They aren’t being taught MLK, they are being taught Prof Derrick Bell’s Critical Race Theory.
Derrick Bell’s CRT runs diametrically opposed to MLK’s “dream” of a color blind society, where people are only treated according to the content of their character. Derrick Bell is on video stating that he thought MLK’s approach was a joke and a lie.
 November 12, 2015 at 10:20am
Forget the #BLM crowd….if an American high school set up a white only event, so that the whites in attendance would feel more safe raging against people of other races, the Department of Justice & the freakn’ United Nations would be weighing in. That’s not conjecture….that’s for real.
 November 12, 2015 at 9:17am
That’s the case with most of these like minded folks. They either go on to become psychologists, sociologists, educators (or education admins), lawyers or government officials.
Notice anything about all of those professions? They are social engineers…
 November 11, 2015 at 10:45am
Also, cost of living should be considered when comparing stats.
If I had to guess….most philosophers are getting hired in major metro / university cities with crazy cost of living rates. A “philosopher” making 80k in Georgetown may be equivalent to someone making 40k a year in Kansas.
Also….don’t plumbers run on apprenticeships…meaning the pay for “plumbers” ranges from 25k – 65k because of the wide span of experience. A “philosopher” can’t get hired anywhere without a masters degree at the very least…if not a PhD. This means the “philosopher in training” is likely not included in that stat line. They aren’t pulling in the philosophy teachers assistant salaries into that figure.
 November 11, 2015 at 10:21am
Is that how you saw the video of the photojournalist and the safe space human wall at Mizzou?
The brown shirts literally surrounded a journalist and physically imposed their will upon him. They marched forward, into his personal space, while demanding they had a right to walk forward…while at the same time demanding he get out of their personal space. LOL
They yelled at the man, while screaming to him not to yell at other people. They got in his face, while telling him that he needed to go because the people in his face didn’t want to see / talk to him.
This wasn’t just a group of people expressing a desire to NOT be photographed. A professor in mass communications tried to knock a guys camera away and literally called on “muscle” to strong arm a person documenting the protest.
So the"reporter" was yelling at people, first?
This seems more a REACTION to the reporters actions
Wrong Cobalt He spoke in a controlled manner , watch the video and you'll see that.
 November 11, 2015 at 9:01am
Trump’s appearance was HUGE. He’s going to save the country Beellions! The TPP? It’s TERRIBLE…we are LOSERS in every trade deal we enter. Trump’s going to make it GREAT. China’s not part of TPP? Whatever, they SUCK. All I know is that Trump is going to make America BETTER.
Seriously though, I can appreciate why some folks think Trump is the answer. I personally disagree, but I think I understand why some people think he’s the person for the job.
What I can’t understand is how you can reach that conclusion from these debate appearances. Want a fun drinking game on a weekday? Take a shot for every time Trump says HUGE, BIG, SMALL, LOSER, WIN, BETTER, GREAT to describe what’s going on in our country, and what he’s going to do. It’s got to be his stump speeches that keep the fire burning.
I would have been so drunk before the 30 minute mark...
Your last paragraph caused me to LOL!
A great suggestion for the next GOP debate party.
 November 10, 2015 at 2:55pm
Only that the people on the way out are far more close to center than the people they will replace them with.
Seriously….after watching the video from UofM where the free lance reporter was surrounded and shouted down….and the video from Yale where a student straight up told a school official to “SHUT UP!” when he tried to respond to her guano-crazy comments……those lefties on the way out look totally reasonable and sane.
If these crazy people are able to convince our legal authorities that “word violence” is just as real & hurtful as physical violence, we’re done. They are getting away with it on college campuses for now…
 November 9, 2015 at 4:00pm
I can’t speak for the president, but if I were in his shoes…..I wouldn’t have engaged them because out of fear of liability, not because I’d be particularly afraid them or their views.
But to be sure, had he exited his car to reason with them….phones would be out, video set to record, and the president forced to defend against a “when did you stop beating your wife” line of questioning. Anything he would have said, short of complete agreement & acquiescence would have gone no where in terms of getting them to move, or resolving the situation. Again, from a liability standpoint, he probably had more to lose than to gain engaging them. THAT is part of the problem.
