Culture War Archives - Page 1126 of 1154

The Cold Hard Facts about Wealth Redistribution

May 15, 2014/in Culture War, Economy, News, Policy, Politics, Taxes/by J.B. Williams

The Democrat sales pitch goes something like this… People should not have the freedom to earn unlimited wealth while others are struggling just to survive. Government should take from those who earn too much and redistribute to people in need. This is the right and duty of government.

Despite being a Marxist philosophy which flies in the face of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, not to mention the concepts of freedom and liberty, the pitch is designed to appeal to the hearts and minds of decent people honorably concerned about the welfare of others less fortunate. In America circa 2014, the message seems to be widely accepted despite the obvious assault on freedom and liberty which quite naturally follows.

For decades, Democrats have claimed to care about the poor, the black community and the under-achiever. They have been redistributing billions in other people’s earnings, allegedly to these and many other disadvantaged groups, not only in America but all over the world, and they have been handsomely rewarded in every election since.

However, the cold hard facts on what democratic wealth redistribution is really all about are entirely inescapable. The facts do not support the sales pitch and the people who should be most angry about that are those who were the alleged beneficiaries, those who voted for this mess.

According to the World Bank the U.S. average per capita income as of 2012 was $53,101, placing 6th in the world for the highest personal income per capita.
According to IRS data, 97.8% of all Federal Income taxes are collected from the top 50% of income earners in America. The other 50% are obviously Democrats.

Keep these numbers in mind as we look at how the federal government is redistributing those earnings via current tax code and welfare systems…

If you are fortunate enough to live in one of the top ten welfare states in the nation today, here are estimated the average annual collective welfare benefits packages for each state, per recipient… showing annual benefits per recipient, voting trends and percentage of increase in benefits since 1995. (Data was taken from a recent audited CATO Institute Report)

(Provided by CATO Institute Report)

Now, let’s not only compare these numbers to the U.S. average per capita income stated above, but also the bottom ten welfare states in the country as of today, based on the same criteria.

(Note the anomalies in Illinois and Maine…Why has Illinois and Maine been targeted?)

Depending upon where you live, it may not pay to work anymore. But how you vote certainly can have personal financial benefits for those who wish to not work.

As demonstrated in the above charts, there is indeed a massive redistribution of wealth taking place in America today. Clearly, a massive shift in welfare benefits has been taking place over the past several years, reducing welfare benefits in right-leaning states and paid out in heavily democrat voting states.

Is race really a factor?

Heavily black populated areas like Illinois and the Deep South have all experienced huge cuts in welfare benefits over the last few years. Welfare funds are being taken from black communities and sent only to heavily democratic voting areas of the country, as seen in the charts above. So no, race is not a determining factor in wealth redistribution, or at least not as it is presented by those redistributing the wealth of American taxpayers.

Is unemployment rate a factor?

Of the top ten highest unemployment states in the country, only four are in the top welfare states and four are in the bottom welfare states. So again, the answer is no.

Is poverty the determining factor?

No… of the top twenty states with the highest poverty rates today, six are in the bottom ten welfare states which have seen their welfare benefits taken away over the last several years. Only one of the states in the top ten welfare states is in the top twenty poverty states.

How about labor union influence?

Eight of the ten states at the bottom for wealth redistribution benefits are Right to Work states… the exceptions being Illinois and Maine, both unionized labor states. All of the top ten wealth redistribution states are forced unionization states. So it appears that the influence of labor unions may be a factor.

What is the overwhelming determining factor though?

With a couple isolated cases, ALL states receiving increases in welfare benefits at the top of the wealth redistribution food chain are heavily democrat voting states.

All but two of the bottom ten welfare states are heavily republican voting states.

Quite clearly, states with heavy democrat voting populations are the biggest recipients of wealth redistribution and it has nothing to do with poverty, race or unemployment.

It has everything to do with politics, wealth being taken from right-leaning states, even those with heavy black, poor and/or unemployed populations – and given to left-leaning beneficiaries, all at the expense of the top taxpayers in the country, most of whom vote Republican.

So, which are the wealthiest states in America?

The answer is, the same ten states also receiving the lion’s share of wealth redistribution from Uncle Sam, taken directly from republican states and given directly to democrat states. The numbers are verified and the numbers don’t lie.

Are democrats taking from white people and giving to black people? NO…

Are they taking from the rich and giving to the poor? NO…

Are they collecting from the employed to give to the unemployed? NO…

Are they taking from anti-union states and giving to pro-union states? YES…

But most of all, they are taking earned wealth from republican leaning states and giving it to democrat leaning states.

That’s how democratic socialist wealth redistribution works in the real world. The money is taken from political foes and given to friends. END OF STORY!

Sources

[1] Per Capita Income by State

[2] Per Capita Income by Country

[3] Annual Welfare Benefits by State

The Problem with the ADL Global 100 Index of Antisemitism

May 15, 2014/in Commentary, Culture War, News/by Jerry Gordon

As a last hurrah for long term National Director Abe Foxman, the ADL released findings yesterday from its Global 100 Index of Antisemitism. The overall finding was that 26% of the more than 53,100 respondents evinced the “deep infection” of Antisemitism. Extrapolating that figure translates to over 1.09 billion of the World’s Population. The polling was done by a survey contractor over the period from June 2013 to February 2014 via phone and personal interviews in more than 96 languages of the respondents. An interactive website of the Global Index 100 results by country can be found, here. The ADL news release noted the high prevalence of Antisemitism among Muslim majority countries:

Among Muslims, which comprise 22.7 percent of the world population, 49 percent harbor anti-Semitic attitudes. In the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), the number of Muslims holding anti-Semitic attitudes is 75 percent.

The ADL’s survey contractor used a battery of 11 questions to ascertain responses regarding perceptions of Jews and their influence locally and globally. The ADL News release noted the basis for the Global 100 Index and Foxman’s cherished hope for an enduring legacy:

The overall ADL Global 100 Index score represents the percentage of respondents who answered “probably true” to six or more of 11 negative stereotypes about Jews. An 11-question index has been used by ADL as a key metric in measuring anti-Semitic attitudes in the United States for the last 50 years.

“For the first time we have a real sense of how pervasive and persistent anti-Semitism is today around the world,” said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. “The data from the Global 100 Index enables us to look beyond anti-Semitic incidents and rhetoric and quantify the prevalence of anti-Semitic attitudes across the globe. We can now identify hotspots, as well as countries and regions of the world where hatred of Jews is essentially non-existent.”

However, because of the low average sample per country, approximately 521, there is a serious question of whether the data base that Foxman hoped for from the ADL Global Index results would have enough detail upon which to base an enduring legacy to aid in developing prescriptive strategies in ameliorating Antisemitism. Antisemitism has existed because of nativist, religious and racial strains that have persisted for more than two millennia. This despit anniversary , as a bastion and refuge for world Jewry in the heartland of the hate filled Middle East.

The country findings confirm other independent surveys, such as those conducted by the Pew Trust in Muslim countries of persistently high presence of Antisemitism; the highest occurring in the Palestine Authority and Gaza at 93%, and more than 15 other countries in the Muslim nations of MENA.

The Pew Trust Attitude Survey in 2005 noted the extent of virulent Antisemitism across the Muslim Ummah. It interviewed more than 330,000 respondents in more than 60 countries. Antisemitism which many believe is a product of doctrinal Islamic hatred towards Jews:

According to the Pew Global Attitudes Project released on August 14, 2005, high percentages of the populations of six Muslim-majority countries have negative views of Jews. To a questionnaire asking respondents to give their views of members of various religions along a spectrum from “very favorable” to “very unfavorable”, 60% of Turks, 74% of Pakistanis, 76% of Indonesians, 88% of Moroccans, 99% of Lebanese Muslims and 100% of Jordanians checked either “somewhat unfavorable” or “very unfavorable” for Jews.^[3]

The top Antisemitic countries/territories ranked by the ADL 100 Global Index are:

West Bank and Gaza – 93 percent of the adult population holds anti-Semitic views
Iraq – 92 percent
Yemen – 88 percent
Algeria – 87 percent
Libya – 87 percent
Tunisia – 86 percent
Kuwait – 82 percent
Bahrain – 81 percent
Jordan – 81 percent
Morocco – 80 percent

The lowest-ranked countries in terms of Antisemitism in the ADL Global Index are:

Laos – 0.2 percent of the adult population holds anti-Semitic views
Philippines — 3 percent
Sweden – 4 percent
Netherlands – 5 percent
Vietnam – 6 percent
United Kingdom – 8 percent
United States – 9 percent
Denmark – 9 percent
Tanzania – 12 percent
Thailand – 13 percent

However, there is a problem. The ADL Global 100 Index didn’t address the matter of hatred of Israel, other than the dual loyalty question. 19th and 20^thCentury Antisemitism was evident in the Czarist Forgery , The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and earlier the anti-Dreyfusard French Anti-Semitic political Publication, La Libre Parole . They portrayed Jews as a controlling octopus of influence in international finance, culture and governments. This, plus racial strains characterizing Jews as sub-human, paved the way for Hitler’s Final Solution that resulted in the murder of Six Million Jewish Men, Women and Children in the Holocaust. The ADL Global 100 Index found that slightly more than half (54 percent) of survey respondents had heard of the Holocaust. A fore telling that when the last survivors are gone, so will the World’s institutional memory of this genocide committed by the Nazis against European Jews.

