Public high school in Wisconsin indoctrinates students in ‘white privilege’

1 Comment

This is from The Daily Caller.

Liberals live to spread white privilege and how we should be guilty.

In 2013 there is no such thing as one race more privileged than another race.

But sadly the race hustlers Jackson and Sharpton spread this lie of racial oppression.

At a small high school in a quaint Wisconsin town, students are learning geometry, chemistry and, of course, that white people have historically oppressed minorities and continue to do so in the present day.

The curriculum on “American Diversity” at Delavan-Darien High School allegedly teaches students that white skin confers a set of unfair privileges, the Daily Mail reports.

“There is not space here to list all the ways in which white privilege plays out in our lives, but it is clear that I will carry this privilege with me until the day white supremacy is erased from society,” declares University of Texas professor Robert Jensen Jensen in one paper assigned to students.

The ideas presented in the course come from a broader academic movement called critical race theory. According to Fox News, “white privilege” was defined in the class as a “set of advantages that are believed to be enjoyed by white people beyond those commonly experienced by non-white people in the same social, political, and economic spaces.”

Another assignment asked students to visit the toy aisle at the local Wal-Mart.

“They were told to go and count the number of dolls that were representative of blacks as opposed to whites,” said one parent, according to Fox News.

The anonymous parent reportedly became disturbed when she perused some of her 18-year-old son’s course material.

“I felt it was indoctrination,” she told Fox News. “This is a radical left agenda and ideology that is now embedded in our school.”

“If you’re white, you’re oppressing,” she added. “If you’re non white, you’ve been a victim.”

The incident was first reported by the conservative Young America’s Foundation’s New Guard blog, where Brendan Pringle wrote, “This course offers a snapshot of a larger trend that has plagued university curriculum for years and has only recently crept into high school classrooms.”

Delavan-Darien School District Superintendent Robert Crist admitted that the parent’s concern “has merit” and presented himself as the voice of moderation in the midst of the kerfuffle.

“A lot of red flags go up in my mind when I look at the materials,” Crist said, according to the Mail. “Ideally, you would want to present one theory that might be way on the left and another theory that may be way on the right and if you find one in the middle you can present that, too.”

Crist said that school officials are evaluating the course and it won’t be taught again until the review process is finished.

He also suggested that propaganda about white privilege can improve critical-thinking skills.

“There are a lot of radical people in our country and across the world,” he said, according to the Mail. “They need to be ideally attuned to some of the different thought patterns that different cultures may have.

Read more:



1 Comment

This is from Patriot Update.

Like the author of this article I have several physical problems.

I have had seven back surgeries,right hip replacement and bilateral knee replacement,

I have also have had a cervical fusion.So my defense abilities are limited.

So I carry a Glock model 22 .40 cal  locked and loaded with almost 80 rounds.

I also carry a variety of knives and a steel expandable baton.

I do want is needed to protect myself and my family.


My name is Frank J. Dmuchowski. I carry a gun. I carry a loaded gun, with a bullet in the chamber at all times. In fact, I carry a 45 .cal semiautomatic pistol. I carry this gun all the time and to every place I am legally allowed to carry it. At night it rests inches away from me, at the ready. I have already used the gun for self defense without drawing it or firing it; more about that later.

I also own other firearms, some for hunting and others for the defense of myself, my family and my property. They stay locked up in a fortified gun safe made with one and one half inch steel walls and three inch door.

I have received extensive (more than 50 hours) training in the safe, legal, defensive use of the gun. I spend hours at the range shooting at paper targets, putting hundreds of bullets through my weapons each month to improve my marksmanship and defensive use skills.

I am now sixty six years old. I am an above the knee amputee. I walk with the aid of a prosthetic left leg. I am a polio survivor, having had all four extremities paralyzed, for a time, at three years old. Although I was able to regain the use of my limbs, when in my thirties, I learned that I suffer from Post Polio Syndrome. This entails damage to my trunk nerves due to overuse as I aged, resulting in muscle loss and weakness. Bottom line is: I am no longer, physically, capable of adequately defending myself, my family and my property. However, my gun acts as an equalizer in defending myself from, say, a bulked up, twenty something thug.

I have never been arrested for anything. Yeah, I have had a few speeding tickets, but I respect the Law and firmly believe in the Rule of Law. I am a Christian and do not believe in violence. In the 60’s I marched in Washington against the Viet Nam war, but always loved and still love the warriors.