 November 9, 2015 at 3:42pm
The president said that many of the complaints were being handled through proposals to the University’s diversity programs, which likely includes some freshman orientation reading or courses, student support programs, etc.
Also, what could the president have done that could have stopped any one of those incidents they are reporting this is about?
Ban rebel flags flown on campus…even by local residents driving through? Is that legal?
How could he have stopped those guys in that truck from yelling the N-Word to the student government president…as he walked off campus?
How could he punish the guy that walked up to the black student association & used the N-word….when no one could identify said man?
Essentially, they asked the University President to publicly endorse & implement the views & social theories of the Liberal Arts academia as fact & policy…and he wouldn’t do it. THAT was his inaction, and he was fired for it.
 November 9, 2015 at 3:26pm
Please provide any additional information from your news sources if you got em.
So far, all I’ve heard was…
1) Student Government President said some white guys in a pick-up drove by him, as he was walking on the sidewalk somewhere near campus, and yelled the N-Word as they drove by
2) Black student association on campus reported that a white man walked up to them (who was allegedly drunk – as per Associated Press) and used the N-word toward them
3) Someone used poo to draw a swastika on the bathroom wall
4) I heard on the radio that some students sitting-in on campus were offended by a truck driving by where they were with Rebel flags flying…which they took as offenses directed toward them
Out of those offenses…there was no one identified for punishment. What was the president supposed to do with a bunch of racist charges with no perp given to him than “racist white privileged people” ?
 November 9, 2015 at 3:09pm
How does 1 person, the president of the University, guarantee that no person of a particular race ever feels slighted or threatened by a person of another race, when said students on campus perceive all slights & threats according to race?
It’s an impossible problem to solve through policy, other than what already has been put in place.
Even IF there were a zero tolerance policy that would expel a student for acting in a racist manner….how would that have helped the specific incidents the students were upset about?
1) The guys that drove by and yelled the N-word at the SGA president were not identified, and may have not even been students, given the infraction happened off campus
2) The drunk guy that allegedly called the black student group N-words was never identified, was not recorded or otherwise was captured for identification & punishment
3) Without cameras in the bathrooms….no way to prove who put up a swastika in poo on the wall, or if it was even directed toward blacks.
Short of straight up communist style mandatory re-education camps to instruct people how to properly speak & think…regardless if you are part of the problem or not, there is nothing this President could have done to single handedly stop these things from happening.
 November 9, 2015 at 2:40pm
Most QBs in the NFL (I single out QBs because they generally show more leadership / above the fray qualities) would not have jacked those people’s banners.
At most…they would have gone over and chatted with the folks…shared a few verbal jabs in good fun, and shut those fans up with points on the board.
I’m from Louisiana, and I can tell you with 100% certainty without even knowing the man…Drew Brees wouldn’t have done what Cam did, and Drew is a class act.
But hey….Cam for MVP!
November 9, 2015 at 12:44pm
Jeez, lets count the assumptions required to reach that conclusion and determine who’s the bigot here…
1) People visiting The Blaze are all “Conservative”
2) Conservatives are all “White People”
3) White People are all “Racists”
Therefore, all people using the word “thug” to describe the behavior of a black man that stole another person’s $500 sign (because insinuating there are a lot of Packer fans in North Carolina offended him) is code word for the N-Bomb.
 November 9, 2015 at 12:38pm
Horse crap…making a sign that in an indirect way slights the Panthers organization by insinuating that there are Packer fans in North Carolina makes you a jerk now? There has always been a certain amount of good willed rivalry allowed in sports….particularly in football & the NFL.
If you think that sign was inflammatory & offensive….such that the leader of the home team felt compelled to engage in criminal activity to ensure it wasn’t seen by others….you haven’t been to a sporting event.
Football players respond to fan heckling by putting points on the board, not by stealing signs & getting P-O’d for fans supporting visiting teams.
BTW…people can be jerks in this country. Completely legal. It’s how others respond that defines our society, not the jerk.
 November 9, 2015 at 12:28pm
It’s a football game for crying out loud! Fans from visiting teams are not only allowed to attend, but are encouraged to travel from their home states to spend money at the stadium and the “home” city.
