Monday, August 31, 2009

Racism - It Never Goes Away!

Playing the Race Card, Again, and Again, and…
At the extreme end of the left-wing are the collectivist ideologies, including fascism
By Jim O'Neill Tuesday, September 1, 2009
“Instead of a multicultural tableau of beaming young idealists on screen, we see ugly scenes of mostly older and white malcontents, disrupting forums where others have come to actually learn something. Instead of hope, we get swastikas, death threats and T-shirts proclaiming “Proud Member of the Mob.” —New York Times writer Maureen Dowd describing a town hall meeting
“On an altar of prejudice we crucify our own, yet the blood of all children is the color of God.”—Don E. Williams Jr.
Conservatives seem to catch on pretty quickly to the fact that they are not fascists, but our liberal friends seem to have a hard time wrapping their heads around the concept. So, for their sake—one last time.
At the extreme end of the left-wing are the collectivist ideologies, including fascism. Collectivists believe in building a massive government, and having everything under the government’s control. The whole Nazi grab-bag—concentration camps, swastikas, jackboots, et al., belongs to the left-wing.
At the extreme right of the political spectrum are anarchists, and they don’t build anything. As soon as they see a government—democratic, fascist, whatever—they want to destroy it. It’s what they do. There’s no way in the world that the Far Right could be fascists
So it’s been swell having the Far Left pretend that we are one of them, but they need to take back their swastikas, jackboots, and armbands now—we insist.
As for the Far Left calling the right-wing “racists,” well, that needs to stop too.
Pretty soon the Far Left is going to run out of things to call us. I suppose they’ll have to resort to calling us “commies.” “Lousy right-wing pinkos!”
Let’s look at the racist history of the left-wing, and we’ll see who the racists really are
Let’s look into a bit of the racist history of the left-wing, and we’ll see who the racists really are.
As I’ve discussed in prior articles, the left-wing during the first half of the 20th century called themselves Progressives, and the Progressives were passionate promoters of the teachings of eugenics. They were especially fond of the eugenic notions of racial “cleansing.”
The Klux Klux Klan of the day was a creature of the Progressive Left—future Democratic President, Harry S. Truman, belonged to the Klux Klux Klan, as did future liberal Supreme Court justice Hugo Black.
The “Jim Crow” South was politically speaking, solidly left-wing. For decades the racially segregated south was a bastion of the left-wing Democratic Party.
The Progressives pushed the concept of a national minimum wage, in order to keep the “inferior” races from competing for jobs better filled by Caucasians, and the modern welfare state was initially started as a government vehicle for racial purification.
Racism: Left-wing’s drive for the minimum wage, planned parenthood, and the welfare state
Royal Meeker, a left-wing Princeton professor, and advisor to liberal poster-boy President Woodrow Wilson, explains the rationale behind the left-wing’s drive for the minimum wage, planned parenthood, and the welfare state:
“Better that the state should support the Inefficient wholly, and prevent the multiplication of the breed, than subsidize incompetence and unthrift, enabling them to bring forth more of their kind.”
“The inefficient.” Jeeze, Royal Meeker sounds almost as bad as Ezekiel Emmanuel.
In an article in the April 3, 1913 edition of The New York Times, Meeker suggested that America’s children should be subject to “compulsory civil service.” “No private or parochial schools should be permitted to trespass upon the child’s time of preparation for service to the state.”
Some things never change. The left-wing drooling over big government is nothing new, trust me. Nor is their racial bigotry.
The Negro Project: Margret Sanger’s Eugenic Plan for Black Americans
Planned Parenthood annually gives out awards called “Maggies,” named after liberal icon Margaret Sanger—considered the “saint” of birth control, and the founder of Planned Parenthood. (I love the Left and their euphemisms—calling planned infanticide, “Planned Parenthood.” Cute).
In her own words, Sanger was not a “fit person for love, or home, or children, or anything which needs attention or consideration.” Wonderful role model for parenting—I can see why Planned Parenthood adores her.
Planned Parenthood should engrave Sanger’s words on the next batch of Maggies they hand out. “Not a fit person for love, or home, or anything which needs attention or consideration.”
Describing what she considered to be the main aim of birth control, Sanger wrote, “More children from the fit, and less from the unfit—that is the chief issue of birth control.” In other words, birth control was used by the Left as a device to limit the population of what they considered “undesirable” elements of society—especially blacks.
Sanger was behind what was called the “Negro Project”—the forerunner of today’s Planned Parenthood. The idea behind the left-wing’s “Negro Project” was to limit, if not eliminate, America’s black population.
Tanya Green writes, “By 1949, Sanger had hoodwinked black America’s best and brightest into believing birth control’s “life-saving benefits.” In a monumental feat, she bewitched virtually an entire network of black social, professional and academic organizations into endorsing Planned Parenthood’s eugenic program.”
You may find Ms. Green’s article of interest—“The Negro Project: Margret Sanger’s Eugenic Plan for Black Americans.”
Sanger didn’t do it alone, of course, the left-wing helped her. The left-wing helped her a lot. Eugenics, after all, was one of the main planks in the Progressive/Democratic platform. Left-wing social engineering at its finest. No wonder Hitler took notes from the American Left.
Although the motivations behind Planned Parenthood may have changed over the years, the results are the same—racial genocide. Look up the figures, and do the math.
It is perhaps because of an unconscious acknowledgement of their own vile racist past, that white liberals are such spineless milquetoasts when it come to black racism.
The Far Left ridicules and mocks spirituality, because their own spirits are stagnant and shriveled
Which brings us to the current state of racism in America’s left-wing. But before I go there, I want to discuss spirituality a bit—I want to bring God into this.
Each of us is born with a divine spark that, through the exercise of our free will, we either nurture and cultivate, or allow to fade and extinguish.
The Far Left does not believe in a divine light within humanity. All of the texts that they study, memorize, and quote from, are written by atheists.
At best, they practice “religion” in quote marks—religions that are twisted travesties of true spirituality. Religions that don’t teach love, compassion and surrender to God, but teach anger, hatred, and arrogance.
The Far Left ridicules and mocks spirituality, because their own spirits are stagnant and shriveled.
When Divine Justice asks them what they did with the opportunity of life, and the gift of free will, they will have nothing to say, but “I spent my life ignoring You, and grew in avarice, anger, and arrogance.” Their skin color will not be an issue.
Conservatives are God’s people. It is not a case of God being on our side, but of us being on God’s side. We are the ones who give America its heart and soul.
At the top of the Washington Monument—up on the capstone where no one can see it—are engraved the Latin words Laus Deo—“Praise be to God.” The words face the east, so it catches the rays of the morning sun each dawn. These words were not placed there for tourists to view.
I believe that we would do well to engrave in our hearts, in our minds, and in our spirits, the concept of Laus Deo, as we prepare for battle.
So, back to racism in America today. What is the current liberal “take” on racism? Well, things have changed radically, and on the other hand, they haven’t changed at all. The liberals are still racists, but they are now anti-white racists.
This sea-change in liberal thinking has been gradually gaining momentum since the 1950s, until today it is the accepted liberal norm. Liberals view Hispanics, and especially Blacks, as being somehow more entitled, more deserving, and just all around “superior” to Caucasians (and Asians).
There are some blacks who are flat-out Black Supremacists, like Louis Farakhan, Leonard Jeffries, Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright, and other proponents of Black Theology.
(As you’ll recall, Wright was the Obama family’s preacher for twenty years. “The One” claims that he didn’t have a clue that Wright was a black racist. Obama would have us believe that he is some sort of hapless jejune naif, who accidentally keeps stumbling into nefarious characters).
With their signature Byzantine but vapid reasoning, liberals believe that race matters, and since race matters more than individual integrity, ethics, or talent, then race must be the defining trait of an individual’s worth, and since Hispanics and Blacks can’t be bad, then they must be good, and since Caucasians and Asians aren’t Black or Hispanic, they must be bad.
I think it’s a load of rubbish, but it makes sense to liberals—somehow.
Once again, I suggest reading Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism,” if you haven’t done so yet. (Goldberg deserves a Pulitzer for his impeccably researched book. Maybe he and Glenn Beck could share the Medal of Freedom that Obama gave to Harvey Milk).
Goldberg writes that, “Positive discrimination forms the backbone of our racial spoils system.”
By “positive discrimination” (don’t you love these terms?) Goldberg means the process whereby certain races (Caucasian, Asian) are kept out of schools and jobs because of preference being given to other races (Blacks, Hispanics)—the “racial spoils system.”
I’ll spare you the wretched reasoning behind identity politics and multiculturalism, and get straight to the point. Goldberg writes, “This welter of nonsense enshrines and empowers a host of collectivist notions that place the state at the center of managing the progress of groups: those who oppose this agenda get clubbed over the head with the charge of racism.”
If you disagree with the liberal agenda you’re a racist—pure and simple.
But surely, if you have no bias against any race, then the liberals will consider you to be non-racist. Right? Well, actually no.
Goldberg notes that, “According to liberals, race neutrality [i.e. not being racist] is itself racist.” It harkens back to the “social Darwinism” of the past, we are told, because it relegates minorities to a savage struggle for the survival of the fittest.”
“Not being racist, is racist”—now that’s emblematic liberal “logic” at its best. For the left-wing it’s “1984” forever.
