Bus driver, 72, charged with slapping 6-year-old

They’re apparently slapping 6-year-olds in southern Minnesota. KMSP-TV’s Leah Beno writes: “A bus driver in southern Minnesota is facing a misdemeanor charge of fifth-degree assault after prosecutors accused her of slapping a first-grader across the face. Yet, while some people who spoke with FOX 9 News said they were appalled to learn of the charges, some said they think the kid deserved it. … The criminal complaint against the driver says the boy continued to kick some other kids until 72-year-old Jane Brooks pulled over the bus and called the Blue Earth Area School District twice for help. She was told to isolate the boy in the front seat. ‘He told me that he had been fighting with another kid and had to get pulled to the front of the bus, and there was some girls across the aisle and some kids taunting him,’ [Melonie] Schiefelbein said. Faribault County Attorney Troy Timmerman told FOX 9 News the boy didn’t stop acting out when he was moved to that seat, and that’s when the bus driver took matters into her own hands. ‘At one point, he was spitting on the children in the seat behind him and that’s when she slapped him,’ Timmerman said. The 6-year-old got a bloody nose, and the complaint states that Brooks told the other students on the bus, ‘Well, maybe that’s what he needed.’ ” And you know what? By the sound of it, it probably was.

With the Great Lakes already low, this is an interesting development. Joe Barrett of the Wall Street Journal writes: “A four-year-old compact meant to protect the Great Lakes water supply from being siphoned by thirsty communities is facing its first test, as a Wisconsin city just outside the Great Lakes Basin moves to tap into Lake Michigan. The Great Lakes Compact, signed by President George W. Bush in 2008, came as a response to concerns that drier regions in the western U.S. would seek access to the Great Lakes, which hold a fifth of the world’s supply of fresh surface water, as their populations grew. The pact, agreed to by the states and Canadian provinces bordering the lakes, contains a provision that allows applications from cities in counties that straddle the Great Lakes Basin, the area in which water drains toward the Great Lakes. The city of Waukesha approved a letter of intent Tuesday night to buy water from nearby Oak Creek for the next 80 years. To help keep Lake Michigan’s water level stable, it plans to pipe its treated wastewater back to the Great Lakes Basin instead of the Mississippi River.”

Plagiarism is bad news for journalists … and school board members, too. Maria Elena Baca of the Strib reports: “Schoolchildren in the St. Francis School District learn about plagiarism and the importance of academic honesty starting around fourth grade, said high school junior Derek Schumacher. So when the student journalist said that when he learned that a school board member in the northern Anoka County district had admitted to lifting a blog post and submitting it as his own column in the Courier, district’s monthly newsletter, ‘It completely shocked me.’ “

Rachel Stassen-Berger of the Strib writes that an ongoing survey shows ad spending on the Chip Cravaack-Rick Nolan race in the 8th District is the fifth heaviest in the country: “Minnesota’s Eighth Congressional District attracted $1.75 million in ad spending in September, landing it in fifth place in the nation. According to a study from the Wesleyan Media Project, the race between Republican U.S. Rep. Chip Cravaack and Democratic challenger Rick Nolan garnered 2,168 ads in the last three weeks of September.” The Duluth affiliates thank everyone who has given so much.

No kidding. What do you need 10,000 rounds of ammo for? Maya Rao of the Strib reports: “The ease of stockpiling ammunition once again became apparent after police discovered that the perpetrator of one of the deadliest mass shootings in Minnesota history had packaging for 10,000 rounds of ammunition in his south Minneapolis home. Last Thursday, Andrew J. Engeldinger had a Glock 9-millimeter handgun, two 15-round magazines and several loose rounds when he killed four co-workers, a UPS man and himself after being fired from Accent Signage Systems. In addition to the ammunition shipping boxes, police found a second Glock 9mm handgun in his house. Authorities have not specified how Engeldinger purchased his ammunition, but Minneapolis police Sgt. Stephen McCarty said Engeldinger possibly ordered it online from an out-of-state dealer.”

Those fires up in the northwest part of the state may burn a long time. Dan Gunderson of MPR reports: “It may be some time before those fires are fully extinguished. That’s because many of them ignited peat bogs. Northwest Minnesota contains many of the state’s 6 million acres of peatland — which is wet, spongy ground made of decomposing vegetation. Peat can smolder for a long time because the material itself contains oxygen. When it’s very dry, it takes on a water-resistant quality that makes putting out the fire tedious work. Even heavy snow won’t put those fires out, according to DNR public information officer Ron Sanno.”

