Why voting NO on the Minneapolis School Referendum is a vote For Minneapolis School Children
No Administrator Left Behind!
What happens if the Minneapolis school funding referendum fails this election? What happens is the voters will be asked to approve it next year in November 2009 (when we vote in Minneapolis City Council elections). The Minneapolis School Board and referendum supporters have stated that if the Referendum fails this year, nothing “bad” will happen. This Referendum will have no effect on school funding in Minneapolis, for this year (2008-2009 school year) or next year (2009-2010 school year). It only affects school funding starting in 2010-2011.
Why should people who support children and Minneapolis public schools vote NO on the Referendum this year? Because they believe that the children of Minneapolis deserve better than the current referendum proposal. The current referendum is flawed and incomplete. Working together the Minneapolis School Board, school administration and teachers union can do and should do much better for Minneapolis school children, than the current Referendum proposal. The District needs to be much more specific about the actions steps it will take to achieve its stated goals, which I agree with. Below are the things I want to know and I think all voters should know made before we support a referendum. Unfortunately, the only way to gets this information is for us to vote NO this year. By voting NO we send a message to Minneapolis School Board, school administration and teachers union that they can do much better than the current Referendum proposal for Minneapolis school children.
Enrollment Decline
Minneapolis parents are voting with their children, by taking their children out of the Minneapolis School District and sending them to suburban districts. This is a major cause of the decline in enrollment in the Minneapolis School District. This says 10 times more about the Minneapolis school district than all the speeches, reports, editorials, and commercials on TV & radio etc. combined. Shouldn’t voters know the specific steps the School District is planning on taking to reverse this trend, before not after approving a $60 million tax increase?
School Closings
The School Board and administration will announce which schools they plan to close in February or March 2009. I want an aggressive school closings plan because I want my tax dollars going to teacher salaries and not to pay for heat, lights and especially for repairing and maintaining buildings that are over 50 years old including several from the 1920s. Others may want to keep neighborhood schools open, especially neighborhood elementary schools. Some people might vote No on the referendum if they knew their neighborhood elementary, middle and/or high schools was going to be closed. We the voters and especially parents deserve to know which schools the District plans to close before we vote on this referendum not after. Unfortunately, that means voting NO this year so we will know the District’s school closing plan before we vote next year.
Black White Achievement Gap
The achieve gap between black students and white students in Minneapolis public schools is among the very worst in the entire United States – worse than schools in Alabama or Mississippi. The achievement gap has not really changed since it was first identified.
The Minneapolis school board, administration and teachers union say they want to close the achievement gap between black students and white students. Is the District committed to doing whatever takes to eliminate the black white achievement gap? Or is only planning to do what is easy and/or what is not controversial? If easy steps could reduce the gap, it would have been eliminated years ago. The only way to know the level of commitment is to know the specific action steps the School Board and Administration are committed to taking to close the black white student achievement gap. But the District has not shared with voters what specific steps it will take to close the achievement gap. I want know and I believe that all voters, parents and especially black parents deserve to know if the School Board and Administration are willing to “take the heat” for making the unpopular and/or controversial changes that will be necessary to close the black white student achievement gap, before approving a $60 million referendum not after approving the referendum.
Staff to Teacher ratio
Several years ago, a study of California schools revealed that California public school had one staff employee for every teacher. The California parochial schools had one staff employee for every six teachers. Obviously a much higher percentage of revenue went to hiring teachers in the parochial schools than in the public schools. What is the staff to teacher ratio in the Minneapolis public schools? Do you know, because I don’t know? Shouldn’t voters know the staff to teacher ratio before approving a $60 million tax increase not after approving a tax increase?
Union Contract
The current contract with the Minneapolis teachers union severely restricts School Board and Administration’s ability and flexibility to change teacher assignments to improve student performance. The current union contract is designed to protect the established seniority system. Teacher assignments (which grade they teach, subject and school location etc.) are based on seniority; not experience in a specific subject or grade, interest in specific the subject or grade etc.
In business if a company has problems with quality and/or low productivity at a particular manufacturing plant; do they send their least experienced mangers and/or poorest performing managers to that plant? NO!! The company sends its best, most experienced managers to “turn around” the poorly performing manufacturing plant. The current union contract forces the District to send its newest and least experienced teachers to the schools with the poorest performance. The current contract does not see having teachers high on the seniority list assigned to a poorly performing school as a badge of honor.
The union contract prevents the District from paying a bonus to the best teachers, whose students show the biggest improvement on test scores. Shouldn’t teachers, that are extraordinary, be paid more than poor teachers? The current contract does not allow merit-based pay.
