California Education Reform - blast from the past

I'm looking for like minded people who are willing to take a step back and EVALUATE the history of education in California, before we spend another nickle on school reform or increased wages, etc. I'm a product of California schools in a different era and I'm apalled at how little we get now for how much we spend. Can anyone else relate to my own school experience?

I went to school in California in the 50's - 60's. I was a first generation immigrant and may have been considered ESL today, but in kindergarden we're all pretty equal. I had been in the country a year and got embarrased enough by minor grammar mistakes that I always took spelling and English more seriously than native English peers. My cousins who immigrated later sometimes were put back into Kindergarden to help with their English or just suffered through until they had it mastered. Half of us are still bi-lingual, but all of us acclimated to our new home within a single generation.

I found school fun and challenging, but not especially difficult through high school and skated through with a commendable GPA on a college bound track. Yes, there was tracking in those days whether anyone admits it or not. It seemed a natural tracking process. If you chose your classes based on College or University requirements then your class schedule didn't have much room for electives.

It was in those elective classes however that I learned about alternative tracks, and the real depth of opportunities available in high school. There were Business classes that had the same depth as my college prep classes. I only touched the tip of the iceberg with Typing I, but there was Steno, Business Machines and most enviable, Work Experience. Students in the Business track were pulled to help out in the office doing clerical and administrative work. What a concept, kind of like an apprenticeship.

It wasn't only Business options though. My high school had an Art Department that was enviable. Art I,II, III, IV; Sculpting, Painting, Drawing, Graphic Arts, Printing (yes we had a full print shop on campus) in the Industrial Arts dept. As a matter of fact the school took on all the tasks of a small city. When the Drama Department needed sets for their productions, the Art Department handled it. When the prom committee needed programs and tickets printed, you guessed it, the job was handled in house, on campus. I remember having to order the Jr. Prom program and the Print Shop was run similar to Kinkos. I had to fill out a work order, approve sketches and sign off on the proofs to get my program printed on time. We had an Olympic swimming and diving pool. We hosted Olympic trials. Our gym and school sports were a major part of our morale and pride. We were the flagship school in the area and our teams proved it week after week.

The school had an auto shop that rebuilt cars, metal shop, wood shop, even furniture upholstery. They built all of the props for the Drama group. Industrial Arts offered drafting and engineering classes and provided the Home Economics department with floor plans that the Interior Design class could work off of. We had cooking, sewing, Child Development, Marriage and Family, fashion design, nutrition, weaving, textiles... I mean each department had a depth of coursework equal to my own college prepatory classes.

I was almost jealous that I didn't have time to explore even more, because my own workload was already heavy. I had time for one elective as a freshman, maybe 2 as a soph & junior. I was done 1/2 way through my Senior year, but then voila, in 1970 at a new school in the same district, I had very few options. I saved up all of my electives for my senior year and poof the choices were gone. Where was the football stadium, the theatre, the Olympic swimming and diving pools?


I had a few options in English that deviated from Eng I,II, III, IV; like comparative religious course, logic in literature, and other funky class titles, but I didn't have the depth of my older school which offered Journalism (with work on the school paper), Yearbook with basic photography classes & a darkroom, prose composition, classic literature, ancient myth, etc.

Another thing that was obvious in 1970, at the new school in the same district, Dress codes were relaxed, attendance was relaxed, tracks went away, extra curricular activities were minimal. Dress Codes were hated, but the argument was always that dress codes were to train us in proper business attire, and it did. Regardless of how much we balked, there was a 'business' or professional atmosphere to the classes depending on the department. If you were in the art or science building it wasn't unusual for them to be wearing lab coats over their school clothes. Shop classes had overalls to protect your clothing. Grooming and Dress was a part of going to school.

True enough, this was a new school and didn't have the stadium & auditorium, the physical amenities of a school built in 1904. This school was what we called a "cookie cutter" school. I guess if you pick one of the state school designs you get a break on the construction funding, so this school was IDENTICAL to another new school across town. It was my senior year, so I wasn't paying attention much to what happened. Changing schools as a senior was enough of a heartache and I didn't think much of my new digs. Looking back however, the changes were real and soon undermined my alma mater as well.

The "Industrial Arts" building that housed the printers, the drafting, the graphic arts groups were shut down permanently. The metal and wood shops were closed and within a single generation the course offerings found the lowest common denominator for both schools. I didn't realize the significance of the changes until my own children entered high school. I was excited for them, I couldn't wait to see their course lists, only to find all of the "alternate" tracks were missing. They still had sports and some art classes. Journalism and Yearbook were there. There was still an auto shop, but no more metal and wood shops and the auto class was limited to one or two project cars for the whole year.

I understand that as a society we were moving into a new computer age, but why not transform Industrial Arts to add computers & Graphic Design using CAD or the new technologies. I know that Home Ec had to add microwaves. Of course we were an evolving society where more advanced technology skills were going to be required, but shutting down whole departments as if all welding was going away?

I didn't realize until more recently, and after reading Charlotte Iserbyt's book on the dumbing down of American Schools that we were destroying our young people. If you looked at schools as a business, what do we produce right now? I say, a handful of college freshman. We've eliminated all but college prep and basic general education with some schools still active in sports. Most schools may offer sports & arts but they don't have the facilities that the older schools had. So, what are the other students who aren't focused on college doing during those critical ages of 14 - 18? Are they in apprentice ship programs; are they learning new business technologies with computers; are they into CAD design and robotics, computer programming or the other skills needed to compete in the new technologies? NO. They have some of those classes in community colleges or private "trade" schools, but they offer few or none on high school campuses.

What happens to the kids of this generation who would not have chosen track one university prep? We bore them out of existence. Less than 70% of our high school students graduate and those who have interests in other things we suppress them, literally hold them hostage, until they finish high school. Some very determined students will leave at 16 and take the GED to pursue their education at a trade school or technical school. My own nephew knew he was an artist at 10. High school became such a burden to him that we allowed him to leave at 17 and take the GED. We searched for art schools for him, but had to settle for a correspondence course on DVD. It was pricey but equivalent to any of the best Art schools around. He worked at a Pizza place for two years, worked on the DVD courses, built his portfolio. He was still young and got a job at a local sign shop for some experience. He really wanted on the computer, but he was stuck sweeping and weeding vinyl signs. By 21 he had a full portfolio from pencil sketches to multi-media gaming and got his first adult job with a probation clause and a starting salary of $40K. His friends are just getting out of college now.

We need to rescue not only our state budget, our school system, that was once enviable, but we need to rescue these kids. They are being bored out of the minds, labeled failures and are blowing in the wind. If nothing else they are wasting valuable learning time. I figure between 12 and 18 there are passions that can and should be tapped into. If you have any recollection of a better system than what we have now... please email me and we can assemble a team to do the research and start fighting back for our kids. My grandkids now.

