A VERY BAD IDEA: Transferring Control of the Internet to the UN

From an intelligence standpoint, it does not make sense to turn over control of the Internet to the UN. At a time when the US Armed Forces and the intelligence community are both trying to develop our national defenses against the threats of cyber warfare, to divest the nation of control of the Internet is not in the best interest of the nation. The Pentagon, White House, and other agencies of government have been signaling the onset of cyber warfare.

Obama’s transfer of the Internet to the UN is just another illustration of how he continues to weaken the Republic, his goal seems to move the nation to a post-modern utopian world. The Obama administration has been informing the world that Putin is on the wrong side of history, that Putin is living in the 19th Century of nationalism, not in Obama’s 21st Century vision of internationalism.

Obama believes anyone espousing nationalism in the United States is backwards, uneducated, and a danger to the “change” he envision for the United States. While Obama is degrading the strength of the US military to a level that existed before WWII, and is intent on seriously damaging the economic power of the nation, as he drives the Republic into unheard of levels of debt (soon the interest on the national debt will exceed the GNP).

Obama believes that the nation-state, and sovereignty must no longer be the basis for the foundation of the international system, in Obama’s new 21st Century world, he alleges Putin doesn’t understand, he wants to eliminate the US status as the only Superpower. It is rather apparent that Putin does understand Obama’s naive vision of the 21st Century and is taking full advantage of it, and of Obama’s leadership from behind. A destabilizing transfer of control of the Internet to the UN will not be in the best interest of the American people, the US Armed Forces, or for The Free Enterprise System. If control of the Internet is transferred to the UN, the American people can expect the UN to eventually levy taxes on use its use; the American public has been fortunate that ever since the US military created the Internet, it has been free for all Americans to use free of taxes.

Eventually the UN may allow certain restrictions to be imposed against certain member states that are not looked on favorably by the majority of member nations, like Israel, the United States, or any other nation the majority member states may disagree with. Internet privacy and computer security has always been protected by the United States, but can be abused by a new and unknown power structure at the UN.

The Republican leadership in the Congress that has done very little or nothing to oppose Obama’s transfer of the Internet to the UN, must take action to prevent the occupant of the Oval Office from effecting the transfer.

It appears Obama is transferring control of the Internet to the UN because he has had difficulty dealing with the open criticism of his administration on the Internet daily; that criticism, guaranteed by the freedom of speech, under provisions of the US Constitution has been difficult for him to accept.

It has been impossible for the Obama administration to control the American people’s freedom of expression, as they criticize the Obama administration’s multiple failures and scandals on Internet daily. Since the Internet would have to remain free and open if it were to remain under the control of the US Commerce Department, that must be changed. When the Obama administration turns control of the Internet over to the UN, he has full knowledge that a coalition of nations that restrict the freedom of expression of their own populations will endeavor to suppress the freedom of expression on the Internet.

Countries like China, Cuba, Iran, the Soviet Union, Syria, Sudan, Venezuela, Bolivia, Vietnam, Pakistan, Myanmar, Malaysia, Mozambique, Algeria, etc. will take aggressive action to change the Internet as we know it today. The American people will forced by the Obama administration to abide by new oppressive UN Internet regulations, and Americans will be forced to abide by new UN Internet restricted regulations be penalized if they do not, or even worse. The American people must be allowed to assert their freedom of expression on the Internet and their right to oppose any attempt to suppress their freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution, regardless of what any new UN Internet regulations may require.

The transfer of the Internet to UN control is not a small issue, it is about basic freedoms guaranteed to all Americans by the US Constitution, and must be opposed by any and all means possible. We encourage you to contact your Congressional representatives and demand that they take whatever action is required to prevent the transfer of Internet control to the UN.

RELATED STORIES: 

U.S. to relinquish remaining control over the Internet – The Washington Post
Why is American internet so slow?

Huge pro-family victory in Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade

These days there aren’t too many big pro-family victories to celebrate. But Sunday’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade in South Boston was one of them!

It went wonderfully. The organizers stood up to the politicians and the rabid media who tried relentlessly to force them to include overt homosexual activist groups in their traditional Catholic, pro-family parade.

All photos courtesy of MassResistance

And in the end many others stood with them. Labor unions, small businesses, several politicians, and an almost endless procession of military, religious, school, and other groups proudly marched before huge, cheering crowds. But it was a nasty fight right up to the end. And the organizers personally thanked MassResistance for our support.

As we reported last week, the parade organizers had been pressured for over a month, and recently their sponsors were even contacted. As of last week, all of the major sponsors and politicians had announced they were boycotting the parade in solidarity with the homosexual groups according to statements that were released.

The vicious intimidation tactics lasted right up to the morning of the parade.

 Enormous parade – Largest event in New England

Many people don’t realize how enormous the Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade is. This year the parade was nearly two hours long. There were groups marching from as far away as Florida. It typically attracts over ¾ million people, and this year there were at least that many.

It is not only a pro-family Catholic event but also a military celebration.Organized by the South Boston Allied War Veterans Council, the parade celebrates Evacuation Day, the day the British were driven out of Boston during the Revolutionary War in 1776, which, like St. Patrick’s Day, is also March 17. Thus it includes dozens of US military contingents and veterans groups of all types.

The religious, festive, historical, and military aspects of the parade give it a special old-fashioned atmosphere that attracts families from all over New England.

The organizers simply don’t want to mix in the “gay pride parade” element. One need only look at photos from any “gay pride” parade (here or elsewhere) to see what you can eventually expect to have. But the politicians and the media decided that this year they would not take “no” for an answer.

Relentless and obsessive media attacks

During the weeks leading up to day of the parade, virtually all of the newspaper coverage focused on the exclusions of the homosexual activists. The Boston Globewas particularly relentless.

It went to some absurd extremes. At one point, the Globe surprised us by printing a strong letter by a Catholic school principal supporting the parade organizers. Then a few days later they published an editorial personally attacking the principal’s Catholic religious views, and of course, letters attacking him also.

The morning of the parade, the Globe’s only “parade news” was a full-page article(that began on Page 1) about two homosexual activists putting “rainbow” colors on one of the floats for the parade, in an effort to sneak in the homosexual message.

Also on the morning of the parade — not to be outdone — the Boston Herald’s columnist Margery Eagan, a tireless anti-Catholic, wrote a particularly venomous article naming and celebrating the sponsors who had dropped out of this “toxic parade.” In the article, Eagan admitted that the businesses were contacted “by the Boston Herald” to intimidate them and inform them that their names would be in the newspaper. Note to the Herald: For a newspaper that depends on advertisers for its livelihood, it’s would seem to be a rather unwise practice to harass someone’s advertisers.

It gets ugly: Mayor of Boston screams & curses at parade organizer

Newly elected Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, a longtime pro-homosexual advocate, put enormous effort to force, harass, and coerce the parade organizers to buckle under and let open homosexual activist floats and banners into the parade. But the organizers stood behind the 1995 US Supreme Court ruling that allows them to include or exclude anyone they choose.

The Friday night before the parade it got ugly. Mayor Walsh and parade organizer Philip Wuschke, Jr. were both on stage at the South Boston Citizens Association. According to an eyewitness we spoke to, Walsh approached Wuschke and began berating him. Walsh told him he’d better agree to include the homosexuals. When Wuschke said no, Mayor went up to his face and screamed “You’d better not f— me over on this. Do you hear me? Don’t f— with me.” And the Mayor continued a profanity laden diatribe until someone stepped in and separated them.

Walsh is a former union organizer and local union president and is probably used to getting his way. But Wuschke is also a union member, and had no trouble telling the Mayor what he could do with his threats.

Violation of 1995 US Supreme Court ruling

This kind of tactic by the Mayor is an obvious violation of the 1995 US Supreme Court ruling. It gave the parade organizers the First Amendment right to decide whom to allow in the parade. In the last paragraph, the Justices also stated that the State may not use its power to coerce them:

“Our holding today rests not on any particular view about the Council’s message but on the Nation’s commitment to protect freedom of speech. Disapproval of a private speaker’s statement does not legitimize use of the Commonwealth’s power to compel the speaker to alter the message by including one more acceptable to others.”

But Walsh apparently has no interest in that. According to a witness at one of the Mayor’s “negotiation” sessions between the parade organizers and the homosexual activists held earlier, the Mayor of Boston remarked, “I don’t give a sh– about the Supreme Court ruling that was 20 years ago.”

On Saturday morning Walsh told the press that he would keep pushing right up until the parade started. In fact, Wuschke and others were getting so many harassing phone calls from the Mayor’s people on Saturday that they had to turn off their cell phones.

Not surprisingly, none of this ever made it to the mainstream media in Boston.

The parade goes on!

Sunday was a chilly but very sunny day. The streets were already crowded an hour before it started. Everyone was excited. The parade began right on time!

The parade began with the City of Boston Police Department riding horses with green socks!

Politicians break ranks and march in parade

It had seemed that no prominent politician would march in the parade and risk the wrath of the homosexual lobby. But there was a LOT of outrage by local citizens over that, especially directed at politicians in South Boston. And apparently that made a big difference!

Left: Congressman Stephen Lynch. Right: State Rep. Nick Collins.
Both represent South Boston.
Boston City Councilor Michael Flaherty had a contingent. During the parade he was in the NECN-TV booth that was televising it!

Of the 10 announced candidates for Governor, only Scott Lively (right) with his running mate Shelly Saunders marched in the parade.

Labor unions abandon Mayor and march in parade

Labor unions were a noticeable presence in this year’s parade. Mayor Marty Walsh has deep labor roots in Boston. It was the unions that got him elected. It’s pretty clear he didn’t want them marching that day. But a principle was at stake — and some of the most powerful unions in the city made it a point to be in the parade.

Ironworkers union.
Carpenters union.

Painters and allied trades union.

Also well represented at the parade were the Teamsters union and thePipefitters union, among others.

Local businesses and more

The big “pro-gay” corporations may have pulled out. But local businesses stayed in the parade, and at least one national company, H&R Block, had a float.

H&R Block was passing out “tax packets” to the crowd.

Organizers call MassResistance office to thank us!

On Monday the parade organizers called the MassResistance office to thank us for our efforts last week getting the truth out — and helping people across the country come to their aid. In fact, people all over America — as far away as Hawaii — called and emailed their outrage to the politicians and cowardly advertisers and their support for the parade organizers. So we say: THANK YOU to all of YOU!

