From my friends at Power Line Blog:
I lived in Massachusetts too long not to share this!
From my friends at Power Line Blog:
I lived in Massachusetts too long not to share this!
Posted by my friends at Power Line Blog:
Lest we forget.
Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article about the draft publication of the Minnesota social studies standards. The standards are available for public comment. The article cites information found in an article at the Center of the American Experiment website.
The article at Power Line Blog reports:
There are several key pieces of our world and nation’s history that are missing when compared with the 2011 social studies standards.
* World War I—benchmarks on the social, political and economic causes of the war; nations involved, major political and military figures, key battles; political impact (including formation of the League of Nations)
* World War II—benchmarks on the social, political and economic causes of the war, and main turning points; nations involved, major political and military figures, key battles; timeline of key events leading to WWII
* The Holocaust (including references to the Nazi regime and Jews)
* Rise and effects of communism and socialism; Communist Revolution
* American Revolution—benchmarks on timeline of the major events and turning points of the revolution, including the involvement of other nations and the reasons for American victory; identifying historically significant people during the period of the revolution (Examples: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Elizabeth Freeman)
* Civil War—benchmarks on timeline of the key events of the war; causes of the war; major political and military events; main ideas of the debate over slavery and states’ rights and how they resulted in major political compromises and ultimately war
I need someone to explain to me how you can teach WWII without teaching about the Holocaust, Nazis, and Jews.
These are just a few examples from the article. Please follow the link to read the entire article. It offers insight as to the reasons our children don’t understand the freedom and heritage they have in America and why many are willing to trade that freedom for the slavery of socialism.
Radical Son is a book by David Horowitz that I read many years ago. There is now a new edition with an updated preface by David Horowitz. Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article about the updated preface. Please follow the link to read the entire article. It provides a lot of insight into the thinking of the radical political left.
The article contains the entire preface. I am simply posting the last part here in the hopes that you will read it in its entirety at Power Line Blog:
In his narrative, Forbes makes clear that he regards the inconveniences he suffered as a result of his crimes as an injustice to him. He exhibits no remorse for his victims and no appreciation for the short jail time he spent for plotting the assassination of Crystal Gray or killing his friend, or for the cold-blooded, botched execution attempt which ruined the life of the ambulance driver, Nelson Malloy, who tried to help him. The fantasy of the “revolution” he served by committing violent crimes, mainly against vulnerable black people who were not political, remains for Forbes a source of inordinate pride. Equally revealing is his continuing adoration for the criminal who recruited him to the Panthers when he was sixteen, made him a gangster, murdered an eighteen-year-old black woman, and ordered him to assassinate another.
Flores Forbes’s story is emblematic of what America’s political culture has become. His title today is Associate Vice President of Strategic Planning and Program Implementation at Columbia University, where he is a pillar of the academic community. Meanwhile, those of us who worked to bring the criminal reality of the “revolutionary” charade to light are persona non-grata among administrators and faculty at Columbia, which happens to be my own alma mater.
And this travesty is not confined to one Ivy League school. There are academic tributes and shrines to Panther gangsters at UCLA, Stanford, UC Santa Cruz, UC Berkeley, the Smithsonian, and numerous similar institutions across the country. This is a pretty fair measure of the Left’s institutional ascendance in America in the wake of the mayhem its radical activists have created and the atrocities they have committed.
Radical Son was written as a witness to the dark undercurrents of American politics and to their enduring power in the nation’s life. It has definitely had an impact. Whether the revelations contained in its narrative can seriously affect the course of this history is unlikely. But as long as the book has open-minded readers, the possibility exists that new generations will be able to put together these lessons with others, and perhaps affect the outcome. Or maybe just one individual will have been affected by this book in such a way as to avoid experiences as painful as I had to endure. That would be sufficient reward for the ordeals of writing it.
In case you are unaware, David Horowitz grew up in New York as a ‘red diaper baby.’ That was the name given to the children of members of the Communist party in America. His parents were school teachers. Let that sink in. His indoctrination into radical political beliefs at home was probably not a lot different than the indoctrination his parents’ students received. I strongly recommend reading Radical Son to understand how the radical left thinks and what their goals are. It is eye-opening.
Yesterday Paul Mirengoff at Power Line Blog posted an article about what is happening in Iran.
