Controversial Black Panther Commemorating School District has 18 Filing for 5 Open Board Seats

Who says that the American people aren't invested in their government? In South Washington County School District 833 (Cottage Grove, Woodbury, Saint Paul Paul and Newport, MN), home to East Ridge High School and the controversial Black Panther Schoolwide Commemoration, an unprecedented EIGHTEEN (18) candidates are running for five open school board seats this year.  Of the eighteen, four are incumbents: Laurie Johnson, David Kemper, Katy McElwee-Stevens and Tracy Burnette.  Laurie Johnson is running for the only open two-year seat; the others are going for the open four year seat terms.  Marsha Adou is the only incumbent who declined to run again.

From Left-Right: Superintendent Dr. Keith Jacobus, Board Members Katy McElwee-Stevens, Jim Gelbmann, Tracy Brunette, David Kemper, Laurie Johnson, Chairman Ron Kath, and Marsha Adou

The four-year term challengers are: Frederick E. Hess (Woodbury), Katie Schwartz (St. Paul Park), John P. Griffin II (Woodbury), Molly Lutz (Woodbury), Leilani Holmstadt (Cottage Grove), Sharon H. Van Leer (Woodbury), Raj Gandhi (Woodbury), Mike Thissen (Woodbury), Wayne A Johnson (Cottage Grove), Michael P. Edman (Cottage Grove), and Safiyyah Cummings (Plymouth).

Three others have filed to challenge Laurie Johnson for the two-year term seat: Girma Dinssa (Woodbury), Susan Richardson (Woodbury) and David W. Firkus (Woodbury).

With a field this large, it will be hard for the challengers to overcome the name recognition advantage of the incumbents, but one can only hope that some of them do, since it is time for new faces on the school board. However, given that there is also a levy renewal and increase along with a new bond request going on this year's ballot, the voter turn-out should be higher than usual for off-year elections, which should play into the favor of the challengers.

Ironically, this spring the district released survey results that painted the general public's view of the job the school board and administration were doing as largely positive.  Somehow, it would seem that those results may have been misinterpreted when fourteen people file for school board; it is hard to believe that everyone sees the current board and administration as all sunshine, rainbows and unicorns.

Let the campaign season begin! It will be a very interesting ride between now and November.

East Ridge High School, The New Black Panthers & The Zimmerman Trial ~ UPDATED

Back in February, East Ridge High School honored Bobby Seale and Huey Newton and The Black Panther Party during a school-wide announcement.  When ERHS parents cried foul over the honoring of a socialist militant cop-killing group like the Black Panthers, the district "leaders" brushed their concerns aside, opting instead to cave under the pressure by certain groups who insisted that the concerned parents were racist in their objection to the announcement.  The issue caused so many problems for some of the concerned parents that they have opted to remove their children - prior to their Senior year - from ERHS and place them in private schools rather than deal with an administration that refuses to listen to parents' concerns and adequately address the question that it seems that violent groups are being promoted by the ERHS administration and staff under the guise that the announcement was "student led."

A photo circulating (which apparently has since been scrubbed from the web) on Twitter about the George Zimmerman trial that is wrapping up in Florida sheds light on one of the many reasons why the concerned parents objected to the honoring of the Black Panthers.  Gee, Principal Harper and Superintendent Jacobus, do you still think that the commemoration of the Black Panthers was appropriate for ERHS? Will you continue to rationalize the announcement if the Black Panthers follow through with their threat to "burn down whitey's" neighborhoods? Or will you finally understand the reasons why parents objected to the announcement?

UPDATED 7/11/13 8:35a.m.
Updated 8/14/13 12:24pm

Sent to me by one of the concerned parents:

This is exactly why we had concerns about honoring ANY militant, violent, race baiting groups.
Despite some in the black community noisy objections, this was NEVER about race. This was, and is, about violence and hatred.

Why hatred is being excused because it is black on white is offensive to all Americans, but it is being excused by a segment of the black community, and much of the liberal community.

It would be interesting to hear if those same people, who objected to the ERHS parents concern, have the same elevated opinion of the Black Panthers today?

Do they condone this rhetoric? Do they stand side by side with a group that is obviously racist?
Racism comes in all colors and is not exclusive against the black community.

A country that elects a black man as president....TWICE....does not have a cultural problem with racism.
Does racism exist? Yes, and it will until the end of time, because humans are flawed and sinful. But is there mass racism being perpetrated on the black community? No.

As someone who is a governmental classified 'minority', I take offense to those who continue to divide this country along racial and sexual lines. I have always seen myself as an AMERICAN first, gender second, cultural heritage last.

Maybe if people started seeing themselves as Americans first- a delicious and harmonious melting pot, we might all come together; instead of being constantly pitted against each other, in a 'salad' bowl of warring ingredients, where someone gets to pick and choose what goes in the bowl.

Along with this letter, written to Al Sharpton  by Dr. Ken Hutcherson:

I was born in Anniston, Alabama, in the 50s and had to fight for my equality most of my life. You see, there were many who thought I should be treated like a second class citizen, drink from a different water fountain, sit in the back of the bus, be counted as three-quarters of a person, go to a different school, eat and sit in the black section of restaurants, use a different bathroom; you know, be separate but equal. Then came Dr. Martin Luther King and all that started to change and praise God! I became a Christian in 1969. Today, I find myself again being put in that same category as a second class citizen, and I am not going to have that same fight.

I did not become a Christian to live the 50s and 60s all over a second time. Muslims have more rights and freedom of religion than I do as a Christian. Tell a Muslim he can’t pray at school or at the airport or downtown when prayer time is called for, and see what happens. Tell a Muslim cleric serving as a chaplain in our brilliant military that he has to marry a same-sex couple, and see what happens. Some of you are saying “what is that about?” Well hold on to your hat, there is more to come.

But as a Christian, let me say Merry Christmas on a national holiday called Christmas and you’d think Satan incarnate himself just showed up. I’m sorry that is a bad example because if Satan did show up, he would get more respect than Christians, Jews, Tea Partiers, patriots and conservatives. Thus all the forenamed groups, and any like them, must stand and fight for their equal rights that are disappearing faster than San Antonio fans after game seven of the NBA championship in Miami. This brings me to the point of Al Sharpton’s recent comments about our movement of taking back our civil rights as conservatives.

You mocked Glenn Beck, thus all of us, with your insult on the tea party fighting for their equal rights. Do you think we are going to go find a hole and hide somewhere? Mr. Sharpton that is not going to happen anymore. We refuse to sit by and let you or anyone else mock, attack, demean or laugh at our beliefs, and think it is okay to push us to the back of the Capitol in DC assuming we will just shut up.

