Archive for the ‘Pledge of Allegiance’ Category

Last night, the Democrat politicians in St. Louis Park voted to restore the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance before City Council meetings. In so doing, the Council officially recognized that reciting the Pledge was patriotic and inclusive.

Actually, that isn’t what they said. “At-Large Council Member Thom Miller, who introduced the amendment, said…the harassment from nonresidents was too much. “To be perfectly clear, I fully support the change we made in June to eliminate the Pledge of Allegiance from our standard meeting agenda.” Nonetheless, he voted to restore the reciting of the Pledge. Did he just say that he’s just another spineless politician? I think so.

What needs to be remembered is how this got started. This started with a terribly flawed process. No notice was given that this rule change was going to be voted on. In fact, citizens weren’t allowed to testify on the issue. That being said, the process was intentional. The City Council intended for citizens to not be able to testify. The last thing they wanted was for a bunch of uppity peasants to raise a ruckus. Like Rep. Omar, the St. Louis Park City Council thinks that they’re the citizens’ betters.

They aren’t the citizens’ betters. They’re just a bunch of arrogant politicians. Rep. Ryan Winkler, the House Majority Leader, is a total lightweight and a charlatan. He’s from Golden Valley. In the summer of 2017, Rep. Winkler criticized the Supreme Court for its opinion on the Voting Rights Act, saying “VRA majority is four accomplices to race discrimination and one Uncle Thomas.” When he was called on his usage of a nasty racist term, Winkler insisted that he didn’t know that Uncle Thomas was a racist term. At the time, I did a little digging into Winkler’s educational background. It turns out that Winkler graduated with a degree in History from Harvard. But I digress. Back to St. Louis Park.

The mayor, Jake Spano, missed the vote but issued a statement on the vote. He said that he wouldn’t have supported the rule change. That’s easy after the fact. Others were less diplomatic:

Ward 1 Council Member Margaret Rog echoed Miller’s sentiments, stating the feedback she’d gotten from residents had been “thoughtful and respectful” but that the same could not be said for those not from the city. “We don’t need to be at the epicenter of a manufactured standoff of what it means to be a good American,” she said, directing her message to St. Louis Park residents. “This circus needs to end.”

Stop making major decisions without asking for the citizens’ input next time. Had the City Council invited testimony before they voted, it’s likely they wouldn’t have made this mistake. Anne Mavity spoke out, too:

Anne Mavity, the councilwoman who proposed the original measure, remained defiant — even as she reversed her vote — and addressed the council’s critics. “I’m not sure that if you say the pledge three times a month instead of this two, you’re more patriotic,” Mavity said. “Or if you say it one time a month you’re less patriotic. That makes no sense.”

Defiant is exactly the right word. Mavity doesn’t care about the uppity peasants. That’s why she doesn’t understand them.

This is a fight over retaining one of the richest institutions of the United States. What other pledge states as a national goal “liberty and justice for all“? In Somalia, Ilhan Omar’s nation of origin, I’m betting that they’d be satisfied with liberty and justice once in awhile. By stating that each person is committed to liberty and justice for all, people are stating emphatically that our national goal soars high above our nation.

That’s why people want to come here. Yes, they enjoy the economic mobility, too, but most people fleeing their nations are fleeing nations where the laws are determined by dictators on a minute-by-minute basis.

That’s why it’s beyond odd that people want to eliminate the Pledge.

By now, the entire industrialized world knows that the St. Louis Park City Council voted unanimously to discontinue to recite the Pledge of Allegiance before their meetings. That isn’t news so I won’t beat that horse. It’s already dead. What hasn’t been discussed is whether there’s a bigger story that hasn’t gotten the attention it deserves. In my opinion, there’s another story that needs covering that’s just as important.

Mayor Jake Spano got it right when he said “It feels to me like we may have missed a step there and if we had that conversation, we might have been able to hear from our community about how they felt about this action.” First, let’s dispense with the “may have.” The City Council intentionally skipped that step. This was an ambush, pure and simple.

