There is no academic subject that is more meritocratic, and less discriminatory, than math. What this college is doing is wrong.
For their entire careers at this university, these women will be known as the math professors who got hired not because of their abilities at math, but because of their gender.
What this school is doing is condescending and sexist, and it reinforces the false stereotype that woman are not good at math.
Melbourne University advertises female-only jobs in bid to remedy gender imbalance in maths
May 18, 2016
The University of Melbourne has taken the extraordinary step of opening up jobs to female applicants only in an attempt to drive change in the male-dominated area of mathematic academia.
Only about a quarter of all mathematics academics in Australia are female, and the university is now advertising three positions in its School of Mathematics and Statistics for female applicants only.
It is believed to be the first time it has limited applications to women only for permanent academic positions.
The jobs, in pure mathematics, applied mathematics and statistics, may range in level from lecturer, to senior lecturer, to associate professor, depending on the candidate’s experience.
The head of the School of Mathematics and Statistics, Professor Aleks Owczarek, said the decision had been taken to promote change.
“We clearly have an issue with attracting female applicants appropriately to our workforce,” Professor Owczarek said.
“So this is an agenda to attempt to address that.” Reaching gender equality in maths stubbornly slow
Women are notoriously underrepresented in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, but mathematics has the lowest representation of all studies.
Lesley Ward, an Associate Professor of Mathematics at the University of South Australia, and chair of the Women in Maths Special Interest Group of the Australian Mathematical Society (WIMSIG), told ABC’s PM it gets worse the more senior the rank.
“At the first academic rank of associate lecturer it’s still only 30 per cent women, by the time you get up to the second highest rank of associate professor it’s down to under 20 per cent women,” Professor Ward said.
“At the highest rank, of professor, it’s 9 per cent women, according to the most recent data we have from 2014.”
She said there were many reasons for the low percentages, but a key cause was unconscious bias which sees men promoted more often than women.
Because of that, Professor Ward welcomed The University of Melbourne’s move, saying change so far had been slow.
“There have been many measures taken by universities and by individuals and by professional societies to help the advancement of women and the achievement of gender equity in these disciplines,” she said.
“In some disciplines it’s been harder than others and in mathematics it’s one where it’s taken a particularly long time.”
Equal Opportunity Act allows for positive discrimination
The University of Melbourne positions have been advertised using a special measure of the Victorian Equal Opportunity Act.
“The use of this kind of special measure that we’re using has been used with regards to Indigenous employment,” Professor Owczarek said.
“For this kind of positions, permanent continuing academic positions, I believe it might be the first time it’s been used,” he added.
Discrimination lawyer Rowan Skinner said the Act allows organisations to take actions to promote equality.
“The Act specifically permits an organisation to engage in what is overtly a discriminatory act, but for the purposes of ensuring that there is equal opportunity overall,” Mr Skinner said.
With so many college students, and especially so many blacks and women, majoring in fake, useless, worthless subjects that will leave them with nothing but huge amounts of debt that they will never be able to pay back from the low wages they will get from working at coffee shops and fast food restaurants after they graduate from college, here’s a wonderful story about someone who chose to study something that is actually useful in the real world. More people should follow Jasmine Burton’s lead and study STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects:
This plastic toilet could save lives
Jasmine Burton helped design an inexpensive, portable plastic toilet to address the lack of basic sanitation around the world.
January 22, 2016
Everybody poops. But not everyone has access to a toilet.
“It’s shocking that this basic necessity is unavailable to nearly half of the world,” said Jasmine Burton, founder and president of Atlanta-based Wish for WASH.
Burton, 23, was a freshman at Georgia Institute of Technology when she learned that as many as 2.5 billion people don’t have access to a toilet.
It bothered her even more that this sanitation problem disproportionately affects women and young girls.
“Young girls in the developing world frequently drop out of school because there isn’t a toilet,” she said. “It angered me as a woman in higher education and as a product designer.”
Just 18 at the time, Burton channeled her feelings into a mission: She would design a toilet.
