Archive for the ‘Education’ Category

Dean Urdahl’s op-ed is must-reading for every Minnesota parent, in my estimation. In his opening paragraph, Rep. Urdahl writes “Our Republic faces crisis after crisis: Our government is crippled by polarization, Congress can’t seem to get anything done, Supreme Court appointments have become a three-ring circus, no agreement can be reached on immigration and our borders, health care solutions can’t be reached, our infrastructure is decaying and the national debt is out of control.”

Then he highlights what he sees as the underlying problem, writing “It’s easy to identify the problems. Digging deeper shows that these are the results of a more pervasive root cause: the diminishing of civic education nationally and in Minnesota. The foundation of our understanding of how our government works is withering. The outcomes include confusion, misunderstanding and decay in our system. A district court judge has told me that every day he sees the repercussions of citizens not understanding how our system works.”

Junior high schools and high schools that don’t teach in-depth history lessons about the writing of the Constitution, including principles like federalism, the Bill of Rights, separation of powers, the 3 branches of government, due process and the presumption of innocence, are cheating students. How many schools teach in-depth lessons on the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, the Civil War, where the Jim Crow laws came from and who started the Civil Rights Movement? Apparently, our schools are failing on these fronts. Badly:

The failure is measurable. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, the highly respected “Nation’s Report Card,” reports that 75% of our graduates leave high school not proficient in civics. They are failing. A nationwide poll found that two-thirds of Americans can name an American Idol judge, but only 15% can name the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. One-third of our graduates can’t name a single branch of our government. The Annenberg Study revealed that 37% cannot name one right guaranteed in the First Amendment. There are students who think Judge Judy is on the Supreme Court.

Fortunately, Rep. Urdahl isn’t one to just complain about a problem. He’s willing to fight to fix the problems he’s highlighted:

A study by the Woodrow Wilson National Foundation found that only 36% of Americans could pass a test that immigrants pass at a 97.5% rate. Last session, I tried to pass a bill that required a course be offered for credit to juniors or seniors in high school. Facing stiff opposition to that from the Minnesota School Boards Association (MSBA), I compromised to change the requirement to “encourage.”

In its recent wrap-up of the legislative session, MSBA touted its success in weakening my bill by claiming that it would reduce the number of electives and reduce local control. These claims mystify me. I compromised and amended the bill to allow for more electives. Honors programs, PSEO and other accelerated options were exempted. Frankly, it comes down to teaching what is wanted versus what is needed.

It’s shameful that a lobbying organization would attempt to water down students’ curriculum. And yes, it’s indisputable that MSBA is a lobbying organization:

MSBA represents every school board member in the state along with more than 837,000 public school students. MSBA is the leading advocate for public education by supporting, promoting and strengthening the work of public school boards.

Here’s what MSBA believes:

  1. An investment in a student is a smart investment in our state’s future.
  2. Providing school districts maximum flexibility and control provides benefits to students.
  3. State policies should ensure every student has the opportunity to graduate prepared to be successful in the postsecondary path of their choice.

That middle bullet point sounds great until you think of who’s running the schools. Parents, have you heard that students have been trained to be activists? Why weren’t they being taught important things like the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, how the federal government was formed or why the Founders decided that the Electoral College was best system for electing presidents?

Editor’s note: This is part of LFR’s special focusing on the difference between education and indoctrination. Without further adieu, here’s Ramblin’ Rose’s first in the series:

Schools’ Imprint on Society
By Ramblin’ Rose

Under the guise of “education,” students are facing “indoctrination.” What is the difference? Education opens the mind to ideas and knowledge of the world and encourages learners to evaluate the information and form their own opinions based upon facts and logic. Indoctrination discourages thought, and through repeated exposure to someone else’s view, learners are guided to accept another’s belief as truth without even thinking.

Before we consider current trends in the field of education, let’s take a look at history. (Yes, leftists are attempting to rewrite history to fit their own agendas…why is that possible? In a bit…)

Homeschooling is not a new concept. The first colonists in this nation taught their own children at home. In the 17th century before the American Revolution as the communities grew larger, the Puritans established schools to teach the essential basic academic skills and to reinforce their core moral values. Almost always, the textbook was the Bible.