Let me see if I can explain something to you, Al, that it seems you have forgotten. When you and Dr. King fought for our civil rights, was it because no one else had their equal rights? Black people were the first to get their equal rights, right? I presume you think that is correct the way you are talking. We both know that the reason why Dr. King and thousands of others fought during the Civil rights movement was because someone else had their rights and liberties, and blacks didn’t. My question to you Mr. Sharpton is who had those rights when we as a black people didn’t? It is true then that equal rights existed first for us to want them. Seems to me it was the white race that enjoyed that freedom. We saw it, said we wanted some of that, and fought and died until we got it. So why is it that you think Judeo-Christian believers, the religious right, tea partiers, patriots and white people in general who are starting to feel like second class citizens and separate but equal; are being scrutinized by the IRS and spied on by the NSA. Why should they not stand up and demand equal treatment under the law and the Constitution of these United States of America? The greatest nation ever founded under the banner of freedom, one nation under God, gives its citizens certain inalienable rights and the promise that they have the right to pursue their happiness. I believe we are endowed with those rights Mr. Sharpton, and deep down you know we are too.

As a black man Al, who went through the Civil rights fight in the 60s just like you did, and saw the first freedom bus burn in my home town of Anniston, Alabama, on May 14, 1961; I hated Dr. King for his non-violent philosophy. That did not change until I became a Christian later in life. Then I understood God’s biblical truth of love your enemy and do good to those who hate and persecute you. I think I have the right to tell you this sir; I think the likes of you and Jesse Jackson have done more damage to the black race than any white man will ever accomplish. You see as long as you can produce an ethnicity with a victim mentality to keep them in poverty, as the two of you get richer – you know like poverty pimps – and convince them that it is the white man’s fault because he has his boot on their necks, and as long as you teach our beautiful black women that there is a government out there to be their baby’s daddy, the two of you win. You are the self-proclaimed, appointed leaders of the black people. How we as black people have swallowed the lie that we have to have certain black leaders to get on the government teat escapes me.

District 833 Ignoring the Voices of the People Again...

Back in March, South Washington School District 833 voted to eliminate 22 teaching positions, increase walking distances for middle/high schoolers and eliminate four administrative support positions in order to save $2.2 million from the budget.  They will vote on the final budget in June, after they see how much taxpayer money Governor Dayton and his DFL cronies will be giving to the insatiable school districts this year and next.  The district recently presented a survey to 400 residents that was meant to gauge the community's feelings about the district, the superintendent, the board, the teachers and whether or not the community would support a levy renewal this fall and/or an increased levy renewal this fall, as well as community support for providing all students with personal computing devices such as tablets or iPads.

Even though the survey revealed that only 6% of the people support individual computer devices for students in the district, the powers that be have just rolled out a new initiative: "T3=Transforming Thinking Through Technology."  This should be no surprise to anyone who attended Superintendent Keith Jacobus's "Parent University" forums, which basically are a sales pitch for balance balls and more "movement" in the classrooms (exercise miraculously increases test scores; active kids do better in school; if that's the case, my kids should all be geniuses, but I digress...) as well as how iPads will add to the children's learning experiences in the classroom.  Not only add to it, but also (not completely of course...) replace traditional teaching methods, like books, since everything can now be in digital formats and teachers will be able to add content as they please.

The concept, from an education standpoint is interesting, so it is unsurprising that the district is preparing to roll out this initiative, especially considering that Keith Jacobus, Ron Kath, Jeff Jorgensen and Randi Anderson enjoyed an all expense paid (by Apple) trip (except for airfare) to Apple, Inc. in March.  It makes one wonder - if the district agrees to purchase, say, MacBooks for all the teachers, then they get a trip to Apple, Inc. (in California) to learn "How to Bring Common Sense Back to Their District," then suddenly they roll out an initiative that will put iPads in the hands of students in 4K - as in the District's PRESCHOOLS - as well as in select elementary, middle and high schools, with the goal to eventually have iPads available to all 17k+ students in the district, how expensive to the district taxpayers that all-expense paid trip to Apple really was? It would seem that it would be to the tune of about $7 MILLION, which in the end, isn't really a free trip for four administrators, is it? And where does that include "bringing critical thinking back to the district"?

The irony is that if these four administrators were anything but part of a school district - say they were in any other public office - that all-expense paid trip would actually break the State's Gift Ban law, which makes it illegal for state officials to accept anything worth more than $5 from anyone.  Somehow, school officials are not included under that law even though Apple, Inc. is a registered lobbyist in the State of Minnesota.

Once again, our District is happily ignoring the people and what they want - remember the Budget battle where keeping teachers had the most support of the people and that was the first thing the Board and Administration decided to cut? - and are pushing forward with their plan for iPads for students regardless of the fact that 94% of the people in the community said they didn't support that initiative.

Not Going Anywhere

A quote by Winston Churchill has been ruminating in my brain these last couple of days.  It is one of my favorites in general, but lately, it has come to gain significance.

You have enemies?

Good.

That means you've stood up 

for something,

sometime in your life.

Judging by some recent comments made on previous blog posts, I've managed to stand up for something and have created some enemies by doing so.  This person, or these people, seem to think that by leveling personal attacks here on my blog and (GASP!) using my actual name, that they're helping whatever cause it is that they support and they see me as opposing.  Rather than having the intelligence to argue their own points in a logical and reasonable way, they've decided to attack me personally.

Ah yes, I do love the way some people's minds work - it's like a "I can't argue my point so I'm going to call you a name"-disease.  This disease usually manifests itself when the attacker has no ground on which to stand and/or no logical reasoning behind whatever their beliefs are, so instead of admitting they are wrong or don't have a clue about which they're talking, they go into six-year-old debate tactics: "Well...well...YOU'RE A BIG FAT LIAR STUPIDHEAD!" followed by a stomp of the foot and sticking out a tongue. And truthfully, no consequence will befall them if they choose to post here. On MY blog. Unless, you count my ability to edit certain comments to remove names of my friends, or those of private citizens of whom they are trying to discredit or insult or the names of my children from the comments, or even remove my own name if I so choose, a right of which I reserve to use when I feel it is necessary to do so. Or there's the consequences of my friends seeing me being personally attacked in a vicious way and then they decide to stand up for me by taking you down (I do LOVE my friends), usually using the same tactic you chose when you attacked me (that'd be called "Tit-4-Tat" debate-style, used by elementary students all over the world).  Otherwise, you know what? You are free to say whatever you want.  Also, if you look WAAAAAAAAAY up at the top of the page, underneath the bulldog with lipstick (I know, it's supposed to be a pitbull, but the bulldog was cuter), you'll see my very own disclaimer: "You've entered my world now; unless otherwise noted, all posts are my thoughts/opinions/musings; callin' it like I see it." That means exactly what it says - I take responsibility for my posts and if you don't like how I call it, well, I guess you'll just have to stop reading and move on to the next blog now, huh? Buh-Bye.

However if you choose to continue reading, you should know that I work hard to research and show factual documentation for the things I post here, and I would expect that since I work hard to research and logically argue whatever point I'm attempting to make, that the polite thing to do if you happen to disagree with me, would be to do your own research and find a way to civilly argue your point, either here in the comments (and take your chances that someone else will come in and disagree with you and expect you to explain your point - you know, a give-and-take of ideas might occur in which you might learn something new or else you might actually teach somebody something new).  That's how things should work here on MY blog and in the real world.