Open Letter to Chicago Mobsters - A lesson from the past

TWO Stories BOTH TRUE - and worth reading!!!!

STORY NUMBER ONE

Many years ago, Al Capone virtually owned Chicago . Capone wasn't famous for anything heroic. He was notorious for enmeshing the windy city in everything from bootlegged booze and prostitution to murder.

Capone had a lawyer nicknamed "Easy Eddie." He was Capone's lawyer for a good reason. Eddie was very good! In fact, Eddie's skill at legal maneuvering kept Big Al out of jail for a long time.

To show his appreciation, Capone paid him very well. Not only was the money big, but Eddie got special dividends, as well. For instance, he and his family occupied a fenced-in mansion with live-in help and all of the conveniences of the day. The estate was so large that it filled an entire Chicago City block.

Eddie lived the high life of the Chicago mob and gave little consideration to the atrocity that went on around him.

Eddie did have one soft spot, however. He had a son that he loved dearly. Eddie saw to it that his young son had clothes, cars, and a good education. Nothing was withheld. Price was no object.

And, despite his involvement with organized crime, Eddie even tried to teach him right from wrong. Eddie wanted his son to be a better man than he was.

Yet, with all his wealth and influence, there were two things he couldn't give his son; he couldn't pass on a good name or a good example.

One day, Easy Eddie reached a difficult decision. Easy Eddie wanted to rectify wrongs he had done..

He decided he would go to the authorities and tell the truth about Al "Scarface" Capone, clean up his tarnished name, and offer his son some semblance of integrity. To do this, he would have to testify against The Mob, and he knew that the cost would be great. So, he testified.

Within the year, Easy Eddie's life ended in a blaze of gunfire on a lonely Chicago Street . But in his eyes, he had given his son the greatest gift he had to offer, at the greatest price he could ever pay. Police removed from his pockets a rosary, a crucifix, a religious medallion, and a poem clipped from a magazine.

The poem read:

"The clock of life is wound but once,
and no man has the power
to tell just when the hands will stop,
at late or early hour.

Now is the only time you own.
Live, love, toil with a will.
Place no faith in time.
For the clock may soon be still."

STORY NUMBER TWO


World War II produced many heroes. One such man was Lieutenant Commander Butch O'Hare.

He was a fighter pilot assigned to the aircraft carrier Lexington in the South Pacific.

One day his entire squadron was sent on a mission. After he was airborne, he looked at his fuel gauge and realized that someone had forgotten to top off his fuel tank.

He would not have enough fuel to complete his mission and get back to his ship.

His flight leader told him to return to the carrier. Reluctantly, he dropped out of formation and headed back to the fleet.

As he was returning to the mother ship, he saw something that turned his blood cold; a squadron of Japanese aircraft was speeding its way toward the American fleet.

The American fighters were gone on a sortie, and the fleet was all but defenseless. He couldn't reach his squadron and bring them back in time to save the fleet. Nor could he warn the fleet of the approaching danger. There was only one thing to do. He must somehow divert them from the fleet.

Laying aside all thoughts of personal safety, he dove into the formation of Japanese planes. Wing-mounted 50 caliber's blazed as he charged in, attacking one surprised enemy plane and then another. Butch wove in and out of the now broken formation and fired at as many planes as possible until all his ammunition was finally spent.

Undaunted, he continued the assault. He dove at the planes, trying to clip a wing or tail in hopes of damaging as many enemy planes as possible, rendering them unfit to fly.

Finally, the exasperated Japanese squadron took off in another direction.

Deeply relieved, Butch O'Hare and his tattered fighter limped back to the carrier.

Upon arrival, he reported in and related the event surrounding his return. The film from the gun-camera mounted on his plane told the tale. It showed the extent of Butch's daring attempt to protect his fleet. He had, in fact, destroyed five enemy aircraft

This took place on February 20, 1942 , and for that action Butch became the Navy's first Ace of W.W.II, and the first Naval Aviator to win the Medal of Honor.

A year later Butch was killed in aerial combat at the age of 29. His home town would not allow the memory of this WW II hero to fade, and today, O'Hare Airport in Chicago is named in tribute to the courage of this great man.

So, the next time you find yourself at O'Hare International, give some thought to visiting Butch's memorial displaying his statue and his Medal of Honor. It's located between Terminals 1 and 2.

SO WHAT DO THESE TWO STORIES HAVE TO DO WITH EACH OTHER?

Butch O'Hare was "Easy Eddie's" son.

-----------------------
Now, for those of you with a bit of skepticism, it is only fair to point out that these two stories have been embellished for the telling. If you'd like to view the truth of the matter, click on the link below.

SNOPES

found the story in my local Integrity business journal - because I'm lazy, I was hoping there would be a version online... there was. I found this at Chucks

.

The Dutch East Indies - A Country Lost

The Americans remember Pearl Harbor & the attack that brought them into World War II. I think of Pearl Harbor also, and how the war destroyed a country & a way of life that the world has chosen to not remember. Is Indonesia a better place than the Dutch East Indies? I don't know, Indonesians are taught that they "won" their independence, which is true, but we were Indonesians too, and bands of cut-throat rebels, not a revolution, destroyed the homes and heritage of my family.

World War II finally ended with Japan's capitulation on 15 August 1945. For those who had suffered in Japanese camps, the war ended not a second too soon. Some of these sufferings have been well-documented and are known across the world but there are thousands of victims of cruelty at the hands of the Japanese army whose stories remain relatively unknown.

These include the fates of the Dutch and Indonesians who were living in what was then called the Dutch East Indies, and is now known as Indonesia. When Japan occupied the country, the military had orders to humiliate, starve and kill the Dutch colonisers. The Japanese used Sukarno and his dislike for the Dutch to organise and pacify the Indonesians. This is their leader, a man who helped the Japanese against the allies in the pacific. How could the world or even the people of Indonesia consider a man who betrayed his own people to gain what he professed to be "independence" for Indonesia. His "reign" as a very corrupt first president tells you he was no hero. How could he justify the internment and labor camps? He was a hero in Japan and the Indonesian history books call him a hero to Indonesia.

It's true that it's hard to justify colonialism if it oppresses the Indigenous peoples, but what does that mean anyway by 1600 standards? The missionaries to Californa didn't massacre Indians, but their records are exactly what the tribes use now as part of their written history to determine tribal connections. Weren't the indigenous peoples from somewhere else too? I don't think you can judge the explorations and settlements of 'new worlds' by today's standards.

