12 yrs ago and look whats changed.

That's what I was thinking

She went on to become Governor of that state.

@@Peekul1and an extreme woke dem.

@@LordofBLTs This is the lady that Trump refers to as, “That woman from Michigan.” 😂😂😂

@@teamdada2194 i don't think you guys even know what woke means anymore. everything i don't like is woke !! >:(

@@James-mq1jrbasically communist

Apollo --> you: the gift of prophecy

Hahaha wow this comment didn't age well.

FAKE COMMENTS

@@jamesshepherd8565haha

First of all, you knkw shes an extremely woke dem now? Do you still first of all?

@@teamdada2194 You people and the term woke. SHEESH! She’s actually doing a really great job! Not just good, GREAT!

@@D_Dougie tell me you’re a democrat without telling me you are lol. Hows biden doing in your opinion? My guess is you’re voting for kamala right? You been paying any attention with what is going on here? I can see being a dem up until obama took over but now you’re all batcrap crazy bubs.

@@teamdada2194 average trumper.

@@boratroopmy comment got deleted fyi. It basically says you boys are crazy.

How about now?

@@LegendaryLock ikr lmao. As a texan I'd happily trade governors

@@jozettes Godspeed, man. 🙏

@@LegendaryLockhow bout the present day?

Ah found it. First off, c’mon dude you can’t wait for people to hand stuff to you. Be a responsible politically involved citizen and look into these things everything is available online and if you’re spoon-fed information you’re easy to manipulate. Anyways: Michigan Senate Bill (SB) 275 of 2009 was introduced in February and seemed to be shot down. Can’t find a page saying it was, but it wasn’t ever passed. The portion Whitmer seems to be talking about is the definition of bullying in SEC 1310b B: i-iii. “Section B: (B) “Bullying or Harassment” means abuse of a pupil by 1 or more other pupils in any form. The term includes, but is not limited to, conduct that meets any of the following: (i) Substantially Interferes with educational opportunities, benefits, or programs of 1 or more pupils. (ii)Adversely affects the ability of a pupil to participate in or benefit from the school district’s or public school’s educational programs or activities by placing the pupil in reasonable fear of physical harm or by causing emotional distress. (iii) Is reasonably perceived to be motivated by animus (hostility or ill-feeling) or by an actual or perceived characteristic.” The sum total of these, leads to a scenario where if a school just implemented the bare written text of this bill and didn’t expand on the “But is not limited to” the following could happen: Any abuse that fits one of the 1’s, 2’s, and 3’s. 1. Abuse that does not hamper educational opportunities, benefits, or programs. 2a.) Abuse that does not adversely affect the ability of a pupil to participate in or benefit from the school’s educational programs, or activities. 2b.) Abuse that does adversely affect the ability of a pupil to participate in or benefit from the school’s educational programs or activities, but is deemed to be an unreasonable fear and does not cause emotional distress. 3.) Abuse that is not perceived to be motivated by animus or actual / perceived characteristics. The bill was later picked up in the house as Michigan House Bill (HB) 4163 of 2011. This bill, which you can look at it’s progression starter off looking very similar to SB 275, but changed a lot before it was passed. (iii) was altered to say on the version passed on Nov. 29, 2011: “Having an actual and substantial detrimental effect on a pupil’s physical or mental health” It removes perception of motive entirely which is probably a step in the correct direction. A new clause was also introduced: (iv) Causing substantial disruption in or substantial interference with, the orderly operation of the school. The amendment Whitmer is denouncing in the video is the following. It was an intermediary of HB 4163 (2011) and SB 275 (2009). It was SB 137 (2011) There was a provision in it that stated: “This section does not prohibit a statement of a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction of a school employee, school volunteer, pupil, or a pupil’s parent or guardian.” This allows one to circumvent the entire bill so long as you say what you said was a sincerely held religious belief. Example: a religious pupil(s) constantly telling an atheist pupil(s) on a daily basis that they are going to Hell or a number of things that they deserve was perfectly allowed with that new provision. Basically you were allowed to bully so long as you did it on a moral or religious basis.

You want kids to end up dead because they don’t fit your religious image of what a person should be? Go get lost if you do

And wants his sons name removed from it

Here we are, 12 years later, and people are talking about 'replacement' candidates....and the first name that came to my mind was Gretchen Whitmer ☺️