In other words, Blacks and Hispanics, the poor dears, are incapable of competing with Caucasians and Asians on a level playing field, and consequently need assistance in the form of money and quotas. Nonetheless, Blacks and Hispanics are superior to Caucasians and Asians simply because, well, they’re Black and Hispanic. If you disagree with any of this, then you my friend, are a racist. Got it?
I can’t begin to tell you how absurd I find this whole liberal pile of garbage. It is demeaning and condescending to the Blacks and Hispanics; it is insulting and racist towards Caucasians and Asians, and it is harmful to everybody. It is a pile of vile, poisonous, puerile crapola. This insane nonsense needs to stop now.
Before closing, I want to make something crystal clear. I despise black racists, because they are racists, not because they are black. I abhor black anti-American traitorous scum—not because they are black—but because they are anti-American traitorous scum. My disdain is unbiased, I despise all racists and traitors equally, regardless of race, color, or creed.
I want to make this clear as well. There are a host of patriotic Hispanic and Black Americans who find this insidious liberal drivel, anathema. They detest the liberal lunacy as much as anyone. I salute their patriotism and courage.
In closing, it is the conservative right-wing, with its emphasis on individual responsibility and personal merit, that most closely adheres to Dr. King’s admonition to not judge someone “ the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” It is the right-wing that is largely “color-blind,” and looks at someone’s performance, rather than their race.
The left-wing considers such laudable attitudes to be hopelessly retardataire, and, unbelievably, racist.
It is the Liberal Left, with their emphasis on “multiculturalism,” entitlement, and identity politics, that nurtures and encourages racism. It is the left-wing that views the world through “colored” glasses. It is the left-wing that has historically been racist, and they continue to cultivate and spread their poison.
In one of her articles Pamella Geller writes, “Patriots, be on notice. This is the favorite tactic of the Left. Any criticism of Obama, no matter what about or how legit, will be labeled racism. Tea party? Racist! Opposition to socialism? Racist! Opposition to nationalized healthcare? Racist! Opposition to cap and tax? Racist! When the Left makes everything about race, and sees everything through a prism of “racism,” it shows us who the real racists are.”
The next time some left-wing whiner tries to hide behind the skirts of the “race card,” you tell them where to shove it. Tell them to stick it alongside their swastika, hammer and sickle, and other leftist gear, because we aren’t buying their nonsense any more.

The Race Idiots
By Selwyn Duke
August 24, 2009
With relativistic people, there is no such thing as a true axiom, yet you’d never know it listening to our modern mantras. We hear things such as “Our strength lies in our diversity,” “Religion has caused all the wars in history,” and “Everything is a matter of perspective” proclaimed with theological assurance. Of course, the last supposition is contradictory, and embracing it renders moral supposition itself meaningless. Regardless, it’s natural for man to make sense of the world by “profiling” elements of reality.
Many of our assumptions pertain to race, and one is always uttered in the wake of stories such as the recent Henry Louis Gates affair. What happens is that, referring to race, people will reflexively say something akin to the following, “Well, we still have a long way to go.” Even conservatives pay homage to this self-evident provisional “truth,” only, they add a qualifier so it goes something like, “We still have a long way to go, but . . .,” with the caboose being “we’ve made great strides,” “we’ve come a long way” or some variation thereof. It’s obligatory, after all. It’s how you polish up you credentials as a person who “understands the problem.”
It’s also reflective of a hang-up. Oh, this isn’t to say I believe we’ve achieved perfection in racial attitudes, perish the thought. It is to say, however, that seeing a failure to achieve perfection in an area as a characteristic problem is far more of a problem than what ostensibly needs invasive and aggressive remedy. It usually yields a cure worse than the disease.
Understand that bigotry is simply a manifestation of one of the Seven Deadly Sins: wrath. It is not the end-all and be-all, the source of all our woes. It is not, relatively speaking, even a major problem (although, it waxes when we let the Sharptons, Jacksons and Obamas of the world stir the pot).
If this statement raises eyebrows, perspective is needed. If we were otherwise perfect and called the ether home, any extant bigotry would rightly stick out like white sheets at a Black Panther meeting. Yet we are far from perfect. We exhibit not just one element of wrath but also its other manifestations and the rest of the deadly sins — greed, lust, sloth, pride, envy and gluttony — to varying degrees. So the question is not whether bigotry exists and is a problem, as this is true of every sin. It concerns whether it is a characteristic problem.
In other words, if we were to constantly lament our lacking math ability, it would imply one of two things. It either stands out in reality, making us pay it some mind, or it stands out only in our minds, in which case we are detached from reality. If the former, it would have to pale in comparison to the mathematical achievement of other nations or to our ability in other areas, such as English and history. So the question is, does our obsession with bigotry meet one of the last criterion’s two elements?

No rational person can make the case that we rank high on the world’s bigotry scale, not on a planet in which racial and ethnic patriotism reign supreme. Many don’t realize that this is in fact man’s default state, but the irony is that it’s because they’ve fallen victim to something they might be wont to preach against: “ethnocentrism.” The fact is that man is tribal by fallen nature, and there is little in the way of political correctness outside the Western world. In fact, far from being taught that it’s wrong to discriminate, many groups are taught that it’s wrong to not place your “people” first. Such a thing can make you a pariah.
The reality is that we kill ourselves talking about bigotry, but much of the world kills others because of it. We’ve all heard about this, from the Balkan ethnic cleansing in the 1990s to the Ruandan genocide in which hundreds of thousands of Tutsis were murdered by Hutu tribesman, who happened to refer to them as “cockroaches.” Oh, I should mention that no hate-speech charges are in the offing.
But, okay, we’re better than the monster in another country, but maybe bigotry is the worst monster roaming our countryside. Except that, well, believing this requires the most incomplete of moral compasses. Let’s now contrast this manifestation of wrath with the rest of our national sins.
It’s obvious where we should start. Given that we have sexual imagery and innuendo everywhere, classes in pornography and “sexology” in colleges, and stories of children re-enacting Caligula’s court in schools, can we really make the case that bigotry is a greater problem than lust? What about greed? Well, given the Bernie Madoffs of the world, the recent Wall Street woes, rapacious government officials and the long-accepted maxim about the lust for money being the root of all evil, it just may rank a bit higher as well. Sloth? Our welfare state and handout-and-entitlement mentality. Envy? Class warfare. Gluttony? We have more obese people than the rest of the world combined. Pride? Given how people are loath to admit error — think Obama and his refusal to apologize to the Cambridge police — and the super-size egos that abound, this trumps bigotry also.
This lack of perspective is no small matter, as it leads to much destructive social engineering. Just think about race-based quotas, affirmative action and set asides. Consider the assumption that relative racial homogeneity within a business or organization equates to racial animosity in its leaders’ hearts, or how largely white neighborhoods are targeted with “low income” housing because, well, we all know there just must be unjust discrimination. And think about how Obama, Gates and so many others will just assume that white police are bigoted because “We still have a long way to go.” All the while we have schools teaching perversion, profligate government spending, illegal aliens “undocumented” into legitimacy, criminals who go unpunished, slackers who are rewarded, heroes who are derided and traitors who are exalted. We have caricatured virtue and vice, exaggerating some parts to grotesque proportions while ignoring others. The result is that we misdirect our scalpel during “corrective” surgery, slicing off healthy tissue while allowing cancerous tumors in our midst to grow unfettered.
Not only does this selective moral blindness numb us to our real national sins, it also allows the reprobate the illusion of righteousness. In fact, while the stereotype of the self-righteous oaf is of a rightist religious zealot, a far more fitting candidate is the loopy leftist lunkhead. He is the one who will parade about defining favored vices as virtue, worshipping sex and mammon, secure in his own saintliness because he utters nary a racial joke and bears nobly that newly-minted white man’s burden. The modern leftist is like a Nazi who thinks he is good because he is hygienic and punctual.
Yet this leftist conception of virtue is as shallow as it is narrow; its definition of goodness doesn’t seem to involve love for what one defends as much as equal-opportunity hatred. As to this, I have long observed something: liberals treat blacks like people; the problem is that they don’t treat people like people. That is to say, they treat blacks like everyone else, but they treat everyone pretty shabbily. With Torquemada-like zeal they advance the dogma that we must treat all people equally, but much is missing from that prescription. Equally at what moral level? You can treat people equally by killing them all with the same expedition and ferocity.
So here is the left’s implied standard: you may curse people out generically for five minutes with seething hatred, just don’t utter one racial epithet. You may let everyone starve, just don’t give one race a morsel of food another cannot digest. You may corrupt all races with vile hip-hop anti-culture, just don’t imply that it is more corruptive than anything else. This is our national hang-up, our racial Puritanism.
Leftists don’t realize it, but with their obsession, they are reminiscent of a group from the past which they view with utter contempt and mockery. And while it’s generally not true that authentic Christians were hung-up on sex, the people in question could be thus described. These were individuals who would, and I’ll be delicate, affix mechanical devices to boys to prevent a certain normal physiological reaction. (No, this was not medieval times but those of the “Enlightenment,” and the instigators were at least as likely to be physicians and scientists as churchmen.) I guess they figured that they “still had a long way to go.”