After becoming a free and independent country, Thomas Jefferson was a strong advocate for public education because he believed that “no other sure foundation can be devised for the preservation of freedom and happiness.” To him, it was the means to guarantee that the individual would understand duties and rights in the new nation. He also feared that without education for all, the result would be to “leave the people in ignorance.” He even suggested that the system be funded with tax dollars.

While Jefferson held that resources would come from the taxpayers, the supervision of each school would be directed by the parents. That is still the belief of many citizens, but unfortunately not the reality. Our continued freedom depends upon quality education of the “next generation.”

The title of the “father of public education” in our country, sadly, goes to Horace Mann, who established the first state board of education in Massachusetts and advanced a school system based on the Prussian school system of the early 19th century. Instead of a curriculum based upon Biblical teachings and the moral standards of God’s Word, educational reform moved to obey the dictates of the state, mandatory attendance, taxpayer funding, and a state curriculum taught by teachers who had training from the state and certification from the state. Mann convinced the Massachusetts legislature in 1852 to adopt this model that became the archetype for public schools across the land.

That might be the point at which education moved to indoctrination for many learners. The government, not parents, directed the curriculum, and the curriculum became the program for the teachers to “follow” in classroom instruction. While some have tried to teach facts and solid information from history and research, others have used the classroom as the platform from which to advance a political agenda that they embrace.

In the 1960’s God was driven from the classroom; many parents, as flower children themselves, sought to “feel good” and abandoned their moral compass; welfare benefits became more abundant and easily accessible for more citizens (and even non-citizens). Mothers could abort babies; fathers abandoned families and their responsibilities. Everything was “free.”

The children suffered -— neglect, abuse, abandonment. Naturally, the school became the “family figure” for many. Parents became passive and relinquished “education” to others. Some parents viewed the schools and teachers as the “experts” to be followed and not challenged; others were relieved that they were not responsible for “those bothersome kids” any longer.

One of the more recent bandwagons was the program known as Common Core that was developed without input from classroom teachers. With Common Core (CC), students do not learn to think because an acquired skill outweighs the content knowledge, the process counts more than the product, and relative standards carry more value than absolute ones. Some celebrated it as the salvation from the incessant testing of No Child Left Behind. Many teachers cheered because the textbooks came complete with the transcript of the lesson plan for each day of the year—no one could violate and deviate the lesson or the schedule.

Some claim that CC was defeated with the passage of Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in December, 2015.

No, it was just transferred to the states, where the governors assigned it to the commissioner/director of education in each state. It is alive and well in the schools. So is testing—multiple times per year in all grade levels. What is tested? Dogma…students must respond to fit the curriculum that has been set by politicians and not parents.

While many contend that the new curriculum teaches students how to learn and rewards the process, the reality is that countless learners are completely frustrated; there is no right answer. They are unable to evaluate their progress; their parents don’t know the material and can’t help. The learners give up in frustration. They become willing sponges for whatever the teachers say. They have not learned metacognition—they have learned submission.

Auguste Meyrat, an English teacher in the Dallas area and contributor to The Federalist, summarized the impact of CC on modern society in an essay published in October last year:

“In such a system, thinking is only the articulation of opinion; it has no bearing on truth. This means that people don’t really need to think critically and understand why they believe what they do. They just need to have the right viewpoint and force others to conform like they’ve been forced to conform. They engage in arguments where the loudest voice wins because no one’s points are better than another. They pressure instead of persuade.”

Some parents have sought an alternative for their children with charter schools, private schools, open-enrollment options, and homeschooling. Yes, that is an avenue, but there is a potentially large boulder in the road for higher education. The authors and proponents of CC are also the authors and evaluators on the college entrance exams where regurgitation of dogma earns points (without attention to argumentation, clarity of expression, spelling or grammar). So what do the parents tell their young people who want to attend institutions beyond high school: “Do your best, stay true to your values and fail” or “Lie so that you may go to college”?