The current union contract also prevents the District from holding teachers accountable when their students perform poorly. If a teacher’s students perform poorly on standardized tests one year that is a matter of concern. If a teacher’s students perform poorly on standardized tests five years in a row, which is a problem. Teachers, that consistently underperform, cause problems for the teacher that gets those students the following year. Good teachers, that get students from poor performing teachers, have to do double work teach current grade work plus teach prior grade work that students did not learn because of the poor performing teacher. Good teachers have to double work because they care about getting the students back learning at grade level. Is this fair to students and good teachers? Teacher under performance needs to be addressed, perhaps by additional training, coaching from successful teachers etc. If a poor teacher does not improve after being a given reasonable time to improve, then that teacher needs to be terminated for the benefit of students and good teachers.
The vast majority of teachers high on seniority list, work hard to be good teachers. But there are a few bad apples that stop working or are just putting in their time until they retire. The slackers know that they will never ever be laid-off because of their seniority. The school district needs a union contract that allows them to lay off these few bad apples for the benefit of students and good teachers.
There are some senior teachers that have given up on black students. They feel no personal responsibility to go the extra mile to help black students who are behind catch up. They feel no personal responsibility if black students fail. The School District needs a union contract that allows it to lay off teachers that have given up on black students for the benefit of students and good teachers.
The Minneapolis School District needs the leverage of passage of the school referendum to negotiate a more flexible and student friendly contact with the teacher’s union. After the referendum what is the Union’s incentive to negotiate changes to the current contract? Voters deserve to know if the union will negotiate changes to the existing contract will allow performance-based pay, performance-based terminations and flexibility in teaching assignments before approving a $60 million referendum not after approving it.
These are the reasons I’m voting for Minneapolis school children by voting NO on the school referendum this year. Children, parents and voter deserve more information and a better proposal than the current referendum. I hope that Minneapolis School Board, Administration and Teachers Union will provide Minneapolis voters and parents with the information we need to make an informed decision about voting YES next year.
Several years ago, the Minneapolis school district decided on the number of teacher to layoff, before even considering reductions in administrative positions. To me this is backwards, decisions on the number of administrative positions are made first, before teacher layoffs are considered.
When a candidate for the Presidency of United States fronts a headscarf worn by a radical in a pandering and obsequious attempt to prevent bad press, he is too spineless and self-serving to be President of the United States
Using Reverse Psychologhy, Al Qaeda Endorses Obama
It’s a bit shocking, really, that the Washington Post rushed to print an alleged endorsement of John McCain by Al Qaeda. Missing was any verification by authorities that it was authored by anyone in command of any of its tawdry, misanthropic, holier-than-thou, spiritually moronic band of woman-beating, bombing and beheading throwbacks. One wonders what the motive of the Washington Post could have been to act (again) as the mouthpiece for terrorists without any fact-checking, a term that has apparently been erased from its editors’ lexicon. It apparently doesn’t occur to them that it’s possibly not to provide free advertisement for them. Apparently, all one has to do to effect instantaneous worldwide publication of one’s opinion – and influence a Presidential election in the United States – is claim to be Al Qaeda and endorse a candidate. Not only that, but then the Leftist press in America will pick it up and circulate it as truth.
Meanwhile, the purpose of these Al Qaeda poseurs in attempting to tamper with U.S. presidential elections – given that they do not get a vote – represents several things:
The Memo. Just another little missive from your blood-lusting Islamofascist superiors that they are the ones to be in charge, lest you forget, so they expect you to follow their instructions. The veiled threat of violence will be legitimately assumed.
Egoistic Arrogance. Of course we must be interested in their opinion.
The use of the most transparent form of reverse psychology. What Al Qaeda wants – since it wants our destruction – must be what we don’t want. So if they say they want Obama, we will, like lemmings, rush to Obama, because if they want McCain it’s our sacred duty as loyal Americans to support the other candidate. Or, so they hope.
Now, let’s flesh that out a little bit, since whether Americans get it or not, the media obviously doesn’t.
Did the headlines say, “Al Qaeda makes attempt to smear McCain with ‘endorsement.’” Nope, but they should have.
Did the headlines say, “Al Qaeda throws support behind Obama with phony McCain endorsement?” Nope, but they should have.
Did the headlines say, “Al Qaeda plays same game as last election with manipulative ‘endorsement.’” Nope, but they should have.
What every single or implied headline said was: “Al Qaeda Endorses McCain.”
Of course Al Qaeda doesn’t endorse McCain. Al Qaeda –like Hizbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood , and Hamas – endorses Obama. And that is not because he is a Muslim, for he is not. He has belonged for 20 years to a virulently anti-white Black Liberation Theology church in Chicago. He converted from Islam to Christianity before puberty, so imams have no authority to issue fatawa against him charging apostasy. Obama was registered as a Muslim at an Indonesian school. He does have Islamic training. But he is no longer a Muslim. Obama is Leftist, not radical Islamist. No, it’s none of that.