Now, people weren’t wrong to preach chastity just as we aren’t wrong to preach charity. But among the legitimate moralists of the day were those who caricatured the virtue, thereby perverting it, just as we do today with racial brotherhood. The question is, will you and I be voices of reason or, in obeisance to the age, insist that all racial talk is “dirty”? If the latter, then we will be deserving of the mockery when people two centuries hence laugh at how “repressed” we were.

Sunday, August 30, 2009

What Happened to Education?

The Rebirth of Education
By Investigating Journalist Jon Rappoport
November 22, 2010
Literacy is the foundation of education, but if the student can’t think and reason about what he reads, if he can’t ask intelligent questions about what he reads, then he is at sea like a cork bobbing on the waves.
Let’s suppose you wanted to create a high-functioning android. What would you do?
You would endow this creature with the ability to absorb information and remember it faultlessly. He would be a remarkable rote learner.
He would never question what he reads. To guarantee this, you would omit teaching him logic.
Then he would go through life like a sponge, soaking up data and reciting it.
Is this what we want from young minds?
Well, in some societies, the answer is a resounding yes. Of course, those societies are managed from the top down. The leaders demand obedience.
In America, things are different. At least for now. We still possess sufficient freedom to want more from students. We want to somehow imbue students with the capacity for independent thought.
However, this goal is not achieved by waving a magic wand. Neither is it achieved by simply reminding young people that they are free.
Let us return, for a moment, to the birthplace of liberty, ancient Greece. Two and a half thousand years ago, something unprecedented happened in the city of Athens. From out of the darkness of prior civilizations, a new concept was set into motion.
The INDIVIDUAL was free. He could choose. He could think about vital issues of the day and make decisions.
A teacher named Socrates began to teach students. He engaged in a practice that was brand new: dialogue. Conversation aimed at understanding, at a deep level, ideas like Justice and the Good.
It wasn’t enough to read about such ideas or memorize second-hand conclusions.
Dialogue, as Socrates used it, contained LOGIC.
He would show that certain ideas inevitably led to absurd conclusions. He would show that certain trains of correct reasoning led to insights.
This was thinking at a whole new level.
It caught on. In fact, it formed the basis for the pursuit called science. It formed the basis for the institution called law. And finally, in the late 18th century, men on this soil created a Republic that operated by and through law.
Law—not decree, not force, not a monarch’s assumption of divine right to rule, not the shifting bobbing changing will of the majority.
The basis of American law was embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, two documents that were debated and drafted by men who very well understood the branch of learning called logic. They were devoted to it.
In fact, logic was the connective tissue that held these documents together and made them operable.
Now, all these years later, the study of logic has been systemically removed from most school curricula.
In other words, the essence of what made the Republic possible has been taken away from the population.
Think about the effect of that action.
It’s as if sailors and navigators, going to sea in ships their ancestors built, no longer knew how to read the stars or use instruments to guide them to distant ports.
No deep appreciation of the Declaration or the Constitution is possible in the absence of logic. These documents become vague mirrors of sentiments expressed centuries ago, in another world, by men whose brilliance is forgotten.
And if you are an ambitious person with an agenda that involves trampling freedom and burying it, if you are seeking to replace this form of government with another one that destroys what was built here, you will also replace logic with spurious and attractive-sounding ideas—so you can move the mob. So you can revert to control rather than freedom.
And who is going to stop you? The young, with their half-baked educations, who can’t follow a train of thought past the first station? School teachers, who never learned logic when they were young?
It’s fine to talk about “the struggle” and the need to “defend liberty.” But if you abandon the world of ideas to those who want to undermine the Republic, the battle is lost.
The world of ideas is not some ivory tower of meaningless chatter. It is vital. It is alive. It is the bloodstream of the Republic.
When Tom Paine penned Common Sense in 1776, it sold an astonishing 500,000 copies in that first year. The eloquent prose and the logic of it literally forced the Declaration to be written.
Such living ideas need to be articulated at length in order to take on their true meaning. But the ideas standing alone collapse. They need the connective tissue of logic to form a coherent whole. Then, the power appears out of the fog.
To paraphrase the old conundrum about the tree falling in the forest, if a logical argument is made and no one can understand it, is it logic? Is it real?
At least in pragmatic terms, we have the answer, and we can see it if we look around us. Minds lacking real education falter, retreat, glaze over, and reach for the latest homily, the latest slogan, the latest prescription for our ills.
Minds revert to older nostrums, which can be summarized under one label: COLLECTIVISIM. The vague philosophy that asserts the group has all rights and the individual has none.
This is where we are heading. This is where we have been heading for some time. On that shore, decorated with empty promises, more and more people believe “everybody will be given everything they need.”
Of course, collectivism is always a mass puppet show, in which the leaders who hold the strings solidify their tyranny behind the curtain.
Portraying themselves as saviors, they promote a false dream. They spin fantasies. They issue sugar-coated directives. They offer empty generalities. They claim they are for the Good. They skip and chisel their way from A to B to F to Z to R effortlessly, as if they are champions of valid deduction.
Minds that cannot distinguish deceptive idealism from correct reasoning buy the Fool’s Gold. And then, in the absence of logic, freedom disappears.
No one remembers what it was. No one cares.
Freedom was just another fairy tale in an old book. Now we have a new fairy tale. It is shinier. It is more modern. It is simpler.
Is this what you want?
If your answer is no, the first profound order of business is the reinstatement of logic, as a branch of learning, as an extensive discipline, as a set of fine tools for minds, in education.
Still Lessons To Be Learned From The Obama School Address Controversy
Barack Obama realizes the necessity of claiming the hearts and minds of the young
By Dr. Frederick Meekins
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Lincoln is credited with saying that the philosophy of the classroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next. Likewise, totalitarian movements such as Nazism and Communism expended considerable resources on efforts designed to sway the youth of their respective countries into embracing ideologies inimical to the self interest of the student.
Viewing himself in the pantheon of historical figures by which entire eras are remembered, Barack Obama also realizes the necessity of claiming the hearts and minds of the young if he is to transcend the chasm between that of mere government administrator or even head of state to that of an adored icon an entire culture or way of life is built upon.
Though the administration distanced itself from the original lesson plan and disavowed any purpose for the President’s broadcast address other than to tell students to stay in school, the fact that such a document was even formulated provides a glimpse into the worldviews of the influential at the highest levels of the bureaucracy and administration. Therefore, even if the misbegotten memorandum is scrubbed from the Internet and its existence denied to the same extent as the Star Wars Christmas special, it must still be scrutinized as part of the documentary history of the United States.
Despite however White House operatives might spin it now, the President and his handlers intended this speech to be more than a simple welcoming of the school year. Each section of the lesson plan revealed even more about the intent of the section that preceded it.
According to the section titled “Before The Speech”, teachers were instructed to have students read books about Barack Obama. For high schoolers, would the President’s operatives in the Department of Education endorse and applaud works of a contrarian perspective such as “Obamanation” by Jerome Corsi and “The Culture Of Corruption” by Michelle Malkin, or is the suggestion merely euphemism for laudatory tomes of a worshipful nature?
Another study question read, “Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials?...Why is what they say important?” Just let the tone of that one mull around in your brain for a moment.
From the way that is formulated, what the question is calling for is unquestioning obedience. For if it didn’t, it would also be accompanied with a question sparking the realization that it is also important for elected officials to also listen to citizens.
In the section “During The Speech”, it is suggested in a roundabout way that, instead of looking critically in terms of what the President as a politician is trying to get over on or swindle from the American people, students should readily embrace whatever it is that the President is asking them to do. No where were students asked to question whether or not it is proper for the President to ask anything of them beyond the purview of his delineated constitutional authority.
It is bad enough for agents of the state to guide the student through a mental exercise with the largely predetermined goal of increasing the student’s fidelity to a particular presidential administration. It is even worse when plans are made to determine and catalogue the degree of compliance on the part of students.
In the lesson plan, teachers were instructed to have students record their thoughts on sticky notes and to write down their goals on index cards. Big deal, some might say, as such a format is quite transient and easily discardable.
Don’t be so sure. Often in the workplace, when management wants to gather intelligence on the mere laborers, workers are compelled to scribble our thoughts on post-its that are then collected after a staff meeting.
These are then either tacked on a flipchart for everyone to see or transcribed for later distribution as the minutes of the meeting. Had the original lesson plan been adhered to, what the students jotted down wouldn’t have been something simply graded in terms of how well it was thought out in terms of content or mechanics but something ultimately forgotten about as the educational process moved on, but these might have come back to haunt the students at a later date.
For example, in the section of the lesson plan titled “The Extension Of The Speech” teachers are instructed to collect what the students have written and to post these around the classroom where all can see them. Students are to interview (or in other words interrogate) each other in order to create a supportive COMMUNITY.
In other words, educators are to establish subdued reeducation camps where students either denounce their classmates failing to live up to the expectations of the Obama regime or out of fear of peer pressure enunciate aspirations that are in compliance with the prerogatives of the group rather than their own or those of their respective families. In a system of secularized government education, even if I have no goal other than sitting on my rear-end after I come home from work and stuff my face with bonbons hour after hour, who is anyone to criticize me whatsoever?
Two of the greatest threats to the sanctity and authority of the family is a peer group and a government that do not uphold the corpus of Biblical values. As destructive as questionable companions can be as a bad apple can spoil the whole bunch, at least these won’t usually keep extensive files for decades to come used to determine future educational and occupational opportunities.
