Fourth graders at a school in St. Cloud, Minnesota, have been told not to tell their parents about the racist, anti-white training at school.By Warner Todd Huston, Flag and Cross, July 26, 2021:According to reports, fourth graders at a school in St. Cloud, Minnesota, have been told not to tell their parents about the racist, anti-white training they are getting at school. Lids were told to stay mum about an “equity survey” they were required to fill out that informs the white kids about how racist they all are. Per Fox News:According to a video uploaded by Alphanews, when students didn’t understand some of the survey questions, they were told by a teacher in the Sartell-St. Stephen School District to not repeat the survey questions to their parents.
“The survey asked questions that some students didn’t understand. Even after hearing an explanation from their teacher, some still couldn’t comprehend the survey questions,” The Center Square reported.
The George Floyd incident sparked a nationwide conversation on race and the role of policing. School districts across America are pushing critical race theory on students to attempt to contextualize current events on matters of race.
The parents found out, anyway, though. And they are none too happy about their kids being exposed to the woke anti-whit critical race theory curriculum.
Kelsey Yasgar said that although parents were “informed that the equity audit was taking place, they were not informed on the date of the activity and not given other details.” She explained further that due to the lack of transparency from the school district and from Equity Alliance Minnesota, the third party that administered the survey, parents were not informed of the questions being asked to the students.
Yasgar was “very upset” when her daughter told her that she was instructed by teachers not to repeat any of the questions being asked of them.
“I do want to say though I believe that this wasn’t a single case that her teacher made this decision. We had been informed that this came down from the administration and Equity Alliance of Minnesota instructed them to make sure the children did not share this information with their parents and that should pose a great concern in any parents’ eyes,” Hayley said.
Folks, don’t just blink and pass over this story. It is being repeated in every single school in the U.S.A.
If you have kids in school, they ARE being exposed to this racist crap.
Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2021-07-28 06:12:482021-10-07 20:21:47Fourth Graders in Minnesota Told Not to Tell Parents About Racist, Anti-White Training In School
This torment must stop. Children are not at risk. And another study shows carbon dioxide levels from wearing masks “suggest(s) that children should not be forced to wear face masks.”
Thankfully, Governor Ron DeSantis said he will oppose any move by the federal government to require children to wear masks in the upcoming school year.
Another study shows carbon dioxide levels from wearing masks “suggest(s) that children should not be forced to wear face masks.”
Biden: Kids Wearing Masks in School a Matter of “Community Responsibility”
Daybreak Insider, July 23, 2021:
As he concedes that will likely be the CDC recommendation (NBC News). Texas governor Greg Abbott said of his state “There will be no mask mandate imposed. And the reason for that is very clear, there are so many people who have immunities” (Hot Air). From Bethany Mandel: Some districts decided not to serve lunch in school, because kids have to take their masks off to eat. Recess is out. So is music. And if children suffer, who cares? We have the luxury of ignoring other ridiculous pronouncements from the CDC in every other area of our lives, but our kids can’t escape its reach. America’s kids are going to be trapped behind masks because of the CDC in classrooms and anywhere else in public. The question they can’t and won’t answer is: Why? (NY Post). From Karol Markowicz: In March, when Texas and Mississippi dropped their mask mandates, President Joe Biden criticized the moves as “neanderthal thinking” and said it was too soon to stop wearing masks. The blue-check media predicted a COVID holocaust in these states. That didn’t happen. Case numbers collapsed in the months after the mandates ended. But, as I’ve been writing in these pages all along, we were wearing masks all wrong anyway (NY Post). Meanwhile, from Dr. Scott Gottlieb: “I happen to believe that we’re further into this delta wave than we’re measuring. So this may be over sooner than we think” (Twitter).
Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2021-07-25 06:18:592021-10-07 20:21:54CHILD ABUSE: “Biden” Good with Kids Wearing Masks at School Again
Critical Race Theory is born of Karl Marx. Patriotic, thinking Americans must fight this internal attack on the very foundation of the Republic as if the Chi-coms were invading Iowa. This is war and it’s a battle we must win by defeating the Marxists behind CRT.
Graham Ledger speaks with patriot and CRT opponent Harriette Reid about how and where you must fight this assault on the constitution.
A discerning look at public school history books, grades six through twelve, will reveal that the teaching of black history is, indeed, broken. Excluded are most of the exceptional accomplishments of blacks throughout American history. History textbooks are the dominant educational tool that shapes students’ views. Our children are missing some of the greatest inspirational stories ever told when American history books are inadequately represented and devoid of black history.
In recounting the history of the 1619 arrival of the first blacks, history books do not share that some were treated as indentured servants, as was Anthony Johnson. Anthony arrived on the English ship, White Lion, eventually became a landowner through the “headright system” and a slave owner. Anthony, a black man, won a court case in Northampton County Court on March 8, 1655, to keep his slave, John Casor. It was the case that changed the American landscape, for it was the first legal sanction of slavery in the Virginia Colony.
How many students know about the black heroes of the Revolutionary War? Thousands of free and enslaved blacks fought in every major battle from Lexington and Concord to Yorktown and served in an integrated army. Some blacks were fighting for the promise of freedom, while others were fighting for their country’s independence. By 1779, fifteen percent of the Continental Army was black. Peter Salem was born a slave and joined the Massachusetts Minutemen, and was a sharpshooter who played a vital role in the Battle of Bunker Hill. Salem was honored in John Trumbull’s painting, “Battle of Bunker Hill.” James Armistead posed as a runaway slave and gained the trust of the British and gave strategic information of troop movements to the Continental Army resulting in success at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781.
Students learn about the Abolitionist movement and Harriet Tubman, but what about Levi and Catherine Coffin, who helped more than 3,000 slaves escape to freedom? Or what about the escaped slaves Ellen and William Craft, who became active in the Abolitionist movement? Or the wealthy free black James Forten family of Philadelphia, who were instrumental in the fighting for slave freedom.
By the time the American Civil War commenced, more than 488,000 free blacks were in the North and South. Thousands of free and enslaved blacks fought in every major campaign in the last two years of the Civil War. Twenty-six blacks were Medal of Honor recipients. Landsman Aaron Anderson (U.S.S. Wyandank), enlisted at the age of 52, was singled out for courage under heavy fire; Sergeant William H. Carney (54th Massachusetts Infantry) received his award for the Battle of Fort Wagner; and Sergeant Christian A. Fleetwood (4th U.S.C.T.), a graduate of Ashmun Institute, said he enlisted “to save the country from ruin.”
