You’ve seen “Black Women for Kamala” and even “White Dudes for Kamala,” but don’t expect to see “Parents for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.”
Vice President Kamala Harris is squarely against parental control of what young children are taught about sex, gender and homosexuality in school. On Tuesday, she chose a running mate — Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz — a former schoolteacher who shares her extreme, anti-parent views.
Harris and Walz are out of line with what most Americans think. Not just Republicans; a majority of Hispanic and Black Democrats don’t want gender ideology in elementary school classrooms, according to Pew Research and You/Gov polls.
On July 25, Harris promised the American Federation of Teachers convention that she opposes the wave of state laws that bar preschool and elementary school teachers from indoctrinating children about sexual orientation and gender choices. Harris also opposes book bans, suggesting she’s OK with giving young children books that encourage them to question their own gender identity.
“We want to ban assault weapons. They want to ban books,” she railed. At issue are books for the youngest readers, like “I Am Jazz,” that tell little girls they can be boys, and little boys that they can be girls. Jazz “had a girl’s brain in a boy’s body. … Jazz was transgender.”
Parental rights and the innocence of young children are at stake in this election, warns Terry Schilling, president of the American Principles Project, which launched an $18 million ad campaign across seven swing states. Schilling calls Harris an “extremist.”
All people, regardless of their sexual orientation, deserve respect. But parents need the final say on what their children are taught.
Harris has a history of bashing lawmakers who side with parents. At a June 23, 2023, pride rally, she called them “extremists.”
Who’s extreme here? You decide.
An AFT report deplores a Henrico County, Virginia, parent for questioning the appropriateness of “I’m a Gay Wizard,” a book in the school library, which depicts two boy characters having oral sex.
Former President Donald Trump vows to cut federal funding for any school or program that tries to push gender ideology and other “inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children.”
On June 18, Harris posted a picture of herself hugging a tall man in drag, dressed in a metallic bikini and stilettos, on Facebook, adding the message, “Our LGBTQI+ children should not fear who they are.”
Of course they shouldn’t. All children deserve respect.
But this battle isn’t about inclusion. Inclusion is a good thing. This is about indoctrination. According to the AFT, “Books that normalize sexual identity confusion can help young people realize that they are not alone in their struggle for identity clarity and confirmation.” What the AFT goes on to say is that “the lack of candid conversations in families” about “nonheterosexual identity development” must be offset by teachers bringing it up.
Sorry, most parents don’t want the AFT — or local school authorities — replacing family. Harris apparently does. So does her new running mate.
Minnesota parents who opposed “Call Me Max,” a book about a transgender boy, being read aloud in kindergarten asked why they should let a teacher plant seeds of doubt in their kindergarteners about their sexual identity. Several states have banned the book from classrooms, but amazingly, California’s state education department recommends it for kindergarteners, first graders and second graders.
On May 22, Walz signed a law barring parental groups from removing books or materials from Minnesota school libraries based on content, calling the parental efforts “regressive.” The bill mimics legislation already passed in California and other blue states that leaves educators, not families, in charge.
Walz also championed legislation to provide tampons in all boys’ bathrooms, in case a transgender needs one. That’s pushing an agenda.
Meanwhile, Harris mocks parents, exclaiming, “Book bans in this year of our Lord 2024.”
The choice in November is between California values — extremely liberal Harris values — or the values your family chooses.
Meanwhile, the real emergency in education is being ignored. Fewer than one-third of fourth graders are proficient in reading, and barely one-third are proficient in math.
Blame the AFT. Its website is all about immigration rights, transgender rights, banning firearms, and other political issues. Not a word about pedagogy — how to teach reading and math effectively.
After Walz’s selection Tuesday, both the AFT and National Education Association rushed to applaud the pick.
Parents: If you care about your children’s innocence and their future, don’t elect AFT toady Harris and her anti-parent running mate in November.
