Indoctrination’s Impact on Schools
By Ramblin’ Rose

How long has it been since this country had the best educational system in the world as measured by instruments recognized internationally? How long has it been since Minnesota was a leader in education?

The test results for 2018 became public a few weeks ago. On August 29th, the Times reported “The North Star system, introduced last year, focuses less on assigning punitive labels for schools based on how students scored on one single test — the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments — and more on the nuances of education to create more equitable and well-rounded learning opportunities for all students across the state.”

A punitive label? A single test? Students take multiple tests annually in MN schools—even 5 times a year in Kindergarten and the test is delivered via a computer—those victims are 5 or 6 years old. But the computer testing is a part of the Common Core (CC) that supposedly died. It seems alive and punitive.
(an aside: Did you know that parents have the right to opt out of the mandated tests in MN? Just visit the Department of Education website for the forms and the warnings of possible consequences for the child’s future with such a decision.)

So how did students do in central Minnesota?

The words from Marsha Baisch, assistant superintendeAnt of elementary education at St. Cloud school district, set a tone of gloom: “The first blush doesn’t always tell the whole story.” She continued with five factors to evaluate “the whole child.” The test scores are only one facet of the new (one year old) reporting system.

As one continued to read the article, the tone was gloomy and seemed to celebrate mediocrity—as long as others also have lowered scores, it must be interpreted as “OK.”

“The patterns of our scores mirror the state,” said Sylvia Huff, executive director of research, assessments and enrollment for St. Cloud school district. “So both the state as well as our district saw a slight drop in math proficiency and in reading, it was basically relatively unchanged.”

The data found on the MN Department of Education website shows that MN students do score at a level “slightly” higher than national average. That is still far from the #1 status that many stakeholders espouse.

Back to central MN…

In St. Cloud schools in math proficiency, students dropped from 40% proficient (i.e., meeting or exceeding the standards) in 2018 to 37% in 2019. The statewide average was 54%, also a decline of 2.4% points. In reading, the drop was less—46% proficient to 45% proficient. Across MN, the score was 59% proficient or above.

Other area schools also reported declines.

Sartell-St. Stephen school district:
Math—77% to 75%
Reading—76% to 72%
Sauk Rapids-Rice school district
Math—54% to 52%
Reading—58% to 56%
ROCORI school district
Math—64% to 62%
Reading—66% to 65%
STRIDE Academy
Math—49% to 48%
Reading—49% to 48%
St. Cloud Math and Science Academy – increased scores noted
Math—13% to 21%
Reading—22% to 27%
Athlos Academy – increased scores noted
Math—25% to 31%
Reading—36% to 40%

And the international comparison is a little more dubious. The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) was first administered in 2000 but only to 15-year-old students in 70 countries. Thus, the results do not correlate to the MN results. However, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Assessment (TIMSS) dates from 1995 in the areas of math and science and tests fourth and eighth graders in approximately 60 countries. In the latest reported data, American fourth graders in math tied for 13th place behind 10 systems, statistically indistinguishable from 9 systems and higher than 34 countries.

In any case, the USA does not score as the leading country in education even though it claims to want to have a leading role on the international scene, as do I. However, unless students have greater academic achievements, they will be followers and not leaders in discussions and decisions based upon information, facts and logic.

It seems that the right answers do count when it comes to international assessments. Maybe the politicians should try to sell Common Core to the educational institutions in order to regain their assumed leadership position.

So, what do parents do in order to attempt to enroll their children in the best schools? They often vote with their feet and the ascribed tuition dollars.

Three obvious alternatives for families are private schools (costly tuition and fees) and charter schools and open enrollments with neighboring districts. We know that Sauk Rapids froze that option recently.

Let’s use one large diverse district as the example of what is undoubtedly reflected in other districts. In the Minneapolis district, there were 45,443 students in a local school and 4,669 attending a school outside the district in 2003. In 2018, the students in a local school numbered 35,141 while those in non-district schools jumped to 18, 044. In this district, 80% of the students leaving the failing district for a chance at a better education were students of color.

The same exodus is occurring across the state. The demographics may vary, but the percentages are probably quite similar. Parents are hoping for better than the government-funded and government-driven schools with the government-dictated curriculum.