While at Georgia Tech, she collaborated with three other students to invent an inexpensive, eco-friendly mobile toilet that could convert waste into renewable energy. They called their sanitation system SafiChoo Toilet.
Made of plastic, the toilet is designed for sitting or squatting, which is a common practice in some countries. It can be placed directly on the ground, or it can be elevated by adding an attachable base. It can also function with or without water.
The system features a waste collection unit (that can go above or below ground), which separates the waste into liquids and solids. There’s also a manually-operated bidet that can be attached.
Burton said these features are intended to help curb contamination and the spread of diseases.
The SafiChoo toilet costs about $50. “That’s the highest price point we want it to be,” she said.
In 2014, Burton and her team won first place and $25,000 at the Georgia Tech InVention competition, the nation’s largest undergraduate invention competition.
“We didn’t think we’d win because products at the contest were always high-tech with super sexy designs,” she said. “Ours was a simple toilet.”
The win enabled Burton to pilot SafiChoo (which means clean toilet in Kiswahili) at a Kenyan refugee camp. She also launched Wish for WASH, the parent company of SafiChoo.
John Zegers, director at Georgia Center of Innovation for Manufacturing, contacted Burton after her InVention competition win. “We thought it was a great product that needed a little bit more development,” he said.
The Center gave a grant to Georgia Tech to develop a SafiChoo prototype and helped Burton’s team find an Atlanta-based manufacturer.
Zegers said he hopes that Wish for WASH is able to keep the toilet a Made in America product.
Burton is currently living in Lusaka, Zambia, as she tests the toilet there. The company is also running an Indiegogo campaign to support the Zambia pilot.
She hopes to begin selling the toilet to U.S.-based customers and to NGOs in 2017.
“It’s amazing when you see how many people have never used a toilet before and what [the SafiChoo Toilet] could mean for them,” she said.
Dashcam video proves that journalism professor was lying when she said police stopped her for “walking while black”
I’d like to think that a journalism professor would be very much interested in telling the truth, and very much against lying.
However, that’s not always the case.
In October 2015, professor Dorothy Bland, the dean of the Frank W. and Sue Mayborn School of Journalism and the director for the Frank W. Mayborn Graduate Institute of Journalism at the University of North Texas, wrote this column for the Dallas Morning News, where she claimed that the police had stopped her for “walking while black.”
However, a dashcam recording (shown below) proved that the police stopped her because she had been walking in the street, in the same direction of traffic, and blocking traffic, all while wearing earbuds, even though there were sidewalks on both sides of the street.
The police expressed concern for her safety.
Since blocking traffic is a misdemeanor, they asked for her ID.
Since she was wearing a hoodie, long sleeves, and long pants, and the police approached her from behind, the police could not have known her race before they stopped her.
Corinth Police Chief Debra Walthall said the police in the video handled the situation so well that she would start using the video to train police about the importance of using their dashcams.
Please keep in mind that professor Bland is a journalism professor. She teaches journalism students, who then go on to become journalists, news writers, and news reporters. How many hundreds, or even thousands, of these journalists, news writers, and news reporters have been brainwashed by professor Bland’s insistence on seeing racism in situations where there actually is no racism? And then, how many thousands, or even millions, of readers and viewers of these journalists, news writers, and news reporters will go on to unknowingly and falsely believe that racism exists in situations where it actually does not exist?
Well this is just plain hypocritical:
How one Minnesota school district handles a rising immigrant population
March 23, 2016
In the district’s middle and high schools, Muslim students have access to private rooms with prayer rugs for the five daily prayers.
Fantastic news! Federal court rules against Obama’s attempt to keep low income black children trapped in horrible government schools!
Although this wonderful news happened three months ago, I just found out about it now: the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against Obama’s attempt to keep low income black children trapped in horrible government schools.
Some background information…
In August 2013, the Obama administration sued Louisiana to try to bring an end to its school voucher program – a program which had just been passed in 2012.
Under the Louisiana program, both of the following criteria had to be met in order for a student to get a school voucher. First, the student must come from a family whose income is below 250% of the poverty level. And second, the current public school that the student is attending must be rated as “C” or below.
