March 18-20, 2018
Mar 18 02:03 The DFL's identity crisis Mar 18 02:09 Our schools have failed us Mar 18 07:17 SCSU professor verbally assaults student, calls it "private matter" Mar 18 08:52 Councilman to participate in refugee resettlement panel Mar 18 11:14 HS principal violates student's First Amendment rights Mar 18 23:54 Students: Leaders or Pawns? Mar 19 09:50 About those MNIT programmers Mar 20 00:46 The Democrats' patriotism deficit
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
The DFL's identity crisis
Apparently, the DFL hasn't figured out what it believes, other than believing in acquiring power. A pair of bills in the Senate illustrate this perfectly. SF2959 is a gun control bill. Here's the language for one of the main provisions in the bill:
The following persons shall not be entitled to possess
ammunition or a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon or, except for clause
(1), any other firearm:
(1) a person under the age of1821 years except that:
(i) a person under 18 who is18years of age or older may possess a pistol;
(ii) a person under the age of 21 years may possess ammunition designed for use in a
firearm that the person may lawfully possess and ;
(iii) a person under the age of 18 years may carry or possess a pistol or semiautomatic
military-style assault weapon (i) :
In other words, people under the age of 21 aren't capable of handling a firearm. That bill was submitted by Sen. Latz, the most prolific DFL gun-grabber in the Senate. SF3453 was submitted by Sandy Pappas. It's a proposed constitutional amendment. Here's the ballot question that would be on the ballot if this passes (it won't) the House and Senate:
Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to allow persons 16 or more years of age
to vote in state and local elections?
Yes __________
No __________
In other words, Sen. Latz would prohibit a 20-year-old single mother from protecting herself or her family but Sen. Pappas thinks 16-year-olds are mature enough to make informed decisions and vote? That's twisted logic on steroids.
Actually, it isn't difficult to figure out what the DFL is thinking. First, they want tons of uninformed voters flooding the system. It's the only way they can win elections. Next, the DFL wants to control people's lives. Raising the minimum age for buying a gun won't solve any problems but it will give government more control of people's lives. Controlling people is part of the DFL's DNA.
Posted Sunday, March 18, 2018 2:03 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 18-Mar-18 05:11 PM
I keep telling you, it's not about gun control, it's about control. If it makes it to the ballot and if the youth (well their parents) vote for this, your "Our schools have Failed us" article will be even more proof the schools really have fail us.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Mar-18 08:50 PM
The good news is that this bill will never get a hearing, much less get a floor vote.
Our schools have failed us
The first reaction I had after reading this article is that our schools have failed us. The article is about the St. Cloud State College Republicans putting together a 'wall' that some snowflakes got upset about:
According to the article, some "students became so upset by the free speech wall they accused the College Republicans of 'hate speech' and 'inciting violence' during a heated February campus meeting over it. But even after a parade of his peers took to the mic and accused Eike and other GOP students of hatred, the international student stood his ground."
At the anti-conservative tribunal, things quickly devolved:
"The student union held a meeting on the topic that can best be described as a trial. Students were shouting, standing, making thinly veiled threats, and making outrageous claims of what our organization is responsible for," Eike told the foundation in a Feb. 3 report.
"Members of the student body can be heard stating that they wish to chop my head off, and they issue indirect threats such as that they hear people conspiring to commit acts of violence against me. I have previously been struck in the face in a school building, surrounded by upwards of 60 people, just for wearing a MAGA hat. Members of my organization have had acts of vandalism happen to campaign material they have hung up in their dorm," Eike continued.
That's disturbing. The anti-CRs complain about hate speech but the CRs have put up with acts of vandalism, angry mobs attempting to bully them and death threats. This video shows how intellectually feeble students are:
[Video no longer available]
Saying that "hate speech shouldn't be covered by the First Amendment" is frightening. Of course, it should be covered by the First Amendment. Popular speech doesn't need protection. Provocative speech needs protecting. Further, saying that "hate speech promotes violence" is BS. The person speaking provocative things isn't responsible for how the listener reacts. The listener is responsible for how he/she reacts. If the listener gets upset, that's their responsibility. The listener has the option of not getting upset. Living life in a perpetual state of being offended is an option but what kind of life is that?
