On his radio program Tuesday NewsTalk 1130 WISN’s Mark Belling called out by name a longtime supposedly Republican media writer in SE Wisconsin.
Belling mentioned him for barely a millisecond, but still managed to totally obliterate the guy, even unintentionally as an afterthought, and rightfully so.
Please follow along.
On his program Belling did a lengthy segment on former US AG Bill Bar ripping President Trump in an interview with the liberal publication “The Atlantic.” In essence Belling hit Barr for being part of the Establishment attempting to resurrect positive standing with the crowd that doesn’t like him. And as Belling pointed out, Barr is far from being alone.
James Wigderson is the editor of the website “Right Wisconsin.” With a title like that one would think the site is Republican-friendly. Wrong.
Wigderson is a phony Republican, a woke Republican, not even close to being conservative. A Never-Trumper and Branch COVIDIAN, Wigderson bends over backwards to find writers to submit pieces to blast Republicans in addition to doing it himself. Sources at the state Capitol are well aware of his tactics, trying to get GOP legislators and their staffers in hot water, thus alienating himself from folks he should be advocating for. Because of his consistent bricks thrown at the GOP Wigderson’s site has lost a lot of any influence it might have had. I know of no Democrat counterpart that would operate the same way.
When you find it, you can scroll on the audio at the bottom of the page to the portion of the program on this segment. I would recommend starting at the 1:15:03 mark. Keep listening to at least the next commercial break. The discussion continues after. Wigderson is mentioned at about 1:23:07 according to my counter.
The point is that even though Wigderson gets the very least bit of attention, Belling’s set-up and consequent commentary likening him to Barr paints him in a very negative light, and I was delighted to hear. Wigderson’s a big jerk.
EVERY WEDNESDAY NIGHT THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER, I’M RE-POSTING SOME OLD BLOGS I THOUGHT WERE INTERESTING AND WORTH ANOTHER LOOK, OR A FIRST GLANCE FOR MY MANY NEW READERS.
Recently someone identified as “Marie” commented on a blog of mine where I questioned the Franklin Public Schools about a teacher forcing students to watch liberal CNN news programming. Of course the school district was evasive, and I reported their indifference to me.
Now here’s how “Marie” responded:
“I’m glad your kids spend 7-8 hours a day in a place where they may learn how to engage with a range of ideas oropinions they don’t agree with without getting defensive and storming out. Before you delete these comments to keep this precious blog unblemished by any other opinion, I hope you will take even a second to ask yourself why different ideas make you so mad, so angry, so disgusted and sure that the people who think that way must be evil and be destroyed. Just take a second and ask yourself if maybe everyone needs to calm down and engage like decent people again. And then you can delete me. I’m a neighbor who is trying to understand the other side. Ask around. There aren’t that many Maries on this street. And when you do find out who I am and see me driving by, I hope seeing me in person takes away some of the hostility I think comes more easily when you’re behind your keyboard than when you’re waving at a neighbor.”
First of all I don’t have kids (plural). Second, I doubt the person is a Marie, maybe not even a female, and not a resident on my street or anywhere in Franklin.
I do know this. Whoever the not-at-all courageous “Marie” is he or she felt quite bold being able to sit down at a computer and spew such junk using just a first (false?) name. And yes, I’ve been on the receiving end of a lot of this cowardice throughout the years.
Made me think of this old blog:
I’ve been blogging about the issue for a long time. Here’s an edited, but still timely blog of mine from September 1, 2009:
Some background on a recent court battle that should be of great interest to bloggers.
began writing a blog in August 2008 about…
That’s model Liskula Cohen.
wrote a blog called, “Skanks in NYC.” The sole purpose of the anonymous blog was to trash Cohen with unflattering pictures and a litany of name-calling, including, “a psychotic, lying, whoring . . . skank.”
and Google, the host of the anonymously written blog. Cohen sought to learn the identity of the individual sliming her.
A Manhattan judge ruled in Cohen’s favor, and the trash-talking blogger was unmasked as blogger Rosemary Port who now plans to sue the website.