Post WWII Indonesia was not exactly suffering under Dutch Imperial oppression. Both Dutch and Indonesians fought to protect the islands. The Dutch were also fighting a war on the European front. Would they have honored Sukarno had he sided with Hitler to purge Indonesia of the Dutch oppressors?

Wasn't there a way for Dutch Indonesians who had as much invested in the defense of Indonesia, in defense of their property, their way of life, to still have a place to call home after the war? My father came back to a very different Indonesia and he didn't deserve the betrayals and the dangers that followed. His attempt at returning to a normal life was dashed by new violence and atrocities led by Sukarno.

Sukarno's fragile balance of power between the military, political Islam, communists, and nationalists that underlay his "Guided Democracy" was to last less than 20 years. I think he was misguided from the beginning perhaps by a learned hatred of the Dutch, perhaps because he wanted a return to the aristocracy he believed he was entitled to. He went to Dutch schools and never did Indonesia suffer the apartheid that plagued South African Dutch colonization. The Dutch and Indonesian people intermarried for over 200 years. What independence was Sukarno seeking that tolerated a betrayal of his country?

http://www.dutch-east-indies.com/story/index.htm

We are now far into the 6th month of a domestic coup d'etat that has taken over America.

Under the operation of an illigitimate administration, the agitation has not only, not ceased, but has constantly augmented.

In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and passed.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

It will become all one thing or all the other.

Either the opponents of fascism, socialism, slavery & entitlements, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new -- North as well as South.

Have we no tendency for self reliance and freedom?

Let any one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost complete legal combination -- piece of machinery so to speak -- compounded by the Chicago Czar regime, new powers & authorizations given to the Federal Reserve, the previous TARP reaction to bank failures. Let him consider not only what work the machinery is adapted to do, and how well adapted; but also, let him study the history of its construction, and trace, if he can, or rather fail, if he can, to trace the evidence of design and concert of action, among its chief architects, from the beginning.

Make note of the 10 planks of communism:
1. Application of property taxes and rents for the public purpose
2. Progressive income tax
3. Confiscation of inheritance
4. Confiscation of property of non-conformists
5. Establishment of a Central Bank credit monopoly
6. Federal regulation of communication and major transportation
7. Government purchase/ownership of the means of production
8. Distribution of wealth and liability attributable to labor
9. Government zoning of Agriculture and Industry
10. Free education in government schools

Have we so buried the constitution in a web of unnecessary legislation & judicial precedence that we can't realize or remember that the U.S. Constitution, as originally written, prohibits all 10 at the Federal level.

Who but the oligarchy of banks & big business corrupting & perverting the men & women of the administrative, legislative & judicial branches, sent to Washington to protect the states and the people of those states from just such an enemy.

Perhaps the term, "sacred right of self government," was misused in our past to enslave other men, but now these same types of men would have you believe that their "affirmative actions", their "social justice", "economic justice" would enslave the same men & women set free in that era. We in fact do have a sacred right of self government, and it has never extended us the right to control or govern others. Not a man, woman, child and not a people or state.

We teach our children enterprise with a lemonade stand, but fail to see how our lack of constitutional resolve has crippled our ability to take on the same enterprise as adults. The local & federal regulators, licensing bureaus, taxes & insurance mandates would take 9 cents out of every 10 before you mixed up the first pitcher.

In September 2008, a massive run on the federal bank was experienced to the tune of over $500B and a decision to stop the run was made by the Bush administration. The players at the Fed & the treasury encouraged a decision to redirect another $700B into the banking system. This was the first point won, to create an international crisis that allowed an Oligarchy to manipulate public money at the highest levels.

We teach our children democracy and send them to foriegn shores to spread & defend it, but we allow a candidate to remain unvetted through to inauguration and marginalize any outcries through the media.

Before the last Presidential election, a law case came to, and was NOT argued in, the Supreme Court of the United States; but the decision of it was deferred until -- after the election? Indefinitely? Still, before the election, Senator Obama, admitted his dual citizenship assuming that the common man would not realize the violation of eligibility as defined by the constitution. He denied his association with the communist agenda and marginalized those who wanted the honest debate between Socialism & Self Soverignty. He's sealed up all of his personal history that might allow his eligibility case to be heard by the Supreme Court. His personal actions have created an army of unsuspecting to become culpable in the conspiracy.

The election came. Mr. Obama was elected, and the presidency, such as it was, secured. That was the second point gained. The indorsement, however, fell short of a clear popular majority by rumors & accusations of voter fraud at all levels by hired foot soldiers in the form of Acorn & SEIU as well as unsuspecting paid workers, and so, perhaps, was not overwhelmingly reliable and satisfactory.

The Supreme Court has still not met nor able to review the eligiblity, but continues to waffle and refuses to call for the evidence of eligibility and force an argument.

The new President, seizes the early occasion of the TARP decision, the international banking crisis, and his overwhelming popularity to endorse financial paybacks as an economic solution and redirects an additional $700B of public money & debt. Pre-planned legislation is quickly pushed through to strengthen his committment to the 10 planks of communism and he doesn't stop until his energy tax gets stalled in Senate committee & his Public health speeches start falling on deaf ears.

Auxiliary to all this, and working hand in hand with it, the ongoing distortion of equality & civil rights that mandates we care more for others than we do for ourselves, is to educate and mold public opinion, at least Socialist public opinion, not to care whether individual rights are protected or ensured, but that the individual is subject to the will & desires & needs of the "public". This shows exactly where we now are; and partially, also, whither we are tending.

It will throw additional light on the latter, to go back, and run the mind over the string of historical facts already stated. Several things will now appear less dark and mysterious than they did when they were transpiring. The people were to be left "perfectly free," subject only to the Constitution. What the Constitution had to do with it, outsiders could not then see. Plainly enough now, it was an exactly fitted niche, for the Health Care & Cap and Trade decisions to come in, and declare the perfect free freedom of the people to be just no freedom at all.

We cannot absolutely know that all these exact adaptations are the result of preconcert. But when we see a lot of framed timbers, different portions of which we know have been gotten out at different times and places, and by different workmen- Wilson, Hoover, Roosevelt, Truman, Carter, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama, for instance-and when we see these timbers joined together, and see they exactly matte the frame of a house with pieces exactly fitting, and all the lengths and proportions of the different pieces adapted to their respective places, and we see the frame prepared yet to lay another such piece in such a case we find it impossible not to believe that since Wilson at least, and incentives & reasons given to all who followed, there is an understanding passed one to the other and all have worked upon a common plan or draft drawn up before the first blow was struck. Is this a conspiracy theory or a nation watching a new house being built in the ashes of what once stood?