Our school system has fostered a thinking that every controversial statement is a micro-aggression that requires a hostile response. This is the thinking behind the Antifa movement. The people getting offended in the video are children intellectually. They aren't adults. Their arguments are flimsy. Meanwhile, the CRs that are getting criticized for their 'Wall' are taking it all in and not reacting violently. They're proving that hostile speech doesn't incite violence. They're proving that people have a choice in how they react.
I won't argue that progressives are infantile intellectually. I'll simply state that they aren't as intellectually mature as the CRs in this instance.
Posted Sunday, March 18, 2018 2:09 AM
No comments.
SCSU professor verbally assaults student, calls it "private matter"
Recently, SCSU Sociology Professor Tracey Ore came unhinged on campus . When she realized that her diatribe was being taped, she insisted that the cameraman stop taping and to delete the outburst. Mark Wasson of the SCSU Chronicle reports that "Students, upset over a display put up by the St. Cloud State University's (SCSU) College Republicans gathered in front of the display case while members of the SCSU College Republicans defended the display. While students were discussing this issue, Professor Tracy Ore, who teaches Sociology at SCSU, confronted UTVS News Director and University Chronicle Managing Editor, Kyle Fahrmann, who was acting as a UTVS cameraman, about recording during the ordeal and demanded he not only stop recording but also delete any footage he had taken."
Then things got weird:
The student Ore was speaking to was the then VP of the College Republicans (VP). He asked that his name not be used in this article. The VP said that Ore, himself and former President of the College Republicans, Mathias Eike had been talking earlier.
He said the conversation became very heated, and that Eike left and that Ore and himself stepped off to talk about things after Eike departed. The VP also said "I could easily tell [Ore] was emotionally charged about it all. And she was really mad and telling me, even when I was being calm with her, 'to get educated' on the issue."
Talk about disrespectful. Prof. Ore lost it. Then she started making unreasonable demands:
He said Ore was "a little riled up" from the way Eike was speaking to her and was talking to the VP with a raised tone in a "mean lecturing voice" and also talking down to him. It was during that conversation that Fahrmann decided to start filming.
When contacted via email Ore was open to comment on the incident but stated she did not know why the University Chronicle would be interested in a " private matter . "
I can't wait to hear Prof. Ore explain how a heated exchange caught on film in Atwood Center is a "private matter." There's no expectation of privacy in a hallway in that building. Prof. Ore knows that. It's just her attempt to hide an embarrassing episode.
If this is how Prof. Ore treats students, perhaps it's time for her to find a new profession. Clearly, she doesn't have the right temperament to teach. She'd be better as a political activist/agitator.
Posted Sunday, March 18, 2018 7:17 AM
No comments.
Councilman to participate in refugee resettlement panel
St. Cloud City Councilman Jeff Johnson will participate in a panel discussion on the refugee resettlement program in Washington, DC this Tuesday morning. The discussion is being held at the National Press Club. It's being hosted by the Center for Immigration Studies, aka CIS. CIS Executive Director Mark Krikorian will serve as moderator to a panel that will include Councilman Johnson, CIS fellow Don Barnett and Richard Thompson, the president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center.
The Times article highlighted the fact that the Southern Poverty Law Center, aka the SPLC, has labeled the CIS as a hate group. The Times article didn't mention the fact that the SPLC is a hyper-partisan organization that frequently lumps center-right organizations in with legitimate hate groups like the KKK.
Greg Gutfeld exposed the SPLC in a monologue:
So, this is funny. You ever heard the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)? They're a hard left outfit that loves to label people as extremists. Their ever-growing list seems to defame everyone. Ben Carson, he's an extremist. Rand Paul. They called Maajid Nawaz an anti-Muslim extremist and get this, he's a moderate Muslim battling religious extremism. It makes no sense. There's [Ayaan] Hirsi Ali, a black feminist who protests against genital mutilation. SPLC placed her name and a guy to anti-Muslim extremists. So that's extreme, to be against genital mutilation? I wonder what they'd make of Gandhi?