Port claimed she went after Cohen because Cohen said nasty things about Port to her boyfriend.
A larger issue is at play: the danger of anonymity on the Internet.
Not everyone who writes or comments anonymously on blogs or chat sites is irresponsible. However, given the opportunity to hide behind a fake name, a writer feels the incentive to engage in outrageous, negative, hostile, even false or libelous commentary. As columnist Dennis Prager once wrote:
“It is the very rare individual who sends a hate-filled, obscenity-laced e-mail that includes his name. As the recipient of such e-mails, I know firsthand how rarely people identify themselves when sending hate-filled mail. It is so rare, in fact, that I usually respond to hate mail that includes the writer’s name just to commend him for attaching his name to something so embarrassing.
The Internet practice of giving everyone the ability to express himself anonymously for millions to read has debased public discourse. Cursing, ad hominem attacks and/or the utter absence of logic characterize a large percentage of many websites’ ‘comments’ sections. And because people tend to do what society says it is OK to do, many people, especially younger people, are coming to view such primitive forms of self-expression as acceptable.
Some might argue that anonymity enables people to more freely express their thoughts. But this is not true. Anonymity only enables people to more freely express their feelings. Anonymity values feelings over thought, and immediate expression over thoughtful reflection.”
I call these people cowards. Ironically, liberal columnist Maureen Dowd used the same term in writing about the Cohen/Port case.
Reckless blogging is like a cancer, permeating the Internet. Sometimes, in the never-ending quest to make waves, the blogger can go too far.
There are bloggers who, like Michelle Port, have no intention of providing important information or discourse. Their sole purpose is to smear. Knowing they couldn’t face their targets or engage them in meaningful debate, fearing the very thought, they cowardly hide behind phony names or titles.
In a perfect world, everyone who writes a blog would have to divulge his/her identity and affiliation. Ditto for people who “comment.” Unfortunately, that’s not going to happen, and the irresponsibility will continue.
I think the chairs SHOULD be taken and understood to be “free”. The saving of a spot is ridiculous.
The above comment was made on a Franklin social media site in reference to people putting out chairs to secure a spot for the Independence Day Parade in Franklin.
Here was another beauty:
“Seriously though, Steve Olson, can’t we put a stop to this parade spot squatting? Seems to be worse every year.”
Steve Olson is our mayor. He’s supposed to do what? Call out the chair police?
In 2017, Franklin proved that the pettiness of Chairgate may never end.
Now we move to July 5, 2017.
The 4th of July had come and gone, but that didn’t end the childish whining and moaning and gnashing of teeth about those big, bad, no good, rotten folks who leave out chairs days in advance of the Independence Day Parade to reserve a spot.
In a word, it’s called Chairgate, one big gigantic WAHH! by folks who liken saving a place to observe the parade to a felony offense. Bet they’re loads of fun at parties.
I thought I had heard everything about Chairgate. That is, until the 2017 version.
On the day after the parade the wussy crybabies bled all over the place on a Franklin social media site. You say this couldn’t happen? Guess again and read. Are these people for real? Sadly, yes
What started it all
My friend mentioned that the Tosa parade has a new(er) rule – no unattended chairs until 6am (their parade starts at 9am). Just throwing that out here – perhaps Franklin could adopt a similar rule?
Kevin NOTE: Sure. Let’s start a rule. No suggestion on how to enforce, but it feels real good to suggest it and talk about it. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. I’m entitled to a parade viewing spot
I’m glad my kid didn’t want to go to the parade because I think it’s too much hassle to find a place to sit.
I would much rather go if I knew it wouldn’t be as much of a hassle to find a spot.
“Ooh, let’s sit there…..oh wait, there is rope there, I think that means I can’t sit there…but can I sit in FRONT of that…..hmm………oh wait, what about over there……wait, someone laid some chairs out there…..I see one over there……wait, is that chalk drawn in a square mean that someone is saving that area?”