The article reports:
In the mid-1980s, I asked a retired French diplomat whether he thought the Iranian regime would be overthrown within the next ten to fifteen years. It seemed plausible to me that the mullahs, who seemed to be ruining the country, would lose power by the end of the century.
The retired French diplomat had grown up in Iran, served France there among other countries, and maintained strong connections with and affection for Iranians. He knew the country and its people as well as anyone I was likely to encounter.
His view was that there would be no overthrow of the regime in the foreseeable future. He told me that Iranians tend to be passive followers, and therefore not prone to rebel.
He attributed the 1979 revolution to lack of resolve by the Shah and lack of support from the U.S. The mullahs, he was sure, would be more resolute, and thus would likely retain power for years.
More than 40 years after the revolution and at least 35 years after my conversation with the retired diplomat, the mullahs are still in power. There is talk, however, that their days are numbered.
They might well be. Whether passive or not by nature, Iranians are protesting in fairly large numbers. And even the retired French diplomat didn’t say the regime would hold power forever.
The article notes that the recent assassination of nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakzhirzadeh might be a sign that the regime is losing power.
The article quotes a New York Daily News article from early December written by Ray Takeyh, an Iranian-American, who is a senior fellow for Middle East studies at the Council on Foreign Relations:
First, it has often been suggested that no matter how unpopular the Islamist regime has become over the years, it is firmly in control of the country given its overlapping and omniscient intelligence services. Now, this widely accepted truism has to be called into question. In recent years, Iran’s nuclear installations have been sabotaged, its scientists killed and its secrets stolen.
Moreover, the country has been rocked by a series of demonstrations that its intelligence organs did not anticipate. To say the least, the Islamic Republic today suffers from persistent intelligence failure, an ominous sign for a regime that rules through fear.
…The second worrisome aspect for the Iranian regime has to be the probable collaboration of its own elites with a foreign power. These killings could not have taken place unless many in the system were so disenchanted with Islamist rule that they were willing to provide critical information to an adversary.
A regime is in trouble not only when its populace grows disenchanted but when important segments of its elite give up on the system. If those who are the chief beneficiaries of the system don’t believe in it, then who does? The Islamic Republic has long suffered from brain drain as its best and brightest have often chosen to leave the country, but now, it seems, even those who have stayed behind are starting to crack.
The article at Power Line Blog concludes:
Takeyh acknowledges that Iran’s current leaders are “made of tougher stuff than the Shah and his generals” and that therefore “The Islamic Republic may endure.” That’s probably how I would bet. But maybe I’m unduly influenced by the words of that retired French diplomat all those years ago.
John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog today about the lawsuit brought by the Trump campaign against the State of Pennsylvania. The law firm handling one aspect of the case has been pressured by anti-Trump types to withdraw from participation in the lawsuit.
The article reports:
A law firm representing the Trump campaign in its challenges to the Pennsylvania election results gave notice that it’s withdrawing from one of the cases.
Lawyers with Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP submitted a filing late Thursday stating they were withdrawing as counsel in a federal suit seeking to block Pennsylvania from certifying its vote. No reason was given. In a statement issued Friday, the firm confirmed the filing but did not say why it was exiting the case.
The Trump campaign issued the following statement:
“Leftist mobs descended upon some of the lawyers representing the President’s campaign and they buckled,” said Tim Murtaugh, communications director for the campaign. “If the target were anyone but Donald Trump, the media would be screaming about injustice and the fundamental right to legal representation. The President’s team is undeterred and will move forward with rock-solid attorneys to ensure free and fair elections for all Americans.”
The article concludes:
Not many years ago, every terrorist in Guantanamo Bay was represented by one of a group of America’s top law firms. For free. No one batted an eye. Now, the President of the United States is having trouble getting lawyers to represent him in asserting perfectly legitimate claims. Some dictator.
This is the latest instance of the most troubling trend in American culture, leftist bullying. Rare is the company (or, as in this case, the law firm) with the courage to stand up against it. It is a serious threat to the liberty of all Americans.
Regardless of your political leanings, you need to look at this carefully. If a law firm can be bullied into not representing someone because of political pressure, what chance do you and I have for equal justice under the law? These are mafia tactics that will only get worse if they are not stopped.
Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article describing his recent experience with the fact-checkers on Facebook. The bottom line is that the fact-checkers need to be fact-checked.
The article includes a screenshot stating that the original post had false information. Yet when Mr. Hinderaker explored the items that the fact-checkers claimed were false, those items were not even in the article.
The article notes:
The explanation given for Facebook’s “fact check” is that “Wisconsin turnout [is] in line with past elections, didn’t jump 22%.” But my Facebook post said nothing about Wisconsin turnout jumping by 22%. Neither did my Power Line post, which I doubt anyone from USA Today or Facebook actually read. According to Wisconsin officials, that state had a record turnout in 2020, not one that was “in line with past elections,” so Facebook’s “fact check” is blatantly false. Also, obviously, it doesn’t even attempt to deal with anything I wrote in my Power Line post, which, among other things, explained why some observers have made exaggerated claims relating to Wisconsin’s 2020 turnout numbers. Nor does it try to explain why there is something wrong with what I wrote on Facebook, which was that “the numbers suggest” that there was major voter fraud in Wisconsin–a claim that, as far as I know, stands unrebutted.
So Facebook is a Democratic Party platform that will do all it can to help Joe Biden cling to his tenuous electoral lead. No surprise there. But the extent to which the internet platforms that control most avenues for the distribution of facts and opinions are willing to lie and cheat to support one political party is alarming. We live in a world that the Founders never contemplated.
Parler is looking really good right now. Please follow the link above to read the rest of the article. Facebook is no longer simply a neutral platform–it is a Democrat campaign site.
Yesterday Paul Mirengoff at Power Line Blog reported that President Trump has signed an Executive Order establishing the 1776 to study the teaching of American history in America.
The article reports the purpose of the Executive Order:
…empowers the 1776 Commission to produce and publicly disseminate a report within a year. That report shall discuss “the core principles of the American founding and how these principles may be understood to further enjoyment of ‘the blessings of liberty’ and to promote our striving ‘to form a more perfect union.” In other words, says Kurtz, “the 1776 Commission, likely to be populated by some of America’s finest historians and scholars, will produce a report on the meaning of the Founding, on how American history can be understood as a struggle to realize our founding principles, and on how best to teach all this to the rising generation.”
The article points out one ray of hope in the Executive Order:
But President Trump’s order doesn’t entail imposing his vision of patriotic education on the nation. Instead, he calls on local communities to reassert control over the curriculum.
Isn’t it great to have a president who views America with pride, who is willing, unabashedly, to defend our founding, and who will contest the views of radicals seeking to enlist an all-too-complicit education establishment in tearing America down? If Joe Biden wins the election, we won’t have such a president.
The federal government has no business in education in the states (because of the Tenth Amendment). This may actually be a step toward regaining local control.
Scott Johnson at Power Line Blog posted an article today about last night’s Tucker Carlson show on Fox News. Tucker Carlson interviewed Tony Bobulinski, a former business partner of Hunter Biden.
The article cites a number of articles that have been written about the interview and includes a partial and full video of the interview. Please follow the link above to see those.
The article notes a few key points about the interview:
Regardless of how you feel about the relationship between China and the Biden family, I think after watching the interview, you might hesitate to do business with the Bidens just on the basis of their concept of ‘plausible deniability’ and the ethical perspective that statement reveals.
It seems like propaganda has become a way of life for American education. I remember fondly when Scholastic Magazine would arrive in the classroom, and we would all read it to find out what was going on in the world at a level we could understand. The magazine still exists, but its purpose seems to have changed drastically.
Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article about the current state of Scholastic Magazine.
The article reports:
This is what our children are being told about President’s Trump’s position on “Racial Justice”:
The long history of unjust treatment of Black people in America is a major focus of this election.
This past spring, in the wake of police killings of Black Americans, huge protests erupted across the country in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. Meanwhile, the coronavirus pandemic has seriously underscored the widespread problem of racial inequality in the United States. Data show that people of color are contracting and dying of the virus at the highest rates, largely because of the wealth gap that exists between white people and people of color. Many Americans of all races are now demanding an end to police violence and other injustices toward Black people in this country.
That’s the preface. This is an issue, according to Scholastic Magazine, on which there is only one possible perspective.
