did not receive a response in time for publication.
Matt Vespa: When it comes to entertainment, I’m really not in the cultural conservative camp. I watch what I want to watch, whether that is Game of Thrones or Rocko’s Modern Life. Yes, I like action movies. Yes, I like bloody horror films. Yes, the bloodier and gorier, the better in that category. Around Christmas time, yes, I will confess I sometimes watch a Hallmark Christmas movie. They’re cheesy. All aspects about it are too good to be true, but to get into the season and to take a break from my usual viewing of graphic violence, I’ve seen worse. Apparently, though—it’s very problematic because everyone is white, there are no feminists, no Muslims, and the male leads have white nationalist haircuts—whatever that means. It’s your typical contrarian drivel from Slate, a Washington Post-affiliated site. Oh, and the areas with the strongest viewership are in states where Trump won. I smell collusion. I smell propaganda, right? No, I actually don’t because I’m not a progressive, but the analysis is quite entertaining [emphasis mine]:
At a rally in November 2015, Donald Trump heralded, “If I become president, we’re all going to be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again, that I can tell you.” Of all his empty guarantees, the president has perhaps fulfilled none better than a counterstrike in the War on Christmas, and no battalion has fired more rooty-toot artillery for him than the Hallmark Channel. In 2017, the network is premiering 21 original Christmas movies (up from 20 last year)—42 hours of sugary, sexist, preposterously plotted, plot hole–festooned, belligerently traditional, ecstatically Caucasian cheer. To observe the first holiday season under the Trump administration, I’m bearing witness to them all.
Hallmark Channel, owned by the Kansas City, Missouri–based greeting-card giant, has boomed since Trump began campaigning. In 2016, Hallmark was the only top-15 entertainment channel with double-digit ratings growth, and viewership has jumped another 16 percent this year. Meanwhile, Hallmark’s Christmas programming, which this year began before Halloween, generates more than 30 percent of its annual ad revenue and has helped Hallmark become the season’s highest-rated cable network among women aged 25–54. More than 70 million Americans watched Hallmark Channel Christmas movies last year.
The network has already approached that number in 2017, with three weeks and five premieres remaining. And the network’s strongholds map to Trump’s Electoral College victories.
After watching a few of Hallmark’s Countdown to Christmas films, the network’s burgeoning red-state appeal comes into focus. As much as these movies offer giddy, predictable escapes from Trumpian chaos, they all depict a fantasy world in which America has been Made Great Again. Real and fictional heartland small towns with names such as Evergreen and Cookie Jar are as thriving as their own small businesses, and even a high school art teacher (played by Trump supporter and the face of Hallmark, Candace Cameron Bure) can afford a lavishly renovated Colonial home. They brim with white heterosexuals who exclusively, emphatically, and endlessly bellow “Merry Christmas” to every lumberjack and labradoodle they pass. They’re centered on beauty-pageant heroines and strong-jawed heroes with white-nationalist haircuts. There are occasional sightings of Christmas sweater–wearing black people, but they exist only to cheer on the dreams of the white leads, and everyone on Trump’s naughty list—Muslims, gay people, feminists—has never crossed the snowcapped green-screen mountains to taint these quaint Christmas villages. “Santa Just Is White” seems to be etched into every Hallmark movie’s town seal.
Okay—well, moving beyond the moronic question why aren’t there any Muslims in a Christmas movie, some parts of this breakdown are true, like the implausible plots of some of these films. Yet, everything else is just total crap. Not in the sense that it’s wrong, but who cares? Honestly, who the hell cares if Santa Claus is white? As a person of color, I couldn’t care less. Santa is an old white guy who brings joy to millions of children of all races and creeds on Christmas, or so the legend says. It’s about spending time with your family, gift-giving, and a reflection of what you’re thankful for as the year comes to a close—NOT wondering why there aren’t any feminists in the friggin’ Christmas village. Not everything has propagandistic intent. Not everything is for a sociopolitical analysis. Not everything is political, but this is the Left. They will make you care, they will ruin your Christmas to talk about white privilege and other nonsense, and they will break you and beat you until you submit; until everyone is on their side of the arc of history and as equally miserable as they are in life. So, I’m not a die-hard Hallmark fan, but because of this—yes, I will watch a few more of this network’s movies, no matter how embarrassing they are. Well, maybe after Home Alone and Die Hard—the best Christmas movie of all time.
Hallmark is problematic now; the Left loves those bath salts, huh?
No, I’m not talking about the RINOs who create defeat from the jaws of victory, but the Democrats who are so partisan and so hardened in their partisan thoughts that they actively want everything to fail so they can swoop in and “save” you in their own socialist/fascist failure “success”.
The world is just Orwell.