Frederick Douglass was a great well-known orator, but what about Robert B. Elliott? Robert B. Elliott was a U.S. Congressman whose speech “The Shackle is Broken” addressed the Civil Rights Bill of 1875, which enriched the meanings of liberty and citizenship. Elliott’s speech was so brilliant that some doubted if he wrote it. Additionally, more than 2,000 black leaders during Reconstruction at the local, state, and national levels contributed invaluable leadership to America.
There are thousands of stories about inspirational leaders: inventors such as Granville T. Woods, called the black Thomas Edison, was awarded more than forty-five patents for his inventions, or the first black woman physician, Dr. Rebecca Crumpler, who graduated from medical school in 1864, or people in business such as the “Potato King” Junius G. Groves who produced more white potatoes than anyone in the world, or explorers such as the first black woman astronaut Mae Jemison, or the NASA pioneer mathematician Katherine Johnson of Hidden Figures fame, and the gifted surgical teacher, Vivien Thomas who never went to college, but was awarded an honorary doctorate from Johns Hopkins University in 1976.
Yocum African American History Association (YAAHA) was founded by two women, one black and one white, who forged a partnership and began their journey to uncover hidden black history. These two women, Frances Presley Rice who is black and the undersigned, created YAAHA, a non-profit organization, to provide educational resources that celebrate black history and prove that black history is American history.
The founders of YAAHA co-authored “Black History 1619-2019: An Illustrated and Documented African-American History” that is an in-depth look at the events which shaped the lives and contributions of the African American community in the United States of America. Now in its third printing, the book is available at Amazon.com and through bookstores nationwide. Proceeds from book sales are donated to YAAHA.
The Headmaster of Bridgeport International Academy wrote:
“Our Academy refers to this excellent and objective review of Black History that sheds light on many chapters of American history in clear, objective, and precise language backed up by thorough research and many compelling photos and individual stories. It enables real conversation and constructive thinking about race in this country instead of the propaganda that seeks racial division for economic and political gain. I encourage other schools to use it when developing their American History courses, particularly during Black History month, as it is a wealth of resources for lesson planning.” – Frank LaGtotteria, D.Min.,Headmaster, Bridgeport International Academy
The article “Let’s Celebrate America’s Black Patriots” by Burgess Owens, the U.S. Representative for Utah’s Fourth district, that was published in the Newsweek online magazine includes a reference to the book, plus information extracted from it.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Sandra K. Yocumhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSandra K. Yocum2021-07-18 06:54:122021-10-07 20:23:02Teaching Black History is Broken
An old story tells of a big, successful store with a plaque in the employees’ lounge which read:
“Rule #1. The customer’s always right. Rule #2. If you ever think the customer is wrong, reread Rule #1.”
I bring this up because the public school education establishment (to be distinguished from the rank and file teachers, many of whom are dedicated public servants), often treat their customers as if they’re wrong and as if the education elites know better than the dumb parents.
School choice is the ultimate answer to America’s education crisis, and there ought to be bipartisan agreement on it. School competition makes education better, and gives all parents more options for their children. But the Left opposes it adamantly, though even a liberal newspaper surprisingly spoke out recently in favor of school choice.
“The liberal Washington Post editorial board on Thursday broke rank with the left and pondered why Democrats are so opposed to giving poor children a choice in schooling.”
The Washington Post opined,
“For 17 years, a federally funded K-12 scholarship program has given thousands of poor children in D.C. the opportunity to attend private schools and the chance to go on to college. And for many of those 17 years, the program has been in the crosshairs of unions and other opponents of private school vouchers…Their relentless efforts unfortunately may now finally succeed with House Democrats and the Biden administration quietly laying the groundwork to kill off this worthy program.”
What a tragedy. And who will suffer the most? Inner-city families.
The Left is all about power. But true public service is always about empowerment—empowering others, regardless of their socio-economic background—so that people can fulfill their God-given destiny.
The pandemic over the past year-and-a-half showed how the teachers unions held hostage many schools from re-opening in person.
During the shutdown, many parents discovered the option of homeschooling. In an interview for Christian television, Mike Donnelly of the Home School Legal Defense Association told me, “The U. S. census bureau issued a report recently that showed that homeschooling households doubled from about five and a half percent, before the virus, to over almost 12%.”
Homeschooling is not as radical as it sounds. Many of our founding fathers and key American leaders, like Abraham Lincoln, were home-taught.
In August 2020, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, observed, “If there was one positive outcome I could point to from the Coronavirus Pandemic…was the fact that public schools were shut down and kids were at home. Parents were to a larger degree, involved in what their kids were learning ….And I’ve heard from a number of parents, who are now rethinking education in terms of how they’re going to go about it post Coronavirus Pandemic.”
Fast forward to the present time and we see many parents revolting against some of what the education establishment is trying to cram down their throats, such as Critical Race Theory (CRT), a racist set of doctrines disguised in anti-racist garb.
CRT is a Marxist attempt to destroy America from within by teaching that white people always oppress minorities. Always.
When parents learn about CRT-type curricula in their schools, they have spoken out against it. Even many minority parents and parents in heavily-Democratic areas have opposed it. It certainly flies in the face of the goals of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that America become color-blind and judge people according to the content of their character not the color of their skin.
But the major teachers’ unions have not backed down from the teaching of CRT. With the unions’ blessing, about 5000 teachers recently pledged to teach CRT, even if it’s illegal.
For example, President Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, promises to “legally defend” members of their union who teach CRT, even if in that particular school district it is illegal.
CRT has different manifestations in our schools. Gary Bauer notes in his End of Day (7/9/2021): “For example, at least 25 school districts around the country are using a book called ‘Not My Idea.’ Here’s how Amazon describes the book: ‘Not My Idea’ is the only children’s picture book that roots the problem of racism in whiteness and empowers white children and families to see and dismantle white supremacy.”
School choice seems to be the best answer to our education crisis, of which CRT is just the latest manifestation. And yet the Democrats are trying to shut it down, as in the poor sections of the District of Columbia.
Ironically, those who claim to champion “choice,” by which they mean killing preborn babies, want a one-size-fits-all approach to education in a diverse country like America.