In June, President Trump signed an executive order encouraging police departments to change how they train officers and use force. But overall, he has defended law enforcement…
As well he should!
…opposed protesters’ calls for reforms, and taken an aggressive stance against the largely peaceful demonstrations.
“Largely peaceful,” the Democrats’ weasel phrase.
In July, for instance, he sent federal police to Portland, Oregon, to break up rallies there. Local officials say those officers illegally detained protesters and sparked violence.
This is outrageous. What was happening in Portland was not “rallies.” It was rioting, arson, crime and violence. The idea that the presence of federal officers “sparked violence” is a far-left trope that is totally at odds with the facts. The violence long preceded, and succeeded, any federal involvement.
Many people see the president’s response to the protests as part of a pattern of racism.
“Many people.” The most dishonest trick of the left-wing journalist.
He has repeatedly made racist statements and at times shown support for people who promote white supremacy.
This is a lie. It is intended to poison young minds against the president, his party and his supporters.
Please follow the link to read the rest of the article. It is disturbing. It’s time to take a stand against the garbage our children are being taught in school. Pay attention to School Board elections. Your future could depend on them.
I spent part of my day today handing out campaign literature at the polls. I met a very sweet, but very misled young lady who told me that socialism didn’t deserve the ‘bad rep’ it has. It’s really a good thing. God help us if the people she supports ever get in power.
Paul Mirengoff posted an article at Power Line Blog today about the ongoing politicization of science. The article raises the question of whether the horse or the cart is leading.
The article reports:
Vaping is an alternative to smoking. It’s a way in which nicotine addicts can access that drug without exposure to the harmful tars and chemicals in cigarettes that cause cancer, heart disease, and other maladies. It therefore presents the possibility of saving millions of lives.
However, much of the left hates vaping. So it’s not surprising that “science” has been marshaled against it.
Last year, the Journal of the American Heart Association published a study finding that vaping posed as great a heart risk as smoking does. According to Wesley Smith, that study fueled public policies that stifled the industry, damaging or destroying many small businesses and denying smokers the leading alternative to cigarettes.
But now, the study in question has been been retracted.
The article notes the problems with the study, then observes that the study was published despite concerns about its findings.
The article concludes:
Anyone can make a mistake. However, publishing an article even though the questions of reviewers have not been addressed seems like more than just a mistake.
And these kinds of “mistakes” always seem to cut in favor of the left’s agenda. Coincidence? Probably not. Smith points out:
. . .[S]cience journals have grown increasingly ideological. Nature has endorsed Joe Biden for president and promised to publish more political science — which isn’t “science” at all. The New England Journal of Medicine should change its name to the New Ideology Journal of Medicine. Science has endorsed “nature rights.” The list goes on and on.
It’s enough to make you wonder whether establishment science follows the data wherever it leads or, instead, is often influenced by political and social agendas. And once you wonder about that, you really shouldn’t blindly “follow the science” — or at least “science” produced after the left’s march through our institutions reached reached the scientific establishment.
Some of these scientists are the same people who are selling us the equivalent of chain link fences to block out mosquitoes when they praise homemade cloth masks.
Fox News posted an article yesterday about one of the most ironic statements made during this presidential campaign.
The article notes:
“They think- 54 percent of the American people believe they’re better off economically today than they were under our administration? Well, their memory is not very good, quite frankly,” Biden told Inskeep (Cincinnati’s WKRC Local 12 reporter Kyle Inskeep). “And in addition to that, we have a president who doesn’t share the values of most Americans. He’s not very honest with people. He’s flouting the conventions relative to public safety in terms of even now- not wearing a mask, a guy who has been a super spreader. But look, whatever they believe they should go out and vote. People should vote. Period.”
Scott Johnson at Power Line Blog noted today:
Yesterday Biden declared yet again that he is a proud Democrat running for the Senate. Joseph Wulfsohn adds that Biden “also appeared to have forgotten Mitt Romney’s name while speaking with reporters about whether Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s faith should be questioned during her SCOTUS confirmation.” Biden observed: “You may remember, I got in trouble when we were running against the senator who was a Mormon, the governor, OK? And I took him on,” Biden said. “No one’s faith should be questioned.”
Remember the Mormon? Much as we would like to forget him, we remember Mitt Romney. Indeed, we do. He joined Senate Democrats to vote for the removal of President Trump from office over a congratulatory phone call to the new president of Ukraine.