The missing question(s) in the ADL Global 100 might have changed the results for respondents in Europe who ironically now consider Israel as the moral equivalent of Nazis for “oppression, and occupation” of the people in the disputed territories, the Palestinians.

What this ADL Index lacks are questions on anti-Israelism that the former chairman of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, used to derive the extent of European Antisemitism. His estimate was that fully 150 million Europeans in the EU countries harbor such anti-Israelism/ Anti-Semitic opinions. Opinions that verge on moral inversion: i.e., buying into the Palestinian meta narrative that Israel is the new Nazi state. Where Israel was once David, it is now perceived as Goliath fighting the Palestinian David. If the ADL Global 100 Index had posed the anti-Israel questions used by Gerstenfeld in developing his estimate the results for European counties may have been dramatically different. See our NER review of Demonizing Israel and the Jews by Gerstenfeld.

When we interviewed Gerstenfeld in the September 2013 NER, Anti-Israelism is Anti-Semitism, he responded:

Gordon: How did you arrive at the number 150 million?

Gerstenfeld: I culled data from four surveys in which people were asked in nine European countries as to whether they agreed with the statement, “Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians,” or alternatively, that Israel was behaving toward the Palestinians like the Nazis did toward the Jews.

Those who answered in the affirmative have deeply anti-Semitic views. In seven EU countries, the lowest responses to the first question were in Italy and the Netherlands – around 38% to 39%. Poland’s response was the highest at 63%. In the U.K, Hungary, Germany and Portugal, responses ranged from 40 to 49%. I then did a simple calculation based on the percentage of people 16 years and older in the European Union. Broadly speaking 80% of about 500 million citizens in the EU are 16 years old or over. There are thus an estimated 400 million ‘adult’ Europeans. I applied a conservative estimate based on the lowest country response to the question about Israel exterminating the Palestinians which was 38%, to the 400 million adult Europeans. That is how I arrived at an estimate of 150 million.

When we noticed single digit responses in the ADL Global 100 survey results for some of the problematic European countries cited by Gerstenfeld, we had in mind his further response in our interview:

Gordon: Why is anti-Israelism equated with anti-Semitism?

Gerstenfeld: Hate-mongering by Muslims and others employs the same motifs that Medieval Christians and Nazi hate mongers used. The claim that Israel is exterminating the Palestinians is slanderous because the Palestinian population has only increased in past decades. Palestinian children and babies are cared for in Israeli hospitals. Palestinian patients are treated in Israeli hospitals and so on.

The anti-Israel hate mongers who claim that Israel harvests the organs of Palestinians are promoting a modern mutation of the anti-Semitic blood libel which was invented in England in the 12th century. There are demonizing anti-Semitic statements emanating from the Muslim world claiming that Jews are “descendents of apes and pigs.” This animalization of the Jewish people comes out of the Quran. One problem is that there are so few anti-Semitism scholars in the world that these things have not been properly exposed in great detail. There is no doubt that anti-Israelism is a third major type of anti-Semitism, like religious and ethnic/nationalistic anti-Semitisms were major types. This anti-Israelism has permeated the mainstream in several European countries. We find it for instance in many Socialist or Labor parties, including those in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, The Netherlands and Belgium.

Gerstenfield’s assessment is confirmed in independent surveys in European countries. Note the results of this Belgian survey of high school students reported in June 2013:

A major survey among Belgian teenagers indicated anti-Semitism was seven times more prevalent among Muslim youths than in non-Muslim teenagers.

Conducted in recent months by three universities for the Flemish government, the survey was published last month based on questionnaires filled out by 3,867 high school students in Antwerp and Ghent, including 1,068 Muslims.

Among Muslims, 50.9 percent of respondents agreed with the statement “Jews foment war and blame others for it” compared to only 7.1 percent among non-Muslims. Among Muslims, 24.5 percent said they partially agreed with the statement, as did 20.6 percent of non-Muslims.

The statement “Jews seek to control everything” received a 45.1 approval rating among Muslims compared to 10.8 approval among non-Muslims. Of Muslims, 27.9 percent said they partially agreed, as did 29.2 percent of non-Muslims.

About 35 percent of Muslims agreed with the statement that “Jews have too much clout in Belgium” compared to 11.8 percent of non-Muslimswho participated in the “Young in Antwerp and Ghent” survey. The results were part of a 360-page report which was produced for the Flemish government’s Youth Research Platform by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

The problem with the ADL Global 100 survey is compounded by translation and differential responses to questions about Jews in countries where there is little presence or exposure, e.g., Laos. Then there are the responses in Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece and the Ukraine to survey questions regarding a Jewish population virtually destroyed during the Shoah. Lingering historical Antisemitism persists in these Eastern European countries and Greece driving their responses.

The Global ADL 100 index results masks the independent European responses from both the Gerstenfeld and independent analysis that found that Muslim émigrés had upwards of 8 times the Antisemitic responses of non-Muslim residents . Responses from the PA, Gaza and Arab countries in the Middle East and North Africa uniformly reflect the hateful Islamic doctrine of Majority muslim MENA countries who over 60 years ago drove out their “Saturday people” Mizrahi and Megrabi Jews. The MENA countries are presently forcing the expulsion of the indigenous “Sunday people”, the original Christian residents before the onslaught of Jihad 14 centuries ago. There is the except in MENA. The stunning response in the ADL Global 100 Index that Iranians appear not to be inclined to follow the theocratic Antisemitism hatred of the Shiite Mullahs. Having spoken with Iranian émigrés here in the US, they had 2,700 years of living in comity with Jews. This despite the horrible period from the 16th to the 20th Century under the Safayid Empire and the Shiite mullahs. It was only in the 20^th Century under the Pahlavi dynasty that indigenous Jews and Persian women flourished as did trade with Israel. That ended with the Islamic Revolution of 1979 that ended liberty for all Iranians. The largest listener audience for Israel’s Farsi language service today is Iranians.

Finally, there is the famous assessment about surveys and polls by that great fictional sociologist, Humpty Dumpty who had this famous exchange with Alice inThrough the Looking Glass:

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

Thus in the context of the ADL Global 100 Index, contrast the questions about perceptions of Jews based on the current US Index versus those chosen by Gerstenfeld for analysis of Anti-Israelism as Anti-Semitism. What is the careworn expression about polls and surveys? You only get responses to the questions you choose to ask. Even then, because of differential negative perceptions of Jews, real or fantasized, you end up with the results reported by Abe Foxman and his team of pollsters. The ADL Global 100 Index results may not comprehensively identify the roiling problems of Muslim and nativist Antisemitism globally and in the West.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review. The featured photo is of graffito in a restroom at the University of Chicago courtesy of The Coffee Shop Rabbi.

Injustice in the name of Justice!

May 15, 2014/in Courts & Law, Culture War, Must Read, News/by Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)

Harvey Ruvin, Miami-Dade Clerk of Courts.

MIAMI, FL – Today, the Christian Family Coalition Florida (CFCF), Florida’s premier human rights and social justice advocacy organization, denounced Miami-Dade Clerk of Courts, Harvey Ruvin, for deliberately going behind voters backs and secretly withdrawing a motion to abate on the discriminatory anti-voter rights lawsuit seeking to overthrow Florida’s constitutional respect for marriage as one man, one woman.

“Harvey Ruvin has made a grave mistake by failing to discharge his duties as Clerk of the County, under his signed Candidate Oath, he is obligated to support the Constitution of the United States and Constitution of the State of Florida. His actions are unethical and deplorable.”

View Harvey Ruvin’s Candidate Oath here. (See page 2)

Motion to Intervene:

Simultaneously, Liberty Counsel, an international pro-constitutional rights law firm argued for a motion to intervene, that is allowing human rights organizations like People United to Lead the Struggle for Equality (PULSE) and the Florida Democratic League (FDL), to be parties to the case and argue in defense of the eight million voters who cast their ballot in the historic 2008 election which enacted Florida’s constitutional respect for marriage as one man, one woman.

Amazingly, in a brazen display of hypocrisy, homosexual extremists have asked Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Sarah Zabel to DENY marriage advocates their day in court. “We fully expected extremists to try to deny marriage advocates their Constitutional right to equal protection and due process rights to intervene in this discriminatory anti-voter rights lawsuit. You cannot on the one hand, play victim, and claim that your Constitutional rights being denied, then turn right around and ask the very same court, to deny others their Constitutional rights.”

ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN FAMILY COALITION (CFC)

The Christian Family Coalition (CFC) is a widely acclaimed human rights and social justice advocacy organization serving Florida’s children and families for over 10 years. Through its daily community outreach, political education programs, and voter registration, CFC effectively mobilizes thousands of fair-minded voters across the state and actively works with municipal, county, state, and federal elected officials to advance common sense, family-friendly, non-discriminatory values and public policies. The CFC is highly respected for its sought-after, educational voter guides consulted by thousands of houses of worship and their voters all across Florida.

Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld: For every Jewish person in the world, there are 700 anti-Semites

May 15, 2014/in Culture War, Must Read, National Security, News/by Jerry Gordon

Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld is the former Chairman of the Jerusalem Center of Public Affairs. He is noted author and commentator on European and World anti-Semitism, most recently of Demonizing Israel and the Jews. See our NER review of Demonizing and interview with Dr. Gerstenfeld, “Anti-Israelism is Anti-Semitism”.

For every Jewish person in the world, there are 700 anti-Semites. If we put all the anti-Semites together into one country, it would become the third largest nation after China and India. That is the essence of the findings of the new survey of worldwide anti-Semitism just published by the ADL.

The report provides much new information and the ADL should be praised for having undertaken it. The eleven questions asked however only deal with classic anti-Semitism. The newest mutation of anti-Semitism — anti-Israelism – is not included in these polls. This is likely to lead to inaccurate conclusions by the many people not familiar with the fact that anti-Israelism has the same core hate motifs as religious and nationalistic anti-Semitism. The questionnaire used is 50 years old and has been employed for that period by the ADL in the United States. Therefore it does not encompass any necessary questions concerning anti-Israeli attitudes some of which are extreme.

The one question asked which does touch upon Israel is whether people surveyed believe the anti-Semitic stereotype “Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the countries they live in.” With 41%, it has the highest amount of answers that “this is probably true,” of any question asked.

The exclusion of the essential questions about anti-Israelism leads to a very misleading positive view of Europe. The 2011 survey by the University of Bielefeld asked whether people surveyed agree with the statement that Israel “is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians.” It was undertaken in 7 countries, of which its population accounts for more than half of the European Union’s citizens. Forty-three percent of those surveyed answered in the affirmative expressing an extreme anti-Semitic attitude concerning Israel.

In the near future, more detailed analyses of the ADL survey will be made. One finding which stands out is that in Middle Eastern and North African countries, 74% of people polled agree with a majority of the anti-Semitic stereotypes. This further confirms that the massive, non-selective immigration of Muslims into the European Union was the most negative post-war event for the Jewish communities there. I have described this phenomenon in the past as state anti-Semitism. European governments knowingly let in, in a non-selective way, a huge number of people who were raised in racist, anti-Semitic and anti-democratic Muslim countries.

Click here to read the ADL Global 100: An Index of Anti-Semitism.

RELATED VIDEO: Israel can be strong without the United States

[youtube]http://youtu.be/Bq4BZ4sHWq8[/youtube]

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review. The featured photo is by Hans Arne Vedlog of Dagbladet Nyheter.

All Home Intruders are White Men, Alarm Companies Say

May 14, 2014/in Culture War, Must Read, News, Video/by The Peoples Cube

Just when we thought the rash of Scandinavian youths knocking out poor minorities couldn’t get any worse, it turns out that white men are now knocking off innocent homeowners. How do we know this? Commercials.

Commercials tend to reflect the state of affairs in customers’ lives. That’s why it’s noteworthy that alarm companies are using the marketing angle of “White man breaks in home to scare family.”

Here is a list of the villains from some of the top alarm company commercials on Youtube:

1. Broadview Security Commercial: “Backyard”

[youtube]http://youtu.be/syjM1dPriBA[/youtube]

2. Brink’s Home Security: “Wrong Door”

A scene from Home Alone? No, this sad-looking white home intruder is about to terrorize you.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/cMpKDZDjBWM[/youtube]

3. Broadview Security: “The Ex”

A romantic scene from The Notebook? No, this is a white home intruder.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/Wkr0-nVwmQY[/youtube]

4. Adt Home Security: “In my mind’s eye | Burglary”

A trio of white intruders.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/wijubVvn-Gs[/youtube]

5. Brinks Home Security: Spot #2

[youtube]http://youtu.be/7ku1YOrxXeQ[/youtube]

6. Broadview Security: “The House Party”

A clone of James van der Beek breaks into a woman’s home.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/DKI4t5MFG1E[/youtube]

7. Brinks Home Security – 3 spots

This Edward Burns-look alike is an angry white home intruder.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/gMIYVDuyX1Q[/youtube]

8. Slomin’s Home Security: Scary Van

Another trio of white home intruders. There are obviously a lot of white home intruders.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/U1JmC6xWUX8[/youtube]

9. Brink’s Home Security: “Treadmill”

Jason Statham, is that you?

[youtube]http://youtu.be/1K8DKH7tCRU[/youtube]

10. Brink’s Home Security: “Just To Be Sure”

[youtube]http://youtu.be/94-j_EnD8M8[/youtube]

11. ADT Home Security – Monitored Alarm Systems

[youtube]http://youtu.be/Oye9xqEhbSA[/youtube]

12. GEICO Commercial: Affordable Home Security

Breaking with the trend, this GEICO commercial features a non-white home intruder.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/DmmbAO3hWdI[/youtube]

Does Warren Buffet’s Billion Dollar Support For Pro-Abortion Organizations make him a Eugenicist?

May 14, 2014/in Culture War, Featured, Healthcare, News, Policy/by Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)

A study by the Media Research Center’s Culture and Media Institute (CMI) has revealed that Warren Buffett is a billion dollar donor to pro-abortion causes! Between the years 2001 and 2012, Buffett gave over 1.2 billion dollars to various pro-abortion organizations including Planned Parenthood.

That’s enough to fund 2.7 million abortions! For comparison that’s around the same number of people who live in the city of Chicago.

There are two ways to create a super race. The first is to eliminate those who are genetically inferior. The second is to create more of those who are genetically superior. The first was originally called negative Eugenics, the second labeled positive Eugenics.Today the word “genetics” has replaced the word “Eugenics.” The goals are the same.

The United States was the birthplace of the modern Eugenics movement. The American Eugenics Society was founded in 1922, the Genetics Society of America (GSA) was founded in 1931. Modern genetics evolved from and was created by the American Eugenicists. The purpose of GSA and its members is to, “[W]ork to advance knowledge in the basic mechanisms of inheritance, from the molecular to the population level.”

Genetics has two branches – negative genetics and positive genetics. It is important to understand how both are creating a “racially hygienic” society in America today.

NEGATIVE GENETICS

Edwin Black in his book War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race writes, “On January 19, 1904, the Carnegie Institution formally inaugurated what it called the Station for Experimental Evolution of the Carnegie Institution at bucolic Cold Springs Harbor, [New Jersey].” “The undertaking was not merely funded by Carnegie, it was an integral part of the Carnegie Institution itself,” notes Black, “[Carnegie Institute Chairman John] Billings and the Carnegie Institution would now mobilize their prestige and the fortune they controlled to help [Professor Charles] Davenport usher America into an age of a new form of hygiene: racial hygiene. The goal was clear: to eliminate the inadequate and unfit.”

No war, pestilence, genocide or government policy has done more to limit the numbers of defectives, feebleminded, poor and unwanted than the Eugenics (genetics) movement.

Edwin Black, author of War Against The Weak, writes, “The global effort to help women make independent choices about their own pregnancies was dominated by one woman: Margaret Sanger… Motherhood was to most civilizations a sacred role. Sanger, however, wanted women to have a choice in that sacred role, specifically if, when and how often to become pregnant.”

Black notes, “… Sanger vigorously opposed charitable efforts to uplift the downtrodden and deprived, and argued extensively that it was better that the cold and hungry be left without help, so that the eugenically superior strains could multiply without competition from ‘the unfit.’ She repeatedly referred to the lower classes and the unfit as ‘human waste’ not worthy of assistance, and proudly quoted the extreme eugenic view that human ‘weeds’ should be ‘exterminated.’ Moreover, for both political and genuine ideological reasons, Sanger associated closely with some of some of America’s most fanatical eugenic racists.” Sanger stated, “My criticism, therefore, is not directed at the ‘failure’ of philanthropy, but rather at its success.”

“The feminist movement, of which Sanger was a major exponent, always identified with eugenics,” wrote Black.

Today we see that negative genetics has led to more black abortions than births in New York City and a 73% black abortion rate in Mississippi. Some have labeled this national birth control effort “Black Genocide. ”Several years ago, when 17,000 aborted babies were found in a dumpster outside a pathology laboratory in Los, Angeles, California, some 12-15,000 were observed to be black,” noted Erma Clardy Craven (deceased) Social Worker and Civil Rights Leader.

POSITIVE GENETICS

Positive genetics focuses on creating a racially pure and superior race to “improve the human stock”. It is not unlike creating a superior ear of corn or breed of cattle. The genetics movement finds its roots in the American Breeders Association. It is not enough to stop the breeding of inferiors, it is just as important to breed the right human. German biologist Johann Gregor Mendel (1882-1884) was the father of genetics.

Recent news has focused on the ultimate achievement of the geneticists – the racially hygienic baby, a.k.a. “designer baby.” The Washington Post reports:

The provocative notion of genetically modified babies met the very real world of federal regulation Tuesday, as a government advisory committee began debating a new technique that combines DNA from three people to create embryos free of certain inherited diseases.

