Free speech? Whataburger teen attacked for wearing Make America Great Again hat. (Read the whole thing... video below shows assult of 16 yr old, shown in photo is the THUG)

Free speech?What the hell is free speech?NOT EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO IT.

I'm not saying that you have to agree, it is a right and we should ALL respect other opinions. Doesn't make it right or wrong..... ONLY RESPECT.

Free speech? Whataburger teen attacked for wearing Make America Great Again hat

By

Christopher Koulouris

-

July 5, 2018

 https://scallywagandvagabond.com/2018/07/kino-ahuitzotl-jimenez-whataburger-teen-attacked-wearing-make-america-great-again-hat/

 

Pictured, San Antonio, Texas, man, Kino Jimenez who assaulted Whataburger teen, Hunter Richard on account of him wearing a Make America Great Again (MAGA) hat. Image via social media.

Kino Jimenez a San Antonio man is fired from his bartending job after video shows him assaulting a teen wearing a Make America Great Again hat at a local Whataburger joint.

Going viral is video of an incident which took place at San Antonio, Texas fast food outlet, Whataburger– which saw a teen being verbally attacked and assaulted on account of him wearing the infamous President Trump campaign hat, Make America Great Again (MAGA).

In the video (see below), a man is seen throwing a drink at a 16 year old teen wearing the red MAGA cap’s face, after having verbally accosted him. From there the individual, since identified as 30 year old man, Kino Ahuitzotl Jimenez by social media users, grabs the MAGA wearing boy’s hair before walking out of the fast food outlet with the hat, mouthing off, ‘this is gonna go great in my fucking fireplace, bixch’. 

Told the violated teen, Hunter Richard via news4santonio, ‘I support my President and if you don’t let’s have a conversation about it instead of ripping my hat off. I just think a conversation about politics is more productive for the entire whole rather than taking my hat and yelling subjective words to me’.

Which is a backhand way of saying, if society wants to propagate the notion that it lives in a civil democratic society (if only…) then it ought to also be prepared to accept views, sensibilities and actions that it might also disagree with, even be offended by.

According to the victim, the incident happened while the 16 year old teen was with friends at the fast food outlet off Nacogdoches and Thousand Oaks, Tuesday night when he was suddenly approached by Kino Jimenez. Howard insisted the attack was unprovoked.

‘I didn’t think it was going to generate the amount like what people are doing, I was looking at the comments by some people and “ they are like this is uncalled for” and other people are like mixed opinions but I didn’t think it would blow up to what it is now,’ the roughed up boy said. 

But it gets better.

Pictured, Kino Jimenez

No love lost for Kino Jimenez….

Kino Jimenez employer responds to viral video:

Following the cellphone video going viral, and the assaulter being identified as Kino Jimenez, a local San Antonio bartender, the man’s employer, Rumble San Antonio, last night posted a Facebook post telling of the man being fired.
Wrote Rumble: ‘It came to our attention earlier this evening that a part-time employee was captured on cell phone video assaulting another person at a local eatery. The assault took place, presumably, because this employee did not agree with the other individuals political stance.’
‘We have since terminated this employee, as his actions go against everything that this establishment stands for.’
‘Rumble has, and always will be, a bar that is as inclusive as any establishment could possibly be. THIS BAR IS A SAFE SPACE FOR EVERYONE! No matter your race, creed, ethnicity, sexual identity, and political stance, you are welcomed here!’
‘We do not condone the actions or behavior that were displayed in the cell phone video, and we never will.’
‘If you have any questions or concerns please message us privately. We support and appreciate your business.’

But it may not just end there, with news of a police report having been filed….

Courtesy of all the riled up social media users, it has since been revealed (brace yourselves….) Kino Jimenez is member of the Green Party of Texas according to their website. The group’s ‘key values’ include; nonviolence, respect for diversity, and social justice. Or maybe not….?
Hate crime? Black man wearing Make America Great Again hat pushes Hispanic man onto NYC subway tracks
Gavin Cortina suspended for wearing ‘Make America Great Again’ baseball cap
Spiritual tribute? Maga hat wearing man tossed out of NYC bar was not discriminated says judge.

.

Principal refuses to allow first black valedictorian to give speech, so Rochester mayor intervenes

 

 

Jaissaan Lovett says he was denied a chance to give his speech as his high school's first black valedictorian, so his city's mayor invited him to give it at City Hall.