I think the teachers unions need to reread Rule #1.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jerry Newcombe, D. Min.http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJerry Newcombe, D. Min.2021-07-15 05:42:072021-10-07 20:23:11The Time for School Choice Is Past Due
During the recent CPAC meeting held last weekend in Texas, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem (R) was one of the conservative speakers (7/11/21). During her talk, she made a passing reference to “The 1776 Pledge to Save Our Schools.” Being unaware of the pledge, I decided to look it up. It was developed by a group called, “1776 Action,” an organization dedicated to “Stopping the Anti-American Indoctrination of our Children and Grandchildren.”
I am told, this is a by-product of the “1776 Commission” as established by President Trump to support “Patriotic Education.” The Commission was quickly dissolved following the inauguration of President Biden.
There are actually two pledges listed in the “1776 Action” web site; one for citizens and one for candidates, such as school board members.
CITIZEN PLEDGE
As a citizen, I believe that:
The United States of America is an exceptional nation whose people have always strived to form a more perfect union based upon our founding principles.
Our Founding Fathers – including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson – as well as leaders like Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass and Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. were among the greatest Americans to ever live, and they deserve to be honored as heroes.
Our children and grandchildren should be taught to take pride in their country, to respect our founding principles of liberty and equality, and to have a sense of American history that is both truthful and inspiring.
Civics education should focus on the serious study of our founding documents and principles – not coerce students into engaging in extracurricular political action on behalf of contemporary policy positions.
Our young people should be taught to view one another not according to race or gender, but as individuals made in the image of God.
Teaching children to hate their country and each other is immoral and deeply harmful to our society and must be stopped.
THEREFORE, I PLEDGE to help replace elected officials, school board members, education commissioners, principals, deans, and university presidents who promote a false, divisive, and radical view of America and our fellow citizens with new leaders who respect our history, our values, our rights, and the God-given dignity of every person.
THEREFORE, I PLEDGE to the voters of (enter District/location name) that I will take concrete steps to do the following in our K-12 public schools:
Restore honest, patriotic education that cultivates in our children a profound love for our country.
Promote a curriculum that teaches that all children are created equal, have equal moral value under God, our Constitution, and the law, and are members of a national community united by our founding principles.
Prohibit any curriculum that pits students against one another on the basis of race or sex.
Prevent schools from politicizing education by prohibiting any curriculum that requires students to protest and lobby during or after school.
Frankly, I see nothing wrong with either pledge as this is how things worked years ago when I went to school. In essence, it is a throwback to another era.
As I interpret the pledges, this is obviously a reaction to today’s perception of academia which appears to be more interested in indoctrination as opposed to education. Case in point: a Virginia school district who recently came under fire for allegedly teaching Critical Race Theory (CRT) and promoting transgender policies. Other school boards are also coming under fire for similar policies. Not surprising, attendance at school board meetings by concerned parents are increasing dramatically across the country, thereby denoting the politics involved.
If all citizens and School Board members signed these simple pledges, it might very well quell the uproar at such meetings. Then again, if they do not, the intensity may increase. It is simply a matter of whether you agree with the pledges or not. As for me, I agree.
CLICK HERE to visit the 1776 Action site to take the pledge.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Tim Brycehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTim Bryce2021-07-15 05:29:112021-10-07 20:23:11PODCAST: Take ‘The 1776 Pledge’ To Save Our Schools
Cuba has made less educational and health care progress than most Latin American countries over the last 60 years, data show.
On CBS’s 60 Minutes, Senator Bernie Sanders recently praised the achievements of communist Cuba. An interviewer asked him about his 1985 comments that Cubans supported communist dictator Fidel Castro because he “educated their kids, gave their kids health care, totally transformed society.” In response, Sanders defended those comments, by stating that when “Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did? He had a massive literacy program.”
But Castro did not give Cubans literacy. Cuba already had one of the highest literacy rates in Latin America by 1950, nearly a decade before Castro took power, according to United Nations data (statistics from UNESCO). In 2016, the Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler debunked a politician’s claim that Castro’s rule significantly improved Cuban healthcare and education.
In today’s Cuba, children are taught by poorly paid teachers in dilapidated schools. Cuba has made less educational progress than most Latin American countries over the last 60 years.
According to UNESCO, Cuba had about the same literacy rate as Costa Rica and Chile in 1950 (close to 80 percent). And it has almost the same literacy rate as they do today (close to 100 percent).
Meanwhile, Latin American countries that were largely illiterate in 1950—such as Peru, Brazil, El Salvador, and the Dominican Republic—are largely literate today, closing much of the gap with Cuba. El Salvador had a less than 40 percent literacy rate in 1950, but has an 88 percent literacy rate today. Brazil and Peru had a less than 50 percent literacy rate in 1950, but today, Peru has a 94.5 percent literacy rate, and Brazil a 92.6 percent literacy rate. The Dominican Republic’s rate rose from a little over 40 percent to 91.8 percent. While Cuba made substantial progress in reducing illiteracy in Castro’s first years in power, its educational system has stagnated since, even as much of Latin America improved.
Contrary to Sanders’ claim that Castro “gave” Cubans healthcare, they already had access to healthcare before he seized power. Doctors frequently provided free healthcare to those who couldn’t afford it. As the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler noted:
As for health care and education, Cuba was already near the top of the heap before the revolution. Cuba’s low infant mortality rate is often lauded, but it already led the region on this key measure in 1953-1958, according to data collected by Carmelo Mesa-Lago, a Cuba specialist and professor emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh.
Cuba led virtually all countries in Latin America in life expectancy in 1959, before Castro’s communists seized power. But by 2012, right after Castro stepped down as Communist Party leader, Chileans and Costa Ricans lived slightly longer than Cubans. Back in 1960, Chileans had a life span seven years shorter than Cubans, and Costa Ricans lived more than two years less than Cubans on average. In 1960, Mexicans lived seven years shorter than Cubans; by 2012, the gap had shrunk to just two years.
(Today, life spans are virtually the same in Cuba as more prosperous Chile and Costa Rica—if you accept the rosy official statistics put out by Cuba’s communist government, which many people do not. Cuba has been credibly accused of hiding infant deaths, and exaggerating the life spans of its citizens. If these accusations are true, Cubans die sooner than Chileans or Costa Ricans).
Cuba has made less progress in health care and life expectancy than most of Latin America in recent years, due to its decrepit health care system. “Hospitals in the island’s capital are literally falling apart.” Sometimes, patients ”have to bring everything with them, because the hospital provides nothing. Pillows, sheets, medicine: everything.”