Legendary Twin Cities rockers The Replacements have cut a new four-song EP. In Rolling Stone, Rob Tannenbaum writes: “In late September, singer Paul Westerberg and bassist Tommy Stinson spent a day in a Minneapolis studio and cut four cover songs that will be released later this year as a limited edition 10-inch vinyl EP. All 250 copies will [be] auctioned online, and the proceeds will benefit Slim Dunlap, the Replacements’ guitarist from 1987 to 1991, who had a severe stroke in February. Replacements drummer Chris Mars ‘didn’t want any part of this’ reunion, Westerberg tells Rolling Stone. ‘I was not surprised, but I was a little disappointed.’ ” Someone’s living in a mercurial world.

Conservatives were exultant after last night’s presiential debate. At Power Line, John Hinderaker writes: “I’ve been watching presidential debates for quite a few years, but I have never seen one like this. It wasn’t a TKO, it was a knockout. Mitt Romney was in control from the beginning. He was the alpha male, while Barack Obama was weak, hesitant, stuttering, often apologetic. The visuals were great for Romney and awful for Obama. Obama looked small, tired, defeated after four years of failure, out of ammo. One small point among many: Obama doesn’t even know how to stand at a podium, as he continually lifted up one leg. He would be below average as a high school debater. There were 1,800 people on Power Line Live tonight, and the verdict was unanimous: it was a great night for the forces of good.” Or at least until the fact-checkers weigh in.

His co-blogger, Paul Mirengoff, adds: “As for Obama, I think he debated fairly well. But he paled in comparison to Romney. The president’s performance was subdued; he was far less inclined to address Romney’s points than Romney was to rebut his; and he tended to ramble. For once, he told the truth when he described himself as an ok debater. The contrast was particularly apparent in the closing statements. Obama meandered, mentioning a few stories of people he met on the campaign trail and telling us how committed he is to the job. Romney said the election is a choice between two paths and proceeded to itemize the differences. To extend the court room analogy, Obama sounded like a tired lawyer who knows he can’t win the case in his closing argument. In fact, though, I think Obama was just tired and uninspired. I don’t pretend he thinks he will lose the election. Not yet, anyway.”

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (23)

  1. Submitted by Thomas Swift on 10/04/2012 - 07:32 am.

    Well whaddya know?

    Brian and I agree on something. A kid that is spitting on other kids deserves a slap….a Hannibal Lecter style mask would come in handy as well.

    As to FACTCHECKERS riding over the hill to save Obama…well, don’t get your hopes up *too* high. The FACTCHECKERS are failing when their facts are checked.

    Obama’s Palace Guard

    “In order for “fact checkers” to swiftly, unanimously, and erroneously reach the wrong conclusion, they created a feedback loop, credulously taking at face value the statements of the Obama administration and liberal policy experts, while systematically ignoring critical sources—including the primary source for the allegation the Obama administration is gutting welfare reform.”

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/obama-s-palace-guard_652895.html?nopager=1

    H/T Mitch Berg’s Shot in the Dark

  2. Submitted by Ray Schoch on 10/04/2012 - 08:02 am.

    Well whaddya know

    Mr. Swift and I disagree on something.

    Pull the bus over, call the police, isolate the kid, have the police remove him from the bus, and let the parents come and pick up the little bugger from the police station. If you want, charge him under the juvenile code, if that’s what’s necessary to get his parents’ attention.

    It’s quite possible to raise children who are polite, law-abiding little humans without hitting them, even once. Perhaps his parents need some instruction.

    As for the debate, I confess I missed it, being involved in other activity. In other times, perhaps, the debate “performance” of each candidate would make more of a difference. In today’s political climate, the likelihood of Mr. Obama being able to change Mr. Swift’s mind about who he’ll vote for in November by what he says in a televised faux-debate seems to me to be approximately zero. The same could be said of me and Mr. Romney.

    Perhaps more telling is that what lots of people will themselves be debating today is the “performance” of their preferred candidate. The common and accepted use of the term “performance” in this context suggests to me that what the nation was watching on TV last night was political theater, not something of substance. Both candidates have said plenty over the past couple of years of perpetual campaigning that illuminate their philosophical and policy stances on most of the issues that matter. I’d be surprised if the debates provided any further insight.

    • Submitted by Pat Berg on 10/04/2012 - 09:29 am.

      Bus drivers

      I’m with Ray for the reasons he cites as well as the fact that bus drivers don’t get paid enough to referee when things get this out of hand, and certainly not enough to justify the potential cost of a legal defense if charges get pressed against them.

      It is not the place of a bus driver to be striking children. If it means the bus gets stopped until someone can remove the child and the other children don’t get to their destination on time, then so be it.