Obama holds, we know, that a man may rightfully be wiser today than he was yesterday-that he may rightfully change when he finds himself wrong. But can we, for that reason, run ahead, and infer that he will make any particular change, of which he, himself, has given no intimation? Can we safely base our action upon any such vague inference? Now, as ever, I wish not to misrepresent Obama's position, albeit I believe ill gained, but clearly, he is not now with us-he does not pretend to be-he does not promise ever to be. Should we not maintain that we the people of a given State, as well as a Territory, were to be left "perfectly free," "subject only to the Constitution?"

Our cause, then, must be intrusted to, and conducted by, its own undoubted friends-those whose hands are free, whose hearts are in the work-who do care for the result. Ten years ago the Republicans of the nation mustered as a party and pushed back the advance of the Clinton administration to a similar end. We did this under the single impulse of resistance to a common danger, with every external circumstance against us. Of strange, discordant, and even hostile elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought the battle through, under the constant hot fire of a disciplined, proud, and pampered enemy. Did we brave all them to falter now?-now, when that same enemy is wavering, dissevered, and belligerent? The result is not doubtful. We shall not fail-if we stand firm, we shall not fail. Wise counsels may accelerate, or mistakes delay it, but, sooner or later, the victory is sure to come.

Can we count on the Republican party or have they moved too progressively or passively into the same frame of Communism that the Democratic party has begun, so many administrations before? I don't know the answer, I don't know if the party politic is up to this battle. Is there time in this administration to take a stand? Will the Supreme Court assist in the fight to restore the authority of the constitution or have they been given a porch to build onto this new house? Will rule of law prevail, or has corruption rotted the very foundation of our house? There is only one question with our new wisdom that we, as an American people should ask.

Do we have a soviergn right to self governement as individuals that trumps the desires of the public, if the individual does not infringe upon another, or behave as a burden or a nuisance to the public? Does the collective desire of the majority trump and trample the rights of the individual? You must answer the question and if answered in the positive, you can not remain nuetral or idle.

Taken from Lincoln's House Divided Speech. The manifesto was seen on my buddies web site who said he first saw it at FDR all over again blog - http://fdralloveragain.blogspot.com/2009/03/lets-start-with-communism.html

July 2009

Bizarre news around the blogosphere today.

Jeff Sessions, a Republican Senator from Alabama says of the Sotomayor appointment, "I don't believe that Judge Sotomayor has the deep-rooted convictions necessary to resist the siren call of judicial activism. She has evoked its mantra too often." Unless these appointees can be held accountable for the perjury they commit during Senatorial hearings, there's no point in having the hearings.



Seems the WH and Pelosi are the only two factions confident about the health care bill, so confident that she may bypass several committees and call for a vote. "When I take this bill to the floor, it will win," she said Sunday. "We will move forward, it will happen."

Homeland Security Revises Immigration Plan, Limits Officers' Power to Arrest Illegals. Opponents said the program, known as 287G, was intended to identify criminal aliens but instead has led to racial profiling; it allowed local police to identify and arrest illegal immigrants for such minor infractions as

a broken tail light

. Program supporters said it has been an effective tool for combating illegal immigration. Excuse me, but minor or not, if you have outstanding warrents, or suspended license, a taillight is all they need to stop you.. should I expect to walk away from those crimes? A'int gonna happen. But we want law enforcement to IGNORE illegal alien status? Let's get this all in perspective. Can you imagine going to another country and getting pulled over for anything... and they don't want to also SEE YOUR PASSPORT? This is laughable at best.

So how can we work to take back our country? I would really like to see the States get behind the people's grassroots attempts to take their country back. The state needs to re-assert it's right of soveriegnty as a member of the United States, and protect the people as they start taking back their taxes and their rights. You have to starve the beast.

Did no one hear what Palin said?

She said:
1. She wants more time campaigning for other candidates.
2. We are in a FULL COURT PRESS from Washington.
3. She didn't want to put Alaskans through a year of a lame-duck governorship since she'd already decided to not run for re-election. The personal attacks on her has made it expensive for Alaskans to have her as Governor. It will be more efficient for Alaska, and it will insure an incumbant for the 2010 election.

I think that's brilliant. I also think it's brilliant that by NOT being governor she can use her star power to help win GOP elections all over the country in 2010 and in 2012. She'll stay in the limelight and she'll be poised to do whatever she wants, after she secures more financial freedom for her family. She can take the target off of her back, finish her book, and take on speaking engagments without the scrutny and restraints of public office. She's one who believes in a servant's heart.. no one even knows what that means in politics.

4. The cost to the state $2 million to investigate the frivolous ethics complaints, all of which so far have been thrown out, plus she took on personal legal bills to save the state $500,000 in defending against this stuff. She's in debt because of this.

This is really hurting the state. It costs nothing to fie a complaint, and the stalkers who do this do it every time she leaves the house. The complaints are complete bs, but have to be investigated nevertheless. She's going to do something about that. Bull to the lawyers who legislate this kind of crap...how can this be legal?

This is not ok. This is thuggish individuals abusing the system and victimizing an entire state. She believes in fiscal responsibility and efficiency. This is no longer efficient.

5. She's giving BHO a heads up on how to leave office with grace, instead of at gunpoint and in your pajamas.

Think, don't panic

The term "influenza" refers to illness caused by influenza virus. This is commonly also called "flu", but many different illnesses cause "flu-like" systemic and respiratory symptoms such as fever, chills, aches and pains, cough, and sore throat. In addition, influenza itself can cause many different illness patterns, ranging from mild common cold symptoms to typical "flu" to life-threatening pneumonia and other complications, including secondary bacterial infections.

Uncomplicated influenza gets better with or without treatment, but may cause substantial discomfort and limitation of activity before getting better. Complications of influenza can include bacterial infections, viral pneumonia, and cardiac and other organ system abnormalities.

Use of antiviral drugs does not eliminate the risk of complications, and some complications can be life-threatening. In addition, influenza viruses can become resistant to specific anti-influenza antiviral drugs, and all of the drugs have side effects. My son, Karel caught a virus when he was a year old, it was hemophalus influenza, that caused a bacterial meningitis. During the illness his life was in danger, but the drugs used to cure him, caused lasting neural deafness and epilepsy.

I think we should take normal precautions, but review the panic response of the 1976 epidemic and the rush to vaccinate. More people died and suffered paralysis from the vaccine, then from the virus. Only 1 person at Ft. Dix actually died from the 1976 swine flu epidemic. Check out the Natural Remedies as well, and the stuff your Grandma used to tell you about washing your hands, sharing utensils, plenty of fluids.