Had the sign demeaned or poked fun at Cam Newton, or the Panthers….I could understand his fustration. If the Panthers were a winless team, I could understand Cam being particularly sensitive to slights toward his team (even one that suggests there are Packers fans in North Carolina…the SHOCK!).
But those aren’t the cases. Cam felt empowered to steal property of another person because *HE FELT* it disrespected him & his team. It’s also illegal….but he’s on pace for league MVP so good luck with that sign-guy.
 November 6, 2015 at 11:45pm
Sorry man, not buying it. If Obama can create a “composite memory” and pass it off as fact in his bio with little consequence to his capacity to serve as POTUS, then even lighter creative liberties Carson might have taken with his application or non application to Westpoint surely should not be a big deal no?
If Hillary out & out lying “ala Brian Williams” about having to corkscrew dive land in Afghanistan, and duck sniper fire after touching down without anyone challenging her capacity as POTUS then a personal theory on how the pyramids that runs counter to conventional knowledge shouldn’t disqualify a candidate should it?
And what about Frank Marshal Davis? Obama writes about a mentor in his biography named “Frank”, and no one bothers to find out who the person running to be the leader of the free world had helping shape his views & opinions? The guy was a self avowed communist w/ a FBI record….that not news worthy?
Not even close to being fair…
 November 6, 2015 at 1:39pm
By the way….god help our future generation when they are called up on to serve our country.
I’ve heard experts predict that kids today will have to change their name in the future to avoid all of the stupid, and sometimes offensive, things they’ve said on social media so that they can get a job.
Given the government is tracking all internet traffic, particularly emails & social media…..any person running for office in the future will be subject to a full prostate exam, and will be called to defend statements made as a teenager on facebook or twitter.
If an otherwise good candidate is disqualified because he took some creative liberties in his book to make a more effective point to his readers about hard work & opportunities….then our future generation is doomed, unless they are willing to play ball.
 November 6, 2015 at 1:34pm
Aye, it might….
I think Ben’s story, as told in his book, is probably 75-80 percent true…and likely happened in some way, shape or form as he described….but is a (to borrow a term from Obama’s bio) “constructed memory”.
To give context though….I seriously doubt Ben had plans on running for President when he wrote the book so he might have made a conscious decision to enhance & embellish something from his past that he thought would more easily & effectively get his point across that…with hard work, doors open…than explaining how things really happened.
Not as bad when you look at what Obama did in his book….by combining his understanding of race relations + experiences with several girlfriends to make 1 girlfriend and a experience he had taking her to see an all black play, which turned into some weird conversation about the issues of race in America…which what was Obama’s point in constructing that memory.
I think this practice is probably ALOT more prevalent in biographies than we think…..BUT, because this guy is a huge threat to the Democrat political class, it’s now an unheard of betrayal of trust & is indicative to how Carson would govern as president. LOL
Jesus Christ….does Hillary lying about flying into Afghanistan under sniper fire mean anything to these journalists if this is a big deal?
 November 6, 2015 at 1:19pm
To be fair….Carson’s team has admitted the events with meeting General Westmorland & being offered a scholarship to Westpoint, as described in Ben’s book was not true.
There was another meeting, earlier in the year Carson said he met the General where Carson may have actually met him….and apparently the process of being admitted to Westpoint would have not allowed for the General to offer Ben a scholarship in that way…but instead may have encouraged Ben to seek enrollment.
My take is that Ben, like Obama, created a “composite memory” of a series of events and rolled them into one concise point to make to the reader. Creative liberty if you will…
In this case though….rolling up some events that happened to you and embelishing a bit to make a point to kids that with hard work, doors will open for you seems less harmful and malicious than Obama doing the same to make a point about how tourtred he was as a young black man in America
That said….they both still took creative liberties with their story.
If all the rest of the candidates weren’t all guilty of worse things, I’d say this would be an issue for me…..but if that’s all they have, I’d say that pails in the comparison to the big ones Hillary and Obama have said
 November 6, 2015 at 1:11pm
And no one in the MSM made a big deal about Obama creating “composite memories” in his book about his struggle as a young black man in America, while dating a white girl….where the girl he describes, and the events that took place were all fake.