I consider myself to be a Patriot. I fly the flag every day in front of my home. I am a Conservative, Constitutional Restorationist. I believe that the Founding Fathers got it right the first time. Our unalienable Rights come from God and not the government. The government is to operate only by the consent of the PEOPLE and not the corrupt political ruling class.

This country must be returned to operate once again under the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as established by the Founders and not the current system. America has been hijacked by Progressive/Liberals starting with Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt in the first half of the twentieth century, continuing with Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton through and on up to Obama. As a Patriot and if necessary, I am ready and willing to give my life to help restore America to its Founding principles.

The first thing that Michael Bender, the instructor of the first of five six hour classes I took to learn about the defensive use of a gun, said to the class was: “My goal today is the help you decide never to use your gun.” He followed this by saying: “Always bring a gun to a gun fight.”

What he was saying by these seemingly contradictory statements is always carry a gun but hope and pray you never have to use it. Michael also talked about becoming sheepdogs as opposed to being sheep. Sheepdogs are equipped at all times to take on the wolf if necessary. A wolf very rarely preys on sheepdogs, but does not hesitate to go after the defenseless sheep. This brings me to explaining how I used my gun to defend myself without drawing or firing it.

I was walking my dog Buster last winter. We live on the outskirts of a town in Wisconsin whose streets are not brightly lighted. While Buster was busy analyzing the smells of all the other dogs and people who recently had been by the corner we were stopped at, I noticed an older red van stopped at the stop sign kitty corner to where we were.

It was about 11 p.m. After a minute or so, the van crossed the street and slowly drove by us. All the windows had smoked glass. As it passed, warning alarms went off in my head as it felt that I was being carefully looked over. It passed us, and then turned left into the first driveway to the east, about fifty feet from where we stood. As the alarms were going off in my head, I opened my jacket, pulled it over my holster, exposing the gun, and then unfastened the safety strap.

turned toward the van so that they could clearly see my holstered gun as we were under the corner street light. I dropped the dog’s leash freeing up my other hand, which I used to take out my cell phone and dialed 9, 1 with my finger at the ready to press the last 1. I stood still with my head turned toward the van so I could watch what they were up to.

After a few moments the van quickly backed out of the driveway and drove to the east away from my position. I am certain that the occupants of the van were up to no good; wolves hunting sheep. Making it clear to the potential bad guys that I was no easy target, they apparently decided to hunt elsewhere. How many hunters would hunt deer if they knew the deer could shoot back? Not very many I am sure.

That night I believe the wolf, instead of finding a sheep, found a sheepdog, and so he moved on to find sheep elsewhere.
I am Frank J. Dmuchowski. I am a gun carrying Patriot.

Read more:



Michigan Union Presses Panic Button Over Right to Work Rumors

Leave a comment

This is from Town Hall.


It is time to break the unions strangle hold on America’s businesses.

At one time unions served a purpose.

Now they just shake down their members and destroy businesses.

Michigan Union Presses Panic Button Over Right to Work Rumors


The Michigan Education Association always portrays itself as the poor, pitiful victim.


It was the victim when the legislature passed relatively mild education reforms. It was the victim when its ballot proposal to enshrine collective bargaining in the state constitution was soundly defeated by voters Nov. 6.


Now the union is wringing its hands over a rumored Right to Work proposal that may be introduced and debated in the state legislature during the lame duck session.


On Tuesday, the union pressed the panic button and issued a screed to its members via email:


“With just a few weeks left in the Legislative session, right-wing politicians in Lansing are looking to exact political revenge against union members by ramming through dangerous bills that will harm school employees, middle-class families and children throughout Michigan.


“Their reckless agenda includes:


• Undermining workers’ rights by passing so-called “right-to-work” legislation 

• Instituting voucher-style “reform” of our public schools 

• Cutting taxes even further for corporate special interests 

“These extremist legislators must be stopped immediately. The Working Michigan coalition is holding events across our state tonight and tomorrow night to help mobilize union members and supporters in the effort to fight back.”


It’s hard to feel sorry for this group of tin-horned gangsters. They were in a good position and they got too greedy.


Gov. Rick Snyder has been criticized for not being tough enough on public sector unions like the MEA. He went out of his way during the union-led kerfuffle in Wisconsin to say he did not want the same type of showdown in Michigan. He, without provocation, essentially called any meaningful labor reform dead on arrival.


But the unions’ attempted power grab – Proposal 2 – apparently changed all that.


The unions broke the apparent truce with a proposed constitutional amendment that would have repealed all of Snyder’s education reforms and allowed collective bargaining agreements to trump state law. MEA officials (and their allies) stood before cameras, thumped their chests and declared they would spend $25 million to pass the amendment.