Unfortunately, that's not how they usually work.  What seems to happen instead is that as soon as one person disagrees with another person, the first thing out of the disagreeing person's mouth is some sort of name like "Hypocrite!" or "You have an Inferiority Complex?" or "Hateful!" or "Bi-Polar!" This tactic is used to shut down debate and discredit the speaker/writer.  If the debate is stopped, then whoever shut it down wins.  At least that's what they think.  But the problem is, no one wins when that happens.  People don't hear each other, they don't really listen to each other and the fights go on and on and on and on.  And pretty soon, we're spinning our wheels in the most divisive political climate the country has experienced in the last 100 years. Or that's what we're told.

Funny how I am trying to teach the etiquette of debate or civil disagreement; honestly, etiquette is not my strong suit as evidenced by Buttercup producing "armpit farts" at dinner on Mother's Day.  All I could do is choke back laughter and beg her to quit.  Granted, we were only at "Lenny's" (as the kids call it...what? Mama was craving some Chicken Fried Steak...It was MY day. What can I say? I'm pretty easy to please), and they put us in a far back corner, and Buttercup is still quite young, but....yeah, what I'm trying to say is: use your manners.  Don't come onto my blog and start trying to shut me down by insulting me or trying to intimidate me, because that's not going to work.  I'm not going anywhere.  If you disagree, please feel free to civilly argue your case, but remember, if you choose to do otherwise there could be consequences...after all, the name of the blog is:

A MNHockeyMama's World.  

Minnesota: Land of Nanny-State Libs Gettin' All Up In Everyone Else's Business...

One of the reason we bought this house was the fact that this neighborhood has no HOA telling us how we must paint our house and whether our trampoline can or cannot be in our yard.  For the most part, my neighbors are pretty cool - we all tend to pretty much stay out of one another's business, and most of them understand when my kids decide to house-jump without telling me where they're playing, and I have to go from house to house to find out which child(ren) they've decided to play with.  My favorite neighbors are the ones to the south of us. I absolutely love them. Since my girls call out "Hey Mr.----" like Dennis the Menace and Mr. Wilson every time they see that particular neighbor, I'm going to call them "The Wilsons."

Mr. Wilson is one of my favorites in large part because he reminds me of my dad.  He has a variety of cool stuff and hobbies that keeps him entertained when he's not working.  Mrs. Wilson is a sweet woman, a little more reserved than Mr. Wilson, but always has a friendly wave and a smile and totally tolerates my little girls coming to visit their cat (and ferret when they still had him).  Another reason I love these neighbors is that when they have an issue with my family, they are willing to come discuss it with me - in person.  We have spent many an afternoon/evening, chitchatting over beers on the deck or in the yard.  They are kind, funny, down-to-earth people.

Recently, I noticed a city truck park on the street across from my house.  The driver climbed out and walked down the street toward my neighbors' house.  I found out from another neighbor that the city worker stood and took photos of my neighbors' yard and all the fun "toys" they have in the large driveway on the north-side of his almost full acre lot.  We talked to Mr. Wilson and told him what we saw that day.  A few days later, he went to City Hall to have a discussion with them.  When he returned, he was furious.

The City told Mr. Wilson that they do not proactively enforce these rules; rather, they are reactive with enforcement, meaning that they only will attempt to enforce the ordinances if someone complains about a property owner not following the "ordinances."  The fact that Mr. Wilson has lived in his house for almost fifteen years, and has kept his yard neat and tidy, has mowed the city-owned land adjacent to his property every summer (which the city only mows about twice a season), has invested in an asphalt driveway to his workshop, and Class 5 gravel for the area around his shop where he stored his large boat and various other items, including vintage wood-sided boats (one at a time) which he lovingly restored to absolute breathtaking beauty in his shop in the summers, doesn't matter to the city. He has been ordered to

  

Good Example of a Vintage Chris Craft Boat 

 remove all his recreational trailers but one and his small sheds (housing his lawn mowers and other yard equipment) at the back of his property in order for him to come into compliance with the ordinance.

We have lived next door to Mr. & Mrs. Wilson for almost five years.  At no time has any of their "stuff" bothered us.  The people on the other side of the Wilsons stay to themselves and are rarely seen; and none of the Wilson's "stuff" can be seen by them anyway as it is primarily located on our lot line.  There is a city-maintained walking path that borders the back edges of all our properties, so there is the possibility that someone walking by noticed Mr. Wilson's stuff and decided to report him, or possibly, there are some new-ish neighbors who have brought their "left-coast" nanny-state ideals with them to Minnesota (and who also tend to forgo talking directly to neighbors about issues) who may have decided that it is easier to call the city and report the so-called evil-doer for breaking city rules. (This is conjecture and is only my opinion based upon previous interactions with those particular neighbors, which includes the fact that they felt the need to call the city to report people legally goose hunting in a field a mile or more away from our neighborhood.) One of my fears is that the Wilsons were caught in the "cross-fire"; - that someone reported my yard for our "infractions*" - we have kept our garbage cans in front of our garage since we moved in five years ago; we seem to have somehow acquired a plethora of bikes; I have a stack of flower pots and other garden stuff along with my wheelbarrow and some other tools sitting around my backyard shed - and the city worker, while notating our infractions, also noticed the Wilson's infractions and decided to hit us both.  If that is the case, I am very sorry.


The real issue here is not the fact that there are city ordinances that need to be enforced.  The issue is that the city selectively enforces the ordinances based upon one report from one neighbor or passerby.  If the city feels the need to enforce the rules, then they should enforce the rules on everyone, not just on those of whom had meddling neighbors complain.  This represents a giant infringement on private property rights.


Another issue that stems from this comes from the on-going Second Amendment battles around the country. Minnesota fortunately has not enacted tougher gun control (not that our DFL controlled Legislature and extreme leftwing governor haven't tried) laws like other states like Colorado, New York and California recently have. However, if Minnesota's nanny-state libs have their way, extreme gun control laws are headed our way.  Recently, there have been cases in those states with the extreme gun control laws where people have not only had their 2nd Amendment Rights trampled, but also their 4th Amendment Rights ripped to shreds by the authorities.  Some of these cases involve meddling neighbors who have reported their neighbors for legally owning guns.  There are ad campaigns in some states encouraging people to turn in their neighbors for legally possessing a gun.  If a city is willing to only enforce ordinances based upon one complaint, what is to stop them from doing the same if/when Minnesota enacts strict gun control laws?

Personally, I don't want to live in a state that doesn't respect private property rights and the 2nd Amendment and that is willing to act on a "tip" from a disgruntled or jealous neighbor.  Like Mr. Wilson, we'll be looking for a new place to call home soon.

Example of an Anti-Second Amendment Ad

*Apparently, we all have been breaking certain City ordinances:

From the March 2013 Newsletter:

The city has a rule relating to the storage of trash/recycling bins – they may not be visible from adjoining properties. 