      But there’s no way that what this driver did is appropriately within the scope of her job.

    • Submitted by Bill Gleason on 10/04/2012 - 09:46 am.

      I am amused by the question of who won the debate

      There are some pretty good high school debaters out there. One of them could probably defeat either Obama or Romney.

      Perhaps we should elect that kid president?

      Think of our good governor. No one would accuse him of being the most eloquent orator or greatest debater. And yet, despite not being first class in these areas, he has done a very good job in the opinion of most Minnesotans.

      The race is not always to the swiftest.

    • Submitted by Thomas Swift on 10/04/2012 - 10:34 am.

      “Pull the bus over, call the police, isolate the kid, have the police remove him from the bus, and let the parents come and pick up the little bugger from the police station.”

      And allow the little snot to disrupt 30+ kids and their teachers, occupy a few hours of time for the police and other invested parties….sure, that’s one way of handling it, I guess.

      • Submitted by Pat Berg on 10/04/2012 - 12:02 pm.

        For the good of the children

        Coming from someone who so often touts the importance of doing things “for the good of the children”, I have to say I’m more than a little surprised that you’re okay with the idea of letting someone besides a parent decide what level of discipline is appropriate and then proceed to administer it.

        If it was my kid that someone else decided they were just going to go ahead and smack, you better bet people would need to be calling their lawyers.

        • Submitted by Thomas Swift on 10/04/2012 - 03:20 pm.

          Pat, let me go on record here

          …if anyone ever sees one of my kids spitting on people, *please* give them a smack.

          You, of course are free to rely on lawyers…it’s pretty clear from the behavior of many kids these days that you’re not alone.

          • Submitted by Pat Berg on 10/06/2012 - 07:42 am.

            Going on record

            So. please outline for us the behaviors for which you’d be okay with permitting a person you do not know and who may or may not have a value system very different from your own giving your child a slap across the face that is hard enough to cause a bloody nose.

            And please also outline for us exactly which forms of physical punishment you are okay with permitting this person to administer and to what degree of severity.

            Finally, please let us know how you plan to communicate these guidelines to each and every person your child may encounter during the day while not under your direct supervision.

            Seems a lot simpler to me to just say “If it’s not your kid, you don’t have a right to smack him or her”.

            Not to mention safer for the kid.

  3. Submitted by Mike Sarenpa on 10/04/2012 - 08:19 am.

    St. Francis School Board plagiarism

    This from the Strib story on plagiarism by St. Francis School Board member: “Rustad said in an interview Wednesday that he had spent little time in traditional schools, and that in home school he hadn’t learned much about plagiarism.”

    Love to see his essays from “homeschool”.

  4. Submitted by Dennis Tester on 10/04/2012 - 08:26 am.

    I watched the debate on CNN

    because they were going to keep track of how much time each candidate spoke in what was planned to be a pretty open format. They also plotted the plus-minus reactions of their focus group of undecideds, separated by gender.

    Each candidate was supposed to get two-minute blocks of time for their remarks and then the other candidate would get his turn. On the running “time of possession” clock, Obama consistently ran 2-3 minutes of more speaking time than did Romney and I was getting impatient with Jim Lehrer for not trying harder to keep the times more even. At the end of the evening, Obama finished with 4 more minutes of speaking time than Romney.

    What’s interesting is that left-wing sites are bashing Lehrer for not taking better control of the debate and for letting “Romney monopolize the time.” Turns out it only seemed that way because Obama’s extra 4 minutes were spent hemming and hawing.

    heh

  5. Submitted by Bill Gleason on 10/04/2012 - 08:28 am.

    I guess when the right is wrong on the facts, Mr Swift,

    they can just be declared optional or rebutted by a claim citing Fox News?
    Sound familiar? This has been your own tactic when arguing against same sex marriage.

    Mr. Berg’s right wing blog: “Shot in the Dark” is hardly a credible source.

    Whereas, fact checking by MPR, the New York Times, the Washington Post, or various other reputable news organizations are merely part of a conspiracy by the main stream media and the liberals to re-elect President Obama.

    Only in the dream world of the right wing.

    • Submitted by Thomas Swift on 10/04/2012 - 10:29 am.

      See, that’s the problem with lettting ones’ self get so emotionally wrapped up in obsessive hatred. Berg provided a link to the source material, as did Fox. I didn’t quote either Fox or Berg…I used them as a conveinent vehicle to that source.

      You may have had a shot at discrediting the information, personally I don’t think you’re up to it, but we’ll never know because you’ve used it as a launchng pad for a personal diatribe instead of a debate.