But that's not the funny part. It's the money. This poverty center has loads of it. A $320 million endowment and chucks almost 20% of it into offshore equities. Cayman Island stuff. I don't understand it. So this poverty group sits on a pile of offshore dough. That's like a personal trainer with a gut. Or a priest with a harem. The Center paid out $20 million in salaries in 2015 but provided just 61 grants in legal assistance. So the Southern Poverty Law Center appears to have no poverty and do virtually no law. It's the most misleading name since the Democratic Party. Yes, count it.
Worse, their love for calling people haters incites haters into action. The maniac who shot [House Majority Whip] Stephen Scalise liked the law center on his Facebook page. And a terrorist who attacked the Family Research Council back in 2012, shooting a security guard, did so after the SPLC labeled them a hate group. He was a fan too.
I don't know, filthy rich, linked to violence. I think the SPLC might end up having to put itself on its own list. Indeed. It's a pretty amazing story. I have a theory that no one goes after this group because of the name. You hear Southern Poverty Law Center, you go, oh, they must be a really good outfit and you don't want to be on their bad side.
The SPLC is itself an extremist group. The Youtube video of Gutfeld's monologue has been taken down. I don't have much time for Bill Maher but I'll make this exception:
[Video no longer available]
This highlights who the SPLC is. Calling a moderate Muslim an anti-Muslim extremist tells me that the SPLC is a sham.
There is a cost associated with the refugee resettlement program but it's intentionally kept hidden. Jeff Goerger admitted it in his resolution when he said "Now therefore be it resolved by the Council of St. Cloud, MN that the City of St. Cloud has the capacity to provide municipal services to the aforementioned prospective new residents without an impact on the City budget or quality of life."
There's no disputing the fact that municipal services cost money. They're line items in the City budget. That's the shiny object argument, though. Whether the money is part of the City budget, the county budget or the school district's budget, it's still money being paid by the taxpayers. The taxpayers don't care whether their money is taken from them to pay for health care services, rent subsidies or translators at the local schools. Whatever the money is spent on, the money isn't at the taxpayers' disposal. It's money they can't use to save for their retirements or their kids' college education or a family vacation.
Jeff Goerger's resolution is dripping with contempt for taxpayers. He's determining whether families should have their taxes raised in the name of making St. Cloud a 'welcoming city', whatever that means. What a 'welcoming city' isn't is a place where people want to live. They're moving to other cities and other states. Capital flight is negatively affecting St. Cloud. That doesn't matter to people like Jeff Goerger, Carol Lewis or Dave Masters. They just bury their head in the sand and pretend that everything is ok.
Posted Sunday, March 18, 2018 8:52 AM
Comment 1 by Margaret at 18-Mar-18 10:03 AM
John Stossel also does a great piece on the Profits of Hate
http://splcexposed.com
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Mar-18 10:05 AM
SPLC isn't a highly respected organization. It might've been at one time but it isn't anymore.
HS principal violates student's First Amendment rights
When I read this article , it confirmed that our schools have failed us . Here's what happened:
New Prague High School senior Andy Dalsin held a poster during the protest which said 'Gun Don't Kill People. People Kill People.' Principal Lonnie Seifert was having none of it, however. Seifert even threatened Dalsin with being hauled away by the police if he didn't comply.
That's just the start of it. Things quickly devolved:
Seifert claims he was just going by district policy, according to KSTP-5. In a statement, the district said "such items [as Dalsin's] must be submitted to and reviewed by school administration at least 24 hours in advance."
That's an unenforceable policy because the First Amendment protects such speech. In fact, when the Supreme Court gutted McCain-Feingold, part of the reason for SCOTUS striking it down was because the bill told people when they could and couldn't run advertising against candidates. This isn't exactly on point but it's close.
First, who gave Principal Seifert the constitutional authority to accept or reject communications of any sort? Next, why is expressing a contrarian opinion on another of our civil rights unacceptable? Didn't the Founding Fathers put the First Amendment into the Bill of Rights to protect contrarian communications? I've said this before but I'll repeat it again -- there's no need to protect non-controversial speech because everyone agrees with it. Finally, the First Amendment implicitly states that nobody in government has the authority to accept or reject student communications.