Betsy McCaughey is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and a former lieutenant governor of New York and chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths. Follow her on Twitter @Betsy_McCaughey. To find out more about Betsy McCaughey and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
Every school district that hosts Black Lives Matter at School (“BLM at School”) perpetuates discrimination while committing intellectual fraud against our youth. Parents and taxpayers should be outraged at the National Education Association for its endorsement and promotion of this race propaganda in public schools.
BLM at School’s parent organization, Black Lives Matter (“BLM”), is a civil rights hack with virtually no ties to the black community. At its core, BLM is anti-God, anti-America, anti-traditional family, anti-police, and anti-white people. Rather than confront overwhelming statistics of black-on-black homicide, BLM’s mission is to “eradicate white supremacy and build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on black communities by the state and vigilantes.” BLM claims police brutality is an existential threat to black people. Thus, when black criminals die at the hands of white cops, looting and rioting are perceived as morally justified.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, there’s no significant difference in the amount of whites versus blacks who encounter police on an annual basis. Despite representing just 13.8% of our population, a 2019 FBI report shows individuals within the black community committed the highest numbers of robbery and murder. These perpetrators are not victims.
BLM at School advocates for racial equality in public education with four demands:
“End zero tolerance implement restorative justice”
“Hire and retain black teachers”
“Mandate black history and ethnic studies”
“Counselors not cops”
Anyone in their right mind knows this absurd call to action has nothing to do with K-12 instruction.
“Restorative justice” says, if someone is attacked (e.g. sexual assault, violence, bullying), the victim must engage in “peace circles” and “problem solve” with their abuser. That’s insane. “Hire black teachers” is a directive to practice racial discrimination on its face. If an applicant—who happens to be black—is not qualified to teach, don’t hire them. “Ethnic studies” is Critical Race Theory (CRT), which is Marxism. And last I checked it’s resource officers, not counselors, who keep children safe at school.
Race propaganda in the United States is intimately linked to the Civil Rights Movement and its most notable icon, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Because he was a powerful and effective orator, sincere conservatives and sincere leftists quote Dr. King when the need arises. His rhetoric fundamentally improved societal conditions for (black) Americans though he was an economic socialist who believed in reparations and the welfare state. Dr. King was also a supporter of affirmative action with close ties to the radical activist and communist sympathizer, Jesse Jackson. Judge for yourself whether these facts discredit Dr. King or simply provide a more grounded view of history.
Of course, less than a century ago, many parts of society were segregated and in need of civil rights reform. A hundred years prior to that, the deadliest war in our nation’s history served as the catalyst to abolish slavery. No doubt, the United States had problems and progress was slow. Still, these are not present-day issues. Full-blooded, black Americans living in 2024 are not slavery survivors, and no school-aged child has experienced legitimate, pre-1964 discrimination. It’s also important to grasp that serious threats of white supremacy and systemic oppression throughout history are primarily credited to the Democratic Party.
Rather than teach falsified history through a CRT lens, educators should give students all the facts and allow them to form their own opinions. Make sure they know that BLM was wholly inspired by a radical Marxist, racist, white male named Eric Mann. Talk about the Transatlantic Slave Trade that was facilitated by powerful Africans selling off their countrymen. Inform young minds that one of the earliest accounts of slave ownership in America is attributed to a freed black man named Anthony Johnson. Explain that black people make up a mere 14% of our population due to Margaret Sanger’s genocidal Negro Project (a.k.a. Planned Parenthood) that lives on under the guise of “reproductive rights.”
Much of our nation’s K-12 curriculum is polluted with “The 1619 Project”—a debunked, victimhood manifesto authored by Nikole Hannah-Jones. I listened to the entire podcast from The New York Times and found it to be a gaslighting falsehood that lacked intellectual prowess. Sure, I was gravely disheartened that America’s sinful past provided substance for her sadistic narrative. And yet, it never entered my mind to loot a Target or torch a police station. Thankfully, my emotions are not easily triggered by someone else’s perception of reality.