Reporters have also documented that Cuban hospitals are ill-equipped. A 2004 series on Cuba’s health-care system in Canada’s National Post said pharmacies stock very little and antibiotics are available only on the black market. “One of the myths Canadians harbor about Cuba is that its people may be poor and living under a repressive government, but they have access to quality health and education facilities,” the Post said. “It’s a portrait encouraged by the government, but the reality is sharply different.”
Under communism, Cuba has also fallen behind on more general measures of human development. As the progressive economist Brad DeLong pointed out:
Cuba in 1957—was a developed country. Cuba in 1957 had lower infant mortality than France, Belgium, West Germany, Israel, Japan, Austria, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. Cuba in 1957 had doctors and nurses: as many doctors and nurses per capita as the Netherlands, and more than Britain or Finland. Cuba in 1957 had as many vehicles per capita as Uruguay, Italy, or Portugal. Cuba in 1957 had 45 TVs per 1000 people—fifth highest in the world …Today? Today the UN puts Cuba’s HDI [Human Development indicators] in the range of … Mexico. (And Carmelo Mesa-Lago thinks the UN’s calculations are seriously flawed: that Cuba’s right HDI peers today are places like China, Tunisia, Iran, and South Africa.) Thus I don’t understand lefties who talk about the achievements of the Cuban Revolution: ‘…to have better health care, housing, education.’
As Michael Giere notes, Cuba was prosperous before Castro’s communists seized power:
A United Nations (UNESCO) report in 1957 noted that the Cuban economy included proportionally more workers who were unionized than in the U.S. The report also stated that average wages for an eight hour day were higher in Cuba than in “Belgium, Denmark, France, and Germany.”…PBS explained in a 2004 retrospective, that
“Havana [prior to Castro] was a glittering and dynamic city. Cuba ranked fifth in the hemisphere in per capita income, third in life expectancy, second in per capita ownership of automobiles and telephones, first in the number of television sets per inhabitant. The literacy rate, 76%, was the fourth highest in Latin America. Cuba ranked 11th in the world in the number of doctors per capita. Many private clinics and hospitals provided services for the poor. Cuba’s income distribution compared favorably with that of other Latin American societies. A thriving middle class held the promise of prosperity and social mobility.”
But after Castro took over, the prosperity came to an end:
Castro’s destruction of Cuba cannot be over dramatized. He looted, murdered, and destroyed the nation from the ground up. Just one factoid explains it all; Cubans once enjoyed one of the highest consumption of proteins in the Americas, yet in 1962 Castro had to introduce ration cards (meat, 2 ounces daily), as food consumption per person crashed to levels not seen since the 1800s.
Hunger became so widespread that a visiting Swedish doctor, Hans Rosling, had to warn Cuba’s dictator in 1992 about widespread protein deficiency among Cubans. Roughly 40,000 Cubans had been reported to have been experiencing “visual blurring and severe numbness in their legs.” Rosling investigated at the invitation of the Cuban embassy in Sweden, and with the approval of Castro himself. Rosling travelled to the heart of the outbreak, in the western province of Pinar del Río. It turned out that those stricken with the disorder all suffered from protein deficiency. The government was rationing meat, and adults had sacrificed their portion to nourish children, pregnant women and the elderly. Dr. Rosling told Fidel Castro about this.
During this period of widespread hunger, Bernie Sanders was peddling the myth that hunger was non-existent in Cuba. In 1989, he published a newspaper column claiming that Fidel Castro’s Cuba had “no hunger, is educating all of its children and is providing high quality, free health care.”
Hans Bader practices law in Washington, D.C. After studying economics and history at the University of Virginia and law at Harvard, he practiced civil-rights, international-trade, and constitutional law.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2021-07-14 06:55:342021-10-07 20:23:15No, Fidel Castro Didn’t Improve Health Care or Education in Cuba
Today’s article comes from Amac and is written by Daniel Roman. My neighbor Steve directed me to it. Please read it then SHARE it using the share on this blog far and wide! It is a longer read than normal but so worth it.
The Graph That Shatters CRT: July 4, 1776 Set Slavery on the Path to Worldwide Extinction
As America celebrates the 245th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence this July 4, the legacy of the Declaration is under attack like perhaps never before. Much of the American left has adopted the view—one even espoused by Joe Biden’s Ambassador to the United Nations—that the Declaration is a “white supremacist” document. This is among the central notions of what has become known as Critical Race Theory. Yet this idea, so crucial to the thinking of the modern left, is not only not true, but the clear historical record shows that the exact opposite is true. The Declaration of Independence did not forever enshrine slavery and racism into the soul of America—it set slavery on the path to inevitable global extinction.
The question goes to the heart of the faith which has animated liberal thought toward race since long before it was formalized in the New York Times’ 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory—a belief not just that America has sins, or was imperfect, but that America was and is uniquely sinful and worse than everyone else.
In this version of American history, the truth of 1776 is not merely that the Founders were forced to make pragmatic compromises with reality and take time to achieve the aspirations they set themselves. It is not simply that Thomas Jefferson, despite his repeated personal desire to do so, failed to see the elimination of slavery in his lifetime.
No, the 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory’s historical claim is much bigger than that. They claim that Jefferson and the Founders never cared to see the end of slavery at all, and above all, they claim that the American Revolution itself was fought specifically to entrench slavery, driven by fears that Britain might abolish it.
As has been noted even by a number of liberal and partisan Democratic historians, these claims are total nonsense.
The abolition of slavery in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia followed rather than preceded the Declaration of Independence and it did so for a simple reason. The British, far from being a force for emancipation, were a force against it. In fact, they opposed any move toward emancipation for the same reason the American Revolution was necessary in the first place. London sought control of all trade and economic activities in the colonies for revenue raising purposes. The British Exchequer profited from the buying and selling of slaves in American ports, and British banks invested heavily in loans to slave trading firms. Any attack on the slave trade would have been as much an act of rebellion against Britain as the attack on the tea trade was.
Reality is the inverse of the 1619 Project’s thesis. Rather than being an effort to avert any moves toward emancipation or restrictions on slavery, American Independence was a prerequisite for any legal limitations to it.
And the evidence is that far from being empty words, many of those who signed their names to the Declaration in 1776 meant what they said about all men being created equal. In 1776, slavery was legal in every single colony. In the years to come it was outlawed in Pennsylvania in 1780, New Hampshire and Massachusetts in 1783, and Connecticut and Rhode Island in 1784. After the Constitution was ratified, it was abolished in New York (1799) and New Jersey (1804).