The two-day meeting of the Food and Drug Administration panel is focused on a procedure that scientists think could help women who carry DNA mutations for conditions such as blindness and epilepsy. The process would let them have children without passing on those defects.

“The technology involves taking defective mitochondria, the cell’s powerhouses, from a mother’s egg and replacing them with healthy mitochondria from another woman. After being fertilized by the father’s sperm in a lab, the egg would be implanted in the mother, and the pregnancy could progress normally,” notes WaPo.

As CH Waddington, a British developmental biologist and geneticist, wrote in 1957, “It is of course a truism which has long been recognized that the development of any individual is affected both by the hereditary determinants which come into the fertilised egg from the two parents and also by the nature of the environment in which the development takes place.” It now appears that American geneticists, under the guidance and with the approval of the FDA, may create a new “racially hygienic” baby.

It appears that Warren Buffett has come down on the side of negative Eugenics. His contributions indicate that he is firmly in the Eugenicist camp much like Carnegie and Rockefeller.

‘Gay’ teachers conference reveals latest plans for school children

May 14, 2014/in Culture War, Education, Featured, News, Policy/by MassResistance

“GLBT” teachers conference in Boston reveals latest plans to push homosexuality even further into schools. Well organized, fueled with taxpayer dollars.

Exclusive report from MassResistance. Coming to your school soon.

What are the latest homosexual and transgender tactics targeting your schools? In the school “culture wars” nothing happens by accident. It is usually the result of careful planning and execution. Here is a look behind the scenes.

Homosexual teachers, school officials, and education activists (and their “allies”) — along with children as young as fifth grade — converged at GLSEN’s 2014 Annual Conference in Boston last month. At this “hands-on” event they to introduced and discussed their latest strategies for thoroughly pushing homosexuality and transgender issues and behaviors into the minds of kids.

The conference program.

Powerful national group heavily connected to state education system

GLSEN (Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network) is the nation’s largest homosexual and transgender activist organization working inside schools in all 50 states. It has set up “gay straight alliance” student clubs (GSAs) inside thousands of high schools (and even some middle schools) across the country. GLSEN pushes a wide range of psychologically penetrating homosexual and transgender programs activities into the schools, such as the controversial “Day of Silence”. It also directly organizes and trains teachers to integrate their techniques throughout the curriculum. Founded in the early 1990s by super-activist Kevin Jennings, it has a multi-million dollar budget, lavishly funded by corporate America and private foundations. The conference program.

This just one of the things GLSEN is implementing in high schools and middle schools across America.

In 2000, the Boston-area GLSEN Conference gained national outrage when MassResistance (then known as Parents’ Rights Coalition) exposed the sickening “Fistgate” workshop which involved adults teaching young kids explicit sex acts. Nevertheless, the Massachusetts Legislature (and corporate America) has continued to support GLSEN.

In Massachusetts, much of GLSEN’s activities in the schools are funded with taxpayer dollars though the Massachusetts Commission for GLBT Youth. They are also closely coordinated through the State Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

All-day conference in Boston

The all-day conference was held on Saturday, April 5, 2014, at Madison Park Vocational High School in Boston. It included keynote addresses outlining their overall plans and direction, and 21 workshops dedicated to specific topics and strategies, by both national and local experts.

Madison Park Vocational High School in Boston.

It was attended by approximately 325 people. About two-thirds were students who were brought in from across the state — from middle schools, high schools, and (according to the conference organizers) some from elementary schools.

MassResistance was also there that day. We attended the keynote sessions, workshop sessions, and just about everything else.

The other objective: Using kids as the vanguard in schools

The GLSEN Conference is run by adults and is meant to train adults. But they go to great lengths to bring in as many students as possible, no matter how young. They come from schools across the state, and usually seem part of a “gay club” or affiliated with a homosexual activist on the school’s staff, such as a teacher or guidance counselor.

That’s because there are big roles for kids in the GLSEN strategies. Part of that is to be the “hands on” teaching of the new techniques. In the workshops, there is a fair amount of role-playing, for instance.

But even more important, the students are seen as the vanguard within the schools, to bring these ideas into the schools and interact with other kids and with authority figures in a way that other staff members can’t. For example, kids are trained to help form the gay clubs and other activities, how to talk about “coming out” to their friends, and how to deal with stubborn school administrators who resist these programs.

Students at the conference taking in the latest propaganda and marching orders.

The Conference’s keynote speeches: Setting the tone for the kids

The opening session that morning included two keynote speeches, both directed at the students. In many ways, these set the tone for the rest of the day. A general message we got from both speeches was that there is no sense of truth, or reality, or of right and wrong. Any way you want to express yourself in life is fine.

The first keynote speaker was Eliza Byard, Executive Director of GLSEN, from their New York office. She told the kids about the necessity of being “out and proud.” She goes to a lot of schools, both here and overseas, and makes it a point to counsel kids and teachers to publicly “come out of the closet” and declare their homosexuality. And GLSEN will support you, she said. She’s also pushing the radical “pronoun” issue — taken from so-called Queer Theory and coming into schools — that people can decide for themselves whether they’re “he” or “she” or something else, and everyone else needs to adjust to that.

Eliza Byard, Executive Director of GLSEN, from New York, giving her keynote speech to the attendees.

The second speaker was a student from western Massachusetts. who talked about her experiences as a GLSEN activist in her high school. She talked about “creating change” in the school, and how she does that, working with both students and adults. Small groups can make change, she said. But she said that “space must be available” for that to happen – i.e., accommodating teachers and school officials and “guidance by adults who allow youth to express themselves and not stifle themselves.”

Then, a middle school student spoke about how she helped organize the “Day of Silence” in her school. One teacher balked at having posters put up because of parent conferences that evening, saying that parents might not be comfortable that. The girl labeled the teacher “ignorant” and “no longer working at the school” (which caused a cheer). She said she’s a bisexual (in middle school!) and that her sister is a lesbian.

These stickers were given out.

The workshops

Below are some of the workshops from this year’s conference. This is what they’re training teachers and administrators to do, as well as the activist students. In one way or another, this is what you can expect to see coming up in your schools. A few of the topics had been introduced in past GLSEN conferences and are being refined. But all of them are about changing the schools and the minds of children in some way.

1.1 The Trevor Project: Empowering Youth to Save Lives!

Wondering how you can make an impact? Learn about The Trevor Project! We’ll discuss language, stereotypes and how to respond to signs of suicide. [Note: The “Trevor Project” steers kids to books portraying “gay” sex. See our MassResistance report.]

Presenter(s): Kate McGravey, Manchester Essex Regional School District; Jaclyn Kinsman, North Reading Public Schools

1.5 When a Teacher Makes a Gender Transition

We will share the successful experience of a faculty member’s gender transition at Milton Academy, K-12, as well as communications strategies, documents and lessons learned.

Presenter(s): Marshall Carter & Sam Landau, Milton Academy

1.6 Strengthening Youth/Adult Collaboration

This workshop will provide participants with helpful tips for achieving healthy, successful collaborations between youth and adults in school and community based settings. [Note: The “youth and adult” connection in the homosexual movement is particularly disturbing.]

Presenter(s): Jessica Flaherty & Giftson Joseph, BAGLY, Inc.

1. 7 Teaching “Out”

This workshop is a space for LGBTQ people to discuss the personal, professional, and political impact of being an LGBTQ teacher, particularly in a K-12 setting.[Note that this starts in Kindergarten!]

Presenter(s): Ryan Ambuter, Paulo Freire Social Justice Charter School

2.1 Supporting Transgender Youth in Schools

This workshop will serve as both a Trans* 101 and a resource for those looking for more knowledge about the rights of transgender students in schools.

Presenter(s): Ryan Ambuter, Paulo Freire Social Justice Charter School

2.2 When They Jump to Conclusions: Education on LGBTQ Topics

LGBTQ youth are often approached as “experts” on LGBTQ topics, by their parents and peers. Join QSA students in this engaging discussion on this multi-layered issue.

Presenter(s): Boston Area Homeschoolers’ QSA

2.5 Reversing the Erasure of LGBT History

Using Los Angeles Unified School District and Lowell School District as case studies, this workshop examines strategies for introducing vital LGBT inclusive history curriculum into schools. [Note: The concept of “LGBT History” is an important psychological tool for legitimizing it to kids. It also introduces deviant figures such as Harvey Milk and NAMBLA activist Harry Hay as worthy of admiration.]

Presenter(s): Debra Fowler, Debbie Costello & Erin Kehoe, Lowell High School

3.1 Starting a Middle School GSA: A Sustainable, Grassroots Approach

Practical advice and encouragement for students, staff, parents and community members who would like to establish a sustainable GSA in their local middle school.

Presenter(s): Anna Watson, Friends of the Ottoson Middle School GSA

3.2 Queering the Classroom: Providing a Safe Learning Environment for All

Providing a safe environment for GLBTQ youth promotes a more comfortable, creative environment for all students. Resources and discussion will address your classroom needs.