Auguste Meyrat continues, writing:

“This, in turn, leads to tribalism—groups of people united in feeling and opinion, but not in reason and truth. The lack of thought makes all these groups vulnerable to mass media and prevents any organized resistance to an encroaching state or lawless ideologue in power. Indoctrination is complete when perception (i.e., whatever is on the screen, whatever an “expert” says, whatever is popular) really does become reality for most people because they’re too stupid or apathetic to respond rationally.”

Tribalism? Yes, think Antifa, Black Lives Matter, #MeToo, and any other number of movements advocated by the media and acted out by young people. Yet this month, students are being encouraged to leave classes in droves to “save the planet” because apparently adults have not embraced the rhetoric from the environmentalists as readily as the sponges in the classrooms around the globe.

That does reflect the news media and the topics addressed via social media, digital media and print media. All coverage pits one group against another, one belief against another. There is no discussion, no exchange of ideas logically debated. Rather, one group is right and their ideas MUST be embraced. Others are all labeled in derogatory terms for whatever ideas they have and values they hold.

In science, it was a “new ice age,” “global warming,” “climate change,” “green new deal” and any other terms that seek to alter life and living out of fear. The NOAA has not documented any evidence of warming since 2005, but that is not the indoctrination being promoted by the radicals. Of course, there is still Darwinian ideas taught as truth. Creationists are driven from education if they do not espouse evolution or the big bang theory.

In literature, it means removing the classics for any number of reasons and the substitution of popular media selected by the “progressives.” Often reading and analysis is sacrificed to the viewing of a film or a video clip.

In reading, it means inviting drag queens (performers from adult clubs) to read to children during library time. In an elementary class in Virginia, kindergarteners learn about transgender rights as the teacher reads them a book.

In biology, it means that anyone of any age may select his/her/its own identity. It is a mandatory program in Oak Park, California. Even after the Trump administration reversed the Obama-era of open bathrooms and locker rooms, schools enforce the “open door” policy.

In religion, it means that each may choose their own deity. There is no morality…free love, abortion (even after birth), legalization of any and all drugs, legalized suicide and assisted-suicide—even for youth, as noted in the Netherlands. How many students, besides those in Virginia and Tennessee, have been forced to bow, pray and write a conversion prayer to Allah?

In sex education, it means the implementation of a K-12 curriculum recommended by Planned Parenthood. In Minnesota, it was passed by the liberal majority in the House and stopped in the Senate but it is promised to be addressed again next session. Parents have described the program as “pornographic” and certainly not appropriate for the ages or the topics. Additionally, four states (California, New Jersey, and Colorado, and Illinois) require the inclusion of LGBT(Q) history. I propose that those courses start with their history dating from Sodom and Gomorrah (circa 2070 B.C.)

In economics, it means students do not understand why the United States, Great Britain, Germany and Japan are wealthy and stable because they embraced capitalism and constitutional governments while Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and Venezuela, Central America, Eastern Europe, and Southeast Asia suffer under socialism and communism.

In history, it means that not only Hitler was a monster but also Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, Che Guevara and the Castros killed millions of their own citizens in the name of communism. In CC, the new textbooks indicate that the Pilgrims came to America with families to kill the Indians and to teach their children how to do it. In CC, one paragraph explains the atrocities of World War II—the bombing of Japan by the USA.

In politics, it means sanctuary cities, counties, states, churches. Illegals “deserve” rights that are designated for citizens according to our laws and the Constitution. How many teachers cried in their classes when Trump won? Were there any consequences when teachers have promoted violence, even death to our President?

In school discipline, it means the implementation of “restorative justice,” as embraced by local school districts and the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

There are certainly other fields that I have not mentioned…but this indicates how indoctrination and socialist/atheist agendas have established a giant hold (strangle hold) on education.

Parents must become aware of what their children are facing/learning in school, support good teachers and challenge those indoctrinate and abandon core values of this nation. Parents must become active learners with their children. Parents must challenge politicians who do not embrace the Constitution and/or who refuse to honor their own Oath of Office.

