RUSH: You know, it’s the fastest week in media. For me it’s one of the slowest weeks. This is like the week leading up to Christmas Day when I was a kid. (interruption) Yeah, yeah, yeah. I’m waiting. I’m waiting for tomorrow. But I’m gonna tell you something. You know, last year… I don’t know if you all remember.
I’m almost ashamed to admit this, that last year I took iPhone 5S day off. Remember that? I came up with some cockamamie excuse. I forget what it was. Maybe I didn’t come up with an excuse to be gone, but I was here awaiting delivery. And you know this year I decided okay, “Rush, let’s show a little maturity here.
“You’ve got a job and you can’t just take off because FedEx or UPS is gonna show up.” So I decided I’m gonna be here, and it’s gonna be the slowest three hours — hee-hee-hee — in media tomorrow. Well, I don’t mind admitting it. I’ve always been one that loves sharing my passions with you and anybody else. It’s great when you find out that somebody else shares your passions. It’s terrific.
In the National Football League, some commentators are starting, are beginning to catch up to your host in realizing/recognizing what’s going on. We have audio sound bites and documentation coming up. If you’re looking for evidence that we have lost the country, and you still are on the ledge about this, you don’t know which way to go, let me throw a story at you.
In San Francisco: “Ninth Circuit Affirms That ItÂ’s Illegal to Wear American Flag Shirts on Cinco De Mayo.” It is against the law in the United States of America to wear American flag shirts on Cinco De Mayo. The story comes from the Daily Caller. “It’s official: the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued an order declining a request for an en banc hearing in a case involving four students in at a California high school who were sent home for wearing American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo.
“The full slate of Ninth Circuit judges has thus agreed with a lower district court and with [three] appellate judges that officials at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, Calif. Could [indeed] censor students who wanted to wear [American] flag-emblazoned shirts,” on Cinco de Mayo. “The federal appeals court issued its denial of an en banc hearing on Sept. 17 — Constitution Day,” yesterday.
How ’bout that for irony?
Yesterday was, in fact, Constitution Day, and on that day the Ninth Circuit “issued a denial of a request for an en banc hearing,” meaning the people wanted the entire Ninth Circuit to hear the case, not just the trio of judges. “‘[N]o further petitions shall be permitted,’ the court ordered.
“The trouble dates back to Cinco de Mayo (May 5) in 2010, when officials at Live Oak High — a school with a predominant Mexican-American student body — forced the students to remove their American flag-festooned shirts.” I remember talking about this story when it happened. Remember it? We ouldn’t believe it! We literally couldn’t believe. It was one of those signs of something that was going on that may be a sign of something to come.
It’s one of these things that we all catalog, “This is crazy; this is never gonna happen,” and here it is. It’s happened. “Administrators [at the school] called the shirts ‘incendiary’ and worried that fighting would break out between white and Latino students if Latino students noticed the [American flag] shirts,” in America, on Cinco de Mayo. “So, assistant principal Miguel Rodriguez told the students to turn their shirts inside out or leave school.
“Students of Mexican heritage told local media that the students wore American flag T-shirts should [also have to] apologize. They said ethnically Mexican students wouldn’t wear a Mexican flag on the Fourth of July.” It’s not a school day anyway, but that wouldn’t matter. You think a bunch of American kids would get upset if somebody shows up a high school wearing a T-shirt with Mexican flag on it on the Fourth of July?
Nobody wouldn’t care! That’s the point. Nobody would be offended by it. They wouldn’t care. It might cause some snarky comment. Nobody would take it to court, for crying out loud! Nobody would demand they take the shirts off and turn them outside in or inside out or whatever. Now, this high school, Morgan Hill High School, is “located 20 miles south of San Jose.”
We’re not talking down near the Mexican border.
This is near Silicon Valley.
“The high school, located 20 miles south of San Jose, has experienced numerous gang problems. Nevertheless, the school seems to have organized impressive Cinco de Mayo celebrations in recent years. In the previous three-judge ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that school officials have wide latitude to limit freedom of expression.
“‘Our role is not to second-guess the decision to have a Cinco de Mayo celebration or the precautions put in place to avoid violence,’ the court modestly observed. ‘Here, both the specific events of May 5, 2010, and the pattern of which those events were a part made it reasonable for school officials to proceed as though the threat of a potentially violent disturbance was real.'”
So on Cinco De Mayo, some American students…
What is this? Aren’t they all American students, or do they have some legals in the school? What is this? So American students on Cinco De Mayo… It was considered to be a provocative. See, they’re trying to stir things up, provocative, and we’ve gotta stop the violence. Therefore the fault is not on those who had the violent reaction. No, no, no! The fault is with those who wore the T-shirts.
I don’t know where you put this in the category, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals — I mean the category of Have We Lost the Country or Not? This, to me… I don’t know how to describe it. It’s worse than silly. “Outrageous” dissents cover it. “Offensive” doesn’t cover it. “Dangerous” is more likely.
Remember the other day we were talking about the new requirements at Ohio State University, if you’re gonna make out or have sex, all of the contractual agreements you must make with your opposite partner — and there must have been “yes” at every step of the way, and there must be an agreement on why “yes” is agreed to every step of the way? Well, another story here from the website Campus Reform.