Youtube/City of Rochester, N.Y. Mayor's Office

When Jaissaan Lovett graduated last month as his high school's first black valedictorian, he prepared a speech — but he says his principal wouldn't let him give it. So someone else stepped in who wanted to hear what he had to say: the mayor of Rochester, New York, Lovely Warren. Not only that, she gave him a much wider audience for his message.

Lovett, a new graduate of Rochester's University Preparatory Charter School for Young Men, was planning on encouraging his classmates and thanking his parents, siblings and teachers, according to the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle newspaper. He also acknowledged some past run-ins with the principal over student protests.

Lovett said he was never asked to give a graduation speech, though past valedictorians had gotten to, according to the newspaper. When he asked to speak anyway, he said the principal, Joseph Munno, said no.

"He didn't want to see the speech or what it said, nothing," Lovett told the Democrat and Chronicle. "He just said no." The paper said Munno declined to comment.

Mayor Warren invited Lovett, who works in her office as an intern, to deliver the speech at City Hall. She then posted it on her YouTube channel and Facebook page.

Jaisaan Lovett's Valedictorian Speech by City of Rochester, NY .Mayor's Office on YouTube

"Unfortunately, Jaisaan's school did not allow him to give his valedictorian speech," Warren said in the video. "For some reason, his school – in a country where freedom of speech is a constitution right, and the city of Frederick Douglass – turned his moment of triumph into a time of sorrow and pain.

"Jaisaan will never graduate from high school again. He will never get that moment back. This is not the time to punish a child because you may not like what he has to say."

Lovett had his own message for his principal, too.

"I'm here as the UPrep 2018 valedictorian to tell you that you couldn't break me. I'm still here, and I'm still here strong," Lovett said in the video. "And after all these years, all this anger I've had toward you and UPrep as a whole, I realized I had to let that go in order to better myself."

The school's board of trustees responded to the controversy in a Facebook post, saying they're "aware of the concern" and will be "reviewing the circumstances regarding what happened." They wished Lovett "much success as he continues his education at Clark Atlanta University, which he will attend on full scholarship, according to the Democrat and Chronicle.

From the UPrep Board of Trustees: We are aware of the concern with the Valedictorian not speaking at graduation. The...
Posted by University Preparatory Charter School for Young Men on Wednesday, July 4, 2018

UPrep, an all-male school serving grades 7-12, is one of Rochester's best regarded charter schools, according to the Democrat and Chronicle, with annual graduation rates well above 90 percent.








.

 

Comedian Michelle Wolf Compares Ivanka Trump to 'Herpes': 'Very Unpleasant, Totally Incurable'

 Tierney McAfee,People EN ESPAÑOL Tue, Jul 3 12:22 PM CDT

Two months after she came under fire for her White House Correspondents’ Dinner jokes about Sarah Huckabee Sanders, comedian Michelle Wolf is doubling down on her criticism of the Trump administration, this time taking aim at first daughter Ivanka Trump.

On her Netflix show The Break this week, Wolf, 33, said she agreed with Rep. Maxine Waters’ recent suggestion that Trump officials should be publicly confronted. And the comedian shared some very specific ideas for critics who may come face-to-face with President Trump‘s elder daughter and adviser.

“You can’t just casually harass these people, you have to insult them specifically,” Wolf said. “ ‘You’re a c–t’ doesn’t hurt them. It’s on their vision board.”

Pretending to address Ivanka, 36, Wolf said: “Is your nickname herpes? Because you’re not necessarily the most dangerous person in the administration but you’re very unpleasant, totally incurable and you always show up when we’re about to get f–ked.”

Wolf also compared Ivanka to the birth control pill Yaz, saying, “At first it seemed like it’d be really cool and helpful, but you need to be immediately recalled.”

The comedian then suggested calling Ivanka “Tiffany,” the name of her younger and less publicly visible half-sister.

“If you see Ivanka on the street, first call her Tiffany. This will devastate her,” Wolf said. “Then, talk to her in terms she will understand. Say, ‘Ivanka, you’re like vaginal mesh. You were supposed to support women, but now you have blood all over you and you’re the center of a thousand lawsuits.’ ”
In an article on Monday, Fox News condemned Wolf’s comments as a “vulgar attack” against the first daughter.

Some people on Twitter agreed that Wolf’s remarks were out of line, while others applauded the comedian for “not backing down.

Wolf’s comments come amid an internal debate among Democrats about how aggressively to confront the president and members of his administration.

After White House press secretary Sarah Sanders was recently asked to leave the Lexington, Virginia, restaurant the Red Hen because she works for Trump, Rep. Waters urged attendees at a rally to keep “push[ing] back” against members of the Trump administration with similar confrontations.