What thrills Islamofascists – a term coined by Matthias Ruthven and perhaps used as early as the 1970s by Olivier Roy – is that they are looking for a Presidential candidate whose thinking and policy they can infiltrate. And that have found one in Obama. After all, the express wish of the Council on American-Islamic Relations – CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorist financing and the group that used to called itself “Hamas in the United States” – is to see shari’a law implemented in America. ICNA and ISNA, both also unindicted co-conspirators in terrorist financing, have also gravitated to Obama, and in the case of ISNA it’s a real problem. These are the guys that made hay over the Headscarf Photo Flap – widely used to paint Muslims as victims in Obama’s campaign. Rep. Keith Ellison went after Obama with a vengeance, and he got everything he wanted and then some. Here’s how it went.
Two Muslim women in headscarves positioned themselves behind Obama at a photo shoot. One of them was a member of the deeply suspect MSA, about which volumes have been written in the last two years recounting their indoctrination to radical Islam of Muslim students by this campus organization. MSA is also tainted by accusations of women within their own ranks that they were forced into Islamic dress cover as a kind of religious testimony to the faith. Of course, Muslim men never put up with the inconvenience of wear hot robes in the Dog Days of Summer to “testify for their faith.” No, it’s the women who have to do that. One woman recounts being called by the head of an MSA wing, a man who then put his wife on the phone with the girl so the wife could scream at her for not complying with stated dress norms. This echoes, of course, the virulent Saudi Princess Haifa, wife of former Ambassador Bandar bin Sultan (who had the habit of strolling into Cabinet meetings uninvited, so powerful was he), who frequently called embassy wives together for her verbally violent punishment soiress where the women were scathed for the slightest infractions of dress or “morals.” Yeah, right. The tactic here is to have a woman discipline another woman at the behest of a male, who will then have to bear no responsibility for being the male chauvinist pig he is. Any questions?
Anyhow, these two Muslim women positioned themselves for an Obama photo shoot that I can promise you would have been distributed all over the Middle East as a fund-raising poster for ISNA. Meanwhile, back in the United States, CAIR and other Muslim propaganda groups screamed “Discrimination!” (which it was not) and then “Racism!” Now that last one is interesting given that Islam is not a race: It is a lift from the Civil Rights Movement, where it was legitimate, but the propagandists are aware that Americans are very sensitive to accusations of racism and too afraid of appearing racist to fight the false accusation when they are smeared with it. There should be a class action lawsuit brought against CAIR, ISNA, ICNA and every other group that uses this false epithet to silence everybody who doesn’t agree with them.
At any rate, it is with the Headscarf Flap that I really began to feel for Obama. He is not an anti-Muslim person. Far from it. And it is likely his staff would have had the same reaction to anybody brandishing a sign that read “Zionists for Obama” in Trajan font or somebody waving a massive crucifix with “Stop Abortion” carved on it. No sane Presidential candidate is going to allow his or her campaign to be appropriated for religious advertising.
In this case it was a simple case of Islamic Billboarding, the presence of a headscarf to visually claim space to make a silent representation of a connection with or control of a political or social unit or physical space. OK, I confess to having invented the term. But that’s what it is in some cases.
This supposed connection of Islam with Obama did not and does not exist — at least not until now. But now it does exist.
How powerful is IslamicBillboarding? Well, it’s pretty powerful. It can make it appear that Obama is Muslim, which most in the Muslim world already believe he is (and that will be a problem for him if he is elected), and it also makes it appear that MSA and ISNA and CAIR appear to be very powerful in American politics in general and in Obama’s campaign in particular.
And the upshot of all this is that Obama got creamed, in three specific ways.
First he was rapped for “racism” and the women in headscarves were quickly fashioned into victims by CAIR.
Second, he got Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim on Congress, all over him publicly. But after a few weeks, Ellison and others had strong-armed Obama into total submission.
Third, part of that “submission” (there’s that word again) is that Obama has a new “Muslim advisor” who has radical connections thoroughly discussed in several articles in the last two weeks, the best of which articles was Daniel Pipes’ article “Would Obama Pass a Security Clearance?” Answer: No.
So, faced with bad press and intimidation by the bad guys most likely to behead you if they don’t like you, what does Obama do? He fronts a headscarf in the form of Ingrid Mattson, president of ISNA — the same-same unindicted co-conspirator in terrorist financing named above – for a precious little “Interfaith Moment” at the Democratic National Convention.