We all know the left wing lurch the Democratic Party has taken over the past for years. You saw that with the energized progressive cohorts that flocked to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in the 2016 Democratic primaries. Now, with tax reform done, Democrats are licking their lips. They think they can use this as the ICBM to nuke the Republicans in the midterms, and that could happen, but this is all based on the bill’s bad poll numbers. Analysis and even some publications, like The Washington Post, admit that this bill will cut taxes for 80 percent of Americans over the next eight years. It’s a gamble on both sides. Yet, for Democrats, that also includes explaining why they voted against middle class tax relief, betted against the American worker, and want business in general to fail in order to screw Trump.
There hatred and their partisanship runs that deep, They want to hurt you, to “save” you and they want you to love them for it. 😦
If this bill becomes more popular, and it’s bound to, and people start seeing more money in their pockets—the defense of this will be, well—less than stellar. You’re already seeing some acknowledgement, like with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), who admitted in a radio interview that there are provisions of this tax reform package that will help the people of his state. Manchin voted against the bill.
Left-leaning tax policy center finds that 80.4% of Americans would see a tax cut in 2018. The average decrease would be $2,140. Only 4.8% would see a tax increase.https://t.co/2UVcvrom6d pic.twitter.com/52F9uDx90Z
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) December 19, 2017
The Wall Street Journal editorial board noted that if Nancy Pelosi had navigated a piece of legislation that saw a deluge in businesses announcing that hundreds of millions will be devoted to charitable giving, investment, and bonuses to their workers, she’d be dancing in the aisles of the House floor in a Santa suit. Just like the disastrous results yielded from their minimum wage hike push, just look at Seattle, the Democrats are once again hoping that no one will notice their economic illiteracy. Gone are the Obama days where the former president did offer support and confidence in the American worker. He could have offered better legislation to that end, but with Trump, the Democrats are hoping that American families get screwed over, hoping economic misery befalls the nation, all for the goal of retaking Congress (and possibly removing Trump via impeachment) and then raise taxes since they think its their money.
The Democratic strategy heading into 2018 comes down to running against the tax bill almost entirely on the basis of its poor opinion-poll numbers, which result from months of negative media spin. Still, there are a couple of things worth noting about the position the Democrats have staked out.
They will also run that every Republican is a sex crazed pervert and will pay millions to have “victims” come forward that will disappear faster than a snowball in volcano when its over. (Just like Trump’s and Roy Moore’s “Accusers”)
Let’s consider this notion in light of these corporate announcements. Between them, AT&T and Comcast have 300,000 employees who will benefit from the $1,000 bonuses. Virtually all American workers not employed by the government depend on the economic health of their employers to support themselves and their families. On what basis do these bonus and investment announcements deserve cynicism and vilification?
Consider as well the economic substance. Among the criticisms of the corporate-rate cut is that businesses mostly would buy back shares, benefiting only shareholders. Certainly many will do that. But the announcements by AT&T, Boeing and Comcast suggest another likely result. In a growing economy with a tight labor market, scarce workers are increasingly valuable. When Boeing says it plans to invest $100 million in its workers, the clear message is that Boeing knows that in a strong and competitive economy, it is going to be in a bidding war for talent.
That is part of the argument made by White House chief economist Kevin Hassett and others. A wide body of research suggests that corporate tax reform that lets companies retain a greater share of earnings will benefit workers in higher wages.
How any of this is bad is a mystery. Democrats are betting that the private sector will fail to respond to the tax bill’s incentives. Democrats used to be the party of hope. Now, by their daily admission, they have become the party of hoping that tax cuts will fail and private investment won’t help workers.
In the meantime, outside of the Democratic noise machine, the economy is growing at four percent, the Dow Jones had a 5,000-point surge this year, the biggest ever in its history, consumer confidence is at a 17-year high, and unemployment is at a near two-decade low. The economy is booming. Even CNN had to admit that this bill would put some “damn good money” in the pockets of working class families. Apparently, this is all bad news. This is apocalyptic for Democrats. In some ways it is because Trump is succeeding economically in way Barack Obama never could. That has to rub them the wrong way.
And since its a Thoughtcrime because they are at War with Trump and have always been at War… 🙂
A resource guide at Bard College encourages students, faculty, staff, and visitors, to avoid using “gender binary” language.
The Pronoun FAQ, found on the school’s Office for Gender Equity resource webpage, encourages community members to “avoid using gender binary language such as ‘ladies and gentlemen,’ ‘boys and girls.’” Instead, they are urged to use “‘everybody,’ ‘folks,’ or, ‘all people.”
“If I ask someone their pronouns once, is that enough?”
The guide also states that simply asking another person about gender identity once is insufficient.
“If I ask someone their pronouns once, is that enough?” the guide asks. “No, the best practice is to ask regularly because gender identity is not always fixed and static, and some people may change their pronouns.”