By Hannah-Jones’ account, every part of America—our Founders, the Constitution, capitalism, healthcare, education—is infected with white supremacy. Thus, black people will never succeed unless current systems of morality, economics, and government are overthrown by toxic anti-white legislation. “Diversity” and “equity” are now propagandist terms intended to make racism palatable and undetectable. You have to be deeply deceived or willfully ignorant to believe “The 1619 Project” or BLM created positive outcomes for black Americans.
In “Setting the Record Straight: American History in Black and White,” David Barton wrote:
“Today, black history is too often presented just from a southern viewpoint, describing only slavery and its atrocities as well as the numerous civil rights violations that continued well beyond the end of slavery. Yet there was also what may be called a northern viewpoint with many praiseworthy events; and to be completely accurate in the telling of black history, the story must be told not only of the martyrs but also of the heroes…”
Barton goes on to list William Nell, Carter Woodson, Benjamin Quarles, Joseph Wilson, Booker T. Washington, and Edward Johnson. To this esteemed lineup, I’ll add the brilliant and powerful contributions of Dr. Thomas Sowell, Col. Allen West, Dr. Carol Swain, Dr. Ben Carson, Winsome Earle-Sears, and the like. Acknowledging the achievements of prominent black Americans shouldn’t be relegated to the shortest month or reduced to skin color. Authentic diversity (of thought) should be celebrated by everyone year-round. Lastly, invoking the phrase “black lives matter,” even while attempting to dissociate from the organization, is an affront to this overwhelming fact:
All human lives—born and unborn—matter.
Educators with integrity, who care about future generations, will refuse to disseminate BLM at School’s segregationist propaganda. Tell students the truth.
Black History is American History.
Tiffany Benson is the Founder of Restore Parental Rights in Education, a grassroots advocate for families, educators, and school board members. For nearly two decades, Tiffany’s creative writing pursuits have surpassed most interests as she continues to contribute to her blogBigviewsmallwindow.com. She encourages everyday citizens to take an active role in defending and preserving American values for future generations.
From the South Lawn of the White House to the pulsing heartbeats of North America’s bustling metropolises, Democrats are stepping into the 2024 electoral fray armed with a transgender-dominated platform that makes the riots of 2020 look like a block party.
This time, the spotlight is focused on the very future of the country: our children.
In a repudiation of the family as the foundation of society, the Democrat platform contends, “Your children are not your children.” And it doesn’t stop there. The Democrats are loud and proud that they’re “coming for your children.”
This was echoed by President Biden himself in April when he proclaimed at a White House event, “There’s no such thing as someone else’s child. Our nation’s children are all our children.”
His sentiment was further reinforced by the LGBTQ activists during their Pride Month celebrations. The rallying cry of “We’re here. We’re queer. We’re coming for your children!” may have escaped the notice of those consuming mainstream media, but as Tucker Carlson has demonstrated, the traditional news platforms no longer control the narrative.
America is turning to Twitter for an unfiltered snapshot of reality, and reality is not pretty. The videos of the LGBTQ agenda are being shared, as citizen journalists take over telling a truth that legacy media won’t touch.
One could write off a single declaration of seizing the children as a mere slip of the tongue, but the unwavering commitment of the progressives suggests deliberate intent to make it a bedrock principle woven into the very fabric of the Democratic Party.
The party finds itself flanked by a president whose mental acuity is questionable at best and demonstrators whose behaviors set a new standard for raunch. By raunch, I refer to the naked men dangling their parts at children along the Pride parade route, and naked women in heavy makeout sessions in a public fountain, while children played nearby.
These individuals are the ones taking over our schools, libraries, parks, and city councils.
Even a top cabinet official – Rachel Levine, the Secretary of Health and Human Services – has officially declared that it’s not just Pride Month but Pride Summer.
Levine, a transgender individual, is determined to see the Democratic Party transgender platform permeate the cultural fabric of America. Levine’s aim is to dismantle the traditional family unit and supplant it with the state, utilizing the powers of the DHHS to cement this agenda ahead of the 2024 elections.