Further, Dailywire.com added to the story saying :
The video was first posted to Facebook by Kenny MacDonald, a student at New Prague High School in New Prague, Minnesota. The short video does not show what took place before or after the principal singled-out the student. In the post, MacDonald provided the following account of what took place:
Kids at our school today walked out, in honor of the 17 students killed in Florida. Students held signs that said, 'Arm our teachers' they had two signs. A student walked out without saying a word peacefully put up his sign which said 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' he was escorted off the property by our principal and threatened to be put into a police car. This violates the first amendment and makes me sick that they can do whatever they want. Please make this go viral
It went viral alright:
Within a few hours, the video had already been viewed nearly 300,000 times, shared over 17,000 times, and received thousands of comments from people who expressed anger and disgust over the suppression of free speech and political indoctrination at public schools.
Then there's this:
It's appalling to read that "New Prague Area Schools fully respects and recognizes that students have free speech rights. Those rights, however, are to be balanced against the District's responsibility to maintain a school environment focused on education."
New Prague Area Schools obviously doesn't respect students' free speech rights because it threatened a student if he didn't remove his sign. Further, a student's First Amendment rights aren't "balanced against the District's responsibility to maintain a school environment focused on education." A student's First Amendment rights are to be balanced against the constitutional tests established by the Supreme Court. In literally hundreds of cases, the Supreme Court (and other appellate courts) have ruled against restrictions placed on people by city governments and school districts.
Finally, it's frightening that a high school principal has such a flimsy understanding of the First Amendment. The School Board should order him to take an online class on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights from Hillsdale College. Principal Seifert's understanding of the Constitution is embarrassing.
Posted Sunday, March 18, 2018 11:14 AM
No comments.
Students: Leaders or Pawns?
Students: Leaders or Pawns?
By Rambling Rose
A month after the massacre of more students in another 'gun-free zone,' thousands of students of all ages left their classrooms to protest gun violence. No one doubts their need for a sense of security in the classroom. However, are the students themselves organizing this movement from the grassroots or are they being manipulated by teachers, administrators, liberal parents or other organized groups with progressive, leftist ideologies and funding?
How many truly believe that the walkouts were completely voluntary? Teachers may not leave students unsupervised in classrooms. Hence, entire classes marched at the behest of the organizers of the school/district. Nor do teachers ignore mandates from building or district supervisors if they hope to continue employment in that school district.
How many believe that elementary, or even middle school students, even understand the gun-control debate? Did the children make the posters and memorize the chants as directed by their teachers, or did they in their own yet-developing minds eagerly organize the march for their school, replete with posters? Is this PC indoctrination of the most eager and receptive learners? Even preschoolers echo a need for peace and a belief that they can (currently) change the world.
How many believe that the protests are really about gun control? It appears more about a power struggle to control the discussion of a left-wing agenda. No one would oppose a chance to protect innocent lives, would they? Since school massacres occurred by someone entering schools with guns to commit the heinous crime, why not ban guns? Schools are gun-free zones filled with many potential victims with no means to defend against the perpetrator. And if it's harder to obtain a gun (legally) and only by older persons, there would not be any more shootings, right? It's a tug of war, and to the victor go the spoils - power.
A post on Facebook stated that the USA is #3 in the world for murders but drops to 189 of 193 countries if Chicago, Detroit, Washington, DC, St. Louis and New Orleans, all with strict gun control laws, are removed from the list. Does gun control work, or does it effectively invite criminals to do their dastardly deeds?
How many believe there is a need to encourage students to exercise their First Amendment rights to destroy their Second Amendment rights? Another post on social media, apparently from a student, called his fellow students "pawns" and challenged them to return to class and learn from history the rationale for the Second Amendment.
One might argue that the students at Rocori High School could have chosen this event to honor their fellow classmates who lost their lives in a school shooting in 2003. One could also contend that such a ceremony could have occurred before or after school.