Common Sense

If there's one thing that Audacity lacks, it's common sense. Who schedules a photo op of a jetliner escorted by fighter jets over Manhattan, post 9/11? Who keeps floundering banks and companies afloat with money borrowed from taxpayers who are facing foreclosure and layoffs themselves? Who starts a policy investigation on torture when you still have soldiers in harms way? Who passes massive new entitlement programs during the beginning of a depression? Who refuses to answer basic questions of identity, eligibility, college and service background when running for the highest office in the land? What have we, the People gained by the TARP and stimulus money being spent? What have we, the People gained by investing public money into GM and Chrysler? Shares have dropped 93% of it's value, brands and plants are discontinued, layoffs are happening, and they may still file for bankruptcy and not pay any of it back. What kind of idiot economists are supporting this? How can we undermine the current intelligence agencies or focus security forces on policy skeptics?

Won't it be fun to watch how Merrill Lynch, BofA and treasury conspired to defraud the shareholders and the taxpayers by misrepresenting values and transaction details?

What is wrong with these people, that they aren't accountable to anyone? This unholy alliance between the banks, wall street, unions, fringe left groups and elected officials has got to STOP!! This is criminal, fraudulent behavior, and it's being perpetrated by those who've been given our trust. This has to be investigated, criminal charges need to be filed, and they need to be put out of office!

Had we been more protective of the free market, there would be no talk of bailouts. So, really... what's the worst thing that could happen if we would have let the banks fail? People would be losing money; international banks would be hurt; foreign countries would be angry at us. Did $700B stop any of that? Wait, which people lost money? Were they protecting a specific GROUP of people? Didn't George Soros say this was great for him personally? Who else has benefited? Let's follow the money in and out of the war chests of our elected officials. I would like some heads to roll.

H.R.1586 - A Blatant Abuse of Power

I'm upset with all the bailouts. It's obvious to me that Washington politicians, banks and wall street have a special relationship that is being preserved through these bailouts to banks. I'm convinced that international bankers needed to cut their losses and pressured Washington to underwrite the bailout. There is no reason for Americans to put up with this. Free markets are free to succeed and fail. The regulations that needed to be in place to protect individuals from fraud didn't exist, so Main Street is left to take their losses and start over, but Banks who perpetrated the outrageous risky paper gets a pass... that is unacceptable.

It's also obvious in the latest AIG fallout, regarding bonuses, that they were allowed in the original legislation. That's a shame, but further proof that unholy alliances exist in Washington. Senator Dodd should be recalled for changing the wording in the legislation that allowed it. However, in typical response to getting caught cheating, congress now wants to publicly fix this, and they come up with a new TAX.

H.R.1586: To impose an additional tax on bonuses received from certain TARP recipients.

This to me is worse than the first mistake and is a blatant abuse of congressional power, to change the tax code to go after AIG bonuses. Regardless of the fact that Senator Dodd changed the legislation to ALLOW these bonuses; regardless of the fact that public sentiment is outrage over the AIG bonuses. What I don't get is that these REPUBLICANS in the house FAILED to see the unconstitutionality and the blatant misuse of power... they voted in favor of the bill. It's obvious we can't trust either party to uphold the constitution. Maybe we need to send them all pocket constitutions.

I recognize a few people here, and I thought they were conservatives. I guess that's not enough to ensure that they might also be defenders of the constitution. I'm convinced that I may never vote a major party player again. IF they represent you, you may want to ask them what LAW did the AIG executives break? and, what part of the constitution gives them the authority to go after a specific group of people using the TAX CODE.

Rep. Robert Aderholt [R, AL-4]
Rep. Rodney Alexander [R, LA-5]
Rep. Joe Barton [R, TX-6]
Rep. Judy Biggert [R, IL-13]
Rep. Brian Bilbray [R, CA-50]
Rep. Gus Bilirakis [R, FL-9]
Rep. Roy Blunt [R, MO-7]
Rep. Mary Bono Mack [R, CA-45]
Rep. John Boozman [R, AR-3]
Rep. Charles Boustany [R, LA-7] - abstain
Rep. Henry Brown [R, SC-1]
Rep. Virginia Brown-Waite [R, FL-5]
Rep. Vern Buchanan [R, FL-13]
Rep. Ken Calvert [R, CA-44]
Rep. David Camp [R, MI-4]
Rep. Eric Cantor [R, VA-7]
Rep. Anh Cao [R, LA-2]
Rep. Shelley Capito [R, WV-2]
Rep. Bill Cassidy [R, LA-6]
Rep. Michael Castle [R, DE-0]
Rep. Ander Crenshaw [R, FL-4]
Rep. John Culberson [R, TX-7] - abstain
Rep. Geoff Davis [R, KY-4]
Rep. Charles Dent [R, PA-15]
Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart [R, FL-21]
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart [R, FL-25]
Rep. John Duncan [R, TN-2]
Rep. Vernon Ehlers [R, MI-3]
Rep. Jo Ann Emerson [R, MO-8]
Rep. John Fleming [R, LA-4]
Rep. James Forbes [R, VA-4]
Rep. Jeffrey Fortenberry [R, NE-1]
Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen [R, NJ-11]
Rep. Elton Gallegly [R, CA-24]
Rep. Jim Gerlach [R, PA-6]
Rep. Robert Goodlatte [R, VA-6]
Rep. Brett Guthrie [R, KY-2]
Rep. Dean Heller [R, NV-2]
Rep. Walter Herger [R, CA-2]
Rep. Timothy Johnson [R, IL-15]
Rep. Walter Jones [R, NC-3]
Rep. Mark Kirk [R, IL-10]
Rep. Leonard Lance [R, NJ-7]
Rep. Thomas Latham [R, IA-4]
Rep. Christopher Lee [R, NY-26]
Rep. Jerry Lewis [R, CA-41]
Rep. Frank LoBiondo [R, NJ-2]
Rep. Donald Manzullo [R, IL-16]
Rep. Michael McCaul [R, TX-10]
Rep. Tom McClintock [R, CA-4]
Rep. John McHugh [R, NY-23]
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers [R, WA-5]
Rep. John Mica [R, FL-7]
Rep. Gary Miller [R, CA-42] - abstain
Rep. Candice Miller [R, MI-10]
Rep. Jerry Moran [R, KS-1]
Rep. Pete Olson [R, TX-22] - abstain
Rep. Thomas Petri [R, WI-6]
Rep. Adam Putnam [R, FL-12]
Rep. George Radanovich [R, CA-19] - abstain
Rep. Dennis Rehberg [R, MT-0] Aye
Rep. Dave Reichert [R, WA-8] Aye
Rep. David Roe [R, TN-1] Aye
Rep. Michael Rogers [R, AL-3] Aye
Rep. Harold Rogers [R, KY-5] Aye
Rep. Michael Rogers [R, MI-8] Aye
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher [R, CA-46] Aye
Rep. Thomas Rooney [R, FL-16] Aye
Rep. Peter Roskam [R, IL-6] Aye
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R, FL-18] Aye
Rep. Edward Royce [R, CA-40] Aye
Rep. Paul Ryan [R, WI-1] Aye
Rep. Jean Schmidt [R, OH-2] Aye
Rep. Aaron Schock [R, IL-18] Aye
Rep. John Shimkus [R, IL-19] Aye
Rep. Christopher Smith [R, NJ-4] Aye
Rep. Lamar Smith [R, TX-21] Aye
Rep. Mark Souder [R, IN-3] Abstain
Rep. Clifford Stearns [R, FL-6] Aye
Rep. Patrick Tiberi [R, OH-12] Aye
Rep. Michael Turner [R, OH-3] Aye
Rep. Frederick Upton [R, MI-6] Aye
Rep. Greg Walden [R, OR-2] Aye
Rep. Zach Wamp [R, TN-3] Aye
Rep. Rob Wittman [R, VA-1] Aye
Rep. Frank Wolf [R, VA-10] Aye
Rep. Donald Young [R, AK-0] Aye
Rep. C. W. Young [R, FL-10] Aye