A great pro-family victory!

There is something profoundly wrong and un-American about presuming to dictate who one must include in one’s private parade. The US Supreme Court understood this by a vote of 9-0. But the Left ignores that, and strives to create a climate of fear and confusion in order to get their way.

This was perfectly illustrated in a Boston Globe article about the Mayor boycotting the parade, where they published a statement by the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts followed by a statement by the Mayor of Boston.

As the Globe reported:

The Catholic Action League issued a statement after the parade congratulating the parade organizers “for their determined defense of their Faith, moral principles, and constitutional rights.”

“The homosexual group which tried to force its way into the parade cared nothing for Saint Patrick or Irish culture, and had nothing but contempt for the Catholic religion. MassEquality wanted to use the parade to promote its own agenda,” the League said in a statement.

In a statement issued this morning, Walsh drew parallels between the fight for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender equality and earlier battles for liberty.

The parade organizers deserve everyone’s thanks for standing up to the “LGBT” juggernaut and the vicious intimidation by the politicians and the liberal press. How many people these days are willing to do that?

You can donate to the parade online HERE or mail to: South Boston Parade, P.O. Box 351, South Boston, MA 02127

But media focuses on so-called “diversity” float

The willingness of the Left to create disinformation never ceases to amaze us.

The organizers allowed two local non-profit “diversity” groups to march. Both had agreed to the rules regarding homosexual labels and signs. Nevertheless, both floats put on some rainbow-like decorations and told the Globe and Heraldbeforehand. Beyond both contingents were fairly non-descript and uninteresting.

Diversity float.

This was the  so-called “diversity float” with wooden cannons decorated in different colors, supposedly representing the “rainbow.” Most people had no idea what it was all about. But the Boston media swooned over it.

As the float passed by in the parade (according to our observation and others we spoke with) almost no one seemed to know what it represented.

Diversity nonprofit group.

This was the other “diversity” non-profit group. They had a banner that looked like the “pot of gold at the end of the rainbow” and other banners talking about “inclusion.” This was somehow supposed to signify “gay rights.” Most people didn’t seem to get it.

But the obsessed media treated them like the stars of the parade. These floats were the only ones pictured in the Globe and the Herald’s print coverage the next morning. Both papers claimed (falsely) that the groups “warmly” received by the crowd. Tuesday’s Globe even had featured a ridiculously distorted lead editorial  celebrating the pathetic float as though it were kind of great “progress.”

The Boston media almost completely ignored the wonderful totality of the South Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade. It was shameful, but unfortunately something we’ve all grown used to.

CONTACT the companies that boycotted after signing on as sponsors! 

Luckily, all of the sponsorship money had already been paid, and none of it was refunded! But their public solidarity with the radical homosexual activists over pro-family Catholics was extremely offensive to people everywhere.

We’ve been contacted by people across the country about getting local bars to stop serving Samuel Adams beer over this! Many remember last summer when a  Samuel Adams commercial quoting the Declaration of Independence left out the reference to God because, they later claimed, it might violate the beer industry advertising standards.

Samuel Adams Beer
Also known as “Boston Beer Co.”
Samuel Adams was fairly open about their boycott of the parade in solidarity of the homosexual movement.
Inquires/Complaints: 888-661-2337
Direct: 617-584-1175 ask for “Jennifer”
Contact form

The Westin Boston Waterfront Hotel
Michael Jorgensen, manager 617-532-4840
Contact: donna.frechette@westin.com
They claimed that they “were never sponsors.” That is untrue. They have given money to the parade for the last several years.

ClearChannel Communications
Radio stations: Evolution 101.7, KISS 108, and JAM’N 94.5 were all going to participate, but pulled out.
Contact: Athanafia Orphanos
Direct line: 617-763-3137
athanafiaorphanos@clearchannel.com

CBSRadio
Radio Stations AMP 103.3 and Mix 104.1 were both going to participate, but pulled out.
Contact: RoDooley Webster, marketing dir.
Direct line: 617-787-7083
rcdooley@cbs.com

WEEI Radio Boston
Was going to participate but boycotted parade at last minute.
General manager: Kevin Graham
Direct line: 617-779-3541
Contact form

WAAF Radio Boston
Was going to participate but boycotted parade at last minute.
General manager: Ron Valere
Direct line: 617-779-5425

New England Coffee Company
Pulled out as a sponsor
1-800-225-3537
consumerrelations@necoffeeco.com

(Note: We had earlier included Gillette in this list. It turns out that Gillette had never been an “official” sponsor, but had simply allowed the use of their parking lot for the parade stating area.)

As the Boston Heraldreported, one major bar in South Boston discontinued their contract with Sam Adams beer over their boycott of the parade. Yessss!

And turncoat politicians . . .

Boston Mayor Marty Walsh
(617)635-4500
mayor@cityofboston.gov

State Senator Linda Dorcena-Forry
Represents South Boston but boycotted parade
(617)722-1150
Linda.DorcenaForry@masenate.gov

An Open letter to Former FL Governor Jeb Bush

common core protestAs you entered the Governors Club in Tallahassee, Florida, you spoke to me as a small group of us held signs to get your attention to our serious concerns about your federal education program called Common Core.

Three grandmas drove 12 hours each to see you, face to face, and you turned and scoured at us as though we were naval lint…pond scum. As I stated “Stop Common Core,” Your disparaging retort was “it is a good thing there’s only 3 of you.” As you turned and disappeared into the exclusive club, $1,000 per plate event to celebrate the Foundation for Florida’s Future, I said, “There were lots more, but we weren’t invited.”

That’s the whole point. You, Jeb Bush and your corporate cronies, have decided what is good for the children of America and WE; parents, educators, and concerned taxpayers, were not invited.

We were not invited to create this National takeover of education under the guise of improving our competitive advantage with our kids who are termed by your group as “human capital.”

We were not a part of the plan to take over 400 data points of information on children and their families including medical records, disciplinary files, family status, religious affiliation, political affiliation and more intrusive facts and share this without parental consent, now that your friend, Barack Obama, weakened the FERPA Laws through executive orders.

common core protest 2We were not invited to participate in the development of the Common Core standards by nameless DC bureaucrats who copyrighted them to prevent their change or improvement. Experts are ringing the alarms now that these standards are devastating to our kids and our future.

Our legislators and school boards were not invited to vote on the adoption of these national standards, their effectiveness, the billions of dollars in costs imposed, and implementation. They did not vote to give all their power to determine our state’s education programs to the federal government.

Religious Schools, charter schools, home schools and your very own initiatives on school choice did not vote for, or ask for, and do not want the One Size Fits All Common Core State Standards.

So WHY are you supporting this unconstitutional federal takeover of education called Common Core? Looking at who else supports this raises even more questions:

President Barack Obama, Arnie Duncan, Bill Gates Foundation, Mike Huckabee, Center for American Progress (George Soros), Eli Broad Foundation, GE, Hewlett Foundation, Pearson PLC (Education conglomerate whose 3rd largest shareholder is the government of Libya) …..strange bedfellows for certain!

Could it be the confluence of money meets power? Could it be the platform for your candidacy for President of the USA in 2016 just as you used the Foundation for Florida’s Future to propel you into the Governor’s mansion?

You have some explaining to do Mr. Bush.

Your efforts to gain political power will have unacceptable collateral damage. Our children are NOW suffering from faulty Common Core standards and curriculum damaging their foundations knowledge. This is a link to hours of heart wrenching testimony at the last State Board of Education meeting in Orlando 2/18/14 by parents, educators and experts documenting the depth of concern and outrage only growing as more are exposed to the seriously flawed National Standards. http://thefloridachannel.org/videos/21814-state-board-education-meeting/ Testimony starts after 1 hour 10 minutes.

Your collateral damage will soon include the politicians who have supported your flawed initiative. Governor Rick Scott has received a recent notice from the Republican base, the RPOF, Republican Party of Florida, demanding the removal of Common Core in no uncertain terms.

EDITORS NOTE: Joy Pullmann wrote in The Federalist, “Common Core: The Biggest Election Issue Washington Prefers to Ignore,” wrote about some bad behavior that has occurred among elected officials who have shown total and utter disregard of the electorate. Then she pointed out the political games being played in Florida:

Florida’s state board of education received 19,000 public comments on Common Core in October. Officials still have not formally reviewed those, and lawmakers including Gov. Rick Scott (R) told constituents the comments were part of lawmakers reconsidering Common Core after dropping its national tests. The day before the comment period closed, however, Florida Deputy K-12 Chancellor Mary Jane Tappen said on a webinar, “We are moving forward with the new more rigorous [Common Core] standards. So, if anyone is hesitating or worried about next year, the timeline has not changed.”

Advice to Young, Unemployed Workers by Jeffrey A. Tucker

We are now in the fifth year of very choppy hiring markets for young workers. The latest unemployment numbers once again leave them out from posted gains. Not even the boom in temporary employment included them.

The United States has one of the highest rates of unemployment among 20-to-26-year-olds in the world. Nearly half of the U.S. army of unemployed is under the age of 34. As for those who are hired, there is a huge gap between wage expectations and paycheck realities, which is exactly what you would expect in a post-boom world. A survey by Accenture finds that more than 41 percent of recent U.S. college graduates are disillusioned, underemployed, and not using their college degrees in their work.

The young generation faces challenges unlike any that most people alive have seen. This situation requires new adaptive strategies.

What follows, then, is my letter of advice to young workers.

Dear Young Workers:

Even if it weren’t for the economic stagnation, you would already be facing a tough market. That’s because you are showing up at the job marketplace nearly empty-handed. Our society long ago decided it was better for you to sit in desks for 16 years than to gain any real work experience in the marketplace that is likely to hire you later.

Even if it were legal for you to work when you are capable of doing so—from the age of maybe 12 or 13—the government has imposed these wage-floor laws that price your services out of the market. Then you are told that if you stay in school, you will get a great, high-paying job right out of college. Then it turns out that employers aren’t interested in you. You are beginning to sense that employers think you have few marketable skills and have no demonstrated predisposition to produce.

Here’s the root of the problem: People have been lying to you all your life.

As a young child you were repeatedly fed slogans about the equality of everyone. The urges to compete and win were suppressed in your childhood games, while sharing and caring for others were exalted above all other values.