Political does not refer to the party of the President; it refers to the ideology of those who control the indoctrination of the system; those committed to the conversion of free thinkers into obedient lemmings who follow their mandates.

Do our schools teach to the strengths of each individual (meet the students where they are and challenge them to do better), or do they embrace CC that mandates teaching to the “lowest common denominator?”

It’s time to call out the St. Cloud Times for protecting their leftist cronies. This Our View Editorial is disgusting. It’s about the postponed Dismantling Hate Crimes event from this past Wednesday. Here’s the opening of the SCTimes’ article:

Sadly, people driven by fear are still driving the public agenda. Witness about two dozen people who showed up Wednesday at the St. Cloud Library to protest a panel discussion about dismantling hate crimes because, well, spreading hate and fear is their go-to.

Shame on the Times for publishing this trash. This isn’t worthy of a college newspaper, much less worthy of a once-respectable newspaper. This editorial is cringeworthy for its sloppiness and fact gathering.

First, the St. Cloud Human Rights Commission published a postponement notice on their Facebook page Wednesday afternoon. The timestamp for the post is 1:16 pm on Sept. 18th:

Next, 2 groups were there at the Library that might’ve been considered protest groups. One was a group who prayed for the Persecuted Church. The other organization is called the “Freedom Speaks Coalition.”

One of the groups applied for and received a permit to use a room in the Public Library from 2:00 pm-4:00 pm September 18. The Dismantling Hate Crimes event didn’t start until 6:00 pm. The Times’ hit piece continues:

First, though, many of the picketers (who showed up despite the cancellation that came soon before the event was to begin) would not stand up for their beliefs in the most basic way possible, by putting their names to their convictions. Offered the opportunity by journalists from the St. Cloud Times and other news outlets to explain their point of view, many offered their thoughts but most refused to provide their names.

Why would a sane person give the Times their name considering the Times Editorial Board’s penchant for smearing its political opponents? The Times is a media organization. Do they think we don’t know that they’re aware of Antifa protests on college campuses against conservatives and Christians? Am I supposed to believe that they aren’t aware of the violence that #BlackLivesMatters has perpetrated? Democrat-affiliated thugs like Antifa, #BlackLivesMatter and CAIR shouldn’t be trusted.

Notice that the Times trusted MDHR’s and CAIR’s narrative that the event was cancelled because some peaceful protesters showed up at the event. What the Times didn’t mention is that the event was postponed before the protesters arrived at the Library. Notice that the Times omitted the fact that Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton told Times reporter Jenny Berg that they hadn’t received any threats regarding the event.

Does the Times actually think that this postponement is legitimate? The SC Chief of Police was scheduled to participate in the discussion, as was an FBI supervisor. Also, 2 St. Cloud police officers were there. To think that CAIR and the Minnesota Department of Human Rights would get frightened by these protesters is foolish.

I’m tired of the Times Editorial Board either watering down their editorials to protect their political favorites or ignoring major facts. (Think Jeff Oxton’s statement.) The Times is supposed to be a news-gathering organization. It’d be nice if their work product reflected that. This video by Marni Hockenberg lays out pretty much the same facts that I laid out in this post:

In the stranger-than-fiction category, it’s apparent that the official statement issued by Commissioner Rebecca Lucero are spreading nationwide. These media outlets accept as Gospel Commissioner Lucero’s non-truths. For instance, this article quotes Lucero when she said “Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state.” The article continues, saying “Lucero says she is ‘heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes.'”

No attempt was made to stifle free speech. Commissioner Lucero shouldn’t spread lies about people exercising their right to speak freely about matters of religion and government. I don’t know what’s worse — Commissioner Lucero spreading propaganda or the Minnesota Department of Human Rights attempting to criticize people exercising their right to free speech.

The right to free speech doesn’t just apply to Democrats. A wise man once said that ‘the law protects everyone or it doesn’t protect anyone.’ How can the Human Rights Commissioner in Minnesota dispute that.