Trash, yard waste, and recycling containers may be placed at the end of your driveway after 6 p.m. the night before your scheduled pickup day; containers may remain at the curb throughout collection day. At all other times, the containers must be located indoors or be fully hidden from view behind a solid fence or wall not less than 5 feet in height.

Recreational equipment storage. Recreational vehicles up to 24 feet in length, such as trailers, campers, boats, snowmobiles and RVs, may be parked or stored outdoors as follows:
•              One piece of recreational equipment is allowed per dwelling unit. When recreational equipment is on a trailer, the trailer and piece of recreational equipment shall be considered as one. Measurement does not include tongue of trailer or motor (if applicable).
•              Equipment may be located on any rear or side lot not within 5 feet of the lot line; it must be on concrete or blacktop.
•              Equipment may be located in the front lot, on concrete or blacktop, and not within 15 feet of the curb.
•              Recreational equipment may not be parked or stored on a public street.

Exterior storage.All materials and equipment – such as lawn mowers, lumber, gardening tools, etc. – must be stored within a building or be fully hidden from adjoining properties. Other items including, but not limited to, play structures, clotheslines, and grills may be visible; however, setbacks may be required and some homeowner’s association covenants may restrict them.

Community Rifts Exposed by ERHS Black Panther Announcement

The Black Panther presentation at East Ridge High School on February 14, 2013 has exposed rifts in the community: the concerns of the parents opposing the announcement have been minimally brushed aside as silly by some, or worse, the parents are being accused (not directly, but by insinuation) of being racist for their concerns about how the Black Panthers were honored during the school-wide announcement at ERHS.  Those who are focusing on criticizing the concerned parents for their outrage have, for the most part failed to understand that both groups have repeatedly stated the same thing:  The Black Panthers and the history of the '60's era should be taught in history classes, and that American History - of ALL Americans should be taught in school.  This has never been something that has been disputed by either group; unfortunately, there are those in the group voicing their support for the announcement who have either insinuated or implied or, in the case of K. Stanley Brooks in an op-ed in the Woodbury Bulletin and in an online column has claimed that the concerned parents were accusing the school of teaching "Black Supremacy" - something that has never been uttered or written by anyone involved with this issue.  Dr. Brooks, has (apparently unknowingly) articulated the point that the concerned parents have repeatedly made: 

....rather it should engage the reader to understand critically the contents and the purpose of the existence of the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense. Who were they defending? Why was there a need for defense? Were there extreme life threatening experiences that drove them to extreme forms of protection for their families and communities? Do people know that their breakfast program was the pre-cursor to what we currently refer to as Free and Reduced lunch programs? Was it positive that the program rapidly expanded from feeding a handful of kids in an Oakland church, to serving over 10,000 a day before they went to school? They were filling a need in that context that should have been addressed by the school district and state. These should be foundational questions to be answered...

Funny, but that statement should actually be directed at the teacher and Principal of East Ridge for the fact that they used a two minute sound bite of information about the Black Panthers without giving the rest of the teachers any information that 1) The Black Panthers would be the topic of that day's commemoration, and 2) Information and the time to do exactly what Dr. Bro0ks has described: make the announcement into a true learning experience for all ERHS students.  If Dr. Brooks and those who continue to criticize and/or attempt to have this issue swept under the rug would truly listen to the concerns of the parents speaking out on this issue, they would see that in truth, they are all in agreement that the manner in which the Black Panthers were presented to the students did not fulfill the most basic thing school is supposed to do: educate.

As has been endlessly repeated: it is not about the fact that the Black Panther Party was mentioned that the concerned parents oppose, but rather that it was not given the historical context and discussion time for the children of ERHS to fully understand the group and what it was about - and that would include the good the group did as well as the bad.  This truly could have been a great learning opportunity along with the other groups and people picked for the daily announcements would have been.  Perhaps if Mr. Harper would come out and say, "You know what? You all are right: we do need to include notes to teachers about whom we will commemorate in the daily announcements during Black History month and give them classroom time to further delve into why those groups and people are historically significant with their students." Wow! What an amazing learning experience that could be.  One thing that has been repeated by all the people weighing in on this issue is the need for a deeper understanding of our Nation's history (all Americans' history - not just select groups), and that is something that has not been addressed at any time by any of the school administrators or school board members.  There is something that we all can come together on and say, "Hey, we actually agree on this issue.  Now please do something about it."  There's a dialogue we could gladly have.


However, this dialogue is unlikely to happen any time soon because, in my opinion, it unfortunately seems that is not how those supporting the announcement are perceiving the issues the concerned parents have brought up.  Instead of truly listening to the concerns, they seem to be hearing only that something brought up during Black History month is being criticized and are taking that criticism as racially motivated due to the fact that it happened during Black History month, the topic in question is the Black Panther Party, and the announcement was (supposed to be) overseen by not only a principal who happens to be of color, but a teacher who also happens to be of color.  

Lest anyone be confused here: racism does happen.  Sometimes people are motivated for racist reasons. However, that does not mean that anytime someone of one race criticizes a person of another race who also happens to be in some sort of a leadership position doesn't mean that the criticizer is racist. What it can actually mean is that person is looking at the leader and saying "Look, I know you know how to do your job.  You are in that leadership position for a reason. I expect that since you are in that leadership position that you are qualified to be there and therefore, I have high expectations for you to fulfill your duties. So, please do your job."  That has nothing to do with race. That is judging a person based on their character and job performance and not the color of their skin.

As a woman, I'd rather have someone judge me based on my job performance, my merit, my abilities, etc. than to be given anything just because I happen to have a vagina and mammary glands rather than a penis and chest hair.  If someone is critical of me based upon their opinion of my lack of writing skills or lack of ability of follow-through, am I going to call them "sexist" for having that opinion of me?  I don't think so.  That demeans both me and the person of whom I would be accusing of being sexist. I realize there will be people who will say that my life experiences as a woman cannot compare to the life experiences of people of color; that racism is far more prevalent and has affected them much more adversely than any kind of sexist behavior I may have encountered throughout my life.  Which may be true to a point; however, the question then becomes, "Based upon my experiences with sexist behavior, does that mean that I view every man I meet as someone who will potentially be sexist and allow that to affect the way that I will perceive everything that men say or do?" My answer would be, "No."  Why not?  Because I don't believe that every man I meet is a chauvinistic pig just because I have encountered some who have behaved that way in the past.  That, my friends, is the essence of stereotypes: judging everyone who shares a similarity - be it sex, race, political beliefs, etc. - with someone who may have acted a certain way as the same.  No one likes to be stereotyped.  

Going through life assuming that because some men choose to discriminate against me because I am a woman means that all men discriminate against women is a pretty sad way to approach life.  The consequence of that assumption will be that because I believe that all men are chauvinists, I will be more likely to read behavior that truly is devoid of bias as sexist because I'll be looking for that behavior to confirm my belief that all men are sexist.  Furthermore, that belief can also become an excuse: I am criticized for poor performance in something in which I truly did perform poorly, but instead of seeing the criticism for what is truly is - a judgement based upon my performance - I choose to believe that the person being critical of my performance is doing it because I am a woman, when in fact, it truly was me who failed in my performance.  But by believing that it wasn't my performance that caused the criticism but rather the criticizer's poor view of women, I can deflect the blame onto the person criticizing me and absolve myself of responsibility for my poor performance. 