Presenter(s): Marie Caradonna, WAGLY (West Suburban Alliance of GLBTQ Youth)

3.3 Coming out to Parents

Coming out to parents as LGBTQ is a big decision. Learn what to expect and get support. Interactive workshop and resources for participants.

Presenter(s): Pam Garramone, Greater Boston PFLAG

3.4 Responding to LGBTQ Partner Abuse In Black & Latin@ Communities

This workshop will define partner abuse, the tactics of abuse, and discuss overcoming challenges for seeking support. The workshop will focus on Black/Latin@ LGBTQ communities. [Note: Abuse and violence in homosexual relationships has become such a problem in Massachusetts that it’s even discussed in “gay club” settings for kids and at “Youth Pride” activities.]

Presenter(s): Ricky Granderson & Corey Yarbrough, Hispanic Black Gay Coalition

3.6 Changing the Game: The GLSEN Sports Project

Participation in sports and Physical Education has positive effects health, self-esteem, sense of school belonging and academics. Unfortunately, some research suggests that LGBT students may not have access to these and they may be less likely than their non-LGBT peers to attend Physical Education classes or play sports teams. This session focuses on developing strategies to create inclusive conditions where all students can benefit from participation and learning. Note: This is the national homosexual movement introducing strategies for “queering” high school sports.]

Presenter(s): Jenny Betz, GLSEN National

Coming up

Unfortunately, most people – and especially most parents – have no idea the extent of the radical homosexual and transgender psychological propaganda being pushed at children in their schools, much less what’s going on behind the scenes. We hope to begin to remedy that.

We’ve just scratched the surface on this Conference. In upcoming emails, we will be reporting in greater detail what took place in some of the workshops, as well as posting some of the handouts.

Pamphlet handed out to kids at the Conference reveals the new “upgraded” name for state-funded radical group:Massachusetts Commission on Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender and Queer/Questioning (not well defined yet) Youth. They keep adding letters.

Salon Publishes Libelous Hit Piece on Peter LaBarbera by Gina Miller

May 13, 2014/in Courts & Law, Culture War, Must Read, News/by Americans for Truth

Spring has sprung with a vengeance on Americans for Truth About Homosexuality’s Peter LaBarbera, although it’s not Spring’s fault, nor is it Mr. LaBarbera’s. The vengeance comes from anti-Christian activists and purveyors of “tolerance” and lies who have caused Mr. LaBarbera quite a bit of trouble since April. After being invited to Canada to speak to a pro-life group, and overcoming efforts to block his entry into the country, he was then arrested there for “trespassing” while he was standing for free speech on a public college campus, a charge which was later changed to “mischief” and is still pending. You see, our neighbor Canada has laws against “hate speech,” and they consider telling the truth about homosexual behavior to be “hate speech,” and that’s why they targeted Mr. LaBarbera.

On April 9th, just before he left for Canada, he was invited by the Traditional Values Club to give a speech at Sinclair Community College (SCC) in Dayton, Ohio on the topic of the radical homosexual movement. A couple of intolerant, pro-homosexual teachers, who are apparently obsessed with hatred for the Traditional Values Club, organized a large walk-out of his speech, which he handled with an abundance of grace. One of the teachers, Kate Geiselman, subsequently decided to write a column, published on April 16th by Salon.com, which calls him an “anti-gay bigot” in the headline. In it, she claims he was “angry” at the walk-out, and as the teachers and students filed out of the room, she declares that he said, “You’re leaving? Are you effing kidding?”

One small, but important detail, however: Peter LaBarbera never said that, which makes her column pure, actionable libel. He did say “effing,” but it was in response to a heckler who flung the actual F-word at him during the walk-out, and Mr. LaBarbera was repeating to the audience what he heard the guy say (replacing the guy’s F-word with the euphemistic “effing”) in illustration of the “tolerance” of those walking out.

Another of the teacher collaborators, Rebecca Morean, posted a comment at the Salon column, stating in part:

LaBarbera certainly said “Effing.” I, and many others heard it, as we were the first to eject ourselves. I’d rather be accused of saying that btw than being a bigot. Odd sense of outrage. There are other tapes, and the fact that the one posted means he didn’t say it is silly. The mic wasn’t by his face.

Another small, but large, detail: a two-minute clip of the walk-out reveals that Mr. LaBarbera was holding the mic and speaking into it the entire time, so the mic was indeed “by his face.” It would appear that Ms. Morean is not concerned with telling the truth, because videos of it also reveal what Mr. LaBarbera said, which does not include, “You’re leaving? Are you effing kidding?”

Here is what he said, as transcribed from video recordings:

“I suppose this is a walk-out. Well, this is, this is what I say, not, not even people willing to hear from the other side. I think this is, this is regretful. [heckler interjects F-word] ‘Your message is ‘effing’ garbage,’ that guy just said. Yeah, yeah this is a shame, but, well, those of you who remained are exhibiting true tolerance… I mean this is—this is the Left in action; I’m sorry. You know, tolerance for me but not for you. Don’t even want to hear a viewpoint. That’s their right, and I just think it’s immature…”

So, a heckler flings the real “F-word” at Mr. LaBarbera, and he responds to the heckler by saying, “‘Your message is ‘effing’ garbage,’ that guy just said.” This is quite a different story than what Ms. Geiselman claims, as does Salon in publishing her column.

I also obtained statements from witnesses who were in the audience and testified that Mr. LaBarbera did not say what the two teachers claim.

Al Giambrone, a co-founder of the Traditional Values Club, wrote:

I was present for the entire event… I was sitting in the third or fourth row on the end seat next to the center aisle directly behind one of the instructors who lead the walkout. I had a perfect view and was well within earshot of Mr. LaBarbera (even if he hadn’t had a mike) when the walkout occurred. I paid careful attention to his reaction and what he said when they walked out because I was curious to see how he would handle it. I knew it was coming. I was quite impressed by the way in which he responded, by his presence of mind and by his effective but respectful demeanor, not only during the walkout but through the entire event. At no time did I hear him use any inappropriate language nor did I see him display any contentious reaction even when hostile members in the audience gave him what many would consider good reason to do so.

Traditional Values Club President Bonnie Borel-Donohue also concurred with Mr. Giambrone.

LEFTIST INTOLERAnCE: SCC Prof. Rebecca Morean leads the “walkout” of Peter LaBarbera’s speech at the college. Here she stands up as LaBarbera is talking, followed by dozens of students. Morean was obsessed in her disdain for the Traditional Values Club at SCC and later gave credence to fellow SCC professor Kate Geiselman’s “effing” lie about AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera.

The teacher-led walk-out is one thing, and it could’ve ended there, but Ms. Geiselman decided to pen a libelous column on top of it, claiming she heard him say something he didn’t say. There are two possibilities. Either she genuinely misheard what he said, or she took his quoting of the heckler and maliciously turned it into a fabricated statement to defame him.

The story gets stranger when we read what she said in another Salon column from two years ago (which is, incidentally, about a different time she was involved in protest-targeting a speech presented by the Traditional Values Club at Sinclair):

The acoustics were poor. Students nearby were whispering to each other. My hearing is bad and I was far away, so I admit that I had trouble getting every word he was saying.

Interesting! Ms. Geiselman admits she is hard of hearing, and yet she goes on record asserting she “heard” Mr. LaBarbera say something in a noisy room as she was walking out, most likely with her back to him—certainly not the most optimal conditions for hearing, even with the keenest of ears.

By the way, I sent an e-mail to two of Ms. Geiselman’s accounts (one at Sinclair and one listed on her website) requesting a comment on this event, but she did not reply.

Regardless of how she came up with the story, Ms. Geiselman and Salon’s editor, Cindy Jeffers, are now the recipients of a demand letter presented to them on Friday by Attorney Charles LiMandri. It gives them ten days to issue an apology and a retraction of the defamatory statements made by Ms. Geiselman in her column and on Twitter. In part, the letter states:

The audio on the two minute video makes it perfectly clear that Mr. LaBarbera did not utter the unprofessional and defamatory words that you attribute to him. This has been confirmed by multiple witnesses who were in immediate proximity to Mr. LaBarbera during his entire presentation. You further falsely accused Mr. LaBarbera of being “a person who makes his living telling lies” in the internet posting attached above. You did so even though you did not even have the decency to listen to his remarks before publicly excoriating him.

… By your false and defamatory statements you have maliciously sought to injure Mr. LaBarbera in his reputation and to expose him to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, shame or disgrace. You have also sought to injure him in his trade or profession. We hereby demand that you issue a public retraction of, and a public apology for, your false and defamatory statements made against Mr. LaBarbera.

This entire story is yet another in the myriad examples of how those on the Left lie to further their agenda. The fact is that truth is not on their side, so in their self-deception, all they have are lies and defamation with which to wage their battles.

I requested a statement from Mr. LaBarbera, and he wrote:

What happened at Sinclair Community College is just another example of the Left’s penchant for using dirty tactics, half-truths and cheap stunts to discredit and demonize their opponents.