86% of students who received vouchers had used those vouchers to flee from public schools which had been rated as “D” or “F.”
Only the most vulnerable children were eligible for the vouchers – the poorest students attending the worst schools.
Obama’s reason for filing the lawsuit was that “many of those vouchers impeded the desegregation process.”
However, in response to Obama’s claim that the vouchers discriminated against blacks, Louisiana Education Superintendent John White pointed out that almost all of the students using the vouchers were black, and said that “it’s a little ridiculous” for Obama to claim that these vouchers caused discrimination against blacks. The Washington Post reported that 90% of the students who received the vouchers were black.
It’s also worth noting that only students whose parents requested such vouchers were eligible to participate in the voucher program. Obama was therefore claiming that parents wanted their own children to be discriminated against. Obama was extremely wrong on this. These parents did not want their children to be discriminated against. In reality, what these parents wanted was for their children to have a chance at a better education.
This also makes Obama a hypocrite, because while he was living in both Chicago and Washington D.C., he always sent his own children to private schools. Does Obama really want us to believe that he subjected his own children to racial discrimination by sending them to private schools?
Furthermore, two different studies, one by Ph.D. students at the University of Arkansas, and the other sponsored by the state of Louisiana, both found that this voucher program made racial integration better, not worse. This further proves that Obama is a liar, and that his entire claim against these vouchers is bogus.
In September 2013, the Washington Post editorial board criticized Obama in this editorial, which is titled, “The Justice Department bids to trap poor, black children in ineffective schools.”
In April 2014, the Daily Signal published this article, which is titled, “Meet one of the students Eric Holder is blocking by standing in the schoolhouse door.”
Fortunately, in November 2015, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Obama’s attempt to keep low income black children trapped in horrible government schools. The court’s ruling can be read here.
Check out this video of “Black Lives Matter” protesters at Dartmouth College, harassing students who are trying to study in the school’s library. And keep in mind that this in an Ivy League school – a supposed pinnacle of academia, intellectualism, and maturity:
Victor Davis Hanson recently raised an excellent point when he wrote:
One common denominator characterizes almost all unrest on college campuses: the demands to create more “-studies” courses (black, Latino, feminist, gay, etc.) and thus to hire more -studies professors.
So far there are few demands to make the physics department more diverse or to hire more engineering professors.
Here’s my take on this:
1) The black students who major in STEM subjects are too busy studying in the library, and don’t have the time, or the desire, to harass the other students who are studying in the library.
2) The students of all races who harass the students who are studying in the library, are themselves too lazy and incompetent to major in STEM subjects.
This recent New York Times article talks about a black student at Amherst College whom the New York Times claims is “unprepared academically” for the particular college that she is attending.
So I’m trying to think of all the reasons why someone who is “unprepared academically” for this particular college would get admitted to this particular college. Here are the reasons that I can think of:
1) Their parents made a big donation to the college.
2) They were admitted for their athletic ability.
3) They were admitted as a result of affirmative action.
If anyone here can think of any other reason, please post it in the comment section.
Anyway, it’s that third reason that I’m interested in for this discussion.
Without specifically mentioning affirmative action, the New York Times article makes a good case against affirmative action.
The student in question even says “I always feel like I need to prove to other people that I do belong here.”
I would respond to that by saying that anyone who is “unprepared academically” for this particular college does in fact not “belong” at this particular college.
Please note that no one said this student was “unprepared academically” for college in general. Instead, this student is “unprepared academically” for this particular college.
But there are thousands of other colleges in the U.S.
If affirmative action did not exist, then instead of getting admitted to this particular college, this student would have been admitted to a different college – one for which she was “prepared academically” instead of one for which she was “unprepared academically.”
Attending a college that is too difficult, is far worse than attending a college that matches your abilities. Affirmative action is causing terrible harm to these students. Colleges should get rid of affirmative action, so that each student will be matched up with a college that matches his or her own abilities.
Here is the relevant text from the New York Times article:
One young woman said she went to sleep at night wishing she would not wake up. Imani Marshall, a senior pre-med student from Chicago, who is black, felt a shudder of recognition and started to cry.