Then at some point—somewhere between the ages of 7 and 10—something changed. All that caring/sharing stuff ended and a world of dog-eat-dog began. You were expected to get perfect grades, to excel at math and science, to be perfectly obedient, to stay in school for as long as possible. You were told that if you did that, everything would work out for you.

It does work out for some. But only a small minority of people are disposed to both compliance and rote learning. And even for those people, not everyone gets what he’s been promised. As for the rest, there is no plan in place. Those who fall through the cracks are expected to make it on their own somehow.

How do you make it? It all comes down to remunerative work. And there’s the barrier you face right now. You have the desire and you are looking for some institution that values what you have to contribute. But you can’t find the match.

Consider: Why does any business hire an employee? It happens based on the belief that the business will make more money with the employee than without it. The business pays you, you do work, and, as a result, there are greater returns coming in than there would otherwise be.

But think through what this means. It means you have to add more value than you take out. For every dollar you earn, you have to make it possible for the business to earn a dollar plus something extra. This task is not easy. Businesses have costs to cover in addition to your salary. For example, government mandates that businesses be insured. You have to be trained. There could be healthcare costs, too. There are uncertainties to deal with. All of these add to the burden that you place on the business, which adds to the costs of hiring you.

What this means is you have to be more valuable than you think. Why are minimum wage jobs so hard? Because it’s difficult for an inexperienced worker to be worth paying that much. The employer has to extract as much value as possible from the relationship with you just to make that relationship happen at all. That can’t happen right away because odds are you are losing the company money in the first months of employment simply because you are untrained. You end up scrambling like crazy just to earn your keep.

If you already understand this rule—that you must add more value than you take out—you now know more than vast numbers of young workers. And this gives you an advantage. While everyone else is grumbling about the workload and low pay, you can know why you are having to hustle so much and be happier for it. You are producing more for the company than you take out. Doing that consistently is the way to get ahead. In fact, it’s the key to life.

But in order to get ahead, you have to be a player in the first place. It does little good to sit around and wait for the right job at the right pay. Forget all your expectations. If something, anything, comes along, you should jump on it immediately. No job is too menial, despite what you have been told. The goal is just to get in the game. Yes, you have much higher salary expectations, and those might be met someday. But not yet.

The first step is to get into the game at some wage, just something, somewhere. The fear that such work, whatever it is, is somehow beneath you is a serious source of personal undoing. Those who are willing to perform the most “menial” of jobs are the people who can make a good life for themselves. Just because you perceive the job as “menial” does not mean it is not valuable to others and especially, ultimately, to you.

You learn from every job you have. You learn how to interact with others, how a business runs, how people think, how bosses think, and how those who succeed get ahead versus those who fail. Working is a time for learning, as much as or more than school.

People’s number-one fear is that their job will somehow define their lives. Hence, they conclude that a job stocking shelves at Walmart will redefine or dumb down who they are. This notion is absolutely untrue. That job is a brick in your foundation.

In order to get any job, you have to do more than drop off a resume or file one online. You have to emerge from the pack. That means that you have to sell yourself like a commodity. You have to market yourself (and marketing is the least-appreciated and yet most-crucial feature of all commercial acts). That is not degrading; it is an opportunity. Find out everything you can about the company and its products. After you apply, you need to go back and back, meet the managers, meet the owners, all with the goal of showing them how much value you will add to their enterprise.

In this new job, success is not hard, but it requires discipline. Just follow a few simple rules. Never be late. Do first whatever your immediate supervisor tells you to do. Do it much more quickly and thoroughly than he or she expects. When that is done, do some unexpected things that add value to the environment. Never complain. Never gossip. Never partake in office politics. Be a model employee. That’s the path toward thriving.

It’s not just about adding value to the company. It’s about adding value to yourself. The digital age has given us all amazing tools for accumulating personal capital. Get a LinkedIn account and attach your job to your personal identity. Start putting together that essential network. This network is something that will grow throughout your life, starting now and lasting until the end. It could be the most valuable commodity you have outside your own character and skills. Take possession of your work experience and make it your own.

While doing all this excellent work, you need to be thinking about two possible paths forward, each of them equally viable: advance within this one firm or move to another firm. You should go with whichever is to your best advantage. Never stop looking for your next job. This is true now and always throughout your life.

A huge mistake people make is to embed themselves emotionally in one institution. The law encourages this attitude by tying all sorts of advantages to the status-quo job you currently hold. You get health benefits, time off, scheduled raises, and it is always easier to stick with what you know. To do so is a mistake. Progress comes through disruption, and sometimes you have to disrupt yourself to make that progress happen.

To be willing to forgo the security of one job for the uncertainty of another gives you an edge. Average people around you will sacrifice every principle and every truth for the sake of security. People, with very few exceptions, fear the uncertainty of an unknown future more than the seeming security of a known status quo. They will give up every right and every bit of their souls for the promise of security (whether it be through a paycheck or an armed police officer), even to the point of personal misery or obeying a wicked despot (whether it be a boss or a dictator). You can break free of this tendency, but it takes courage, risk-taking, and a conscious act of defying convention.

You should always think of yourself as a productive unit that is always on the job market. You can go from institution to institution, always upgrading your skills and hence your wages. Never be afraid to try something new or to plunge into a new work environment.

Clever finance management here is crucial. Never live at the level that matches your income. Your standard of living, instead, should match your next-best employment opportunity, the one you have forgone or the one you might take next. If you stick with this practice—and it requires discipline—you will be free to choose where you work and to take greater risks. You will also develop a cushion should something go wrong.

At the same time, there could be advantages to sticking around one place, even as everyone else around you is moving from here to there. Even if that happens, you should still think of yourself as being on the market. You are governing yourself. Don’t let yourself be beholden to anyone, but understand also that no one owes you a living. That’s the only way to make clear judgments about your career path.

At every job, you are going to learn so much about human ethics, psychology, emotions, and behavior. Most of what you will learn will be enlightening and encouraging. Some of it, however, is not pretty and might come as a shock.

First, you will discover that people in general are extremely reluctant to admit error. People will defend an opinion or an action until the end, even if every bit of logic and evidence runs contrary. Sincere apologies and genuine admissions of error and wrongdoing are the rarest things in this world. There is no point at all in demanding apologies or in becoming resentful when they fail to appear. Just move on. Neither should you expect to always be rewarded for being right. On the contrary, people will often resent you and try to take you down.

How do you deal with this problem? Don’t get frustrated. Don’t seek justice. Accept the reality for what it is. If a job isn’t working out, move on. If you get fired, don’t seek vengeance. Anger and resentment accomplish absolutely nothing. Keep your eye on the goal of personal and professional advancement, and think of anything that interrupts your path as a diversion and a distraction.

Second, we all want to believe that doing a great job and becoming excellent at something will lead to personal reward. This is not always or even often true. Excellence makes you a target of envy from those around you who have failed by comparison. Excellence can often harm your prospects for success. Meritocracy exists, and even prevails, but it is realized through your own initiative, and it is never just granted freely by some individual or institution. All personal and social progress comes about because you alone push through the attempts of everyone around you to stop it.

Third, people tend to possess a status-quo bias and prefer to follow orders and instructions; most people cannot imagine how the world around them might be different through initiative and change. If you can train yourself to imagine a world that doesn’t yet exist—to exercise the use of imagination and creativity in a commercial framework—you can become the most valuable person around. You might be among those who can be real entrepreneurs. You might even change the world.

As you develop and use these talents, and as they become ever more valuable to those around you, remember that you are not infallible. The commercial marketplace punishes pride and arrogance and it rewards humility and the teachable spirit. Be happy for your successes, but never stop learning. There is always more to know because the world is ever-changing, and none of us can know all things. The key to thriving in this life is to be prepared to not only change with it but to get in front of the change and drive it.

From where you are now, unemployed with few seeming prospects, your future might look hopeless. This perception is not true. There are barriers, to be sure, but they are there to be overcome by you and you alone. The world does not work like you were told it works when you were a kid. Deal with it and start engaging the reality around you right now just as it is, using intelligence, cunning, and charm. You are the decision-maker, and whether you succeed or fail ultimately depends on the decisions you make.

In many ways, you are a victim of a system that has conspired against you. But you get nowhere by acting like a victim. You don’t need to be a victim. You have free will and the capacity for self-governance; indeed, you possess the human right to choose. Today is the day to start exercising it.

Find a Portuguese translation of this article here.

20121129_JeffreyTuckeravatar (1)ABOUT JEFFREY A. TUCKER

Jeffrey Tucker is a distinguished fellow at FEE, CEO of the startup Liberty.me, and publisher at Laissez Faire Books. He will be speaking at the FEE summer seminar “Making Innovation Possible: The Role of Economics in Scientific Progress.”

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of FEE and Shutterstock.

Common Core’s End Game: Redistributing Grades

Ending inequities in academic outcomes drives much of the decision-making for bureaucrats who run our schools. Ultimately, the education bureaucrats, who are beholden to Washington, express much anxiety over losing federal aid. The message from Washington is that outcomes will be equalized.  It’s in the President’s proposed education budget and new guidelines to eliminate “disparate punishment” on the basis of race. Merit and fairness are cast aside, as both rewards and punishments are redistributed.

When I teach college English, the topic of communism comes up because many writers, such as Richard Wright, were at one time communists. But I inevitably get students who think redistribution of wealth is nice-sounding.  Karl Marx’s dictum, “To each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” resonates with young adults who have been raised on tolerance and social justice.  But then I challenge them on the reality of this precept.  Would you share your cars, I ask.  How about your electronics?  How about your grades?  What if I redistribute the grades, so everyone gets the class average?  That’s when there is an objection!

Of course, they mind. It turns out that there is some resentment about similar efforts at redistribution they had been forced into when they did group projects in school.  Inevitably, there were one or two students in the group who did most of the work.  But the slackers still got the benefit in terms of their grade.

The Common Core standards are intended to replicate such redistribution on a national scale.

The main impetus behind Common Core is closing the achievement gap because it’s the main objective of school boards, superintendents, principals, and many teachers.  The way to close the achievement gap is by redistributing grades.