Meyrat seems more optimistic than I. I hope that he is right:

At some point, indoctrination will always collapse on itself and leave mediocrity in it[s] wake. Teaching, by contrast, is what will sustain our culture and bring out its virtues. It fosters the presence of active thought––not uniform thought––and it is what will ultimately mend and civilize our sorely divided country.” [emphasis added]

Now that the first ruling is in on SCERAC’s lawsuit is in, it’s time for St. Cloud Educational Rights Advocacy Council (SCERAC) to lick its wounds, then regroup. The arguments put forth by the Rinke-Noonan Law Firm on SCERAC’s behalf were deemed insufficient.

Specifically, “Stearns County District Court Judge Kris Davick-Halfen on Wednesday denied the advocacy group’s motion for a preliminary injunction and granted the state’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit”, writing “Throughout its filings, (the plaintiff) has made a passionate and thoughtful argument as to why the governor and legislature should provide the St. Cloud school district with the additional funding it requests. Nevertheless, this court cannot grant the relief (the plaintiff) requests and must grant (the defendant’s) motion.”

Later in the opinion, it states “(The plaintiff) does not allege that the St. Cloud District receives less funding per pupil than other school districts. Instead, the … complaint alleges that St. Cloud School District would be able to do more with additional funds. This does not constitute a violation of the Education Clause.”

Later, Davick-Halfen notes this:

When discussing the denial of the preliminary injunction, Davick-Halfen cited a Minnesota Supreme Court case where “a court should examine whether granting the (plaintiff’s) request would ‘maintain the status quo until the case can be decided on its merits.'” “The relief that (the plaintiff) is requesting in this temporary injunction would be a substantial change from what has been occurring,” Davick-Halfen states.

What SCERAC was asking the court to do is order the legislative and executive branches to do something that they chose not to do. This is prohibited by the separation of powers clause. Simply put, Minnesota’s Constitution doesn’t give the Judicial Branch the authority to intervene in the appropriations process. That’s left to the political branches. It isn’t left to the judicial branch.

This Our View Editorial highlights the short-sightedness of the St. Cloud Times. The subject of the Our View editorial is the new Tech HS that will officially open Tuesday. One of the lessons we supposedly learned is that “If Central Minnesotans have learned anything in the past decade, it’s that investments in school facilities are rarely quickly decided. It can take several years and several rounds of proposals to find out the will of the people.”

Actually, what I’d learn from that statement is that the school board could get things done faster if they listened to their constituents instead of making a proposal, then putting the school board’s proposal up for a vote. I know it’s a revolutionary concept but I’m betting that listening to the people who will be asked to foot the bill for projects might improve the ideas the board votes on.

That concept is rooted in William F. Buckley’s that he’d rather be governed by people randomly picked out of a phone book than by a bunch of elitists. I’m wholeheartedly with Mr. Buckley on that.

For all intents and purposes, I was the No Vote organizer on the first Tech building referendum that got defeated. The St. Cloud Times ruined the ISD 742 strategy when it wrote that they were “disappointed” that they hadn’t seen more yard signs promoting the Tech building referendum. The minute I read that, I knew that Willie Jett and the ISD 742 school board were trying to silently pass the referendum without telling the community at large.

In other words, the education elitists didn’t want the hoi polloi finding out about the referendum. The school board knew that their proposal was, at minimum, controversial. They wanted to keep turnout down. As the Vote No coordinator, I wanted to whip voters into a frenzied mob. On November 3, 2015, the referendum lost by a wide margin. (I guess I did my job pretty well.)

My next goal is to get people to understand why it’s important to flush the establishment critters off the school board ASAP. People hear about universities being centers of indoctrination. It’s indisputable that they tilt heavily to the left but it’s equally indisputable that indoctrination doesn’t start on university campuses. It starts in Kindergarten, grade schools and high schools.

If people don’t start asserting themselves, we’ll have students who are heavily indoctrinated before they’re junior high students. As an activist/leader, LFR will publish something on this topic soon.

Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit has exposed Kamala Harris as a total fraud. The DNC might as well get out the jelly because Kamala’s toast. In this video, Harris stated that she was part of the second class to get bussed:

Perhaps she thought that nobody would research that claim, which is a pretty good bet if the only media was the MSM. Fortunately for truth-seeking Americans, they can rely on the modern-day Pamphleteers, aka bloggers. Enter Mr. Hoft and the gentlemen at Powerlineblog.com. First, Mr. Hoft’s find. This is the Berkeley yearbook from 1963, the year before Sen. Harris was born:

This is the 1964 Berkeley yearbook, the year of Sen. Harris’s birth:

It’s pretty obvious that Berkeley was integrated long before Sen. Harris was that 10-year-old girl in pigtails. Next, enter John Hinderaker and Paul Mirengoff of Powerline blog. Here’s what Mr. Mirengoff wrote:

Harris presents a misleading picture of Berkeley and, implicitly, of her family’s status. A friend who graduated from college there around the time Harris depicts tells me:
Berkeley was not segregated or racist during that era. It was one of the most liberal places in the country. I’d like to learn a lot more about [Harris’] busing. I accept that she took a bus to elementary school, but I don’t think they were busing kids to various neighborhoods for racial reasons in Berkeley in 1971. Makes no sense at all to me. Her mom and dad were PhDs, and she went to India during summers to stay with her mom’s family (see Wikipedia). She makes it sound like they were poverty-stricken…or something.

So much for the issue of bussing being “personal” for Sen. Harris. That’s utter nonsense. Here’s what Mr. Hinderaker, the founder of Powerlineblog wrote on this subject:

What I think is most remarkable about this story is that the Democrats are now nostalgic for busing! Joe Biden is a villain because he opposed it decades ago, while Harris is a heroine…or a martyr…or something, because she participated in it.

But here’s the thing: in the 1970s, everyone opposed busing to achieve racial balance in public schools. Federal courts in urban areas around the country had ordered children to be bused from their homes to faraway schools to achieve a numerical, bean-counting ethnic balance in public schools. The result was a disaster: neighborhood schools were destroyed, student achievement declined, violence erupted, civil disobedience by parents of all races ensued. Finally, as I recall, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order: No more busing!

While this doesn’t change the fact that Biden had a lackluster performance Thursday night, it changes the glow surrounding Sen. Harris’s ‘moment’ in the sun. It’s now established fact that Sen. Harris’s big moment happened because she embellished, otherwise known as lying through her teeth.

Let’s see if the MSM tries propping her up after this.

At a time when there’s major distrust of institutions of government, you’d think that government closest to the people would hold themselves to a higher level of listening to their constituents. That certainly isn’t what’s happening at the ISD742 monthly meetings.

A loyal reader of LFR sent me an email highlighting the fact that the school board welcomes people to their meetings but doesn’t want the public’s input. Contained in the email is a sentence that says “This is a public meeting and any residents are welcome to attend and listen, but there is not a public input session scheduled at this meeting.”

BTW, here’s the email:

I’m not a constitutional law professor but I can’t see how this isn’t a violation of the First Amendment. This judge’s ruling seems to strengthen that belief:

A section of a Virginia school board’s bylaws violates the First Amendment and results in stifled speech, according to a ruling by a federal district judge on April 27. U.S. District Court Judge Henry C. Morgan Jr. held that the Virginia Beach School Board’s rule banning personal “attacks or accusations” during public comment periods at board meetings was a form of prior restraint.

The ruling stemmed from a lawsuit filed last July by David and Nicole Bach, who are parents in the school district. The Bachs claimed that school district officials enacted the provision in retaliation for the Bachs’ criticism of the district’s gifted education program. After the school board imposed the restriction, the Bachs argued that the bylaw stifled their free speech rights. The judge ordered the school board to strike the contested provision from the bylaw, but also allowed the other rules for the public comment portion of meetings to remain.

This is directly on point. Most importantly, it’s an attempt to stifle speech that the school board doesn’t want to hear.

That’s tough. If these politicians don’t want to hear from their constituents, they should resign. If they can’t stand the heat, they shouldn’t be in the kitchen.

The next time that the St. Cloud School Board meets, citizens should insist on giving input. If the board doesn’t permit it, the citizens should notify the school board that they’re filing a lawsuit in federal court claiming that their practices violate their First Amendment rights.

Citizens shouldn’t be stifled by the ruling class. It’s clear that they don’t see themselves as public servants. How sad is that?

