• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Minneapolis “Star” Katherine Kersten Exposes the Feminist Leftist Cancer Killing Learning at Edina School District

Kersten responds to Star Tribune Counterpoints re: Edina School District’s racial identity policies

“On Saturday, October 7, the Star Tribune ran my op-ed piece on the Edina Public Schools (Racial Identity Politics are ruining Edina’s fabled schools.”)  Today the paper features two commentaries in opposition, and four letters to the editor (all opposed). Together, they provide a window on why our public schools face the ideological assault they do.

The first commentary is the most revealing. It’s headlined “Why it’s crucial for today’s students to unlearn racism.” The author is Annie Mogush Mason, Program Director of Elementary Teacher Education at the University of Minnesota.

Though Mason asserts that “Kersten’s commentary rests on untenable ground throughout,” she makes no attempt to provide evidence for this claim. Instead, she offers her own view of American history, which she says justifies ideologically driven education of the kind the Edina schools practice.

Mason clearly regards our nation as a despicable place. She denounces “the savagery of colonization” that gave birth to America, and declares that “racist practices”

allowed this country to expand geographically and to amass its great fortune. These practices also contributed to the development of the white race, and for those identified as white to gain and maintain… ’white privilege.’

(One wonders why, if America is such an oppressive place, so many “people of color” continue to risk their lives to come and live here.)

Mason views herself as a member of America’s moral vanguard. She seems to believe that she and her fellow social justice warriors—purified of our nation’s sins—are entitled to compel the rest of us to face up to, confess, and seek forgiveness for our own complicity in evil.

Schools must be at the center of this re-education campaign, in Mason’s view.

Teachers, she tells us, must engage “in careful study of how their lives and identities”—as white people—“interact with those of students and families.”

“When white teachers do this work,” she assures us, “they are less likely to get stuck in feelings of guilt or shame about their white privilege.” Thus liberated, she says, “they can turn their attention”—not to teaching reading and math effectively—but to promoting “justice in schools.”

Mason informs us that students also are increasingly “able and willing to explore how their own world views are limited by whiteness.” Thanks to the racially conscious instruction they now receive, she notes,

As I write, children and young people in my neighborhood are busy doing things like organizing teach-ins at their schools, attending mayoral forums and engaging in action research projects to strengthen their schools.

Could this be why so many American kids increasingly struggle to read or do math? According to Mason, both teachers and students are leaving academics behind to focus on social justice.

Annie Mogush Mason holds a position of influence at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. As Director of Elementary Teacher Education there, she works “to bring an intersectional and race-conscious framework to curriculum and instruction,” according to her web site.

Mason says she works “primarily with preservice teachers [student teachers who have not yet begun to teach] to understand how their personal identities impact their work with students, and I encourage all of my students to develop orientations toward social justice.”

The fact that ideologically motivated educators like Mason wield such influence at the University of Minnesota should be of serious concern to the citizens of our state.

The author of the second counterpoint to my op-ed was Charles Heinecke, a junior at Edina High School. His piece was headlined “To this white male, there’s no ‘culture of intimidation’ at Edina High School.”

Heinecke claims he has never experienced or witnessed ideological intimidation at the high school. But then, he is not the sort of student at whom such intimidation is aimed, since he shares the social-political agenda of the powers that be there.

Heinecke seems untroubled by Edina School District leaders’ own admission that the high school has violated students’ First Amendment rights. On August 24, 2017, Commissioner Peter Kirsanow  of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights wrote to the chair of the Edina school board about reports of high school teachers’ “discrimination” against and “bullying” of students “with different political beliefs.” Kirsanow reminded school officials that federal civil rights law prohibits such discrimination in public schools.

In a response dated Sept. 21, EPS Superintendent John Schultz essentially acknowledged that the high school has failed to meet its First Amendment obligations. Since receipt of Kirsanow’s letter, he wrote, “the district has invited a team of attorneys to conduct training on employee and student free speech rights and limitations, which was attended by administrators and all high school staff.”

Heinecke’s failure to notice free speech violations at the high school is not surprising. His own Star Tribune commentary shows little attention to detail, and repeatedly mischaracterizes my words.

For example, he criticizes me for “us[ing] the word ‘Marxist’ to describe an AP English class” in which he says he was a student. “As to Marxism, he says, “I don’t recall learning that private property is theft” in that class.

In fact, the teacher of the class in question used the word “Marxist” to describe her class. I merely quoted her. Specifically, the teacher wrote in a course description that “By the end of the year, [students] will have…learned how to apply marxist[sic]feminist, post-colonial [and] psychoanalytic… lenses to literature.”