This may sound far-fetched or conspiratorial.  But the language is there even in the many reports produced by commissions and committees promoting Common Core. For example, the report by the Gordon Commission, “To Assess, to Teach, to Learn: A Vision for the Future of Assessment,” calls for recognizing “collective knowledge” in the Common Core assessments for the “21st century.” This report, authored by 30 “scholars, policymakers, and practitioners” (including Bill Ayers ally Linda Darling-Hammond who is in charge of one of two national Common Core tests) and 50 consultants, was commissioned by the Educational Testing Service, the company that puts out the SAT, which was changed on March 5, 2014, to align with Common Core.

Common Core redistributes grades in three ways, primarily:

  1. By lowering standards.
  2. By assigning points for behaviors and attitudes instead of academics.
  3. By grading students as a group instead of individually.

It does this in the areas of Math, English, and Science.

Lowering Standards in Math

Algebra is delayed until ninth grade (from eighth grade).  Here in Atlanta, the president of Georgia Institute of Technology said a student who had not had algebra in eighth grade and calculus by senior year wouldn’t be qualified for admission.

As in the other disciplines, Common Core math emphasizes “process.”  So, those students who arrive at the correct answer through the straightforward old-fashioned methods suffer when they fail to explain the process through convoluted diagrams, drawings, and explanations.  A student who comes up with the wrong answer but performs the required task of demonstrating process may get more points than the student who arrives at the correct answer.  But if we really look at the boxes and visual representations of math problems, we see that Common Core math speaks to those who do not grasp the concepts abstractly, but need visual representations.  It’s like using fingers and toes to do calculations.  Those who are able to memorize, work the calculations, or even do the math in their heads, will be punished.  Those who need the pictures will be rewarded.

Lowering Standards in English Language Arts (ELA)

Reading experts, like Maryanne Wolf, describe various levels of literacy or reading ability.  Beginning readers “decode” words, moving along slowly on the page.  “Fluent” readers read effortlessly and quickly.  They read with such ease that they are able to spend most of their mental energy analyzing what they are reading, bringing in prior knowledge, and adding new ideas.  Fluent readers read with pleasure; decoding readers struggle.

Under the pretext of “close reading” of short excerpts, Common Core forces the fluent readers to stay on a short passage until the entire class or group understands the content.

Section B of the Publishers Criteria reinforces reading as decoding by demanding that “All students (including those who are behind) have extensive opportunities to encounter grade-level complex text.”

Curiously, this section insists that rather than improving their own reading skills, struggling students be pulled along: “Far too often, students who have fallen behind are only given less complex texts rather than the support they need to read texts at the appropriate level of complexity.”  More opportunities for catch-up are embedded in the charge to “build progressions of texts of increasing complexity within grade-level bands that overlap to a limited degree with earlier bands (e.g., grades 4-5 and grades 6-8).”

Common Core discourages teachers from using any information beyond the text at hand.  For example, the sample teaching instructions for the Gettysburg Address bewildered teachers who were told to teach this seminal, historically and literarily important document “cold.”  Students in such class discussion are discouraged from bringing in outside information to the class discussion so as to level the playing field.

Common Core’s emphasis on “visual literacy” and speaking and listening skills also redistributes grades from fluent readers to struggling readers.  Students up through grade 12 are evaluated on “Speaking and Listening Standards” – abilities formerly mastered by first grade. Under Common Core, 11th and 12th graders have to demonstrate their ability to “Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions . . . with diverse partners on grades 11-12 topics.  . . .”

So, much of class time is spent on group reading of very short passages, watching videos, playing educational computer games, and then having discussions among groups of students.  Students are graded on their ability to collaborate and accept diverse views. Thus, we jump ahead to another means of redistributing grades: rewarding compliant behavior.

Assessments Based on Attitudes and Behaviors

Another lengthy report, on assessments, sponsored by the Department of Education and titled “Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century” on new assessments, encourages following the KIPP charter school character report card, where students are graded on behaviors and attitudes. Sample measurements go beyond the simple “citizenship” segment of report cards of yore. Teachers evaluate the student on 24 characteristics, under the categories of “Zest,” (“Invigorates others”) “Grit,” “Self Control – School Work,” “Self Control Interpersonal,” “Optimism” (e.g., “Believes that effort will improve his or her future”), “Gratitude,” “Social Intelligence” (e.g., “Knows when and how to include others”), and “Curiosity.” The report also encourages the use of biometric computer measurements.

The evaluation of such “noncognitive” skills indicates a violation of personal boundaries between teachers and students, and between data companies and students.  And why should a student be graded on his ability to “invigorate others”?  This places the burden of other students’ performance on the student.

Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS):

NGSS are not technically Common Core standards, but they are standards developed by the same group, Achieve, a consortium of corporations and some governors, that developed the other Common Core standards.  Many, however, fear that they are the next phase in the imposition of federal standards.  Ten states have already adopted them.

During a March 5, 2014, hearing on Georgia SB 167, an anti-Common Core bill, opponents objected to the fact that the bill precludes the implementation of NGSS.

As in the standards for ELA and math, the NGSS are intended to be transformative, or as Appendix A states, “to reflect a new vision for American science education.”  They call for new “performance expectations” that “focus on understanding and applications as opposed to memorization of facts devoid of context.”

It is precisely such short shrift to knowledge (dismissively referred to as “memorization”) to which science professors Lawrence S. Lerner and Paul Gross object.  Writing at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation blog, they charge that standards “slight” essential math skills and effectively eliminate high school physics.  They claim that the “practices” strategy of NGSS is an extension of the failing “inquiry learning” of the early 1990s.

As in ELA and math, “knowledge” in NGSS is shirked, while attitude is assigned high importance.  Students are given ideological lessons on such things as “Human impacts on Earth systems.” According to section ESS3.C, in grades K-2, students should understand, “Things people do can affect the environment but they can make choices to reduce their impact.” In grades 3 through 5, students should learn “Societal activities have had major effects on the land, ocean, atmosphere, and even outer space. Societal activities can also help protect Earth’s resources and environments.”

As I learned from attending the hearing on SB 167, ending inequities in academic outcomes drives much of the decision-making for bureaucrats who run our schools.  Philip Lanoue, superintendant of Clarke County Schools, one of the many state employees testifying against the Common Core withdrawal bill, praised Common Core for “equaling the playing field” and “closing the achievement gap.” Principals, teachers, and superintendants spoke about how Common Core “engages” students and involves “critical thinking.” (Teachers opposed to Common Core risk their jobs if they speak out.)

Sure, students are engaged when they work on fun projects.  Most would rather do that than read, write, or solve math problems.   Pretending to be pundits, or “critical thinkers,” as they repeat politically correct pieties, appeals to students’ vanity.  Common Core makes lagging students feel good about themselves, and it makes administrators look good.

Ultimately, the education bureaucrats are beholden to Washington.  Much anxiety was expressed at the hearing about losing federal aid were SB 167 to pass.

The message from Washington is that outcomes will be equalized.  It’s in the President’s proposed education budget and new guidelines to eliminate “disparate punishment” on the basis of race.  Merit and fairness are cast aside, as both rewards and punishments are redistributed.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research.

Over 2.5 Million Citizens From 18 Arab Countries Condemn Tehran’s Meddling in Their Affairs

428043_404633476218571_1575900793_n (1)CAIRO, March 18, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — Over 2.5 million citizens from 18 Arab countries signed statements calling for the safety and security of Iranian dissidents in Iraq. The signatories of this statement also strongly condemned Tehran’s meddling in Arab countries’ affairs that have continued non-stop under Rouhani’s presidency. The statement was announced by Lawyers Union for Democratic and Legal Studies in a press conference held in Cairo.

Shadi Talat president of The Lawyers Union for Democratic and Legal Studies, Egyptian MP Atefe Mikhalif, Dr. Waleed Farhat head of the Association of Egyptian Lawyers in Defense of Ashraf Residents, and Mrs. Jaylan Jaber Egyptian writer, also delivered speeches in this press conference.

Up to 60 parties, organizations, unions and associations in various countries were very active in this campaign. The signatories of this statement include people from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Libya, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Sudan, Kuwait, Morocco, Yemen, Tunisia, Oman, Qatar, Lebanon, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Mauritania, in addition to 127 MPs from Arab countries, jurists, university professors, physicians, engineers, women, dignitaries and human rights activists.

This statement reads in part, The Iranian regime is spreading fundamentalism and supporting terrorist groups; provoking sectarian warfare; created instability in regional countries and especially backing the bloodthirsty Assad regime in his massacre of the innocent Syrian people; flagrantly meddling in all of Iraq’s affairs; helping create divisions among Palestinians”, and “all of these measures and their results are the main elements behind spilling the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent people and displacing millions of people in these countries”.

According to the statement signed by a large number of Arab countries, “The mullahs’ regime in Tehran does not hide its intentions and has escalated it to the level of blatant aggression against the sovereignty of regional countries, especially

Iraq. This is in addition to neglecting international laws and conventions, and challenging the international community, especially when it openly expresses the goal of targeting its opponents, welcomes any and all crimes for oppression of the Iranian dissidents (members of the Iranian opposition People’s Mojahedin) who are under UN protection. All these measures are taking place before the world’s eyes and ears.”

Nearly 3,000 Iranian refugees, members of opposition organization the People’s

Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK), are stationed in Camp Liberty near Baghdad airport. For 25 years these Iranian refugees have lived in Camp Ashraf, north of Baghdad, where Iranians have built with their own hands.

From 2009 to 2013 Camp Ashraf and Camp Liberty has been the target of seven attacks by Iraqi forces under orders of the Iranian regime, resulting in 116 defenseless refugees being killed and over 1,350 others wounded. In the massacre of the remaining residents in Ashraf on 1 September 2013, seven residents – including 6 women – were abducted as hostage. There is no news of these hostages. As emphasized on numerous occasions by the US and UN, Camp Liberty residents are protected persons under the Geneva Conventions, and ‘persons of concern’ as stipulated by the UNHCR.

The signatories of this statement emphasized the responsibility of the US and UN regarding the safety and security of Liberty resident refugees, and called on the

US and UN to take “practical measures to provide Camp Liberty residents’ safety and security”, including ending the Iraqi government’s obstructions and preventing the delivery of providing Liberty residents basic humanitarian needs and protection necessities, and also imposing pressure on the Iraqi government to “release the seven abducted hostages”.

The signatories also confirmed the positions of over 2 million and 155 thousand Iraqis supporting Liberty residents’ rights. Over 2.5 million Arab citizens stressed the necessity for the International Criminal Court to conduct an independent and transparent investigation on crimes against humanity in Ashraf.