According to this article, the Center for the American Experiment is ruffling a few feathers with its recent report on Minnesota’s economy. Economist John Phelan, the author of the report, wrote that “The state’s economy is growing, but it’s growing below the national average.”

Later in the article, it says “Phelan cited data that has become popular with conservative economists: gross domestic product per worker. By that measure, Minnesota ranks 28th among the 50 states and Washington, D.C., and is well below the national average. It’s in stark contrast to the figures cited by economists, including gross domestic product per capita. By that measure, Minnesota is indeed above the national average and ranked 15th. The difference is that per capita measures the state’s economy against its entire population, while per worker measures it against only those who are employed.”

Economists can argue which is the better way of measuring economic growth. The only thing that people care about are whether lots of good-paying jobs are getting created. They aren’t. If the economy was creating lots of good-paying jobs, there wouldn’t need to be a push for a $15/hr. minimum wage because the economy would be creating lots of jobs that pay more than that.

Further, companies and people are moving out of Minnesota for places like North Carolina, Georgia, Texas and other states because Minnesota’s business climate sucks. The DFL argues that we just need a well-trained work force. I don’t disagree that we need skilled workers but I’ll vehemently disagree that that’s all we need. I was stunned to hear during the campaign that Minnesota’s lowest income tax bracket was higher than the top bracket in 20+ states.

That’s before we talk about Minnesota’s regulatory regime. Saying that it’s stifling is understatement. It’s designed to prevent competition and prevent economic growth. Most of it is built to appease the environmental activists and encourage lawsuits.

Given the high taxes and punishing regulations, why would anyone build or expand their business in Minnesota? They’d have to be masochistic.

According to this AP article, the DFL’s investigation (I use that term loosely) into Keith Ellison’s alleged domestic abuse is drawing to a close. What that investigation will find is anyone’s guess.

According to the article, “The longtime Minnesota congressman and Democratic National Committee deputy chairman has called the allegations false and tried to ride out the storm of questions after winning the Aug. 14 primary. But the old sexual assault allegations that have thrown Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination in doubt have renewed focus on Ellison and a six-week old investigation into his conduct that has shown few outward signs of progress.”

Ken Martin, the chairman of the Minnesota DFL (Democratic-Farmer-Labor) party is getting frustrated:

Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party Chairman Ken Martin said he believes the investigation has concluded and that a final report should be issued in the coming days. “I’m starting to get a little frustrated because it’s been a long time now, almost two months,” he said. “I hope soon. I hope any day here.”

That won’t happen after Karen Monahan’s Twitter rampage last night:


That’s just one of her tweets. Here’s another:


Then there’s this:


Based on this new information, I’m skeptical that the investigation is finished. I suspect this is just getting restarted. If these types of tweets keep coming out, the DFL won’t have a choice but to throw Ellison under the #MeToo bus.

I first wrote about Dan Wolgamott’s LTE in this post. I noted at the time that Wolgamott whined that “our current elected officials aren’t making our kids a priority. We’ve seen the same story play out too many times in our schools: budget deficits that lead to increased class sizes, fewer opportunities for our kids than we had, and when budget deficits get too large, a referendum for a higher local levy. Lily and all of her classmates deserve an outstanding education and a chance to succeed! If we want Minnesota to continue to be a leader, we have to do better, and the Republican-led Legislature needs to step up and adequately fund our schools.”

The problem with that statement is that it’s rubbish. It was a prediction based on Wolgamott’s partisan bias. The truth is that Republicans stepped up and funded education. The bill they passed and sent to Gov. Dayton’s desk would’ve spent $90,000,000 more than Gov. Dayton requested.

The problem? In another of Gov. Dayton’s infamous temper tantrums, Gov. Dayton vetoed the bill. In his LTE, Wolgamott said that if “we want Minnesota to continue to be a leader, we have to do better, and the Republican-led Legislature needs to step up and adequately fund our schools.” Actually, what’s needed is to elect a Republican as governor and never let another spoiled brat DFL politician in as governor. Gov. Dayton was a 2-term failure. He fought with the DFL Senate Leader in 2014. He shut down government in 2011 because he didn’t get everything he wanted. That sounds familiar:

In 2015, Speaker Daudt and Sen. Bakk tried negotiating a bipartisan budget bill. After a week of negotiating, they still hadn’t reached an agreement with Gov. Dayton so they decided to negotiate between themselves. An hour later, they’d reached an agreement. Once again, Gov. Dayton was the impediment.