If this can be true of matters of sex or gender, than why can it not be true in matters of race as well?  Is it not an easy excuse to say, "Oh, those parents aren't really upset that violent criminals were commemorated, and the teachers not given the opportunity to discuss the group in class with their students and make it a true learning experience," but rather, "They're upset because the people being honored are black and it was done during Black History month."  That removes the culpability of poor judgement on the part of the administrator and teacher, and places it instead upon the concerned parents by implying they are racist and therefore in the wrong for their criticism.

As was mentioned in a previous blog, there were emails FOIA'd regarding the Black Panther issue. The FOIA'd emails included an email from someone calling themselves "WoodburyVine" in which the writer accused the concerned parents of having a "political motive" behind their opposition to the Black Panther announcement.  The writer also did some research on your's truly and put it out in a "Community Alert," along with eviscerating me for having the gall to post tweets found on the Twitter Public Timeline (if you don't want your tweets or your kids' tweets read by all the world, protect your accounts and tell your kids to protect theirs), which not only showed the fact that Mr. Harper was "protecting" Ms. Tishanna Brown, but how they felt disenfranchised from much of the ERHS school community.  Apparently, WoodburyVine believed that I put those tweets up to a) put the children in danger; b) to somehow make fun of them and/or c) minimize their experiences as minority students in "racist Woodbury."  None of the above is correct.  The reason the kids' tweets were posted was because they were direct evidence showing an effort by Mr. Harper to protect Ms. Brown from criticism for the announcement. Something that should also be noted (as it was on April 25, 2013 during the presentation to the school board) is that the school district administrators and Mr. Harper, while protecting the teacher, threw the kids under the bus by claiming the announcement was "student led." Also, based on the FOIA'd emails between Mr. Harper and Ms. Brown, not only did Mr. Harper not vet the announcement, but he apparently didn't listen to it either, and the same series of emails showed that the author of the language for the announcements was not a student, but rather Ms. Brown herself.  Were the kids tossed under the bus because their teacher and principal hoped that fabrication - that the presentation was "student-led" - would deflect criticism away from themselves? (Worth noting here: within those emails it was also shown that there was quite an amazing variety of historically great black Americans honored in the days following the Black Panther announcement including the great performers of the Harlem Renaissance, Congressman Hiram Revels, etc. for which Ms. Brown and Mr. Harper must be given credit.)

Perhaps the community members critical of the concerned parents wonder if Mr. Harper and Ms. Brown were white and had commemorated a controversial white person or group, would the same concerned parents voice opposition to such a presentation?  Knowing the people who have been vocal in their opposition to the Black Panther announcement, I would have to say "Yes."  Personally, if I found out that during "'60's Week" at my kids' high school a teacher and an administrator decided to do a school wide, two-minute sound-bite commemoration of Charles Manson and his group "The Family," I would most certainly pitch a fit.  If the teacher and administrator used the excuse, "Well, it was during '60's Week and it is historically significant to that era and, you know, commemorate can mean many different things - it doesn't have to mean honor...and it was student led and we really didn't vet the announcement but it's ok...." do you think that I or other parents would just back down?  Not a chance.  And if we didn't back down, would there be people in the community who would be criticizing us and calling us out for religious intolerance since Manson's group was a cult?  If that seems ludicrous to you, why?  How is it any different than a two-minute, sound-bite announcement commemorating a group which was founded by known violent criminals, who advocated for killing cops, as well as the overthrow of the American capitalistic system and the removal of businesses from the people - based on the business owners' skin color - who built those businesses, and which was also on the FBI's most watched list? If you read the history of the Black Panther Party and its founders, would you also have to believe that this was not a group that deserved to be honored in a school wide announcement without including at least some classroom discussion that would put the group into the context of the era in which it was formed? 

Regarding the children's tweets and the lack of connection to the community those tweets showed:  How about a dialogue about why that might be?  How about we as adults sit down and seriously look at our own actions and the values we are demonstrating to our children and consider how those things are affecting our kids' lives and the way they look at the world?  How about instead of constantly focusing on the differences between people, we start looking for the things we share in common with one another?  How about we, as adults, take off the glasses of distrust, and attempt to truly get to know one another as people? How about we start demonstrating to our children through our own behavior that people are people are people - if you take the time to actually talk to someone who may not look or act like yourself or those with whom you associate, you will more than likely discover that you have something in common with that person that you wouldn't have known had you not chosen to talk to that person?  How about we look at ways to teach our children, by our own actions, that most people are generally good people regardless of what race, ethnicity, sex, etc. they are?  How about we start teaching our children that they are Americans first and like family, we care for our fellow countrymen/women regardless of whether or not they look or act like ourselves? How about we teach our children the entire history of our great Nation, including the good, the bad, the mediocre and the ugly? And by teaching them the history of their country, they not only learn to love their country and their fellow citizens, but they also see the mistakes that have been made in the past, understand those mistakes and be given the knowledge on how not to repeat those mistakes?  

How about it - anyone out there up for starting a dialogue about this?

A Question of Ethics?

It just gets dirtier and dirtier.

In order for South Washington County District 833 to acquire Crosswinds school and move the Woodbury Elementary students into that school to make room for the little darlings of Spanish Immersion in Woodbury Elementary, the offer by Perpich Center for Crosswinds must be defeated in the Minnesota Legislature.  To believe that this issue would be treated fairly is to believe that the Democrat leadership in the Minnesota Legislature is fair, which, judging by the load of crap coming out of the legislature this session, would be a false belief.

It turns out that The Crosswinds-Perpich bill (Minnesota House HF592 and Minnesota Senate as SF530) has been stalled, and is not being heard in the Education Committee.  According to the rules (made by the Democrats at the beginning of the session), if a bill is not heard in a committee, the bill is dead.  But why would the bill be stalled in committee? And who would be stalling it?  The "official" person stalling the bill is Patricia Torres Ray (DFL-63), Chairwoman of the Education Committee.  However, one of the primary members of the Minnesota Senate Education Committee also happens to be none other than Susan Kent, Freshman Democrat Senator from District 53.  District 53 includes parts of the South Washington County School District 833 where Senator Kent just happens to have a child in the choice Spanish Immersion program.  It is rumored that Senator Kent has been pushing Senator Torres Ray to keep SF530 stalled - if the bill receives no hearing, it effectively dies and South Washington County School District 833 will acquire Crosswinds to use as they please, including moving elementary students into a school designed for 6-10th graders.