Democrats like Levine appear to be drawing from the Marxist ideology of Frederick Engels and Karl Marx, who famously critiqued the family and foresaw its inevitable demise.
Engels said “On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.”
Thus, he predicted, the family “will vanish as a matter of course.”
His colleague Marx explained how that would be achieved: “The education of all children, from the moment that they can get along without a mother’s care, shall be in state institutions at state expense.”
The American middle class, with its inherent kindness and compassion, has proven to be fertile ground for this Democrat redefinition of “love,” which amounts to actual hatred of the nuclear family.
Leveraging the tolerance of centrists, the Left has weaponized the Christian principle of “What Would Jesus Do” to quell debate and sway major Christian denominations to their cause. It has worked with many mainstream Christians, who haven’t found a good response to that rhetorical question.
The platform for 2024 looks set to feature a triumvirate of transgender dominance, the sexualization of children, and a critique of the traditional family. Why this direction? Because the Democratic Party, now under the influence of its most radical elements, finds itself incapable of reining in its fringe. The genie cannot be returned to the bottle.
Parents, brace yourselves: They are coming for your children. Alphabet agencies and unions like the National Education Association, and even the State of California, have made it clear and are leading the charge.
California Republican State Sen. Scott Wilk issued a warning: A new bill that would criminalize parents who don’t affirm their child’s “gender transition” is a bridge too far. It’s time for parents to run for the border.
“If you love your children, you need to flee California,” he said.
Democrats, seemingly emboldened by favorable polling in the 18- to 34-year-old demographic, are confident they have the winning issues for 2024.
For much of America, however, Democrats have simply packed the powder keg, stretched out the fuse, and are holding a match aloft.
Right now, there’s a growing conflict between whether our schools should be focused primarily on academic instruction or social instruction.
Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), stated recently that teachers must assume the role of “Social Justice Warriors” in classrooms across the country. The National Education Association (NEA), another very large teachers’ union, urged the U.S. Justice Department to label concerned parents as “Domestic Terrorists” in an attempt to silence their objections. It’s clear that these teachers’ unions simply want to dismiss parents as being unworthy of advocating for their own children.
But parents need to be involved in the education of their children now more than ever.
Just look at what’s going on with Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Kathy Hoffman. She was recently sued for advertising links to chat rooms where minors discuss sex and gender with adults present and without parents necessarily knowing.
Then, there’s Chandler Education Association Union President Katie Nash, who is on video at a Chandler Unified School District Board (CUSD) meeting actively promoting the teaching of White Supremacy Theory, the 1619 Project, and “Anti-Racism” programs typically derived from Critical Race Theory (CRT).
What does any of this have to do with academic instruction? Nothing.
But it’s being pushed in our schools, and while it can be tempting to blame teachers for this, we need to be careful. Most teachers should be considered as dedicated and trustworthy professionals. Instead, this is a failure of union leadership and their minions who have lost interest in academic education in favor of a growing obsession with political power. What has been the result? Declining academic scores across the country.
Of course, all of this is in direct contradiction with Arizona statute, which clearly defines these social activities as fundamental rights reserved to parents to be directed by them in the home. But these teachers’ unions don’t seem to care. They’d rather do whatever it takes to usurp these parental rights—even if it means lower academic scores.
Is Academic Proficiency Now a Secondary Consideration?
As social instruction grows, academic proficiency suffers. Consider a recent CUSD presentation of a “Portrait of a Learner” program, which described several social aspirations for students, yet somehow omitted any reference to academic proficiency. Shouldn’t we expect academics to be the primary focus of something that involves “Learning”? Either that, or you would think it would at least push students toward developing practical job skills training.
This continued lack of focus on academic proficiency is resulting in a continued decline in student test scores across the state. There does not seem to be any comprehensive plan to recover from this.
The most recent shiny new program is called the Whole Child Concept. But it appears to do nothing more than broaden the scope of the Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) programs already embedded in school curriculum.