The top of the Pronoun FAQ states that the document is meant “to help community members educate themselves so that we can grow and evolve as a community,” and lists a few common pronouns, including gender-neutral alternatives such as “ze,” “zim,” “zir,” “zirs,” and “zirself.”
The pronoun guide also seeks to educate readers on questions such as, “What are gendered pronouns?” and “what are non-gendered or non-binary pronouns?”
In a section dedicated to “Suggestions for Faculty,” the guide concedes that “[i]n large classes, faculty may be unable to learn every student’s name and pronouns.”
“In these scenarios, the most inclusive practice would be to simply avoid referring to students with gendered pronouns,” the guide says. “For example, if a faculty member wants to acknowledge something that a student has said, the instructor may refer to the person using ‘they’ (‘as they said…’) or by gesturing to the student and using ‘you’ (‘as you said…’).”
The guide also suggests that faculty not call on students by gender, and replace words such as “man” with “person.”
“[I]nstead of calling on ‘the man by the window’ to ask or answer a question, an instructor can call on ‘the person in the blue t-shirt by the window,’” the guide explains.
Campus Reform reached out to Bard College for comment, did not receive a response in time for publication.
Oh look, after nearly a year they finally did something…Wow! Let’s all throw a party… 🙂
When the Titanic struck an iceberg, the crew might have rushed to the storeroom, grabbed the materials and spruced up the ship with a shiny new coat of paint. Women in their beautiful fur coats could stand on deck, admiring the lustrous sheen, as everyone pointed to it saying, “What a thing of beauty!”
The new paint job would have “succeeded” to the extent that it would make the Titanic more lovely, but today we would recognize that it might have been kind of beside the point.
Word has now reached us that congressional Republicans have passed tax reform. Everyone is standing around admiring the lustrous sheen, pointing to it and saying, “what a thing of beauty!”
The iceberg is immigration and the Titanic is our country.
Picking the battleground on which to fight is one of the most important advantages the ruling party has. But instead of choosing the fights that make Republicans heroes and Democrats swine, House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have decided to lead with the GOP’s least popular ideas.
They’re being bullied by rent-seekers, hucksters and people who don’t have America’s self-interest as their No. 1 concern — or in their top 20 concerns. Cheap labor advocates don’t actively hate America, like university professors do. They’re just indifferent to it. We wish you the best of luck getting re-elected, but in the meantime, we need more foreign workers.
If the Chamber of Commerce’s arguments were popular, they’d make them boldly and loudly! Instead, the mass immigration advocates make their case quietly behind closed doors.
Republicans seem to be afraid of having the argument about immigration. What they ought to fear is NOT having that argument.
They need to hold months-long debates on building the wall, ending the anchor baby scam, shutting down sanctuary cities, restricting “refugees,” having a total immigration moratorium, and on and on and on.
Not only will they be saving the country, but Republicans will also be bewildered by how popular they’ll be. Why haven’t we been talking about immigration for the past 20 years?
Didn’t everyone else just watch a reality TV star win the presidency by running on immigration? Imagine those same issues being pushed by you guys. Wouldn’t it be fun to be popular for a change?
Whether out of cowardice or stupidity, Republicans keep pushing 10-to-40-percent-popular ideas, while leaving the 70-to-90-percent-popular ideas on the table.
Obviously, the GOP needs someone to tell them what is, and isn’t, a good idea. For a flat fee of $5,000 a week, I could do it. It would take me 10 minutes a day. I have a busy Christmas season (MERRY CHRISTMAS, FELLOW CHRISTIANS!), so until I can devote several minutes every day to this, here are some illustrations.
Congressional Republicans: We’re thinking of passing a behemoth health care bill that keeps Obamacare, but makes a few minor changes around the edges, sure to provoke SEIU protesters. Is this a good idea, Ann?
Congressional Republicans: What if we do it behind closed doors without hearings?
Congressional Republicans: Should we make a big effort to pass a resolution calling for sanctions on Iran?
No. Bad idea.
Congressional Republicans: Really? Are you sure?
YES. NEXT ONE.
Congressional Republicans: How about we adopt President Obama’s universally reviled idea of instant amnesty for any illegal who claims to have been brought here as a child, with no proof required?
Congressional Republicans: What if we start impeaching judges who block enforcement of immigration laws?
YES! Start right away.
Congressional Republicans: Should we earmark specific funds for a border wall, even though the president has full authority as commander in chief to build a wall without us?
You should have done this Jan. 21. Hold lots of votes. Get Democrats on the record voting against a wall.
Congressional Republicans: Should we end the diversity lottery and chain migration policies that require us to take the rest of the world’s losers?
YES! Great idea!