Punish the bastards
They should get tickets for littering for leaving all that crap
It’s not just the parade
…the roping off of fireworks areas…People tripping on ropes in the dark. Not cool. Next year there will be ropes all over.
Someplace else has a stupid rule and so should we
I used to live in Menomonee Falls and they have a rule you can’t set up until 7pm the day before the parade. Having chairs on the streets a week before the parade is a little ridiculous.
You just wait and see. All hell’s gonna break loose someday.
You could use part time summer grounds crews, citizen volunteers to keep the roadway clear. If a fight breaks out over space, that’s a cost, if someone trips on a rope and injures themselves that’s a cost. Does the city have any liability if someone gets injured in such a manner? That’s a cost. There are people that could try to sue. We are a sue happy society.
Fight fire with fire
Best to nip in the bud now. It would cost very little if any to enforce this and could prevent injury and adults behaving badly in front of children at a family event. Maybe next year people can try their own “social experiments” and sit in “reserved” spots to see how the “reserver” responds.
By far the dumbest comment
Maybe the city can sell permits? $10 for a 4 x 4 section $15 for 6 x 6 which would be for one of those canopies Etc?
KF NOTE: Pay for a reserved spot? In this town with its obscene taxes? Not even if they bring me drinks and snacks.
The problem I see is that Franklin and I have something in common. We need and will find something to complain about. So if you fix this problem we’ll just find something else. So let’s find something that is a true issue if we are really going to invest effort and $
Bitching about parade spots for a lack luster parade only proves that we are all entitled ass hats. Boo hop want a tissue? Walked about 1/4 mile of the parade (end to 1/4 mile up) and saw only happy faces enjoying family friends and holiday. Wake up next day and read this cry baby fest.
Love the city and I love to complain. But we can until we are blue in the face and fact is this isn’t a real issue and thus nothing will change. It’s annoying yes. Inconvenient for some yes. But at the end of the day parade and fireworks went off to my knowledge with no problems. Thus I do not authorize the Mayor to spend my tax money enforcing a non issue.
Please, if we take it away you do realize that people will be fighting to get a spot the day of and be even more crazy. Also, I think it’s ridiculous that people show up as it’s starting and expect a spot, but with that being said we always share space with those who need it. I also don’t think a free-for-all is a good idea either. Roping off a small space is helpful especially for those who have children in the parade and you need to cart all around to drop them off right before. It’s all good! Why can’t we be happy about how many attended this year and how many people love our city and our parade that they are ready and willing to be there with happy faces, cheering on America. I was waiting to see when the complaining posts would start about the joyous festivities. Franklin always has to have something to complain about and other communities are noticing.
Kevin note: Amen
June 28, 2021:
Important information regarding setup for the 4th of July parade:
As the 4th of July is quickly approaching, the Franklin Police Department would like to share the following guidelines for our citizens. The department does not grant permission to place chairs or reserve spaces along the parade route. Items placed off the roadway and/or in grassy areas will be allowed to stay. The department will move or remove any items placed in the roadway. We recommend you do not leave items any earlier than 48 hours prior to the parade. Items placed on the parade route will be done at your own risk. The Franklin Police Department is not responsible for any missing/ damaged items and will not take a theft report. No parking of any type of vehicle or trailer will be permitted at any time on either the shoulder or the median. Thank you and have a safe 4th of July. —Franklin Police Department
“Word comes through that Joe wants to say hello to the students and teachers who have gathered in front of a high school, including a group of Navy ROTC, flags erect. The guys in the press vans leap out and race toward the front of the motorcade, and by the time I get there, the Bidens are just stepping out of the armored Cadillac known as the Beast. I watch, with some trepidation, as President Biden walks off down the road and into the grass. He crouches into a deep knee bend, impressive for a 78-year-old, as a little boy carrying a tiny American flag comes toward him. He embraces the child as Jill lingers on the macadam behind him in black-and-white stilettos, looking every inch a goddess at 69. It’s moments like this with the Bidens—hugging children!—that bring home just how incomprehensibly irregular and out of place our previous president and first lady really were.” —From a nauseatingly fawning piece in Vogue about Jill Biden
“There was no Vogue cover story for Melania Trump. Three years ago, Vogue instead was celebrating porn star StormyDaniels (complete with posed, pretty Annie Leibovitz portraits) as a ‘catalyst of historic proportions,’ destined to ruin the Trumps” —Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the Media Research Center
Today’s read is from President Trump. Here’s an excerpt:
When I was president, I delivered on my promise to build a border wall to protect our country. All Joe Biden had to do was paint it.