It is always amazing how there are so many people who seem to only get involved in local politics to further their own agendas:  David Kemper, SWC School Board Member, also has children participating in the Spanish Immersion program.  Certainly there is no way he'd allow that to cause him to put the well-being of the district's most diversely populated elementary school students below the happiness of a small group of Spanish Immersion kids...or would he?  During the last big battle over Spanish Immersion kicking neighborhood kids from their school, David Kemper refused to remove his vote from the issue.  No conflict of interest here, folks, nope. Just keep moving.

FYI: The Spanish Immersion Program of District 833 is one that requires students to begin the program in full-day Kindergarten.  Full-Day Kindergarten is only offered as a fee-based program (except in two district schools where the Free/Reduced Lunch Program participants is equal or over 50% of the population) in SWC 833.  If parents cannot afford the fee, there are sometimes funds available.  However, to get into the school a family must enter a lottery (after showing they can pay the $2K+/yr fee for all-day Kindergarten) where slots are filled at random, unless the family somehow "hit the Spanish Immersion lotto jackpot" with an older child, then the siblings of the child already in the program are allowed to participate without having to be part of the lottery.  This system is elitist from the outset, since most of the families interested in SI are those who can afford to pay the Kindergarten fee, and it seems that the longer the families are in the cocoon of SI, the more "entitled" and vocal they become.  It would seem that David Kemper and Susan Kent have not been immune from the elitist attitudes exhibited by their cohorts in the choice program.

More information:
Crosswinds School information
It has been mentioned that Joanne Ward (DFL 53A) might be willing to vote in favor of the Perpich Center acquiring Crosswinds if she feels that she has support from her constituents to do so.
"Perpich Center for the Arts would Sustain Diversity at Crosswinds"
District 833's plans for Crosswinds
Information re Spanish Immersion in District 833
Previous post on this topic

Updated 3/1/2013 2:56pm

THE BLACK PANTHERS WERE UNABASHEDLY MARXIST

There seems to be confusion about why parents are upset about the fact that East Ridge High School chose to honor the Black Panther Party during a Black History Month presentation on February 14, 2013.  Accusations of elitist racism are being bandied about like shuttlecocks on the comments sections of previous blogs.  To quote our current President: LET ME BE CLEAR, this has NOTHING to do with racism.  As was stated in a previous blog, the objections stem from the nature of the group that was the Black Panthers in that it was a fundamentally MARXIST, VIOLENT, ANTI-CAPITALIST, ANTI-AMERICAN organization, that, while important to American history (and not just "Black American History"), is not a group that should be COMMEMORATED - definition: "Honored" - by a school regardless of what month it is.  Furthermore, there are MANY other examples of great Americans who would have been better choices to honor, had the teacher and principal done their job and tried to find better examples.

If anyone is confused about whether or not the Black Panther Party actually was a MARXIST organization, here is the Party's Platform from 1968 as it was published in The Black Panther. 23 Nov. 1967:3.:

THE TEN POINT PLAN
1. WE WANT FREEDOM. WE WANT POWER TO DETERMINE THE DESTINY OF OUR BLACK AND OPPRESSED COMMUNITIES.
We believe that Black and oppressed people will not be free until we are able to determine our destinies in our own communities ourselves, by fully controlling all the institutions which exist in our communities.
2. WE WANT FULL EMPLOYMENT FOR OUR PEOPLE.
We believe that the federal government is responsible and obligated to give every person employment or a guaranteed income. We believe that if the American businessmen will not give full employment, then the technology and means of production should be taken from the businessmen and placed in the community so that the people of the community can organize and employ all of its people and give a high standard of living.
3. WE WANT AN END TO THE ROBBERY BY THE CAPITALISTS OF OUR BLACK AND OPPRESSED COMMUNITIES.
We believe that this racist government has robbed us and now we are demanding the overdue debt of forty acres and two mules. Forty acres and two mules were promised 100 years ago as restitution for slave labor and mass murder of Black people. We will accept the payment in currency which will be distributed to our many communities. The American racist has taken part in the slaughter of our fifty million Black people. Therefore, we feel this is a modest demand that we make.
4. WE WANT DECENT HOUSING, FIT FOR THE SHELTER OF HUMAN BEINGS.
We believe that if the landlords will not give decent housing to our Black and oppressed communities, then housing and the land should be made into cooperatives so that the people in our communities, with government aid, can build and make decent housing for the people.
5. WE WANT DECENT EDUCATION FOR OUR PEOPLE THAT EXPOSES THE TRUE NATURE OF THIS DECADENT AMERICAN SOCIETY. WE WANT EDUCATION THAT TEACHES US OUR TRUE HISTORY AND OUR ROLE IN THE PRESENT-DAY SOCIETY.
We believe in an educational system that will give to our people a knowledge of the self. If you do not have knowledge of yourself and your position in the society and in the world, then you will have little chance to know anything else.
6. WE WANT COMPLETELY FREE HEALTH CARE FOR All BLACK AND OPPRESSED PEOPLE.
We believe that the government must provide, free of charge, for the people, health facilities which will not only treat our illnesses, most of which have come about as a result of our oppression, but which will also develop preventive medical programs to guarantee our future survival. We believe that mass health education and research programs must be developed to give all Black and oppressed people access to advanced scientific and medical information, so we may provide our selves with proper medical attention and care.
7. WE WANT AN IMMEDIATE END TO POLICE BRUTALITY AND MURDER OF BLACK PEOPLE, OTHER PEOPLE OF COLOR, All OPPRESSED PEOPLE INSIDE THE UNITED STATES.
We believe that the racist and fascist government of the United States uses its domestic enforcement agencies to carry out its program of oppression against black people, other people of color and poor people inside the united States. We believe it is our right, therefore, to defend ourselves against such armed forces and that all Black and oppressed people should be armed for self defense of our homes and communities against these fascist police forces.
8. WE WANT AN IMMEDIATE END TO ALL WARS OF AGGRESSION.
We believe that the various conflicts which exist around the world stem directly from the aggressive desire of the United States ruling circle and government to force its domination upon the oppressed people of the world. We believe that if the United States government or its lackeys do not cease these aggressive wars it is the right of the people to defend themselves by any means necessary against their aggressors.
9. WE WANT FREEDOM FOR ALL BLACK AND OPPRESSED PEOPLE NOW HELD IN U. S. FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, CITY AND MILITARY PRISONS AND JAILS. WE WANT TRIALS BY A JURY OF PEERS FOR All PERSONS CHARGED WITH SO-CALLED CRIMES UNDER THE LAWS OF THIS COUNTRY.
We believe that the many Black and poor oppressed people now held in United States prisons and jails have not received fair and impartial trials under a racist and fascist judicial system and should be free from incarceration. We believe in the ultimate elimination of all wretched, inhuman penal institutions, because the masses of men and women imprisoned inside the United States or by the United States military are the victims of oppressive conditions which are the real cause of their imprisonment. We believe that when persons are brought to trial they must be guaranteed, by the United States, juries of their peers, attorneys of their choice and freedom from imprisonment while awaiting trial.
10. WE WANT LAND, BREAD, HOUSING, EDUCATION, CLOTHING, JUSTICE, PEACE AND PEOPLE'S COMMUNITY CONTROL OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY.
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and, accordingly, all experience hath shown that mankind are most disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But, when a long train of abuses and usurpation, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

What if?