During his watch, Gov. Dayton watched the MNLARS project fail repeatedly. Further, Gov. Dayton didn’t catch the child care fraud even though a whistleblower told them about it in 2014. Finally, Gov. Dayton didn’t notice the elder abuse scandal. That didn’t get his attention until Republican Sen. Karin Housley started investigating.

In summation, Wolgamott is a blowhard. He accused Republicans of not stepping up for ‘the children’, only to watch Gov. Dayton not step up for the children. We don’t need partisans like Wolgamott in the legislature. We need solutions-oriented men like Jim Knoblach in there. Chairman Knoblach has a history of putting solid, bipartisan budgets together.

Doug Schoen’s op-ed in the Hill explains why Democrats just can’t win for losing. In his op-ed, Schoen wrote “Despite this, the Republicans steadily made ground in the six months leading up to the 1994 midterm elections, all the while promoting their set of alternative policies, famously titled the ‘Contract with America,’ and eventually winning the actual vote by 7 points nationally. Thus, while the minority party would suffer setbacks and trail in the generic ballot from time to time, a persuasive plan for governing, focused on detailed and moderate policy ideas, compelled voters to flip the House by a landslide.”

After Trump’s victory, the Democrats were so upset that they started “The Resistance.” The end result of the Resistance is the Democrats’ inability to agree with President Trump on anything. When President Trump says that the sun rises in the east, Democrats feel compelled to say something like ‘Trump isn’t an expert. He should consult with a scientist.’ The point is that sometimes they’ll just say he’s wrong, sometimes they’ll just question him.

At no time have they offered fresh ideas.

Next, Schoen highlighted the Republicans’ strategy in 2010:

Once again, it is important to point out that the Republicans were only as successful as they were in 2010, flipping 63 seats, because they presented a compelling and effective alternative to Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic leadership at that time. The Republicans clearly articulated to voters what they intended to accomplish.

Instead of offering fresh ideas, Democrats are left to this pandering:

Teacher pay might or might not be enough. What’s certain is that the ratio of administrators to teachers keeps increasing. At the rate that ratio keeps increasing, administrators will outnumber faculty within the next few years. With so many federal regulations in place, the administrators are required to administer each program.

If Democrats wanted to raise teacher pay and provide better learning experiences, they’d offer reforms rather than pander to the special interests. If Democrats broke free of these special interests, they might actually offer a compelling solution, which would help them win voters’ trust. Because they won’t (and haven’t) done that, everyone loses.

The reason why tax cuts are popular is because people are tired of feeling like ATMs. Each week, people feel like the Democrats’ special interest groups have thought of another way to spend our money. The people have noticed that the Democrats’ special interest groups haven’t thought of ways to save money or make things better.

The GOP has its faults but it’ll never be accused of not coming up with fresh ideas. That’s why Republicans are well-positioned to buck history this year.

UPDATE: Jeff at LidBlog has a great post on the disappearing blue wave that’s today’s must-read. Jeff’s advice is the right advice at the moment:

While the political news is good for the GOP, now is the time for us to be increasing our efforts at turning out conservative voters and making sure our message of personal and economic freedom is getting out to the average, middle-of-the-road voter. Encourage your fellow conservatives to be more active in their work, and to be reminding their friends and families about the importance of staying involved and voting for suitable candidates. Let’s not allow the Democrats to slow down our string of economic, political, and foreign policy victories… get out there and make sure that Republicans hold on to the House and maybe even grow their lead in the Senate!

I have 1 slight quibble with Jeff. If GOP activists do their job, we’ll definitely expand the GOP majority in the Senate. Finally, it’s worth noting that the RNC has invested a ton of $$$ in GOTV infrastructure. It isn’t the sexiest topic with journalists — until it produces great results.