Instead, Biden has enacted the most radical open borders agenda imaginable. This is perhaps the first time in world history a nation has purposely and systematically dismantled its own defenses to invite millions of foreign migrants to enter its territory and break its laws.
The Friday before Election Day, during school time, hundreds of Franklin High School seniors of voting age were taken to an Assembly and then drilled by school personnel about why they should vote for the referenda.
Doors to the Assembly reportedly were locked so no one could leave and no one could enter to see and hear what was going on.
I wrote the following:
The impropriety of this action by Franklin school officials is clear. The surprise Assembly on the Friday before the election should never have taken place. I’m not sure if the Assembly was illegal, but it certainly was extremely unethical.
It smacks of a desperate, underhanded, sleazy maneuver by folks who must be very worried about the outcome of the election. On principle alone, these referenda need to be resoundingly rejected.
Shame on the Franklin School District for this disgusting and despicable tactic!
Later on April 2, I blogged an e-mail I received from a Franklin parent:
Now that the school district has given the senior class a civics lesson and is encouraging them to exercise their right and privilege to vote(many for the first time):
1. Will they be excused from school to vote? 2. Will the students get a lesson in how to register to vote; how to determine what district they live in; and where their polling place is located? 3. Will they provide transportation to the polls? 4. Will they earn a grade for voting—how are the students going to be assessed following this civics lesson? Will they have to wear the I Voted sticker as proof of voting? 5. Will they tack on an additional 2 hours to the make up school days since the students missed first/second hour to attend this civic lesson?
I have more questions to add but the most important one is:
When will the investigation into the legality of this action begin? Who will be held accountable?
Just how naïve do they think we are? By Kevin Fischer April 25, 2007
During my career, I’ve interviewed literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of elected officials, policymakers and authority figures. I’ve covered just as many press conferences. After all that I’ve heard, trust me, I know when I’m being snowed.
That’s why I have to shake my head at some of the statements made in an article reporter John Neville posted today on the District Attorney’s investigation into charges of misconduct by Franklin officials during the recent school referendum. Some of the quotes are incredibly breathtaking in their posture that Franklin school officials saw nothing, heard nothing, said nothing, and did nothing wrong.
For example, School Board President James Ward said “he doesn’t know of any pro-referendum materials disseminated by school district officials.”
With regard to the much-publicized, much-talked about assembly for Franklin High School senior students the Friday before the election, Ward “said the reason he knew about the assembly was that his daughter, Anna, a senior, attended the event and told him.”
How can the School Board President be so left out of the loop and the decision-making process about an assembly of 348 students in the high school the Friday before the election?
How can the School Board President, one of the top cheerleaders for the referenda, not be aware of pro-referendum literature in the community, and literature that was actually handed out in the schools?
Then you have Franklin High School Principal Mike Cady.
In an interview about the assembly, Cady said, “No information was presented with any kind of an angle or slant.”
Neville writes that, “Cady said students were shown a 13-minute referendum video, sample ballots and a map with polling locations. Also discussed, he said, was the impact of a passed referendum on local property taxes.”
Seems to me that during the assembly, school officials certainly pointed all the arrows to a YES vote.
Was the 13-minute video produced by the school district?
Was the video produced with school district resources?
Was the video produced on school time?
Did the video present both sides of the referendum issue? (The answer to that is an obvious NO).
How naïve do they think we, the taxpaying public, are?