      The logical path to a credible counter argument would lead one to that source material itself, but when attention is focused lupon a personality like a crow to a shiney penny, bemused onlookers are best advised to simply stand back and watch the show.

      • Submitted by Bill Gleason on 10/04/2012 - 11:07 am.

        Try to be intellectually honest, Mr. Swift

        You cited Fox and their description of what was in the paper in question. I cited a later use of the same research by the American Psychological Association which included:

        “… research has shown that the adjustment, development, and psychological well-being of children is unrelated to parental sexual orientation and that the children of lesbian and gay parents are as likely as those of heterosexual parents to flourish (Patterson, 2004; Perrin, 2002; Stacey & Biblarz, 2001)”

        [Note to readers: Stacey & Biblarz is the research in question]

        link: http://bit.ly/VhjQpx

        Repeating something contrary to fact does not make it true.

        As for your right wing friend Mr. Berg; you did thank him in your comment. He is even less credible than Fox. He in turn cited the Weekly Standard. As another commenter has already pointed out, this is also a not credible source.

        The American Psychological Assocation is a far more credible evaluator of the proposition that gay parents are good parents than the right wing anti-science crowd of sources you have cited on the matter.

        Unfortunately, Mr. Swift, you have a track record as a commenter on MinnPost. I don’t think very many people are being fooled. But in case someone is encountering you for the first time, I think that a caveat is in order.

        Good-bye for now. I have to go out of town.

  6. Submitted by Rando Douglas on 10/04/2012 - 08:57 am.

    10,000 bullets can add up quickly

    I have a small collection of World War II rifles, due to the fact that I am a history geek as well as a man that enjoys things that go boom and puts holes in paper at roughly the same time. Each gun has a different caliber bullet to go with it. Some of these bullets are available locally, but they are usually expensive so my only option is to buy them in bulk online.

    For example, a “spam can” of military surplus ammo for my German Mauser comes with about 800 bullets. Now multiply that by the various calibers of the other guns (including pistols) and you are in the ballpark of a few thousands bullets easily.

    I don’t get out to the range nearly as often as I would like, so these bullets last me a long time. But if I bring some friends to go shooting with, we could easily go through 500 rounds over the course of an afternoon.

    • Submitted by William Johnson on 10/04/2012 - 06:27 pm.

      Packaging for 10,000 rounds of ammo??

      Packaging means he had a storage container for that amount of rounds. Did he really have 10,000 rounds — no it didn’t say that.
      I have several military surplus ammo cans that can hold a thousand rounds of pistol ammo. But if this is the type of “packaging”, it is only that. Nowhere in the article did it say he had 10,000 rounds of ammunition. Somebodies feeding the anti-gun people with false info.
      As someone who also has the same types of Military Surplus weapons as a collector, I too buy online to save on this type of ammo. I also do so for pistol ammo. A day at the range easily consumes 500 rounds of ammo.
      Does that make me a threat to anyone? I don’t think so. It reminds me of the article a few weeks ago that asked the question “why does a particular federal agency need 340,000 rounds of ammunition? But, the article did not look at the fact that the amount gave every police officer about 340 rounds each. That is just enough for them to do the required quarterly firearms qualification.

      Packaging indeed. Nobody can fire off a round of “packaging”.

  7. Submitted by Beryl John-Knudson on 10/04/2012 - 09:16 am.

    Devil in the details, yes sir…

    Anybody remember those hustlers at state fairs; even at times, in the kitchen-supplies department at Dayton’s on Saturday afternoons. There they were fast talking their staring audience, selling multipurpose shredders with numerous blades that could slice anything…”Sold” he would say as Mrs Ferguson down the block bought another.

    Maybe it was something about the slick hair and the fast word play – same speech yanking the listeners attention with such a loud message – strong in volume but little truth to tell ?

    But it didn’t matter, this guy gave the listeners something to hang on to. Didn’t have to understand what his message suggested…endless war, fat cat insurance sharks savoring their control of health policies…and so much more advocating control by the corporate few ?

    Mrs Ferguson after she died had 10 plastic wrapped shredders in her cupboard. She still used an old kitchen knife.
    None worked as the hustler-on- a babble-high promised. But she was sold on whatever he promised because he had the pulpit thumping, old time evangelist’s approach. He could sell her anything. Didn’t matter eh,?

    Back at the podium: Hardest part to hear was a slip of the tongue or mere arrogance when Romney said in a somewhat patronizing voice…”Your poor” to Obama. he covered it carelessly a sentence later …”Your” became “The”.