Indeed, the period around 1776 marked a pivot point that set off a wave of abolitions around the globe. In his 2011 book Better Angels of our Nature, scholar Stephen Pinker illustrates this trend perfectly with a graph charting the progress of abolitionism worldwide:
One answer is that the ideas of the American Declaration of Independence did not emerge out of thin air. As countless scholars have argued, and Pinker explained in his 2018 book Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress, America’s founding document represented an encapsulation of the ideas and values of the European Enlightenment, which challenged certainties about the social order and the world. All institutions—monarchs and Popes, empires and even slavery—were forced to justify themselves based on reason. In other words, simply having existed for centuries was no longer enough.
That’s one reason why the Declaration of Independence stood out at the time – its language was a radical departure from what had come before.
Previous British and European rebellions had generally tried to contest that they were in fact rebelling at all. Their proclamations often read like complex legal briefs, referencing obscure land rights cases from 1231. When America’s Founding Fathers issued their declaration, however, they did something different. They made bold appeals to Enlightenment ideas such as universal rights. In their declaration, all men were equal not because a royal charter said so, but because God created them that way. Their rights existed not because a King granted them or a Parliament passed them into law, but because they were unalienable.
These Enlightenment ideas generally, and the American Revolution specifically, set the end of slavery in motion in several very practical ways.
As we have seen, no territory in America outlawed slavery under British rule, and the British in fact did not allow any territory they ruled to exercise that sort of autonomy in any other case either prior to that point or subsequently. Meanwhile, every northern U.S. state was able to outlaw slavery by 1804, yet the British Empire did not do so until 1833.
“Aha” the leftists will say, “but slavery remained in the American South until the Civil War was over in 1865.” This is true, of course, but there is no reason to believe the British would have tried to abolish slavery if it would have risked conflict or cost.
On the contrary, it is almost impossible to imagine that there even would have been an abolitionist movement anywhere in the world without the success of the American Revolution.
For one thing, the British abolitionist movement itself emerged as a propaganda move during the wars against Napoleon. The French Revolution, which by the way was directly inspired by the American example, had abolished slavery throughout French territory. French slaveholders in the Caribbean resisted these decrees, and when slaves and supporters of the French Revolution tried to enforce them, the French slaveholders called in the British Royal Navy, which happily seized French sugar islands under the pretext of “suppressing a slave rebellion.” Public revulsion against this use of British military force to reintroduce slavery spread in Britain, driven by those who had sympathized with or supported the American cause. The first British abolitionists overlapped with the American sympathizers of the 1770s.
On a wider level, the abolition of slavery anywhere was the clear and direct consequence of those enlightenment ideas which inspired the American Declaration and which the American Revolution had given real credence in a non-theoretical sense for the first time, transforming the relationship between governments and the governed.
For centuries, political thought in Europe had been defined not in terms of the “rights” of individuals as people, but rather through the privileges of classes and offices. The Magna Carta of 1215 might have been progressive in that it restricted the power of the English King, but it restricted the power of the King over a class, his nobles. The right of nobles to govern their estates as they saw fit, to avoid taxation without their consent, and to be guaranteed a jury of their peers in any legal proceeding, meant that peasants unlucky enough to live on their estates, or Jews living in their towns, lost the ability to appeal to the King for protection.
In this environment—the pre-American Revolution environment—any effort by a King to abolish slavery would have been seen as an act of tyranny, one in which a despot stripped the property of “citizens” without their consent.
It is thus no coincidence that when slavery was abolished in U.S. states, it was done not by a King, but by governments that could claim to be elected by the people. In the new American republic, elected officeholders who abolished slavery were exercising the people’s sovereign right to self-government to fulfill the moral imperatives of the Enlightenment. It was the ideas and institutions put in place by the Revolution that made this possible at all.
Before the Revolution, no state had ever abolished slavery, and arguably no state could. After it, the pressure was irresistible, and it became seen as a requirement of republican self-government not just in America, but everywhere.
The authors of the American Declaration intentionally lit a beacon for the world, an example for other nations and peoples to follow. Nonetheless, unlike the French Revolution, the American Founders pursued their radical and uncompromising goals through conservative means, protecting property, respecting the rule of law, and giving American society enough time to actually realize the rights of human equality and freedom far beyond the dreams of the Founders.
The survival of their republic two and a half centuries later, and the total equality under the law of all men and women, races, and religions is a testament to that approach.
In time, America was able to abolish slavery in the 1860s in the bloodiest war of its history, and a century later bring to about a civil rights movement which brought this final measure of equality. These events stand out as among the only times in human history when a society has drastically reformed itself, as opposed to being transformed by foreign invasion or a murderous dictator.
The historical fact is that the American project launched on July 4, 1776 was a work in progress which took time to reach its full potential. But if the American Declaration of Independence did not abolish slavery overnight, or bring about racial equality the following day, it set the nation on the path that made those things inevitable. In fact, it set the entire world on a path where they seemed only a matter of time.
Contrary to the claims of the 1619 crowd and the Founding’s other detractors, it is impossible to see how slavery or racial equality would have developed in a world in which the Americans failed, the authors of the Declaration were hanged, and the British proved that rights and power did not derive from the consent of the governed or God, but from what Kings felt inclined to grant. In that world, everyone would have remained slaves.
COLUMN BY
DANIEL ROMAN
Daniel Roman is the pen name of a frequent commentator and lecturer on foreign policy and political affairs, both nationally and internationally. He holds a Ph.D. in International Relations from the London School of Economics.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Save America Foundationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSave America Foundation2021-07-09 14:04:142021-10-07 20:23:27Shattering Critical Race Theory!
AFT’s five-day conference will also spotlight addresses by first lady and Vogue token cover model Jill Biden, and voter fraud proponent Stacey Abrams. The union lauded what it called a “galvanizing national speech” by its president Randi Weingarten, who vowed to defend any teacher who is prevented from teaching “honest history” in states that have banned the teaching of CRT.
“We have a legal defense fund ready to go,” Weingarten threatened. “Teaching the truth is not radical or wrong. Distorting history and threatening educators for teaching the truth is what is truly radical and wrong.”
Critical Race Theory is not honest or truthful history, nor is it, as Weingarten also misrepresented, “a method of examination… that helps analyze whether systemic racism exists.” It is a poisonous, Marxist ideological weapon, the very purpose of which is to inculcate racial division and anti-Americanism.