I do not believe in censorship.  I believe so strongly in the First Amendment that I refuse to censor even the most inane and/or offensive comments people post on my FaceBook page, which sometimes causes irritation among my friends on FB, but I tell them this: "If I believe that it is acceptable to censor you or anyone else, what is stopping you from censoring me? To condone, advocate or passively stand by while others' rights are taken away is foolish - what is to stop those people from trying to take away my rights if I allow them to take away others' rights?"  If something is offensive, don't read it, turn the channel, turn off the media, switch to a different website.  But don't sit there and complain that someone is offending your sensibilities because you were too dumb to put the paper down or turn off the TV/radio.

However, there are times when caution needs to be taken when it comes to Freedom of Speech, as in the case of the teacher and principal (who claims to not have known what was planned for announcements that day) of East Ridge High School when they decided to broadcast a presentation commemorating the Black Panther Party to the entire school.  It was not Freedom of Speech, it was Propaganda and Indoctrination.   The students were captive listeners in that situation.  The students in school that morning could not avoid hearing the announcements.  They could avoid actively listening to the announcements, but could not leave, turn off the broadcast, etc. during the announcements.

So, last night as I was talking to my husband about the controversy, I re-read the poem in question, "A Black Child's Pledge," and started to think about the ways in which this poem could be taught in a classroom.  As I said in my previous post, the piece on its own and viewed in the context in which it was written, is an interesting piece and in all truthfulness, is an important one as it was written during one of the most tumultuous times in recent American history.  It could be taught in literature and history classes and serve the purpose of educating students about 1960's lit and the Civil Rights Movement.  Unfortunately, the way it was presented to the students on the morning of February 14th, it was used as a method of commemorating a group of militant, socialist thugs: The Black Panthers.

I read the poem again and was struck by the language within it: Instead of pledging allegiance to America, the child is pledging allegiance only to the black members of America.  Instead of pledging to do no harm and to protect other Americans, the child is pledging only to do no harm and protect other black Americans.  The theme of the poem is one of unity within the black community and war with anyone who does not belong to that community.  Is this the inclusive, multicultural viewpoint that has been pushed by educators and Progressive leaders for many years? Or is this more race war tactics of the type that has been perpetuated by our President and other leaders?  And what about the references to "liberation"?  I understand the idea of freedom from the oppressive Jim Crow/segregation laws of the time - but to take the idea of "liberation" forward to the 21st Century makes less sense to me.  When Barack Obama is in the White House, Condi Rice was Secretary of State and Oprah Winfrey is one of the richest women alive, the idea liberation is foreign when viewed through the lenses of race.  Furthermore, how were the children who are not black supposed to take the meaning of the poem?  Were they supposed to raise their fists in a Black Power salute or hang their heads in shame for being seen as oppressors of others? Or were they to just sit there silently listening as a poem affirming black unity was read and linked to a militant, violent group of people who believed fully in the principles being pledged, including but not limited to, killing non-black American citizens if they felt that those non-black people were infringing on their right of liberation?

What if it were any race or creed or religion other than Black and tied with a militant anti-any-other-race group being commemorated, even if that group played some kind of significant role in history? What if, instead of a "Black Child's Pledge" the poem was titled "A White Child's Pledge"?  What if the poem started with: "I pledge allegiance to my White People....I will learn all that I can in order to give my best to my People in their struggle for liberation....make me less capable of protecting myself, my family and my White brothers and sisters....I will train myself to never hurt or allow others to harm my White brothers and sisters...These principles I pledge to practice daily and to teach them to others in order to unite my People." And, what if following that poem, there was a presentation commemorating the Ku Klux Klan as "The People of the Day"? Like the Black Panther Party, the KKK is part of American History.  They were (are) a militant group that began in the post-Civil War (1866) era of Reconstruction, a terroristic organization used to intimidate black Americans and break up Republican meetings (Frances Rice). (The irony of a "White Child's Pledge" being used in conjunction with the KKK is the seldom-mentioned fact that the early KKK lynched at least 1,000 white Republicans who were assisting the newly freed slaves vote, own property and find their way in their newly acquired freedom from slavery.) What if instead of a "Black Child's Pledge" it was a "You-Enter-the-Race/Ethnicity/etc. Child's Pledge" being read in conjunction with a commemoration of a militant group associated with that Race/Ethnicity?  What if it was a "Muslim Child's Pledge" with a commemorative speech about Al Qaeda following the poem? Would parents be appalled to hear that while the Nazi Youth Pledge was read to commemorate Hitler during "German History Month" that some children raised their hands in a straight-armed Nazi Salute? Would there be an outcry of indignation then? Would people go to the school and demand an apology? Would the parents be calling the principle and teacher and demanding to know why such racist drivel was being inflicted upon their children? Would people stand idly by and be placated as the principle said "I didn't vet the information being presented...I'll try to do better from now on...it has to do with history; we feel that the children need to know about important people in history..." Or would those parents pitch fits, threaten to sue, and harass the school staff until SOMETHING WAS DONE ABOUT IT?

So, if the previous examples are offensive and feel wrong to people, why is a pass being given to the principal and teachers of East Ridge High School?  Or is it true that only black Americans have suffered so much that they are the only ones allowed to salute - pumping their fists in the air in solidarity with the poem as it's read and continuing as militaristic, socialist, anti-white, anti-cop, anti-Capitalism groups are commemorated during the month set aside to focus solely on Black American history?  Or have we all become so afraid, so PC that either we fear reprisals against our kids or ourselves if we speak out or we believe that we can't speak out in case we OFFEND someone? Or, have we all been so completely brainwashed that we AGREE with the poem and the militant Black Panthers - as white Americans, we, by virtue of our heritage and skin color, were the ones inflicting the wrongs on every other race in history even though most of us weren't even born while the atrocities were being carried out nor would we dream of ever treating ANYONE the way minority groups have been treated throughout the history of our country?  Or have we forgotten MLK's dream of a land where People are judged by the content of their characters, not by the color of their skin?

If any of the previous statements is the case, there's no wonder there were people rallying for Christopher Dorner and his sick manifesto in California this weekend without reprisal or condemnation from anyone in the MSM or left-side of the aisle. And there's no wonder why the principle of East Ridge High School and his Sociology teacher, Ms. Tishanna Brown, continue to believe that what happened on Valentine's Day was just not that big of a deal.

East Ridge High School & The Black Panthers

KSTP News interviewed Ms. Kelly Fenton, concerned East Ridge parent, about the controversy surrounding the use of announcement-time to promote the Black Panthers under the guise of "Black History Month." They also interviewed Principal Aaron Harper.

