Wisconsin elections officials said they have removed more than 205,000 voters from the rolls.
QUICK FACTS:
Local news reported Wisconsin Elections Commission officials deactivated 174,307 voter registrations “because the voters hadn’t cast a ballot in four years and didn’t respond to a mailing.”
But the commission also deactivated 31,854 registrations of “voters who may have moved and didn’t respond to a mailing.”
Officials say the removal is “part of routine work to keep the state’s registration lists up to date.”
The deactivation was required under Wisconsin law.
Trump released a statement asking, “Would this mean that we would have won Wisconsin?”
In honor of the 56th anniversary of the voting rights act: Wisconsin election officials cancel 205K voter registrations (from @AP) https://t.co/0N3h0JiPJ0
Purging voters from the rolls has been a point of major contention in the perennial swing state, notesThe Associated Press.
Conservatives filed a lawsuit in 2019 demanding that the Wisconsin Elections Commission remove voters from the rolls if they didn’t respond to mailings within 30 days.
The lawsuit ultimately failed and Democrat Joe Biden went on to beat Donald Trump by about 20,000 votes.
As of Aug. 1, 3.5 million people were registered to vote in Wisconsin. About 3.29 million voted in the 2020 presidential election, according to The Epoch Times.
TRUMP’S FULL STATEMENT:
Wisconsin has just canceled 205,000 voter registrations because they say they could not find the voters. Why did they wait until AFTER the election? Would this mean that we would have won Wisconsin? Congratulations!
NEW!
"Wisconsin has just canceled 205,000 voter registrations because they say they could not find the voters. Why did they wait until AFTER the election? Would this mean that we would have won Wisconsin? Congratulations!' – President Donald J. Trump pic.twitter.com/IaJHJ2NunF
K-12 schools serve the Frozen generation, children and adolescents who have grown up with “Let It Go” as their anthem. Perhaps it is not surprising that Social-Emotional Learning has become a hot topic in education in order to support students who have spent their youth singing lyrics like, “let it go, let it go, can’t hold it back anymore.”
Emotions are the “it” that students cannot hold back anymore. As a result, schools are increasingly teaching students how to manage their Social-Emotional Learning (SEL). The idea is to provide direct and explicit SEL instruction, in the same way that instruction is provided in math, reading, and writing. Educators no longer assume that students come to school with a skill set for regulating their emotions or social interactions.
This begs the question, what exactly is SEL? Furthermore, does SEL align with Christian values, and is it something that the faith-based community should support?
The Committee for Children is a great SEL resource and has been used as a guide for framing the contents of this article. To begin, Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) is the process by which people build skills to:
Understand and manage emotions
Set and achieve positive goals
Feel or demonstrate empathy for others
Establish and maintain positive relationships
Make responsible decisions
Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) is also research-based and built on a theoretical framework called the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, or CASEL. This framework identifies the following five core competencies:
Self-awareness
Self-management
Responsible decision-making
Relationship skills
Social awareness
The research also shows that school-wide SEL programs bring about a variety of positive short and long-term results for students such as:
Improved academic outcomes with an increase of 11-percentile-points
Future wellness in society: lower rates of teen pregnancy and drug use; up to 12% reduction in high school dropout rates; lower incarceration rates; increase in college degree completion; and the ability to hold a full-time job as an adult
Reduction of bullying in schools
Improvement in teacher competency and lower rates of teacher turnover
Fewer school office discipline referrals
Long-lasting benefits and positive life choices
In addition to the benefits, the Committee for Children also highlights alarming statistics that demonstrate a need for SEL such as:
100% increase in suicide rates among children ages 10 to 14
70% of teens self-reporting that they struggle with some aspect of mental health
64% trauma rate among all students
37% increase in teen depression
Overall, SEL promotes behaviors that are generally associated with a Christian lifestyle such as kindness, empathy, reaching out to those who are broken and hurting, having positive relationships, and coping with the difficulties of life in a positive way. What is missing? SEL teaches these behaviors without Jesus, the Bible, or prayer as its foundation.
