Cancel Culture Boomerangs on the Left as They Wish Trump Assassination Attempt had Been Successful
“Libs of TikTok and other accounts have chronicled the hideous remarks of many others regarding the attempted Trump assassination”
It’s amazing how many people have stupidly put themselves out there saying these outrageous things and not realizing there would be consequences.
The College Fix reports:
Cancel culture comes back to bite the Left amid posts wishing Trump was assassinated
In a perfect world, people like this teacher in the Oklahoma-based Ardmore City Schools district would have the self-control not to post stupid stuff on social media after a U.S. presidential candidate is almost assassinated.
The high school music teacher responded to a Facebook user’s post saying they were going to donate $500 to would-be assassin Thomas Matthew Crooks for “tryin’ to save us,” according to a screenshot obtained by Libs of TikTok.
“Same!” wrote the teacher. “Wish they had a better scope” — followed by an “oh well” emoji.
Oklahoma State Superintendent Ryan Walters subsequently posted on X that the teacher’s comments were “unacceptable” and added: “We will not allow teachers to cheer on violence” against President Trump.
Later the same day Walters posted “I have investigated it enough. I will be taking [the teacher’s] teaching certificate. She will no longer be teaching in Oklahoma.”
As of Friday, the Ardmore school district website had a pop-window notice of a district news release which stated officials had started a “thorough and swift” investigation, and that the district “strongly condemns acts of physical violence and any words that seek to encourage it.”
According to the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, the Ardmore staff “Master Contract” states the “Superintendent and the School Principals will annually remind staff members and orient new staff members concerning the importance of maintaining proper decorum in the on-line, digital world as well as in person.”
Libs of TikTok and other accounts have chronicled the hideous remarks of many others regarding the attempted Trump assassination, including those of other educators. Some, like a fire chief from a town not far from where the shooting occurred, not only apologized profusely but backed it up by resigning.
Again, in a perfect world, people would “pause before [they] post,” as a recent Education Week article put it. (It also noted the travails of two other teachers in addition to the Ardmore case … not to mention that of Superintendent Walters himself who had tweeted “The left, the liberal media, and the radical extremists of Joe Biden’s party tried to assassinate @realDonaldTrump.” Ed Week only attempted to contact Walters for comment, not the teachers.)
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
A music teacher??? Does that seem anti-intuitive or what! I sometimes wonder how the land of Bach, Beethoven and Brahms could possibly have condoned the violence against its Jews under the Nazis But I may be under estimating the power of compartmentalized thinking. I guess the sensitivity I associate with music appreciation does not lessen the glee of seeing one’s enemies bloodied.
Have you forgotten how almost all of central Asia was conquered and subdued by Chaka Khan?
Wagner, Strauss, Tchaikovsky & many other brilliant composers rabidly hated Jews. Doctors, professors, philosophers & other members of the German intelligencia were enthusiastic participants in the Final Solution. This used to be common knowledge.
That likely violates the first amendment. If she were working in an office without public contact firing her would definitely be illegal. As it is they can argue that her effectiveness as a teacher is diminished because her students will know what she wrote and will hold her in contempt, or something. If she chooses to sue she could make it difficult for them.
After BLM riots 3 years ago a number of school districts negotiated a clause in teacher’s employee contracts that banned celebrating violence or condoning it in either school media or personal media.
Urging or threatening a crime of violence against a federal official or candidate is itself a crime. It is also evidence of moral turpitude. Sounds like good grounds for revoking her certificate.
Threatening is a crime, but it needs to be literally an actual and credible threat. Urging is not a crime, and it can’t be. Urging (unless it crosses the line into incitement, which this came nowhere even near), is protected speech, so there can’t be any law against it, and government entities can’t even discipline their employees for it, unless they can show how it affects their ability to perform their duties. Revoking a certificate is right out. Completely illegal. This is settled, black-letter law.
I don’t see that the teacher urged or threatened from the article. Having a after the fact opinion that she wished the shooter had hit Trump sounds like sick protected speech.
If I was her student I would be afraid of her. She believes I should die because I have different political beliefs than her.
There’s no evidence for that, so it would be an irrational fear, and would not justify the state violating her freedom of speech.
Your suggestion is even less rational than a gay student claiming to fear a Christian teacher, because the teacher believes he deserves to be executed. Under your theory the state would be justified in firing all Christian teachers.
Remember, this is not a theory of mine, this is settled law. A government employee cannot be fired or disciplined for expressing the exact wish that this woman did, unless it significantly impairs her ability to do her job.
They can be fired for violating the terms of their employment contract. That is also settled law. There have been cases when a teacher was fired for explicitly violating terms and the firing was upheld. The teaching cert is another thing and I suspect that will fall under different case law.
I’m sure there is nothing in her contract about what opinions she’s allowed to express on her own time I doubt a government employer is even allowed to put such a thing in a contract.
the elephants from the view wish trump was shot in the mouth:
Ana Navarro says bandage should have been over Trump’s mouth during RNC speech
My son is a music teacher turned assistant principal.