Ms. Marshall, who went to a selective public school in Chicago and came to Amherst on full financial aid, said she had felt unprepared academically and socially for Amherst. Yet she felt that by asking for help, she would undermine not just her own standing but that of her entire race.
“I feel like an impostor,” Ms. Marshall said the other day over lunch at the central dining hall. “I close myself off a lot of times from help. I always feel like I need to prove to other people that I do belong here.”
I read the email that Erika Christakis sent to Yale students, defending their right to wear Halloween costumes, and, more importantly, their right to think for themselves.
I also watched the video where her husband, Nicholas Christakis, behaved with grace and dignity as a Yale student conducted a profanity laden temper tantrum directed at him.
The Christakises are too good for Yale. I recommend that they become Montessori teachers. They deserve to work at a real school that values intellectual freedom and independent thinking, and which would never tolerate the kind of disrespect from a student toward an adult that was displayed in that video. Well, perhaps a two-year-year old might be forgiven for acting that way, but a twelve-year-old who behaved that way toward an adult at a Montessori school would certainly be expelled.
Yale was probably a great school fifty years ago, but the fact that it now encourages and tolerates the kind of behavior in that video is proof that those days are long gone.
The Christakises would take a huge pay cut by switching to Montessori, but they would be treated with respect, which would more than make up for that.
Video shows Yale student freaking out and yelling profanity at professor who said students have a right to dress up for Halloween
The principal of this school was born in the wrong country. Perhaps in her next life (if such a thing exists) she’ll be born in one of those dictatorships where political leaders can cancel elections if they don’t like the results.
After many days of protests, she finally did announce the results, but she said of those results, “It’s not okay for a school that is really, really diverse to have the student representatives majority white.”
In other words, she thinks it’s not OK for people of color to make their own decisions when it comes to voting. According to her, people of color should only be allowed to vote for people of color, and should not be allowed to vote for white people.
The Washington Post reports:
S.F. middle school delays election results because winners not diverse enough
When Everett held its election three days later, its principal promptly refused to release the results, saying she was concerned that the winners were not diverse enough.
Critics compared her to a dictator who scraps elections when results don’t go her way.
Everett’s 36-year-old principal, Lena Van Haren, was disturbed by the lack of diversity among the winners…
Only 20 percent of students are white…
… nearly a week after the election, Van Haren sent out an e-mail to parents explaining her decision to withhold the election results.
“This is complex, but as a parent and a principal, I truly believe it behooves us to be thoughtful about our next steps here so that we can have a diverse student council that is truly representative of all voices at Everett,” she wrote
In the comments section of local media, critics demanded Van Haren’s resignation. Some ominously quoted George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984.” Others compared her to a slew of strongmen.
“I’m sure Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and Napoleon did the same in the name of some bulls— excuse,” another wrote.
Van Haren ultimately gave in, going from class to class and announcing the election results.
“While there was some diversity among the 10 winners, no English learners were elected, even though they make up about a third of enrollment,” the Chronicle reported. “African American and Latino students were underrepresented, while white, Asian and mixed-race students, who are in the minority at the school, took the top four spots.”
Van Haren declined to comment to The Post when reached by phone on Monday night. But she hasn’t backed down from her belief that a diverse population should translate to equally diverse representatives.
“It’s not okay for a school that is really, really diverse to have the student representatives majority white,” she told the Chronicle.
Councilwoman wants police department to hire black police officers who can’t read well enough to do their job
A city councilwoman in Oakland, California, wants the police to lower their standards on their written test so more blacks can become police officers. The exam measures reading comprehension and other things that are necessary for the police to properly to their job.
You know what? I’m sick of fighting against this kind of nonsense. And I don’t live in that city anyway. So let them adopt her proposal. Let’s see what happens when a city hires police officers who don’t know how to read at the level that their job requires. It would make a great experiment.
The San Francisco Chronicle reports:
An Oakland City Council member who wants the Police Department to hire more African American officers has focused her attention on the written exam for new applicants — which is the point where many candidates get eliminated.
