California man caught on film throwing bag of dog poop at house with Black Lives Matter signs
October 21, 2020
For customer support issues contact
support@rawstory.com. Report typos and corrections to
corrections@rawstory.com.
Stories Chosen For You
Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) argued that the United States is "not a democracy" in response to teachers union president Randi Weingarten's call to enact gun bans similar to ones in Australia and New Zealand.
At an American Federation of Teachers (AFT) meeting Tuesday morning, Weingarten had addressed the Nashville school shooting by calling for a reaction similar to "other great democracies."
"How many lives will be shattered before we have the courage to do what Scotland did, what Australia did, what New Zealand did, what other great democracies do? We must solve this epidemic, and that's up to us," she said.
Boebert spoke about Weingarten's remarks after right-wing host Charlie Kirk speculated that the teachers union president wanted to repeal the Second Amendment.
"And, you know, maybe one of the things that we need to address with the Democrat party is, you played a clip from the teachers union with Randi there talking," Boebert said. "Maybe one thing we need to address is we're not a democracy! So quit with that!"
"Maybe that's where you're getting it wrong," she added. "It's saying that we are a democracy. We are a constitutional republic."
Boebert demanded schools retool their curriculum to fit her civics lesson.
"And that is something that needs to be taught in our schools, not this woke critical race theory on how to hate our country and hate your fellow classmates and community members because of the color of their skin," she opined. "Maybe teach a little honor and respect for our history and the correct history, rather than all this woke nonsense that produces the Ilhan Omars of the world."
According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the United States is considered a "representative democracy."
"This means that our government is elected by citizens," one USCIS lesson explains. "Here, citizens vote for their government officials. These officials represent the citizens' ideas and concerns in government."
Watch the video below from Real America's Voice.
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Teen carjackers arrested after realizing they don't know how to drive a stick shift: police
March 29, 2023
Two teenagers in Maryland have been arrested after they tried to carjack a person on Saturday but soon realized they couldn't drive the car because it was a stick shift, WBNS reported.
The 16-year-old and a 17-year-old have since been charged with one count of carjacking and one count of conspiracy carjacking each. They have been charged as adults.
The teens reportedly forced open the car door and grabbed the man while demanding he hand over his keys.
IN OTHER NEWS: Trump-appointed judge blasted over his ‘remarkably childish’ attack on law professor
The man complied and got out of the car, but when the two teens got into the car they realized they could not drive away because the car had a manual transmission. The pair then jumped out of the car and ran.
When police saw the teens a short time later, they tried to run but were apprehended.
Watch the video below or at this link.
Two Juveniles Arrested for Germantown Carjacking www.youtube.com
CONTINUE READING
Show less
University of Texas School of Law Steve Vladeck fired back at a controversial Trump-appointed judge on Wednesday for personally attacking him in a recent court decision.
Anti-abortion groups challenging the FDA's approval of an abortion-inducing drug filed their lawsuit in Amarillo, Texas, since the Trump-appointed U.S. district judge that hears 95% of the cases filed in the city is known to be a champion of conservative causes.
Writing in Slate, Vladeck said that Texas and other red states have steered dozens of lawsuits to Amarillo with "no logical connection" the city, adding that "it’s part of a broader pattern of judge-shopping—where plaintiffs steer cases to the same isolated geographical venues and then publicly admit that the reason they’re doing it is because by filing in those jurisdictions, they know which judge they’ll draw."
The judge Vladeck is referring to is Matthew Kacsmaryk, who is considering a case on whether to issue a nationwide ban on the most common form of abortion medication "in a lawsuit that could’ve been brought anywhere in the country" -- but was brought to Amarillo specifically so Kacsmaryk -- whose anti-abortion views are well known -- would hear it.
IN OTHER NEWS: Trump makes it embarrassingly clear he doesn't know the difference between NATO and NAFTA
"If all Judge Kacsmaryk did in his Tuesday ruling was deny the DOJ’s motion to change venue in the ESG case, it wouldn’t be much of a story," Vladeck writes. "But in the course of rejecting the DOJ’s arguments, Kacsmaryk decided to come after me—even though I’m not involved in that case in any way."
"First, he dismissed the (incontrovertible) evidence of Texas’ behavior as 'an amicus brief filed by a professor with a Twitter account.' Leaving aside that the amicus brief to which he’s referring, once again, was filed in a different court in a different case, this clumsy attempt at a burn (lots of professors—and lawyers—have Twitter accounts) never comes close to addressing the substance of my trifling little tweets. If I had posted my data to a more academic site, would it somehow be more compelling?" Vladeck continues.
Vladeck says Kacsmaryk then took a more personal shot at him by name-dropping the late Texas Law Professor Charles Alan Wright, saying the late professor would be above taking his grievances to Twitter. Vladeck points out that he currently holds the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law.
"It’s hard to say what exactly Kacsmaryk intended to convey by name-checking the man whose chair I have the honor of holding; no doubt it was meant as another fire-emoji-level burn of me personally," he writes. "But it’s a remarkably childish and churlish shot for a sitting federal judge to take at a non-party for the sin of amassing accurate data in support of a position he doesn’t like."
Vladeck writes that it says a lot about a judge who would "go out of his way to try to denigrate someone with no direct involvement in a case before him for no other reason than scoring points (on Twitter, one presumes) and auditioning for a promotion in the next Republican administration."
Read the full article over at Slate.
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Copyright © 2023 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com, for support contact support@rawstory.com.
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}