When one considers the walkout at St. John's Prep, Sartell and Sauk-Rapids, they fall under the questions above. As reported today in the Times, the principal at St. John's Prep stated "students were responsible for anything they missed in class, but there would be no punishments for students who walked out." By contrast, the superintendents of the other two districts reported "students from Sartell and Sauk-Rapids Rice high schools who decided to participate in the walkout will face the standard penalty of an unexcused absence."
Across the nation, the divide continues. In Baltimore, where there is not enough money to heat the classrooms, the mayor provided $100,000 to bus students to Washington, D.C. to participate in the protests at the Capitol. A parent in Chicago pointed to the political indoctrination on public property stating students "not old enough really to have formed an informed political opinion on this and they're going to do what their teachers tell them in this case, what their peers are saying they should do."
What did other students do who chose, probably with the help of adults in their lives, not to be truant? Students at Arbor Preparatory High School (Ypsilanti, MI - likely location determined from a Google search) received 17 sticky notes with instructions to leave 14 messages for fellow students and 3 for adults with an encouraging message. No locker in the school was without notes. Others honored a Walk Up challenge and invited other students to join them or just be nice to someone else. One of those promoting this alternative was Ryan Petty whose 14-year-old daughter was murdered a month ago in Florida.
Those acts will probably impact more lives than the noisy protests and assaults. In Minneapolis, a student was attacked and beaten for carrying a Trump poster. No one was arrested in that assault. In New Prague, the principal walked a student off campus and threatened to place him in a patrol car for carrying a sign that claimed people, not guns, kill. That incident was captured on tape and has gone viral. Who gained from those actions?
Yesterday, March 14th, Dr. Andzenge's column "Obsession with violence, crime has created major crime industry" on the opinion page of the St. Cloud Times was on target. We have created a society that honors violence. This may be the reason for the increased number of violent acts in this country. We can decide if we choose to perpetuate violence by responding with more violence, or if we opt to make a change in life by kindness.
Posted Sunday, March 18, 2018 11:54 PM
No comments.
About those MNIT programmers
The DFL has insisted that Republicans have to fund the MNLARS disaster without providing oversight. One of their chief arguments is that not funding MNLARS is that the programmers who've bungled the project thus far might leave if Republicans don't fund MNLARS to the tune of $43,000,000. Tom Steward's article for the Center for the American Experiment highlights the DFL's argument, saying "'We're going to lose all these programmers,' Dibble said. 'We might as well turn off the lights and not proceed with MNLARS anymore if we don't do this today.'"
DFL Rep. Rick Hansen "issued this long shot in the Morning Take tip sheet. ': Now these highly sought after workers are seeking new jobs and at least one top project developer has resigned: Continuous stalling, blaming and pontificating, instead of problem-solving, continues to make the problem worse and will add months until we have a fully functioning system for Minnesotans: There is a cost to the House Republican inaction: Republicans now own the MNLARS problem. It's on them and only them.'"
Republicans should be praised for getting rid of the programmers who created the MNLARS mess. Republican legislators should be further praised for insisting on rigorous oversight of the project. The MNLARS project has been a disaster from the time the Dayton administration took it over. The Dayton administration was told before MNLARS went online that it would fail. The Dayton administration ok'd the project anyway. Then it insisted on a ton more money to fix MNLARS. That took it from a $40,000,000 price tag to a $93,000,000 price tag.
It's still failing. The additional $50,000,000 didn't fix the DFL's MNLARS crisis either. Now the DFL is insisting that Republicans will be blamed if they don't write another $43,000,000 blank check to the Dayton administration, who will use the money to pay these failed programmers.
[Video no longer available]
Meantime, Dayton has proposed penalizing Minnesotans even further for the dysfunctional system with a $2 per vehicle transaction fee to go to fixing MNLARS. Not a chance, according to MNN's coverage. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jim Knoblach from Saint Cloud says that's dead on arrival. "To me it just adds insult to injury. He's now going to try to charge everyone who uses the system to pay for this disaster. We're not gonna do that," Knoblach says.