Kate Geiselman and Salon must be held accountable for creating and promoting a lie to advance their intolerant, conservative-bashing agenda. I absolutely did not say the “effing” line reported by SCC prof Kate Geiselman. It is simply absurd to say that I would say that in front of a bunch of students and pro-family advocates whom I had just met!

This is a bad and implausible lie that this ‘writing’ instructor came up with. Geiselman was writing fiction, and it’s bad fiction at that.

Another thing that strikes me about the Left’s “anti-hate” myth directed at mostly Christian conservatives—and stoked by the SPLC—is that it pretty much gives them carte blanche to engage in all kinds of vicious and deceitful attacks against their foes.

After all, if the Left is really battling HATERS on a moral par with the KKK (the SPLC claim), then do details and facts matter as much as ASSAILING THE HATERS? And is being fair to, and truthful about, the target that important—since in their minds they are dealing with despicable extremists?

This is a dangerous game by the Left: in their arrogance and pride, they have decided for everyone that there is no legitimate opposition to the LGBT agenda—and then they distort reality according to that model. If the liberal media doesn’t hold them accountable, conservatives must step up and expose the Left’s systematic campaign of misinformation.

Not only are these people vicious liars, but they’re also intellectually dishonest. They always claim to support “diversity,” yet they bust their rears to shut down those with views that are diverse from theirs. They demand “tolerance,” but they are the most intolerant people among us, plugging their ears as they shout, “LA-LA-LA-LA-LA! I CAN’T HEAR YOU, ‘HATER’!” If they had a shred of intellectual honesty, if they truly believed their ideas on homosexuality were solid, right and true, then why would they be threatened by someone presenting the other side of the debate?

The real losers here are those college kids who were led by the nose by the conniving, lying teachers—those kids who did not get to hear Mr. LaBarbera tell the truth about the dangers of homosexual behavior and the lies the activists tell to push their freedom-robbing agenda. The kids are the real losers, because they’re learning the same, age-old fascistic techniques of socialist-communist regimes throughout history that have worked to silence the voices of those who tell the truth about the tyranny of their evil schemes.

Behind the Scenes on the Chicago Teachers Union Anti-Common Core Resolution

May 13, 2014/in Culture War, Education, Featured, News, Policy, Politics/by Mercedes Schneider

On May 7, 2014, the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) passed a resolution against the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

That evening, I wrote this post and included my own experience and conversations on Lewis’ position on CCSS. In the post, I figuratively note that this is now a battle between Lewis and American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten, who has stated that if it comes down to AFT constituency rejection of CCSS and keeping CCSS at the AFT convention in July 2014, she plans to keep CCSS.

Though I metaphorically describe the battle as being between Weingarten and Lewis, I know from my interactions with Lewis that she is a union president who serves her constituency. Unlike Weingarten’s dealings with AFT members, Lewis does not try to force CTU membership into the mold of her top down choice.

On May 10, 2014, fellow blogger Anthony Cody posted a guest article by CTU member Michelle Gunderson. In it, Gunderson describes the process by which CTU arrived at and crafted CTU’s anti-CCSS resolution.

Include below is Gunderson’s post in part:

By Michelle Gunderson.

Wednesday evening I stood before my brothers and sisters at the Chicago Teachers Union to speak in favor of our resolution opposing the Common Core State Standards. When I finished speaking, there was a call for the vote. It was unanimous. It was resounding – not a single voice raised in opposition.

There are times when the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) seems like an engine; that we are able to accomplish great and difficult work seemingly overnight. I would like to pull back the curtain for a moment, and help others understand the purposeful and deliberate process we take in order to form our decisions and actions at CTU.

There are those in the media who contend we are being reckless and blindly following Karen Lewis, the president of our local. Nothing could be further from the actual case.

As much as we admire Karen Lewis and are grateful for her talents, this work was not generated from her. In fact, characterizing this event in such simplistic terms denigrates the social justice transformation of the Chicago Teachers Union, a long and hard-won struggle that involves many. We do not act on Karen Lewis’ behalf or her wishes. She acts on ours, with our guidance, and we love her for it.

It is hard to imagine a union in existence where a full democratic process is expected by everyone involved – leadership, rank and file, and union staff. Yet, in Chicago, we hold this ideal in such high regard we cannot imagine a union working any other way.

Several months prior to the passing of the resolution, the Caucus of Rank and File Educators began discussing and debating the Common Core in our open meetings. We read Diane Ravitch’s bookThe Reign of Error in small study groups. And many of us followed Anthony Cody’s work on this blog. Through conversations and study we came to a strong conclusion. The authors of the Common Core view the purpose of education as college and career readiness. We view the purpose of public education as a means for educating a populace of critical thinkers who are capable of shaping a just and equitable society in order to lead good and purpose-filled lives.

With our philosophical underpinning so drastically divergent from that of the Common Core we did not see any room for common ground.

That is why we say no to Common Core.

My hat is off to CTU.

To read the rest of Gunderson’s piece on Anthony Cody’s blog, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo was taken by firedoglakedotcom. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

inBloom, BloomBoard, and the Undeniable, Corporate Reform “Need” for Student Data

May 13, 2014/in Culture War, Education, Must Read, News/by Mercedes Schneider

On April 21, 2014, the Gates-funded data warehouse inBloom publicized that it was shutting down.

The New York Times called it a “setback for the nearly $8 billion prekindergarten through 12th-grade education technology software market.”

InBloom CEO Iwan Streichenberger calls it “a real missed opportunity for teachers and school districts seeking to improve student learning.”

I’m sorry, but making my classroom part of “the nearly $8 billion… technology software market” does little to convince me that Iwan Streichenberger can do anything substantial toward “improving student learning” in my classroom.

I wonder just how dead inBloom actually is.

One of the sponsors of inBloom is a company called BloomBoard, a company started by Jason Lange and Eric Dunn in 2o1o. The two entities complemented one another: inBloom was to collect student data; BloomBoard is to collect teacher data for “professional development” and teacher evaluation– and embedded in teacher evaluation is student data.

BloomBoard needs student data. InBloom was to provide student data.

In true corporate reformer fashion, Jason Lange is a “CEO” who is now making a go at profiting from public education dollars after establishing his professional background in mergers and acquisitions and private equity.

Co-CEO Eric Dunn hails from the highly controversial Edison Learning, the reborn version of Edison Schools. (If managing schools leads to financial failure, just rename and change the game to education software focused on “achievement management solutions.”)

“Mergers and acquisitions” and “achievement management” are not terms on my resume. Then again, my entire professional career has been inside of the classroom. Imagine that.

According to this August 2013 BloomBoard Frequently Asked Questions file, inBloom and BloomBoard are not related:

7. inBloom, which collects student data to personalize learning pathways, recently faced controversy regarding user privacy concerns. What is BloomBoard’s relationship with inBloom?

The two companies are entirely separate entities with no connection. However, BloomBoard does work with inBloom in some districts and/or states that choose to utilize the inBloom platform data architecture. The sharing of the word ‘Bloom’ in our names is purely coincidence – and we actually called it first. [Emphasis added.]

The two “companies” (technically, inBloom became a nonprofit after its birth as the Shared Learning Collaborative [SLC]) might be “entirely separate entities”; however, to say that they have “no connection” is a stretch since not only did BloomBoard sponsor inBloom; BloomBoard expected to benefit financially from its association with inBloom.

Companies with access to the [inBloom] database will also be able to identify struggling teachers and pinpoint which concepts their students are failing to master. One startup that could benefit: BloomBoard, which sells schools professional development plans customized to each teacher.

The new database “is a godsend for us,” said Jason Lange, the chief executive of BloomBoard. “It allows us to collect more data faster, quicker and cheaper.” [Emphasis added.]

The “godsend” in inBloom for Lange’s BloomBoard would have been the “quicker, cheaper” student data required to fuel his teacher professional development product.

In 2012, BloomBoard CEO Jason Lange posted this press release (no longer available except via archive) concerning its “partnership” with SLC (precursor to inBloom):

Press Release: November 14, 2012

November 15th, 2012 by Jason

BloomBoard Partners With Shared Learning Collaborative To Accelerate Interoperability And Improved Use Of Data

Palo Alto, CA (November 14, 2012) — BloomBoard is proud to announce a partnership with the Shared Learning Collaborative to accelerate the standardization of data across our nations’ schools. Stephen Coller, Director of Developer Engagement for the Shared Learning Collaborative, praised the partnership stating “The SLC and BloomBoard share a passionate belief in the power of interoperability and data standardization to reduce the burden on teachers and spark innovation on a massive scale.”

Through this partnership, BloomBoard will be able to leverage a common data architecture for SLC states and districts, resulting in automated account creation and maintenance, single sign-on, near-immediate implementation, and improved recommendation engine algorithms in the BloomBoard professional development marketplace.

BloomBoard provides school districts and states with user-friendly tools to collect educator effectiveness data — and then recommends personalized training for each teacher based on his or her particular professional development needs. In addition, BloomBoard customizes its tools so that schools can use processes and instructional frameworks that are already in place. And in an industry where comparable tools may cost thousands of dollars per school, BloomBoard offers its platform and desired customization to schools, districts and states at no charge. [Emphasis added.]

