Both Arizona Senators Voted Against Overturning Biden’s Vaccine Mandate

Both Arizona Senators Voted Against Overturning Biden’s Vaccine Mandate

By Corinne Murdock

Democratic Senators Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema voted against a resolution to nullify President Joe Biden’s mandate that businesses with 100 or more employees get vaccinated for COVID-19 or implement weekly testing.

The only Democrats to vote for the resolution were Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Jon Tester (D-MT). The resolution was sponsored by Senator Mike Braun (R-IN). As AZ Free News reported, it was based on the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which establishes that the House and Senate together may overturn a federal regulation without presidential approval.

The two senators didn’t address their vote against stopping Biden’s vaccine mandate, one that aligned with a majority of their party. A day after that vote, Sinema said that she encouraged all Arizonans to get vaccinated quickly in a post announcing COVID-19 vaccinations through the Phoenix Veterans Affairs (VA).

“We strongly encourage all veterans — and all eligible Arizonans — to get vaccinated as soon as possible,” wrote Sinema. 

At the end of October, Kelly asserted that the goal was to “beat” COVID-19 through higher vaccination rates.

“Our mission is to beat this virus. The science and data are clear. Vaccines save lives,” wrote Kelly. “Higher vaccination rates = Mission Success.”

Around that same time, Sinema posted a similar affirmation of the necessity to vaccinate most, if not all, Arizonans.

“Glad to see the continued progress toward returning to normal. We’re encouraging all eligible Arizonans to get the vaccine for our continued health and economic recovery,” wrote Sinema.

Sinema followed up with an urge to vaccinate as many American youths as possible.

“The sooner young Arizonans get vaccinated, the sooner our schools can fully return to safe and effective in-person learning. We strongly encourage all Arizona families to get vaccinated as soon as vaccines are available,” wrote Sinema.

Big COVID-19 Pharma hasn’t spent much on Kelly directly, but they have invested in Sinema. 

Pfizer spent over $1 million on Democratic congressional candidates and nearly $860,200 on Republican congressional candidates in the 2020 election. They didn’t donate to Kelly’s campaign directly, but they did donate $10,000 to an affiliated PAC, “BOLD,” which donated $3,000 to Kelly. In fact, Pfizer donated $7,500 to Kelly’s Republican opponent Martha McSally. Pfizer did donate $2,500 to Sinema and $5,000 to her PAC, “Getting Stuff Done.” 

Pfizer spent under $360,000 on Republican House candidates versus $288,000 on Democratic House candidates, and $190,386 on Republican Senate candidates versus $75,300 on Democratic Senate candidates. The company did spend more on Democratic campaign committees than Republican ones, by around $22,000.

Johnson & Johnson had similar donation patterns: they didn’t donate to Kelly, but they did donate $4,500 to Sinema. They also donated $10,000 to BOLD.

Johnson & Johnson also donated more to Republicans overall in the 2019-2020 election cycle: $160,500 to Republican committees versus $121,000 to Democratic committees, $214,500 to Republican House candidates versus $211,750 to Democratic House candidates, $67,000 to Republican Senate candidates versus $47,500 to Democratic Senate candidates. The same was true when it came to governors’ associations: the Republican Governors Association received $105,000 compared to $55,000 for the Democratic Governors Association. 

Committees for the Republican and Democratic committees for the House and Senate all received $30,000. The company gave $10,000 each to the Democratic and Republican Parties of Arizona ahead of the 2020 election.

Moderna stated as recently as June that they don’t plan on endorsing a political action committee (PAC), and that they wouldn’t engage in partisan donorship for candidates.

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

Chandler Teachers Pushing Rebranded Social-Emotional Learning: Guise for Child Sexualization, CRT

Chandler Teachers Pushing Rebranded Social-Emotional Learning: Guise for Child Sexualization, CRT

By Corinne Murdock |

Chandler Unified School District (CUSD) teachers are pushing the adoption of a rebranded version of social-emotional learning (SEL) referred to as “Windows, Mirrors, and Sliding Glass Doors” (WMSGD). SEL itself is a guise for controversial educational approaches such as Comprehesive Sex Education (CSE) and Critical Race Theory (CRT).

Windows, Mirrors, and Sliding Glass Doors was first introduced as the “windows and mirrors” concept in 1988 by a white woman, Emily Styles. It was later picked up and popularized in a 1990 essay by a black woman, Dr. Rudine Sims Bishop, with the addition of “sliding glass doors”—children not only see into others’ perspectives (windows) and reflections of themselves (mirrors), they are able to step into others’ perspectives (sliding glass doors). The essay insisted that children can and must understand the world through multiculturalism, and that books should reflect that reality. Multiculturalism signifies a diversity of cultures, ethnicities, and races; it’s an offshoot of intersectionality, which reduces an individual to different aspects of their identity — such as race or sexuality — in order to create a hierarchy of discrimination, oppression, and privilege. 

Bishop claimed that children could be affirmed, uplifted, or even offended by books. In reference to children’s interaction with majority-white literature, Bishop asserted that “nonwhite” children understand how they are “devalued” in modern society. She further suggested that a lack of diversity within children’s books contributed to racism, or a “dangerous ethnocentrism,” which she claimed was still pervasive.

“When children cannot find themselves reflected in the books they read, or when the images they see are distorted, negative, or laughable, they learn a powerful lesson about how they are devalued in the society of which they are a part,” claimed Bishop. “Children from dominant social groups have always found their mirrors in books, but they, too, have suffered from the lack of availability of books about others. They need books as windows onto reality, not just on imaginary worlds. They need books that will help them understand the multicultural nature of the world they live in, and their place as a member of just one group, as well as their connections to all other humans. In this country, where racism is still one of the major unresolved social problems, books may be one of the few places where children who are socially isolated and insulated from the larger world may meet people unlike themselves. If they only see reflections of themselves, they will grow up with an exaggerated sense of their own importance and value in the world—a dangerous ethnocentrism.”

Windows, Mirrors, and Sliding Glass Doors doesn’t just address race—since it’s steeped in the principles of cultural responsiveness and equity, it also offers a framework suitable for broaching topics of sexuality. One example of this is the children’s book on gender identity, “It Feels Good to Be Yourself” by Theresa Thorn, marketed for children 4-8 years old. 

On all fronts, the Bishop teaching approach mirrors SEL.

In the push for adopting Windows, Mirrors, and Sliding Glass Doors, it appears that the teachers are being led by their most esteemed peers. During CUSD’s Governing Board meeting on Wednesday, the first to advocate for a Windows, Mirrors, and Sliding Glass Doors curriculum was Chandler High School (CHS) teacher Sara Wyffels. She claimed schools weren’t effectively humanizing or providing unspecified resources to their students. Wyffels has taught with CUSD for 15 years and earned Arizona Teacher of the Year in 2021.

“I would like some support to humanize public education: the teachers, students, and curriculum,” said Wyffels. “This is an amazing opportunity to validate students as humans existing in this world and to provide resources to meet the needs of our children.”

Wyffels added that she not only teaches Spanish to her students, she validates students as humans and provides other resources to fit their needs — though she didn’t specify what those “needs” were, or what she was providing. Wyffels also asked for assistance from parents and community members for herself and all other educators because their teachers were “in crisis.”

The Declaration of Independence already identifies and protects the dignity and worth of individuals. That validation of humanity is further secured by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” reads the Declaration of Independence.

In a written reflection inspired by a Proverb from the Bible, former President Abraham Lincoln further clarified one of the main purposes of the founding documents.

“There is something back of these, entwining itself more closely about the human heart. That something is the principle of ‘Liberty to all’ — the principle that clears the path for all — gives hope to all — and, by consequence, enterprize [sic], and industry to all. The expression of that principle, in our Declaration of Independence, was most happy, and fortunate. Without this, as well as with it, we could have declared our independence of Great Britain; but without it, we could not, I think, have secured our free government, and consequent prosperity. No oppressed people will fight, and endure, as our fathers did, without the promise of something better, than a mere change of masters,” wrote Lincoln. “The assertion of that principle, at that time, was the word, ‘fitly spoken’ which has proved an ‘apple of gold’ to us. The Union, and the Constitution, are the picture of silver, subsequently framed around it. The picture was made, not to conceal, or destroy the apple; but to adorn, and preserve it. The picture was made for the apple — not the apple for the picture. So let us act, that neither picture, or apple shall ever be blurred, or bruised or broken. That we may so act, we must study, and understand the points of danger.”

Though she wasn’t as explicit about her support for implementing a Windows, Mirrors, and Sliding Glass Doors curriculum, CHS World History teacher and 2021 Chandler Woman of the Year Gloria Garza-Wells said that test scores were down because they weren’t meeting the needs of students and their families. 

“By offering a curriculum centered on honesty, integrity, and courage we can provide the windows and doors to make sure that every child is seen,” asserted Garza-Wells.

CHS dual enrollment English teacher and Arizona State University (ASU) faculty associate Dr. Monica Baldonado-Ruiz praised Bishop’s idea that students should see their identities reflected in the curriculum and the ways they’re taught. As she began to cry, she apologized for “get[ting emotional.”

“For most of their school experience, many of our students have only seen windows. They have not been reflected in the curriculum. Their experiences have not been celebrated or highlighted as points of genius. I speak as one who never saw herself reflected in curriculum until she went to college,” said Baldonado-Ruiz. 

Former Arizona Superintendent of Public Education Diane Douglas wrote at length in an Arizona Daily Independent opinion that the push for “safe sex” education for children wasn’t safe for the children at all. Rather, Douglas asserted that children lacked the maturity to process sexuality materials. 

“There is NO kind of sexual activity—heterosexual, homosexual, bi-sexual, any SEXUAL—that is ‘safe’ for emotionally immature school-aged children—male or female—even those who have reached that miraculous, chronological ‘age of majority’—18 years old. Nor is it my business how consenting adults choose to privately express their sexual beliefs and inclinations unless it crosses the line into abusing children or stealing their innocence with public sexual exhibitions or desensitizing and sexualizing children; deluding them that they too should and can be safely, sexually active,” wrote Douglas.

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

Maricopa Community Colleges Suspend Vaccine Mandate

Maricopa Community Colleges Suspend Vaccine Mandate

By Corinne Murdock |

In the wake of multiple federal court rulings striking down all provisions of President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandates, Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD) has suspended their vaccine mandate for employees. A number of colleges and universities followed Biden’s executive order requiring federal contractors to get vaccinated. 

MCCCD notified employees that it would hold onto the policy detailing their now-suspended mandate on their website, indicating that they would await further ruling on the subject. For the time being, their January 7 deadline is no longer in effect.

“Given the rapidly changing landscape, if an employee would like to voluntarily provide your vaccine information or continue with the accommodation process you may certainly do so,” wrote MCCCD. “MCCCD will leave the Federal Vaccine Mandate submission structure (including this website) in place and will continue to monitor the situation.”

All three of Arizona’s public universities — Arizona State University (ASU), Northern Arizona University (NAU), and University of Arizona (UArizona) — also have employee vaccination mandates in place. UArizona and NAU told AZ Free News that they were reviewing the court ruling and its potential impact, and indicated that ASU was as well. 

“At this time, we continue to strongly encourage employees to get vaccinated and verify their vaccination status,” said UArizona spokeswoman Holly Jensen.

Pima Community College also has a vaccine mandate; spokeswoman Libby Howell told Arizona Republic that they were keeping their mandate in place despite the ruling, but noted that their governing board may decide to vote to suspend it next week. 

The federal contractor vaccine mandate was suspended nationwide on Tuesday by U.S. District Judge R. Stan Baker, a Trump appointee to Georgia’s southern district court, in the State of Georgia, et al., v. Biden, et al. 

Baker’s opinion concurred with those issued by judges in separate rulings on other mandates prompted by Biden: that the president’s exercise of power didn’t align with the Constitution or other legal precedents. Baker also cited the ruling of another federal judge in Kentucky, Gregory Van Tatenhove, a Bush appointee, who previously suspended the same order in several states: Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee.

“As another Court that has preliminarily enjoined the same measure at issue in this case has stated, ‘[t]his case is not about whether vaccines are effective. They are.’ […] Moreover, the Court acknowledges the tragic toll that the COVID-19 pandemic has wrought throughout the nation and the globe,” wrote Baker. “However, even in times of crisis this Court must preserve the rule of law and ensure that all branches of government act within the bounds of their constitutionally granted authorities. Indeed, the United States Supreme Court has recognized that, while the public indisputably ‘has a strong interest in combating the spread of [COVID-19],’ that interest does not permit the government to “act unlawfully even in pursuit of desirable ends.” 

The reason that Baker applied his ruling nationally — as opposed to a limited application like Tatenhove’s Kentucky v. Biden ruling — was because the intervening plaintiff, Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc. (ABC), is a national company. 

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

Kyle Rittenhouse Will Attend ASU in Spring, Says ASU Lied About Enrollment Status

Kyle Rittenhouse Will Attend ASU in Spring, Says ASU Lied About Enrollment Status

By Corinne Murdock |

Kyle Rittenhouse told Louder With Crowder (LWC) on Wednesday that Arizona State University (ASU) wasn’t honest in their characterization of his enrollment status, and declared he will attend ASU in the spring despite student activists’ pushback late last month. 

Rittenhouse was vindicated by a jury of all charges last month, proving he’d lawfully exercised self defense during the Kenosha riots. During Wednesday’s episode of political news and comedy show Louder with Crowder, Rittenhouse explained that he’s a student at ASU currently. 

“Yeah, it’s online. I took a compassionate withdrawal from my classes. My professors offered it and then a week later they gave me a compassionate withdrawal which – thank you for that. But then they came out with a statement saying, ‘Oh no no, he’s not enrolled at ASU anymore.’ I’m enrolled, I’m just not in any classes, but I have a student portfolio,” said Rittenhouse.

AZ Free News inquired with ASU about the technicality of student portfolios and enrollment. ASU spokesman Jay Thorne told AZ Free News it couldn’t go into detail about Rittenhouse’s enrollment status due to FERPA law. Their official statement contradicted Rittenhouse’s claim, saying he wasn’t enrolled currently.

“Kyle Rittenhouse did not go through the ASU admissions process but was enrolled in two publicly available online courses for this semester. University records show that he is now no longer enrolled, a status precipitated by his own actions,” stated Thorne.

That wasn’t all that Rittenhouse had to say about his future education. Rittenhouse also told LWC that he wasn’t deterred by the socialist and social justice student protestors at ASU. 

“There weren’t even a lot of protestors there. It was a very, very small amount. And then people are just like, ‘I thought you were getting an education?’ and I’m like, yes, that’s what I want to do,” explained Rittenhouse. “I want to go to law school. I’m going to ASU in the spring in person. I want to do my four year undergrad there before I take the LSAT and go do my three years of law.”

Some recognizable faces were among the protestors’ number. One of the featured speakers there was Mastaani Qureshi – one of the three women found guilty of ASU’s Code of Conduct for harassing two white male peers with apparently rival political beliefs out of a common space on campus. Mastaani apparently took issue with another white male that represented apparently rival political beliefs, Rittenhouse, for his potential attendance at ASU. She claimed he was a white supremacist, vigilante, and killer.

“We want to say that Kyle Rittenhouse is not just any random killer, he’s a white supremacist killer. He is a vigilante. He is the descendant of white Americans who killed black and brown people. White supremacists back in the day were also acquitted of all charges if we have read history,” asserted Mastaani. “Kyle Rittenhouse didn’t get a guilty verdict because he was f*****g white!” 

The entire Kenosha ordeal has shaped Rittenhouse’s career goals. Rittenhouse originally expressed an intent to study nursing, a desire reflected by his reason for being in Kenosha that fateful night last August: to put out fires and administer first aid to anyone present. Then on Wednesday, Rittenhouse confirmed with Crowder that he intends to study law instead of nursing because of the prosecutorial misconduct he witnessed and experienced during his trial. 

“I want to be a criminal defense attorney,” said Rittenhouse. “I’m big on, no matter who the person is, I believe everybody deserves fair and good legal representation.”

OJ Simpson jury consultant Jo-Ellan Dimitrius helped select the jury for Rittenhouse’s trial. Rittenhouse said that she was an amazing support for them.

“She’s a phenomenal jury consultant. She’s more than that for us, though. She was a rock for my mom – someone my mom could lean on and hold during this entire ordeal,” said Rittenhouse.

Watch the LWC Rittenhouse interview here.

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

Phoenix Suspends Vaccine Mandate After Federal Court Halted Biden Mandate

Phoenix Suspends Vaccine Mandate After Federal Court Halted Biden Mandate

By Corinne Murdock |

The city of Phoenix decided to suspend the city’s vaccine mandate after a federal judge halted President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal contractors. The city based its mandate for its employees under an interpretation of its workforce as federal contractors based on the amount of federal dollars and contractors it had. 

The Phoenix City Council was scheduled to discuss their vaccine mandate during a policy session on Tuesday. Since the city announced the mandate’s suspension shortly before the meeting took place, officials instead modified the agenda item to showcase how well the city had handled the pandemic, the timeline of events preceding the mandate, and an explanation why the city classified itself as a federal contractor.

City Manager Jeff Barton offered a prelude to the presentation by insisting that the mandate was decided upon for the greater good. 

“The January 18 vaccine mandate was not a city of Phoenix mandate. It was a federal mandate passed onto the city via executive order and with today’s ruling our city has halted implementation,” emphasized Barton. “Our fight against COVID-19 has forced us to be creative and innovative with our service delivery, and at times has forced us to make extremely difficult decisions as public servants for the greater good.”

Barton added that city administrators were “extremely flexible” with their COVID-19 policies for employees throughout the pandemic.

“I value their right to personal choice, religious freedom, and other convictions. But I also have an obligation to ensure the city operates within state and federal laws,” said Barton. 

A week after the city announced their mandate, Councilman Sal DiCiccio called for a public vote on the mandate. DiCiccio said that the mandate would only strain further an already critically manned first responder force. 

The response of first responders to the mandate was consistent with DiCiccio’s assessment. The Phoenix Law Enforcement Association (PLEA) and The United Phoenix Firefighters Association (UPFA) joined Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s lawsuit against President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal contractors and employees.

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.