They failed, and now the Right to Work folks are out in force, hoping to capitalize on the union defeat.


So now the unions are attempting to marshal their forces in an effort to protect their last bastions of power: compulsory union membership and automatically deducted dues. A Right to Work law would eliminate those union lifelines.


If it is indeed introduced, Right to Work legislation it would likely come to a vote. The antics of Democrats legislators in Wisconsin, who fled the state in 2011 to prevent a vote on anti-union legislation, could not be replicated. Michigan law gives power to the Speaker of the House to order the state police to round up legislators, even across international lines.


We have to wonder if the MEA regrets breaking the truce with the Snyder administration and pushing for passage of Proposal 2. They’ve talked their way into a dangerous corner and they’re not sure how they’re going to manage to escape.



Leave a comment

This is from The Blaze.

Paul Ryan had a double disadvantage during the debate.

Ryan had to deal with Slow Joe and the moderator Martha Raddatz.

Slow Joe laughed,smirked and interrupted Paul Ryan.

Then DemocRat hack Raddatz would want to move on so Ryan could not answer.

Raddatz kept interrupting Paul Ryan yet she let Slow Joe ramble.

Martha Raddatz made Jim Lehrer  look like a great moderator.


Following Thursday night’s vice presidential debate between Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Vice President Joe Biden, the Republican Nation Committee released an ad blasting Biden for his numerous outbursts, interruptions, and constant laughing:

And the video isn’t that far off from portraying the debate in its entirety. Biden actually interrupted Rep. Ryan quite a bit. In fact, according to Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, the vice president interrupted the Wisconsin congressman 82 times.


Complaints Mount Against Michelle Obama’s New Lunch Menu

Leave a comment


This is from Town Hall.

Moochelle has made herself the head of the food Gestapo.

When was Moochelle elected to any office?

Does Moochelle has a background in nutrition?

November the sixth we can fire Moochelle and her husband.


In Wisconsin, high school athletes are complaining about not getting enough to eat each day, due to the skimpy new school lunch menu mandated by the United States Department of Agriculture and First Lady Michelle Obama.


The story we published earlier this week on that subject is unfortunately not unique. Students across the country are complaining about the new school lunch regulations.


Perhaps the real motive is to starve students into slimming down. Just ask students in Pierre, South Dakota who, too, are in an all-out revolt.


“I know a lot of my friends who are just drinking a jug of milk for their lunch. And they are not getting a proper meal,” middle school student Samantha Gortmaker told


Despite the fact that the new regulations have increased the cost of a lunch 20 to 25 cents per plate, it’s not pleasing students.


Some are throwing away their vegetables while others are adapting to the rules by becoming industrious. In New Bedford, Massachusetts, students have created a black market – for chocolate syrup. The kiddie capitalists are smuggling in bottles of it and selling it by the squeeze, according to


Nancy Carvalho, director of food services for New Bedford Public Schools, was quoted as saying that hummus and black bean salads have been tough sells in elementary cafeterias. That means even smaller children are going through the day fighting hunger pains, which can never be considered a good thing.


One government official tried to put the blame on the students.


“One thing I think we need to keep in mind as kids say they’re still hungry is that many children aren’t used to eating fruits and vegetables at home, much less at school. So it’s a change in what they are eating. If they are still hungry, it’s that they are not eating all the food that’s being offered,” USDA Deputy Undersecretary Janey Thornton was quoted as saying.


Ms. Thornton just put her finger on the problem. The government is trying to impose a new diet that children are not accustomed to. It’s not reasonable to expect them to either eat what the government deems healthy or go hungry.


Many will opt to go hungry, and that’s the government’s fault.





Prop. 8 Judge: ‘What Judges Do and Must Do Is … Move the Strike Zone’



This is from CNSNews.

Like most activist judges Judge Vaughn Walker is wrong.

The strike zone must not be moved it  is in a fixed position.

The Constitution defines were the strike zone is located.

If a law does not fit in that zone it is a bad law and Unconstitutional.

The position of the law needs changed not the strike zone.

Judges should enforce interpret laws not make them.– Judge Vaughn Walker, the now-retired federal judge in San Francisco who nullified California’s Proposition 8 in 2010, said if judges really are umpires, they must sometimes “move the strike zone” in order to champion social issues like same-sex marriage.