The sad part is that Commissioner Lucero’s propaganda is spreading like wildfire. The AP article stripped out things like the fact that Jeff Oxton, the St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief, said that they were monitoring things but that they hadn’t received any threats concerning the event. Why didn’t the AP keep that part of the SCTimes article in the AP article? It’s like the AP intentionally did that just like the NYTimes’ editors omitted the part about the supposed victim doesn’t recall the incident and isn’t talking to anyone.

The more articles I see with Commissioner Lucero’s highly inaccurate quote, the more certain I am that the Dismantling Hate Crimes event was nothing more than a Democrat publicity stunt. Our commissioners don’t just serve the governor. They’re supposed to serve We The People, too. I don’t know how they can do that when they turn a blind eye on a special interest’s propaganda. That’s what CAIR did with Jaylani Hussein’s rhetoric.

Hussein said that CAIR is a civil rights organization in one breath, then insists that groups like “Freedom Speaks Coalition is a hate group.” This is the USA, where that type of organization can criticize organizations like CAIR or politicians like Commissioner Lucero. Apparently, CAIR didn’t learn that in Civil Rights 101 when it was in law school. Perhaps they were attending a Farrakhan rally the day they taught that.

Then again, they might not have learned that because CAIR is really just Hamas DBA as CAIR in the USA:

It’s one thing for CAIR to spread their propaganda. It’s quite another when a commissioner that works for us puts out a statement that accuses her bosses, aka We The People, of committing hate crimes. That’s quite a prejudice for a human rights department.

CAIR-MN insists that it’s a civil rights organization that works closely with the FBI. This article provides proof that isn’t true, stating “The Fiscal Year 2013 Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Bill, which passed the House on Wednesday, contains in its Committee Report (a separate public document that spells out how agencies are expected to spend the money allocated to them) a recommendation that Attorney General Eric Holder follow in the FBI’s footsteps and sever ties with CAIR”:

The committee understands that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has an existing policy prohibiting its employees from engaging in any formal non-investigative cooperation with CAIR. The committee encourages the attorney general to adopt a similar policy for all department officials.

This isn’t Fox News reporting. This is from an official House committee report saying that the FBI has severed ties with CAIR.

CAIR specializes in propaganda. That’s what they specialized in with the Dismantling Hate Crimes event. They did that even after the event was postponed. When Jaylani Hussein, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Minnesota, arrived from the Twin Cities after the event was cancelled. Hussein started spreading his propaganda virtually immediately. That carried into Thursday, too.

On Thursday, Hussein said “The idea behind it was pretty large, not specifically just addressing Islamophobia. Unfortunately, as we know, Islamophobia is an issue in St. Cloud, and the postponement, I guess, was evident of that.”

He continued, saying “We are not talking to someone that has legitimate claims; we are talking to people clearly showing a racist as well as a xenophobic and white nationalist agenda. And that’s the unfortunate reality.”

What’s unfortunate is that Hussein criticized St. Cloud without a basis for his opinion. Then again, as a propagandist, his responsibility is to criticize people he knows nothing about. That’s what happened in this instance.

Hussein said Freedom Speaks Coalition is a hate group that uses anti-Muslim statements to further its agenda. He also said groups that feed into white nationalist groups are really the ones who could potentially put community members at risk.

“St. Cloud residents cannot allow for a small fringe group of haters to dominate and take over the narrative of what St. Cloud is and who it is,” Hussein said. “There should be concern about these hate groups who are creating a very unsafe environment to the point where talks like these are not taking place.

“More people, more residents need to shun and call these people for what they are — hate groups who are trying to create fear,” he continued. “And there are consequences to that type of activity.

It’s interesting that Hussein would say that. CAIR calls itself a civil rights organization. Fair enough but shouldn’t civil rights organizations fight for everyone’s civil rights, even for those organizations with which it disagrees? HINT TO HUSSEIN: This is the United States, home of the First Amendment. That means all organizations and people have the God-given right to disagree with others as long as they don’t put people’s lives in danger.

See also: MDHR commissioner decries “attempts to silence discussion”
St. Cloud hate crimes event postponed; MDHR, CAIR upset

Things have changed pretty dramatically since the last time I wrote about last night’s scheduled event on “Dismantling Hate Crimes.” First, the event was scheduled to start at 6:00 pm Wednesday night. Sources close to the event have told me that the event was postponed at 3:30 pm, well in advance of the event. But i digress. This afternoon’s updated article was significantly modified from yesterday’s article.