    Small words do matter hey, when the substance is just repetitive mind gouging, the same old story; none which recognizes a growing portion of society which won’t improve under Romney…because he doesn’t even recognize them. The POOR exist. Somebody tell Romney.

    Obama, next time let him have it…many are counting on you.

    • Submitted by Dennis Tester on 10/04/2012 - 10:30 am.

      “Your poor”

      wasn’t as bad as Obama’s Freudian slip when he said “And everybody’s getting a fair shot. And everybody’s getting a fair share,” He quickly changed it to “DOING a fair share.”

  8. Submitted by Beryl John-Knudson on 10/04/2012 - 09:44 am.

    Devil in the details, yes sir…

    Anybody remember those hustlers at state fairs; even at times, in the kitchen-supplies department at Dayton’s on Saturday afternoons. There they were fast talking their staring audience, selling multipurpose shredders with numerous blades that could slice anything…”Sold” he would say as Mrs Ferguson down the block bought another.

    Maybe it was something about the slick hair and the fast word play – same speech yanking the listeners attention with such a loud message – strong in volume but little truth to tell ?

    But it didn’t matter, this guy gave the listeners something to hang on to. Didn’t have to understand what his message suggested…endless war, fat cat insurance sharks savoring their control of health policies…and so much more advocating control by the corporate few ?

    Mrs Ferguson after she died had 10 plastic wrapped shredders in her cupboard. She still used an old kitchen knife.
    None worked as the hustler-on- a babble-high promised. But she was sold on whatever he promised because he had the pulpit thumping, old time evangelist’s approach. He could sell her anything. Didn’t matter eh,?

    Back at the podium: Hardest part to hear was a slip of the tongue or mere arrogance when Romney said in a somewhat patronizing voice…”Your poor” to Obama. he covered it carelessly a sentence later …”Your” became “The”.

    Small words do matter hey, when the substance is just repetitive mind gouging, the same old story; none which recognizes a growing portion of society which won’t improve under Romney…because he doesn’t even recognize them. The POOR exist. Somebody tell Romney.

    Obama, next time let him have it…many are counting on you.

  9. Submitted by Greg Kapphahn on 10/04/2012 - 11:14 am.

    Chess vs. tic-tac-toe

    I suspect that Obama’s performance in the first debate will turn out to be part of a long-term strategy.

    He’s playing chess.

    Mr. Romney and his admirers think Romney won a decisive victory last night because he and they can only comprehend playing tic-tac-toe.

    With all their SuperPac ads, the Romney camp is producing lots of sound and fury and think they’re winning the war because of a few successful skirmishes, but they’re so distracted by their celebration of those skirmishes and the noise they, themselves, are making that they’re unable to detect the massive flanking forces coming up on either side and to their rear and failing, as well, to notice the forces invisibly dug in in front of them toward which they’re marching at full speed.

    Obama won’t put Romney in check until a week or two before the election with the final “checkmate” coming on election night,…

    after which point, all the SuperPac, Romney camp, “sound and fury” and all the money they will have spent to generate it will have been proven to have been “signifying [precisely] nothing.”

    • Submitted by Robert Owen on 10/04/2012 - 02:29 pm.

      What a peculiar analogy. It’s not the best way to start a chess game, giving up several key pieces in the opening moves of the game.

      If you were thinking rope-a-dope, that’s a boxing strategy.

      A chess player starts a game with sixteen pieces which can move in various ways. A tic-tac-toe player has at most five simple motions. If a chess player can’t defeat a tic-tac-toe player your guy is in deeper trouble than you can imagine. Don’t forget, most tic-tac-toe matches between competent adversaries end in a draw.

      ,…

      • Submitted by Greg Kapphahn on 10/04/2012 - 02:46 pm.

        I Suppose It Should Not Be Surprising

        That some of Romeny’s supporters are so desperate at the sorry state of his campaign and so determined to believe this first debate has now swept all that aside and even won him the election that they are unable to consider any other possibility.

        But then when you ONLY have a few simple motions to play with, chess is just a bit too complex to comprehend, I suppose, no matter how its played.

  10. Submitted by Matt Haas on 10/04/2012 - 04:18 pm.

    So

    As far as I could see, the only thing to be clarified with this opening round is that Romney is a very convincing liar. While that may be what some look for in a President, (though I cannot imagine why) I think as the debates continue he will find that he’ll be so busy keeping the fabrications in some semblance of continuity that he won’t even recognize that the President has been slowly feeding him the rope until, well we all are familiar with the analogy. Stacking lies upon lies is generally not looked upon as a good way to win an argument.

Leave a Reply