Educators and students like Mason and Heinecke are free to berate those who point out the increasing ideological indoctrination—and the growing academic mediocrity—of the Edina Public Schools. But that won’t change reality, and the urgent need to take steps to prevent further decline….”

(Comment from glenn:   I like to remind Americans these days that the human male is born a killer by Nature (I prefer “by Nature’s GOD”),  a defender and protector of his space and family and country, curious, a builder, a warrior,  a discoverer,  a wonderer, an inventor, a worker and such.   She owns precious, sacred,  motherhood, the primary center of future humanity, the primary teacher of her child’s understanding of  word and deed.

By Nature the human male animal usually by instinct is driven to protect his mate and offspring and usually, in the ideal, shares his general knowledge of the ‘outside’ world, the world in which his offspring eventually will enter.

At least these were the parental duties until the rise of the feminist, Leninist, and black racist revolutionaries in our America the past generation or two…..and the ignorance, black and feminist revolutionary hysterics pushed into the nation’s educational systems from K through graduate school in the social “sciences” of Marxist studies to force all to be equally obedient and ignorant……in the name of “equality”.)


Selling Fascism in Minnesota’s Edina Public Schools


by John Hinderaker at PowerLine:

I wrote here about left-wing indoctrination in the Edina, Minnesota public schools. As a local story, it has been explosive. As a national story, it is a warning to normal parents and students everywhere. Leftism in the Edina schools is the subject of the cover story in the current issue of Thinking Minnesota. I highly recommend the article, written by veteran Twin Cities columnist Kathy Kersten.

The Edina controversy actually kicked off with a presentation that I did to a group of 120 or so in Edina, six days before the magazine hit the streets. My speech was attacked and misrepresented on Facebook and elsewhere by liberals who, of course, didn’t see it.

The speech was recorded, and the video, which is about 28 minutes long, is now on YouTube. You can watch it and judge for yourself whether I am a “white supremacist” or a “neo-Nazi,” as local liberals claim.


Trump Government to Follow 20 Principles of Religious Liberty

The Government Will Now Follow 20 Principles of Religious Liberty

by Gene Veith       (article sent by Mark Waldeland)

“Attorney General Jeff Sessions, for the Trump administration, has issued a memo setting forth twenty principles of religious liberty that the government must abide by.  This document addresses nearly all of the current religious liberty controversies and rules in favor of accommodating religious beliefs.

In practice, this document means that the Christian baker could refuse to participate in a same-sex wedding, churches could advocate political positions from the pulpit, businesses could opt out of providing abortion and contraceptive insurance, religious organizations could limit their hiring to those who agree with the religion, and the government could not refuse contracts or benefits on the basis of religion.

The twenty principles include summaries of existing federal law, such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1993), as well as interpretations and applications that are to guide government agencies.

Read the document here.  Some highlights:

 “The free exercise of religion includes the right to act or abstain from action in accordance with one’s religious beliefs.”

“Except in the narrowest of circumstances, no one should be forced to choose between living out his or her faith and complying with the law.  To the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, religious observance and practice should be reasonably accommodated in all government action, including employment, contracting and programming.”

“Our freedom as citizens has always been inextricably linked with our religious freedom as a people,” Sessions said. “It has protected both the freedom to worship and the freedom not to believe. Every American has a right to believe, worship, and exercise their faith. The protections for this right, enshrined in our Constitution and laws, serve to declare and protect this important part of our heritage.”

Furthermore, the document says that religious freedom applies “not just to individuals, but also to organizations, associations, and at least some for-profit corporations.”

Some of the memo’s provisions do not have the force of law, as such, and are subject to legal challenge, but as official interpretations, government agencies–including the IRS –are obliged to follow them.

For more details, Jeff Sessions Just Issued New Guidance On Protecting “Religious Liberty”.  (Notice the quotation marks.)  Predictably, liberal groups are condemning the principles as allowing discrimination against LGBTs and as being anti-woman.

In separate but related actions, putting the principles into practice, the Trump administration has reversed the Obamacare contraceptive mandate, allowing businesses to opt out of providing birth control coverage on religious grounds.  Also, Attorney General Sessions has ruled that laws regarding non-discrimination on the basis of sex do not apply to transgendered individuals.

This places the Trump Administration squarely in favor of religious rights, coming down on the side of Christian conservatives on every one of the issues under contention.

The document is by no means as radical as it is being portrayed on the left.  The philosophical and legal controversy has to do with which is the most fundamental right, to which the other rights must defer, religious liberty or non-discrimination?  This document states that religious liberty is the most fundamental right.  The left insists that the most fundamental right is non-discrimination.”