“Case by case, what judges do and must do is take account of the pitcher and the batter in the legal arena, watch the windup, the throw, the curve, and the delivery and then, where they believe appropriate, move the strike zone,” Walker wrote on Aug. 28 in the University of Illinois Law Review.

But Walker, flouting Justice Antonin Scalia and other strict constructionists, said that “judges not only make law, but cannot avoid doing so.”

“Many judges and politicians say that judges should act like umpires in the judicial arena and simply ‘call balls and strikes,’” Walker wrote in the article, titled Moving the Strike Zone.

“These judges and politicians have convinced a large portion of the U.S. public that judges should act this way and, therefore, should not make law but instead interpret the Constitution using so-called ‘originalism’ or ‘strict constructionism.’ But is it even possible for a judge to simply act as an umpire?” Walker wrote

In 2010, Walker overturned California’s Proposition 8, ruling that the voter-approved ballot initiative violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause by defining marriage to be the union of one man and one woman.

In his article, Walker said federal judges must “reflect the common understanding of the day” and that “clear and fixed legal rules” do not exist.

“There is no fixed ‘strike zone,’” Walker wrote.

The former chief federal judge for the Northern District of California, Walker has drawn criticism for not disclosing his homosexuality until after he retired from the federal bench in 2011 — not during the 2010 trial on same-sex marriage.

In the article, Walker said judges are well-suited to “reject or correct” laws that are based on “discredited understandings” or “dogmas born of myths and unsubstantiated beliefs.”

“Courts are particularly well suited in some situations for law making even on fundamental issues,” he wrote. “Unlike elected officials, judges, particularly federal judges, are not looking to the next election for vindication or retention of their positions,” he wrote.

“Although a courtroom is hardly a laboratory suitable for scientific experimentation, factual premises that underlie many social, economic, and political policies that have been legislatively enacted are exposed in a courtroom in way that is not possible elsewhere.

“In the hurly burly of electoral politics, in the halls and hearing rooms of legislative bodies, long-winded and evasive assertions are rarely challenged effectively. But a courtroom is different.

“One prominent litigator has said that the witness stand is a lonely place. It is especially lonely for someone who spouts a racial or gender theory, propositions without credible support, or dogmas born of myths and unsubstantiated beliefs. Yet each of these has been and continues in the present day to be the support for so-called legislative findings or facts that have been enacted into law and that treat some citizens differently and without reason.

“In a courtroom, these findings or facts can be exposed for what they are – propositions born of misunderstanding, bigotry, or intolerance,” Walker wrote.

The image of the judge being an umpire comes from Chief Justice John Roberts, who, during the opening day of his confirmation hearings in 2005, said his “job” as a Supreme Court justice was “to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch or bat.”


Judge strikes down Wisconsin law limiting union rights

1 Comment


This is from Fox News Politics.

This ruling is a clear case of Liberal Judaical Activism.

If this ruling is not over turned the unions will break Wisconsin.

Public sector unions busted Wisconsin’s budget before.

The people of Wisconsin need to help Governor Walker fit this ruling.


MADISON, Wis. –  Wisconsin judge on Friday struck down nearly all of the state law championed by Gov. Scott Walker that effectively ended collective bargaining rights for most public workers.

Walker’s administration immediately vowed to appeal, while unions, which have vigorously fought the law, declared victory. But what the ruling meant for existing public contracts was murky: Unions claimed the ruling meant they could negotiate again, but Walker could seek to keep the law in effect while the legal drama plays out.

The law, a crowning achievement for Walker that made him a national conservative star, took away nearly all collective bargaining rights from most workers and has been in effect for more than a year.

Dane County Circuit Judge Juan Colas ruled that the law violates both the state and U.S. Constitution and is null and void.

In his 27-page ruling, the judge said sections of the law “single out and encumber the rights of those employees who choose union membership and representation solely because of that association and therefore infringe upon the rights of free speech and association guaranteed by both the Wisconsin and United States Constitutions.”

Colas also said the law violates the equal protection clause by creating separate classes of workers who are treated differently and unequally.

The ruling applies to all local public workers affected by the law, including teachers and city and county government employees, but not those who work for the state. They were not a party to the lawsuit, which was brought by a Madison teachers union and a Milwaukee public workers union.

Walker issued a statement accusing the judge of being a “liberal activist” who “wants to go backwards and take away the lawmaking responsibilities of the legislature and the governor. We are confident that the state will ultimately prevail in the appeals process.”

Wisconsin Department of Justice spokeswoman Dana Brueck said DOJ believes the law is constitutional.