Yesterday’s article started by saying “the panel on dismantling hate crimes scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday was postponed over safety concerns, according to Taylor Putz, communications director for the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. Putz told the St. Cloud Times Wednesday afternoon that the department postponed the event due to ‘logistical concerns’ and a ‘larger public safety concern’ due to the number of people expected to attend the forum.”

Today’s article starts by saying “A panel on dismantling hate crimes scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday was postponed over safety concerns, according to Taylor Putz, communications director for the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. Putz told the St. Cloud Times Wednesday afternoon that the department postponed the event due to ‘logistical concerns’ and a ‘larger public safety concern’ due to the number of people expected to attend the forum. ‘We want to make sure the space is safe and accessible,’ Putz said.”

In this afternoon’s article, greater emphasis was put on villainizing the protesters:

“Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state,” Minnesota Department of Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero said in a news release issued just over an hour before the planned start of the event. “Our community deserves better.”

“I am heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes. The goal of the forum was to discuss the community we want to create. One that is full of dignity and joy,” she said.

For the record, the ‘protesters’ held what I’d consider one of the mildest protests in American history. The ‘protesters’ held signs that criticized CAIR but they certainly didn’t threaten anyone there for the Dismantling Hate Crimes event. Most of the people there spent most of their time praying for “the Persecuted Church.”

Jaylani Hussein

I don’t know what Commissioner Lucero is talking about when she insists that the protesters silenced the “discussion on hate crimes.” If I had to guess, I’d bet that this is a PR stunt that didn’t turn out the way CAIR-MN and the ACLU of Minnesota hoped it would. The MDHR has a reputation for being racist or, at minimum, having a biased perspective on racial issues. This article highlights MDHR’s bias. This is the most paragraph in the entire article:

Despite the “public safety concern” cited by the human rights department, St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton said Wednesday the department received no reports of threats related to the event.

In other words, the postponement of the event was due to factors having nothing to do with the protesters. Let’s put that storyline to rest forever. As I told Ox on his program this afternoon, it isn’t a secret that the Twin Cities elitists don’t have a high opinion of people living in rural Minnesota.

Let’s be clear about this. The protests were peaceful, mild even. There weren’t altercations, brawls or confrontations. The day after the cancellation, though, the MDHR has issued a statement, saying that they’re working with “community partners, local law enforcement and the FBI to plan a future forum that is safe.”

This is purely spin. Jeff Oxton, the assistant chief of police stated quite clearly that the department received no reports of threats related to the event. Further, the police weren’t called to the event to break up any altercations.

That leads to a simple, important question. Why is the Minnesota Department of Human Rights playing this up like there was a major confrontation at the Dismantling Hate Crimes event? Clearly, there wasn’t a basis for cancelling the event from a public safety standpoint.

The Minnesota Department of Human Rights is filled with far left ideologues who think that there should be limits on disciplinary actions against minority students. I’ve called MDHR the ‘dog-whistle department’ because they see racism where it doesn’t exist.

It isn’t overstatement to state that the Looney Left’s ideas on maintaining public safety is failing miserably. Lt. Bob Kroll certainly criticized Minneapolis City Council know-nothings in this article. Lt. Kroll stated that the City Council “ran on an anti-police agenda and they all made it. It’s ultra-left. It’s been [an] extreme Democrat-controlled council. It’s been that way for 22 years.”

The thing is that things are getting worse. Minneapolis’s Police Chief asked for an additional 400 officers. Minneapolis’s mayor asked the City Council for an additional 14 officers because he didn’t think he could get more than that. He was right. The City Council rejected the request for 14 officers.

Later in the interview, Lt. Kroll said “It’s an ultra-left agenda that [thinks that] the police are the problem. [They say] it’s a racially biased criminal justice system here, and we need to de-police. That’s the overtone of our council.”