Had these assorted sticky notes, index cards, and related scribblings been collected as suggested in the original lesson plan they would have likely been forwarded surreptitiously to the Departments of Education and Homeland Security. For starters, they were already to be kept until a later date and redistributed so that teachers might be able to hold students accountable to these so-called “goals”.
But beyond academic criteria such as grammar and the application of facts to a formulated question, should public educators be given the authority to evaluate aspects of the life of the student beyond the classroom? Some might respond that concerns of the ruminations of students being turned over to be catalogued by the government is paranoid. But is it really?
One provision in the lesson plan suggested that students should be encouraged to submit two minute videos to the Department of Education’s “I Am What I Learn” contest “explaining why education is important and how their education will help them achieve their dreams.” And what if the student responds that education—- provided one is able to rise above the swill urging intellectual conformity—- will assist them in realizing that the vast majority of politicians are frauds and full of it?
Despite the fact that the government acting through educational institutions exercises a degree of power to the extent of altering the course of students’ lives, some are disturbingly blasé about Obama’s desire to wrap his tentacles even tighter around the minds of as many students as possible. This attitude can shockingly be found even among those claiming to be Conservative that really ought to know better.
In his 9/7/09 column titled “The Obama Controversy—- What To Think”, Albert Mohler proved just how quickly some Christian leaders are willing to turn on their more discerning brethren in order to appease the sophisticated and curry favor with elites. In his opening paragraph, Mohler questions, “Why would a speech calling for students to remain in school and set personal goals for themselves incite any controversy at all? Is this just another eruption of the culture war?”
For a theological historian or historical theologian, Mohler exhibits a disturbing misunderstanding regarding the past, the so-called “orders of creation”, and the public role of believers in society.
Though an understanding of the Culture War has had to advance beyond belief in the infallibility of the Republican Party, shouldn’t Mohler realize that there are things worth fighting for and that much of the acrimony characterizing American culture today is not the fault of believers or other kinds of conservatives and libertarians wanting to mind their own business and to raise their children in a spirit of individuality and a religious adoration of the family’s own choosing.
The fundamental issue at hand here is just whom has God entrusted children to regarding those matters beyond mere survival. Ought a child’s worldview to be molded primarily by largely law-abiding parents or by a federal government that ultimately does not know the child and can only care about the child in the most detached and abstract manners?
Mohler writes, “At this level, the controversy is a national embarrassment. Conservatives must avoid jumping on every conspiracy theory and labeling every action by the Obama administration as sinister or socialist. Our civic culture is debased when opposing parties and political alignments read every proposal by the other side as suspect on its face.”
Is Mohler’s enthusiasm for gentility and manners going to do him any good when his children are forcibly hauled off for mandatory national service? Mohler might be willing to swallow the party line that the President intended nothing more for the day than to encourage students to strive for their best (efforts for which these youngsters will actually be penalized for as adults by Obama’s own policies), however, there is indeed evidence that the Obama regime did indeed have other intentions for the occasion.
The day President Obama enunciated his scholastic oration, the Department of Homeland Security announced it would be infiltrating the Girl Scouts. As part of the President’s “My Education, My Future” initiative, Secretary Janet Napolitano and the Chief Executive Officer of the Girl Scouts of America unveiled a new emergency preparedness merit patch.
To earn this honor, scouts must identify and prepare for potential emergencies, learn about local alerts and warning systems, and engage in community service. By themselves, these things are neutral.
However, what should concern the astute American is that the involvement of the Department of Homeland Security goes beyond the publication of a few pamphlets and workbooks. The initiative is to be administered by Citizen Corps, a division of FEMA.
Does anyone honestly believe the program is going to remain limited to memorizing public safety platitudes that are the contemporary equivalent of either “stop, drop, and roll” or “duck and cover”? Eventually, in the name of defending the Motherland and public health, at first girl scouts and eventually all children irrespective of whether or not they belong to these organized youth movements will be compelled to reveal to authorities what their parents prepared for supper, how far they drove the car on the weekend, and even if they have enunciated any reactionary perspectives such as salvation being found only through belief in Christ and marriage only being between a monogamous man and a monogamous woman.
Unsettling as Obama’s power grabs are, even more disturbing is the ease with which some grant Obama a free pass for the most ludicrous of reasons.
Contemporary mainstream Evangelicalism holds that since all people are equal ontologically irrespective of race, all people should be held to the same standard. From that flows the corollary that individuals should be held to the very same criticism.
However, according to Albert Mohler, our response should not so much be based on the objectivity of a specific truth but rather tailored to pander to the preferences of a particular group. Of the President’s remarks on education, Mohler said, “Let’s be honest here. Most middle-class white kids get plenty of these messages, starting at home. But might this message be particularly helpful for a child struggling for a role model or looking for justifications for his studiousness?”
In other words, middle class White parents should be made to feel guilty for actually taking care of their progeny instead of pawning them off on the social welfare system while they go off clubbing in pursuit of the parent of their next bastard child. If minority parents deliberately neglect their children, that is their own fault and White people are not obligated to take this unfortunate reality into account when formulating their own parental decisions. It is just as immoral for church officials to play on racial guilt as those in government.
It has been said that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. Provided a certain level of physical care is maintained, parents (not government officials, credentialed educators, or even eminent theologians) should be the ones to determine through what form in what manner values and the precious heritage of this great nation should be passed on to their respective offspring.
When will Parents Stop Funding Failure in Education?
Part 1 of 2
By: Devvy
March 8, 2010
© 2010 -
"What was done to Rabbi Shifren...will be remembered with shame in this nation. 'Kill Your Teacher' must be read to understand what has happened to our once great California School System..." Lupe Moreno, President, Latino Americans for Immigration Reform, City of Santa Ana, Library Commissioner
Teachers like Rabbi Nachum Shifren, who wrote the book: Kill Your Teacher - Corruption And Racism in Los Angeles City Schools are driven out of the system. His account of attempting to educate classrooms full of belligerent hooligans is all too common. I know because I have received hundreds of emails over the last couple of years (too many to count after 20 years) with the same theme: The school district honchos turn a blind eye. Political correctness trumps learning and even in Rabbi Schifren's case -- death threats and burning down his classroom- the rancid system simply pulled the rug out from under him.
The district in which he taught was primarily black and Mexican students. It didn't take long for the bigotry to rise to the top:
"At some point, community "activists" started doing their malevolent thing, dredging up archaic visions of classic Jewish/Black antagonisms and issues of divisiveness. In response to breakdowns of classic discipline, non-cooperation, uncouth behavior or language, the issue of race and division continually surfaced. "Why you always wanna keep the Black man down, Shifren?" was an oft-repeated refrain usually heard after a low score on a test or report card. I'm not trying to keep anyone down. If you'd do your homework, your grade would be higher." (pg. 18)
Of course, the responsibility for failure is not the fault of the student. Any politically correct "justification" will do to continue passing dumbed down students along through the system. Common as rain in Hawaii. Rabbi Shifren sums up this putrid racket promoted by self serving politicians and the teachers unions:
"Several years ago, I taught at Sereno Middle School. One of my students, a Latino, was becoming a severe problem to the extent that his behavior had severely impacted learning. When it became clear at the mid-semester evaluation that he would not pass my class, he reported to the principle that I had threatened to shoot him with a shot gun! This would have been laughable if it were true. But the bitter truth was that, as the principal, Mr. Moreno pointed out to me in his office that day, special "terrorism laws" required that I be removed from my position until the allegations could be investigated. Aside from the fact that during the "investigation" I would be laid off without pay, the most egregious factor at play here was that the student's family was here illegally! My life and ability to support my family had been jeopardized by an illegal alien, with the backing of the District.
"No amount of overstatement can be used to describe the absolute anarchy in our schools from masses of foreign students, principally from Mexico, that are tying our hands with a myriad of programs designed to bring them up to speed with their grade level. Bilingual education is as much a failure as it is a fraud. In nearly all cases, the families are here for economic reasons that have nothing to do with assimilation into American society.
"Chicano activists abound, and are there to encourage the flood across the border. Groups like Aztlan and Mecha literally preach to these illegals that it is WE, the White establishment that owes them free education, housing and a whole host of other gratuities. Actually, they are told, the "reconquists" (reconquering of Southwest United States) is in full swing, so efforts to learn the host language and culture are unnecessary. Furthermore, since our country has an institutional racism (their claim) toward Latinos, they can only use confrontational politics in attempting to wrest control from the controlling population." (pgs 41-41)
Let me add that these illegals are so ignorant they have zero understanding of one very important historical event: The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which brought an official end to the Mexican-American War (1846-1848); it was signed February 2, 1848:
"Under the terms of the treaty negotiated by Trist, Mexico ceded to the United States Upper California and New Mexico. This was known as the Mexican Cession and included present-day Arizona and New Mexico and parts of Utah, Nevada, and Colorado (see Article V of the treaty). Mexico relinquished all claims to Texas and recognized the Rio Grande as the southern boundary with the United States (see Article V).