SOURCE: The Lawyers Union for Democratic and Legal Studies

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by James Gordon from Los Angeles, California. This photo is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Black Senior Forced to Choose: Obama or Jesus

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

My Dad – Lloyd Marcus, Sr. Merchant Marine Quartermaster.

I had an extraordinary telephone conservation with my 86 year old black dad, a lifelong Democrat and huge Obama fan. He called to ask me, “Is Obama anti-Christian?” Dad has been a Christian pastor for over 50 years. I said, “Dad, I have been telling you about Obama’s anti-Christian policies for the past five years.” Dad replied, “And I have not been listening.”

Dad confessed that he simply could not bring himself to go against a black man in the White House. I felt dad was expressing the sentiments of many blacks of his era. I asked Dad to explain why he could not honestly assess our black president.

Dad became passionate. He said it was because of deep, deep scars he suffered at the hands of white people. Dad said, “I don’t hate white people, but my scars run very deep; calling me a n***** and rubbing my head for luck.”

He shared about the awful things he experienced while in the Merchant Marines around 1946. Dad and Jackson were the only blacks on the ship. Dad was a Quartermaster.

He said the crew was sea-weary, exhausted and emotionally spent after almost losing their ship in a storm. The crew was extremely excited and really looking forward to their much needed shore leave when they landed in St Petersburg Florida.

Upon their arrival, word came down that every crew member had shore leave except Marcus and Jackson. St Petersburg had a curfew for “coloreds”. Blacks could not be on the streets after dark.

Dad said he broke down in tears. Jackson was enraged and began cussing. He yelled at Dad for crying. “Marcus, knock it off!”

Word spread among the sailors that there were two coloreds on the base. The sailors were outraged by Dad and Jackson’s presence on their base. On several occasions the two young black men had to be encircled by guards for protection.

Dad and Jackson took their chip which granted them a hair cut to the base barber shop. The barber said, “I ain’t never cut a darky’s hair and I ain’t gonna start now! My razor just might slip and cut a darky’s ear off.”

Jackson and Dad had to eat their meals in the mess hall alone after everyone else had eaten.

Another ship arrived at the base. When the crew of that ship heard about the two n****** on base, a mob of them stormed the building where Jackson and Dad were. The angry mob planned to lynch the two n******.

Chased by the mob, Dad and Jackson, assisted by shipmates, fled down back stairs to the office of the officer-in-charge who confronted the mob. “Now look here boys. I know you don’t want these coloreds here. I don’t want them here either. We told them people in New York not to send them down here, but they did it anyway. And by golly, we are gonna do right by them.” The mob dispersed.

Then, the officer had the nerve to instruct Dad and Jackson, “Now you boys leave them alone.”

On another occasion, Dad and his white buddy, Armstrong, had to catch a train to meet their ship in California. While waiting at the train station, an official approached Dad, “What are you doin’ boy? Don’t you know your place?” The official escorted Dad to the rundown horrible colored waiting room.

Enraged, Dad said he turned to Armstrong and said, “You white son of a b****!” Dad said he was not a curser and he knew it was not Armstrong’s fault. He was just so humiliated and frustrated.

In the 1950s when Dad broke the color barrier to become a Baltimore City fire fighter, his humiliation continued. In the firehouse, Dad could not drink from the same coffee pot as the white firemen; separate eating utensils, sleeping area and bath room.

Dad said he could go on and on about racial injustices which have left him with deep scars.

Dad is not on the internet. He said, “My computer and I are not on speaking terms.”

I told Dad I was going to send him information in the mail confirming that Barrack Obama is anti-Christian.

For the first time, I felt emboldened to challenge Dad regarding this sensitive issue. I said, “Dad, once you know the truth about Obama, which loyalty will reign supreme? Will it be your loyalty to a fellow black man or your commitment to Jesus Christ.”

Dad chuckled and replied without hesitation, “It will be to Jesus Christ.”

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Onderwijsgek. This photo is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Netherlands license.

What is going on in the Virginia state legislature?

Something is terribly wrong with the Virginia state legislature.

On Wednesday, March 5th, in House Joint Resolution 484, the elected representatives of the people of Virginia commended the notorious, terror-tied Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church.

Dar al Hijrah has a history of ties to multiple known and convicted terrorists, led by its former Imam, Anwar al-Awlaki, who became head of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, before he was killed in a US air strike in 2011.

It was this institution that the Virginia House and Senate agreed to commend by voice vote.

This amounts to an official government endorsement of an entity whose members and employees have been tied to Jihad for many years.

In addition to the fact that an Imam at Dar al Hijrah mosque from 2001-2002 was Anwar al-Awlaki, not just an Al Qaeda terrorist, but the leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the mosque has a macabre history and other Imams that have preached there have expressed violent extremist views as recently as 2013:

Other Imams at Dar al-Hijrah have expressed extremist views as well:

• Imam Sheik Shaker Elsayed of Dar al-Hijrah called for armed jihad in a speech at a high school in Alexandria, Virginia in February 2013.

Dar al-Hijrah is affiliated with three Muslim Brotherhood front groups (The Muslim Brotherhood has been designated a terrorist organization by Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.) in the United States:

• The Muslim American Society

• The Islamic Society of North America

• The North American Islamic Trust

All three of these organizations were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the largest successful terrorism financing prosecution in US history: the US v the Holy Land Foundation.

This hardly seems like the type of organization that any governmental body in the United States—on any level—should be praising.

The members of the Virginia legislature—especially the leadership in both the House and Senate—should be ashamed. They should move right away to rescind the unjustified honor that they bestowed on Dar al-Hijrah and replace it with a resolution condemning the mosque’s numerous ties to terrorists and extremists.

Florida: All Sixty-Seven Counties constitute Common Law Grand Juries

“In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.” – Mark Twain 1904

Of course we all understand how both political parties have seriously ignored our Constitution. Some political and bureaucratic leaders from both parties are publicly brazen with their behavior that is repugnant to the Constitution and at the same time to their oaths of office If we continue to acquiesce , who else will stand up for our Constitution ? Surely no one in Tallahassee or Washington, D.C.

Let’s face it, our beloved Constitution can’t stand up and defend itself.

We have already learned that we get very weak results using the electoral process. Both Senators Rubio and Flake proved that we can continue to invest and work hard to elect Constitutionally centered candidates who, once in office, often succumb to the strong incentives to vote for bigger government, higher taxes, and more spending and reduced LIBERTY.

Of course if we continue on our current course struggling to win elections for candidates that may or may not abide by their oath of office, we are continuing to play the game with the rules the Progressives dictate, or we can decide instead to hold anybody who gets paid from the public treasury accountable to their sworn oath to uphold and defend our Constitution using our Common Law Grand Jury (CLGJ). Because our CLGJ is the highest ranking court of record in the land, not even the US Supreme Court can review its decisions. Using this approach, county by county, we can Restore Our Constitution !

[youtube]http://youtu.be/66DY0rVoG00[/youtube]

 

Since last August, a small group of dedicated Florida Patriots have been working hard to build the foundation to Restore Our Constitution by reconstituting the primary tool our Founders gave us to keep our government centered on our Constitution, our county based Common Law Grand Jury.

Since NY became the first state with all their counties reconstituted, on Saturday March 15th, 2014 we completed our first major milestone in Florida, reconstituting our CLGJ in all sixty-seven Florida counties. Additionally, on the same day both Connecticut and Rhode Island became fully reconstituted. Now we begin Phase 2, which is all about educating the public on the benefits of and how to participate in our CLGJ.

This movement is not just about holding our leaders accountable to their oaths, it is even more about putting justice back into our judicial system. Everywhere I go, I meet people who either directly or indirectly have been seriously abused by our judicial system. For me, a critical event in my learning about our defective judicial system was when Chief Justice John Roberts wrote his opinion that Obamacare is Constitutionally valid when anybody who reads Article 1 Section 8 knows it is fully unconstitutional. The lightbulb turned on in my head that the main root cause of almost all our problems is the failure of the judicial branch to hold the two other branches accountable to our Constitution.

So I conclude with my request: do you want to help Restore Our Constitution ? If yes, the time is now to jump in with both feet to help by registering as either a jurist or a County Organizer on the National Liberty Alliance website.

Please consider that all the unconstitutional initiatives like Common Core, Obamacare, gun control, Agenda 21, regionalism can all be solved simply by holding our leaders accountable to their oaths of office using our Common Law Grand Juries.

If not now, when? If not us patriotic Floridians, then who ?

RELATED STORIES:

Organizers “Reinstate” Common Law Grand Juries in Pennsylvania

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is of a Federal Grand Jury in Deadwood, South Dakota.

Bill Gates Dined with 80 Senators on March 13, 2014

Bill Gates has too much power. The following announcement, dated March 13, 2014, is from Politico:

DINNER WITH GATES – About 80 senators are expected to attend a dinner discussion at the Capitol tonight with Microsoft founder Bill Gates and the NYT’s David Brooks. The 6:45 p.m. dinner, according to an invitation obtained by Huddle, is sponsored by the No Labels Foundation, and one of that group’s honorary co-chairs, Sen. Joe Manchin, will make opening remarks. So what’s the No Labels-Microsoft connection? No Labels co-founder Nancy Jacobson is married to longtime pollster Mark Penn, executive vice president and chief strategy officer at Microsoft, said a source who will be attending the event. [Emphasis added.]

I find Gates’ access to 80 senators very disturbing. There’s more.

The No Labels Foundation has Andrew Tisch on its legal board (also listed as a co-founder). Andrew Tisch is the brother-in-law of the controversial, test-happy New York Chancellor Merryl Tisch.

No Labels bills former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg as a mayor “who solves problems.” In reality, Bloomberg was nothing less than the scourge of New York City education.

Bloomberg and Tisch promote punitive education agendas that complement Gates’ “educational purge” viewpoint of the test score as the public education colon cleanse. (Just because Bloomberg is no longer NYC mayor, do not believe that his destructive view on public education cannot cause future damage elsewhere.)

Yet here is how No Labels bills itself:

No Labels is a citizens’ movement of Democrats, Republicans and independents dedicated to a new politics of problem solving. The constituency for this movement existed for years before it had a name -– built by Americans frustrated by watching Washington spend more time on politics than common-sense problem solving. …Today, No Labels is building a voice for Americans, whatever their political ideology, to ensure our leaders in government will work across the aisle to solve problems. We’re rebuilding the infrastructure for cooperation among our leaders. And we know that together, we can move our nation forward once again.