A faith-based approach would clearly be prudent and preferable for Christian families. Nevertheless, with the separation of church and state in K-12 public schools, SEL is a step in the right direction. Many adults can think of a special child in their lives such as a relative, close family friend, or someone they might coach or mentor. With this special little person in mind, think about if that child would benefit from treating others with kindness and being treated with kindness. Think about if that child would enjoy a peaceful classroom where their teacher can focus on teaching and learning and not managing difficult and disruptive student behaviors. Think about if that child would appreciate coming to a school that values strong and healthy relationships. The answers here are yes and amen.
What the research does not show is whether or not SEL makes students more open to accepting Jesus Christ as their personal savior. I like to think that if such a study were conducted, the results would overwhelmingly show that learning to treat others with kindness opens up one’s heart to receive the love of Jesus. Hearts would become “unfrozen” and “let it go” would also mean surrendering to the great I Am. The moral of this story: the Christian community can feel good about being “sold” on SEL and supporting this important work in our K-12 public schools.
Joe Rogan is certainly a different character from Mike Rowe.
But they have an audience because they both have some common sense and a way of expressing themselves that cuts through a lot of the bull that a lot of others tend to spin. They’re saying what they honestly believe, and their audiences can tell that.
Mike Rowe lit up the internet with a great post on Facebook about why he wasn’t going to be encouraging Americans to get vaccinated, despite believing in the worth of vaccines and getting vaccinated himself. He pointed out that people had legitimate concerns about the government’s shifting positions on the virus, and that if they really wanted to convince people, they shouldn’t be demonizing the unvaccinated.
“They’re always certain, usually wrong, incapable of shame, and utterly void of humility. Is it any wonder millions find them unpersuasive?”
That earned him a lot of ire from some on the left and the folks over at the Bulwark — who wouldn’t know common sense if it came up and smacked them in the head.
Now, Joe Rogan is taking on vaccine passports as a threat to freedom.
During an episode of his podcast, Rogan spoke about how they are trying to make people do what they want — effectively forcing people to get the vaccine to participate in society.
“Don Lemon was talking about that openly on CNN. Don’t have a vaccine? Can’t go the supermarket. Don’t have a vaccine? Can’t go to work.”
Rogan explained how unique the American experiment was, how up until 1776, many countries were run by dictators.
“This was the first experiment in self-government that actually worked and it created the greatest superpower the world has ever known, the greatest cultural machine, the greatest machine of art, creativity and innovation, right f–king here. And how did it do that? It did it through freedom. Because when you give people freedom, let people do whatever the f–k they want to do. They actually find ways to succeed and grow and thrive.”
He continued:
“But as soon as you put the boots to them, as soon as you tell them, ‘You have to do this, or you can’t do that. You have to listen to me,’ now you have a mini dictator. You have one step away from a king. One step closer. You’re moving one step closer to dictatorship.”
“That’s what the f— is happening,” Rogan declared. “That’s what’s gonna happen with a vaccine passport. That’s what gonna happen if they close borders. You can’t enter NYC unless you have your papers. You can’t go to here, unless you have that. You can’t get on a plane unless you do what I say. And people say it’s all about protecting people…no, it’s not.”
Rogan said the problem with applauding vaccine passports is that it gives politicians power that they will not give up.
“As soon as you give politicians power, any kind of power that didn’t exist previously, historically, they don’t relinquish that power. They find new ways to do it,” he said.
New York City has already announced that they will be requiring proof of vaccination to be able to enter public indoor businesses like restaurants, gyms, and theaters, starting August 16. So, we’re on that march in a variety of different, Democratic-controlled areas — unless we call it out.
There were four GOP candidates, out of 24 total, that were eligible for the state party endorsement.
The California GOP has decided not to endorse a candidate in the Sept. 14 recall election of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom.
During a virtual meeting, the decision was made with support from about 90% of delegates, just a day following two influential California Republicans, Harmeet Dhillon and Shawn Steel, reportedly encouraging the state party not to endorse a candidate, the Associated Press reported.
“The polls are showing that the recall is in a statistical tie, and we cannot afford to discourage voters who are passionate about a particular candidate, yet may not vote because their favored candidate didn’t receive the endorsement,” they said in an email obtained by the AP.
Conservative talk radio host Larry Elder, former U.S. Congressman Doug Ose, former San Diego mayor Kevin Faulconer, and state Assemblyman Kevin Kiley were the four Republican candidates who qualified for an endorsement, out of a total of 24 GOP contenders.