This isn’t a new tactic. The DFL ‘nonpartisans’ in other cities have used the “inclusive and welcoming” argument before to push through unpopular resolutions and rule changes. When St. Cloud wanted to ambush Councilman Jeff Johnson with a resolution on refugee resettlement, the put the resolution on the agenda at the last minute, then arranged for special interests, including CAIR-MN, to speak when the microphones opened up. They made sure average citizens didn’t have the chance for input.

When St. Louis Park voted to drop the Pledge, the public didn’t have the opportunity to testify. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? When I led the Vote No campaign to sink the bonding referendum, I tirelessly told LFR readers that the ISD 742 School Board was trying to keep the referendum as low profile as possible. Stealth was its chief tactic. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Are you sensing a pattern yet?

The DFL locally and Democrats nationally don’t win arguments anymore. They don’t bother trying, in fact. They call people who oppose them bigots or racists, instead. Once upon a time, Democrats consistently insisted on openness and fairness. Now, they insist on those things only when it helps them. There’s nothing consistent about it anymore.

During this past Monday night’s study session, the St. Louis Park City Council hoped to not to take public testimony:

According to WCCO news, the session was meant to re-address the council’s unanimous decision to drop the Pledge of Allegiance from council meetings. The session was not meant to include public input, but that did not stop community members from interrupting.

People were already pissed with the Council’s decision. They held this study session to plot a path forward. Their intention was to restrict or eliminate input from their constituents. What part of that sounds like a plan to resolve this outcry?

Passing this rules change without public input is what got the Council in trouble. Did they think that plotting political strategy without public input would help fix this problem? Only people who are totally out of touch would think that would fix things.

This looks like white gas getting poured on a raging fire:

The pattern that’s emerged is for Democrats to restrict public testimony and/or to accuse people who oppose them of being racists. Fortunately, the DFL hasn’t called these patriots racists — yet.

This article highlights just how hair-brained the city of St. Louis Park, MN is. By now, the entire nation knows that St. Louis Park’s soon-to-be-replaced City Council voted unanimously to stop reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of their meetings. The confusion and uproar started when “Council member Anne Mavity, who sponsored the rules change, told KARE 11 that she didn’t feel saying the pledge was necessary, especially for non-citizens.”

Amidst the uproar, KARE11 reported that the citizens attending Monday’s study session erupted in reciting the Pledge and chants of USA, USA!” Jon Lauritsen said the meeting “wasn’t intended to accept public input.” (Are you getting the impression that the City Council might be a bit out of touch? Don’t fight that impression. The St. Louis Park City Council is attempting to bend over backwards in its attempt to be seen as a “welcoming community.” These Democrats have started spinning as fact that the Pledge of Allegiance is polarizing. Read the Pledge for yourself, then determine whether it’s divisive or whether the City Council is divisive:

That’s the definition of divisiveness? Liberty and justice for all is divisive? Why would anyone think that the American flag is divisive? The Democrats on St. Louis Park’s City Council are simply spinning things. No right-minded person thinks that anything about the Pledge is divisive. That doesn’t mean that Ilhan Omar doesn’t think it’s divisive and probably racist, too. (St. Louis Park is part of Rep. Omar’s district.)

Lawrence Jones and Rep. Dan Crenshaw, (R-TX), asked some great questions tonight:

To the people of St. Louis Park, you have the opportunity to start cleaning out the sewer this November:

Contact
mayorjakespano@gmail.com
952.928.1448
Term ends: January 2020

Based on what we’ve seen thus far, this mayor and this city council is really out of touch with their constituents. When that happens, it’s time to fire them. PERIOD.

Something that I missed in this post was something that Anne Mavity said in explaining why she submitted a rules change that would stop the St. Louis Park City Council from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance before City Council meetings.