Watch this closely, for it is shocking indeed. In a country in which MOST Muslim women do NOT wear cover, Ingrid Mattson is one of the few high-ranking Muslim women who does. So what Muslim woman does Obama choose for his token? One of the many U.S. Muslim women who is moderate? No.
Ingrid Mattson is a Saudi Wahhabi apologist and a radical. What would happen to Ingrid if she appeared on Saudi TV without a face veil? She’d be stoned to death. What would happen if she showed up at the Grand Mosque dressed as she was on American national TV? She would have been whipped to death on the streets by the religious police. Ingrid Mattson, like Al-Arabiya’s Nadia Bilbassy-Charters – who interviewed Laura Bush at the White House dressed in a skirt halfway up her thigh and appeared at the National Press Club in a skin-tight, white satin sheath with a hemline higher than that! – is one of the Spin Sisters, one of the women fronted by radical Islamist men to make them appear to be gender egalitarian when they are not. Women like Ingrid Mattson could care less what happens to the rest of the oppressed Muslim women of this world so long as they get theirs. Look at Mattson’s position? Fame. Power. A little more fame. Now she’s been seen on national TV in her headscarf, while defending the repressive Saudis. She has never made a a statement against FGM (which is mandatory in Shafi’i Sunni Islam), never lent support to Shirin Ebadi’s incredibly brave attempt to wrest women’s freedom from the Iranian mullahs, never decried the murder of Turkish feminist Konca Kouris, never hailed Farzana Hassan’s attempt to prevent shari’a law from being imposed in Canada, and never touted the scholarship of the devout Muslim women seeking a new, gender-egalitarian (it was ruined by centuries of overtly manipulative translation) hermeutics of the Qur’an.
The headscarf means many things. Mostly it means ignorance of the fact that it was NEVER mandated by Muhammad and did not appear in Islamic culture until three centuries after the advent of Islam. Therefore many women who wear it do it because they think it is mandated and want to do the right thing. But in the West it is often holier-than-thou competition for men’s attention both with other Muslim women and with Western women they call “sluts” whether they have evidence for it or not. As a woman, I can’t tell you how infuriated I am at this accusation and how sick I am of hearing it.
What headscarfing is, often, is political Islamic Billboarding at the behest of men. Worldwide, the headscarf is, overwhelming, male oppression of the female that prevents men from having to experience any anxiety that one of “their” women will be found a tempting little plumb by some other man. Men do not have to earn women’s love, they merely have to make an arrangement with her father for it (despite the Qur’an’s guarantee of freedom in marriage for women as well as men). In the strict Wahhabi orientation Ingrid Mattson refers to as a “reformation,” it is an act of slander against the female form as a sexual organ from toes to crown, with the exception of hands and eyes, a form that is utterly controlled and violently criminalized. How bad is it? In Saudi Arabia, the abaya covers everything but hands and eyes. Well, make that one eye. Last week the Wahhabi imams in Saudi Arabia said that one eye must be covered, because two eyes is just too much of an evil trap for a man’s sexual purity. This is an apparent attempt to control those lurid glances at the market, where women are already under the control of a male chaperone!
But I digress. The point is that while Muslim women in Iran endure torture in Evin Prison to escape this oppression, it bothers Ingrid Mattson not at all to support oppression of Muslim women by sporting one herself in the name of faith.
Anyhow, back to the Democratic National Convention. Here comes Ingrid Mattson in her headscarf – a payback from the alleged affront to the Muslim community for Obama’s refusal to have his campaign used for Islamic Billboarding. Ellison was pleased. The American Muslim community flocked to Obama’s side. Mattson made a speech that should have sent off screaming warning bells, but Americans behaved as if they were stricken with connexin-26 gene deafness.
But this warrants another, closer look. Who else appeared? A Christian priest and a Jewish rabbi. Where were the Hindus, whose numbers in the USA are larger than those of the Muslims, who claim they are over 6 million when likely the most accurate number is 1.3 million? Where are the Buddhists? Where are the Jains? Where are the Native American medicine men? Where are the Baha’i and Amadiyyah, whom the Sunnis punish and persecute worldwide with charges of apostasy? Where are the Orthodox? Where are the Taoists and the Confucians? Where are the Sufis, so vilified by the Wahhabis and the Taleban — the Sufis whose European and American forms may represent the best hope for Muslims in America? Where are the New Agers, who in this country vastly outnumber the Muslims and are the fast-growing spiritual orientation in American (no, you were mislead, it is not the Muslims)?
You will not find any of those faiths appearing with the radical-learning, Wahhabi-oriented, headscarf-flaunting Muslima Ingrid Mattson! Why? Because only the People of the Book – Jews and Christians – are even marginally acceptable to these 7th-century-styled Muslims, and all the rest are considered to be practitioners of illegitimate, if not Satanic, religions and faiths. Obama would not have made the mistake of including them when a Muslim speaks. He wouldn’t have dared. Especially since the entire purpose of this tawdry exercise was to front a headscarf in capitulation to intentionally-invented Muslim grievance.