"The United States paid Mexico $15,000,000 "in consideration of the extension acquired by the boundaries of the United States" (see Article XII of the treaty) and agreed to pay American citizens debts owed to them by the Mexican government (see Article XV). Other provisions included protection of property and civil rights of Mexican nationals living within the new boundaries of the United States (see Articles VIII and IX), the promise of the United States to police its boundaries (see Article XI), and compulsory arbitration of future disputes between the two countries (see Article XXI).
Militant, hot-button America hating groups like LaRaza, Aztlan and others, ignore the fact that THEIR government ceded over the lands described above in the treaty. The photos we've seen over the years of Mexican males grasping their genitals and humping (I walked by them doing it at the state capitol in Sacramento) yelling: "You stole our land. You get out" and "Equal Rights for all immigrants" is a bald faced lie. These crude, juvenile exhibitions are carried out by stupid mobs who are being manipulated for a political agenda far beyond their understanding.
What educators like Rabbi Shifren are talking about is educating America's children. No matter how painful the raw truth is, it must be faced and action taken because we have lost two generations of kids. Adults who can't make change at a register without the computer telling them the amount. Who know nothing about the history of our constitutional republic. They do know where to get an abortion at 12 so their parents won't find out, but they can't find Iraq on a world map.
Rabbi Shifren has written many outstanding, and terribly sad and tragic columns for Newswithviews; his archives are here: He is running for a seat in the California State Senate (District 26). I hope you will take the time to study his platform, his experience and his desire to see California's children get a real education.
America used to have the finest school system in the world. Now, public schools are nothing more than government indoctrination centers. Many years ago, I wrote a column titled, When are parents going to fix education? The only thing that has changed is the numbers going south. While there are tens of thousands of fine educators like Rabbi Shifren, there are tens of thousands of teachers who are so under educated, they couldn't find gas at a filling station. They are products of the same dumbing down system they now teach in.
Parents continue to vote the same politicians back into the state houses who refuse to (1) boot the federal government out of their schools; (2) nullify the influence of the teachers unions; and (3) remove all social indoctrination programs. I wrote this news item back in May 2004. The influence of sexual deviant recruiting operations on school campuses has grown because parents are either too busy or simply don't care. Schools in California must now force the celebration of sodomy. That's right. Your adolescent son must now be taught that having sex in another male's rectum (sodomy) and playing in his feces is to be celebrated.
In 2007, California's formerly steroid pumped, morally bankrupt governor signed a law to further inculcate toxic propaganda into California's schools:
Mom' and 'Dad' banished by California
Schwarzenegger signs law outlawing terms perceived as negative to 'gays'
"Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife" effectively have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls rest rooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose. "We are shocked and appalled that the governor has blatantly attacked traditional family values in California," said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.
#Before all the social engineering and extremist eco/greenies groups, and illegals with their screeching and stealing of state resources for education, America's children received a real education. Before Gay Porn as Required Reading in Ill. High School, Media Silent, America's children attended moral learning institutions. Before all this rot being pumped into children six or eight hours a day, America's children went to school and learned how to read, write, do arithmetic, science, home making, shop and phys ed. There was no instruction on how to put a condom on a cucumber or raunchy porn disguised as sex ed.
How activism works:
Supporters of the recall accused the board of voting to spend more on administrative fees and less and less in the classroom. For example, the previous superintendent was earning more than $250,000 a year -- twice the state average.
"The recallers say they are energized by the arrogance of power by the school superintendent and what they see as his rubber-stamp school board; a waste of resources; inattention to the needs of parents and students. They argue that the district spends its money on unnecessary things, and would be better able to meet the well-recognized overcrowding problem if they were more focused on education rather than on bureaucracy-building. They raise some serious points.
"The official recall notice served to each board member says: "You are recklessly spending tens of millions of dollars on an administration building and over $100 million for a single high school next to a dump - while our schools are in dire need of repair and our students are crammed into substandard portable classrooms with non-functioning restrooms. Your reckless deficit spending has created a self-inflicted, multimillion-dollar budget crisis that puts our children at risk and resulted in massive program cutbacks - severely diminishing the quality of education."
Part 2 of 2
By: Devvy
March 8, 2010
© 2010 -
What's been done to America's children over the past half century is nothing short of criminal and only the overwhelming power of moms, dads and grand parents across this country will turn it around. The power lies in activism and voting out all career politicians in your state capitol who refuse to do what must be done to clean up our schools and give America's children a real education instead of dumbing them down.
Equally noxious are the teacher's unions. Now, before ya all send me lots of hate mail, my daughter teaches junior high at a private school. She still had to jump through all the hoops and pass the tests required by the state. I am proud she graduated Magna Cum Laude from college in the Sciences. She loves her students and is doing her best for them.
Myron Lieberman's outstanding book: The Teacher Unions: How They Sabotage Education Reform and Why is a must read. Lieberman was a high school teacher and then for years the chief negotiator of union contracts for schools districts in California, New York and other states. He's been a consultant for the NEA and AFT and a university professor.
Lieberman's book clearly and with facts lays out the major obstacle for education reform: the NEA and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). "The NEA and AFT are the most powerful organizations in American education today. With over three million members paying dues in excess of $1 BILLION a year, they help choose presidential candidates and make national education policy. With more than 6,000 full time officers and staff, these unions have more operatives than the Democrat and Republican parties combined."
They make national education policy? Education is the exclusive domain of the states of the Union. That means the state legislatures are supposed to make the laws pertaining to education. School districts work with the legislature to set the curriculum and environment for America's precious children to become educated, not indoctrinated. When the unconstitutional Federal Department of Education became a cabinet and the power of those unions grew, any notion of educating children was washed away by corruption and propaganda.
The NEA and FTA are rotten, corrupt, rancid operations that have NO place in public education for America's children. Be sure to pay special attention to the facts and numbers on beginning on page 80 of Liberman's book: Bipartisanship: Rhetoric and Reality.
On page 39 of Rabbi Shifrin's book, he talks about The California Exit Exam and lowering of standards to pass children through the system who are uneducated. I don't want to use the word stupid. Stupid belongs to the teachers, principles, politicians and King Makers who run the teachers unions who promote the lowering of standards. Lieberman goes into great detail about this in his book, pg 232: "Critics of unions have emphasized that the decline in scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Test coincided substantially with the period of time in which tech bargaining became widespread." He goes on to cite several studies of scores and the arguments. This book is an excellent read in understanding the bigger picture.
How any teachers in this country could belong to any of those organizations is beyond me. Oh, yes, I know how teachers are threatened that if they don't, they will not work in the government's indoctrination centers. I've heard from them since I ran for Congress ('93-'94). Good, decent men and women who want to do nothing but teach to educate, are afraid of losing their jobs if they don't pay dues to these well greased machines destroying education. Teachers are not required to join a union to work, but the pressure is there; sometimes subtle, sometimes in your face.
A wonderful thing happened last month that sent shock waves through the union honchos: A Rhode Island school board voted 5-2 to -- gasp!!! fire the whole bunch at Central Falls High School. U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, cheered the firings. Whoa! That won't earn any political currency with the usurper's administration. The honcho of the state AFL-CIO got his panties so twisted, he almost choked to death while trying to shout the collective outrage:
“This is immoral, illegal, unjust, irresponsible, disgraceful and disrespectful,” said George Nee, president of the Rhode Island AFL-CIO, to shouts and cheers from a crowd of more than 500 at Jenks Park. “What is happening here tonight is the wrong thing … and we're not going to put up with it.”
Really? Pray tell what does the AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations) have to do with holding teachers accountable for actually educating America's children? It's immoral, unjust, irresponsible, disgraceful and disrespectful to fire incompetent teachers and administrators? 74 classroom teachers, plus reading specialists, guidance counselors, physical education teachers, the school psychologist, the principal and three assistant principals were all given their walking papers because the schools are not educating children. They are turning out dummies. THAT is what "more money for education" is being poured into with the muscle of teachers unions.
According to an excellent piece by Jennifer D. Jordan: "Even in a school system known for its academic troubles, the numbers at Philadelphia's Vaux High School are jaw-dropping: More than 90 percent of 11th-graders tested last year could not read or do math at grade level." Is this what you keep shoveling truckloads of money into?
In my opinion, unions should be scrutinized at another level:
The Communists planned to create not only a new way of life, but new human beings. They sought to achieve not only the reconstruction of social and cultural institutions, but reconstruction of human beings.
"In The Communist Manifesto, the founders of Communism, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, set forth “ten measures for a successful communist-socialist revolution.” These ten planks called for, among other things, the abolition of private property and the right of inheritance; a progressive income tax; government control of communication and transportation; government control of factories and production; and government ownership of the schools."
Communist Goals (1963). Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35. January 10, 1963
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
William Z. Foster was an open communist who wrote, Toward Soviet America. He was the National Chairman of the Communist Party of the U.S. and Secretary-Treasurer of the Amalgamated Steel Workers' Association. The AFL played a key role back then (1901). Unionizing teachers was the natural 'progression' in The Program. But, that's for another column. Toward Soviet America is available free on line and truly a must read. You cannot defeat your enemy unless you understand them.
Yes, I am fully aware that too many of America's children come from the most deplorable home conditions imaginable. However, you have to run schools like a business: Failure is not tolerated and employees who don't perform are fired. Just like the private sector. Yes, parents must take a bigger role in making sure their children are ready to enter school, but it will take a decade to correct the moral meltdown (drugs, booze, porn, domestic abuse) destroying our nation. It has to be done one family at a time, not by mother government - state or federal. What's so insane is that children of members of these unions are getting dumbed down just like the rest of the kids.