Councilwoman Desley Brooks suggested the department could consider lowering the passing score on the written test or getting rid of the exam altogether.
The exam… measures reading comprehension, and knowledge of certain vocabulary words — such as “corroborate.”
… the written exam is a critical indicator of whether an officer can fill out police reports, gather testimony from witnesses and comprehend the laws he or she has to enforce.
Liberal Rebecca Watson explains why it’s OK that rich kids will get to see new episodes of Sesame Street nine months before poor kids
In this video, liberal Rebecca Watson praises HBO for funding new episodes of Sesame Street, which it will let PBS air for free after nine months. The number of new episodes produced per year is also getting bigger because of this deal with HBO.
I agree with Ms. Watson that this is a good idea. She admits that rich kids will get to see the new episodes nine months earlier than poor kids, but also says that this is not a problem. I praise her for seeing this as a win-win situation instead of as a class-warfare type thing. I wish more liberals shared her way of thinking.
I myself grew up watching Sesame Street, Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood, The Electric Company, 3-2-1 Contact, and other educational shows on PBS, and I am definitely a better person for having done so. Perhaps this makes me a “bad” libertarian, but I can’t think of any practical reason to oppose government funded public television. In theory, libertarians such as myself are supposed to be against it. But I believe that in this particular case, real world evidence proves that the theory is wrong. The financial cost of public television, as a percentage of the federal budget, has always been trivial, and the educational benefits of public television over the decades have been enormous. I am glad that I, as well as millions of other people, watched it when we were children, and if that required the use of taxpayers’ money, then so be it.
During the 2010-2011 school year (the most recent year for which data is available) Baltimore’s public schools spent $17,329 per student.
What do students get for all that money that is being spent?
According to standardized tests, only 16% of eighth graders in Baltimore’s public schools are proficient or better at reading, and only 13% are proficient or better at math.
Jon Stewart thinks the solution is to spend more money. He recently said:
“If we are spending a trillion dollars to rebuild Afghanistan’s schools, we can’t, you know, put a little taste Baltimore’s way. It’s crazy.”
Unfortunately, like all liberals who claim that public schools are underfunded, Stewart refuses to admit how much money they are actually spending. I doubt he looked up the number before he made his statement. But he did say what he said, so we know he thinks the current amount is not enough, even if he does not actually know what that amount is.
I wonder how much money would have to be spent for Jon Stewart (as well as all the other liberals who claim that public schools are underfunded) to think it was enough.
In Baltimore, 35% of public school teachers send their own children to private school. This proves that 65% of the public school teachers in Baltimore are idiots.
Oxford University Press bans pigs from children’s books, so here’s Porky Pig reciting the Pledge of Allegiance
Oxford University Press is the largest university press in the world.
The Telegraph reports:
The Oxford University Press has warned its writers not to mention pigs, sausages or pork-related words in children’s books, in an apparent bid to avoid offending Jews and Muslims.
I’m Jewish, and I have neither been offended, nor heard of any Jew claiming to be offended, by pigs being mentioned in literature.
Poll: frat jerks cause $75,000 of damage to ski resort: should their parents be allowed to bail them out?
I’m no expert, but I think it’s going to cost a lot more than $75,000 to repair these damages. And that doesn’t even take into account the lost revenues from not being able to rent those rooms. The students who did this should be forced to pay for all of those costs, be expelled from the school, and have criminal charges filed against them.
I think their parents should be prohibited from paying for the damages. The students should have to work to pay for it.
New Jersey public school forces student to get psychological evaluation, blood test, urine test, and to strip, because he twirled a pencil. The state threatened to take him away from his father.
Ethan Chaplin, Student, Says He Was Suspended For Twirling Pencil
April 7, 2014
Was it a twirling pencil or something more sinister?
That’s the question that hovers over the story of Ethan Chaplin, a Vernon, N.J. seventh-grader who, last week, was told he could return to Glen Meadow Middle School only after he received a psychological evaluation.
