February 4-5, 2018
Feb 04 00:42 Unaccountable SJWs Feb 04 03:37 I'm boycotting today's Super Bowl Feb 04 12:46 Adam Schiff's dishonesty artistry Feb 04 19:02 Cultural Bridges' lobbying Feb 05 09:51 Politico's dishonest headline Feb 05 10:59 FISA standards Feb 05 15:33 Worse than Graham-Durbin?
Prior Months: Jan
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Unaccountable SJWs
At a time when SJWs run most suburban schools, I had difficulty reading this post . The opening paragraph states "Last fall, the state Department of Human Rights delivered letters to 43 Minnesota school districts and charters, notifying them that - based on significant disparities in their student discipline data - they were under investigation for violating the state Human Rights Act."
My initial reaction was that these investigations weren't complaint-driven. If they were complaint-driven, why would the MDHR send notifications to entire school districts? Doesn't that sound like a scattergun approach? It certainly isn't a focused investigation.
That theory is verified by the MDHR's Hostile Environment in Education webpage . According to the website, a "hostile educational environment (hostile environment) is created when a child is subjected to conduct that interferes with or denies the child from participating in or enjoying the benefits, services or opportunities in the school's programs and the conduct is intimidating or abusive on the basis of actual or perceived protected class status. The Act identifies the following protected classes: race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, sexual orientation or disability."
A later paragraph says "In assessing whether the conduct created a hostile environment, school officials should assess whether the conduct was subjectively and objectively offensive." I'm betting that the vast majority of instances are subjective. This paragraph is frightening in the age of snowflakes:
If the school determines that a hostile environment was created, school officials should address the needs of the student who was the target of the hostile conduct and take action to stop the conduct from occurring again, which may include taking adverse action against the individuals who engaged in the harassing conduct.
Again, there's no talk about addressing specific complaints. If you want something to be effective, it has to address specific offenses, not nebulous conditions that are as much perceived as real. This webinar video 'explains' how people with good intentions can still do "bad things":
[Video no longer available]
Specifically, that webinar talks about "implicit bias." It's a way for progressives to explain how 'good' people can still be racists and how we need government to protect people from good people who are subconsciously racists.
According to this website , everyone has implicit biases:
A Few Key Characteristics of Implicit Biases
- Implicit biases are pervasive. Everyone possesses them, even people with avowed commitments to impartiality such as judges.
- Implicit and explicit biases are related but distinct mental constructs. They are not mutually exclusive and may even reinforce each other.
- The implicit associations we hold do not necessarily align with our declared beliefs or even reflect stances we would explicitly endorse.
- We generally tend to hold implicit biases that favor our own ingroup, though research has shown that we can still hold implicit biases against our ingroup.
- Implicit biases are malleable. Our brains are incredibly complex, and the implicit associations that we have formed can be gradually unlearned through a variety of debiasing techniques.
Apparently, Commissioner Lindsey's 'investigators' think that these school districts are filled with racists that don't know that they're racists. The first question I'd ask these people is whether they've visited the schools in these districts or if they're just relying on reports from these districts. If these investigators haven't done much in the way of investigating, then this office should be shut down or, at minimum, be dramatically transformed. As it exists right now, it's place where SJWs bully people.
Posted Sunday, February 4, 2018 12:42 AM
No comments.
I'm boycotting today's Super Bowl
I'm proud to state that I won't watch tonight's Super Bowl. I won't watch because the NFL is attempting to get back in the good graces with the average fan by putting on big displays featuring the military. Apparently, the PR meisters told Commissioner Goodell that the NFL's ratings drop is tied to the disrespect shown to police officers, the military and the average working joe.
At this point, I'll emphatically state that Commissioner Goodell is the most tone-deaf commissioner of a major sporting league that I've ever seen. How could he have gotten the Ray Rice and Charles Johnson rulings that badly wrong? Those are decisions that the average eighth grader would've gotten right. Further, what commissioner would've gotten things so badly wrong with the kneel-down protests of the National Anthem?