“If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere,” she said.

Some Democrats reacted by seeking to distance themselves from Waters’ remarks, while Trump and other conservatives strongly condemned her comments and made calls for “civility.” But those calls were quickly criticized as hypocritical in light of the president’s own habit of verbally attacking his enemies.

 

  Wolf faced some backlash in April after she mocked Sanders at the White House Correspondents’ dinner, saying “she burns facts, and then she uses that ash to create a perfect smoky eye.” New York Times White House correspondent Maggie Haberman, MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski and others faulted Wolf for what they perceived to be cracks about Sanders’ appearance.

But Wolf refused to apologize, and insisted her remarks had nothing to do with Sanders’ looks.
“All these jokes were about her despicable behavior,” Wolf said at the time.






 .

Was James Baldwin right when he called white Americans moral monsters?

Ricky L. Jones, Opinion contributor Published 2:58 p.m. ET June 27, 2018 | Updated 1:29 p.m. ET July 3, 2018

Professor Ricky Jones talks Tucker Carlson and race relations in the U.S. Louisville Courier Journal

Buy Photo

(Photo: The Courier-Journal)

CONNECTTWEETLINKEDIN 39 COMMENTEMAILMORE

In 1979, the legendary writer James Baldwin began work on a manuscript examining his relationships with Medgar Evers, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. He never finished it. In 2017, filmmaker Raoul Peck used Baldwin’s words as the foundation for his riveting masterpiece “I Am Not Your Negro.” 

Peck’s entire film is captivating, but one segment in particular ceaselessly haunts me. The meditative voice of narrator Samuel L. Jackson deliberately carries us through one of Baldwin’s most damning reflections on a good percentage of white Americans, “I’m terrified at the moral apathy – the death of the heart which is happening in my country. These people have deluded themselves for so long that they really don’t think I’m human. I base this on their conduct, not on what they say. And this means that they have become, in themselves, moral monsters.” 

As he did throughout his life, Baldwin raises difficult but necessary questions with which we must wrestle. Why are so many white Americans so brutally mean and inhumane? Why do so many others feel comfortable justifying or excusing it? Why do others still, who claim “not to think that way,” find it acceptable to say little and do even less? Make no mistake, there are certainly whites who stand in the tradition of William Lloyd Garrison, John Brown and others. However, reasonable people must admit they are the exceptions, not the rules.  

To be sure, no matter how sensibly and dispassionately one approaches the subject, many whites immediately paint them as angry black people, [reverse] racists, or maniacs. Despite that, while far too many cower and equivocate, other brave Americans continue to raise the issue in the public sphere. A small sample of important work over the last few years includes Ta-Nehisi Coates’ “The First White President” in the Atlantic, Charles Blow’s “The Lowest White Man” in the New York Times, Rose Marie Berger’s rumination “Why are white people so mean?” and Michael Harriot’s recent sledgehammer piece, “White people are cowards” in The Root. 

All of these writers along with stalwart academics like Duke University’s William “Sandy” Darrity, Emory University’s Carol Anderson and others contextualize the subject and push back against the emerging narrative that white American mean-spiritedness appeared and apexed with the ascension of Donald Trump. That is a lie. The truth is none of this is new. Its genesis is actually rooted in times long before America’s current anti-black and brown immigrant president’s family immigrated to the country.

Voter fraud is a canard. Voter suppression, however, is real and is not new. It has been around since the limiting of the franchise to property-holding white men at the beginning of the country’s political story. Forcing the extension of it to others has always been a struggle. 

Traumatizing families and children of color is not new. White Americans enslaved blacks, raped black women, demonized black men, ripped black children from their parents, sold them all when profitable, visited any number of other inexcusable atrocities upon them ... and justified it all. Those who resisted were threatened, punished or killed. Once slavery ended, whites continued to glorify slavery and the Confederacy with flags, statues, monuments and political candidates who reaffirmed all the nastiness and death. They still do.

The Supreme Court’s support of such indecency is not new. Remember Dred Scott and many other legal blows to decency and democracy.

That only scratches the surface. Native American genocide, black codes, grandfather clauses, poll taxes, intimidation, disproportionate incarceration, convict leasing, Jim Crow, Japanese American internment, police murder of black men, women and children often without consequence. None of it is new. It is the continuation of a long-standing pattern and, as Congresswoman Maxine Waters advised, resistance needs to be fomented. 