That's a last minute win for former SD mayor @Kevin_Faulconer — whose campaign being threatened by the surge of @LarryElder…he strongly supported an endorsement, and flipped this morning — just sidestepped what could have been a grassroots party nod to the talk show host.. https://t.co/MI2zcJeQyu
The Congressional Budget Office released a report Thursday estimating the $1 trillion proposal would add $256 billion to the nation’s budget deficit over the next 10 years, meaning nearly half of the package’s proposed new spending could end up tacked on to the nation’s growing debt load despite calls to raise funds entirely through increased revenues, reallocated funds and spending cuts.
Over the next 10 years, enacting the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act would increase the government’s net spending by $315 billion while increasing revenues by only $50 billion, CBO projected Thursday.
When announcing the proposal last week, the White House said it would be funded with more than $250 billion in unspent Covid-19 relief funds, strengthened tax enforcement for cryptocurrencies, new revenues and “other bipartisan measures”—not once mentioning added debt.
It’s unclear how the new estimate may hurt the bill’s chances in the Senate, but on Tuesday, a group of seven GOP senators demanded a CBO estimate showing the bill’s effect on the federal deficit and said: “We support infrastructure, but it has to be paid for.”
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who voted against moving forward with the infrastructure proposal last week, released a statement Thursday slamming the estimate and vowing to vote against the final bill, pointing out that lawmakers “promised the bill would be fully paid for and not increase the [national] debt.”
All Democratic senators and 17 Republicans voted to advance the bill last Wednesday, setting the stage for its likely approval in the chamber, but its fate in the House is more uncertain given a crop of progressives who’ve signaled they may not support an infrastructure vote unless the Senate also moves forward with a separate, and highly divisive, $3.5 trillion budget bill.
TANGENT
Amid inflation concerns that have rattled markets in recent months, the gap between government spending and revenue has swelled to more than $2.2 trillion in the 2021 fiscal year—less than last year’s $2.7 trillion at this time, but far more than historical deficits of less than $1 trillion. A larger deficit typically means the government is taking on more debt, which can ultimately limit the government’s ability to increase spending in order to curb economic downturns—or fight pandemics.
WHAT TO WATCH FOR
A vote to finalize the infrastructure bill in the Senate is expected by Saturday, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday. The package would then move to the House for approval.
BIG NUMBER
$35 trillion. That’s how much CBO projects the nation’s debt will swell to by the end of this year—before adjusting for fiscal stimulus.
Princeton University is offering a Black Lives Matter course, which will teach students about the “historical roots and growth of the Black Lives Matter social movement.” Starting this fall semester, Princeton University students can enroll in the “#BlackLivesMatter” course, which will feature readings from a former Black Panther member and avowed Marxist, as reported by The College Fix.
The course description reads:
This seminar traces the historical roots and growth of the Black Lives Matter social movement in the United States and comparative global contexts. The movement and course are committed to resisting, unveiling, and undoing histories of state sanctioned violence against Black and Brown bodies. The course seeks to document the forms of dispossession that Black Americans face, and offers a critical examination of the prison industrial complex, police brutality, urban poverty, and white supremacy in the US.
The course includes readings from Angela Davis’ book “Freedom is a Constant Struggle.” Davis is an avowed Marxist, former Black Panther member, two-time vice-presidential candidate of the Communist Party USA, and was awarded the International Lenin Peace Prize by the Soviet Union.
The class at Princeton, which has a tuition of $56,010, will be taught by professor Hanna Garth, who is a sociocultural and medical anthropologist.
I am most broadly interested in the ways in which people struggle to overcome structural violence. My recent work is focused on the connections between food systems, structural inequalities, health, and wellbeing. This work has looked at the ways in which macro-level changes and shifts in local food distribution systems impact communities, families, and individuals. I have studied how food scarcity and reduced access to affordable food influence individual distress, and household and community dynamics. I have also studied the ways in which food justice organizations attempt to improve access to healthy food for low income communities.
The professor adds, “All of my research, teaching, and mentoring is designed around my commitment to feminist methodologies and critical race theory.”