The NFL owners can't be too bright if they agreed to a lucrative contract extension for Commissioner Goodell. What has he done that a dozen other people couldn't have done better? Wouldn't Condi Rice make a better NFL Commissioner? I'd predict she'd be light years better than Commissioner Goodell in terms of PR.
Part of the reason why I won't watch tonight's Super Bowl is because I refuse to watch another Bill Bellicheat-coached team in the Super Bowl. Anyone that thinks that any of New England's Super Bowl-winning teams is better than the worst of Bill Walsh's Super Bowl winning teams is delusional. Imagine how many thousands of yards Jerry Rice would've accumulated had he played with the defenseless receiver rules they have now. On the flip side of that, imagine the match-up between Gronk and Ronnie Lott or the match-up between Dion Sanders and whoever the Patriots' top wide receiver was.
The great thing about being a Vikings fan is that I don't have to put up with the stupid things that Marshawn Lynch, Colin Kaepernick or Michael Bennett have done. The Mike Zimmer-Rick Spielman Vikings are old school. They played poorly in the NFC Championship Game but they consistently play the game right. Last year, a script was flipped this season in the NFC North. Going into this season, there's no reason to think that the Vikings aren't the pre-season favorite to repeat as NFC North Champions.
I'd rather wait until the Vikings are playing the final game of the season. It isn't a stretch to think that might not be more than a year away.
While I'm boycotting the Super Bowl, I'm applauding 2 of this year's NFL HoF class: Randy Moss and Ray Lewis. Both of these gentlemen are iconic players that transformed the league. These are some highlights from Randy Moss's coming out party on Monday Night Football in Milwaukee:
[Video no longer available]
As for Ray Lewis, he was the leader of the Ravens team. It wasn't that he was the leader of their defense, which he was. It was that he was Baltimore's leader. When Ray Lewis was playing, every Baltimore player had to play up to Ray Lewis' expectations.
Posted Sunday, February 4, 2018 3:37 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 04-Feb-18 10:12 AM
You have to get over your hatred of the Patriots and the "Bellicheat" mantra everyone else spouts. I loved the Walsh 49ers but they had multiple stars on those teams whereas the Patriots only constant star is Brady and Belichick has plugged and played with 5th, 6th round and undrafted players to get them to multiple super bowls. The so called cheating (video taping practices) was and is done by all teams (no different than watching game tapes) and the deflate gate was another manufactured crisis of Goodell's. I do agree that Goodell should be fired.
As for the Vikings, their one shot was this year and they blew it badly. Now they have to figure out which QB to keep or pick up in FA and the QB tops on everyone's list just got traded to Washington so they are already behind. History and statistics tell us the Vikings won't have another shot for 8 - 10 years and then they will find a way to blow that too.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 04-Feb-18 10:42 AM
Actually, I don't have to 'get over' the Patriots/Bellicheat thing. They cheated. That's a matter of historical fact. As for the star factor, many of the players who were major contributors were free agent pick-ups. Guy McIntyre wasn't a top draft pick. They just found players scouting, then developed them. They got rid of players, too, then backfilled with players they drafted & developed.
Comment 2 by Doug Wilken at 04-Feb-18 11:02 AM
I cannot take original credit for this thought, but what if Goodell was planted by Major League Baseball to injure the competition?
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 04-Feb-18 12:00 PM
Where did you buy that tinfoil hat? LOL
Comment 3 by eric z at 06-Feb-18 08:09 AM
It was a great game, Gary. You record it, delay watching the start, fast forward through commercials, halftime stupidity, and then the only problem is the idiot camerawork that shows someone's wife in the stands, an owner's box, a closeup of Brady's hand, and at the last second cuts to the field where you have to quickly see empty backfield or not, who's split out or in the slot, whether motion tips of zone coverage or man coverage, all the stuff that matters. The folks controlling the cutting from one camera to another probably hate football and feel they have to be creative to make up for what to them is boring athletes doing their job. What's shown us is not the film that teams study to understand things, it's pablum.