The school board in Central Falls, Rhode Island has taken the first and long over due shot: Fire teachers who don't perform. Next, boot out career politicians who are bought by these unions and refuse to pass laws that no illegal aliens will be allowed into any schools in your state. They have no legal right to be here and they sure as heck have no legal right to the fruits of your labor to keep them in schools at any level. Illegal means illegal.
#Parents need to get get involved. I know things are very bad out in America for parents either out of work, looking for work or worried about getting laid off. But, our children are our most precious gift from God. We just can't let this dumbing down and indoctrination continue. Get the facts (the two excellent books above) and together, as a nation, we can turn this around. And be sure to get Rabbi Nachum Shifren's book: Kill Your Teacher - Corruption And Racism in Los Angeles City Schools. 
How activism works:
Supporters of the recall accused the board of voting to spend more on administrative fees and less and less in the classroom. For example, the previous superintendent was earning more than $250,000 a year -- twice the state average.
"The recallers say they are energized by the arrogance of power by the school superintendent and what they see as his rubber-stamp school board; a waste of resources; inattention to the needs of parents and students. They argue that the district spends its money on unnecessary things, and would be better able to meet the well-recognized overcrowding problem if they were more focused on education rather than on bureaucracy-building. They raise some serious points.
"The official recall notice served to each board member says: "You are recklessly spending tens of millions of dollars on an administration building and over $100 million for a single high school next to a dump - while our schools are in dire need of repair and our students are crammed into substandard portable classrooms with non-functioning restrooms. Your reckless deficit spending has created a self-inflicted, multimillion-dollar budget crisis that puts our children at risk and resulted in massive program cutbacks - severely diminishing the quality of education."
A Warning to America's Teachers
By Rabbi Nachum Shifren
December 30, 2009
We as teachers cannot afford to sit on the sidelines any longer. It cannot be business-as-usual as we seek to bring enlightenment to our over 100 charges each day, nonchalantly plowing through our benchmarks and state standards. There is something deeply disturbing about our profession, and the time has come to shed light on our role as the mentors of America's youth.
Never before in my recollection has there been a youth so out of touch with America's values. This applies to the upscale "westside" schools as it does to the most challenging inner city environment. As I patrol the halls at times during our announcement and pledge-of-allegiance period, I see very few students or even teachers saluting to the flag. Why is this important? Why must our students visibly identify with their country? I bet you there are a whole bunch of teachers out there that have given up on presenting an unabashed view of patriotism and altruism. I sense that our destructive media and kowtowing boards of education prefer not to instigate the leftist media with any above-the-radar incidents that would bring scrutiny to their fiefdoms.
What's happening across the land is basically that we teachers of America are losing our students. We are losing them to the Internet madness of pornography, the armies of organized gangs marauding through our cities and towns, the prolific drugs and stimulants that alter fragile, undeveloped minds, but most insidious of all, we're losing our youth to a national lethargy and political correctness that threatens to sap the collective fighting spirit of America, turning us into victims and setting our nation up for a home-grown fifth column, ripe for the picking of the leftist ideologues that abound on our campuses.
For us teachers, it all starts in the credentialing programs. These are often run by pinheads that are burned-out, self imposed refugees from the classroom, putting on a facade of love of the profession, but in reality want to be left alone, stress free and student-free. If teaching is so wonderful, why are they out of the class? Why are they not in our inner city ghetto schools, dealing with the gangs and violence that abounds? Where are these self-professed "professionals" (funny, the more PhD and magnanimous appellatives that surround their titles, the less they seem to be fit for the daily rigors of campus combat!)? Answer: teaching is difficult, not for the squeamish or faint-hearted. That's why it is the COMPLETELY INEXPERIENCED, ROOKIE TEACHERS THAT GET FED THROUGH THE MEAT GRINDERS of America's inner city campuses, untrained, inexperienced, ill-equipped to deal with the dysfunction and often racist environment that permeates the failing schools and fuels our out-of-control drop-out numbers.
The experienced teachers either are re-assigned to the "good" schools (sans black/Hispanic racial contentiousness), or finagle getting some "administrative" gig--far away from the students--or, lacking the above, quit. California educrats tell us that the average lifespan of a teacher is 7 years.
SEVEN YEARS? How much did it cost to train our teachers, how many man-hours to get them in para-professional positions, putting entire classes on hold while they plow through their course load on their way to getting credentials?
When you talk to these teacher drop-outs, its not the money (what money?) that bothers them. It's the total lack of administrative support, parental backing, community indifference, and lack of validation toward their professionalism that drives them away.
What we don't see in our nation's teachers, even the most erudite and professional, is often a total lack of the raison d'etre for being a teacher in America. Period. When one walks by the class, witnessing a myriad of instructional aids, high-tech devices thrown in to make us look "modern," computerized classrooms with Internet auxiliary programs, and the like, the naive observer gets the notion that all MUST be going great, what with the arsenal of high-tech gadgetry and all.
What we don't see is the alienation and disconnect between imagery by design and the credo of each individual student's responsibility and connectedness with his or her country.
Essentially, we're teaching in a vacuum. We draw no conclusions about our nation's status among the nations, our uniqueness and special place in history, and the role of the individual in asserting freedom and individual liberty. Teachers nowadays are loathe to reinforce values that have etched their way into American culture by our founding fathers, nor are they willing to risk revealing the consequences of those values that will guarantee our freedom in tomorrow's war of ideas and assaults upon our country.
Today's modern teacher cannot stand before a class and tell why America is NOT a racist nation. Our educators cannot withstand the fuselage of queries about why America considers itself "different" from the plethora of dictatorships and tyrannies run roughshod over the globe. What teacher today can, with straight face, unflinching clarity, and bold assertiveness, claim, "there is no such thing as global warming," for example? Who among us has the audacity to insist that "multiculturalism" is code for the unraveling of the national glue that holds us together, often used as a racist ploy, chipping away at the very foundations of America? Where is the teacher so confident and steadfast in principle, that can withstand the run-away train of junk-grades, given to take the pressure off due to "community activists" and football coaches meddling into the teacher's grading system.
We've become lackeys of the administrations, grotesque miscreants in a well-orchestrated dog-and-pony show by principals and administrators, covering their collective behinds as they hoodwink entire communities with the usual smiles and accolades given to let everyone know all's well.
What's needed for our profession is a book Alinsky DID NOT WRITE: Rules for Radical American Patriotic Teachers.
We need to break the silence, adopt a radical, non-union stance in order to save our youth. That is, assuming we care!
Those teachers that are ready to "come out" for America, are urged to attend a one-of-kind seminar on January 21 in Los Angeles. We promise you an exciting, no-nonsense program for and by teachers in the field, leaders of America's youth, and politicians that are ready for less "hope and change," as we prepare for the America that will survive with faith and values intact.
Place and time will be communicated pending your email confirming your participation.
All participants will receive a free copy of Rabbi Shifren's incredible documentary of L.A.'s inner city schools, "Kill Your Teacher"
Concerned parents are urged to come. Neighborhood councils, school boards, department chairmen and advocates for academic excellence are heartily welcome.
See you on the 21st!
We can’t Afford No Child Left Behind
No Child Left Behind has created a culture of insipidness within our public school system
By Bob Beers Friday, August 14, 2009
Back in 2007, the Heritage Foundation published a report on the cost of No Child Left Behind. Here is a synopsis of their findings:
In October of 2006 the Office of Management and Budget reported that No Child Left Behind increased state and local governments’ annual paperwork burden by 6,680,334 hours, at an estimated cost of $141 million dollars. For some reason Washington didn’t seem upset about that.
A number of states have published reports estimating the cost of complying with No Child Left Behind. For example, the state of Connecticut found that the state government would spend more than $17 million in 2007 to comply with NCLB. Virginia estimated that state implementation costs totaled approximately 20 million per year. If we exclude those states with the courage to tell Washington to keep their money, the average cost per state of $15 million per year comes out to a whopping $675 million. So why was the report from OMB a miniscule $141 million? Was it because someone gave Bush Jr. the calculator? Or is the answer something far more Machiavellian?
You’re right, it is.
In the summer of 2007 I attended a legislative conference in Philadelphia attended b y hundreds of state representatives from across the US. One of the speakers was President Bush. His speech contained mostly fluff, but buried within the rhetoric was an absolute conviction that NCLB was going to continue to be forced upon the unwilling states, regardless of the cost. Unfortunately it seems Obama agrees with that sentiment.
No Child Left Behind has created a culture of insipidness within our public school system. This culture stems from the school boards and filters on down through the administration. Even though the majority of teachers hate the program, they are forced to either go along or lose their job.
School Administrators only look at the dollars. I know, I’ve spoken with those in my state. Many claim that they do care what happens to the children, but when push comes to shove every decision comes out with dollar signs on it. I have yet to read about a single superintendent or principle willingly sacrificing a portion of their paycheck to improve the quality of education in their school. To be fair, most of them are not given a choice. They too are trapped within a system that has been carefully crafted by the left for the past sixty-plus years. Why else would programs that have proven themselves every time they’ve been used be scrapped in favor of what essentially boils down to babysitting?