How is it that two non-educators are able to “recommend personalized training for each teacher”?

Based on “algorithms”– mathematical formulas– “value added” advice for “improvement.”

No human judgment required. Just plug in the data, and the BloomBoard “platform” tells the human teachers what they need.

And don’t let the “free” platform fool you, for it provides a means for districts to become dependent upon the products tailored to fit the “free” platform.

Of course, “cost effectiveness” is maximized if American education relies less on human professionals and more on computerized platforms, tools, and algorithms– all ultimately dependent upon student data.

Since student-data-related profits are the name of the game, is it naive to believe that inBloom is really a done deal?

Massive student data collection is part of the 2009 National Governors Association (NGA) Symposium spectrum of reforms approved by US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.

The federal government will continue this massive student data collection push, inBloom or no.

And do not overlook the USDOE trend toward standardization.

Standardization and consolidation are melded concepts.

On May 8, 2014, the US House of Representatives “quietly” pursued the USDOE student data collection goal:

If you blinked you might have missed it: The U.S. House of Representatives gave quick and quiet approval to a bipartisan bill that would reauthorize the Education Science Reform Act, with an eye toward making federal K-12 research more relevant and timely for those out in the field.

The legislation also calls for new or improved collection of data on areas such as high school graduation rates, school safety, discipline, and teacher preparation and evaluation. And it would add a new focus on examining the implementation of a particular policy or strategy, not just its impact.

It also makes changes to a federal program that helps states bolster their longitudinal data systems, a hot area of policy these days. It would shift the focus of grants away from just building data systems—since most already have robust systems in place—to actually using them to improve student outcomes. The measure would also beef up privacy protections for student data, a huge issue in state legislatures this year. [Emphasis added.]

“Improving student outcomes”– the nauseatingly familiar euphemism for teacher and school value as determined ultimately by student standardized test scores.

This federal “change” to “using” data systems over “building” data systems does not preclude the “need” for data warehouses as “godsends” for “faster, quicker, and cheaper” data collection.

Otherwise, there is no need for both the Gates-funded Data Quality Campaign (“implementing” and “using” data systems) and Gates-funded inBloom (unprecedented quantities of data collected).

Plus, I’m thinking that “the nearly $8 billion prekindergarten through 12th-grade education technology software market” that would “suffer” (tongue in cheek) from inBloom absence will surely continue to diligently search for its next outlet.

Why, that arrangement might already be part of the history of high-power boardroom handshakes.

Stay tuned, America.

Kevin Durant: ‘MVP’ Son

May 13, 2014/in Commentary, Culture War, News/by Raynard Jackson

Donald Sterling’s racist rant about Blacks last month put a huge amount of focus on professional athletes. Many sports writers and fans have labeled today’s athletes as spoiled, ungrateful, prima donnas who have no appreciation for those who came before them.

You can count me in this group. But, if what I have been seeing over the past two weeks continue, I may become a believer in the fledgling view that some athletes are beginning to “get it.”

First, NBA players made it clear to NBA Commissioner Adam Silver that they would boycott playoff games if Sterling was not banned from the game. The players won. Sterling was not only permanently banned from the NBA, but the league is in the process of forcing him to sell his NBA franchise.

For those who need more convincing that some professional athletes are beginning to “get it;” one need look no further than newly crowned MVP of the NBA, Kevin Durant.

His acceptance speech given last week during the presentation of the award will go down as one of the best speeches ever given by a professional athlete. Watch the speech in it’s entirely:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/kxVAOoQeNJ8[/youtube]

What manner of man is Kevin Durant that he was moved to give such a wonderful speech? He called each of his teammates by name and made a personal comment about each; and ended by giving his mother the best Mother’s Day gift possible. The above video speaks for itself.

The video immediately went viral and has continued to be discussed inside and outside of sports. But, in watching Durant’s impassioned speech, I could not help but notice an alarming fact that I have yet to hear any discussion of regarding his comments—his beginning and ending of his speech.

In the media and on various blogs, I have yet to see one mention of Durant’s public confession of his Christianity. Here is how he opened his speech, “First off, I would like to thank God for changing my life…for letting me realize what life is really all about…basketball is just a platform in order for me to inspire people and I realize that…”

He then closed his speech by saying, “last, I just like to thank God again…he’s the first and the last, alpha and omega. I thank you for saving my life.”

Talking about Durant’s speech without mentioning the role of God in his life is like having a hamburger without the bun; it’s simply just a piece of meat that is not complete. You know as well as I that if Durant had opened and closed his speech with him talking about being homosexual, it would be the lead headline of his whole speech. But because he talked about his belief in God, the media made a conscious decision to pretend it was never mentioned.

This is Exhibit A in the continued secularization of our society. Durant, by all accounts, is a great person on and off the court. He conducts himself in a manner that brings honor to his parents, the NBA, and society at large; and also is an avowed God fearing Christian.

Durant’s mother, Wanda Pratt, instilled these Christian values in him and his brother, Tony. As a single parent, she raised them as if she were a drill sergeant. She didn’t give them choices, but rather gave them direction. She took them to church, not asked if they wanted to go. She protected them with the shadow of her moral values and Christian beliefs. Christian values doesn’t stop you from doing wrong, it just stops you from enjoying doing wrong.

Talking about Kevin Durant without acknowledging his Christian values is like talking about Richard Nixon without discussing Watergate; or Nelson Mandela without discussing Apartheid; it would be an incomplete account of who they were. So, as we Christians celebrate the shining example of Durant’s life, let us not allow the media to edit out the essence of who Durant is — a God fearing Christian.

This is not about proselytizing or “wearing one’s Christianity on their sleeve;” but rather about telling the whole story of who a person is. Homosexual athletes receive praise from on high from the media and politicians when they come out of the closet; they argue that these athletes should not have to hide who they are.

So, why then should Christian athletes who come out as Christians not receive the same accolades from the media and politicians? Why should they hide who they are: The media, with their reporting, has truly shown who they are.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo of Kevin Durant (35) defended by James Harden at the Drew-Goodman game in August 2011 is by Game Face. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

US Muslim groups won’t move to excommunicate Boko Haram

May 13, 2014/in Culture War, Featured, News, Policy/by Jihad Watch

Notice that the Daily Caller’s Neil Munro repeatedly asks Muslim leaders in the U.S. to offer Islamic counter-arguments to Boko Haram’s claims for Islamic justification for its actions, and they refuse to do so. This is, as I am quoted as saying in this piece, because they can’t.

“US Muslim groups won’t move to excommunicate Boko Haram,” by Neil Munro, Daily Caller, May 12, 2014:

U.S. Islamic leaders won’t try to formally excommunicate the Islamist Boko Haram group unless they can meet with its leadership to debate the religious legitimacy of its actions, a spokesman for a leading mosque told The Daily Caller.

“There is a great reluctance to excommunicate someone by extension. … It would be like convicting someone in absentia,” said Imam Johari Abdul-Malik, the spokesman for the “Home of the Migrants” mosque, or Dar Al Hijrah mosque, in Falls Church Va. If crimes have been committed, the Nigerian government should punish the individuals, he added.

On May 7, Abdul Malik led a group of Muslim advocates at a press conference at the National Press Club, where they denied that Islamic strictures are shaping Boko Haram’s years-long campaign of killing and kidnapping Christians.

“Islam is not the problem,” said Ahmed Bedier, a Florida-based Islamic advocate. “We’re tired of people coming on television and asking where does this ideology come from,” Bedier said. “Well, this ideology comes from nowhere,” he insisted….

At his May 7 event, Abdul-Malik urged Boko Haram to change its view of Islam, even as he declined to challenge its religious claims. “Groups like Boko Haram desire to take us back to a medieval … world where kidnapping of women and girls and enslavement and rape are acceptable,” he said.

“The world has changed … [and] in particular we are saying as modern day Muslims that we now reject all of these acts and that they are contrary to our faith,” he said.

However, Abdul-Malik didn’t promise any religious or political action by U.S. Islamic groups. When pressed May 9 by The DC to cite Islamic texts that contradict Boko Haram’s Islamist arguments, Abdul-Malik quickly ended the phone call….

In a February video, Shekau justified his murder of Christians by quoting the Quran. The verse cited by Shekau, “We have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever, unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone,” is found in the fourth verse of the Quran’s 60th chapter.

“We wish to reiterate that our [jihad] is not for personal gain; it is meant to ensure the establishment of an Islamic state by liberating all Muslims from the excesses of the infidels,” the group’s spokesman, Abu Qaqa, said in 2012, according to study of the group. “We don’t kill innocent Muslims. The fact is the bottom line of our struggle is to set the Muslims free from enslavement. We only kill the unbelievers,” he said.

The Muslim groups aren’t excommunicating Shekau’s group because his Islamic claims are based on iconic Islamic texts, said Robert Spencer, the author of several best-sellers on Islamic law and traditions.