Is Obama a Muslim? No.
Is Obama pandering to a radical Muslim minority? Yes.
Is he accepting advisors who have radical links? Yes.
Is he a coward? Yes. And that is the problem with Obama: He is woefully inexperienced, as this incident also shows, but he is, worse, a coward.
Obama, despite his terrible associations, has only one real problem: He doesn’t know when he needs to stand up and refuse to cow to such pressures, and he doesn’t have the spine to do it when he does realize it.
So, does Al Qaeda really want McCain to win? Of course not. They want Obama to win, because if he does, the whole problem of establishing shari’a law for Muslims in the United States (read: women, since shari’a is most concerned with keeping control of women) gets a lot easier. And that’s just the first step. It’s Muslims first, then everybody else. And they’ll do it with non-Muslims by using the tactic that the free speech, free choice, and free women of this culture are an insult to their faith. They will also use the “family law” codes that allow the also sexist (but not to anything like the same degree) Jewish Beths Din family law to institute legal shari’a courts (as in Britain) among Muslims here. Problematically, the vast majority of Muslims in America, moderates all, have caved to Saudi pressure for radical imams – Tabeban-trained in Pakistan or Wahhabi-trained in Saudi Arabia – to run American mosques. Now they run 80% of them, and the American Muslim community has not had the spine to correct the problem and doesn’t have it now.
But make no mistake: Al Qaeda endorsed Obama because they already know, by everything he has done and all he has not done, that he is the best bet for entering American power centers by the back door. And Americans should be highly suspect of a media that helped them run this little piece of reverse psychology on the American public.
And Americans should also realize that the evidence of Obama’s capitulation to what Stephen Schwartz calles “The Wahhabi Lobby” in the United States is incontrovertible and crystal clear: When a candidate for the Presidency of United States fronts a headscarf worn by a radical in a pandering and obsequious attempt to prevent bad press, he is too spineless and self-serving to be President of the United States.
Non-Partisan? Not in North Minneapolis
“EARMARKS?” – League of Women Voters Moderate Forum, again.
Click HERE to see the Ellison 2008 Federal Earmarks. What went to north Minneapolis?
What does it mean when an organization says their “non-partisan”? Non-Partisan means showing no support either way to an event, person or political candidate. In Minneapolis especially among the non-profits and faith-based organizations the opposite is true. This election year many 501(c)3’s have chosen to align themselves with one or more political candidate. This becomes evident with the large gathering of non-profits and Faith-Based organizations in Minneapolis holding political forums and events.
In Articles of Incorporation filed by each one of these organizations in the State of Minnesota, usually in Article III it reads, “No substantial part of the activities of the corporation or organization shall 
constitute the carrying on of propaganda or of attempting to influence legislation. The corporation shall not be participants or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office”. This election year there are multiple violations as it pertains not being non-partisan and aligning organization with a driven agenda focused on a political candidate or issue. These organizations (faith-based and social service) are in direct violation of IRS tax-exempt status due to the actions of a few “pundits” and “HNIC’s”.
I know everyone is excited about Obama, more than likely being the 1st Black President of the United States, that’s okay – but to remember to always use sound business practices when engaging in the political arena.
The League of Women Voters, The Isaiah Project and many more tax exempt/501(c)3 organizations in the United States have stepped over the line by blatantly showing support for an incumbent or political candidate to support and change legislation on behalf of their organizations mission. This became evident in a meeting with point people with the ISAIAH project – who came to my office to request that – “If a candidate I know will be in line with their organizations mission (if elected), will they (the candidate/staff) help them to move forward in Washington, DC?” The League of Women Voters is also guilty of several heinous actions when it comes to a political agenda and particular incumbent. In a recent conversation with Star Tribune writer Steve Brandt I asked, “How come you don’t write about other candidates that are running for office?” His reply brought me chills and horror – Brandt stated, “Well if the League of Women Voters doesn’t find it important enough to have a debate – why cover that candidate?” (I have the email from Mr. Brandt) The last time I checked – both of the above mentioned organizations hold an IRS tax-exempt status and are 501(c) 3’s. Let’s not forget ACORN. To be raided soon in Minneapolis for voter fraud. Those of you that have had ACORN in our social service organizations, I suggest you keep a close watch or get them out now!
On Monday, October 20, 2008 at Jordan New Life Church in North Minneapolis a Political Forum was held (Jordan New Life was excellent at being non-partisan) with candidates from the Minneapolis School Board, Local House and Congressional Candidates. Rep. Keith Ellison didn’t show up, but he did something way better – he sent his son, Isaiah. Overall the young man held his own, but when asked about Economic Stimuli for north Minneapolis – the words hit the fan that this journalist had always thought was happening, “Earmarks”.
Like Keith, when answering questions it was like a cat licking him or herself on a Friday night. Isaiah went on to say his Father has supported the North side and infused over 80 million dollars in: “Earmarks”- even to the church he was currently sitting in. With this said, my question is, “where in the hell did the money go?” Furthermore, why has North Minneapolis seen no new jobs, business or economic stimuli with $80 million dollars being pumped in?
In a line from “The Bitch Switch, by Omarosa Manigault-Stallworth – The Apprentice alumni and Millionaire Donald Trump muse. Omarosa says, “Knowing how to turn in on and off is important”, speaking on her on and off again disposition(s). The Minneapolis non-profit sector has learned to turn it on – and leave it on. If “earmarked” money went to local non-profits, rather than businesses this is why there has not been no new jobs created; No new businesses; No new development…nothing! This is a great disparity that needs to be addressed by every person in Minneapolis. In most cases in the Minneapolis area, non-profit directors have never run a shoeshine stand and how can the residents of North Minneapolis let this go unanswered. Please watch this video closely and ask your representatives…”Where’s the money?”
Short answer: “Local non-profits and faith based organizations get the money as long as they support the politicians that help them obtain it!”
Minnesota’s Star Tribune Newspaper and its “Gate-Keeping Journalism” Excludes Republican and Independent Party Candidates
This letter was received by IBNN from Minnesota 5th Congressional District Independent candidate William McGaughey. With less than 23 days before the November 4, 2008 elections, the same frustrations are voiced as it pertains to the Star Tribunes “communist”, “DFL Skewed” and unfair reporting practices. Be fair and let the “People” decide!
The success of democracy depends on informed voters. Their information comes mainly from the media. Voters depend on the media to present reasonably fair and balanced pictures of the candidates for public office, their experience, stance on issues, etc. But suppose the media decline to report on particular campaigns? Voters are then inclined to vote for known candidates, the incumbents, and ignore others on the ballot.
Such a situation describes what is happening in the race for Congress in Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District, comprising Minneapolis and its suburbs. The Star Tribune, headquartered in Minneapolis, is the city’s only daily commercial newspaper. The local electronic media draw many of their news stories from it.
The filing deadline for political candidates in Minnesota was July 15th. Since then, the Star Tribune has not published a single article about the 5th District Congressional race. It did not report the names of candidates who had filed for this office. Unlike previous years, it did not publish a Voter’s Guide for the primary. It did not report the votes received by each candidate in the primary. There were three: DFL incumbent, Keith Ellison; Republican, Barb Davis White; and me, of the Independence Party.
Rep. Ellison has been named and quoted in dozens of Star Tribune articles in the three months following the filing deadline. Barb Davis White and I have been named twice – once before and once after the primary – to the effect that we were running unopposed in our respective party primaries. Both were single-sentence statements of that fact.
Meanwhile, the Star Tribune has given extensive coverage to other Congressional races, notably in the 3rd and 6th District races. Granted, one involves an open seat vacated by Jim Ramstad, and other a seat occupied by Michele Bachmann. The 5th District, in contrast, is considered a safe seat for any DFL candidate running for reelection. I find it interesting, however, that while the Independence Party candidate in the 3rd District has received ample coverage in the Star Tribune; I actually got more votes than he did in the primary. (This information comes from the Minnesota Secretary of State’s website, not the Star Tribune.)
The Star Tribune has a reputation of favoring DFL candidates, both in its editorials and news reporting. When I ran in the Independence Party primary for U.S. Senate in 2002, the Star Tribune did not mention me in any of its pre-primary articles. It did not report the primary results even though I finished second with 8,400 votes, or 31% of the total, in a three-person race. When I attempted to place a paid ad, the Star Tribune “legal department” insisted that I change the wording. I did not use crude or insulting language or incite violence. The newspaper simply did not like my political views.
I call this “gate keeping journalism”: a tendency to decide what candidates and what positions are respectable and to defeat the disfavored candidates and views through silence – withholding the oxygen of information that voters need to cast intelligent votes. For decades now, the Star Tribune has been a prime practitioner of this art. In my view, this newspaper has aspired to shape the political news as well as report it. And, with a paid circulation of a half-million readers on Sunday, it has largely succeeded.
The Star Tribune and its editors – like some political parties, need a good “house-cleaning!”
TO “EQUIVOCATE” (Meaning: To use vague or ambiguous language in order to deceive or to avoid telling the truth.)