Washington claims that every child not only deserves to go on to higher education, but that they all have a burning desire to do so. Yes, I’m sure if you ask the average 4th grader what they want to be when they grow up the vast majority are going to list a profession that requires an advanced degree. Fireman, cowboy, soldier or movie star won’t even be in the mix. The real truth, backed by NEA’s own statistics, is that less than a third of high school graduates will apply and be accepted to a four-year college. Of those accepted, less than a third will finish that education, even if given an extra year. So, based on numbers they themselves are aware of, why is the federal bureaucracy so dead set on promoting a program that fails miserably? And why do they continuously buck against a program that excels every time it is tried? I’m talking about vocational education. Yes, I mean shop classes.
The cost of implementing NCLB has all but eliminated vocational education. In the Clark County School District, one of the largest in the US, you can still find classrooms fully equipped to teach auto shop, wood shop and home economics in the districts middle schools. Not one of them is being used for that purpose. Some are not even being used as classrooms, even though the schools are overcrowded. In many of the high schools, vocational education has been cut back drastically because of budget concerns. It seems the district, just like Washington, won’t pay attention to its own data.
Not too far from my home stands one of the first Career and Technical Academies in the nation. It used to be called VoTech High School. Now its called SECTA. Even with the name change, SECTA remains one of the highest performing schools in the nation with an average 98% functional graduation rate. The naysayers on the school board claim the numbers are because the school gets to pick and choose its pupils. But in reality it is because the staff and administration at that school work together as a team to make sure the education is made relevant to the students. They learn the core subjects such as science, english, history and math as they apply to a profession, not just boring, overworked theory. There is a young man who attended VoTech with an emphasis on plumbing. In middle school his teachers labeled him as unable to grasp concepts beyond addition and subtraction. After high school he went into the navy as a plumbers mate. When he revisited his alma mater he explained what he was doing in the navy to his old teachers using advanced calculus to illustrate concepts. Not bad for a labeled failure.
Using some more NEA stats; one of the most successful groups in college is that made up of mature returning students. Believe it or not, that group makes up a good percentage of teachers, especially those in the Career and Technical Academies. So why the push of NCLB?
Many of my fellow conservatives don’t like my derision of G.W. Bush. Too bad. Bush was a lousy President who did everything he could to destroy our country’s sovereignty. Consider the attempt to remove the border between the US and Mexico, the attempt to sell sovereign base authority to a terrorist nation, and the support of an educational bureaucracy that no one likes outside of the feds. There is more than enough evidence that NCLB is yet another avenue the left is using to reduce the strength of the United States as a country. If they can get us to graduate more illiterates than not, the socialist revolution will succeed without a shot being fired. Bush had no problem with that. So what can we do?
One plan would be to allow states to opt out of the NCLB program. These states would be able to work out an alternate agreement with the federal government. Under this agreement, the states’ representatives would have broader authority to consolidate existing federal programs with state programs to work out their education funding. Of course, this assumes the states CAN work out school funding. That’s another column.
Another plan is to use what has already been proven to work, vocational education. Make the core classes relevant to the students. Allow them to use both their minds and their hands. Bring back real detention. Don’t allow those students who want to disrupt the classroom to do so. Put them somewhere away from the other students where they only get the three R’s, no sports, no recess, until they prove they are able to rejoin civilized society. Get rid of the diversity nonsense and teach real citizenship. Allow teachers to teach what they know. Don’t force them to pull double duty as secretaries for the administration. The average teacher day, believe it or not is about 10-12 hours, not 6. And there is no such thing as a 3-month vacation. Just because there are no bottoms in the classroom chairs doesn’t mean the job stops. It takes a minimum of 2 ½ months to set up lesson plans for the next year.
Of course, pulling off such a plan would also require dumping NCLB. How about that?
A Model School for the Global Community
by Berit Kjos - 1992
"We must help parents to pass on their values to their children," announced President Clinton in a Rose Garden message on April 30, 1999. "We must help parents fulfill their most important responsibilities."
Some parents may like to hear that the president will "help" us do our job. Others shudder. They don't want Clinton's army of social engineers to tamper with their family's values. They don't trust his attempts to "fix" the social conditions that led to the Littleton shooting. And they fear that Clinton would use this crisis, as he has every other crisis, to persuade the masses to accept more government control.
A glimpse back into the seventies and eighties shows how Clinton helped create the conditions that weakened the role of parents. For example, his touchy-feely "Governor's School" -- an annual summer school for selected Arkansas high school students -- modeled many of the same psycho-social strategies for changing values that were used in Littleton. Founded in 1979, it infused its lessons with values-clarification, socialist economics, radical environmentalism, and shocking suggestions designed to "free" students from parental authority and traditional values.
Author Ellen Gilchrist, a guest speaker at the school, summarized this particular objective well. "Students do me a favor," she told the selected crowd of Arkansas youths. "Totally ignore your parents. Listen to them, but then forget them. Because you need to start using your own stuff, your real stuff that you have." [1]
In his April 30 speech, Clinton also touted the "mental health" system being implemented in America under the guidance of the World Health Organization (See The UN Plan for Your Mental Health): [2]
"Because many parents need help in recognizing the signs of illness in their children, we're working to expand access to mental health care for children of all ages. Next month, Mrs. Gore will host the first White House Conference on Mental Health. We are also working to expand counseling, mentoring and mental health services in our schools."
In the context of public health management and surveillance,3 mental health deals primarily with politically correct thinking, not mental illness. According to a government definition, "Mental health refers to how a person thinks, feels, and acts when faced with life's situations. It is how people look at themselves, their lives, and the other people in their lives and explore choices." [4]
The old ways of thinking don't fit the new paradigm or worldview. Global citizenship requires collective thinking, not individual thinking. People must learn to see themselves as part of the group, and their worth depends on service to the community. Solidarity and consensus are in. Christianity, individual worth, and national sovereignty are out..
                       OLD PARADIGM                                     NEW PARADIGM
Beliefs             Based on Bible                                           New Age, earth-centered blend
View of self     Individual                                                    Part of a greater whole
Values             Based on Bible                                           Human idealism based on consensus
It's up to our schools, media, Hollywood, and all the other parts of UNESCO's "lifelong learning" program to conform the masses to the new ideology -- and thus "promote. . . the optimal development of the mental health of the population." [5] Professor Benjamin Bloom, called the Father of OBE, summarized their mission well: "The purpose of education and the schools is to change the thoughts, feelings and actions of students." [6]
This process of change includes strategies that produce cognitive dissonance or moral confusion. In Clinton's Governor's School, the students were immersed into a seductive fantasy world that made traditional values seem unreal. The consensus process forced them to conform to a radical idealism that built hatred, not tolerance, for contrary opinions. So, by the time they left the school, an imagined utopia seemed more real than the actual world. As in Soviet brainwashing, they had been weaned from truth, facts, logic and reality. Their conscience had been twisted, their emotions destabilized, and their minds prepared to be manipulated. Would this be considered mental health by our global managers?
The transition back to reality -- to home, family and normal life -- was painful. For some it was devastating. "When I came back home, I sort of wrote a suicide note to myself," confessed LeAndrew Crawford, a former student. "Not actually wanting to kill myself, but wanting to kill the reality of what society had been teaching me for so long. . . . I was totally down, because my family just didn't feel like my family. . . . I didn't want to be back."
Brandon Hawk did commit suicide within a year after attending "mysterious cult-like meetings" which continued even after he left the Governor's School. Hearing about his death, other concerned parents contacted Brandon's parents.
"They see the same thing in their kids that we saw in Brandon," the father explained. . . . They just sort of walk off and leave the family."
All the above quotes exposing Clinton's Governor's School came from Jeoffrey Botkin's documentary video, The Guiding Hand: The Clinton Influence on Arkansas Education. Through interviews with former students, parents and staff members, he unveiled the radical social philosophy behind "lifelong learning" and Clinton's education reform.
"They're taking the best, the cream of the crop... the leaders in our next generation," said former student Steve Roberts, "and pushing into them the values that Governor Clinton has -- that the leftist media has -- the values that go totally against what this nation was founded on. This is what I was exposed to. There wasn't any warning, there wasn't any one that said, 'Okay, now you're going to have to take all the values that you grew up with and put them on a shelf and be exposed to this.' If my parents had known what was going on there, they wouldn't have let me go."