Chairman Knoblach is right in declaring that proposal DOA. Why should we pay for the Dayton administration's incompetence?
I've said it before but I'll repeat it here. The DFL is the party of big government. Gov. Dayton and DFL legislators like Scott Dibble, Rick Hansen and Frank Hornstein have insisted that the money be appropriated but that the legislature not provide oversight on the project.
This can't be taken seriously. Republicans are right in insisting on rigorous oversight. If that costs us a few of these programmers, it's worth it.
Posted Monday, March 19, 2018 9:50 AM
Comment 1 by Terry Stone at 19-Mar-18 11:28 AM
The solution to MNLARS continues to be sub-contracting the service with the State of North Dakota whose software is working flawlessly.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 19-Mar-18 07:11 PM
I can't picture Gov. Dayton admitting that a Republican administration did something better than his administration did something. Admitting that ND's software is better requires admitting that Republicans are smarter. I can't picture Gov. Dayton admitting that even though that'd be the right thing to do.
Comment 2 by Rexnewman at 22-Mar-18 07:15 PM
Let's be careful about blaming programmers per se. Given good specs their task is straight-forward. But if left to guess and continually hit with change orders, the only thing straight-forward is failure. This fish rots from the head.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 22-Mar-18 08:21 PM
That's a fair point, Rex. In Mr. Dayton's case, I'm certain that he isn't a competent project manager. He can't leave soon enough.
BTW, the IFO, the professors' union for 4-year MnSCU universities, endorsed Tim Walz. That just reinforces my opinion of Walz.
The Democrats' patriotism deficit
If Democrats cared about the US, we wouldn't have to deal with Rep. Adam Schiff, (D-Calif.), leaking information about the House Intelligence Committee on a daily basis. If Democrats cared about the US, we wouldn't have to deal with discredited former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe whining about Jeff Sessions firing him. If Democrats cared about the US, we wouldn't have to deal with former FBI Director Jim Comey leaking confidential information to a professor.
Last week, Hillary Clinton, the Democrats' presidential candidate in 2016, criticized the people living in blue collar states , saying "If you look at the map of the United States, there's all that red in the middle where Trump won. I win the coast, I win, you know, Illinois and Minnesota, places like that. I won the places that represent two-thirds of America's gross domestic product. So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward. And his whole campaign, 'Make America Great Again,' was looking backwards."
The point is that presidents are supposed to represent the entire nation .
Trey Gowdy put it best in talking about McCabe:
Here's that part of the transcript :
WALLACE: Now, Andrew McCabe, the former deputy FBI director who was fired late Friday night says the reason that he was fired was to undercut his credibility as a potential witness in the Mueller investigation. I want to put up some of Andrew McCabe's statement: This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals, more generally. It is part of this administration's ongoing war on the FBI and at the efforts of a special counsel's investigation, which continue to this day.
Congressman, your response?
GOWDY: Oh, Andy McCabe has undercut his credibility all by himself. He didn't need any help doing that. And I find it richly ironic that he is lamenting that those are attacking the FBI when he himself does the exact same thing. It was the FBI who said he made an unauthorized disclosure and then lied about it. That wasn't President Trump. It wasn't me. It wasn't a crazy House Republicans. It was his own fell FBI agents that said he leaked and then lied about it. So, if he's got credibility issues, he needs look no further than himself.
McCabe didn't tell the truth. President Trump didn't destroy his credibility. McCabe destroyed his credibility by being a partisan instead of being a law enforcement officer.
I'd love questioning Adam Schiff about what proof he has that the Trump administration gives a rip about the Mueller investigation. Thus far, I haven't seen anything that'd indicate President Trump has done anything illegal. I've heard Rep. Schiff say he's got proof that President Trump has acted illegally but I haven't seen the proof. Thus far, the only logical conclusion to draw is that Democrats are using this fishing expedition exclusively for political gain.
I'd love questioning Sen. Manchin or Sen. Heitkamp why they voted against the tax cuts that've pushed the US economy into overdrive.
That's the opposite of patriotism. That's the definition of partisanship.
Posted Tuesday, March 20, 2018 12:46 AM
No comments.
