Displaying posts published in

April 2021

Biden wants to use taxpayer funds to promote critical race theory, irking GOP by Naomi Lim,

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-wants-use-taxpayer-funds-promote-critical-race-theory-irking-gop

Education is not typically a high-profile policy area for administrations, but it’s proving problematic for President Joe Biden as his team pushes teaching plans Republicans view as dangerously “woke.”

Biden’s first days in office were peppered with concerns he was too prone to the whims of teachers unions as some groups threatened to derail talks over returning to in-person instruction unless their members were vaccinated against the coronavirus.

Now, another classroom clash is brewing. However, this time it’s over the Biden administration’s efforts to incentivize so-called “woke” lessons for teachers and students alike by offering federal grant money.

Biden’s Education Department this week proposed introducing two new priorities for funding covering American history and civics education programs and activities. The first strives to elevate projects that “incorporate racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse perspectives” into their syllabi, while the other aims to improve “information literacy.”

Biden is approaching a crucial moment for public education, according to Republican strategist John Feehery.

Parents have lost faith in their local school districts during the pandemic because of teachers unions, which “have done everything in their power to keep schools closed, just as they collect their paychecks,” Feehery told the Washington Examiner. More schools are providing in-person instruction as vaccine rates increase and Biden’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus spending package funds are dispersed.

“Kids have to make up for lost time because of the union-imposed COVID disaster, but instead of focusing on opening schools, the Biden administration is focused on creating an ideological curriculum to please their far-left progressive wing of the party,” he said.

The D.C. Statehood Gambit The latest House Democratic power grab is unconstitutional.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-d-c-statehood-gambit-11619045039?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

A week after the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee introduced legislation to pack the Supreme Court by adding four new Justices, the House is set to vote on a bill to pack the U.S. Senate by adding two new Senators. Unlike court-packing, the bill granting statehood to Washington, D.C., has majority support among elected Democrats and the official backing of the White House. But the impetus behind both measures is the same—to tilt the constitutional playing field and consolidate liberal power.

Fashioning an independent seat of government in a federal system while affording representation to its residents is a dilemma dating to the founding. The Framers provided in the Constitution’s Article I that Congress could, “by cession of particular states,” control a small area in which the federal government would operate. In 1790 part of the territories of Virginia and Maryland, two of the 13 states that ratified the Constitution, were delineated for federal control.

Advocates of statehood brush aside the constitutional concerns and frame their cause as a simple question of democracy. It’s true that the roughly 700,000 residents of the District don’t have the ability to elect voting Members of Congress. Many hold influence over the federal government as employees and contractors or in other positions, and in the Founding era proximity to the seat of power was itself considered a form of representation.

Yet the natural remedy for the imperfect status quo, if representation is the real concern, would be for Congress to do something it has done before—return part of the District to the state that ceded it in the first place. That’s what happened in 1846 when Congress reinstated Virginia’s control over the D.C. suburbs of Arlington and Alexandria.

Biden Indicts the Minneapolis Police Investigating the entire department will burden the crime-plagued city.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-indicts-the-minneapolis-police-11619045332?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

Derek Chauvin awaits his murder sentence at a Minnesota Correctional Facility, yet the federal government spared hardly a moment before shifting its scrutiny toward his former colleagues. A new Justice Department probe of the Minneapolis Police Department is targeting the city’s officers in an effort to prove the Democratic narrative of “systemic” police racism.

Attorney General Merrick Garland on Wednesday announced a pattern-or-practice investigation of Minneapolis police. Federal investigators in coming months will examine the department’s record and policing methods. If they find behavior they dislike, they have the power to force reform of the department through a consent decree. Mr. Garland referred to the process as a matter of straightforward oversight, saying “good officers welcome accountability.”

Yet Minneapolis police are right to suspect that Washington is probing them with a foregone conclusion. In his address after Mr. Chauvin’s conviction Tuesday, President Biden said his Administration’s next step would be “confronting head-on systemic racism and the racial disparities that exist in policing.” The man who drafted the 1994 crime bill that led to the arrest of countless black drug users is now claiming racism is endemic among American police.