According to News 12, Chaplin said he was sitting in class, spinning a pencil with a pen cap on top when a fellow student told his teacher, “He’s making gun motions, send him to juvie.”
After the incident, Chaplin’s dad, Michael, said his son was effectively suspended pending a psychological examination, which the middle schooler passed.
The school tells a different story.
Vernon Schools Superintendent Charles Maranzano told HuffPost he couldn’t discuss the specific incident because of privacy laws, but he did say “no school in the state of New Jersey or nationally would leap to a school suspension for twirling a pencil. That’s not what the basis of our actions are.”
Instead, Maranzano said the student was not suspended, but was told he could return as soon as a doctor completed a psychological evaluation and determined the student posed no threat to himself or others.
“Our actions are always based on what’s best for the health safety and welfare of all the students,” Maranzano said. “We’re responsible for their mental and physical health and safety and security. When a student misbehaves or displays actions that are non-conforming or don’t meet our expectations, it causes us some concerns.”
Maranzano also said, in the wake of several deadly shootings, schools are being especially careful.
“I don’t want to be the one who failed to act when there were warning signs being demonstrated or displayed,” Maranzano said.
Michael Chaplin told InfoWars about what his son had to undergo during the psychological evaluation.
“The child was stripped, had to give blood samples (which caused him to pass out) and urine samples for of all things drug testing,” Michael Chaplin said. “Then four hours later a social worker spoke to him for five minutes and cleared him. Then an actual doctor came in and said the state was 100 percent incorrect in their procedure and this would not get him back in school.”
Maranzano said Chaplin is back in school.
Dad: NJ threatens to take away son after pencil-twirling incident
June 10, 2014
VERNON, N.J. (PIX11) – A 13-year-old boy was the most famous kid in school for a few weeks.
A simple pencil-twirling incident landed Ethan Chaplin in hot water with his school, which threatened to suspend him after a classmate claimed he was spinning the writing utensil like a gun.
After media attention from PIX11 and around the world, school officials backed off — but child protection agencies did not.
Letters to Ethan’s father, Michael, show the school found his son did nothing wrong at all, and that there would be no disciplinary action. The superintendent was even confident the issue would be behind all of them.
And that’s exactly what happened, until Ethan’s father received startling communication from New Jersey’s Department of Child Protection and Permanency and Department of Children and Families.
“I received a letter from them saying they had found an incident of abuse or neglect regarding Ethan because I refused to take him for psychological evaluation,” Michael said.
In an effort to play along and clear his name, Michael agreed to take his son for an evaluation.
Ethan was seen by a social worker, and had his blood drawn and urine taken. In the end, no behavioral problem was found.
The state, it seems, is ignoring that set of testing, demanding further evaluation and threatening that if Michael doesn’t comply, they are will terminate his parental rights and free Ethan up for adoption.
“All I can do is keep fighting, keep telling the truth and (keep) presenting the evidence. That is all I can do and hopefully the state does the right thing,” Michael said.
He has even reached out to Governor Chris Christie’s office, who replied they would contact the Dept. of Children and Families to investigate.
“…I’m scared because they have a habit of running away with things unchecked and that’s exactly what’s going on,” Michael said.
PIX11 tried to get a comment from DCPP and NJ Department of Children and Families but received no answers.
The agency told PIX11 they can’t discuss the allegations or even acknowledge they have involvement with the family.
All of them were unarmed, young black males who were killed by someone who was not black.
Attention Dr. Blake Armstrong of South Texas College: here’s why your comparison of the Tea Party to the Nazis is inaccurate
The Blaze recently reported:
Prof. Tells Students Not to ‘Tell Anybody’ About His Vexed Tea Party ‘Analogy’ — He Didn’t Know It Was Already Caught on Video
Dec. 8, 2014
A psychology professor at South Texas College in Weslaco, Texas, was seemingly caught on video last month comparing the tea party to the Nazis of the 1930s in Germany.
He then told his students not to “tell anybody” about his remarks — but one of his students had already started filming after he allegedly called Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) a “bastard” for using the name “Cruz” to win his election.