Tax Day Tea Parties

I wholly support the tea parties that are being organized all over the country this year. The next biggest tea party day will be tax day of course, and I assume there will be more civil protests near the 4th of July.

Although these are grass roots protests, the first, following the chatter inspired by Rick Santelli’s magnificent rant and the support it inspired. Most of the organizers are being cautious about being partisan and some aren't allowing any politicians to speak or use the occasion as a forum. I think the goal is to find the core of what we believe, and none have done it better than Glenn Beck and Fox News. They'll be attending 4 tax day tea parties in Sacramento, the Alamo, Atlanta and Washington DC. I'm hoping also that we can have some real discussions about our 'core' principles that can beyond the tea parties and lead to some real reform.

What would real reform mean, and can people be as united on the basics? For me real reform isn't just band-aids on the status quo. We the people, really need to form a more perfect union. Did you know that one president tried. President Reagan's effort to re-establish the proper role of the federal government through this Executive Order on Federalism was revoked in 1998 by Bill Clinton's new EO 13083, which largely re-justified the excessive unconstitutional role the federal government has assumed since the time of Franklin Roosevelt.

Can we, after this massive outpouring of patriotism, really rally behind..individual liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values? If we can, we may not be happy with any of the two party candidates.

What next? I think it's important that if we can find solidarity on individual liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values then we have a chance to impact the direction of our government in the next election cycle. The problem, finding candidates. The GOP and the Libertarian Party has attached itself to many of the tea parties. Will we find enough candidates to replace congress and make change?

Reason & Religion

I love Ayn Rand. As a witness to communism and a defender of Democracy and Capitalism, there is no greater voice. Christians may not understand her objectivism, and her foundation tries to argue religion vs reason with Reason winning, and religion being an evil. I don't really argue with that either, since I'm not a very religious person. Consider this, a writing about Objectivity.

Objectivity is both a metaphysical and an epistemological concept. It pertains to the relationship of consciousness to existence. Metaphysically, it is the recognition of the fact that reality exists independent of any perceiver’s consciousness. Epistemologically, it is the recognition of the fact that a perceiver’s (man’s) consciousness must acquire knowledge of reality by certain means (reason) in accordance with certain rules (logic).

This class of theories holds that the truth or the falsity of a representation is determined solely by how it relates to a reality; that is, by whether it accurately describes that reality. As Aristotle claims in his Metaphysics:

"To say that [either] that which is is not or that which is not is, is a falsehood; and to say that that which is is and that which is not is not, is true"

I still don't disagree with that, and wish that secular scientists would remind themselves of it a little more often. I often tell my grandchildren that what they believe doesn't matter, there is a truth that is true whether you believe it or not. Belief in something doesn't make truth more true, nor can it make a falsehood the truth.

To me, reason was how I determined what was true, faith is my belief in what is true, and religion is how I choose to live out my faith. (again, I'm not a very religious person...so I don't live out as close to my faith as I would like, but that's not to be confused with double-mindedness.) To do less would be living a lie. (yes, yes, I'm often guilty of that, too, but it in no way is a reflection of what I believe.)

That brings me, however to the objectivist. A reasonable case for atheism in that the ONLY basis to determine TRUTH is observation and reason.

This means that although reality is immutable and, in any given context, only one answer is true, the truth is not automatically available to a human consciousness and can be obtained only by a certain mental process which is required of every man who seeks knowledge—that there is no substitute for this process, no escape from the responsibility for it, no shortcuts, no special revelations to privileged observers—and that there can be no such thing as a final “authority” in matters pertaining to human knowledge. Metaphysically, the only authority is reality; epistemologically—one’s own mind. The first is the ultimate arbiter of the second.

By their own admission there are shortcomings to this. By definition they build a box of rules that won't allow for "special revelation" and they claim that the only authority is "reality", but what they mean is man's perception of reality, because let's face it if you don't have all the facts, then it's logical to think that you may not stumble upon the truth, let alone the whole truth. By their own definition of reality, they limit truth to their perception of reality.

I find it almost amusing and in direct conflict with Aristotle's simple statement. If you want to be bound by the limitations of the human condition and put yourself in a dark box, it would be easy to see why they'll never be illuminated. Their reality will remain dark and box like. I don't choose to limit my understanding of things to the human condition.

Truth is truth whether you believe it or not, on that we can agree.

Support Geert Wilders

Support Geert Wilders!

From the Freedom Party:

The Freedom Party (PVV) and Geert Wilders are faced with an all-out assault. Exploding legal expenses might cripple the continuation of the battle for our liberties. The survival of the Freedom Party and Geert Wilders’s struggle for the defense of the West are now in jeopardy.

Therefore, we need your financial support urgently.

There are three ways you can donate money.

1. Via Paypal. More information on www.geertwilders.nl.

2. Support our Foundation. Stichting Vrienden van de PVV,

bank account : 67.04.72.344

Internationals donators add: IBAN: NL98 INGB 0670 4723 44

BIC: INGBNL2A

3. Send a cheque to: Stichting Vrienden van de PVV, PO Box 20018, zip code: 2500 EA The Hague, The Netherlands.

www.geertwilders.nl

Why does Geert Wilders need support, and why should you support him? See here.

HR1388, S3577, S277 Updated - DO NOT STOP CALLING!

There are reports floating around the Internet that the GIVE ACT (HR1388)/National Service Reauthorization Act (S3577)/Serve America Act (S277) has been passed by the Senate in a 74-14 vote according to Kate Phillips of The Obama NY Times.