Last May then-Attorney General William Barr launched a federal civil-rights probe into the death of George Floyd in police custody, and that investigation continues. But Democrats are now expanding the charge of wrongdoing to the entire department, seeking proof that Mr. Chauvin’s actions represent the culture of policing today. No matter that the Minneapolis police chief since 2017, Medaria Arradondo, testified for the prosecution in the Chauvin trial and has pushed to reform certain police practices like choke holds.

Reform in Saudi Arabia: The Road Not Taken By Dr. James M. Dorsey

https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/reform-in-saudi-arabia-the-road-

Saudi Sheikh Salman Awdah, a popular but controversial religious scholar who has been mostly in solitary confinement since 2017, appeared in court recently only to hear that his case had been adjourned yet again for four months. Charged with more than 30 counts of terrorism, a term that is broadly defined in Saudi Arabia to include adherence to atheism and peaceful dissent, prosecutors are demanding the death sentence.

It was not immediately clear why the trial of Sheikh Awdah was postponed, but some analysts suggest the government may have wanted to avoid a high-profile court case at a moment in which Saudi Arabia is maneuvring to prevent a deterioration of relations with a Biden administration critical of the kingdom’s human rights record.

The State Department’s annual human rights report has identified Awdah as one of “at least 120 persons [who] remained in detention for activism, criticism of government leaders, impugning Islam or religious leaders, or ‘offensive’ internet postings.”

Awdah’s crimes reportedly include sedition, stirring public discord, inciting people against the ruler, supporting imprisoned dissidents, and being an affiliate of Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi Arabia designated the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in 2014.

Awdah was detained after he called in a tweet to his millions of followers for reconciliation with Qatar three months after Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt imposed an economic and diplomatic boycott on the Gulf state.

The four countries lifted their boycott in January 2021 with no indication that their demands for far-reaching changes in Qatari foreign and media policy had been met.

A 64-year-old militant Islamist cleric who shed his support for jihadists after his release from prison in 1999, Awdah denounced Osama bin Laden in the 2000s and became a leading figure in the government’s deradicalization program.

Like other scholars, writers, and journalists, several of whom were sentenced last year to lengthy terms in prison, he became a voice for political and social reform in the wake of the 2011 popular Arab revolts, calling for a humanist interpretation of Islam and reform of Islamic law through recontextualization. He argued that Saudi Arabia should be a democracy rather than a theocracy, embrace pluralism, respect minority rights, and allow for the emergence of an independent civil society.

United Nations human rights experts described Awdah, who has not sought to hide his militant past, as an “influential religious figure who has urged greater respect for human rights within Sharia.”

How Much Ruin Do We Have Left? Victor Davis Hanson

https://amgreatness.com/2021/04/21/how-much-ruin-do-we-have-left/

As Americans know from their own illustrious history, any nation’s well-being hinges on only a few factors. Its prosperity, freedom and overall stability depend on its constitutional and political stability. A secure currency and financial order are also essential, as is a strong military.

Perhaps most important is a first-rate inductive educational system. Of course, nothing is possible without general social calm (often dependent on a reverence for the past) and secure borders.

The ability to produce or easily acquire food, fuel and key natural resources ensures a nation’s independence and autonomy.

Unfortunately, in the last few months, all of those centuries-old reasons to be confident in American strength and resiliency have been put into doubt.

The challenge is not just enemies abroad such as China, Russia, North Korea and Iran. The greater problem lies within us, as we erode the inherited and acquired strengths that made us singular, both materially and spiritually.

We are now witnessing a concentrated effort to alter the constitutional order and centuries of custom and tradition. The left believes that’s the only way it can retain its transient power, given the unpopularity of most of its current agenda.

A nation’s institutions are its bedrock. Yet, the Electoral College and the Constitution’s emphasis on individual states establishing voting laws are under assault.