This “unity among political parties” provides a creepy complement to the “bipartisan” push for the privatization of public education– a Bill Gates specialty.

To date, there is no record of Gates’ directly supporting No Labels. However, such does not preclude indirect contributions (i.e., Gates money to other organizations to which No Labels members belong).

Gates money is more deeply rooted than one might think.

On March 17, 2014, the North Denver News revealed that Gates spending on the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) is not likely mere millions, but billions:

Research by Jack Hassard, Professor Emeritus at Georgia State, shows compelling evidence that Gates has spent $2.3 billion pushing the Common Core. More than 1800 grants to organizations running from  teachers unions to state departments of education to  political groups like the National Governor’s Association have pushed the Common Core into 45 states, with little transparency and next to no public review. [Emphasis added.]

Bill Gates hanging with former President Bill Clinton. Too much power.

Here are good questions: Is Gates aiming for the White House? Or is he content to puppet the White House? Can he buy his way in?

A better question, America: Can we extract Gates from the influence he has already (and obviously) purchased?

Folks, we need to Stop. This. Train.

NOTE: A comment from Sarah Littman: Mercedes, it wasn’t just senators. My Congressman, Jim Himes (CT-4) was tweeting from this dinner as well.

RELATED STORIES: 

Bill Gates loves Common Core for your kids, BUT NOT HIS

GATES: Hike taxes on workers, increase immigration to fix unemployment…

Islamists’ “Christian-Jewish Phobia”

“A Radical Muslim’ is a ‘Practicing Muslim’, a ‘Moderate Muslim’ is a ‘non Practicing Muslim’ or otherwise known as an Apostate of Islam. The penalty for Apostasy under Sharia law is Death”

Whenever any person or organization refutes the actions, statements, and/or objectives of Muslim Brotherhood (MB) organizations and their supporters, the executives of these organizations immediately go into their modus operandi. Essentially this means the MB (Islamic based terrorist groups) immediately begin to blackmail, threaten, intimidate, physically attack, discredit (false and deceptive, but truth is of little concern to groups who kill, rape, and rob from even innocent Muslims themselves), and these groups use the infamous ‘lawsuit’ to ‘force’ their enemies into silence.

NIHAD AWAD

Nehad Hammad (AKA: Nihad Awad)

These terrorist organizations are beginning to realize the power, stamina, persistence, and love/allegiance of the American people to our country and our children. With the recently released best seller ‘Muslim Mafia’, it has made at least one terrorist supporting group Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) realize that Dave Gaubatz does not go away easily. As readers are reviewing this article I will give you a typical scenario within CAIR National.

CAIR’s executive director Nehad Hammad (AKA: Nihad Awad), their spokesperson Ibrahim Hooper, and government relations director (contractor Simple Resolve) are under immense stress. They know they have committed felonies and the FBI are looking at their actions, they know they support the same violent ideologies as Hamas and Al Qaeda, they know foreign governments support them (illegally), they know they have intimidate and blackmailed large and small corporations such as Burger King, NIKE, Bank of America and dozens more. They have used the same tactics against individuals to include Glenn Beck when he was at CNN, Fox’s O’Reilly, Michael Savage, and many more news journalists. They know that Saudi Arabia is behind the Islamophobe campaign and dumps millions of dollars into U.S. corporations to silence them.

Readers need to ponder and seriously question why even Fox journalists seldom (specifically after 11 Sept. 2001) question, condemn, or conduct investigations in regards to the Saudi government. Does Mr. O’Reilly and Beck (both of whom I have respected) aggressively pursue allegations Saudi Arabia is behind and/or endorse the terrorism committed against innocent people around the world? Does any Fox journalist question why Saudi Arabia donates millions to CAIR, spends millions building mosques throughout America, and at the same time allows 50 year old men to marry 7 year old girls? Does Fox or any other American network question the Saudi leadership about spending millions to distribute hate material against Christians and Jewish people in America? Not only is the material ‘hate’ related, but also the material condones killing Americans to include our children.

Since it can be easily proven no major network condemns the violent actions of Saudi Arabia, one must ask why. There can only be four possibilities:

1.  Saudi Arabia is a rich and powerful country and puts billions into the American economy; therefore news organizations do not want to offend the ‘elite’.

2.  Mr. Beck (former Fox journalist), O’Reilly, Hannity and others have personally been intimidated by terrorist groups like CAIR, and they personally are fearful for not only their financial careers, but the safety of their families and themselves. Readers should note that no amount of personal security will protect you if Al Qaeda targets you or related group of killers. O’Reilly, Hannity, and Beck are smart enough to know this. If CAIR or one of their affiliates in the Muslim Brotherhood labels you an Islamophobe and oppressor of Islam, they have in reality put you on a ‘hit list’. They rely on the Major Hasan’s from Ft. Hood, and thousands more like him to carry out physical attacks when the time is correct.

3.  Saudi Arabia has many powerful and influential political leaders they have essentially’ bought over the years, and major news organizations are fearful of ‘offending’ former Presidents and they’re Saudi ‘thugs’.

4.  Investigative journalists from major news organizations are not experts and for the most part only report what their ‘assistants’ hand to them. Their assistants know even less about the Middle East, Islam, or Islamic terrorist organizations. Although they believe themselves to be the most informed and reliable people to bring the news to the American people, this is by far more of a fantasy than reality.

Readers are now asking what is the correct answer from above. The truthful answer is a combination of all four. Saudi pumps millions into our economy, CAIR (MB) has threatened numerous journalists like Hannity, Saudi officials have personal friendships and business dealings with powerful Americans, to include U.S. Presidents. Lastly, news journalists are not experts on Islamic based terrorism.

Below is an example of how the peace loving Muslims within this terrorist group (CAIR) attack anyone who dares to ask ‘tough questions’.
From CAIR National:

1.  “Attacks on CAIR are the work of a very finite and interrelated band of Career Islamophobes, whose own credibility is in doubt, who profit economically and politically by bashing Muslims and smearing their leaders and organizations.

2.  This band includes Daniel Pipes, Steven Emerson, Joe Kaufman and David Horowitz together with affiliates like Stephen Schwartz and Andrew Whitehead. These individuals who are all staunchly pro-Zionist and anti-Muslim and create the bulk of the anti-CAIR literature, which is consumed and circulated by others.

3.  All of them spew their bigoted conspiracy theories primarily through the internal which is an un-relegated medium with no professional standards as far as content or fact-checking.

4.  They promulgate their content through thousands of than their own Islamophobic sentiment.5. Some of their lies and conspiracy theories seep through right wing AM and Cable TV radio talk shows that lean towards accepting their conspiracy theories about Muslim Americans and their organizations (Savage, Medved, Prager. O’Reilly, Carlson. Beck, FrontPage Magazine, the online hate site, etc…)”

Again I ask readers to observe how many times CAIR uses the term Islamophobe and hate. CAIR executives remind me of small children. Often children use the strategy of name calling to resolve disputes, but most children grow and become more adult like and professional as they mature. CAIR executives are highly educated, yet still use childlike defense mechanisms instead of facing realities head on. Seldom will you hear any Islamic terrorist use sound and rational reasoning to confront Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, David Horowitz,or myself. In addition CAIR executives are not refuting the documents within our book. The thousands of documents my team obtained from CAIR were salvaged before CAIR had an opportunity to shred them. CAIR officials knew the documents contained criminal information against them. They know the documents show the true CAIR, which is a terrorist organization operating in America. Instead they are using the typical ‘name calling’.

I will close by asking the novice counter-terrorism reader and the more versed reader why anyone takes the name calling by a terrorist organization seriously. I ask all to think of the absurdity of Islamic terrorists calling any American an Islamophobe when the Saudi government does not allow (and this is highly encouraged by CAIR, ISNA, and many others) Christians or Jewish to live and practice their respective religions inside Saudi Arabia. Would this logic not equate to every Saudi citizen and anyone who supports Saudi to be Christian-Jewish Phobes, and hate mongers? By CAIR’s own definition this would be true.

American citizens need to contact Fox and the other networks. Ask them why they have not examined and reported on the documents presented inside ‘Muslim Mafia’. Ask them to choose from the four alternative answers mentioned above, or feel free to add their own reasons. I encourage readers to write me with the results.

RELATED STORIES: 

Texas: Muslim arrested fleeing to Jordan after hit-and-run, lawyer seeks sharia

Virginia: Muslim Couple Arrested on Immigration Charges for Harboring Domestic Slave

Dearborn, MI: Lebanon-born Muslim arrested at airport on way to join Hizballah

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of a 13th century Belgian Manuscript illustrating the dialogue between the jew “Moyses” and the Christian “Petrus”. Illustration of “Dialogi contra Iudaeos” written by en:Petrus Alphonsi. This is a photograph of an exhibit at the Diaspora Museum, Tel Aviv en:Beit Hatefutsot. (Photo taken by en:User:Sodabottle)

Do you know the truth about Saint Patrick?

The following historical description of the life and times of St. Patrick is provided by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association:

Poor Patrick. Over the centuries, this devout man became forever associated with guzzling green beer and banishing snakes from Ireland. Few party goers know or care about his Christian legacy. But even among some believers, Patrick earns little respect.

The truth about his life – what can be traced – is much more interesting. So, sit back, put aside your preconceptions, and take a little digital tour of all things “Patrick.”

First off, most sources note that Patrick was not born in Ireland but either in Wales or Scotland, the son of a Roman-British army officer during the decline of the Roman Empire. According to one school of opinion, he was born about 390 A.D., while the other school says it is about 373 A.D. His real name was probably Maewyn Succat. Though Patricius was his Roman name, he later came to be known as Patrick.

At 16, Patrick was taken prisoner by a group of Irish raiders who were attacking his family’s estate. They transported him to Ireland where he spent six years in captivity. It was there that the young man began to seek God.

In a 2006 Breakpoint commentary, Chuck Colson, the late chairman of Prison Fellowship Ministries, picked up the story: “Patrick had been raised in a Christian home, but he didn’t really believe in God. But now—hungry, lonely, frightened, and bitterly cold—Patrick began seeking out a relationship with his heavenly Father.