Inasmuch as McConnell and Ryan were terrified of not earmarking $18 million to “battle misogyny in the Marines” in the first budget passed by this GOP-controlled Congress, I’m inclined to think that there’s no hope.
But this is the season of hope! For your New Year’s resolution, Republicans, how about: “I will lose 10,000 pounds of unpopular ideas and demand debates on only our most popular ideas. I will start right away.” (Ann Coulter)
It’s (nearly) over. By a 51-48, strictly along party lines, the US Senate has passed a GOP-backed tax reform package that will cut taxes for more than 80 percent of all Americans (raising taxes on a tiny, disproportionately wealthy fraction), benefit small businesses, and make America’s extraordinarily high corporate tax rate — both statutory and effective — far more internationally competitive. All Democrats, including every alleged “moderate.” voted ‘no,’ while every Republican voted ‘yes.’ The only Senator not voting was John McCain, who is fighting cancer at home in Arizona. This is a very significant victory for the White House and Congressional Republicans, as it also achieves long-sought conservative policy goals such as repealing Obamacare’s coercive individual mandate tax, and opening up oil drilling in parts of Alaska’s ANWR region. At last, a signature legislative achievement from the unified GOP government.
Oh goodie, now the people with ObamaCare can help put a down payment on their Health Care! Yipee, the Congress is not TOTALLY useless, just 98% useless.
Congrats. Take the rest of the year off, you worked hard… (sarcasm).
University of Michigan training session used ‘Privileged Identity Exploration Model’
A two-day professional development conference held recently at the University of Michigan included a training session that aimed to help white employees deal with their “whiteness” so they could become better equipped to fight for social justice causes, according to organizers.
Participants who took part in the “Conversations on Whiteness” session, held December 5 during the university’s Student Life Professional Development Conference, were taught to “recognize the difficulties they face when talking about social justice issues related to their White identity, explore this discomfort, and devise ways to work through it,” the university’s website states.
The goal was to help participants in “unpacking Whiteness” to support students and staff with issues and efforts “related to identity and social justice,” the website added.
The “Conversations on Whiteness” session was one of more than a dozen workshops offered at the conference, held Dec. 4 and 5. The whiteness session utilized the “Privileged Identity Exploration Model” to help white participants explore the “discomfort” of their “white identity,” according to organizers.
First introduced in 2007 by University of Iowa professor Sherry Watt in a College Student Affairs Journal article, the model purports to be a method for understanding how people react to stimuli that alert them of the privilege they hold. The model is to be used by “facilitators” to “engage participants in discussions about diversity,” according to Watt.
Watt states there are eight defenses people use to avoid recognizing their privilege. Examples of defenses include “denial,” where someone simply refuses to admit their privilege, and “minimization,” where someone trivializes the impact of their privilege.
The College Fix reached out for comment to the three university staff members listed as facilitators of the event: Abby Priehs: associate director of residence education; Steve Bodei: associate director of Student Life Leadership Education; and Nick Smith: director of campus involvement.
When asked why the “unpacking Whiteness” event was created, and whether or not students at the University of Michigan had complained about the quality of racial discourse on campus, Smith responded: “This is an internal training for U-M Student Life staff.” A subsequent query to Smith was not returned.
Neither Priehs nor Bodei responded to phone calls from The Fix on Monday night.
The Student Life Professional Development Conference was based around the overall theme of “Identity, Wellness, & Work: Healthier, Happier, & More Efficient,” according to the University of Michigan’s student life website.
Additional sessions were titled “Building and Strengthening Your Assessment Muscles,” “Empower, Safety and You,” and “Making Meaning: the Role of Spirituality in Higher Education.”
Another session, titled “I Don’t Feel Safe Talking About Race,” was devoted to giving staff “tools to create a safer climate to promote dialogue around racial issues.” Meanwhile “The Intersection of Well-being, and Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion on Campus” workshop aimed to help Student Life staff “work towards wellness justice for all students on campus.”
The University of Michigan is not alone in holding trainings to help staff cope with “intersecting identities.”
American University hosted a training event earlier this year designed to help staff understand their own identities.
Among the research guides available online from the University of San Francisco, meanwhile, is a “White Privilege Resource Guide” that provides resources to help researchers deal with their various forms of privilege. (College Fix)
We conservatives need to get our heads right about the mid-terms or liberals will end up guzzling patriot tears and their gloating will be flat-out intolerable. We’re not doomed in 2018 – I mean, it’s not like tax reform or pulling out of the Paris Climate Scam, which have already killed millions of people, including me and you. But, if we fail to get on course for victory then we’re going to see Nancy Pelosi and the Gropeocrats back in charge and trying to make America into California.