They conduct an assembly with voting-age students on school property during school time the Friday before the election. They play a one-sided video. They hand out ballot instructions and maps with polling places. As I stated in previous blogs, it was a last-minute desperate, highly questionable and unethical measure to take.
This was clearly an election primer geared toward getting positive votes. And we’re supposed to believe school officials when they throw their hands up in the air and claim they did absolutely nothing wrong?
Sure James Ward didn’t know anything about those pro-referendum pamphlets. He first found out about that assembly when his daughter who attended it came home and told him about it…….yeh, that’s it. My daughter told me, after it was all over.
And that assembly? They weren’t trying to pull some shenanigans. Principal Cady says it was just a “civics lesson.” You mean like a seminar on honesty in government?
If this was such an important “civics lesson,” why weren’t the non-voting age students included in this educational endeavor? Because they specifically and purposely targeted students who could go out and vote YES….that’s why. Their intent was clear.
This is simply amazing. This same band of folks tried to sell us a bill of goods with the $78-million tax increase. You didn’t fall for it. Now they’re trying to pull the wool over your eyes again by claiming innocence on the one hand, and ignorance on the other (I didn’t know anything about those pamphlets. I didn’t know anything about the assembly. We weren’t telling the kids how to vote……it was a…..civics lesson. That’s it……a civics lesson).
They must think we’re really stupid. Guess what? We’re not. This doesn’t even come close to passing the smell test.
Remember everything that’s transpired here the next time they come asking for a tax increase claiming they know what’s best and you should trust them. —My blog, April 25, 2007
Again, the “Assembly” was extremely unethical. Supposedly learned officials should have known better. They thought they could get away with it, and that’s why they did it.
School officials who objected at the time weren’t loud, persistent, aggressive, or effective enough.
The Franklin school district is the victim of inept management.
Students, their parents, and taxpayers deserve much better.
Parents across Wisconsin are standing up and fighting back against racist critical race theory being taught in their schools. Some teachers are telling them to go to hell.
Meet the CRT burghers The populist parent uprising against critical race theory By Peter Wood, the Spectator, June 27, 2021
I knew that critical race theory was spreading rapidly through America’s institutions, including not just schools and corporations, but also the military. But I was still taken aback when the burger at my favorite tavern arrived branded (literally) as a CRT special. It was, fortunately, mere coincidence. The Clear River Tavern in Pittsfield, Vermont was not after all making a political statement. But almost everyone else is.
The CRT burger at the Clear River Tavern in Pittsfield, Vermont
The burghers in places as far-flung as Loudoun County, Virginia, Fort Worth, Texas and Langley, Washington have turned out in recent days at local school board meetings to protest the CRT-inflected curricula that their districts have been inflicting on students. The protesters — mostly parents of enrolled students — regard the emphasis on critical race theory as state-sponsored propaganda aimed at indoctrinating children in racial grievance, allegiance to authoritarian leaders and hatred of their own country. As if to prove these accusations well-founded, supporters of CRT have been rounding up children to stage counter-protests. At the Washington State protest, for example, the parents, according to the Everett, Washington Herald, were ‘met by over 360 counter-protesters, nearly half of whom were South Whidbey School District students, who marched to the protest site from nearby South Whidbey Community Park in support of the school board’s progressive actions’. The youngins were well trained. They came bearing the obligatory signs, including ‘Don’t Censor Our Education’, ‘Respect Education’, Trans Rights,’ and, of course, ‘Black Lives Matter’.
Is the popular outrage against CRT truly a pro-censorship movement? Is it disrespectful of education?
The way to tell is to look at what vexes the anti-CRTers — and what they favor instead. Among the more widely watched videos is one of a citizen opposing his school board’s pro-CRT stance: the T-shirted, tattooed British expat Simon Campbell sticks it to the Pennsbury, Pennsylvania school board. The audience cheers as Mr Campbell charges the school board, ‘It seems to me that you think you can supersede the United States Constitution.’ As the cheers die down, he continues, ‘I’ve got news for you school board president Benito Mussolini, your power does not exceed that of the US Constitution and the First Amendment Rights of the citizens of this great nation.’ His five minute bravura performance needs to be savored in the original.