“Let’s be clear: critical race theory is not taught in elementary schools or high schools,” Weingarten continued. This is a complete lie. Apart from the fact that CRT was already spreading like wildfire throughout grades K-12 in America, the National Education Association (NEA), the nation’s largest teachers’ union, proudly announced just last week that Critical Race Theory would be incorporated into the curricula of K-12 schools all across the country.
The field of education has become Ground Zero in the nation’s battle for the future of America. And the enemy is Critical Race Theory and its propagandists.
Critical race theory holds that because racism is so deeply ingrained in the American character, classical liberal ideals such as meritocracy, equal opportunity, and colorblind justice are essentially nothing more than empty slogans that fail to properly combat—or to even acknowledge the existence of—the immense structural inequities that pervade American society and work against black people. Thus, according to critical race theorists, racial preferences (favoring blacks) in employment and higher education are not only permissible but necessary as a means of countering the permanent bigotry of white people who, as Bell put it, seek to “achieve a measure of social stability through their unspoken pact to keep blacks on the bottom.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Discover The Networkshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDiscover The Networks2021-07-08 06:06:462021-10-07 20:23:30Teachers Unions Go All in For Spreading Critical Race Theory
This is a stunning indictment of the left’s takeover, takedown of the American public education system.
Look what they wrought…..
Treasonous Schools: Only a Third of American Students Proud to Be American
A recent poll revealed just how treasonous our schools have been by showing that only a third of students saying they are proud to be an American.
By Warner Todd Huston, July 6, 2021:
A recent poll revealed just how treasonous our schools have been by showing that only a third of students saying they are proud to be an American.
Once again, we see leftists are winning the culture war by warping the minds of our children in government schools. The poll found that only 36 percent of the respondents of the poll felt they were proud Americans.
Only 36% of respondents aged 18 to 24 said they were very or extremely proud to be American, a new Issues & Insights/TechnoMetrica Institute of Policy and Politics survey found. That made the age group the only tracked demographic in which pride falls below 50%.
The poll found an almost identical percentage (35%) of the 18-24 group saying they are only slightly or not proud at all to be an American.
The question was as of 1,424 adults:
Among age groups, those 65+ (86%) had the most people who responded favorably, followed by 45-64 (75%) and 25-44 (59%).
Overall, 68% of respondents said they were extremely or very proud to be an American. Another 15% were “moderately” proud.
Only 6% say they “aren’t proud at all,” being an American, and 8% say they are only “slightly proud.”
In what tippinsights said was somewhat of a surprise because of universities having become bastions of the left, the poll found that 75% of college graduates are extremely/very proud to be an American, compared with 62% of those with only a high school diploma.
Naturally, conservatives were far prouder (at 81 percent), while moderates were proud at 66 percent and Democrats only 55 percent.
Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permanently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Help us fight the great fight.
And if you can, please contribute to Geller Report. YOU make the work possible.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2021-07-07 07:06:492021-10-07 20:23:34TEACHING HATE: Only a Third of America’s Students Proud to Be American
The Zinn Education Project, inspired by the late anti-American propagandist Howard Zinn, is calling upon all teachers to pledge to instruct students in the racist, neo-Marxist concepts associated with Critical Race Theory – even if it is banned.
Zinn was the author of A People’s History of the United States, published in 1980, a subversive book that became ubiquitous in American high schools and universities across the country. It has done more than any other single book to convince American youth that their country’s history is nothing more than a litany of racism, imperialism, hypocrisy, and genocide.
The Zinn Education Projects urges teachers to pledge to defy any laws that ban teaching that America is systemically racist. In addition, the National Education Association (NEA), the nation’s largest teachers’ union, announced it plans to join with the domestic terrorists of Black Lives Matter and the Zinn Education Project “to call for a rally this year on October 14 – George Floyd’s birthday – as a national day of action to teach lessons about structural racism and oppression.”
“From police violence, to the prison system, to the wealth gap, to maternal mortality rates, to housing, to education and beyond, the major institutions and systems of our country are deeply infected with anti-Blackness and its intersection with other forms of oppression,” the Project claims. “To not acknowledge this and help students understand the roots of U.S. racism is to deceive them — not educate them.”
Completely false race-mongering. The real deception is in indoctrinating — not educating — students to believe Marxist lies about the freest, most diverse and prosperous country in history.
Asserting that “There is no such thing as pure fact,” Zinn maintained that the proper role of educators was not to teach objective truths but rather to lead “social struggle” by promoting student collectivism and emphasizing “the role of working people, women, people of color and organized social movements.” In 2008 he helped launch the so-called Zinn Education Project (ZEP), a collaboration between Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change. The initiative was designed to incorporate Zinn’s writings and worldview into all aspects of K-12 school curricula.
The ZEP lessons reinforce Zinn’s presentation of the United States as redeemable only through a socialist revolution. Major historical events are replaced with instances demonstrating relentless oppression. For example:
Searching the ZEP curriculum for lessons on the December 7, 1941 attack on “Pearl Harbor” leads mostly to lessons about the internment of the Japanese. “This Day in History” for the date of December 7 marks not the attack on Pearl Harbor, but the 1874 Vicksburg Massacre, described as a massacre by whites of between 75 and 300 African Americans defending black sheriff Peter Crosby, a former slave and Union veteran. The point is that Vicksburg, as “one of many massacres in U.S. history,” was “designed to reassert white supremacy during Reconstruction.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Discover The Networkshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDiscover The Networks2021-07-07 06:54:442021-10-07 20:23:34Zinn Education Project Urges Teachers to Defy Laws Banning Critical Race Theory
Sometime ago, I asked my blog readers to take a simple quiz regarding American government and history. I wanted to see just how well we knew some of the basics, such as our governing docs and some historical events. Nothing elaborate, I just wanted to take a pulse of our knowledge in general. 134 brave souls took the quiz for which I give my thanks. I didn’t want the quiz to be complicated which is why I tried to keep it as simple as possible. I could have asked for such things as age and political party affiliation, but I didn’t want to muddy the waters and turn people off.
Out of those who took the test, probably 25 people got a perfect score. I was not surprised by this as I didn’t try to invent a complicated quiz, just something that could give us some fundamental idea of what we know and what we don’t.
The quiz was far from scientific, yet I believe I can draw some conclusions from it based on the input. But first, let’s review the responses to each question. I’ll show both the number of responses and the percentage of the total, followed by my comments.