Let’s remember that 7 City Council candidates said that they could envision a Minneapolis without police officers:

Candidates were asked if they could envision a Minneapolis without police, and what they would do as an elected official to bring the city closer to the abolition of police. Most of the seven city council candidates who answered affirmatively to the first question pledged to work to better fund education and social programs and address criminal elements at their roots in an effort to reduce the need for police officers.

The stupidity of local politicians never ceases to amaze me. What’s required for these idiots is a dose of reality. Do they think that gangs and other thugs will suddenly experience a change of heart and become ministers at the local church or become inspirational small business and community leaders? If they think that, then they’re nuts.

On the other side of the river, St. Paul is having its difficulties, too:

The latest in a recent spree of gun violence in St. Paul saw a man shot dead on Wednesday evening as he left Bible study with his young daughter and his father. The shooting was reported at 8:40 p.m. outside St. Albans Church at the intersection of Fuller Avenue and St. Albans Street North.

Investigators learned the victim was leaving the church after Bible study in a group that included his young daughter and his father. Gunshots rang out, with the victim running from the area. Meanwhile, the victim’s father – who has a valid permit to carry – drew a handgun and returned fire.

It’s the 20th homicide in St. Paul this year and the 6th in the space of just 17 days, a trend that has sparked concern by city leaders and police.

Back in 2008, I went through St. Paul’s operating budget. What I found was enough waste to choke a herd of horses. I remembering thinking that I could cut at least 30% of the budget without the public noticing. There’s no question that St. Paul can afford to hire more police officers. What’s needed in both St. Paul and Minneapolis is the political will to prioritize public safety.

That isn’t happening in either city in 2019. In fact, it’s heading in the opposite direction right now. The priorities are foolish and the leadership is nonexistent. I’m usually optimistic but I don’t see things getting better anytime soon.

Yesterday, I watched Harris Faulkner’s interview of former NYTimes’ Executive Editor Jill Abramson. This article shows that Ms. Faulkner is a great interviewer because she’s a quick thinker who relies on logic.

Here’s a partial transcript of the key exchange:

“It’s true that material fact was left out and The Times ran an editor’s note explaining that, which is what you do when you leave something out, but it was no conspiracy to leave out that fact. It was, you know, unfortunately, cut from the piece — as I understand it,” Abramson said.

Faulkner responded by asking how the accuracy could be challenged when the alleged victim, and an alleged witness, didn’t cooperate.

“It’s hard to take on something that even the victims doesn’t say happened,” Faulkner said.

“Well, it’s friends of the victim… she has chosen not to talk to the press,” Abramson said, before adding that alleged witness Max Stier went to the FBI over the alleged incident.

Faulkner quickly added that Stier is a “former Democratic operative for the Clintons,” but the ex-Times honcho downplayed his liberal agenda.

“He works for a nonpartisan political group now,” Abramson said. “I don’t know that you can characterize him as a partisan. If he was such a partisan, why didn’t he go public with this right during the confirmation hearing when he could have really dealt a blow?”

Faulkner reminded Abramson that Stier did go to the FBI at the time. Abramson said that proved the investigation into Kavanaugh was a “sham,” to which Faulkner asked, “Then why did it end up in your paper?” Abramson responded that the incident is a “third example of sexual impropriety” by Justice Kavanaugh, to which Faulkner quickly added, “allegation.” “It’s important,” Abramson said.

That’s when Faulkner’s jaw dropped:

“Wow, you really think that, without the evidence from the victim’s own mouth,” a stunned Faulkner said.

There isn’t a court in this nation that would convict a person who was accused of any crime by a witness who didn’t see the alleged crime but who heard about it third-hand. Further, the ‘witness’ (Max Stier) would get demolished on cross-examination because he was part of Bill Clinton’s legal team while Justice Kavanaugh was part of Independent Counsel Kenneth Star’s team. There isn’t an ounce of corroboration in the article. Victims who don’t talk and lawyers who won’t consent to interviews with law enforcement don’t strengthen a case.

When people accuse a high-profile person of a heinous crime, they’d better have everything nailed down 9 ways to Sunday. If they’re only sort of prepared, they’ll get annihilated in court. A legal system that routinely allows hearsay testimony and that lets people get convicted on allegations alone isn’t a nation. It’s a third world dictatorship.