Aside from that, Philadelphia scored last in each half and that mattered.
Adam Schiff's dishonesty artistry
Adam Schiff's op-ed ignores lots of facts. That isn't surprising. It's just disappointing. For instance, Rep. Schiff said "In the run-up to the release of a deliberately misleading memo, some Republicans hyped the underlying scandal as 'worse than Watergate.' When it was published, however, it delivered none of the salacious evidence of systemic abuse that it promised - only a cherry-picking of information from a single FISA court application."
Is Rep. Schiff suggesting that it isn't a big deal that the FBI didn't disclose the fact that the basis for their surveillance warrant was a piece of opposition research? Does Rep. Schiff think it's ok for political campaigns to use government to spy on their opponent? Or is he ok with that only when Democrats use the FBI to spy on Republican campaigns?
As for the cherry-picking chanting point, I wish Rep. Schiff would drop it. What context is needed after Andrew McCabe testified to Congress that, without the fake Trump 'dossier', the FBI wouldn't have even attempted to get a surveillance warrant on Carter Page?
Mr. Schiff can't get his facts straight. For instance, he also wrote "The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court was established in 1978 to supervise and provide an additional check on highly-classified counterintelligence surveillance processes. The norms and institutions protecting the Department of Justice from political interference in the years since have been tested, but never before as they are under President Donald Trump."
Actually, the Obama administration used an opposition research document paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. It was the Obama FBI that applied for the surveillance warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. What part of that sounds legitimate? Here's a hint: there isn't a part of that that sounds legitimate.
Weaponizing government, then using it against a political opponent, aka the Trump campaign, is about as corrupt as it gets. Rep. Schiff isn't an honest man. In this interview, he can't resist spinning about Russian collusion:
[Video no longer available]
Early in the interview, Schiff said "Even this very flawed memo demonstrates what the origin of this investigation was and that origin involved collusion." Here's the definition of collusion :
a secret understanding between two or more persons to gain something illegally.
Rep. Schiff, what specific part of the US Statutes did the Trump campaign violate? Mr. Schiff, a lengthy explanation will prove that you aren't being honest. A succinct answer is what's needed. If you can't cite the specific statute that Trump violated, then I'll state that you're a windbag who is up to political mischief. I'll state that you aren't worthy of my attention or anyone else's.
Posted Sunday, February 4, 2018 12:46 PM
No comments.
Cultural Bridges' lobbying
In Stephanie Dickrell's article , an organization called Cultural Bridges will ask the St. Joseph City Council to consider a resolution. The resolution would "declare the city a welcoming place for all."
According to the article, the "move comes after posters declaring white-nationalist views were hung around St. Joseph in mid-January." The posters carried messages that said "unapologetically white," that "hate speech is free speech" and "there are two genders."
The citizens of the city of St. Joseph definitely aren't interested in political correctness but they know their Constitution. Hate speech is protected by the First Amendment as long as the speech doesn't advocate specific acts of violence. Speech that everyone agrees with doesn't need protection.
What we don't know from this article is whether the posters represent the thoughts of the people living in St. Joe. What's certain, however, is that the people sponsoring the resolution definitely have a pro-refugee resettlement agenda:
This poster was found stapled to a power line pole:
The article seems less than professional. Early in the article, Stephanie Dickrell wrote "We are trying to speak up in a united effort to let people who are not of our culture who live in our community know that we support them and that we welcome them," said Dianne DeVargas, a member of the group. Cultural Bridges started in response to the arrival of Somali families to the area a few years ago, and has been helping them settle and integrate into the community, said Dianne's husband Vincent DeVargas, another member of Cultural Bridges."
Later, Dickrell wrote "They all felt very strongly that if we did not say anything, that that was as much as admitting that the signs were correct," Dianne said. "So without giving them any more press time, which we didn't want to happen, we want to spin this into a positive event." Still later, Dickrell wrote "There's a number of single mothers who have chosen the area because they feel it's a safe, quiet place to raise their children, Dianne said."