Joe Biden seems to be having a problem with mental acuity. This is becoming very obvious and should be addressed by the Democrat party. Keeping him on the campaign trail with the mental difficulties he is obviously having is elder abuse. His family needs to step in and put a stop to it.
MRCTV is reporting today on an interesting choice of words by Vice-Presidential candidate Kamala Harris during a broadcast targeting Hispanic voters in Arizona.
The article reports:
Kamala Harris may have just let out a Freudian slip – and if anyone’s upset by it, it won’t be her political opponents.
The California senator, who is running to be Joe Biden’s vice president should the pair win the election in November, seemed to momentarily place herself at the top of the ticket in an odd moment during a virtual round table Monday, encouraging voters to cast their ballot for “A Harris administration, together with Joe Biden.”
“A Harris administration, together with Joe Biden as the president of the United States…the Biden/Harris administration will provide access to $100 billion in low-interest loans and investments from minority business owners,” Harris awkwardly claimed.
If Joe Biden is president, why is it the Harris administration? Who is pulling the strings?
Steven Hayward at Power Line Blog notes:
I’m betting the Secret Service is taking resumes of food tasters right about now.
The article at MRCTV concludes:
Harris’ mix-up between herself and the man who is actually running for president is also in line with many concerns on the right over Biden’s age, mental acuity and physical ability to do the job of POTUS, with many saying that a vote for Biden is really a vote for Harris if and when Biden becomes unable to hold the office.
When you consider Kamala Harris’ record as California Attorney General, the thought of her in the White House is troubling. Her prosecution of cases was very uneven and often appeared to be politically motivated.
John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article today that is definitely a positive step toward re-uniting America.
The article reports:
Yesterday, OMB Director Russell Vought issued on behalf of the Executive Office of the President a memorandum to the heads of all federal departments and agencies. The memorandum bans all agencies from “training” their employees in critical race theory or white privilege. It is a thing of beauty. Here is the memo, in its entirety.
The memorandum includes the following:
It has come to the President’s attention that Executive Branch agencies have spent millions of taxpayer dollars to date “training” government workers to believe divisive, anti-American propaganda.
For example, according to press reports, employees across the Executive Branch have been required to attend trainings where they are told that “virtually all White people contribute to racism” or where they are required to say that they “benefit from racism.” According to press reports, in some cases these training have further claimed that there is racism embedded in the belief that America is the land of opportunity or the belief that the most qualified person should receive a job.
These types of “trainings” not only run counter to the fundamental beliefs for which our Nation has stood since its inception, but they also engender division and resentment within the Federal workforce. We can be proud that as an employer, the Federal government has employees of all races, ethnicities, and religions. We can be proud that Americans from all over the country seek to join our workforce and dedicate themselves to public service. We can be proud of our continued efforts to welcome all individuals who seek to serve their fellow Americans as Federal employees. However, we cannot accept our employees receiving training that seeks to undercut our core values as Americans and drive division within our workforce.
The President has directed me to ensure that Federal agencies cease and desist from using taxpayer dollars to fund these divisive, un-American propaganda training sessions. Accordingly, to that end, the Office of Management and Budget will shortly issue more detailed guidance on implementing the President’s directive. In the meantime, all agencies are directed to begin to identify all contracts or other agency spending related to any training on “critical race theory/9 “white privilege,” or any other training or propaganda effort that teaches or suggests either (1) that the United States is an inherently racist or evil country or (2) that any race or ethnicity is inherently racist or evil. In addition, all agencies should begin to identify all available avenues within the law to cancel any such contracts and/or to divert Federal dollars away from these un-American propaganda training sessions.
The memorandum concludes:
The President, and his Administration, are fully committed to the fair and equal treatment of all individuals in the United States. The President has a proven track record of standing for those whose voice has long been ignored and who have failed to benefit from all our country has to offer, and he intends to continue to support all Americans, regardless of race, religion, or creed. The divisive, false, and demeaning propaganda of the critical race theory movement is contrary to all we stand for as Americans and should have no place in the Federal government.
I welcome anyone who believes that the majority of Americans are racist to find another country in the world with more equal opportunity for all of its citizens. If you can (and I doubt you can), please go live there.