“In 1931, which was really interesting, the Nazis — people were kind of tired of them. They’ve been around since 1920, 11 years now. They’ve won seats — they’re like the tea party! That’s such a good example,” the professor said. “Don’t tell anybody I said that though.”
He continued: “But in the sense of how they politically came to power, there’s a good analogy there. That eventually people realized, ‘Oh, these Nazis are a bunch of nuts,’ ‘These tea party people are a bunch of nuts.’ I mean, the analogy really is a good analogy.”
The student responsible for recording the comments, who asked to remain anonymous, identified the professor as Dr. Blake Armstrong. The video was recorded during a Nov. 17 class and uploaded on YouTube the same day.
The student told TheBlaze he recorded his professor because he feels strongly that “it’s wrong for him to use his position as a soap box for his beliefs, especially with young, impressionable students.”
“This semester, [Dr. Armstrong] insulted Republicans about three times before this video was recorded,” he added. On this day, he called Sen. Ted Cruz a bastard for using the last name Cruz to win his election. I didn’t know exactly what he meant, but I decided to start recording.”
While the student said Armstrong’s Nazi-tea party reference is the most “severe” rhetoric he’s heard in the class so far, he argued “it’s very easy to see that he has a vendetta against Republicans and religion with an emphasis on Christianity.”
Here’s the video:
Dr. Armstrong, if you are reading this, I would like to explain why your comparison of the Tea Party to the Nazi is inaccurate.
In the 1920s and 1930s, Germany was considered to be one of the most civilized and most advanced countries in the world. At the time, no one thought that a genocide could have been possible in Germany.
But then in 1938, Adolf Hitler confiscated all the guns from the Jews.
Hitler explained his action with the following:
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”
By comparison, the Tea Party believes that everyone – including Jews – has the right to own guns.
The Nazis supported bigger government in every area of life. They supported wage and price controls. They supported having the government tell businesses what to produce and how much of it to produce. They supported strong federal involvement in health care and education.
By comparison, the Tea Party is against all of these things.
In 2004, when Barack Obama was an Illinois state Senator, he voted against allowing people in their own homes to use guns to protect themselves and their families from rapists and murderers. Hitler agreed with Obama on this issue, at least as far as Jews are concerned. Dr. Armstrong, did you vote for Obama when he ran for President?
Here are some other things that Obama has done, which Hitler would have been proud of, and which the Tea Party is against:
* Obama had four U.S. citizens killed without judicial process.
* In May 2011, Obama signed a renewal of the Patriot Act.
* In December 2011, Obama signed a bill that gave the U.S. government the power to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without any charges being filed or any trial taking place.
* President Obama has defended warrantless wiretapping.
* In Germany in 1938, Adolf Hitler outlawed homeschooling. He said “Give me a child when he’s seven and he’s mine forever.” Hitler’s ban on homeschooling is still in effect today. In 2006, Katharina Plett was arrested for homeschooling her own children. Her husband and their children fled the country. In 2008, Juergen and Rosemary Dudek were sentenced to 90 days in jail for homeschooling their own children. Uwe and Hannelore Romeike and their homeschooled children fled Germany after the police showed up at their house to enforce Germany’s ban on homeschooling. They came to the United States in 2010 and were granted political asylum, which gave them legal permission to live in the U.S. as political refugees However, in March 2013, the Obama administration argued in federal court in favor of deporting them and sending them back to Germany. This means that Obama does not consider them to be political refugees, and that he does not consider Germany’s policy of jailing homeschooling parents to be a form of persecution.
Dr. Armstrong, the Nazis supported bigger government. The Tea Party supports smaller government. The two philosophies have absolutely nothing in common.
For the record, in the 2008 United States election, I wrote in Ron Paul for President. In the 2012 election, I voted for Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson.
Dr. Armstrong, did you vote for Obama? If so, besides having done the horrible things that I mentioned above, I also would like to draw your attention to these hundreds of other horrible things that Obama has done.
Anyway, if there is any one thing that I hope you get out of this, it is the following: the Nazis supported BIGGER government – the Tea Party supports SMALLER government.