“As he wrote in his Confessions, ‘I would pray constantly during the daylight hours’ and ‘the love of God surrounded me more and more.’ Six years after his capture, God spoke to Patrick in a dream, saying, ‘Your hungers are rewarded. You are going home. Look—your ship is ready.’”

According to the History Channel website, “Patrick then walked nearly 200 miles from County Mayo, where it is believed he was held, to the Irish coast. After escaping to Britain, Patrick reported that he experienced a second revelation — an angel in a dream tells him to return to Ireland as a missionary.”

Soon after, Patrick began religious training, a course of study that lasted more than 15 years. After his ordination as a priest, he returned to Ireland to spread the Gospel to pagans and Druids who were still practicing human sacrifice and slavery.

William J. Federer, an author and historian, writes: “Wherever he went, Patrick left ministers. He founded 300 churches, baptizing over 120,000 converts. It was said that Patrick found Ireland heathen and left it Christian, resulting in Irish missionaries re-evangelizing Europe in later centuries.”

Chuck Colson added, “Irish monks considered it part of their Christian duty to copy all books in danger of being lost as the Roman Empire crumbled. Everywhere they went, they carried on their tradition of copying and preserving the Bible and every other book they could get their hands on.”

Rooted in Scripture

In a web article, Irish Church Missions (ICM), an Anglican Evangelical mission agency working in Ireland since 1849, showed how much Scripture meant to Patrick personally: “Nobody can read the works of Patrick and fail to notice how deeply his mind was immersed in the teaching of Scripture. He was a man of the Bible and knew his Bible.”

Especially important to Patrick were the words of the prophet Hosea, Those who are not my people I will call my people, and those not beloved I will call my beloved, and in the very place it was said to them, You are not My People, they will be called Sons of God.

“It is estimated that his works include about 180 quotations from the Bible,” says ICM. “This is not surprising since his ‘Confession’ was not about confessing his sins, but about the Gospel message he preached.

Patrick’s message centered on Jesus Christ, crucified, risen and ascended, reigning as Lord over heaven and earth. This, he determined to preach throughout Ireland, so that “…through me many people would be reborn in God.”

According to ICM, “Denominational claims on Patrick mean little when what is important is that the man be seen for what he was — a pattern Christian whose life and work should be a persuasion on Christians everywhere to be as he was in his commitment and witness to Christ and in his service for people. If that thought is not lost in the festivities of St. Patrick’s Day, there is gain for those who participate in them.”

Oh, and about those snakes? Because they were a symbol for paganism in Ireland, Patrick really did “banish” snakes in a figurative way. Literally, however, Patrick gets too much credit. According to Smithsonian.com and National Geographic, the emerald isle’s climate and geography are too hostile for snakes.

Tenth Anniversary of legalized “therapeutic” prostitution in San Francisco

Here is the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexualityagain—offering a 2004 California State approved certificate for what amounts to therapeutic prostitution. The “course” provides credits toward the PhD and all other sex ed degrees at the IASHS. Note the “baby massage” is included with the “erotic” training and remember the IASHS has sold child pornography to Hustler and has advocated child adult sex in publications and it is implicit in its mission statement. As you know, most of our “trained” researchers have been trained at the Kinseyan IASHS or by their graduates, on downward.

image003

For a larger view click on the image.

The World Net Daily article below includes the police view of the IASHS as establishing scientific cover for giving certificates for current open door policy to California Sexual Trafficking:

Basically, what the district attorney is saying to the pimps, the panderers and traffickers of women is, ‘Keep doing what you’re doing because we’re not going to do anything about it.'” The new law also does away with restrictions against sexually suggestive advertising and loosens restrictions on trainees. …[USING] a “culturally sensitive test to all applicants, in the applicant’s own language, to confirm basic proficiency in massage before issuing a permit.” Goodwin says the term “culturally sensitive” casts a wide net in San Francisco, pointing out that some massage schools are explicitly prostitution oriented, such as the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality’s program in “Sexological Bodywork.”

LAW OF THE LAND: Prostitution legal in San Francisco? City quietly passed measure liberalizing massage industry.

Originally posted: July 20, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern

Ten weeks before San Francisco shocked the nation by issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, the city quietly took another step in America’s cultural
revolution by liberalizing its massage permit laws to the point where some critics call it de facto legalization of prostitution.

Addressing the issue of sex workers in the massage industry, outgoing Mayor Willie Brown, with the nearly unanimous support of the Board of Supervisors, signed a new law Dec. 5 that redefines it as a public health issue rather than a matter of law enforcement.

The law went into effect July 1. By removing a requirement that applicants submit to fingerprinting and provide photo IDs, the measure opens the door to include most anyone in the massage industry, including convicted pedophiles and rapists, asserts Brian Goodwin, a massage therapist in San Rafael, Calif., near San Francisco.

Goodwin, largely through his website, has been a relatively lone voice sounding the alarm about legislation that has received scant attention in the press. “Basically, San Francisco’s new massage law is the only massage law in the world written specifically for the benefit of criminals, to help criminals to commit crimes, especially those crimes related to sex-slave trafficking, prostitution, rape, pedophilia, etc.,” Goodwin says.

After its passage, the leading public lobbyist behind an effort to decriminalize prostitution in the massage industry, David Palmer, hailed San Francisco’s “humane and compassionate” approach to the issue.

“San Francisco has not chosen to take a standard route to separate or distinguish adult entertainment from therapeutic massage,” Palmer, president of the San Francisco
Coalition of Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork, said in the July issue of the trade newsletter Massage Today. “San Francisco is a trendsetter,” he added. Palmer’s website acknowledges the ordinance comes at the end of a long process that began with the Board of Supervisors establishing a Task Force on Prostitution in March 1994. The task force’s final report, in 1996, admitted San Francisco “may not unilaterally legalize or decriminalize prostitution.”

Nevertheless, the panel urged the board to “remove authority for the licensing of massage parlors, masseuses and masseurs and escort services from the Vice Crime
Division’s jurisdiction and place it with agencies already qualified to grant other standard business licenses.”

At the time, the task force received wide media coverage and was roundly condemned in local newspaper editorials. Also, the first attempt to act on the recommendations, under the leadership of Supervisor Tom Ammiano in 1999, received attention. But passage of the recommendation Nov. 18, led by Supervisor Chris Daly, received barely a mention — one paragraph in the San Francisco Examiner in November, buried in a listing of recent board decisions, with no reference to the 1996 Task Force on Prostitution that inspired the changes. The item in the Nov. 21 Examiner reads:

In other actions: The board adopted a measure sponsored by Supervisor Chris Daly that transfers the licensing and regulating of massage parlors and massage practitioners from the Police Department to the Department of Public Health, in effect, saying that massage is more a health concern than a criminal one. [Supervisor Tony] Hall cast the lone vote in opposition.

Daly did not return a request for comment by press time, but in January, he told the Examiner the regulatory change would in no way affect the police department’s
jurisdiction in enforcing illegal activities such as human trafficking and prostitution, said to be an increasing problem. But Goodwin sees the city easing up on enforcement,
noting on June 24, San Francisco District Attorney Harris dropped all criminal charges in a prostitution sting operation, declaring, “Prostitution and regulatory violations at the clubs raise complex issues involving worker safety, exploitation of women, equity and fair notice.”

San Francisco Police Department Capt. Tim Hettrich summarized the city’s response: “Basically, what the district attorney is saying to the pimps, the panderers and traffickers of women is, ‘Keep doing what you’re doing because we’re not going to do anything about it.'”

Opening the door

How does San Francisco’s new massage law open the door to prostitution?

Under the old law, Police Code 27, applicants for a massage permit were required to undergo an identification process that included photographing and fingerprinting. That has been removed from the code, along with a section that prevented anyone convicted of prostitution from getting a permit. The latter omission was one of the main objections voiced by Hall. The new law also does away with restrictions against sexually suggestive advertising and loosens restrictions on trainees. Previously, the trainee could work only for the massage school in which he was enrolled, and the trainee permit could not be renewed beyond three months. The new law also has a trainee permit, but its only requirement is the payment of fees and registration as a student, and it can be renewed indefinitely.

For a full permit, the director of the Department of Public Health must administer a “culturally sensitive test to all applicants, in the applicant’s own language, to confirm
basic proficiency in massage before issuing a permit.” Goodwin says the term “culturally sensitive” casts a wide net in San Francisco, pointing out that some massage schools are explicitly prostitution oriented, such as the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality’s program in “Sexological Bodywork.”

The most drastic change, he says, is how violations are treated.

Under the old law, violators were misdemeanor criminals, threatened with revocation of the massage permit and up to six months in jail and a fine.

Under the new law’s Section 1928, however, violations no longer are crimes but simply treated like parking tickets, with “administrative fines.” The law may be violated as often as desired, as long as the fines are paid.

“The ramifications of this law have yet to be seen,” says Goodwin, who believes the previous law’s inclusion of identification requirements served as a deterrent to sex
traffickers who enslave women and children as prostitutes.

The old ID requirements also served to deter the San Francisco Bay Area’s 8,000 registered sex offenders from becoming massage therapists, he says.

But now, Goodwin contends, anyone can quickly acquire get a “trainee” massage permit by paying the fees and lying about identity.

RELATED STORIES: 

US reports rare case of woman-to-woman HIV transmission – Yahoo News

Study finds current US Penal Codes based on Scientific Fraud and Child Sex Crimes

HEALTH ALERT: Condoms never FDA-approved for sodomy

Hillary Clinton: Abortion Needed for Equality and Human Development?

Restoring Liberty reports, “Twenty years after the Clintons failed to get countries to declare a right to abortion, Mrs. Clinton told a posh UN crowd that humanity cannot advance without reproductive rights. ‘You cannot make progress on gender equality or broader human development without safeguarding women’s reproductive health or rights,’ she declared. Clinton is adamant that reproductive health includes abortion.”

“The undisputed leader in the race for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination was the highlight of International Women’s Day at UN headquarters last Friday [March 14th], drawing thunderous applause from a well-heeled audience as she decried how women’s equality remains “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” notes the editors of Restoring Liberty.