KSTP presented the issue as unskewed as can be expected by a MSM outlet.  However, they focused primarily on the fact that the poem, "A Black Child's Pledge," had been read during the announcement, with a little attention paid to the fact that the poem was from the Black Panthers.  What readers and KSTP viewers need to understand is not the fact that the poem was read, it is the context in which it was read to "commemorate" the Black Panthers.  Therein lies the difference: the poem as a literary device is innocuous, the poem being read in conjunction with a description of the Black Panthers as just a group of "militant marxists who are ok because they also fed children and helped with community organizing" is offensive.  

Aaron Harper claims that he hadn't "vetted" the content that was to be read during Thursday morning's announcements and that it was "student-led." He assured KSTP that he would be better about paying attention to the information dispersed over the PA system of the school.  The fact that Mr. Harper is shielding Tishanna Brown and claiming that he should have been more aware of what was being read leads one to wonder what else Tishanna Brown has been up to in her classroom - what part of her interests and biases are filtering through to her students, and why didn't Mr. Harper know what was being read to his entire school that morning? Furthermore, if it wasn't such a big deal, why is he assuring parents that he will "keep a closer eye" on things from now on?

Please stay tuned for more updates as this story continues.

Suburban High School Honors Black Panther Party

This story has been picked up by KSTP Channel 5 (Twin Cities); they will be broadcasting an interview with one of the concerned parents tonight on their 6pm program.

East Ridge High School in Woodbury, Minnesota decided to use Valentine's Day as a day to commemorate the Black Panther Party in a school-wide presentation.  Apparently, the day set aside for all things love is the perfect day on which to roll out information about one of the most violent and militant groups in the USA's recent history.

According to the transcript obtained by a concerned parent (after the principal refused to honor her request for a written copy of the announcement that her son had heard that morning. A few hours later a district representative contacted her and gave her the transcript) the presentation, led by Social Studies teacher, Tishanna Brown, began with a reading of A Black Child's Pledge, by Shirley Williams, which was originally published in The Black Panther Newsletter on October 28, 1968:

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO MY BLACK PEOPLE.

I PLEDGE TO DEVELOP MY MIND AND BODY TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.

I WILL LEARN ALL THAT I CAN IN ORDER TO GIVE MY BEST TO MY PEOPLE IN THEIR STRUGGLE FOR LIBERATION.

I WILL KEEP MYSELF PHYSICALLY FIT, BUILDING A STRONG BODY FREE FROM DRUGS AND OTHER SUBSTANCES WHICH WEAKEN ME AND MAKE ME LESS CAPABLE OF PROTECTING MYSELF, MY FAMILY AND MY BLACK BROTHERS AND SISTERS.

I WILL UNSELFISHLY SHARE MY KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING WITH THEM IN ORDER TO BRING ABOUT CHANGE MORE QUICKLY.

I WILL DISCIPLINE MYSELF TO DIRECT MY ENERGIES THOUGHTFULLY AND CONSTRUCTIVELY RATHER THAN WASTING THEM IN IDLE HATRED.

I WILL TRAIN MYSELF NEVER TO HURT OR ALLOW OTHERS TO HARM MY BLACK BROTHERS AND SISTERS FOR I RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED EVERY BLACK MAN, WOMAN, AND CHILD TO BE PHYSICALLY, MENTALLY AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY STRONG.

THESE PRINCIPLES I PLEDGE TO PRACTICE DAILY AND TO TEACH THEM TO OTHERS IN ORDER TO UNITE MY PEOPLE.

The presentation went on:

"Good Morning, East Ridge! I'm _____________. 'Power to the People' and 'Black is Beautiful' are two of the slogans associated with todays "Black History Month" person, or should I say, "People" of the day.  Today we commemorate Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale, co-Founders of The Black Panther Party for Self Defense.

In October of 1966, Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale founded the Black Panther Party for Self Defense. In the most part to address the rampant police brutality faced by many black communities around the country.  The Panthers practiced militant self-defense of minority communities against the U.S. Government, and fought to establish revolutionary socialism through mass organizing and community based programs such as free lunch and medical programs. The party, consisting mostly of men and women under the age of 25, was one of the first organizations in U.S. history to militantly struggle for ethnic minority and working class emancipation" (SIC)

Page 1 of Original Transcript

Page 2 of Original Transcript; note the change in
font and lack of punctuation; evidence of the
teacher "cutting and pasting" info from
www.marxist.org

According to an East Ridge parent, the principal told her that this presentation was one of many the school was doing for Black History Month and meant to draw attention to the historical significance of the Panther's movement.  So, basically, folks, there is no reason to freak out because this was just an educational exercise.  There were no other groups that are historically significant in Black American History that should be given the same level of honor and significance.  There aren't any other positive historical Black Americans from which to choose, nope, we must choose the ones that somehow manage to mix "revolutionary socialism" and "militant self-defense" with "organizing and community based programs such as free lunch and medical programs..." (Which, by the way, how did the teacher say that sentence with a straight face?)

It is no wonder that with the glorification of such groups as the Black Panthers that there are people who are excusing and adoring another cop-killer this week, Christopher Dorner.  It is no wonder that our kids have no real concept of American history when they are fed sound-bytes like the one above.

It is offensive to me and should be to any American that out of the many people and groups who could be honored for Black History month that East Ridge would choose The Black Panther Party as one that they chose to honor. I wonder if I were to go to the school, enter American History classes and ask random students who Hiram Revels was, if they'd know he was the first Black American elected to the Senate in 1870? Or what about CORE (Congress of Racial Equality) a group of which MLK was part, which focused on non-violent actions to gain racial equality?  Google or Bing "Black Americans in History" and hundreds of links pop up - even a lazy teacher could do that and come up with better examples of Black Americans in History than the Black Panthers.  Either the East Ridge Principal, Aaron Harper and his cohort Tishanna Brown are ignorant of the great tapestry of Black American History and too lazy to research examples of people worthy of honoring or they have an agenda that they are following to further some perverse purpose of encouraging children to believe that "militant self defense" against the US Government and police is ok as long as one is combining that with "free lunch and medical programs."

Another point: say a student's interest in the Black Panther Party was piqued during this presentation, so s/he goes online to check out the group.  What will that student find? The following is an example of what a brief search would give that student:

In October of 1966, in Oakland California, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale founded the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense. The Panthers practiced militant self-defense of minority communities against the U.S. government, and fought to establish revolutionary socialism through mass organizing and community based programs. The party was one of the first organizations in U.S. history to militantly struggle for ethnic minority and working class emancipation — a party whose agenda was the revolutionary establishment of real economic, social, and political equality across gender and color lines.

Oh, but wait, isn't that the EXACT language used by the teacher in the presentation? Why, yes, it is.  Funny, but isn't that called PLAGIARISM? Which website did Ms. Brown steal this from? That's right, www.marxist.org.    It looks like Ms. Brown cleaned it up and made it a bit nicer by adding "like free lunch and medical programs," but otherwise, she seems to have been at a loss as how to write an original statement about the Black Panthers herself.

But, never mind that, parents, there is no agenda here. This was an educational opportunity used to enlighten and educate the students on Black American History.