Parent Flight
One of the unintended consequences of this movement to focus on social instruction is “Parent Flight” to other educational alternatives such as charter schools, private schools, and homeschooling. The recent expansion of the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program in Arizona now allows for parents to choose from these alternatives over unsatisfactory district schools.
But as you might expect, teachers’ unions and their political arm, RedforEd, vigorously oppose this legislative expansion, claiming that it defunds schools. But what they won’t tell you is that it clearly does not defund a student’s educational opportunities. Equally important, it enhances a parent’s choice as to where they believe their children would receive the best education.
The program has been so popular that parents already overwhelmed the website in an effort to get out of undesirable district schools. Yet somehow it does not seem to occur to opponents of ESAs that, if they had district schools that were satisfactory to parents, then those parents probably would not even consider moving their kids to another competing educational alternative.
Quasi-Religious Woke Doctrine?
Perhaps what’s most frustrating about the growing social instruction in our schools is that, for years, our nation has been gradually removing religious (mostly Christian) influences from our public schools. In fact, it feels like the First Amendment right to “Freedom of Religion,” which was fundamental to the first European immigrants to this continent, has gradually been reinterpreted by the Left to mean “Freedom from Religion.”
But you can’t help but notice how certain aspects of woke doctrine seem to have become “articles of faith” that cannot be questioned by anyone without facing severe social backlash. It’s clear that Christian doctrine has been suppressed in schools and replaced by Secular Humanism, the belief that humanity is capable of morality and self-fulfillment without belief in God, and the more extreme Cultural Marxism, the Neo-Marxist movement seeking to apply critical theory to matters of family composition, gender, race, and cultural identity within Western society.
If teachers’ unions want to apply the “Freedom from Religion” doctrine in public schools, they should also apply a “Freedom from Extremist Political Doctrine” as well. It’s the only way to ensure our schools remain on neutral ground for political ideology, and it leaves social development at home with the child’s parents—where it should be.
Teacher Opt-Out?
Finally, along with our First Amendment rights comes a prohibition on “compelled speech,” which prevents a person from being forced, under threat or duress, to say things they don’t really believe in. But we hear regular reports of teachers being bullied and harassed by other “activist” colleagues to force them to go along with their extreme Leftist political doctrine. Many teachers simply comply because they are concerned about having to work in a hostile environment or having their livelihoods threatened.
This implies that there is some sort of informal “political test” for teachers in our schools. It is often enforced by aggressive colleagues who are usually associated with a teachers’ union. The apparent message is: “comply and be welcome, or dissent and be ostracized.” It is no wonder teachers are under such workplace stress because of these implied threats.
However, there is a recent report of one brave, principled teacher, who, in looking over the daily SEL lesson, simply said, “we are not going to do this today” and put the controversial assignment aside. So, if parents have the right to “opt-out” their children from the presentation of controversial subject matter, that same rule needs to be extended to teachers who do not believe in these social lessons or deem them inappropriate for the children in their class. It’s time to give these teachers an “opt-out” choice as well.
In conclusion, here are a few ways we can start to clean up our public schools:
Return the primary focus of schools to academic instruction rather than social instruction.
Reduce the influence of the politically biased teachers’ unions.
Protect parents’ rights to direct the social upbringing of their children.
Prohibit political and social ideologies from being established in schools.
Protect teachers from being compelled to present controversial materials that they do not believe in.
Kurt Rohrs is a candidate for the Chandler Unified School District Governing Board. You can find out more about his campaign here.
The State of Arizona has great reason to celebrate. In a case that the Club joined as a plaintiff, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah ruled against Prop 208, determining that the money raised from the tax would exceed the constitutional spending limit for education. This decision followed the Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling last August that Prop 208 was unconstitutional. And now, it officially puts the nail in the coffin of the largest tax hike in Arizona history.
This is great news for taxpayers throughout our state, except if you’re House Democrat Minority Leader Reginald Bolding apparently. But while Prop 208 may be dead, the fight is not quite over yet.