PLEASE ANSWER ALL 10 QUESTIONS – AMERICAN CITIZENS ONLY
1. Signed in 1620, it is the first governing document of Plymouth Colony as written by the colonists, later known to history as the Pilgrims. It was in essence a social contract in which the settlers consented to follow the document’s rules and regulations for the sake of survival.
Comment: I considered this a tricky question as most people are unaware of any American history prior to 1776. I was pleasantly surprised to see how many people got it right. Those that answered “Magna Carta” disappointed me; even though it is an important document that influenced others, it was still developed in England, not America. I consider it significant that people recognized its name though. By the way, the last three, Pilgrim Declaration, Plymouth Compact, and Standish Consent and Degree were figments of my imagination.
2. How many “separate but equal” branches are there in the U.S. Federal Government?
Comment: People may have gotten other parts of the quiz wrong, but somehow the concept of “three separate but equal branches of government” representing the checks and balances of government has been successfully stamped into our brains. Only three people missed this.
3. What is the following quote from? “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.”
27 – 20% – Bill of Rights
94 – 70% – Declaration of Independence (CORRECT)
06 – 05% – Gettysburg Address
00 – 00% – Oath of Office
07 – 05% – US Constitution
Comment: The lion’s share of answers went correctly to the Declaration of Independence, but I was surprised to see how many people picked the Bill of Rights. As an aside, many of us had to memorize this section of the Declaration in elementary school.
4. Which U.S. President was NOT impeached?
34 – 25% – Bill Clinton
20 – 15% – Andrew Johnson
80 – 60% – Richard Nixon (CORRECT)
Comment: I expected this kind of response to the question. Richard Nixon resigned before impeachment proceedings could begin. The other two were impeached, meaning to hold trial in the Senate, yet were found not guilty. No U.S. President has ever been forcibly removed from office through peaceful means (assassination is another matter altogether).
5. What is the following quote from? “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,…”>
04 – 03% – Bill of Rights
32 – 24% – Declaration of Independence
02 – 01% – Gettysburg Address
00 – 00% – Oath of Office
96 – 72% – US Constitution (CORRECT)
Comment: Most people got this correct, but notice how many confused it for the Declaration of Independence. This particular quote is from the Preamble of the Constitution. Like the Declaration, many of us had to memorize this in grade school, but I don’t think they do so anymore.
6. What U.S. President served as commander-in-chief during World War I?
Comment: I expected this question to be a little tougher as a lot of us have forgotten the events of nearly 100 years ago. Baby boomers may still be familiar with World War II, but I thought they would surely have problems with the first war, “The War to end all Wars.” I wasn’t surprised that Teddy Roosevelt captured the number of responses that he did simply because of his strong name recognition. By the way, William Howard Taft was the only President who also became Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (and the first to throw out a baseball on opening day).
7. What is the following quote from? “…and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
001 – 01% – Bill of Rights
000 – 00% – Declaration of Independence
000 – 00% – Gettysburg Address
127 – 95% – Oath of Office (CORRECT)
006 – 04% – US Constitution
Comment: I was flabbergasted that anyone got this wrong. The six who answered “US Constitution” should have read the question more carefully.
8. What is the following quote from? “…that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
005 – 04% – Bill of Rights
002 – 01% – Declaration of Independence
122 – 91% – Gettysburg Address (CORRECT)
000 – 00% – Oath of Office
005 – 04% – US Constitution
Comment: I was pleased to see most people remembered Lincoln’s speech. Interestingly, Lincoln was not the keynote speaker that day and, because of this, his words were almost overlooked by reporters in attendance. Thank God somebody was paying attention.
9. It stated that further efforts by European countries to colonize land or interfere with states in the Americas would be viewed as acts of aggression requiring U.S. intervention. It asserted that the Western Hemisphere was not to be further colonized by European countries but that the United States would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries.
Comment: I was pleasantly surprised by this one as I had assumed many people had forgotten about the Monroe doctrine, an important document which, to this day, is still in effect. I wonder if those who answered “Emancipation Proclamation” really understood the significance of that document. Probably not.
10. Which U.S. President was NOT directly involved with the Vietnam War?
81 – 60% – Dwight Eisenhower (CORRECT)
49 – 27% – Gerald Ford
01 – 01% – Lyndon Johnson
03 – 02% – John Kennedy
00 – 00% – Richard Nixon
Comment: This was perhaps my most controversial question as some of you argued that Eisenhower sent advisers to Viet Nam. True, but we send advisors to a lot of places. Viet Nam was Kennedy’s “line in the sand” to stop the proliferation of Communism. As to Ford, he inherited the Paris Peace talks from Nixon following his resignation and was in charge when we finally pulled out in 1975. Interestingly, I find younger people have no clue about this war whatsoever.
Conclusion
A few things occurred to me as I was compiling the results. First, the Gettysburg Address is better known than the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The Gettysburg Address is a moving speech but it certainly doesn’t bear the significance of our governing documents.
Second, it seemed to me that a lot of people cannot distinguish between the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. They view them as synonymous documents. For what it’s worth, the Declaration was used to sever Britain’s authority over its American colonies. The U.S. Constitution specifies how the government is to operate. The Bill of Rights is an attachment to the Constitution and specifies the basic rights of the citizens, specifically the first ten amendments. It was greatly influenced by such documents as the “Magna Carta.” All three documents, the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, are important reads that all citizens should be familiar with, not just students in grade school.
Finally, here are the number of correct answers versus incorrect answers submitted on the quiz:
In most schools, a 77% would represent a “C” which is probably not as bad as we think. Actually, this number is probably higher than the national average as I like to believe my readers are smarter than most.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Tim Brycehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTim Bryce2021-07-06 07:43:042021-10-07 20:23:36PODCAST: My American History Quiz
Media Matters for America, the George Soros-funded smear machine that lies about conservative media, whined Thursday that the late Andrew Breitbart’s prescient 2012 criticism of Critical Race Theory “appears to be working” this time around.
Media Matters’ Spencer Silva wrote Thursday that today’s backlash currently sweeping across America against the Marxist ideological weapon known as Critical Race Theory (CRT) began with conservative media revolutionary Breitbart drawing attention to the doctrine as far back as 2012, the year of his untimely death.
At that time, Breitbart News founder Andrew Breitbart had linked then-President Barack Obama with Harvard Law professor Derrick Bell, the race-mongering anti-American “godfather” of CRT, whom Obama admired.