The article said “Council member Anne Mavity, who sponsored the rules change, told KARE 11 that she didn’t feel saying the pledge was necessary, especially for non-citizens.” That’s bassackwards thinking. Do we want refugees to assimilate or do we want them clinging to their society’s norms? Newt Gingrich had it right when he stated that we aren’t a multi-cultural nation, that we’re instead a multi-ethnic nation.

It’s apparent that Mavity is utterly clueless. According to this article, Mavity said “As a proud American, I’m appalled that our little suburban community’s meeting protocols have sparked this polarizing conversation.” Would a “proud American” think that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance is “polarizing”? Those things don’t mesh together whatsoever.

If you’re a proud American, affirming your loyalty to the greatest nation in the history of mankind is a privilege. It isn’t polarizing. Further, if parts of the population find American ideals distasteful or polarizing, perhaps it’s those people that need to re-examine their loyalties. This video is disturbing:

KARE11’s Jon Lauritsen reported that “Public input was not supposed to be part of Monday night’s study session.” It’s worth noting that the main topic for Monday night’s study session was the rule change eliminating the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance at City Council meetings. People were furious because the rules change was passed unanimously without public input.

Conservatives push for local control of issues. That being said, they also push for accountability and listening to constituents. The whole idea behind local control is so We The People have maximum input.

Finally, Mavity’s depravity is frightening because, according to her public statements, she doesn’t understand why a simple little rule change should be controversial. What a dipstick. This isn’t about making a simple rule change. It’s about why the St. Louis Park City Council thinks that pledging allegiance to this great nation is controversial. What a dipstick!

More and more, the American people are getting the impression that anti-American forces are trying to take apart part of the United States’ identity simply by complaining. In St. Louis Park, it might not have taken even that much for the City Council to vote to eliminate reciting the Pledge of Allegiance before City Council meetings.

According to the article, “council members voted for removal because some argued the Pledge of Allegiance could discourage non-citizens from the political process.” So the St Louis Park City Council voted unanimously to stop reciting the Pledge because it might offend someone? How is that different than a heckler’s veto against conservative speakers?

Thankfully, our pro-American president isn’t sitting on the sidelines while the Hate America First Democrats strip away one tradition after another. This isn’t just one isolated incident after another. These are related. There’s no question that there’s a plan in place. Here’s President Trump’s tweet:


Apparently, these politicians don’t understand who they’re dealing with as constituents. This is the age of Brexit, populism and President Trump. Check this out:

(Anne Mavity, the council member who sponsored the original changes to the meeting protocol, previously told KARE 11 that non-citizens shouldn’t have to say a pledge to do business with the city). However, the decision led to some backlash and even national media attention, including the president’s tweet. Mavity said she supports a detailed research process that incorporates feedback from constituents. “We clearly fumbled by not anticipating the desire of our St. Louis Park residents to be in conversation about this,” Mavity said. “So, I want to make sure we get it right at this time.”

First, if non-citizens have a problem with meetings that start with the Pledge of Allegiance, that’s their problem. Period. Next, it’s important for the United States to maintain its identity. Someone should send this recital of the Pledge to the Council:

I’ve watched the Pledge getting recited dozens of times. Each time, I gain new appreciation for the Pledge. Whenever this Pledge is recited, though, something special happens. I can’t explain it but I know it when I feel it.

That’s why winning this fight isn’t just important. It’s essential.

The mayor supports reinstating the pledge but was out of town when the vote occurred in June. On Monday night, he said council members “skipped a step” and should have taken more time to consider the community’s feedback. “Let’s have a focused discussion (about the pledge),” Spano said in interview. “Whether or not that is in fact welcoming or unwelcoming and what does that mean? And how do we move forward as a group?”

It’s difficult to believe that the Council accidentally skipped a step. I think it was intentional because I’m betting that the Council wanted a specific outcome and because they didn’t want to have to explain their decision to the uppity peasants.