Slavery is endorsed in several sections of the Koran, where is described as “those whom your right [sword] hands possess,” he said.

The Quran is said by Muslims to be a direct transcription by Muhammad of statements by their god, Allah.

Close. Muhammad didn’t make transcriptions, according to Islamic tradition; his followers did. But in any case the Qur’an is considered to be a perfect transcription of the perfect and eternal book.

So “it is perfectly legitimate for a Muslim to capture a Christian woman and use her for sex,” Spencer said. “This is something that Mohammad did himself,” according to Islamic traditions, Spencer said.

The acid test of opposition to Shekau’s Islamic claims is whether the U.S. Islamic groups will declare that Shekau’s groups and ideas are heretical, said Spencer. But Islamic debates are very legalistic, so any attempted excommunication would require Islamic groups to cite Islamic texts before pronouncing “takfir” on Shekau and his movement, Spencer said.

TheDC asked Abdul-Malik if Americans Muslim groups would pronounce “takfir” on Boko Haram. “There is a great reluctance to excommunicate someone by extension. … It would be like convicting someone in absentia,” he replied.

The groups won’t take that step, Spencer said, because “they know Boko Haram has a perfectly good case based on the Koran … [and] they know that Muslims in their community … would be indignant towards them if they pronounce ‘takfir’ on a group that is following the Koran.”

Numerous U.S. Islamic groups contacted by TheDC declined to offer Islamic counter-arguments against Boko Haram. Instead, they merely said its actions are “unjust” and “un-Islamic.”

Shekau was trained as a Muslim cleric, according to a report by the International Crisis Group. He includes an Islamic title — imam — in his war-name, which is “Imam Abu Mohammen Abubakar bin Muhammad Shekau.” The name is also a salute to one of Islam’s earliest caliphs, Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr….

Boko Haram and the Kidnapped Schoolgirls: When will the West wake up?

May 12, 2014/in Culture War, Must Read, National Security, News, Policy/by ACT For America!

Yesterday, as many celebrated Mother’s Day, 250 anguished Nigerian mothers continued to search for their young daughters, kidnapped by the Muslim jihadist group Boko Haram.

Unfortunately, this horrific incident is but only one example of the oppressive treatment of women in Sharia-adherent Islamic societies across the globe. Until now, the world has remained largely silent and disinterested.

For years ACT! for America has worked to educate about Sharia law – the Islamic law that oppresses women through brutal acts including stoning, honor killing and female genital mutilation (FGM). The ongoing passage of anti-FGM bills across state legislatures is one result of our ongoing efforts thanks to activists like you.

We pray that the Nigerian schoolgirls will soon be found, so they can return to the loving arms of their mothers. And we hope that the worldwide outrage over this incident will lead to a true understanding of the oppressive ideology behind Sharia and won’t begin and end with the hashtag “Bring back our girls.”

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Boko Haram and the Kidnapped Schoolgirls

The Nigerian terror group reflects the general Islamist hatred of women’s rights. When will the West wake up?

By Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Since the kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls in Nigeria last month, the meaning of Boko Haram—the name used by the terrorist group that seized the girls—has become more widely known. The translation from the Hausa language is usually given in English-language media as “Western Education Is Forbidden,” though “Non-Muslim Teaching Is Forbidden” might be more accurate.

But little attention has been paid to the group’s formal Arabic name: Jam’at Ahl as-Sunnah lid-da’wa wal-Jihad. That roughly translates as “The Fellowship of the People of the Tradition for Preaching and Holy War.” That’s a lot less catchy than Boko Haram but significantly more revealing about the group and its mission. Far from being an aberration among Islamist terror groups, as some observers suggest, Boko Haram in its goals and methods is in fact all too representative.

The kidnapping of the schoolgirls throws into bold relief a central part of what the jihadists are about: the oppression of women. Boko Haram sincerely believes that girls are better off enslaved than educated. The terrorists’ mission is no different from that of the Taliban assassin who shot and nearly killed 15-year-old Pakistani Malala Yousafzai—as she rode a school bus home in 2012—because she advocated girls’ education. As I know from experience, nothing is more anathema to the jihadists than equal and educated women.

How to explain this phenomenon to baffled Westerners, who these days seem more eager to smear the critics of jihadism as “Islamophobes” than to stand up for women’s most basic rights? Where are the Muslim college-student organizations denouncing Boko Haram? Where is the outrage during Friday prayers? These girls’ lives deserve more than a Twitterhashtag protest.

Looking Beyond Donald Sterling

May 11, 2014/in Commentary, Culture War, News/by Raynard Jackson

By now, everyone knows the story of Los Angeles Clipper’s owner, Donald Sterling’s banishment from the National Basketball Association (NBA) for his racist comments captured on audio tape last month. What Sterling said was totally stupid and insulting. Period! I don’t think there is any disagreement from anyone on that issue.

In the past, I have been very critical of professional athletes for their unwillingness to take a public stand on any controversial issues. You can argue whether the NBA players were aggressive enough in their protests, but at least they did protest. The Sterling issue was so bizarre that even Michael Jordan publically denounced him. You’re talking about miracles!

For a generation of athletes who have no idea what real sacrifice is all about, they made me proud. Yes, they know about sacrifice relative to playing their sport (playing through pain and injury); but they have yet to show a willingness to give up their sport, even temporarily, to take a principled stand on anything – until now.

When I think of professional athletes taking a principled stand in sports, I think of people such as Muhammad Ali, Jim Brown, Tommie Smith, John Carlos, Curt Flood, or Spencer Haywood.

So, to find out that these NBA players told the commissioner of the NBA in no uncertain terms that they were prepared not to play in their upcoming playoff games if Sterling were not permanently banned from the game and he was barred from ongoing ownership of the Clippers; this, indeed, was a historic moment for today’s athlete.

This Sterling situation was about racism, bigotry, and hate; no question about it. Relative to the Black community, there is an issue being overlooked: An alarming rise in the number of people and organizations who have contracted laryngitis when it comes to issues of racism, bigotry, and fairness involving the Black community. But like fools, many in the Black community take up the cause of every other group as their own and then get absolutely no reciprocity when Blacks are treated unfairly.

The Human Rights Campaign is supposed to be the homosexual version of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)—standing up for the equal and fair treatment of those who are homosexual. The National Council of La Raza is supposed to be the Hispanic version of the NAACP—fighting for the equal and fair treatment of Latinos. The National Organization of Women (NOW)—is the largest organization of feminist activists in the U.S. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU)—an organization of 2.1 million members united by the belief in the dignity and worth of workers and the services they provide and dedicated to improving the lives of workers and their families and creating a more just and humane society.

I went to each of these groups’ websites and none had issued one statement regarding the Sterling issue since it first broke. Not one word, not one sentence. Yet, liberal Black groups such as the NAACP lose their minds when someone says something considered insulting to homosexuals; or against amnesty for illegals; something deemed misogynistic towards women; or in opposition to increasing the minimum wage.

In fact, many of these Blacks spend more time supporting amnesty for illegals than they do issues devastating the Black community, like double digit unemployment. Black women constantly take on the battle for affirmative action for white women who are the biggest beneficiary of the program. Many of the workers at sports stadiums are Black and also members of SEIU.

All these groups claim to stand for fairness and equality for all, but somehow they never seem to be able to verbalize any support when the Black community is treated unfairly.

What Sterling said was an affront to all Americans, not just Blacks. If these groups hold themselves out to be the moral beacon of America; how then can they selectively show moral outrage when bigotry and racism rears its ugly head?

This type of behavior from other groups towards Blacks has been a consistent occurrence; and the main reason is weak leadership within the Black community.

These groups all know that these media appointed Black leaders will carry their water for them and will never ask or demand anything in return. These groups, with their words, claim to be in solidarity with the Black community; but with their actions, they show that they have little regard for the Black community. The only difference between them and Donald Sterling is that Sterling at least was man enough to say how he felt.

RELATED STORY: Tim Tebow Mocked While Michael Sam Praised

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Arnaud Klamecki from Lille, France. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

Islam’s Role in Boko Haram’s Kidnapping of Schoolgirls

May 11, 2014/in Culture War, National Security, News, Video/by Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)

Creeping Sharia reports, “…mostly Christian schoolgirls forced to convert to Islam then sold to jihadists as servants and sex slaves via Islam’s Role in Boko Haram’s Kidnapping of Schoolgirls — on The Glazov Gang | FrontPage Magazine.

This week’s Glazov Gang was joined by Dr. Mark Durie, a theologian, human rights activist, pastor of an Anglican church, and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Dr. Durie joined the show to discuss Boko Haram’s kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls in Nigeria and the Islamic roots of that barbaric act. He shed light on the Islamic theology that inspires and sanctions Muslims to enslave and rape kafir women.

He also analyzed Islam-Denial in our culture, the subjects of abrogation and taqiyya, the forces that brought him into this battle, and much, much more.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/JfInxh4OsRY[/youtube]

To learn more about Boko Haram read: FACT SHEET: Boko Haram Nigerian Islamist Group – Clarion Project

RELATED STORY: Terrorists Who Kidnap Little Girls