Mr Campbell was moved to speak by an email from the district’s director of ‘Equity, Diversity & Education’ in which she advised the superintendent on how to censor public comments she disagreed with — and the president of the school board agreed with that proposal. This is a good place to pause on the terminology. The defenders of critical race theory frequently create a maze of distinctions. If you challenge the 1619 Project as an instance of CRT, they loftily inform you that you don’t know what you are talking about. CRT is an exquisitely refined doctrine that has been crafted by law professors over the years — and has nothing to do with Nikole Hannah-Jones and the New York Times’s confected fantasy about the slave origins of American society. Or if you challenge the Ibram X. Kendi’s virulently anti-white ‘anti-racism’ agenda, the proponents of CRT sneer that Kendi’s approach differs entirely. In schools, the rubric under which CRT is most commonly deployed is ‘DEI — Diversity, Equity and Inclusion’. And once again, school officials intone from Olympian heights that DEI and CRT are as different as apple pie and applejack.
Marc Lamont Hill, host of UpFront on Al Jazeera English, and Joy Reid, MSNBC national correspondent, have been the most conspicuous figures in the left’s effort to diffuse public ire against CRT by drawing opportunistic distinctions among the various embodiments of the basic creed. Both have had CRT’s most celebrated critic Christopher Rufo on their shows in efforts to cut him down to size. The don’t-let-him-get-a word-in-edgeways style of interview has pleased CRT partisans but only further infuriated the general public. That public fully understands that the basic message of CRT is that America is ‘systemically racist’, that white people hoarding their privileges is the engine of systemic racism and that nothing short of a total transformation of American society can bring about ‘racial justice’. The 1619 Project, anti-racism and DEI are just euphemistic variations on this theme.
When someone like Simon Campbell summons the US Constitution and the First Amendment to his side of the table, he has a point. CRT and its progeny are a doctrine aimed at delegitimizing America. These doctrines aim to unseat the US Constitution as a racist document. They see the First Amendment as protecting white supremacy by giving white people exclusive control over public speech. And they treat the whole dynamic of the county as a contest over ‘power’. In that contest, censorship by the proponents of CRT is fully warranted, since they are battling the unfair advantages of the white racist regime.
It is an open question how deeply members of the K-12 educational establishment understand this nonsense. America’s school teachers and school administrators are not exactly the cream of the intellectual crop. Most of them have been through those indoctrination mills called schools of education where John Dewey mingles with Paulo Freire and retired terrorist (‘guilty as hell, free as a bird’) Bill Ayers. All they know about education is that it is supposed to be ‘transformational’. The question ‘transformed from what to what?’ gets answered with the all-purpose progressive catechism, ‘from oppressed to free’, which serves as a license to destroy any claims of culture, civilization, tradition, moral order, or knowledge that stand in the way.
With legions of teachers and school administrators imbued with this outlook, it is little surprise that CRT looks like a fine new pedagogical instrument. It is yet another hammer for battering the pillars that uphold the ideal of America as a society committed to those unevenly yoked goals of liberty and equality. Why not just replace them with ‘diversity’ and ‘equity’? The reasons why not may be invisible to today’s educators, but fortunately not to the parents who show up at the school board meetings.
‘They caught you red-handed with an enemies list to punish opponents of critical race theory. You’re teaching children to hate others because of their skin color,’ declared Dick Black of Ashburn, Virginia, addressing the school board in Loudoun County, Virginia before the board abruptly adjourned the meeting and called the police to arrest the protesters for trespassing. Among the other speakers was Xi Van Fleet, a woman who survived the Cultural Revolution in Mao’s China, only to find critical theory back on the educational agenda in the US where students are being taught ‘to loathe our country and our history’.
‘You talk about critical race theory which is pretty much teaching your kids how to hate each other, how to dislike each other,’ averred Tie Smith addressing the Bloomington Public School Board in Illinois on June 9. Smith explained that CRT was taking away his accomplishments as a successfully self-educated black man.