S277 - Serve America Act HAS NOT BEEN VOTED ON YET.

The House passed HR1388 last week, S3577 was voted cloture [where they stop debate and avoid a filibuster] on the 19th, and now has been bundled into S277 and is expected to be voted on “later this week”.

It almost seems like they want to confuse you, huh?

The NY Times wants you to believe that this is a done deal and everything is over. But really the article said, “…the Senate tonight voted 74 to 14 on a procedural move“…. The cloture motion to stop debate and filibustering.

These are BAD BILLS

HR 1388 specifically targets Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) and the National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC). From school-based service learning programs to focusing on severely economically depressed communities, the GIVE act sounds good until you get to part about the mandatory service requirement for youth. How can volunteerism be mandatory?

Section 6104 of The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act requires that a commission be established to investigate,

“Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”

Of course I imagine armies of youth planting trees and working on community service projects; however, I can’t get on board with the involuntary servitude. It’s even scarier when you consider Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel coauthored The Plan: Big Ideas for America that calls for compulsory service for Americans ages 18 to 25:

Here’s how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They’ll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we’re hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities’ most pressing needs.

Doesn't sound like much more than a long summer camp, until you hear what the architect really wants.

From your Black Grandma

I came across this site because of a political cartoon I liked, and I'm a little appalled by some of the articles. The site is called Black Commentator and you can check it out for yourself. The link will take you to an article called "Republicans Refuse Stimulus for Citizens Deep in Poverty". They were referring to Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour. I don't know him and can't speak to his objections, but this stimulus isn't the end all be all to everyone.

What struck me MORE though about the article was how the Black Commentator described the poor in this community.

For example, in Lambert, a community of 1,700, we found many people experiencing grinding poverty - living in ramshackle houses built nearly a century ago, with rampant unemployment, scores of young people with nothing to do but make babies, trash and stripped cars all over the place, people with serious health needs, cut off from mainstream services for the lack of public transportation.

Although the local mayor said the “people wanted to live that way,” in a dramatic moment of repudiation at the food pantry, people were asked what they wanted. They launched into a chorus of, “jobs, jobs, library, decent houses, food, transportation, health services!” In other words, people had gross needs that were not being served by state, county and local leaders.

I have to stop here to make a point, although there is plenty more to say about the article. Right here, I see blatant untruths and contradictory logic. I've never been to Lambert, Mississippi, but let's take inventory, I can see the town in my mind's eye. I understand the depression that comes from poverty or needing a helping hand to jump start a new direction.

1. Ramshackle houses
2. Trash
3. Stripped Cars
4. Unemployment
5. Young people
6. Sick people
7. Lack of Transportation

Knowing only that much about Lambert, I know that if I dropped my 2 sons off in Lambert, I would bet my life that they wouldn't be "stuck" in poverty for very long. They would find the owners of the ramshackle houses and fix them up for money or barter. They would force a contract with the city of Lambert to pick up the trash if the city doesn't know how to get that done. They would take the parts of the stripped cars and barter til they had a few working. I could even see them grow big enough to hire the lazy young people who only have time for sex. I could see them open a grocery store or bus service to towns that have free clinics or other services.

Of course the article doesn't recognize the description of Lambert as having any opportunity per se, they continue to argue that the residents couldn't possibly turn it around themselves.

Their poverty is not merely that shaped by the lack of money, but a poverty of the spirit shaped by the oppressive forces that have robbed them of hope, such that many cannot conceive of leaving or don’t know how to manage the transition to a new reality of living. They do not fit the model of Harriet Tubman, they fit her model of those who do not yet fully know they are free.

Stay with me here, cause it gets better. I want to remind you also that this is a Black Commentator talking about a black community with a black mayor. What is his answer to the problems of Lambert?

There needs to be a new Poor Peoples’ March today while the attention of the nation is being socialized to the damages that can result from an unregulated economy. But this time, it should deal with those who have been ravaged for decades with no one coming to their aid because those in power were allied with their oppressors.

Does the Black Commentator really believe that Governor Barbour (white) benefits somehow from continued poverty for the people of Lambert? It's possible I suppose, but doesn't the Governor benefit more by having communities thrive? Does he have give no blame to the mayor (black) who so arrogantly said “people wanted to live that way.” Who exactly are the oppressors here if not the black leaders and commentators?

Well just pretend I'm a Black Grandma, with slave roots and sleeves rolled up.

Shame on you Black Commentator! Shame on the mayor of Lambert and the black leaders and the black preachers of Lambert.

Don't listen to your leaders and your brothers who want to keep you in poverty. Don't believe them when they say you need to wait for the "Massa's crumbs." Don't listen to the anger they spew and the lies they tell. Keeping you down apparantly makes them look taller. Not only are you free, but you have been given the greatest gift of all. Like Joseph, who was sold into slavery by his own brothers, he trusted God in all things, and God turned what men had intended for evil to save his family, even those same brothers, in their time of need.

Don't settle for the Lambert that exists today. Mothers of Lambert, get those kids back in control. You teach them how to clean up their town, paint their homes, and take responsibility for their actions. You take a switch to them if you have to, and you remind them of their rich heritage and how your grandparents didn't have the choices and the opportunities that they have. Don't allow the leaders to go to Washington and let you settle for crumbs...take control of your kids and you teach them how to bake their own bread.

Teach them to NEVER take a handout, just a helping hand. Teach them with a broom and paint brush and get your homes in order. The enemy of poverty isn't the white man or the rich man...the enemy is anyone who tells you that you need a handout. Anyone that tells you that you can't make it on your own, the scars are too deep, those are the real oppressors, the liars and the snakes in the garden.

Get rid of the leaders around you who are not working on your behalf. Don't wait for the jobs to come to you...create the jobs, give businesses a reason to come to Lambert. Force your local mayor to provide the transportation service that your town needs or get another mayor who will. Advertise for what you need by showing off the pride you have in yourself and your community. Remember that

"all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

Bipartisan change you can believe in

I think this says it all.

Take Back Our Children

It was very hard for me to watch the President's address last night. It's never really what he says that worries me, it's what he really means that shows through.

An increase in the Federal standardization of our children's education is not what we need right now. Pouring more federal money and mandates into our educational system be it through grants or civil service or any way you cut it...we need to be afraid and we need to take a stand. We currently have the state as the biggest partner in public school, but the Feds want a bigger influence.