So, the first step toward victory is some real talk about us normals – you know, conservatives who are more concerned with our country than with muttering about principles and trying to sell cruise cabins. We need to talk about how we’ve screwed up and how we need to change what we’re doing wrong. We got lazy after we vanquished Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit and installed what has turned out to be the most conservative president since St. Ronald. We had the House, and we had the Senate, so we relaxed. Sure, we’ve gotten some great things done, but every step has been a battle thanks to the enraged Dems, their lying media pals, and that cheesy bunch of Never Trump weasels who are motivated by rage at how we dissed them and their Conservative, Inc., cronies. The enemy is creating a sense of permanent chaos, and they intend to present themselves as a return to normality. “Vote for us liberals and everything goes back to normal,” they’ll lie. They’ll actually amp up the insanity with impeachment shenanigans and obstruction, and they’ll probably bumble their way into provoking a short and hilarious civil war.
We have to stop them, but stopping them starts with us fixing what we’re doing wrong. We can only change ourselves, so we need to do that.
Yeah, I know the Democrats are awful – don’t you read my sensational columns and follow my outstanding Twitter feed? But we’re not talking about them now.
Yeah, I know the liberal media is composed of lying creeps who to serve as Chuck Schumer’s steno pool when they aren’t awkwardly harassing the interns since they aren’t capable of winning themselves women like real men. But we’re not talking about them now.
Yeah, I know the Trumpaphobic True Conservatives™ are desperately trying to regain their power and prestige after we rejected them along with the rest of the Jeb!-loving Establishment Fredocons who never managed to conserve anything except the cash they raked in falsely promising to fight fight fight. But we’re not talking about them now.
We’re talking about us now. Let’s talk about what we did wrong. Let’s talk about what we need to change, because if we don’t change The Swamp is going to swamp us. Our opponents are motivated. They are organizing. They are targeting the weakest Republicans, and in Virginia and Alabama they snatched seats we should have kept or taken.
In Virginia, we had a huge, bloody primary fight that left the winner weak going into the general. Ed Gillespie is an Establishment meat puppet, but he would have been okay, and “okay” is better than any commie Dem. We need to pick our fights. Here’s a news flash – the most conservative candidate won’t win every time. We need to figure out who is the most conservative candidate who can win, and back him/her – that’s the old Buckley rule. The purge of the squishes must come later. We need raw numbers, and if that means accepting the occasional Susan Collins, fine. She’s the closest thing to a win in Maine, so accept that and move on.
In Virginia, the Democrats nearly took the legislature by identifying vulnerable seats, sneaking in with money, tech, and logistics, and pushing turn-out of motivated pinkos. They caught us napping. That’s their plan in 2018 too – but now we know the score. We need to identify our vulnerabilities and start building our defenses – and we can also to identify their vulnerabilities so we can snatch some Democrat seats in Trump country. That means we need to give money and time and not do the grumbly “I’ve got the madz and the sadz at how the GOP isn’t perfectly conservative so I’m staying home, darn it, and ensuring the Democrats win” thing.
We’ll never get 100% of what we want. Ever. Deal with it. So, John McCain torpedoed the Obamacare repeal? I guess the rational response is to let the libs run rampant, right? Sheesh. Stop being a pouty teen, man up, and get back in the fight.
I get mad too. I’m furious with the Elderly Mutant Establishment Turtle. But I’m an adult, not a child, and sometimes I have to delay my unholy vengeance. We worry too much about purging our ranks and not enough about making sure we still have ranks to purge. Oh, the accounting shall come – we will have our revenge. But today we need to keep control of Capitol Hill so Donald Trump can keep packing the courts, gutting the bureaucracy, and winning the war against jihadi dirtbags.
We can wait to get even.
Exhibit A is Roy Moore. Face it – we screwed that up bad. He was a terrible candidate, and terrible candidates lose.
Let’s concede he was treated unfairly by the lying media. Gloria Allred and her scuzzy minions lied about him. Team McConnell spent a ton of much-needed money trying to force a GOPe stooge down Alabamians’ throats so The Tortoise wouldn’t have to deal with the uppity Mo Brooks. Maybe there was some voter fraud. All that’s irrelevant.
Roy Moore was a terrible candidate from the beginning, and when it became clear he was wounded we should have rebuffed his selfish determination to stay in the race. I don’t care if he was innocent. That’s not the point. I don’t care about Roy Moore – he, like every politician, is expendable. He should have dropped out right away because he became a liability. When he wouldn’t, we had to support him or write off a winnable seat, wasting money and credibility because Humility Boy decided Jesus was on his side (Narrator: But Jesus was not on his side).
We owed Roy Moore nothing – he owed us loyalty, which he failed to show when he refused to drop out and make way for an undamaged candidate. His determination to make this race about “clearing his name” cost us a Senate seat. If he wanted to clear his name, there were courtrooms for that. Instead, we got stuck with a guy we knew was a doofus even before he admitted he was a skeevy doofus.