In Southlake, Texas, voters by an overwhelming margin and with record turnout replaced the entire Carroll school board with a slate of candidates opposed to the district’s ‘Cultural Competency Action Plan’, another DEI scheme. They denounced the plan as creating ‘diversity police’ and ‘reverse racism’.
In Tredyffrin Township, Pennsylvania, residents packed a school board meeting to complain about a ‘racial equity’ curriculum that they said labels white students as oppressors. According to the Tredyffrin-Easttown, Pennsylvania Patch, resident Deana Wang told the board, ‘America is great because of two reasons; this county nurtures innovative minds that drive progress on a global scale, and American people seek to embrace constructive criticism. Critical race theory is creating the indoctrination environment that will constrain children’s creative sense of self and consequently limit their analytical productivity as adults.’
Look wherever you might across the United States, populist uprisings against public schools for embracing CRT are underway. CRT proponents are fighting back, not just via figures such as Marc Lamont Hill and Joy Reid, but also by organizing their counter-protests. But for once the numbers and the energy are on the side of those who seek to uphold traditional values and accurate history. This is a grassroots movement which has substantial political implications for the 2022 midterm elections. The Biden administration beginning on inauguration day has gone all-in in its support for CRT, the 1619 Project and related endeavors. The Anti-CRT Burghers have a lot to chew on.
On June 25, Biden signed a new Executive Order to advance ‘Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility in the Federal Workforce (DEIA).’ The White House released a ‘Fact Sheet’ with the EO explaining that despite ‘decades of progress…systemic racism and gender inequality are still felt today’. The new EO established a ‘government-wide initiative’ to ‘reinvigorate’ such efforts. Agencies are directed to develop strategic plans, establish chief diversity officers and expand DEIA ‘training throughout the Federal workforce’.
We know pretty much what ‘DEIA training’ looks like. It is remarkably similar to systematic bullying and intimidation combined with censorship of any and all dissenting opinions. We owe the schools a debt of gratitude for teaching the public in advance how critical race theory plays out in the lives of real people.
We may owe something as well to the military’s rapid deployment of this ideological warfare. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, in a busily incoherent word salad, explained to the House Armed Services Committee on June 24, why he supports critical race theory in military training, i.e. he wants to ‘understand white rage’. This came on top of the chief of naval operations Admiral Michael Gilday refusing to explain to the House Armed Services Committee on June 15 why he recommended that all US sailors read Ibram X. Kendi’s book, How To Be An Antiracist and declining to say whether he personally upheld Kendi’s quixotic views that ‘white people are another breed’ and that they ‘invented Aids’. We can weigh these remarks against secretary of defense Lloyd Austin’s declaration that ‘We do not teach critical race theory. We don’t embrace critical race theory and I think that’s a spurious conversation… We are focused on extremist behaviors and not ideology, not people’s thoughts, not people’s political orientations. Behaviors are what we are focused on.’
DEIA training as a comprehensive government-wide policy may prove popular with parts of President Biden’s base, but Americans in general are likely to choke on this menu. We sense that our CRT burgers are made of suspicious stuff and may well be poisonous. This is not to steer anyone away from the Clear River Tavern, if you find yourself driving up Vermont’s bucolic Route 100. Distinctions are always in order. The Tavern’s CRT burger, with bacon and onion rings is delicious. The Biden version is unpalatable at best — and when it comes to schools, is rightly provoking a rebellion in the cafeteria.
The Biden administration is sending migrants all over the country. Without notice, Joe Biden and “border czar” Kamala Harris are flying migrants (especially children) to various states and releasing them there. Two governors — Iowa’s Kim Reynolds and Tennessee’s Bill Lee — want to know why.
The end to President Joe Biden’s lies is nowhere in sight. The Federalist will continue its rigorous coverage of the White House, keeping the administration accountable with substantive fact-checking throughout Joe Biden’s tenure.