Garth has taught other classes, such as “Race and Racisms,” “Postcolonial and Decolonial Theory,” and “Theories of Social Justice.”
Garth wrote a book titled “Black Food Matters: Racial Justice in the Wake of Food Justice,” which “analyzes how Blackness is contested through food, differing ideas of what makes our sustenance ‘healthy,’ and Black individuals’ own beliefs about what their cuisine should be.”
“This comprehensive look at Black food culture and the various forms of violence that threaten the future of this cuisine centers Blackness in a field that has too often framed Black issues through a white-centric lens, offering new ways to think about access, privilege, equity, and justice,” the overview of the book states.
Garth and Princeton administrators did not respond to requests for comments about the Black Lives Matter course from The College Fix.
“Students will learn to study systematically how human groups interact with one another and how social networks and a variety of institutions help shape those interactions and outcomes,” the course description reads. “How are these interactions and outcomes categorized and understood? Where do different people fit into the social categories we use to make sense of our societies, and why? And how are different actors able to transform those spaces in which to fit?”
In March, Princeton University welcomed Black Lives Matter Global Network co-founder Alicia Garza to hold a lecture titled: “The Purpose of Power.”
In a 2015 interview, Black Lives Matter Global Network co-founder Patrisse Cullors said that she and Garza are “trained Marxists.”
“Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers. We are trained Marxists,” Cullors said in the interview. “We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories.”
The Black Lives Matter Global Network website previously declared that the organization was against the nuclear family.
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable,” the BLM organization stated in its “About” section before deleting it last September.
Princeton offering Black Lives Matter course with readings from avowed Marxist
Princeton University is offering a Black Lives Matter course, which will teach students about the “historical roots and growth of the Black Lives Matter social movement.” Starting this fall semester, Princeton University students can enroll in the “#BlackLivesMatter” course, which will feature readings from a former Black Panther member and avowed Marxist, as reported by The College Fix.
The course description reads:
The course includes readings from Angela Davis’ book “Freedom is a Constant Struggle.” Davis is an avowed Marxist, former Black Panther member, two-time vice-presidential candidate of the Communist Party USA, and was awarded the International Lenin Peace Prize by the Soviet Union.
The class at Princeton, which has a tuition of $56,010, will be taught by professor Hanna Garth, who is a sociocultural and medical anthropologist.
From Garth’s website:
The professor adds, “All of my research, teaching, and mentoring is designed around my commitment to feminist methodologies and critical race theory.”
Garth has taught other classes, such as “Race and Racisms,” “Postcolonial and Decolonial Theory,” and “Theories of Social Justice.”
Garth wrote a book titled “Black Food Matters: Racial Justice in the Wake of Food Justice,” which “analyzes how Blackness is contested through food, differing ideas of what makes our sustenance ‘healthy,’ and Black individuals’ own beliefs about what their cuisine should be.”
“This comprehensive look at Black food culture and the various forms of violence that threaten the future of this cuisine centers Blackness in a field that has too often framed Black issues through a white-centric lens, offering new ways to think about access, privilege, equity, and justice,” the overview of the book states.
Garth and Princeton administrators did not respond to requests for comments about the Black Lives Matter course from The College Fix.
In 2020, Princeton University offered a course titled: “Sociology 102: Police Violence, #BlackLivesMatter and the Covid-19 Pandemic.” The course will “introduce students to the concept of race and discipline of sociology.”
“Students will learn to study systematically how human groups interact with one another and how social networks and a variety of institutions help shape those interactions and outcomes,” the course description reads. “How are these interactions and outcomes categorized and understood? Where do different people fit into the social categories we use to make sense of our societies, and why? And how are different actors able to transform those spaces in which to fit?”
In March, Princeton University welcomed Black Lives Matter Global Network co-founder Alicia Garza to hold a lecture titled: “The Purpose of Power.”
In a 2015 interview, Black Lives Matter Global Network co-founder Patrisse Cullors said that she and Garza are “trained Marxists.”
“Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers. We are trained Marxists,” Cullors said in the interview. “We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories.”
The Black Lives Matter Global Network website previously declared that the organization was against the nuclear family.
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable,” the BLM organization stated in its “About” section before deleting it last September.