Weird candidates lose. The claims of illegality against him are shaky, but based on his own admissions, the best case was this guy scammed on high school girls in his thirties. Okay, legal or not, that’s going to turn people off. And it did –Republican turn out tanked because when your argument is, “Well, my creeping on teens was technically legal,” you’re going to lose votes.
Oh, and it’s not just that he was a Class A Strange-o. Let’s not forget his awful campaign. While the Democrats were crunching numbers and working the data, Roy was disappearing for days at a time and then riding to the polls on Sassy the Wonder Horse. Perhaps more GOP voters would have turned out for someone who neither checked out the local cheerleader action nor shopped at Elmer Gantry’s Big Warehouse of Redneck Stereotypes.
Yeah, Moore was still better than that baby-killing advocate Doug Jones, but Luther Strange would have won. Mo Brooks would have won. Sassy the Wonder Horse would have won. Moore lost. We need to stop nominating losers.
We have a lot of Senate races coming up. I like some of the more conservative folks – Dr. Kelli Ward in Arizona, Austin Petersen in Missouri. But here’s the thing – if they, fairly or not, allow themselves to be marginalized such as they are less likely win the general than their GOP primary opponents, I’ll toss them over. Nothing personal, just business. It’s their job to win, and we don’t owe any politicians loyalty to back them if they can’t complete that basic task. This is a performance-based endeavor and even though we like them, if they aren’t the ones most likely to win then they need to go. This is about winning. Period.
The lessons are clear. We need to understand that our enemy is serious, motivated and intent on finding and exploiting the weaknesses in our candidates. We need to be ruthless in deciding who is most likely to win, even if it means backing someone who is 80% with us instead of 90%. It means being coldly rational instead of over-heatedly emotional.
We need to win the midterms next year. We need to get our heads right to do it. Yeah, our enemies are horrible and politics is unfair. Boo hoo. We can’t change that. The only thing we can change is ourselves, and we need to or we’ll get crushed. (Kurt Schlichter)
YouTube restricted access to a video produced by the Capital Research Center, apparently for promoting Martin Luther King Jr.’s dangerous ideas on equality.
The platform’s new content guidelines are taking their toll on content creators, flagging otherwise innocuous videos as dangerous—and it’s impossible to tell if the video was automatically flagged by the system, or if a moderator made the call.
Last week, Joseph Klein produced a video called “Right-Wing or Left-Wing, Identity Politics is Destroying America” for Capital Research Center, an American conservative thinktank. Klein describes the three-minute video as a “critique of the identity politics driving liberals and conservatives even further apart.”
Klein makes the same case Martin Luther King Jr. did in his famous speech about judging people not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Shortly after uploading it, YouTube placed the video in “limited content mode,” blocking it from view in the United Kingdom and 27 other countries.
In the United States and other countries where the video was still partially available, it was locked behind a warning message requiring users to sign in.
According to Klein, his video was twice given a manual review and confirmed to contain “inflammatory religious or supremacist content.” It was quietly reinstated after Fox News reached out to YouTube to inquire about the issue. Google claimed that the restriction was in error, which is unlikely, given the prior manual reviews.
The video is watchable on Facebook.
“Throughout the video, I criticize identity politics on both ends of the political spectrum, from college activists to alt-right Internet trolls,” writes Klein for the Washington Examiner. “Despite my attempts to remain nonpartisan, I am a libertarian working at the right-leaning Capital Research Center, and it’s likely my bias is detectable. And this fits a growing trend of center-right videos being placed in “limited content mode” or otherwise restricted.”
The Capital Research Center video is only the latest video to be censored on YouTube. The incident follows PragerU’s videos, which had at least 37 of their videos placed into a limited state.
Source: Washington Examiner.
n academic department at the University of Minnesota declared that “bows/wrapped gifts” are “not appropriate for gatherings and displays at this time of year.”
According a copy of the guidelines obtained by Campus Reform, UMN’s College of Food, Agricultural, and Natural Resource Sciences (CFANS) encouraged its employees “to recognize holidays in ways that are respectful of the diversity of our community,” recommending a series of steps to take.
“Consider neutral-themed parties such as ‘winter celebration.'”
“Consider neutral-themed parties such as ‘winter celebration,’” the flyer suggests, adding that “decorations, music, and food should be general and not specific to any one religion.”
The guidelines go on to say that individuals “may display expressions of their religious faith in their own personal space if it does not have a meaningful public function,” and not “in public areas,” such as “reception areas” or “kitchens.”