He’s also a democrat who can’t stand Trump (was brainwashed in college, I’m working on him and I think I’m making progress but the counterindoctrination is still ongoing).
Very shortly after the shooting he called me to assure me that he condemned the act unequivocally regardless of his opinion of Trump.
It struck me as a little odd at the time…why would he even think I’d believe that of him? I’m wondering if this type of sentiment was so widespread in education/music he was afraid I’d hear of it and think he was in agreement.
There is a “personal character” clause , sometimes called a “professionalism “ or “professional standards” clause in every contract.
And in every credential.
This allows pretty much anyone to be fired — and it allows any credential if organization to de-credential anyone.
You may have a first amendment right to say that five-year-old children should be raped three times a day , but you can also be fired and lose your professional licensure for saying such things
Anyone — ANYONE!!! — who thinks that police officers, nurses, lawyers teachers can just go around advocating murder …… without adverse impact on professional standing simply does not know what he or she is talking about.
It’s not “cancel culture” — it is professional standards. It’s character.
You do not have a constitutional right to be a judge , a cop , a marine corps officer , an NFL quarterback, a doctor , a kindergarten teacher , a university professor. You can say whatever you want without going to jail BUT you can also go shovel sh;t for a living.
“You don’t have to go home; you just can’t stay here.”
Same idea.
Why is this difficult to comprehend?
If you get a drivers license , and then you drive like a maniac, you lose your license. There’s no constitutional right to a drivers license.
Come on people, grow up.
You are completely and utterly wrong. A government entity cannot fire you, cannot revoke a certificate, cannot do anything to you, as punishment for exercising a constitutional right.
Not if you work for the government. And no, you can’t lose a license for it, because licenses are by definition issued by the government.
I’m afraid you’re the one who doesn’t know what you’re talking about.
You don’t have a constitutional right to any specific employment, even by the government, but you do have a constitutional right not to be denied such employment as retaliation for exercising a constitutional right, just as you have a constitutional right not to be denied any government benefit for such a reason. If you are receiving a government grant, it can’t be withdrawn because you said something.
In exactly the same way, you are not entitled to any of the jobs you listed, but you do have a right, both against the government and private employers, not to be denied such a job because of your race, sex, religion, disability, or age over 40, unless it significantly impairs your ability to do the job.
And, once again, you cannot lose your license for exercising a constitutional right. This woman didn’t teach like a maniac; she expressed an opinion. Revoking her teaching certificate for that is exactly the same as revoking her driver’s license for that, and doing so is unconstitutional.
Go educate yourself. This is not even slightly controversial. It is settled law.
Mil,
The established dictum, at least in the practice of medicine and other health care professions, is that licensure is not a right, but a privilege removable at any time “for cause”. The operable words are “for cause” as determined by the agency/board/commission issuing and policing the professional licenses. There is another layer to this in medicine, that of course being the specialty and subspecialty boards which confer our practice credentials independent of our licenses. Both can be arbitrary, capricious and quite vindictive.
We need look back no further than the last five years to see multiple examples. Many physicians, including those who are quite respected, lost their licenses due to challenging the absurd, rigid orthodoxies that became worse than intellectual gulags during the COVID19 pandemic. Using the “settled science” dogma of the climate alarmist cult, the Faucians took over medicine and purged the collegial back and forth that characterized the profession. No free discussion, just believe or be stripped of your credentials. Hundreds of physicians had their licenses revoked for speaking out against the use of unproven drugs and speculative practices because CDC just made guesses. Our patients are not living clinical trials! Many lives were ruined, and many actually took their lives. So, for you to say that government won’t take a license for exercising a constitutional right is absurd. The same thing happened to other health care professionals such as pharmacists, nurses, etc. Morale. In health care was destroyed, and it likely won’t be coming back anytime soon.
YMMV, however such a universal statement about government not taking a license for exercise of a constitutional right—THINK AGAIN. It happened extensively throughout an entire economic segment.
Mill: It’s hard to imagine why you would post such obvious drivvle.
Everyone has the constitutional right to say that the boss is stupid and should drop dead. If we say that to his face we’ll lose our job.
You sound like an attorney: Surely, you know that many attorneys have been disbarred for things that they’ve written — that they had every right to write, but were determined to be unprofessional.
These things are obvious to a ten-year-old.
Regardless, you have my best wishes, sincerely. If you respond to this, I will not reply.
Peacock, you are the one writing drivel. What I wrote is not drivel, it is the settled, black-letter, undisputed law.
A private employer is not bound by the constitution. The government is. How is it even possible that you don’t understand this basic fundamental difference?
The government may not punish a person in any way for exercising a constitutional right. That means it can’t fire them, it can’t discipline them, it can’t even cut off grants that it has been giving them! It can’t even do anything that would chill others from saying the same things.
This is drivel. It is simply not true.
Many things that are not true are “obvious” to ten-year-olds. That’s why we don’t let ten-year-olds make important decisions on their own.