Medgar Evers was slain in 1963, Malcolm X in 1965, and Martin Luther King in 1968. James Baldwin passed in 1987. None of them ever experienced Donald Trump, but all witnessed omnipresent American white supremacy and meanness. Maybe Baldwin was right when he said we are dealing with “moral monsters.” It is hard to say at this point. If that is the case, we need to be clear about it. Such an acknowledgment would lower the expectation that many of our white brothers and sisters will be inclined to make decisions based on human decency rather than economic and political calculations or privilege maintenance. At least that honesty would eradicate the lies and pretense.  

If America continues on this path (and there is no historical or contemporary evidence that it will not), maybe Emma Lazarus’ words famously associated with the Statue of Liberty, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” should be replaced with a paraphrasing of Dante, “Abandon hope, all ye who enter here ... unless ye be white.”  

Sick and tired watching so called "men" sit back and complain about the world but do nothing.

Do you really think that we want to hear about it from you while YOU do nothing? LOL

John Legend..... what a foul dirty nasty mouth

."Ask me, 'Should we be reuniting 2,000 kids with their families?' Ask me that," he shot back. "Yes, we should. I don't care about fucking Sarah Sanders. Reunite the fucking kids with their families, and then we'll talk about Sarah Sanders and her fucking dinners."



This is NOT the way to get your point across. Why can't you speak like a man with manors?
We were all embarrassed FOR YOU. No class at all. Wow, just wow.



Read the story below

John Legend Minces No Words When Asked About Sympathy For Sarah Huckabee Sanders

 https://www.refinery29.com/2018/06/203271/john-legend-no-sympathy-sarah-huckabee-sanders

What a bunch of sissy asses....... There is nothing wrong with them...............Boys Will BE BOYS. If you have boys or a brother you know what this means. Sissy Asses.

.

'Boys will be boys' sweatshirt pulled from stores after being accused of sending a 'sexist' message

Scroll back up to restore default view.

Australian sleepwear brand Peter Alexander has pulled a “boys will be boys” children’s sweatshirt from its stores following backlash from parents saying the slogan had sexist connotations.
Melbourne mother Bridie Harris noticed the boys’ gray pajama top while out shopping last week and took to social media to complain.

“Boy won’t be boys,” she wrote on the Peter Alexander Sleepwear Facebook page. “Boys will be held accountable for their actions.

“I hate to see an Australian store, who makes such great PJs, put such a sexist statement on a T-shirt intended for young boys. Excusing boys of their behavior is not a step in the right direction. It’s 2018.”

Peter Alexander’s “boys will be boys” sweatshirt was met with criticism. (Photo: Bridie Harris‎ via Facebook)

She said the slogan promoted a culture that allows men “to get away with stuff” because of their gender.

“It gives them an excuse for inappropriate behavior,” Harris said in an interview with the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper. “If a girl hurts someone or does something, you never hear someone that says girls will be girls.
“As kids, I get it’s little tiny things, like rough play, but it sets [them] up for a culture where they can get way with anything. I thought it was a long-resolved discussion.”
Harris’s views were echoed by many other people on social media who agreed the children’s sweatshirt also struck them as offensive.

One woman called the top “cringe worthy,” while another said she was “so disappointed that this is something that [the brand] would promote for children.”

A Melbourne mother complained about the top, saying the slogan was sexist. (Photo: via Facebook)

However, many accused Harris of being overly sensitive and did not see a problem with the top.

“Omg why get rid of it!” one commenter wrote. “There is nothing wrong with a old saying. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it.”

Another mother said she was disappointed she could not buy the top for her boys.

“I would like to buy the ‘boys will be boys’ PJs,” she wrote. “I have two boys and would like them to know that’s it’s OK to be boys.”

“The pajamas don’t say, ‘I’m a boy, I’ll go punch another boy or harass someone and that is okay because I am a boy,’” read another comment. 

The tops have been removed from Peter Alexander Sleepwear stores. (Photo: Courtesy Peter Alexander Sleepwear)

“ Boys WILL be boys!” one man wrote. “Making boys feel like they can’t be boys anymore because apparently it’s part of rape culture and they all turn into murderers and rapists anyway.”

A Peter Alexander Sleepwear spokesperson responded to the thread, confirming the brand’s decision to remove the item from its stores.  

“Hi Bridie. I  just wanted to update you and again thank you for taking the time to get in touch with us and bringing this to our attention,” the post began. “We do not tolerate the behavior that is being associated with this slogan. In light of your feedback, we have decided to withdraw this item from sale.”

Peter Alexander Sleepwear has been contacted for comment.