Additionally, CFANS claims that “in general,” numerous holiday items are “not appropriate for gatherings and displays at this time of year since they typically represent specific religious iconography,” including “Santa Claus, Angels, Christmas trees, Star of Bethlehem, Dreidels, [and the] Nativity scene.”
“Bows/wrapped gifts,” along with the “Menorah, Bells, Doves, Red and Green or Blue and white/silver decorations” are also discouraged.
According to the flyer, “red and green are representative of the Christian tradition as blue and white/silver are for Jewish Hanukkah that is also celebrated at this time of year,” and so both should be reconsidered.
Susan Thurston Hamerski, media contact for CFANS, informed Campus Reform that the guidelines were used for conversation among faculty and staff, claiming they are “not policy” and “not for distribution.”
Martin Luther King is not only turning in his grave, he no longer even exists for the modern Progressive Liberal.
The “I have a Dream” speech was ranked the top American speech of the 20th century in a 1999 poll of scholars of public address.
Now, it’s forgotten and “racist”.
In a recent academic journal article, two University of Northern Iowa professors blast the prevalence of “whiteness-informed civility” in college classrooms, saying that civil behavior reinforces “white racial power.”
They say that endeavoring to “treat everyone the same” regardless of race, for instance, “functions to erase racial identity in the attempt to impose a race-evasive frame on race-talk.”
Two University of Northern Iowa professors recently argued that practicing “civility” in college classrooms can “reproduce white racial power.”
C. Kyle Rudick and Kathryn B. Golsan assert in a recent academic article that civility, particularly “whiteness-informed civility,” allegedly “functions to assert control of space” and “create a good white identity.”
“Civility within higher education is a racialized, rather than universal, norm.”
This civility can reinforce white privilege, Rudick and Goslan argue, because “civility within higher education is a racialized, rather than universal, norm,” according to the field of “critical whiteness studies.”
To study this phenomenon, Rudick and Goslan interviewed 10 white college students and asked them questions such as “What do you consider to be civil behaviour?” and “How do you think your racial identity may affect your understandings of civility when talking with students of color?”
Students who indicated that they “treat everyone the same way” were accused of trying to create a “good White identity,” according to Rudick and Goslan’s analysis.
“First, participants stated that they tried to avoid talking about race or racism with students of color to minimize the chance that they would say something ‘wrong’ and be labeled a racist,” the professors report. “Another way that participants described how they tried to be civil when interacting with students of color was to be overly nice or polite.”
White students who make an extra effort to be nice to students of color, Rudick and Goslan claim, are merely upholding “white privilege” and “white racial power.”
Even students who indicated that they treat “everyone the same” were accused of reinforcing white racial power by the professors, who contend that treating everyone the same in the spirit of colorblindness can actually be a “race-evasive” strategy.
In this vein, one interviewee, Ryan, stated, “I feel like I treat everyone the same…To me, if you’re white or black…, then I’m going to treat you like you’re a human being. I guess I don’t see skin color whenever I see someone.”
Criticizing this colorblind strategy, Rudick and Goslan argued that it “functions to erase racial identity in the attempt to impose a race-evasive frame on race-talk.”
To fight this, Rudick and Goslan argue that college professors must intervene, saying, “it is incumbent upon instructors to ensure that their classrooms are spaces that challenge, rather than perpetuate, WIC [whiteness-informed civility].”
“One way that instructors can challenge the strategies of WIC is by ensuring that White students and students of color engage in sustained, sensitive, and substantive conversations about race and racism,” they suggest.
Rudick and Goslan also say that professors should “encourage White students to understand how using WIC to downplay issues of race or racism in higher education serves to elide their own social location and reinforce the hegemony of White institutional presence.”
Rudrick told Campus Reform by email that he wrote the article in the spirit of his “continued service to Cthulhu,” but did not respond to follow up inquiries. Golsan did not respond at all.
Major US Airport Goes Full Anti-Christmas This Year, by Regan Pifer
The politically correct, walking-on-eggshells, diplomatic tiptoe Americans have been brainstormed to perform has now spread to our airports.
The latest victim? The Cleveland Hopkins Airport.
That’s right. If you see airport vendors performing a bipartisan ballet throughout the terminal A, it’s because of the latest holiday competition.
According to Cleveland.com:
A holiday decorating contest at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport is being interpreted by some airport businesses as anti-Christmas.
The airport recently launched what it’s calling an inaugural Holiday Concessions Decorating contest, with a Winter Wonderland theme.
In the contest rules, the airport states: “There should be no reference to any one specific holiday celebration whether religious or secular. Stay within the theme of Winter Wonderland.”
And really, can you blame the “mistake on the lake”?
I mean, who really wants to hear the message of “peace on Earth”, “goodwill to man”, and “sacrificial love”?
I can see how so many would find that Christmas cheer offensive.