Clemson University… Oh, by the way, Clemson? That’s the Florida State opponent this weekend. Jameis Winston, the quarterback for Florida State, suspended for the first half for shouting about vaginas and stuff from a tabletop in the student union — I mean, literally shouting about. (He wasn’t using the word “vagina.” He’s dropping F-bombs and so forth.) I’m gonna make a prediction to you.
This guy stands up on the table student unit, starts shouting and is literally out of control. He’s imitating some video, YouTube video that’s out there. He gets suspended by the school for the first half. I guarantee you when this guy shows up in the second half he’s gonna see get a standing ovation. Where’s the game? Is it at Clemson or is it at Florida State? Do you know? (interruption)
Well, especially if it’s at Florida State, but I don’t care where it is. He’s gonna get a standing O from the students. He’s gonna get a standing ovation of support for having been suspended, and he’s gonna get a standing evokes for having the guts… (interruption) It is a Florida State home game, Seminoles home game. He’s gonna get a standing ovation for doing what he did.
The students will say, “That a way, man! Way to bust it through, man! Way to really blow out the envelope, man! That’s so cool. Did you see what he did?” and they’re gonna give him a standing O. You wait and see. (interruption) You disagree with that? (interruption) Of course you don’t disagree. Okay. So anyway, Clemson is the opponent.
“Clemson is requiring students and faculty to complete an online course through a third party website that asks invasive questions about sexual history. In an email Clemson says that failure to complete the course will be a violation of the ‘Student Code of Conduct, General Student Regulation 8: Failure to Comply with Official Request.'”
“Clemson University is requiring students to reveal how many times theyÂ’ve had sex in the past month and with how many partners.” Clemson, a public university, “is requiring students and faculty to complete an online course through a third party website,” and among the questions: “[H]ow many times theyÂ’ve had sex in the past month and with how many partners.”
“In screenshots obtained exclusively by Campus Reform, the South Carolina university is asking students invasive and personal questions about their drinking habits and sex life as part of what theyÂ’ve billed as an online Title IX training course.” Now, off the top of your heads out there, you know what Title IX is? Yeah, it’s a quality in university… It’s sports related.
Title IX basically made universities get rid of a bunch of male sports to make room in the budget for female sports. That’s what Title IX is. It’s under the auspices of Title IX (i.e., feminine equality, female equality) that the survey is required. Now, the questions. “‘How many times have you had sex (including oral) in the last 3 months?’ asks one question.” That’s a Clinton question.
You know, they could have said, “How many times have you had a Lewinsky?” But they didn’t say that. “‘How many times have you had sex (including oral) in the last 3 months?’ … “‘With how many different people have you had sex (including oral) in the last 3 months?’ asks another. In a campus-wide email, the South Carolina university announced that all students, faculty, and staff would be required to complete a mandatory, one-hour long Title IX training course by November 1.”
What’s the training here after you’ve answered these deeply personal and invasive sexual-behavioral questions? What’s the training going on here? “‘We believe youÂ’ll enjoy the assignment,’ the email, provided to Campus Reform, reads. ‘It is an engaging and informative online course, created with students for students. It will provide you with useful information regarding sexual violence and relationships.
“The course promotes a healthier and safer campus environment.'” How? (interruption)They’re gonna make the survey results known. (interruption) What…? (interruption) Well, the question of anonymity is relevant here. How else are they gonna determine if everybody’s complied if they don’t know who has and who hasn’t. The only way you can do that is by name and number.
Now, whether they publish the results attached to named?
I can’t believe that, but then I never thought that you could go to jail for wearing an American flag T-shirt on Cinco De Mayo, either. “Although the email said that the course — which also asks if a student is a part of Greek life [fraternity or sorority] or an athlete — was ‘created by students,’ it is actually a product of CampusClarity, ‘[a] Title IX and Campus SaVE Act education program that combines sexual assault and substance abuse prevention in a comprehensive online training program.’ …
“Clemson students are still required to log in to the course with their student IDs and include their first and last names, email addresses, and housing information.” Everything that you admit to in this will be known. ‘It’s not that I have an issue with being trained on Title IX,’ one Clemson student told Campus Reform in an interview.
“‘I have an issue with the personal questions that are asked, and the fact that I’m told it’s anonymous, but it’s clearly linked to my name, and it’s obviously through a third party so not only is my information that I’m going to be filling out — incredibly personal information regarding my sex life that I have issues with speaking about — it’s not only going to the university, it’s going to a third party company that I don’t know.'”
All ostensibly to promote more polite, respectful sex on campus.
All right, let me take a brief time-out while you digest those two things.
We have just barely scratched the surface, here.
RUSH: I just got an e-mail flash. Very early this morning, “Clemson University has suspended the mandatory training until further notice due to the content of certain questions.” They claim that they had no idea the third-party company was asking these kinds of questions. They thought it was going to be a survey designed to promote peaceful, respectful consensual sex on campus.
They had no idea that the questions were this personal. So the latest here is that Clemson University is no longer prying into its students’ sex lives. For now. They made the announcement very, very, very early this morning. So some sense permeated. Common sense reared its head and was listened to.
But nevertheless, understand: Somebody tried to do this. Somebody was attempting to get this done. And at some point they’ll bring it back in a disguised form and get it done, because there’s an agenda behind this. Make no mistake that there is an agenda (that’s largely gonna be the feminist agenda) driving it.