Silva recalls: “As Joel Pollak, then-editor-in-chief of Breitbart News, would tell CNN’s Soledad O’Brien, ‘Derrick Bell is the Jeremiah Wright of academia. He passed away last year, but during his lifetime, he developed a theory called critical race theory which holds that the civil rights movement was a sham and that white supremacy is the order and it must be overthrown.’”
Silva claims that Breitbart’s “smear attempt” — i.e., his warning about a president whose radical beliefs had been ignored by the media — failed. But now, he says, “[r]ight-wing media and activists, as well as their peers at conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Manhattan Institute, seem to know exactly what they are doing because they have dusted off the same playbook from 2012.”
He concludes: “Nearly a decade later, Breitbart News’ failed smear of critical race theory is back — and this time it appears to be working.”
It’s working not because conservative think tanks are ginning up a “smear” about CRT, but because Americans themselves are waking up to the truth about the left’s weaponization of race and their subversive, Marxist agenda.
Media Matters’ Influence on the Obama Administration
A February 2012 Daily Callerexposé revealed that Media Matters had “regular contact with political operatives” inside the Obama White House, in part through its weekly strategy calls with members of the administration. In June 2010, for instance, David Brock and Media Matters president Eric Burns met at the White House with Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett and the President’s former communications director, Anita Dunn, who had recently (in November 2009) stepped down from that post amid controversy. Dunn, for her part, parroted Media Matters’ claim that Fox News is “more a wing of the Republican Party” than a media outlet. When Fox News host Glenn Beck had accurately revealed, in 2009, Dunn’s self-professed admiration for Mao Zedong, Media Matters condemned the broadcaster for what it called his “ridiculous smear of Anita Dunn.”
Collaborating with NOW, Against Rush Limbaugh
In early May 2012, Media Matters and the National Organization for Women held a secret, narrowly focused strategy session to brainstorm ways of getting the conservative talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh off the air. According to Media Matters online outreach director Jay Carmona, the key would be to target Limbaugh’s advertisers in local radio markets. “[M]ost local station affiliates make the bulk of their profit off of these local advertising dollars,” said Carmona, “so targeting your local advertisers really is how you get those local stations to drop Rush.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Discover The Networkshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDiscover The Networks2021-07-03 07:36:002021-10-07 20:23:44Media Matters: Andrew Breitbart’s Attack on Critical Race Theory ‘Appears to be Working’
Public schools destroy our children, smash their ability to think, render them miserable jackboots for hard left. Look what they’ve done to our children. Think Hitler youth.
Poll: Support for School Choice Growing
As three quarters of voters support the idea, according to a RealClear Opinion poll. Also from the story: …a majority of voters (66%) say that some or all of the COVID funds the federal government set aside for K-12 education should be directed by parents. Most voters in both parties agree parents should direct all or some of the funding.
Support for school choice in America continues to soar.
According to a June poll from RealClear Opinion Research, polling more than 1762 registered voters, a majority support school choice (74% vs. 16% opposed) while 10% are unsure. This is true across party lines, with 83% of Republicans, 69% of Independents, and 70% of Democrats saying they strongly or somewhat support school choice.
Additionally, a majority of voters (66%) say that some or all of the COVID funds the federal government set aside for K-12 education should be directed by parents. Most voters in both parties agree parents should direct all or some of the funding.
These results represent a marked increase in support for school choice since similar polling was conducted in April 2020. Overall support has increased from 64% to 74%; public school parent support has increased from 68% to 80%; Democrat support has increased from 59% to 70%.
Major Findings:
· 74% of voters support school choice
· 66% of voters believe parents should have access to COVID education stimulus funds
Statement from Tommy Schultz, CEO of the American Federation for Children:
“Public support for school choice is at an all-time high. And, as the nation recovers from unprecedented, nationwide school closures, a new story is unfolding. Parents are rising up and demanding the freedom to choose the best educational environment for their children. Thankfully, more and more lawmakers are listening. Already in 2021, seventeen states have passed legislation to improve, expand, or create new school choice programs.
For thousands of children, this means new opportunity and new hope for a brighter future. While we celebrate these transformative policy wins for kids, the work continues. We at AFC will continue fighting for every child in the country to have access to the American Dream through educational choice and opportunity.”
Full details:
Question: School Choice
Generally speaking, would you say you support or oppose the concept of school choice – which gives parents the right to use the tax dollars designated for their child’s education to send their child to the public or private school which best serves their needs.
Support:
All: 74%
Race & Ethnicity:
Asian: 70%
Black: 73%
Hispanic: 69%
White: 76%
Party ID:
Democrat: 83%
Republican: 70%
Question: Funding Students over Systems
On average, American taxpayers spend $15,946 per student nationwide on K-12 public education. Would you support giving parents a portion of those funds to use for home, virtual, or private education expenses?
Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permanently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Help us fight the great fight.
And if you can, please contribute to Geller Report. YOU make the work possible.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2021-07-01 05:45:442021-10-07 20:23:54Poll: School Choice Support at All-Time High As Government Schools Abandon Education For Hard Left Indoctrination
Princeton University admitted an incoming class with 68 percent of students who self-identify as a person “of color” after nixing its standardized testing score requirement.
The Ivy League institution announced in April that it admitted 1,498 students for the class of 2025. A full 22 percent of admitted students are first-generation college students and 68 percent self-identify as “people of color.”
The record number of racial minority admittees comes after the school removed its standardized testing requirement citing a “lack of access to testing sites.” Students were allowed to submit their standardized test scores, though they allegedly play a limited role in the admissions process.
“Please know that standardized testing is but one element of our comprehensive and holistic application review process,” the university announcement reads. “We employ no minimum test scores for admission; rather, the entirety of a student’s background is considered in context. Additionally, we do not require applicants to submit the optional writing section of the SAT or ACT.”
In 2019, students, advocacy groups, and mostly minority Los Angeles-based school districts filed a lawsuit against the University of California system claiming that standardized testing discriminates against applicants based on their race, wealth, and disability. The lawsuit alleged that tests created a test-prep industry that favored wealthy families.
Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permanently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Help us fight the great fight.
And if you can, please contribute to Geller Report. YOU make the work possible.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2021-06-30 05:31:592021-10-07 20:23:58Princeton Boasts New Class Is 68% ‘Of Color’ After Waiving SAT Score Requirement