Therefore, the Cleveland Hopkins airport decides to do away with any religious message dealing with Christmas and makes their holiday decorating contest an impotent, message-less and meaningless winter wonderland.
One airport vendor, who asked not to be named, said he believes the airport is trying to avoid offending travelers who have a range of beliefs. “That’s what I’m assuming,” said the manager, who purchased $200 in new decorations to match the theme. “So I’ve tried to stay away from Christmas. I have snowy trees and wreaths.”
Another vendor, who also did not want to be named, was more blunt: “I understand their decision. I don’t respect it. All this politically-correct stuff is garbage. They want us to keep it as neutral and bland as possible.”
I’m glad there are a few people in Cleveland who haven’t been affected by the radio-active chemicals on the lake.
That we do not need to neutralize our language, our traditions, our holidays to cater to that 1%. The teensy, weensy minority snowflake.
Cleveland City Councilman Zack Reed agrees…well, he agrees in a way that will get him re-elected.
“I want to see Merry Christmas,” said Reed, who sits on council’s transportation committee. “The vast majority of people in Cleveland say Merry Christmas. The vast majority of people in the country want to hear Merry Christmas. We’re not trying to be insensitive – but you can’t take away our right to say Merry Christmas.”
In other news, a Spirit Airlines employee has been “accused of stabbing her co-worker with scissors during an argument at a Cleveland Hopkins International Airport ticket counter”.
Vonda Gardner, 39, of East Cleveland is charged with felonious assault. She posted $25,000 bond on Tuesday following her arraignment at Cleveland Municipal Court, court records say.
The 25-year-old victim, of Westlake, suffered a cut to his stomach during the incident that happened about 7 p.m. Sunday, a police report says.
The victim had been sitting on the luggage conveyor belt behind the Spirit Airlines ticket counter and was told by another co-worker to get up because he was not allowed to sit down, the report says. That co-worker also told him that Gardner took photos of him on the belt, the report says.
The victim asked Gardner about it and proposed a meeting with their manager. Gardner was typing an email to her manager at the time, and told the victim “Don’t worry about it, I got it taken care of,” the report says.
The victim started to read the email over Gardner’s shoulder, prompting her to turn off her monitor, the report says. When the man turned the screen back on, Gardner, who was holding a pair of scissors, reached over and stabbed him with them, the report says.
It sure sounds like Cleveland Hopkins airport could use some Christmas cheer.
But Gardner will certainly be put on the naughty list this year!
To help out millennials, sites like The Job Network have advice for how to handle the job interview. Here is their list of the top ten mistakes young people make:
- 1. Focus on me, me, me
- Oversharing is perfect for a late night dish session with your new roommate. It’s not appropriate for an interview. Don’t misinterpret the “Tell me about yourself” part of the interview as a chance for you to rattle on and on about your life and dreams. Keep it professional and relevant to the task at hand.
Conversely, millennials are often hesitant to talk about their strengths and skills, lest they come off as arrogant. A bit of selling yourself is not only permissible, it’s going to be necessary. Strike a good balance between confidence and arrogance.
What you wear to the interview will make a lasting impression—one you may not have time to change in the course of a short interview. Do yourself a favor and look your absolute best. Err on the side of professional. You can always go more casual later once you have the lay of the land, and the job.
- Not doing your homework
Before you go into an interview, you must learn everything you can about the company and the position. Read up. Take notes. Have answers ready to show you’ve done your homework and you can get done what they need done.
- Maintaining a social media shit show
Go through your social media profiles and walls and feeds and scrub them clean of anything that might give a potential hirer pause. That includes party stuff, political stuff, and anything otherwise questionable.
- Not using your age to your advantage
Yes, older, more seasoned candidates have more experience. But if you can find a way to sell your age as an asset, that can give you a huge boost. Figure out what that means to you—passion, vigor? Then sell it.
- Not asking questions
You will be asked if you have any questions. Have a few prepared and ask them.
- Not speaking like a grown-up
Um…. like… you know. It’s hard sometimes, bro. It’s like…. (you’re not going to get the job). Do a few mock interviews with a pal and put a quarter in a jar every time you use lame fillers like these in your speech. When you can get through a few sentences without them, you’re good to go.
- Fear of commitment
The hiring manager wants someone who can be in it for the long run. Even if you don’t want that—even if you are a “typical millennial” and want to keep your options open at all costs, the interview is not the place to assert yourself. Research is your friend here. The more invested and informed you seem about the company, the more likely you are to assuage their fears that you’ll get hired and bail.
- Poor communication skills
It’s not enough to talk like a grown-up. You also have to write like one. Proofread every piece of correspondence you send for errors, large and small. And learn to write clearly and well. It’s almost as important as the way you speak.