In the below video of UN Women Executive Director Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka eerily echoes Clinton when she states “progress for women is progress for all.” Celebrating progress already made for women’s rights, women’s empowerment and gender equality, she further urged women, men, youth, and leaders of nations, communities, religion and commerce to recommit to making gender equality a global reality.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/ZVuBI6qXvcI[/youtube]

 

So why is abortion needed for gender equality and human development? We have heard similar words before from Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood:

“More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief aim of birth control.” – Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

Are men less fit than women? Is it necessary to abort more males than females? It is also interesting to note that Mlambo-Ngcuka is black. Margaret Sanger wrote on blacks, immigrants and indigents:

“…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ‘spawning… human beings who never should have been born.”  – Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people.

Linda Gordon, in Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America,”We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

Today we read stories that there are more black abortions than births in New York City and a 73% black abortion rate in Mississippi. Some have labeled this national birth control effort “Black Genocide. ”Several years ago, when 17,000 aborted babies were found in a dumpster outside a pathology laboratory in Los, Angeles, California, some 12-15,000 were observed to be black,” noted Erma Clardy Craven (deceased) Social Worker and Civil Rights Leader.

Edwin Black, author of War Against The Weak, writes, “The global effort to help women make independent choices about their own pregnancies was dominated by one woman: Margaret Sanger… Motherhood was to most civilizations a sacred role. Sanger, however, wanted women to have a choice in that sacred role, specifically if, when and how often to become pregnant.”

Black notes, “… Sanger vigorously opposed charitable efforts to uplift the downtrodden and deprived, and argued extensively that it was better that the cold and hungry be left without help, so that the eugenically superior strains could multiply without competition from ‘the unfit.’ She repeatedly referred to the lower classes and the unfit as ‘human waste’ not worthy of assistance, and proudly quoted the extreme eugenic view that  human ‘weeds’ should be ‘exterminated.’ Moreover, for both political and genuine ideological reasons, Sanger associated closely with some of some of America’s most fanatical eugenic racists.” Sanger stated, “My criticism, therefore, is not directed at the ‘failure’ of philanthropy, but rather at its success.”

VIDEO OF UN WOMEN’S DAY PANEL WITH HILLARY CLINTON:

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is courtesy of United States Mission Geneva. This image is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Gates and Duncan and Their Common Core “Freedom” Charade

In his purchased keynote at the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) (I know, huh?), billionaire-with-zero-teaching-experience Bill Gates insisted that the feds are getting the bum rap when it comes to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). As Huffington Post’s Joy Resmovits notes:

Gates went on to address critiques that the Common Core represents a national curriculum, a federal takeover or the end of innovation. He said these claims are false and distract from teaching — and that teachers can provide the most effective response to critics. [Emphasis added.]

However, Resmovits continues with details that do indeed implicate US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and his USDOE in attempting to fashion “a national curriculum, a federal takeover, and an end to innovation”:

The creation of the Common Core started in 2009, and thanks in part to nudges from the federal government via the Race to the Top competition and the application process for waivers from the No Child Left Behind Act, most states have adopted them. 

“Nudges”?? Come now, Joy.

Robert Scott: CCSS-adoption Pressure Is Real

Consider Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott’s account of of the “nudge”:

“We had just spent three to four years developing our own college and career readiness standards,” Scott said referencing the TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge & Skills) as the main reason Texas was not interested in adopting the Common Core State Standards. However, there was still tremendous pressure being applied for something that, according to Scott, he was told was voluntary and state led. 

“We said no to Common Core and they said, ‘you want Race to the Top money?’ That was $700 million. They said, ‘do it.’ Well, we still said, no thanks.” Scott recalled. The feds also asked if Texas wanted an No Child Left Behind waiver and again, the state said no.  

Scott was education commissioner until late 2012. It was his successor, current commissioner Michael Williams, who applied for a No Child Left Behind (NCLB) waiver, which Texas was granted. Both RTTT and the NCLB waivers are tied to federal accountability mandate, which means testing. Education Week reported, even though Texas took the waiver without adopting the Common Core State Standards, the state still “had to scrap its own state accountability system in favor of one that aligns with federal requirements. It also had to redo student achievement goals.” Even Politico reported that Texas made concessions, buckling and giving into political coercion. [Emphasis added.]

Texas is one of five states that did not sign on to RTTT– that is how Texas escaped CCSS. As part of RTTT, states were required to demonstrate that they were part of some “common standards”– and CCSS was the only game in town. Thus, those “45 states and the District of Columbia” supposedly “volunteering” for RTTT were required to submit this CCSS memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed by the governor and the state education superintendent as part of the RTTT application.

That is hardly Duncan/USDOE neutrality when it comes to CCSS.

But Bill is trying. And he doesn’t need truth to back his claims. He has his money– thus, he is his own truth.

Next step in this reform charade: Gotta pull Arne in line with Bill’s truth.

Hey, Arne, Follow Bill

Resmovits continues by noting that Indiana might be the first to escape CCSS:

In recent weeks, several states have made moves to hobble or scrap the Common Core entirely. Indiana has come closest, with its state Senate on Wednesday approving a bill that withdraws the state from the initiative and adopts its own set of academic standards to “maintain Indiana sovereignty” by July.

Now, I know this must just be a matter of coincidence, but it so happens that Arne told The Blaze on March 15– the day after Bill’s NBPTS speech– that Indiana is free to exit CCSS:

Education Secretary Arne Duncan told The Blaze Friday that states are completely free to discard Common Core education standards. ..

This week, the Indiana legislature sent a bill to the desk of Gov. Mike Pence to pull out of the Common Core standards….

The Blaze asked Duncan during the White House press briefing Friday to comment on the final approval in the Indiana legislature.

“They absolutely have the right to do this,” Duncan told The Blaze. “This is a state-led effort; it always has been, always will be. And whatever Indiana decides, we want to work with them to make sure that students have a chance to be successful.” [Emphasis added.]

Duncan isn’t fooling anyone with his sudden benign attitude toward states’ altering– much less dropping– CCSS.

He has pushed this “common standards” idea since 2009; he has told newspaper editors how to report on CCSS; he has insulted parents and offered this tepid backpedaling on his insult.

Duncan wants CCSS and all of the trimmings– curricula and tests– and so does Gates.

Duncan and Gates can say that CCSS is not a federal coercion. However, one document interferes with their spin:

That pesky CCSS MOU.

The CCSS MOU; No State Freedom Here

The CCSS MOU is a contract that states entered into with USDOE as per USDOE’s requirement for vying for that $700 million of which Texas Ed Commissioner Scott spoke.

Duncan’s use of the term “state-led” is one used in the CCSS MOU to actually tell states that they are to lead:

Purpose: This document commits states to a state-led process…that will lead to the development and adoption of a common core of state standards.

So, the federal government has states sign a contract saying they will lead themselves– according to USDOE stipulation.

That’s right: The entire MOU is the federal government telling states that they will be “state led” and what that will look like, down to the details.

Duncan and Gates can cry foul all they like. This is the actual text from the CCSS MOU regarding “federal role.” It is a tourniquet of federal control, for it mandates that states “agree” to “common standards”:

Federal Role. The parties support a state-led effort and not a federal effort to develop a common core of state standards; there is, however, an appropriate federal role in supporting this state-led effort. In particular, the federal government can provide key financial support for this effort in developing a common core of state standards and in moving toward common assessments, such as through the Race to the Top Fund authorized in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Further, the federal government can incentivize this effort through a range of tiered incentives, such as providing states with greater flexibility in the use of existing federal funds, supporting a revised state accountability structure, and offering financial support for states to effectively implement the standards. Additionally, the federal government can provide additional financial support for the development of common assessments, teacher and principal professional development, and other related common core standards supports, and a research agenda that can help continually improve the common core over time. Finally, the federal government can revise and align existing federal education laws with the lessons learned from states’ international benchmarking efforts and from federal research.

And states tied to the CCSS MOU are tied to assess CCSS:

Purpose: This document commits states to a state-led process that will draw on evidence and lead to development and adoption of a common core of state standards (common core) in English language arts and mathematics for grades K-12. These standards will be aligned with college and work expectations, include rigorous content and skills, and be internationally benchmarked. The intent is that these standards will be aligned to state assessment and classroom practice. The second phase of this initiative will be the development of common assessments aligned to the core standards developed through this process. [Emphasis added.]

The bolded section above is the state agreement to the CCSS spectrum: CCSS, CCSS curricula, CCSS assessments.

Bill Gates comments on the necessity of this CCSS spectrum in his 2009 speech at the National Conference of State Legislatures–a group that he gave a $557,000 CCSS grant to in 2013. (See a video of Gates’ 2009 speech at the end of this post.)

As to the “adoption” of CCSS, the MOU is clear that CCSS must be adopted in its entirety. States can add but cannot remove CCSS. Notice that the language is carefully constructed to make it appear that this “effort” is not the coercion that it actually is:

This effort is voluntary for states, and it is fully intended that states adopting the common core may choose to include additional state standards beyond the common core. States that choose to align their standards to the common core standards agree to ensure that the common core represents at least 85 percent of the state’s standards in English language arts and mathematics. [Emphasis added.]

The only way that states are free from a CCSS tie to the federal government is to be released from the CCSS MOU.

A Challenge to Duncan

If Arne wants to go public and tell states that they are “completely free to discard Common Core,” then let him offer states a new MOU, one which clearly details this “freedom” and which declares the former CCSS MOU null and void.

The very existence of a CCSS MOU bespeaks federal coercion.

Never mind that it is ILLEGAL according to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Subpart 2, section 9527(c)(1):

(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal law, no State shall be required to have academic content or student academic achievement standards approved or certified by the Federal Government, in order to receive assistance under this Act. [Emphasis added.]

The USDOE has clearly overstepped its jurisdiction via its CCSS MOU and has been counting on no authority challenging its brazenness in doing so.

The crafters of ESEA apparently knew that there was no such thing as a “state led” federal MOU.

Bill and Arne: Who is in Whose Pocket?

Concerning Bill’s pushing the idea of no federal CCSS push: Even Arne is taking money from Bill, and Bill is clear that he seeks out those who might fulfill the goals of his foundation in order to offer them money.

Gates wants CCSS. Arne wants CCSS. But it goes a step further.

Gates purchased $1.4 million in “training and technical assistance” for USDOE.

USDOE is now indebted to Gates– and is allowing Gates to “help” it run the country.

This is truly sickening.

Arne and Bill, you are a disgrace to American democracy. Your presence in the affairs of American public education is nothing more than the stench of deceit and self-aggrandizement.

RELATED STORY: Gates is Funding U.S. Department of Education Directly