The University of Minnesota is “Equivocating” as it pertains to their rationale for pulling out of the north Minneapolis project. But are they also “Equivocating” as to their rationale for the Mental Health project?
No “Equivocation” on this joint venture was proposed to address the mental health concerns, which has resulted in the large number out-of-home- placement of children in the North Minneapolis and surrounding community.
Now, the meeting, Dr. Robert Jones stated, due to the increase in cost U of M is unable to go forward, citing some figures of over $385.00 per square foot and the additional cost of certain additional equipment as the bases for being unable to continue with the project. However when asked by the 5th District Congressman, Rep. Keith Ellison, as to “what was projected as the original budget for the project and what are the present projections – (In essence what is the increase in cost) the EQUIVATION begins.
Further it is important to note community member who were present at the U of M Regent meeting when the go-ahead was given for the U of M involvement and questions were asked as to budget for the project, statement was made something to the effect “we’ll get to that later”. This raises additional question as to whether cost was a concern. (Given donation from the Gates foundation for money allegedly supplied by Warren Buffet, the dollars amount was of little concern)
When a board member ask the question, after one half hour of Equivocation by Dr. Jones quoting Marvin Gaye, “What Going On?” the NorthPoint representative Ms. Stella Whitney-West, CEO of NorthPoint Health and Wellness Center stated in the open meeting, the issue is “Board Involvement” , that is the board of this joint venture must remain as Federal Law requires, that is, board member must be individuals who has utilized NorthPoint Health Center in the last year. This response implies that the U of M would be unable to have a seat on the board and that the present control would remain the same. Congressman Ellison stated, “Let’s see if we can work of changing this requirement. The NorthPoint representative responded in the negative. Congressman Mr. Ellison then stated, “Why are we here, let’s shut down!”
Further, off the record, the NorthPoint representative Ms. Stella Whitney-West, CEO of NorthPoint Health and Wellness Center stated the real issue is that the U of M requested the lion share of revenue generate by the clients who utilize the joint Health Center and Board control. To subject citizens to approximately two hours of EQUIVOCATION IS A MAJOR REASON WHY MOST COMMUNITY MEMBERS REFUSE TO GET INVOLVED.
Father, you have forsaken your Children and left them to Die in the Wilderness. Forsaken Children rebel until Father shows Unconditional Commitment and Caring. Another open letter to the Minnesota GOP, John McCain, Sarah Palin, Senator Norm Coleman, Governor Tim Pawlenty and President George Bush
President Bush and McCain - Please look at the MN GOP.
The Minnesota GOP has no “Skin in the Game” – probably because it doesn’t look like them. They have neglected certain campaigns of local candidates that are flying under the Republican Party Flag. I can speak for all of them but choose to speak for the candidate that my agency has been hired to work for, Barb Davis White for Congress 2008 Campaign. For whatever reason, race, being a Woman or lack of experience by this organization, the MN GOP, Senator Norm Coleman and the Republican power brokers of in Minnesota have left their children to die in the 2008 campaign season. Barb Davis White can beat Keith Ellison with the help of the people and the organization of the Republican Party. How would the McCain/Palin folks feel about this action in Minnesota – trust me, they will get this story…
Barb Davis White is running for Congress in Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District against Rep. Keith Ellison without the assistance of the Party she’s aligned with. Since initial contact in the form of a meeting with Darren Bearson, Executive Director of the Minnesota GOP; Brian Humphreys, Political Director by her Press Secretary in August there has been no call backs; no invites to rallies; no ads placed in local radio, newspapers and television in support of Ms. Davis White’s race for Congress. No contact with Chairman Ron Carey has been the flavor of the race. Each time the MN GOP was contacted by the campaign, everyone was “out to lunch in the morning, afternoon and dinner time” no calls backs to the campaign office. Numerous messages have been left with not 1 call back. Also a meeting was requested with Chairman Carey by Barb’s campaign – no call backs our meeting set up (?).
If this is the way the Minnesota GOP handles one of the most critical races in Minnesota for one of their own, we need a dramatic, enema-like house cleaning of the players at 525 Park Street in St. Paul – first thing Monday morning! Last month (September), the Barb Davis White for Congress website received over 192,000 “multi-page” views with tracking this month (the last full month before the November 4, 2008 election), pacing ahead of last month’s numbers. I’m very sure they are tuning in false numbers to the National Republican Party – they have not done 1 thing for the campaign of Ms. Davis White.