So, what was going on? The most revealing evidence of planned mental programming with an ominous resemblance to the Communist "re-learning"7 comes from those who participated. Consider their testimonies as recorded in The Guiding Hand:
"For the six weeks ... they are not allowed to go home except for July the Fourth. They are discouraged from calling home and talking on the phone. They can receive mail but they are encouraged to have as little contact with the outside world as possible. So it's a closed campus." (Shelvie Cole, psychologist and concerned mother)
"I don't think a lot of people understand what is going on... I felt that I needed not to talk about it. I don't know why. Maybe because we were supposed to stay here and the fact that we couldn't leave... I just felt like, hey, I'm not supposed to talk about this. No one else... who had gone before would talk to me about it." (Kelli Wood, former student)
"Students do me a favor. Totally ignore your parents. . . . . " (Guest speaker Ellen Gilchrist quoted by a student)
"[The instructors] tear down their authority figure system and... help establish another one... the student himself. They convince the students that 'You are the elite. The reason why you're not going to be understood when you go home -- not by your parents, your friends, your pastor or anybody -- is because you have been treated to thought that they can't handle.' ...[This] intellectual and cultural elitism gives them the right... to say, 'We know better than you.'" (Mark Lowery, former director for Governor's School publicity)
"We watched movies like Harvey Milk. We learned about gay life -- those things that your parents say, 'This is wrong... You shouldn't see this type of thing because, hey, that's just not right...'" (LeAndrew Crawford, former student)
EMPHASIZE FEELING-CENTERED (affective, not cognitive or rational) TEACHING:
"Rather than learning what 2 and 2 equals, they would be asked what they feel about 2+2. Right now we have a move going on in our Arkansas schools called restructuring, where they are trying to get away from more objective, substantive learning into this subjective area of feelings." (Mark Lowery)
"I guess, if I could express myself, I'd close my eyes and just think, let things wander through, because that is just the type of sensation you got in Bill's class." (LeAndrew Crawford)
"You would think that there would be some academic challenges... getting ready for college... The main textbook that I remember from there is a book called Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and the book is totally. Hindu religion defined." (Steve Roberts, former student)
"It was kind of like that Baha'i idea. How you have Islam, Baha'i, Muslim, Christianity... They're all different kinds of trees, but underneath, its root system grows together [and] is the same god." (Steven Allen, student)
"They're bringing a political agenda in the guise of academic excellence. . . . It was something that was well orchestrated, well organized, it was mind-bending and manipulative. And the faculty all knew that it was going on." (Steve Roberts)
"I think the whole intent of the Governor's School in taking 350 - 400 students per summer, is to pick out the four, five or six students that could be political leaders and then to mold their minds in this more liberal and humanistic thinking. . . The greatest influence of the Governor's School is to promote the thought. . . that to be considered intellectual by your peers. . . you have to be a liberal thinker... [This is] not teaching . . . but indoctrination." (Mark Lowery, former director)
"Prominent themes promoted by this school include radical homosexuality, socialism, pacifism and a consistent hostility toward Western civilization and culture, especially [America's] Biblical foundations." (Jeoffrey Botkin)
[Voice of student heard while classroom video shows morbid scenes]: "I saw bones, skeletons, dead bodies after dead bodies after dead bodies."
"A lot of places. . . even Christian camps, you get that stress about 'What am I doing wrong?' . . .There it was like, hey, I can talk to God! Me and God are one, the world is one... Jump up and down, you know, just twirl around."
"They say relaxation, but there is a word past relaxation. There's a word in between the feeling of relaxation and love that we've missed. I don't know the word, but I came up with my own. I called it AGaia [he spelled it Ayuguya] . . . . A lot of my friends went around [saying], "Hey, Gaia, Gaia, Gaia. . . You know peace, love happiness. . . Bringing back the hippie age, I guess you would say." (LeAndrew Crawford)
"You could dress just about any way you want. We had almost naked people. It was real liberal. . . an awful lot of cursing." (Mike Oonk, former student)
"The students. . . say, 'This is the perfect place. I never want to go home.' I caught myself saying that several times." (Mike Oonk)
After Brandon Hawk's suicide and the subsequent fear and confusion, concerned parents in Arkansas asked the same kinds of questions raised after the eruption of evil in Littleton. Why did it happen? Will it happen again? Could it happen to my child? What should parents do?
Indoctrinating students with pagan beliefs, socialist values, utopian dreams, and idealized love will lead to personal despair and social chaos. But that result fits the battle plan of globalist autocrats just fine. Notice in the chart below that America's biblical boundaries set the stage for personal freedom. But today's change agents demand social controls, and they needed social chaos to justify their oppressive action. That means replacing moral restraints with sensual freedom. Not only does it unravel the old social order, it gives an illusion of new-found freedom.
"As political and economic freedom diminishes," wrote Aldous Huxley in Brave New World, "sexual freedom tends compensatingly to increase. And the dictator... will do well to encourage that freedom. In conjunction with the freedom to daydream under the influence of dope, movies and the radio, it will help to reconcile his subjects to the servitude which is their fate." [8]
                       OLD PARADIGM                                 NEW PARADIGM
Morals            Biblical Boundaries                                  Sensual freedom
Rights              Personal freedom                                    Social controls
Economy         Free enterprise                                        Socialist/Collective
Government     By the people                                         By those who control the masses
The Guiding Hand includes glimpses from a documentary video promoting the Governor's School. In it, former Governor Clinton shared his enthusiasm for his education model. "It would be impossible for me to describe to you just how exciting and unusual this educational adventure is," he said. Illustrating death education, the same video shows a group of students lying on the floor while a teacher asks, "Are you ready to divorce yourselves from your bodies?"
Clinton pushed the same brainwashing strategies in Arkansas' public schools. When he lost the governorship to Frank White, his successor was shocked to discover the "garbage in the curriculum." White tried to introduce conventional moral values to the school, "but Clinton accused White of badgering educators," says Jeoffrey Botkin, who produced The Guiding Hand. "The school simply went underground with its controversial philosophy until Clinton returned as governor. Since then, the full curriculum at the Governor's School -- including illegal psychological testing -- has been more carefully concealed from parents and voters."
This same transformative process lies at the heart of Goals 2000, the massive education program signed into law by President Clinton in 1994. But Clinton was no newcomer to an international team of change-agents. In 1989, he led the national Governor's Conference on Education. It's six goals for U.S. education matched UNESCO's six education goals, which were introduced the following year at the 1990 UN World Conference on Education for All.
Do you wonder how Clinton was linked to UNESCO? During the eighties, he served on the Study Commission on Global Education with globalist leaders such as --
1. Professor John Goodlad, who served on the governing board of UNESCO's Institute for Education. 9 In 1970, he warned his fellow educators that "most youth still hold the same values as their parents.... If we do not alter this pattern, if we don't resocialize.... our society may decay." [10]
2. Ernest Boyer, President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, which had been funding global socialist causes since the start of this century.
3. Frank Newman, president of the Education Commission of the States, which serves as an unelected body of social engineers who have been coordinating the writing of uniform education laws and standards in states from coast to coast.
Together, they prepared a report titled The United States Prepares for Its Future: Global Perspectives in Education. In the Foreword to the Report, New Age networker Harlan Cleveland, author of The Third Try at World Order, wrote:
"A dozen years ago... teaching and learning 'in global perspective' was still exotic doctrine, threatening the orthodoxies of those who still thought of American citizenship as an amalgam of American history, American geography, American lifestyles and American ideas. . . . It now seems almost conventional to speak of American citizenship in the same breath with international interdependence and the planetary environment." [11]
"Conventional" to whom? And who were the obstacles to progress in this report?
God's Word alone can break through the human speculations and answer the hard questions that followed the Littleton crisis. Three key Scriptures show the decline of America.
First, in 1 John 5:19 we learn that "the whole world is under the control of the evil one." Satan, who hates God and His people, has been given power to influence and inspire all who refuse to follow the Shepherd. Freed from parental authority through government schools, few children can resist the peer pressure and occult temptations that tear down their protective walls of modesty and conscience. Small wonder youth are driven to kill by deadly desires, wild cravings, and unquenchable impulses.
Second, God said long ago, "All who hate Me love death." [12] Death education, an important component of global education, fits right into an education system designed by men who see biblical truth and Christian parents as their main obstacles to change. Today's love for shooting and killing didn't begin with occult movies and video games, those merely offered the opportunities. It began with a fallen nature inspired by the evil one who loves what is gross, cruel, crude, and deadly.
Third, Romans 1:18-32 shows the decline both of people and nations that turn from God to pagan beliefs and values. Three times it tells us that God "gave them over" to their own rebellious nature:
"The wrath of God is being revealed... against all... who suppress the truth by their wickedness. . . . Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools. . . . Therefore GOD GAVE THEM OVER in the sinful desires of their hearts TO SEXUAL IMPURITY. . . . They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshipped and served created things.... Because of this, GOD GAVE THEM OVER TO SHAMEFUL LUSTS. . . . Since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, HE GAVE THEM OVER TO A DEPRAVED MIND. . . filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless."
Morally, America has become like a dying lake that looks clear on the surface while the algae and decay spreads in the darkness below. By the time the scum stains the surface, the whole lake is corrupt. The next eruption can happen anywhere.
Clinton can't fix this problem with mental health surveillance, universal health identifier for electronic tracking, gun control, forced solidarity, school based counseling, conflict resolution, anger management, values clarification, and other forms of the manipulative consensus problem. These will only speed the demise of truth, morality, and freedom in this country. What's more, they will fuel the growing hatred toward all who hold fast to "obsolete" biblical truths and refuse to join the march toward a global consensus.
Nor is it enough to bring morality back to America. Americans must be brought back to God. His moral standards are good, but only by His life and strength can we meet them. Like Cassie Bernall, the Littleton youth who shared her hope with needy classmates before she chose to die rather than deny her Lord, Christians need to reach out and lead the confused back to the true Counselor. He alone can give strength, love, peace and victory in the midst of turmoil and decay. Therefore,
"be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day. . . ." (Ephesians 6:10-14)
Also See: Education Ain't What It Should Be