God help us if we’ve descended that far.

UPDATE: The SCTimes has taken down their article on the event, leaving only a video of Marni Hockenberg leading a peaceful rally. The link has changed, too. The good news is that you can still find their article by clicking on the link in this post. I don’t know why they’ve hidden this story. If anyone gets the hardcopy version of the Times, please check the paper and let me know if the article is in that version.
UPDATE II: Now it’s back again. Go figure. All I did was email the reporter and told her that her article had disappeared.

This St. Cloud Times article reports that an event titled ‘Dismantling hate crimes’ was postponed. The SCTimes article starts by saying the “panel on dismantling hate crimes scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday was postponed over safety concerns, according to Taylor Putz, communications director for the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. Putz told the St. Cloud Times Wednesday afternoon that the department postponed the event due to ‘logistical concerns’ and a ‘larger public safety concern’ due to the number of people expected to attend the forum.”

That sounds rather ominous, doesn’t it? How can you argue against postponing an event over “larger public safety concerns”? I’ll be the proverbial skunk at the garden party by highlighting a statement by St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton. The Times wrote that “Despite the ‘public safety concern’ cited by the human rights department, St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton said Wednesday the department received no reports of threats related to the event.

Of course, the Times used some interesting editing techniques for this story. The MNDHR concerns about the alleged “larger public safety concerns” were positioned in the first 2 paragraphs. By comparison, Jeff Oxton’s statement that no threats related to the event wasn’t found until the 16th paragraph of the Times’ article. It’s almost as if the Times wanted its readers to think that the threat was averted at the last minute. It’s as if the Times didn’t want readers to know that there weren’t any threats related to the event.

Panelists scheduled to participate were:

  1. Blair Anderson, chief, St. Cloud Police Department
  2. Jaylani Hussein, executive director, Council on American-Islamic Relations
  3. Rebecca Lucero, director, Minnesota Department of Human Rights
  4. Michael Melcher, supervisory special agent, FBI
  5. Teresa Nelson, legal director, American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota

What’s interesting is that the event was scheduled for the day after the third anniversary of the terrorist attack at Crossroads Mall. Another thing that’s interesting is that the propagandists, aka CAIR-MN and ACLU of Minnesota, were afraid of people praying for the Persecuted Church.

This is smelling more and more like a setup. This article is quite illuminating:

“Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state. Our community deserves better,” says MDHR Commissioner Rebecca Lucero. “I am heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes. The goal of the forum was to discuss the community we want to create. One that is full of dignity and joy.”

Panelists would have had the opportunity to define hate crimes, explain criminal and civil responses and discuss prevention.

Commissioner Lucero’s statement is as phony as a $3 bill. If she thinks that 2 dozen activists praying for the Persecuted Church are a threat to the community, then that isn’t the type of community I want anything to do with. Then there’s this KSTP article:

“We remain committed to advancing a community dialogue focused on dismantling hate crimes,” Chair of the Regional Human Rights Commission Eunice Adjei said in the release. “While the decision to postpone the forum was unfortunate, we have renewed energy to ensure this community discussion takes place.”

Based on St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton’s statement, the decision to postpone didn’t have anything to do with threats received by the St. Cloud PD. The more I read about this postponement, the more I think it’s likely that this is based on fiction.

Anyone that thinks that Brett Kavanaugh’s family went through a living hell are right. It’s indisputable that the Kavanaugh family went through hell and then some. What’s frightening is that it’s likely that what they went through is nothing compared to what will happen if President Trump or President Pence picks someone like Amy Coney Barrett to replace Justice Ginsberg, especially if that Republican has a Republican Senate.

What Republicans need to understand is that this isn’t a confirmation process. To Democrats, confirming a Supreme Court justice that would tip the balance of the Court to a pro-Constitution majority is political bloodsport. It isn’t hyperbole to say that this is an existential threat to the Democratic Party. The biggest victories in the Democrats’ history weren’t won in the political branches, aka the legislative and executive branches. They were won through the judicial branch.

A judicial branch that isn’t heavily tilted in the Democrats’ direction is a frightening thought to Democrat demagogues. A solid originalist majority on the Supreme Court is the Democrats’ worst nightmare.

The lengths that hardline progressives will go to undermine originalist justices is disturbing. This weekend, the NYTimes ran an article that attempted to take another shot at Justice Kavanaugh that was, putting it charitably, thinly sourced. The ensuing firestorm has been telling:

Democrats couldn’t stop Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation but that isn’t stopping them from attempting to take a second bite at the proverbial apple. A story that was peddled last year that the NYTimes and the Washington Post rejected at the time is being peddled this year as a new story. The thing about this new story is that it’s being pushed by a Clinton operative who’s refused to be interviewed and whose alleged victim can’t recall the incident. Nonetheless, everyone is hyping the article. That includes the NYTimes, CNN, MSNBC, the Washington Post and various other propagandist websites and networks.

Ancient hatemongers like Nan Aron will be out in force when the next nominee is named. Youthful hatemongers like Pete Buttigieg will criticize Republicans by preaching the liberal theology of taking the Bible out of context. Fictional stories, otherwise known as filthy lies, will be published claiming that the nominee is a combination of being meaner than Hitler, more bloodthirsty than Stalin and more ruthless than Ebenezer Scrooge.

Don’t think that these Democrat activists won’t attempt to subtly intimidate the nominees’ families. Remember that, to these Democrats, this is an existential threat. They won’t stop at throwing the kitchen sink at this nominee. If you think that I’m overreacting, remember what Democrats did to state legislative candidates last fall:

A candidate for Minnesota House in District 15B, Shane Mekeland, said he suffered a concussion when he was attacked while campaigning Friday at a restaurant in St. George Township. Benton County Sheriff Troy Heck said his office is investigating the alleged assault.

In another case, Rep. Sarah Anderson, R-Plymouth, says a man punched her in the arm after she confronted him about kicking some of her yard signs Sunday.

If people think that Democrats won’t come after the next Supreme Court nominee that a Republican makes, they haven’t learned from recent history. If Democrats won’t hesitate in attacking state legislators, why wouldn’t they attack a potential Supreme Court justice?

Republicans better prepare for the next confirmation battle. It won’t be pretty. It won’t be a test of wills. It’ll be a preview of Armageddon.

According to this article, Democrat activists have pushed Angie Craig into supporting President Trump’s impeachment. Ms. Craig hasn’t been a portrait in courage since getting elected. Instead, she’s been part of the Do-Nothing Democrat Caucus since its inception. To her credit, Craig has admitted (in a roundabout way) that President Trump’s economy is working but that government is failing to provide Minnesota’s workers:

We have a major skills gap in the Minnesota job market. Minnesota employees cannot find the skilled workers they need with the right qualifications, and right now job seekers are having a difficult time getting the skills they need for the high-paying jobs that are available today. College isn’t the right path for every student and we shouldn’t be limiting the options of Minnesota students by underfunding or de-emphasizing technical education and career skills programs.

If employers are having a difficult time finding workers with the right qualifications, that’s an endorsement that President Trump’s economy is working. It’s also an indictment that government isn’t doing its job of training students to be productive members of the workforce. But I digress. That’s a topic for another day.

Far-left activists and politicians have been demanding the impeachment of President Trump since the first day he got elected. The problem is that according to a recent poll by Monmouth University only 35% agree that President Trump should be impeached.

University of Minnesota Professor Richard Painter who previously challenged Tina Smith for the US Senate in the Democratic Primary raised some eyebrows when he implied he was unhappy that he didn’t feel that Angie Craig was aggressive enough on impeaching President Trump.

No problem for Angie Craig:


All it took for Angie Craig to admit that she’s pro-impeachment was getting called out by a far left activist. If that isn’t a profile in courage, what is? Angie Craig is an empty pantsuit. How left is Richard Painter? This far left:


Angie Craig is now admittedly pro-impeachment and pro-single-payer health care. Whoever is the Republicans’ candidate against Craig should remind voters of those 2 things morning, noon and night every day through Election Day, 2020. I’ll buy that CD-2 is shifting demographically. I don’t buy that they’re shifting to a hard-left district that’s as far left as MN-04 or MN-05.