The Campaign for Barb Davis White for Congress needs your support in reaching their financial goal to slow the campaign of Rep. Keith Ellison. Since the MN GOP (short for “GO ON PLAYING”) is not willing to return a phone call, invite and plan a community rally for Barb to attend; assist the campaign with financial and technical help, it’s up to the people who read this to participate and join in by first of all donating to the Barb Davis White for Congress Campaign (www.barbdaviswhiteforcongress.com) and then calling 651-222-0022 and ask Chairman Carey “What the hell is up with the Minnesota GOP?” Just an observation…”What happen to the Dr. Ron Paul/Campaign for Liberty people in Minnesota?” (We will talk about that next time.)
The Democrats and Keith are very well organized, doing rallies, forums and “Get out the Vote” campaigns. Al Franken is a “mainstay” in north Minneapolis showing up at local Black restaurants and community events. Y-T-D there has been no sighting of Senator Norm Coleman in North Minneapolis or at community events (the MN GOP does not feel that Minority-Ethnics are not important to the Republican Party which is very sad). A small effort by Senator Coleman and the Minnesota GOP could make the difference in the Barb Davis White for Congress 2008 Campaign.
Since the Minnesota GOP does not want to help…”It’s WAR”
Explosive Video, Fannie Mae CEO calling Obama and the Dems the “Family” and “Conscience” of Fannie Mae
Do you believe…Now?
Obama, ACORN – Follow the Money!
Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loans
Do you remember how we told you that the Democrats and groups associated with them leaned on banks and even sued to get them to make bad loans under the Community Reinvestment Act which was a factor in causing the economic crisis (see HERE and HERE) … well look at what some fellow bloggers have dug up while researching Obama’s legal career. Looks like a typical ACORN lawsuit to get banks to hand out bad loans.
In these lawsuits, ACORN makes a bogus claim of Redlining (denying poor people loans because of their ethnic heritage). They protest and get the local media to raise a big stink. This stink means that the bank faces thousands of people closing their accounts and get local politicians to lobby to stop the bank from doing some future business, expansions and mergers. If the bank goes to court, they will win, but the damage is already done because who is going to launch a big campaign to get the bank’s reputation back?
It is important to understand the nature of these lawsuits and what their purpose is. ACORN filed tons of these lawsuits and ALL of them allege racism.
Case Name
Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011
State/Territory Illinois
Case Summary
Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.
U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs’ suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank’s loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).
The parties voluntarily dismissed the case on May 12, 1998, pursuant to a settlement agreement.
Plaintiff’s Lawyers Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Childers, Michael Allen (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Clayton, Fay (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Love, Sara Norris (Virginia)
FH-IL-0011-9000
Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Obama, Barack H. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Wickert, John Henry (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-9000
UPDATE: www.Hotair.com comments on this story HERE.
The Bailout – The way it should work! Is anyone Listening?
This idea sounds just crazy enough to possibly work, so naturally it won’t be given serious consideration. How great is our bureaucracy!!
Here goes: I’m against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG. Instead, I’m in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to American We Deserve It Dividend.
To make the math simple, let’s assume there are 200,000,000 U.S.Citizens 18+. Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child.
So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up. So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00. My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a We Deserve It Dividend.
Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let’s assume a tax rate of 30%. Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam. But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket. A husband and wife have $595,000.00. What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family? Pay off your mortgage – housing crisis solved.
Pay off College Loans- what a great boost to new grads. Put away money for college – it’ll be there safe in a bank – creates money to loan to entrepreneurs. Buy a new car – create jobs; Invest in the market – capital drives growth; Pay for your parent’s medical insurance – health care improves; Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean – or else!
Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company that is cutting back, and of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces. If we’re going to re-distribute wealth let’s really do it…instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 ( ‘vote buy’ ) economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President. If we’re going to do an $85 billion bailout, let’s bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!
As for AIG – liquidate it. Sell off its parts.
Let American General go back to being American General. Sell off the real estate. Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up. Here’s my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn’t.
Sure it’s a crazy idea that can ‘never work.’ But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party! How do you spell Economic Boom? I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion We Deserve It Dividend more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in Washington DC And remember, The Birk plan only really costs $59.5Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.
Ahhh…I feel so much better getting that off my chest.
Kindest personal regards,
You’re Friend – Jon Canaday
PS: Feel free to pass this along to your pals as its either good for a laugh or a tear or a very sobering thought on how to best use $85 Billion!!
IBNNNEW- The Death of North Minneapolis… Donald Allen
- IBNN Exclusive Report: Youth with weapon attempts to enter funeral of Alisha “Lele” Neely (Captured on Film) Donald Allen
- WCCO 4 (CBS) Television fails in journalistic integrity with “edited and spliced” tape of the Minneapolis Police Beating of Ira Stafford…rating F- Donald Allen
- MURDERAPOLIS – Code 4, No More Donald Allen
- Minneapolis’ Star Tribune newspaper’s bias reporting causes defamatory speculation at Internet marketing firm (Updated) Donald Allen
News Services
Stumble It!