The ruling throws into question changes that have been made in pay, benefits and other work rules in place across the state for city, county and school district workers.

Walker’s law, passed in March 2011, only allowed for collective bargaining on wage increases no greater than the rate of inflation. All other issues, including workplace safety, vacation, health benefits, could no longer be bargained for.

The ruling means that local government and schools now must once again bargain over those issues, said Lester Pines, an attorney for Madison Teachers Inc. that brought the case.

“We’re back to where we were before the law was enacted,” he said.

Pines predicted the case would ultimately be resolved by the state Supreme Court.

“What’s going to happen in the interim is unknown,” he said.

The state Supreme Court in June 2011 ruled that the law was constitutional after it had been blocked by a different Dane County judge on a challenge over its passage being a violation of open meetings law.

Walker introduced the proposal in February 2011, six weeks after he took office. It resulted in a firestorm of opposition and led to huge protests at the state Capitol that lasted for weeks. All 14 Democratic state senators fled the state to Illinois for three weeks in an ultimately failed attempt to stop the law’s passage from the Republican-controlled Legislature.

The law required public workers to pay more for their health insurance and pension benefits at the same time it took away their ability to collectively bargain over those issues. Walker argued the changes were needed to help state and local governments save money at a time Wisconsin faced a $3 billion budget shortfall.

Anger over the law’s passage led to an effort to recall Walker from office. More than 930,000 signatures were collected triggering the June recall election. Walker won and became the first governor in U.S. history to survive a recall.

The lawsuit was among several filed against the law.

A coalition of unions filed a federal lawsuit in Madison in June 2011, arguing that the law violated the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause because it exempted firefighters and police officers. A federal just upheld most of the law in March, but the rulings are under appeal.

Another lawsuit was filed in July 2011 by two unions representing about 2,700 public workers in Madison and Dane County. They also challenged the law on equal protection grounds. The case is pending.

Democrats and unions were ecstatic with Friday’s ruling.

“As we have said from day one, Scott Walker’s attempt to silence the union men and women of Wisconsin’s public sector was an immoral, unjust and illegal power grab,” said Phil Neuenfeldt, president of the Wisconsin State AFL-CIO.

The Democratic minority leader in the state Assembly called the ruling a huge victory for workers and free speech.

“This decision will help re-establish the balance between employees and their employers,” said Rep. Peter Barca.

Republican Rep. Robin Vos, a staunch supporter of the law and the presumptive next speaker of the Assembly, called the ruling an example of the “arrogance of the judiciary.”

“I’m confident it’s a single judge out of step with the mainstream,” Vos said. He said the law is working “and we’ll continue to implement it.”
Read more:


An open letter to The Wisconsin Jewish Chronicle

Leave a comment


This is by Rabbi Judah Freeman,JPFO writer and Alan Korwin,Publisher.

Dear Editor,

In light of the evil perpetrated at a crowded Colorado movie theater, and now that the Wisconsin legislature has partially re-established the right of the people to publicly bear arms, Jews in the state must reexamine some of their beliefs.

A set of Wisconsin synagogues decided to ban the legal possession of firearms on their property soon after the enabling law passed. Their lengthy justifications and rationalization for doing so are posted on their websites.

One dangerous issue in the Wisconsin synagogue-sans-guns debates is the Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act, under consideration in some states. It basically says if you declare a so-called “gun-free zone,” you’re liable for any harm it causes. Synagogues are likely unaware that if they ban the civil right to arms, and someone is harmed in an assault, they may bear liability. The Colorado massacre forever establishes that a paper no-guns policy is a cruel hoax.

A second conundrum arises from the fact that denial of a civil right under color of law, which the synagogues’ proposed no-gun signs appear to be, is a federal crime (18 U.S.C. §241 et.seq.). This is an unsettled area of law, but does a house of worship want to be a test case? A no-gun sign of course is feckless, but why let reality interfere with feel-good sophistry?

I can tell you that six people were in a Wisconsin synagogue just recently, discreetly carrying sidearms. They came and went in peace without anyone having a clue and no one was harmed. They could have wreaked havoc had they wanted to, despite the signs — but law-abiding armed citizens don’t do such things. Here’s the bad news you face in Wisconsin, which that movie house and the nation just learned: Your signs do not work.

Everyone, good or bad, has complete power to completely ignore no-guns signs. Good people — the law-abiding citizens who bear arms solely for defensive use, and thus those best positioned to respond to an attack in a synagogue — are more likely to obey your signs, and leave their defensive tools at home, or in their vehicles. As for “undesirables,” those you dream will be disarmed by a sign on the wall … well, that’s the rub, isn’t it?