If I didn't know better, I'd think that Ms. Dickrell had a distinct pro-resettlement bias. Mrs. DeVargas certainly isn't unbiased. She's staunchly pro-resettlement. This is worthy of closer inspection:
Dianne credited the idea for the welcoming resolution to the people in St. Cloud who stood up against the refugee moratorium.
The ostriches that voted for the 'welcoming' resolution voted against knowing how much refugee resettlement was costing taxpayers. Notice that I didn't ask how much it cost the city or the county or the school district. How much money was spent at the hospitals or in schools on translators? How much money was spent on taxpayer-funded health care or taxpayer-funded EBT cards?
These are hidden costs that aren't line items in the city budget or the school district operating budget. Let's be clear about this. The people who voted for the welcoming resolution aren't fiscally responsible.
I don't know how Monday night's vote will turn out. I wouldn't bet against it passing.
Posted Sunday, February 4, 2018 7:02 PM
Comment 1 by Bob Carrillo at 05-Feb-18 09:29 AM
IF the people of St Joseph allow THEIR City Council to ram this suicide pact down the throats of the town's citizenry, they need to be institutionalized as criminally insane.
Add Secondary Migration (more poorly vetted - poorly educated - poorly screened for diseases - low or no skilled immigrants [ NOT REFUGEES AT ALL ] coming in droves from other States, which are cutting off the welfare gravy train), to the illegal alien "Sanctuary City" squatters, to this mix, and this place will become one of the most dangerous places in America in which to live. Add the economic cost to all of this, and just watch St Joseph MN become a ghost town.
In the last 3 years alone Minnesota has watched approximately $50 BILLION DOLLARS of personal wealth, and the people connected to that wealth, exit the State of Minnesota PERMANENTLY. (See: "The Great Wealth Migration").
Former UK Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher once said: Socialism is wonderful until you run out of other people's money"...
Message to the St Joseph City Council - St Cloud City Council - ALL Minnesota City Council bodies?: KNOCK IT OFF AND GROW UP! And while you're at it, grow a brain and a conscience.
Politico's dishonest headline
Todd Purdum's article has a dishonest title. It's called "How conservatives learned to hate the FBI." That's dishonest and then some.
The honest headline would be "Why conservatives hate corruption." Democrats, starting with Adam Schiff and Leader Pelosi and other Democrat spinmeisters, have insisted that Republicans hate the FBI and the DOJ. Without question, Republicans hate the things the FBI and DOJ did in obtaining authorization to surveil Carter Page. Without question, Republicans are disgusted with the things that Andrew McCabe did in hiding from the FISA Court the things that should've been revealed to the FISA Court.
Since there isn't an advocate for the 'defendant' at a FISA hearing, what's required is for people representing the government to paint an honest, full and comprehensive picture of their materials that inform them that a person needs further investigation, aka probable cause. Democrats at the FBI painted a dishonest portrait to the FISA Court. Specifically, they didn't tell the FISA Court judge that they wouldn't have filed for a surveillance warrant without relying on the salacious details enshrined in the infamous Trump Dossier.
It's difficult to picture the FISA Court granting a surveillance warrant on the Trump campaign had the Court known that the FBI relied on trash compiled by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. In light of this information, it's difficult to read the opening paragraph of Purdum's article:
The aggressive Republican attacks on the FBI are the latest sign, if one were needed, that President Donald Trump has upended the longstanding norms of Washington, as he and his allies in Congress seek to undermine the one institution of government that conservatives have typically seen as a bastion of integrity and law-and-order.
Republicans are rightly upset that the FBI isn't the impartial organization it once was. Alan Dershowitz exposes the problems in this interview:
[Video no longer available]
Thus far, what has the public seen that suggests that the FBI upper management is honest? They didn't tell the FISA Court who paid for the compiling of the Trump Dossier. At minimum, that's disturbing. At maximum, that's disqualifying.
Finally, I'd challenge Democrats to cite examples of Republicans criticizing rank-and-file FBI agents. Democrats can't do that because it hasn't happened. Republicans have criticized the suits running the FBI. Most importantly, they've criticized the suits because they're bitter partisans who didn't tell FISA judges the whole truth. That can't happen.
Posted Monday, February 5, 2018 9:51 AM
No comments.
FISA standards
I won't pretend to be a lawyer. I didn't even go to law school. I certainly have never stood before a judge in a FISA court. That isn't needed for this article, though. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that a man applying for a FISA warrant when the chief 'witness' is a political operative who's spent months digging up dirt on a presidential candidate .
That's what Jim Comey did. Now he's pretending like he's the man integrity. He's a warped individual. Unfortunately, he isn't a man of integrity anymore. I remember when he tweeted "All should appreciate the FBI speaking up. I wish more of our leaders would. But take heart: American history shows that, in the long run, weasels and liars never hold the field, so long as good people stand up. Not a lot of schools or streets named for Joe McCarthy." Here's a question for Comey that also applies to Adam Schiff: how many schools and streets are named for FBI directors that withhold relevant witness information from a FISA court?
Jonathan Turley put things in perspective when he said this:
Let's put this one in perspective. The memo concerns allegations that Comey signed off on multiple secret court applications to put a Trump aide under surveillance. It appears that Comey and his staff never told the court that the infamous "dossier" by Fusion GPS was paid for in significant part by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. It was never revealed that the author of the dossier had told the FBI that he was "desperate" to prevent Trump from being president or that he had shopped the story with various reporters, who could not verify its contents.
Does Comey think that information is irrelevant? Does Mr. Schiff think that's irrelevant? If they think that, then that's proof that neither man has the integrity required for the job they currently hold or that they once held.
That's it? Dishonest and misleading memo wrecked the House intel committee, destroyed trust with Intelligence Community, damaged relationship with FISA court, and inexcusably exposed classified investigation of an American citizen. For what? DOJ & FBI must keep doing their jobs.
- James Comey (@Comey) February 2, 2018
As I said in my opening, I'm not a lawyer. I'm willing, though, to say that Comey's omissions are worthy of investigation.
Posted Monday, February 5, 2018 10:59 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 06-Feb-18 08:02 AM
The entire FISA thing needs examination. As does the so-called Patriot Act, where the government can examine what books you have checked out of the local library with the librarian constrained to not give you notice of the snooping. It's excessive, and stupid.
Worse than Graham-Durbin?
This afternoon, Hogan Gidley, the deputy White House press secretary, was interviewed by Harris Faulkner. During the interview, Gidley expressed his displeasure with the McCain-Coons 'compromise' immigration bill. Gidley expressed his disgust by saying "I have to give it to Senators Coons and McCain. Congratulations because it takes a special kind of person to write a bill that's worse than Graham-Durbin. They did it. It is incredible. You have to have a border wall in the security package. The president has been very clear about this. You have to end chain migration. You have to end the visa lottery. Absolutely, the president wants to fix DACA but let's be clear. Not having a border wall is the same thing as Sen. McCain going to bed at night and locking his front door but leaving all of his windows open.
How stupid do these senators think President Trump is? They must think he's the worst negotiator in the history of the republic. That bill won't fly. It won't get to President Trump's desk.
Earlier in the program, Faulkner played a clip of a Democrat talking about how he was part of a group of 50 Republicans and Democrats who had come up with a bipartisan bill that didn't include funding for a border wall. The Democrat, whose name I can't remember, said that immigration legislation had to start with a bipartisan bill or it didn't have a chance in the House or Senate. What BS. Just because a bill has bipartisan support doesn't mean it fixes the problem.
Legislation that doesn't fix border security issues is a non-starter with President Trump. No amount of bipartisanship happy talk will get it past President Trump's veto.
It's time the Senate woke up and realized that President Trump holds the cards in this fight. Senate liberals, including McCain, Graham and Flake, are like Sen. Schumer in that they're playing a terrible hand badly. If they don't do a 180, they'll get thrown around like a rag doll.
Posted Monday, February 5, 2018 3:33 PM
No comments.