Charles Stickley wrote, "Ever wonder why many Americans react to important information with a blank stare? If psychopolitics succeeds in its mission throughout the Capitalistic nations of the world, there will never be an atomic war, for our enemy will have SUBJUGATED ALL OF HER ENEMIES. Communism has already spread across one sixth of the inhabited world . Marxist Doctrines have already penetrated the remainder . An extension of the Communist social order is everywhere victorious . The spread of Communism has never been by force of battle, but by conquest OF THE MIND. IN PSYCHOPOLITICS WE HAVE REFINED THIS CONQUEST TO ITS LAST DEGREE."

Parents are barely hanging on to any control as witnessed in last years California case against a home school. Parents almost lost their right to teach their own children, if they didn't have the "appropriate teaching credentials." The price of those credentials is teachers who no longer teach facts, but behavior modification. The drop out rate of our high school youth isn't a reflection of poor parenting, it's a reflection that the SYSTEM isn't doing enough. Our young people still have a sense of survival and freedom at their core. By 16 they realize that they may not be one of the handful of new college freshman being produced by the SYSTEM. Either they already know what they want and prefer to pursue their education elsewhere, or they don't know what they want, but aren't challenged enough or encouraged enough in the SYSTEM to find it.

It was clear from last nights address that "Dropping out of school will no longer be an option". That the Feds want control "from cradle to the start of their career." Does that mean there will be reform in our schools to re-engage those not tracked for college, or will they take those "rejects; the incorrigible; the trouble makers; the lazy; the washouts" and put them into public service? The new civil soldiers. How will they stop these children from finding their own path? They've already labeled them as failures because they couldn't conform to the core of the SYSTEM. They weren't willing to become "standardized", pegged and put on track for more of the same.

I propose that these "drop outs" are not failures. The Public School system has only one product K-12, and that's to create a handful of college freshman for future indoctrination. These young people who have other interests are the future innovators; plumbers; electricians; artists; CEOs and patriots. Will some of them use those talents in gangs...absolutely. But a majority will take that self-reliance; determination; resiliency and intuition and they be fine. But what have we done to those that we didn't squash? We wasted their time and tried to break their spirit.

Governor Jindal was able to create emergency legislation due to Hurricane Katrina that allowed the school funding to assist faith based and private schools who were picking up the slack when the Public School system in New Orleans was failing. As Rahm Emmanuel so clearly states..."let's not waste a good crisis". While our public schools are struggling with state and federal mandates, and not enough money to implement those mandates...this is a great opportunity to regain control of our children and their school funds.

If we can enact similar legislation that allows 60% - 75% of the money currently allocated by ADA for each student, and allow the money to follow the child; directed and managed by the parents; regardless of the religious affiliation; regardless of the grade by grade standardization policies; regardless of the accreditation of the campus or instructors, then we can save our children and the future of America. They take our money, but the money does NOT follow the children. The money goes directly to the institutions that comply or propagate the anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-family dogma of the far left. We need to stop that.

We need to REFORM the educational system and take back our children.

God is in control

by Twila Paris

God is in control

This is no time for fear
This is a time for faith and determination
Don't lose the vision here
Carried away by emotion
Hold on to all that you hide in your heart
There is one thing that has always been true
It holds the world together

God is in control
We believe that His children will not be forsaken
God is in control
We will choose to remember and never be shaken
There is no power above or beside Him, we know
God is in control, oh God is in control

History marches on
There is a bottom line drawn across the ages
Culture can make its plan
Oh, but the line never changes
No matter how the deception may fly
There is one thing that has always been true
It will be true forever

He has never let you down
Why start to worry now?
He is still the Lord of all we see
And He is still the loving Father
Watching over you and me

watching over you...watching over me..
watching over every things..
watching over you..watching over me..
every little sparrow..every little things...

And you thought Civil War was out of the Question?

Their goal is to revitalize the union within the confines of the Constitution.
Many of the words were taken directly from the words of Madison and Jefferson. Though none of the recent state legislation infers that they wish to secede from the Union, there are now 21 states that have joined New Hampshire and Oklahoma in drawing a line in the sand. Considering the Martial Law, the involuntary youth brigade, the threat of an offshore banking takeover, the ratification of the UN Sea Treaty, the danger of the North American Union...etc., etc., etc.

WOW!!! Don't wake sleeping dogs, eh?

HCR 6 – AS INTRODUCED

2009 SESSION

09-0274

09/01

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 6

A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

SPONSORS: Rep. Itse, Rock 9; Rep. Ingbretson, Graf 5; Rep. Comerford, Rock 9; Sen. Denley, Dist 3

COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs

ANALYSIS

This house concurrent resolution affirms States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

09-0274

09/01

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine

A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1, Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled; and

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 2, Article 1 declares that the people inhabiting the territory formerly called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or State, by the name of The State of New Hampshire; and

Whereas the State of New Hampshire when ratifying the Constitution for the United States of America recommended as a change, “First That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly Delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised;” and

Whereas the other States that included recommendations, to wit Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Virginia, included an identical or similar recommended change; and

Whereas these recommended changes were incorporated as the ninth amendment, the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, and the tenth amendment, the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people, to the Constitution for the United States of America; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:

That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and

That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory; and

That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;” and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press:” thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; and

That the construction applied by the General Government (as is evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” and “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof,” goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their power by the Constitution: that words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers, ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and correction; and

That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them: that nevertheless, this State, from motives of regard and respect for its co-States, has wished to communicate with them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate, they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified: that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions would flow from them: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism -- free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this State does therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments on acts not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment unaltered to limited government, whether general or particular. And that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That they will concur with this State in considering acts as so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States, not merely as the cases made federal, (casus foederis,) but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories; and

That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of the General Court; and

That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:

I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.

II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and

That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State’s legislature.

We're Toast

It's obvious that there is NO difference between the Parties. This gal has been blowing the whistle for 40 years. We've sold out our children and now our country. These aren't NEW videos...I can't imagine what she thinks about our new Administration.





View the rest of this interview on YouTube

As a Christian, it was easy to stay responsible for my own kids education even though they were in the public school system. I attended CHEA conferences and knew that my husband and I were responsible to train up our kids. It didn't bother me that they had no real interest in a college degree. They were antsy to live life and they took what ever college course work was necessary to supplement the lack of skills attained in High School. They aren't rocket scientists, but they have good jobs and excel in their chosen fields. That's enough to make me proud.

Their dad and I took parenting seriously and knew that a fear of God was at the top of the list. We also helped them find their God given gifts and talents and helped them develop life skills, gave them a moral compass and demanded integrity. My youngest son however is the only college graduate and he's also the only one that requires great debate to win over on social and political issues. Funny how that proves her point. He's had the most trouble reconciling with God, but has enough respect for us as parents and a healthy fear of God, that he's mostly just confused.

These videos depress me in that we may be too late. Perhaps we've had our chance and this is just the last dance.