“Posting signs to ban guns
does not ban guns.”

That is the problem you face. The decision of whether to post signs, reached it seems without input from knowledgeable pro-rights advocates, has reached a false conclusion. Posting signs to ban guns does not ban guns. Signs do not prevent a person with a gun from going berserk. Signs simply create dangerous, reckless and negligent make-believe gun-free zones — safe and attractive places for would be murderers and terrorists to wreak havoc with the fore-knowledge that they will face no resistance.

Let’s imagine for a moment that door signs somehow will protect you from both Muslim jihadis bent on slaughtering Jews and from armed congregants with ill intent or about to go berserk. Throw in anti-Semitic skinhead attackers for good measure. We admit we’re not clear on how that protection would work exactly. This leads us to wonder what other rational reasons the synagogues must have for declaring what are essentially victim-disarmament zones. Banning the tools of self-defense to protect… whom exactly? This whole dustup may be simply a function of an undiagnosed condition known as hoplophobia — the irrational, neurotic fear of guns — crying out for treatment.

If in fact the synagogue’s concern is with people who have qualified for a firearms permit and been cleared by the FBI and state police, then hoplophobia is likely the cause. Presumably your congregations agree with your decision, which suggests they all fail to see the “make-believe” part of the plan.

This is actually quite dangerous: a room full of Jews with no way to protect themselves, adamant about not letting in anyone who could protect them in an emergency… and deluding themselves into believing this makes them safer. Aren’t they actually even less safe with a front door that says, in essence, “We’re all defenseless in here”?

When one single synagogue in Wisconsin gets smart and refuses to post signs, the relative increase in threat level to the disarmed synagogues will become more painfully obvious. Hopefully the Jewish advocates of the disarmament program will get it. The perpetrators of anti-Semitic violence will — the synagogue without a no-guns-allowed sign has to be a less attractive target to miscreants.

Like you, we wish guns would just go away, replaced by an era of enduring peace, harmony, prosperity and abundance. Until then, while murderous criminals continue to exist in the world, it is incumbent on all of us to be smarter than our avowed enemies and to take prudent steps to protect our families, congregations, and communities. Requiring everyone in synagogue to be defenseless, in denial of their G-d-given human right to defense of innocent life, does not accomplish — and indeed subverts — that paramount goal.

The handful of people who would legally and discreetly exercise their right to carry sidearms in your shul or on your grounds are not your enemy, but your ally. You should welcome the person willing to risk life and limb in your defense, just as you would welcome a member of the police or armed forces. These people are HaShomrim.

If Jews learned the lessons and truly believed their “Never again!” bumper-sticker slogans, they would welcome their fellow armed landsmen with open arms, instead of treating them like Blacks at a lunch counter.

The misguided belief that signs on a wall will protect you is not merely false but perilous and jeopardizes the lives and safety of the entire congregation. Colorado proved it. The fact that some Jews hold and advocate for such an incredulous lack of security threatens the entire community — Jew and Gentile alike — and should be rejected outright.


Rabbi Judah Freeman, JPFO Staff Writer
Alan Korwin, Publisher, Bloomfield Press

Founded in 1989, Wisconsin-based Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) is a leading advocate for the right to keep and bear arms in America.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO)
PO Box 270143
Hartford WI 53027


Wisconsin atheists try to block Texas nativity

1 Comment


The article below is from The Washington Examiner.
I am thinking of starting a group called Freedom from idiots.
If you do not believe in God that is your business.
But do not try to impose your views on me or anyone else.

Small-town America beware: The Freedom from Religion Foundation, an atheist group based out of Wisconsinregards itself as a “church/state watchdog.” To that end, they’ve challenged a nativity scene in Athens, Texas.
“[T]he Freedom from Religion Foundation says the nativity scene shows favoritism,”reports an ABC affiliate in Texas. “They tell CBS 19 they want it removed, or they want their own sign added . . .[which] would read, “At this season of the winters solstice may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”
The local judge in Texas says that “because we have all the other decorations, it’s legal.”



Leave a comment


This is from
The DemocRats are involved in possible fraud no big surprise.

A local news agency found a man who claimed to have signed at least 80 petitions in an effort to recall Scott Walker. The Democrat party spokesman said that any of those who have signed multiple petitions are probably “mentally ill.” In Wisconsin, the burden to discover fraud is on Scott Walker, not the state


Older Entries Newer Entries

%d bloggers like this: