FL Rep. Manny Diaz offers Trapped Students a Way Out of Failed Schools

/in , , , /by

Students in Florida that are trapped in failing and/or troubled schools may have new hope on the horizon.

The various misdeeds of the Miami-Dade School District, and the events that took place at Miami Norland Senior High School, in the aftermath of Adobegate makes the case for an upcoming House Bill concerning charter schools being sponsored by Rep. Manny Diaz.

An aspect of this bill, co-location, has unions up in arms about this legislation, but as a whistleblowing union steward who desires reform, I am for it and view co-location and competition as a viable remedy to reform the Miami-Dade School District, and other Florida school districts, for the better.

Simply put, co-location is the sharing of public school space by both charter and public schools, sometimes on the same school campus.

In Florida, charter schools are under the supervision of county school boards but privately managed.  As schools and school districts are very unwilling to reform themselves in terms of clean ethical governance, co-location makes perfect sense and just may force schools like Miami Norland SHS and districts like Miami-Dade to clean up their act, especially in the areas of compliance with professional development procedures, teacher observation and evaluation improprieties, test cheating, and treatment of whistleblowers for the betterment of the students they purport to serve.

A well-run charter school on the same campus as a poorly run public school akin to Norland would force the Norland’s of the state to change their ways and shape up, or the school districts that supervise them to clean them up, or else risk losing their students to the charter school on site as parents would have a viable alternative to an inadequate public school option.

During the 2011-2012 school year, two vocational teachers at Miami Norland SHS, Mr. Emmanuel Fleurantin and Mrs. Brenda Muchnick, and most likely persons unknown, engaged in massive test cheating on two Adobe industrial arts certification exams, hence of Adobegate.

With the assistance of cheating, undertaken by Mr. Emmanuel Fleurantin and Mrs. Brenda Muchnick, Miami Norland’s school grade went from a “C” for the 2010-11 school year to an “A” for the 2011-12 school year.

As a result, total federal funds (SIG, RTTT) given out due to a grade influenced by cheating was $100,560; the total state funds per FSRP was between $130,000- $140,000; the total overall combined federal and state incentive funds were $230,560- $240,560.

Each teacher at Miami Norland Senior High School received $1730.41 from all three payouts.

This affair is detailed in the Miami-Dade OIG Final Report and the Department of Administrative Hearings brief, issued by the School Board Attorney on January 8, 2014, justifying Mr. Fleurantin’s termination.

During the following school year, 2012-2013, Miami Norland SHS led the state in FCAT invalidations due to cheating with 13 student exams being invalidated.

The response by school district administration has been outrageous and unjust: Mr. Fleurantin, a black union member, has been suspended pending termination while Mrs. Muchnick, a white non-union member, received a slap on the wrist for the same offense from the same cheating scandal and is back working at Norland.

When one reads the Miami-Dade OIG Final Report and the Department of Administrative Hearings brief, one can reasonably conclude that Mrs. Muchnick is equally culpable and a reasonable person would think her employment was up for termination as well.

For my efforts, I as the whistleblowing union steward suffered an attempted transfer and a bogus CRC complaint devoid of merit (dismissed later) in September and an actual involuntary transfer on October 24, 2013, followed by another on December 10, 2013.

To make matters worse, my award winning library program has been closed since my departure, in violation of state law, and the students have not had library media services since then.

A Norland employee told me a week ago that students have been complaining about being unable to access library books, and one acted up.

Too bad the faculty, which apparently seems to care about their bottom line and financial incentives gained from cheating more so than their students, does not speak up about this injustice and defend the students’ right to read.

Whether the Norland faculty is silent due to complicity or cowardice, to quote Barbara Bush, a reasonable person may conclude “they are a sorry bunch.”

Sadly, Norland SHS is under the leadership of a principal who has two prior ethics complaints successfully processed against him by the FLDOE. Mr. Lee is a principal who has threatened me twice with retaliation (documented in grievances) in May 2010 and February 2013; a principal who has fabricated my observation and been caught doing so in a meeting on April 4, 2012; and a principal who has undertaken various forms of adverse action, in concert with the other union stewards and District officials, against me since late August 2013 for my efforts in trying to clean up the school.

As a parent of a Miami Norland SHS student, why would you leave your child to languish in what a fair-minded person may conclude are the clutches and the bad influences of Mrs. Muchnick, Mr. Lee, and a faculty that apparently could care less for your child when you can give them a better environment and educational opportunities on the same school grounds under the bill sponsored by Rep. Diaz?

Rep. Diaz’s bill preserves the concept of neighborhood schools and gives the parents and students of Florida trapped in similar situations throughout the state a way out.

If these events have transpired at Miami Norland SHS, and they have, you can believe that they have transpired (or are transpiring) at other schools throughout Florida.

Districts like Miami-Dade and schools like Norland SHS feel entitled to public funds and in their arrogance rails against those who expose test cheating, which leads to better school grades and enhanced funding, and other frauds while the state simply passes the buck and declines to take action.

Rep. Diaz’s bill would curtail the “business as usual” environment as parents would have the means to place their child in a better educational, and ethical, environment.

Unions and public education advocates have decried the fact that Rep. Diaz is in charge of this bill, but it is phony outrage as they have plenty of advocates in the Legislature that have significantly influenced educational bills over the past few years: Sen. Bill Montford, who is the CEO of the Florida Association of District School Superintendents and former superintendent of Leon County Public Schools; Sen. Don Gaetz and Nancy Detert, former public school superintendents; as well as teachers in both chambers, namely Sen. Dwight Bullard, a Miami-Dade teacher and a UTD member.

Critics decry Rep. Diaz’s involvement as a conflict of interest.

So he is a legislator with a passion for education reform that embraces charter schools; how is that different from Sen. Montford’s or Sen. Bullard’s passion for public education and the bills that they propose and support?

As with traditional public education, charter schools are deserving of advocates as well in the Legislature. The purpose of representation is to serve all the interests of everyone in the state encompassing all races and ethnicities.

The legislation proposed by Rep. Diaz will receive, as with any legislation, intense scrutiny in the appropriate House committee as well as the House floor as well as the appropriate Senate committee and Senate floor when it arrives there.

What really scares unions and traditional public education advocates, as well as school districts and the Norland’s of the state, is that they cannot continue on the same path collecting taxpayer dollars as they go with little oversight and with no accountability as it is on the horizon.

Immigration Plan: Trust Obama?

/in , , , , /by

House Republicans say they are ready to move forward with an immigration reform plan—and it sounds remarkably like amnesty for illegal immigrants.

While avoiding key phrases like “path to citizenship,” the ideas put forth by congressional leaders this week would give legal status to people who are here illegally. It would just have more steps, including a probationary period, a work permit—and the government upholding a lopsided part of the bargain.

The plan assumes that border security would be ramped up and immigration laws would be strictly enforced in America. Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) said Members of Congress are prepared to make this deal. The Wall Street Journal reported:

Mr. Ryan said it would make sure that the Obama administration went ahead with the enforcement provisions. “We want to make sure that we write a law that he can’t avoid,” Mr. Ryan said.

Unfortunately, the President seems to be doing quite well avoiding laws he doesn’t like. On immigration, he has already selectively enforced laws, and he went around Congress to implement major portions of the DREAM Act—which had failed in Congress more than 30 times—by executive fiat.

“Policymakers have no real reason to trust the President to uphold any new immigration laws,” Heritage Vice President Derrick Morgan wrote yesterday.

The President and Congress did not pass comprehensive immigration reform during his first two years in office when liberals controlled both Houses of Congress. He now wants conservatives to join him in this unpopular policy, apparently asking them to trust that he will enforce the law in return.

The lure of a rebounding U.S. economy, the promise of eventual amnesty, and the lax enforcement of immigration laws are strong temptations. That’s why amnesty doesn’t work to control illegal immigration; in fact, it just encourages more people to risk sneaking in.

Amnesty is unfair to all Americans who are living in this country legally—whether they were born here or immigrated legally. Millions more are waiting their turn for their opportunity to become Americans, and it’s simply wrong to allow lawbreakers to jump the line.

Why is this a hot topic on Capitol Hill right now? Americans aren’t demanding changes to immigration laws. Heritage’s Morgan reports:  

Only 3 percent of the American people think immigration is a top priority. Most have a healthy skepticism of promises to control the border: only 5 percent think it is very likely that a new immigration law will actually seal the border.

It’s true that the immigration system is broken. That’s why Heritage has set out its own recommendations for reforms that would welcome immigrants, protect U.S. citizens, get people into jobs, and secure the border.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

EDITORS NOTE: This column is by Amy Payne. Read more of her columns by clicking here.

GOP Walks into U-shape Ambush RE: Immigration

/in , , , , /by

Recently we reported that the House GOP, especially Speaker Boehner, was looking at a means to advance the idea of “comprehensive” immigration reform.

President Obama threw down a gauntlet during his State of the Union address, (which very few watched, by the way). The House GOP is currently at a retreat conference in Baltimore (some might say their at a retreat both literally and figuratively) and they may well be crafting a strategy at this session.

Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol writes in his blog,

The Wall Street Journal reports that some House Republican leaders are looking to give illegal immigrants legal status right away, with the chance for a green card—and citizenship—down the line….First, illegal immigrants would be offered a “probationary” status, allowing them to work while the government tightened border security and interior enforcement. Officials have explained that this would allow people to work legally while they wait for permanent legal status. (Officials have explained that this group could revert to illegal status if enforcement benchmarks are not met.)

Mr. Kristol (and I) challenge that parenthetical statement. Kristol says,

Is it plausible, and would it even be fair, to force legalized working immigrants to “revert” to illegal status just because some bureaucrats haven’t met certain arbitrary benchmarks? The forced “reversion” would never happen, and it shouldn’t.

I’m constantly amazed how so much legislation is written in double-speak to appease and assuage some concerns while enabling the true goals to be met. “Comprehensive” legislation equals lots of pages of legislation with caveats buried deep inside and no one reads but everyone votes for.

Even Pat Buchanan warns about the prudence of this legislative shift in a National Review article where he says

An imminent Republican debate over immigration will play into the hands of the Democratic party. With the widespread unpopularity of Obamacare, Republicans should instead focus on the embattled health-care law ahead of the 2014 midterm election. By pivoting to the issue of immigration, Republicans are walking right into the trap.

Buchanan surmises that the “Chamber of Commerce and the big-business folks want the immigration deal solved.”

And therein lies the u-shaped ambush awaiting the House GOP and Speaker Boehner if they fall on this grenade. First of all, at a time when Americans are suffering from high levels of unemployment, they should not be adding illegals into the job market until we can rectify the situation for Americans.

The Democrats will certainly blame the Republicans for exacerbating the jobless situation for Americans and castigate the GOP as the party of big business and corporations who want cheap labor.

Second, why would Speaker Boehner do anything that feeds more members into the liberal progressive welfare nanny-state? Who does the Speaker believe these new legal-status individuals will support? Ya think we have voter fraud issues now?

Lastly, why would the GOP want to discourage its base, which enabled them to have a House majority in 2010?

This issue combined with the insidious government education initiative “common core” will result in many conservatives basically saying, “you’re on your own” and this will add fire to the direction and policy of the Republican Party.

My advice to Republicans? You cannot win by being a lesser version of the liberals. If you cannot articulate a clear delineation based upon a policy agenda that promotes the advancement of the individual American, you will lose.

Focus on healthcare solutions, policies that get Americans back to work, get behind our veterans and their concerns, and present a vision for our national security — and communicate that as a unified body.

Even Harry Reid wised up and is denying President Obama fast track trade authority and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Make the connection with the American people, because right now, President Obama and the progressive socialists have lost credibility with Americans.

What do you think, should the House GOP cave in and advance some type of comprehensive resolution to illegal immigration? I think I know the answer…

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

RELATED COLUMNS: 

Rubio Continues Pulling Back On His Immigration Reform Position

Boehner and the Republican Scarlet Letter: “A” is for Amnesty

TAKE ACTION: Politicians Attacking Florida’s Voter-Approved Term Limits Law

/in , , , /by

This month, Representative Keith Perry (R-Gainesville) introduced a bill to lengthen his own term limits from a maximum of eight years in one seat all the way up to twelve.

This is a direct attack on we the people of Florida, who passed those term limits with 77 percent of the vote and support them by an even greater margin today, according to polls.

By trying to overrule the peoples’ vote on term limits, Perry is focusing on keeping his own seat, rather than finding solutions to the problems Florida faces.

We say that if eight years are good enough for the President of the United States, then they’re good enough for the gang in Tallahassee.

Here’s how you can help us defend term limits in Florida:

  • Call Rep. Perry at 850-717-5021 to tell him you support the current term limits and don’t want his bad bill becoming a bad law.
  • Contact your House member and State Senator to tell them to oppose this proposal.
  • Write a letter to the editor of the Gainesville Sun or your local newspaper opposing Rep. Perry’s plan to weaken term limits

If the President Wants to Minimize GHG Emissions, He’ll Approve the Keystone Pipeline

/in , , , , , /by

The State Department released its final report on the environmental impacts of the Keystone XL pipeline. It not only pulls the rug out from a key argument of pipeline opponents, but it puts the president in an awkward position.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/d-Gn6UpmK-A[/youtube]

First, the report undercuts pipeline opponents’ claims that stopping the construction of Keystone XL would block development of oil sands crude development in Canada:

[A]pproval or denial of any one crude oil transport project, including the proposed Project, is unlikely to significantly impact the rate of extraction in the oil sands or the continued demand for heavy crude oil at refineries in the United States based on expected oil prices, oil-sands supply costs, transport costs, and supply-demand scenarios.

The report states that oil transport by rail is “already occurring in substantial volumes,” and “rail will likely be able to accommodate new production if new pipelines are delayed or not constructed.”

In short, blocking Keystone XL will not stop oil sands crude development in Canada.

Second, the report debunks arguments that a pipeline is the most environmentally dangerous of all scenarios. It looked at alternative scenarios if Keystone XL wasn’t approved—i.e. “No Action/maintaining the status quo–and compared their environmental impacts to the proposed pipeline.

The alternative scenarios all have higher greenhouse gas emissions associated with them than Keystone XL. From the report: “The total annual GHG emissions (direct and indirect) attributed to the No Action scenarios range from 28 to 42 percent greater than for the proposed.”

Impacts of Keystone XL alternatives [table]

If the president is as concerned with minimizing greenhouse gas emissions as he says he is, then he should give the pipeline the go-ahead.

Along with its environmental analysis, the report reaffirms the economic benefits from construction of the pipeline that were stated in the draft EIS:

  • 42,100 new jobs.
  • $2 billion in earnings.
  • $3.4 billion added to U.S. GDP.

Tom Donohue, President and CEO of the U.S. Chamber commented on the release of the report:

The State Department has once again found nothing in its environmental analysis that would prevent the Keystone XL pipeline from moving forward. It’s time for the administration to stop playing politics with a project that will create good-paying American jobs, improve our energy security, and strengthen relations with our closest ally, Canada.

Five years of delays, distractions, and foot-dragging is long enough. It’s time to do what’s right for America, our economy and workers, and our relationship with our special neighbor to the north—approve the Keystone XL pipeline.

Now, we’re in the National Interest Determination stage, where eight other federal agencies and the public can weigh in on whether approving the pipeline is in the nation’s national interest.

Based on all that we know now about the jobs that will be created, the economic impacts, and its minimal effects on the environment, it’s clear that approving the Keystone XL pipeline is in America’s best interests.

Rubio Continues Pulling Back On His Immigration Reform Position

/in , , , /by

One of the authors of the controversial Senate immigration reform bill, Florida Senator Marco Rubio, spoke to the Shark Tank and other reporters at the Capitol about the upcoming House immigration reform debate, where he believed that a set of principles that would be widely supported will probably come out of the House of Representatives.

Rubio’s ears were ringing as earlier in the day, Speaker John Boehner told reporters during a press conference at RNC headquarters, that a set of immigration principles would be discussed at the upcoming Republican congressional retreat. Rubio stated that the American people lacked confidence in the Obama administration, which is pushing blanket legalization in the immigration reform debate, to enforce any and all immigration enforcement measures.

Rubio was pummeled by grassroots activists for his change of position on immigration reform, when he co sponsored the Senate immigration bill, but now seems to be backing away from his own bill.

It’s still an Issue that needs to be solve, I think the better way to solve it at this point, given the lack of confidence people have in the federal government, is to do it in a way that will gain people’s confidence, and that is why I think a sequential approach is the better approach- it was originally what I had advocated for, it’s not the direction the Senate headed, but in essence, it sounds like that’s the direction everyone wants to head now.

Rubio added that if there was another debate on this issue, he would engage and “give ideas about how to move forward.”

My observation on it now is, that this is not a process today that’s conducive to some big piece of legislation, lack of confidence people have in the federal government has only eroded in the past 12 months, I think it will continue to erode.

And then he added:

The observation that I have made, which I made a couple months ago, and now everyone is agreeing with, is that this is an issue that needs to be handled sequentially, given the mood and sentiment around here and the lack of trust people have. That’s the only observation I couple months ago is that some central piece of legislation, one big piece of legislation just isn’t going to pass.

When questioned if  his bill was “one big bill,” Rubio responded:

That was the direction the senate went, but if you back and read what I wrote in the WSJ last year, up to the time that debate began , I argued that a better approach , there is a difference between what you do and how you do it, those are two separate issues, and from a procedural standpoint  my argument was, that if we could begin to do this in a way that was sequence so that people can gain confidence and momentum behind the idea I thought that that was a more realistic approach.

Rubio then reiterated  that “the Senate decided” to go in the “big piece”of legislation direction.

Now the Senate decided to do it in one big piece of legislation, I didn’t think that was the best approach, But I chose to get involved with it because I wanted to influence, and hopefully make something positive happen. By nature, if I see a problem, I try to solve it.

EDITORS NOTE: This column and photo originally appeared on The Shark Tank. 

Oklahomans are All In on School Choice

/in , , , /by

A majority of Oklahomans favor an education savings account system, with the largest margin of support and most positive intensity coming from younger voters ages 18-34, according to a Friedman Foundation poll released this week. An ambitious school choice proposal is on the table in Oklahoma. Last week, state legislators introduced a bill to create an education savings account system (ESA) for low- and middle-income students. (See a short video of the press conference and an explanation of how ESAs work.)

The proposal is bigger than Arizona’s ESA program, a pioneering policy that has provided crucial lessons for implementation in other states. (see here, here, and here for research on ESAs) Similarly, our release this week of the “Oklahoma K-12 & School Choice Survey” provides states interested in ESAs a new perspective on how voters react to this innovative plan.

Oklahomans are much more likely to support ESAs than oppose them. The margin in favor of ESAs is very large (+22 points). A solid majority of respondents (56 percent) support an “education savings account system”; just one-third (34 percent) oppose ESAs.

All demographic groups showed a propensity toward supporting ESAs. No group registered a larger proportion of negative responses than positive responses. Young voters (ages 18 to 34), Republicans, and school parents exhibited the biggest margins of support and represent the groups most likely to be on board today.

The positive intensity for ESAs is highest among young voters (ages 18 to 34), school parents, and Republicans. There is mild negative intensity among older voters and Democrats. 

Oklahomans prefer universal access to ESAs rather than limited eligibility based on financial need. Nearly six out of 10 voters (58 percent) said they agree with the statement that “ESAs should be available to all families, regardless of incomes and special needs.” Approximately 37 percent “strongly agree” with that statement. One-third (32 percent) disagree with that statement, and 19 percent “strongly disagree.”

For most voters, an ESA proposal would not be a make or break issue. A majority (58 percent) said it would not make her/him more or less likely to vote for a political candidate who supports ESAs. However, if a voter has an opinion on this issue, he or she is more likely to vote for the pro-ESA candidate (19 percent more likely vs. 14 percent less likely).

Oklahomans send different signals about how to fund preschool, a topic receiving considerable attention lately by policy wonks and public officials.

On the first of two questions, a plurality of voters (29 percent) indicated they would like to see an increase of funding public preschool providers directly. However, about 26 percent of respondents said they would equally favor that or a proposal establishing an ESA system for four-year-old children. An additional 17 percent would prefer structural reform – the ESA system – over simple funding increases.

The follow-up question asked to what extent respondents would favor or oppose a pilot ESA program for Oklahoma’s four-year-olds. Considering this proposal on its own merits, more than half of respondents (55 percent) said they would favor such a limited ESA program, compared to 32 percent saying they would oppose the preschool ESA system.

The window looks as if it’s wide open for Oklahoma’s education reformers to change the funding mechanism for K-12 education (via ESAs).

First, certain questions in our poll pick up voters’ desires for changing the status quo and having more access to private schools.

  • 56 percent believe Oklahoma’s K-12 education system is on the “wrong track”; 65 percent of school parents gave this response.
  • 58 percent rated the state’s public school system “fair” or “poor”; 63 percent of school parents gave this response.
  • Voters are much more likely to grade local private schools A or B (74 percent) compared to giving those grades to local public schools (45 percent).
  • When asked for a preferred school type, nearly equal proportions of voters would choose a regular public school (39 percent) or a private school (37 percent). The disconnect is stark when juxtaposing those responses against Oklahoma’s actual enrollment patterns (94 percent public school and 4 percent private school).

Second, Oklahomans are more likely to favor – rather than oppose – education reforms such as school vouchers, tax-credit scholarships, and charter schools. Collectively, these responses provide a hospitable climate for an ESA proposal.

Click “Oklahoma K-12 & School Choice Survey” to read the full report.

Gays forcing Catholic school to hire man ‘married’ to another man

/in , , /by

The next step of the “gay marriage” agenda is about to begin here in Massachusetts. It’s the push to use the legal system to force religious organizations to include homosexuality and transgenderism.

Fontbonne Academy in Milton, MA, a Catholic girls’ high school, is under attack by the homosexual movement.

Across the country whenever a “gay marriage” battle heats up pro-family people are always told, “It’s all about civil rights. It won’t affect your religious institutions.” And the politicians and judges believe them.

That’s about to change. This week the powerful Boston homosexual legal group,Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) filed a complaint with theMassachusetts Commission against Discrimination (MCAD) against a Catholic girls prep school because the school declined to hire a man because he is “married” to another man.

“We cannot hire you,” says Catholic school

Back in July, Matthew Barrett of Dorchester applied for a job as the food service director at Fontbonne Academy, a Roman Catholic girls’ high school in Milton, Mass., and was subsequently offered the job. When he filled out a pre-employment form listing his “husband” as an emergency contact the school told him that “the Catholic religion doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage. We cannot hire you.”

Barrett, right, and his “husband” pose for the Boston Globe.
[Boston Globe photo.]

Barrett claimed to be shocked by the school’s action. But it appears that he was purposefully dishonest. He told the Boston Globe that he was raised a Catholic and that he was informed by school officials during the interview process that employees are expected to follow Catholic doctrine. However, he did not tell the school that he was openly involved with homosexual behavior and was in a “gay marriage.” Those, of course, are serious violations of Catholic teaching.

Targeting religious organizations that refuse to change

Historically, GLAD acts very strategically. From transgenderism to public sex to gay marriage, they take on high-profile cases in order to force changes on society.This case represents the beginning of the homosexual movement’s legal assault on conservative churches, particularly Catholic, that have steadfastly refused to modify their religious convictions and comply with the homosexual movement’s demands on society. Up until now they’ve been largely left alone. But that’s about to change.

As the Boston Globe related, this represents a new front in the culture wars:

Barrett’s complaint, which may be the first of its kind in the country,comes at a time when religion-based schools in the increasing number of states where gay marriage is legal have been scrutinizing hiring and employment practices to ensure they conform with the pillars of their faiths.

School administrators have been fired from Catholic schools and universities in Arkansas, California, New York, and Washington, among other states, after marrying their same-sex partners or announcing plans to do so.

The legal assault begins

The well-funded homosexual legal groups, fresh from their victories in “gay marriage” federal and state lawsuits across the country, are now ready to take on the churches.

Bennett Klein, the GLAD lawyer representing Barrett, makes their position against religious groups perfectly clear in the GLAD website’s presentation of this case. Klein states:

Religiously affiliated entities do not have a free pass to do as they please in how they treat employees, particularly when it comes to our important laws against discrimination.

Our laws carefully balance the important values of religious liberty and non-discrimination. When Fontbonne Academy fired Matt from a job that has nothing to do with religion, they came down on the wrong side of the law.

And as Klein said in the Globe article, the there is a big “problem” that the homosexual movement must stamp out:

We’re seeing religion-affiliated entities more and more trying to push the line toward discriminating against gay, lesbian, and transgendered people.

In other words, God’s laws must be made to bend to the gays’ will, not the other way around!

One clue of the seriousness of this is that GLAD got the story placed on the front page of the Boston Globe instead of somewhere inside. And GLAD had the Boston Globe’s reporter interview Barrett in GLAD’s downtown Boston office rather at his house or some neutral site.

Front-page Boston Globe article Jan. 30, 2014.

Long-time animosity toward the Catholic Church

It’s not surprising that a Catholic institution is the first being targeted by GLAD. Of all the major religious denominations, the Catholic Church in America has been the most consistent in not compromising its core beliefs to the Left, particularly on abortion and “gay marriage.” Over the years, this has caused a particularly venomous hatred of Catholicism in the homosexual movement.

For example, as MassResistance often reveals just about every “gay pride” parade contains a strong anti-Catholic element, often mocking and profane.

Men dressed as nuns mocking the Catholic Church march in Boston Gay Pride Parade on June 8, 2014.
[MassResistance photo]

Another local example: In 2012, as MassResistance reported, a Catholic Church in Acushnet, Mass., simply had a sign outside supporting traditional marriage. Angry homosexual activists threatened to burn the church down, and demonstrated outside of the Sunday Mass with signs calling the parishioners haters.

Sign outside Catholic Church in Acushnet, MA that generated horrible attacks by homosexual activists, including threat to burn church down.

What happens next

We don’t think that GLAD would publicize this case so dramatically if they didn’t think they could win it. They certainly have huge ties to the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. In addition, we expect that GLAD will put the full force of its legal team, and possibly even recruit free help from lawyers from gay-friendly downtown Boston firms to ultimately force Fontbonne Academy to hire Matt Barrett.

The homosexual movement knows that if it is successful in this case, it will set a precedent for Massachusetts and send a strong message to every other conservative religious institution in the state. But worse, it will surely become a template for similar action across the country in states where “gay marriage” exists, despite “religious freedom” clauses that may exist in their laws.

Our side must fight back hard!

This needs to be taken seriously by our side and fought hard! It is madness, and should not have any legal leg to stand on. But as we’ve said over and over in the past, much of the mess we’re in now is the result of mushy, fear-based legal defense by pro-family lawyers in important cases. We are praying that Fontbonne gets the necessary kind of legal firepower to stop this.

As states across the country are confronting the issue of “gay marriage” being forced on them by activist judges and corrupt politicians, many “conservatives” have been backing off and saying that this won’t affect them. This shows that they’d better think again.

And to those pro-family people who simply say that the “gay marriage” fight is about “every child needs a father and a mother” or “we’re not against anyone; we’re just pro-marriage” or similar politically-correct platitudes — you need to come out of your fantasy world.

We will keep you informed on this case!

2. Update: Pro-family Jamaicans continue their bold fight against repealing law banning open homosexuality in their country.
The Jamaicans are setting an example for the rest of us here in America. They are not backing down, but are pushing forward!

As we reported earlier, on December 10, 2013 — International Human Rights Day — Brian Camenker of MassResistance went to Jamaica and delivered a stirring speech at a pro-family rally in Kingston. The speech was broadcast live over national radio.

Camenker was invited by the Jamaican pro-family group Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society (JCHS). He was asked to come and warn citizens about the slippery slope effects that would come with legalizing homosexual behavior, which is now being considered by the Jamaican government.

The government is considering repealing the 150-year-old “Buggery Law” which currently makes sodomy technically illegal. The law is widely supported across Jamaica. But homosexual and left-wing activists buoyed by well-funded international groups are mounting a national campaign to get the law repealed, and thus build a public homosexual movement in that country. JCHS has been at the forefront of this issue.

Carrying on the PR battle in Jamaica’s media

Dr. Wayne West, the head of JCHS has continued to write and speak on this issue. JCHS understands the stakes involved in losing this fight. As a result, they confront the homosexual movement with fearlessness and clarity that is rarely found here in America.

Dr. Wayne West, head of Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, introduces Brian Camenker at event on Dec. 10, 2013.

The group has recently resurrected a powerful full-page newspaper ad that directly exposes and confronts the medical dangers of homosexual behavior. The ad was previously published in Jamaican newspapers on International Day Against Homophobia, May 17, 2013 — to counter the propaganda from the other side.

Powerful full-page ad by Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society that appeared in Jamaica newspapers.

Here’s what the ad said:

Most people here and abroad are unaware about how overwhelmingly harmful and even deadly such behavior is. And worse, most pro-family groups — particularly here in the U.S. — are afraid to bring up the health issue, even in court cases, for fear of being labeled and attacked by the Left!

How many American pro-family groups would have the nerve to publish this ad? We are grateful that Jamaica has a fearless group like JCHS led by a such a bold, articulate man as Dr. Wayne West. They set an example for all the rest of us!

3. MassResistance in the Washington Times.
Our international footprint in the “gay marriage” arena is starting to get noticed!

Recently MassResistance was quoted in the Washington Times newspaper. In their December 25, 2013 article titled, “Gay marriage makes a world of differences in a defining year,” the newspaper wrote:

In Massachusetts, the traditional values group Mass Resistance has found that its materials — including a video on what same-sex marriage “did to Massachusetts” — have been of interest to people in Australia, the United Kingdom, France and, recently, Jamaica, said Brian Camenker, president of the group.

In America, gay-rights groups were able to conduct a “blitzkrieg” in some states, thanks to deep-pocketed benefactors and political allies, he said.

Overseas gay-rights advocates “just don’t have that enormous advantage,” Mr. Camenker said. “So that sort of holds them back.”

It’s quite surprising how many calls each week we get from around the country and beyond for advice, strategy, and general information on confronting this issue..

By the way, that video really has caught on around the world! And people are truly shocked. You can watch it HERE.

RELATED COLUMN: Maine’s highest court: Transgender student’s rights were violated | The Portland Press Herald / Maine Sunday Telegram

Top-down Parental Involvement: Another federal education boondoggle?

/in , , , /by

As the nation observed the 50th anniversary of President Johnson’s War on Poverty in early January, the 2014 Georgia Family Engagement Conference here drew over 1,200 participants, up from 800 at the inaugural state conference in 2012. About a dozen states have held such confabs, pursuant to the “Parental Involvement” section of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, an arm of the War on Poverty that sends federal funds to low-income-area schools in hopes of “equalizing” so-called educational outcomes.

About a third of the participants in the conference were parent volunteers; those I met were impressive in their dedication and length of service. Most in attendance, however, were professionals—state or local education officials, administrators of grant-funded nonprofits, education researchers, and so on.

An important thrust of the conference was to share strategies for fulfilling the federal mandates that go along with Title I money. Parental engagement receives 1 percent of the total Title I pot, which has risen from $3.2 billion in 1980 to $14.4 billion in the budget just passed. Naturally, that money comes with strings, many of them defined in legal jargon that is difficult for your average parent volunteer to understand.

Ken Banter, Title I director for the rural Peach County Schools, confirmed, “The monitoring piece with federal funds is humongous.” A whole session—“What is a Title I School and What Does that Mean for My Child?”—was devoted to basic explanations from two Georgia Department of Education Title I specialists. Judy Alger asserted, “We know through research that poverty equals low performance” (though when I inquired about the research, she suggested Google). Therefore, Title I designation is “a good thing” for a school, sending it more teachers, more literacy and math coaches, more tutors, and more technology. But, Alger warned, “They give us money because they want to tell us how to do things.” For instance, noted Kathy Pruett, under Targeted Assistance Programs, snacks are okay, meals not.

One string requires that parents be recruited to review the Comprehensive Local Education Agency Improvement Plan (CLIP). Ken Banter shared how he tried to make things easy for parents by dividing the 65-page CLIP into 2-page sections, preparing a 5-page handout on acronyms, and giving away donated book bags of school supplies to volunteers. As a result, he said, participation in his 4,000-student district increased from 10 parents in 2012 to more than 150 in 2013.

CaDeisha Cooper, Title I director for the Candler County Schools, said of her summer leadership program, “What you do is what the law requires you to do.” She makes a particular effort to translate the legal gobbledygook into simple language for parents.

The problem of parents’ difficulty understanding government programs arose again at the only panel on the controversial new federally orchestrated education standards, “Giving Students a Chance: Understanding the Common Core Georgia Performance Standards.” The panelists all represented organizations that support Common Core: Lisa-Marie Haygood and Donna Kosicki are president-elect and past president of the Georgia PTA, respectively, and Dana Rickman is director of policy and research at the Georgia Partnership for Excellence in Education. Kosicki led a word-association exercise on feel-good terms like “relevance.” Haygood offered that “it is important to stop switching gears” and not abandon Common Core.

Rickman showed a number of slides demonstrating Georgia’s lagging college readiness. When I asked how Common Core will help, Rickman replied, “It is believed that the new standards will lead to improvement” and directed me to the Fordham Foundation’s website. Fordham, like the PTA, has received funds from the Gates Foundation, the biggest private funder of Common Core.

The conference drew dozens of vendors, many of them nonprofits. There was Building Positive Families, Watch D.O.G.S. (Dads of Great Students), and groups promoting health, art, and the prevention of drug abuse. Some paid a vendor fee to put on a workshop. At Family First’s workshop, “Increasing Male Involvement and Engaging Dads in Schools,” Andy Mayer described the group’s services for schools, such as “All-Pro Dad” breakfasts and exercises that get dads (or father figures) “connecting,” with prompts like, “I’m proud of you because. .  .  .” Increased PTA membership is deemed a measure of success. The PTA is the primary booster of the Family Engagement in Education Act of 2013, which would provide no new funding but lots of new instructions for how to spend it—in the words of a PTA backgrounder, “a roadmap for investment in sustainability of practice in family engagement in education” by schools, localities, and states.

The Athens conference was funded by nonprofit and for-profit vendors and exhibitors, as well as sponsors and registrants, according to Michelle Tarbutton Sandrock, parent engagement program manager for the Georgia Department of Education. Schools and districts, however, used Title I funds to send representatives to the gathering.

Georgia College economics professor Ben Scafidi says the costs to the public for parental engagement personnel and activities are difficult to isolate. What is clear, as he noted in his 2012 report “The School Staffing Surge,” is that the United States spends more than other nations on non teaching staff. Between 1970 and 2010, non teaching staff positions increased 138 percent nationally, while teaching positions increased 60 percent and student enrollment rose only 7.8 percent, according to the Heritage Foundation. How much did it help? Between 1992 and 2008, math scores for 17-year-olds remained constant, and reading performance declined.

Amid all the presentations and exhibits, conspicuously lacking was research establishing that government-sponsored parental involvement improves learning. When I asked Tarbutton Sandrock about this, she referred me to Karen Mapp of the Harvard Family Research Project and Anne Henderson, senior consultant for community organizing and engagement at the Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. Both are advocates for government-funded parental engagement.

Fifty years into the War on Poverty, a vastly expanded, federally funded bureaucracy works to manage parents’ involvement in their own children’s schools. Meanwhile, educational attainment stagnates and poverty grows.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Weekly Standard. Photo courtesy of the Marco Island Sun Times a Gannett Company.

RELATED  COLUMN: More parent involvement leads kids to behave and do better in school

Feds to seek death penalty for Boston Marathon jihad mass murderer Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

/in , , , , /by

This is a face-saving gesture. The clueless, politically correct, willfully ignorant Feds discounted intel they received from Russia about Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and failed to investigate the mosque the Tsarnaev brothers attended in Boston, despite the fact that it has numerous ties to jihad terrorists. Now, when it is far too late, they’re trying to look tough on jihad terror.

“Feds to seek death penalty against accused Boston bomber Tsarnaev,” by Pete Williams for NBC News, January 30 (thanks to Kenneth):

The Justice Department has notified a federal judge that it intends to seek the death penalty if a jury convicts Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for last April’s bomb attacks at the Boston Marathon.

Tsarnaev is awaiting trial on charges that he and his brother built and planted two pressure-cooker bombs that killed three people and injured at least 260 others. He is also charged with killing an MIT campus police officer.

Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement: “After consideration of the relevant facts, the applicable regulations and the submissions made by the defendant’s counsel, I have determined that the United States will seek the death penalty in this matter. The nature of the conduct at issue and the resultant harm compel this decision.”

Among the factors listed by the government were that the killings were intentional, resulted from acts calculated to cause grave risks to public safety, and were committed in a cruel manner. And prosecutors said the defendant has demonstrated no remorse….

Of course. It was his jihad. A mujahid does not feel remorse for his jihad.

Israel Foils Al Qaeda Plot Against US Embassy

/in , , , /by

Time and time again, Israel has proven to be America’s closest, most reliable ally in the Middle East.

Last week we saw the latest example of Israel’s dedication to America as an ally when Israel’s Shin Bet security service announced that it had arrested Al Qaeda terrorists who were part of a cell plotting to launch an attack on the US embassy in Tel Aviv, Israel.

tel aviv bombers

The al-Qaeda terror suspects. Photo: Shin Bet.

Shin Bet indicated that the three terrorists, two from Jerusalem and one from the West Bank, were recruited by an Al Qaeda terrorist operative based in the Gaza Strip who worked directly for Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.

The suicide bomb attack on the US embassy was to be part of an audacious plan to conduct simultaneous attacks on three targets in Israel, the other two targets being an Israeli transit bus and a neighborhood in East Jerusalem.

While there have been fears of an Al Qaeda presence in Israel for some time now, this plot is the first indication of actual, active Al Qaeda terrorists inside Israel.

What is particularly upsetting about the aftermath of the takedown of this Al Qaeda cell has been the muted U.S. reaction.

First, in Washington, Obama State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said U.S. investigators and intelligence officials were not yet able to corroborate the Israeli information and declined to comment on specifics of the case. Harf even told reporters, “I don’t have reason to believe it’s not true. I just don’t have independent verification.”

Meanwhile, senior U.S. officials elsewhere, speaking to reporters anonymously, were confirming the plot, while the Obama State Department was essentially giving no comment.

One wonders just exactly what the State Department meant when it said it did not have “independent verification.”

Who would the State Department be looking to for that “independent verification”?

Eventually, the Obama State Department did “acknowledge” the plot and Israel’s arrest of the terrorists, claiming that they had been in touch with the Israelis on the matter for some time.

What has been completely absent from any statement on the matter from the U.S. has been any expression of gratitude toward Israel for breaking up a plot by our sworn enemy, Al Qaeda, to bomb our embassy.

That silence comes just days after President Obama told the New Yorker, that the current Al Qaeda was the “jayvee” team, once again dismissing the threat from jihadist terrorism.

The only strong statement acknowledging Israel’s key role in heading off this Al Qaeda attack came from Illinois Representative Peter Roskam who released the following statement:

“The plot to attack our embassy in Israel reminds us why we must remain vigilant against the continued and evolving threat from Al Qaeda. With the tragic deaths of American personnel at the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi still fresh on our minds, the Israeli intelligence community’s work to stop this attack in its tracks once again demonstrates the mutual importance of our close security cooperation with Israel.”

It certainly appears that the Obama administration is actively ignoring this entire event. And no wonder; after all, it’s a bad situation for Obama in three ways:

  1. It indicates that the “on the run,” “jayvee” Al Qaeda that Obama keeps dismissing is still out there plotting against U.S. targets;
  2. Israel, the country Obama seems to dislike and throw under the bus more than any other U.S. ally, came to the rescue;
  3. Israel seems to have done a better job of looking out for the security of our diplomatic personnel and facilities than we have ourselves. It’s too bad that Israel’s security services weren’t in charge of security in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, instead of Hillary Clinton, Obama’s then-secretary of state!

All of this serves as a painful reminder that the U.S. and its allies continue to be the target of the jihadists and that we must remain ever-vigilant.

Most importantly, we must work to maintain close, friendly relations with our allies, such as Israel, who have stood by us for decades.

I Am Afraid of My Government

/in , , , /by

I came into this world when Franklin D. Roosevelt was President and I have never been afraid of my government until now.

I am not alone. A consistent and growing theme of commentaries on the conservative news sites and blogs that I read every day is the fear of the Obama administration that has been cracking down on those who criticize it. They get audited by the IRS. They are refused the same status as non-profit entitles engaging in public education as Left-leaning organizations. They are accused of being racists, homophobes, anti-immigration, and anti-women.

This goes beyond the ordinary disagreements between individuals and groups that express opposition to the Obama administration. It has the look of a deliberate campaign and we have three more years of Obama as President in which to endure it.

In a speech to the leftist nonprofit Center for American Progress, Sen. Chuck Schumer, (D-BY) recently urged the IRS to “redouble” its intimidation tactics against the Tea Party. He represents a State whose governor recently said that conservatives were not welcome to live and do business. Its largest city, New York, just elected a Marxist as its mayor.

ted cruz on obama

For a larger view click on the image.

Jim Lakely, the director of communications of The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank that has led the effort to debunk the global warming hoax, recently posted a commentary, “The Unceasing Political Thuggery of Obama’s Gangster Government.” He noted Michael Barone’s description of the Obama administration as a “gangster government.”

Lakely cited the growing list of actions taken against who have expressed criticism. It includes Dinesh D’Souza who produced a documentary about Obama’s life, “Obama’s America” and who arrested on felony charges for violating campaign finance law. “This is beyond absurd—especially in light of what the FBI and IRS have found not worthy of any investigation, let alone indictment” in the past. A Hollywood group of conservatives, the only one there, received an IRS demand for its complete donor list; this is a repeat of similar demands of Tea Party groups seeking non-profit status. James O’Keefe whose Project Veritas exposed the nonprofit status of the leftist ACORN is being audited as was Frank VanderSloot, a big Republican donor as was conservative journalist Wayne Allen Root—twice. The list keeps growing.

The Heartland Institute was subjected to the stealing of its confidential budget and planning documents by global warming activist Peter Gleick “for the purpose of harassing” its donors, but no action has been taken against him by law enforcement authorities.

“Never in the history of this country have we seen such a broad and coordinated abuse of the government’s power to threaten criminal prosecution and ruin the lives and livelihoods of people the President and his party see as political ‘enemies’”, says Lakely.

“This should be the political scandal of the century—if only we had an honorable and competent MSM (mainstream media) press corps in this country.”

Ordinary Americans have cause to share my fear as they discover the wreckage that Obamacare is inflicting on our healthcare system, losing their insurance plans, and now we are hearing that the insurance industry may have to be bailed out as it is subjected to major losses. The government’s website is not only a disaster, but it subjects anyone using it to the threat of identity theft as experts testify it can be hacked with ease.

The economy of a nation with enormous energy reserves, enough to make us energy sufficient for decades, is being undermined by a deliberate campaign to shut down coal-fired plants and make the construction of new ones impossible. The Keystone XL pipeline from Canada has been delayed for five years despite the jobs it represents and access to oil at the same time the government has slowed the provision of leases to oil companies seeking to explore and extract our own reserves.

And millions of Americans are out of work or have ceased looking for work as the result of the worst economic “recovery” in the history of the nation. This is occurring at a time when the Obama administration has added $6 trillion to the nation’s debt, causing a leading credit agency to downgrade the nation’s credit rating for the first time in its history.

The scandals attributed to the Obama administration keep mounting from “Fast and Furious” that transmitted weapons to Mexican drug cartels, to the failure to provide security to our Libyan consulate despite many requests, leading to the Benghazi killing of a U.S. ambassador and three brave security personnel who went to his aid. The list keeps growing.

There is ample reason for Americans to fear their government these days and the mood of the nation is growing worse as they realize that they have a President who lies all the time and pursues “climate change” policies that have no basis in known science and a campaign of class war based on “income inequality” as the incomes of Middle Class Americans have suffered a decline. The solution to income inequality has always been an increase in the national economy.

The nation’s military is being undermined by budget cuts and policies that encourage open homosexual participation and the introduction of women into its combat forces. A growing list of generals and admirals have been forced to retire.

It has taken only five years to bring the nation to this point and none of the scandals has resulted in anyone in the Obama administration being held accountable.

They have good reason. When they can no longer depend on the Department of Justice, the Internal Revenue Service, and other elements of the government to act lawfully, this nation—a nation of laws—we are all in jeopardy.

For these and other reasons I and many Americans are growing fearful. We have good reason.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Supreme Court Brief filed Supporting Hobby Lobby and Conestoga and Religious Liberty

/in , , , , , /by

Claiming “an unprecedented attack on religious liberty,” the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) yesterday filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs in two separate cases, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc, and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp., pending in the U.S. Supreme Court. In both cases, the plaintiffs are devout Christians who built their businesses from the ground up.  They object on religious grounds to providing certain contraceptives which are mandated by the Department of Health and Human Services headed by Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.  Both cases are scheduled for oral arguments on March 25, 2014 and the Court’s decision is expected sometime before the end of June.

TMLC’s brief focuses on religious liberty, “This case is not about competing rights; there is only one right at issue here − the right to religious freedom.”  The brief goes on to explain that there is no constitutional right to “free” contraception or abortion.  Moreover, that “The employers are not objecting to their employees’ private decision to use these drugs, they are objecting to being forced by the government to pay for insurance plans that facilitate or contribute to these decisions. The employers object to being used to further a government objective that violates their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

TMLC’s brief appealed to the foundations upon which our country was built:

“The United States was founded upon a set of noble and workable principles that formed the basis for the Bill of Rights. Paramount was the recognition that for a citizenry to be truly free, they must be allowed to think, to speak, and to worship God without government interference or unjustified restriction.”

The brief referred to our Founding Fathers:

“They risked their fortunes and their lives to create a country where people could be free to live and to worship consistent with their own conscience, and to provide for their families without unnecessary and crippling burdens created by an all-powerful government. The citizens currently before the Court challenging the Mandate can appreciate the struggles those early patriots faced. They too cannot allow injustice to prosper and are risking their fortunes and their livelihoods to defend the constitutional freedoms that define this country.”

Click here to read the TMLC’s entire 16-page brief

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) is a national public interest law firm located in Ann Arbor, Michigan.  It has filed 11 federal cases involving 33 different plaintiffs challenging the HHS Mandate.  One of those cases, Eden Foods v. Sebelius et al, is currently in the U.S. Supreme Court, but not scheduled for argument.  The Government has suggested to the Court that the Eden Foods case be held in abeyance pending the decision in the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga cases.

Richard Thompson, the President and Chief Counsel for the Law Center, commented, “The religious liberty of every American is at stake.  If we lose these cases, the guarantee of religious liberty under our constitution and laws becomes a farce.”

The 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby represented by the Becket Fund in June 2013, arguing that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to corporate entities, thereby shielding Hobby Lobby founder David Green from providing insurance plans that abide by the Obama Administration’s contraception mandate.

However, in August 2013, the 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rejected the same arguments, forcing the Mennonite owners of Conestoga Wood Specialties, represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, to offer health insurance to their employees in a grave violation of their religious beliefs.

The State of the Dis-Union: Preparing World Citizens

/in , , , , /by

There were many who had reason to be outraged by President Obama’s State of the Union address: the military whose funding has been cut, and who have been besmirched as emotionally unstable while they are forced to be sitting ducks in battle and then face the potentiality that the administration will abandon what others had died for, like Fallujah; the millions in the middle class whose health insurance has been dropped or whose premiums have doubled and who are losing jobs to illegal aliens and are insulted by the idea that a job that pays $10.10 is something to aspire to.

But I want to focus on Obama’s continued efforts to re-educate America, to re-educate her people so that they become shriveling dependents who long for a leader who will unilaterally make decisions for the masses.

Only such a people could believe Obama’s claim of having “a set of concrete, practical proposals to speed up growth, strengthen the middle class and build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class.”

Only a well-educated, independent-thinking populace could feel the chill of words regarding “congressional action.” Conflating America with himself, Obama said, “America does not stand still, and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.”

Once again, there was discussion of government job-training programs. (Has anyone actually gotten a job as a result?) To prepare “tomorrow’s workforce” (and that’s all it is: a workforce, not an educated citizenry), we must guarantee “every child access to a world-class education.”

Translation: indoctrination into world citizenship.

Obama referred to one “Estiven Rodriguez,” who “couldn’t speak a word of English when he moved to New York City at age nine.” Apparently, Rodriguez “led a march of his classmates – through a crowd of cheering parents and neighbors – from their high school to the post office, where they mailed off their college applications. And this son of a factory worker just found out he’s going to college this fall.” Obama referred to the army of tutors and teachers that helped him, but immigrants have done far more with only night classes, and often working two or three jobs.

Then, said Obama, “Five years ago, we set out to change the odds for all our kids. We worked with lenders to reform student loans, and today, more young people are earning college degrees than ever before.”

There is a reason why this government wants to monopolize student loans to produce more “peace and environmental justice studies” graduates: Democrat voters.

Obama invoked the misleadingly named “Race to the Top” contest (really a race for stimulus funds attached to federal education standards called Common Core). He claimed, it “has helped states raise expectations and performance. Teachers and principals in schools from Tennessee to Washington, D.C. are making big strides in preparing students with skills for the new economy – problem solving, critical thinking, science, technology, engineering, and math. Some of this change is hard. It requires everything from more challenging curriculums and more demanding parents to better support for teachers and new ways to measure how well our kids think, not how well they can fill in a bubble on a test. But it’s worth it – and it’s working.”

Notice how he didn’t reference Common Core, now dubbed Obamacore. After test scores plunged and mass confusion ensued, even the New York NEA teachers union came around to opposing Common Core. “Problem solving, critical thinking” are hallmarks of progressive educators, like Linda Darling-Hammond, close pal of Bill Ayers, who has been in charge of designing one of the two Common Core national tests. And what, exactly, is wrong with filling in a bubble? It means the test-taker has to know something and the grader can’t give extra points for correct attitudes.

What, also, is the “new economy”? Did we not need science, technology, engineering, and math in the old, twentieth-century economy?

By stating “It requires more challenging curriculums,” Obama admitted what Common Core proponents deny: it does change the curriculum. These are curriculums that eliminate most history, except that which advances the U.S. as racist, sexist, homophobic, imperialistic, etc.

The reference to “New ways to measure how well our kids think” is not reassuring when the Department of Education promotes the idea that “educational strengths” include “social competence” and “ethnic awareness.”

The new standards do not involve knowing about the country’s founding or the Constitution. Such students might understand this pre-speech message from Jon Carson of Organizing for Action:

“Friend –

“Tonight, President Obama made sure everyone knows:

“He’s not waiting for Congress. He’s taking action now, and he’s going to explore every method in his power to restore real opportunity for all Americans.”

Then he asks for a $5 donation.

But kindergarten is not early enough. Said Obama, “The problem is we’re still not reaching enough kids, and we’re not reaching them in time. That has to change.”

He cited “research” to justify making “high-quality pre-K available to every four year-old”: “Research shows that one of the best investments we can make in a child’s life is high-quality early education.” Funny, how they always say “research,” but not which research or what the research actually says about government-funded preschool.

Nonetheless, “As a parent as well as a President, I repeat that request tonight.”

What if Congress doesn’t snap to and fulfill his “request”? Well, Obama has friends: “And as Congress decides what it’s going to do, I’m going to pull together a coalition of elected officials, business leaders, and philanthropists willing to help more kids access the high-quality pre-K they need.”

Such “coalitions” must ensure that Obama fulfills his promises: “Last year, I also pledged to connect 99 percent of our students to high-speed broadband over the next four years. Tonight, I can announce that with the support of the FCC and companies like Apple, Microsoft, Sprint, and Verizon, we’ve got a down payment to start connecting more than 15,000 schools and twenty million students over the next two years, without adding a dime to the deficit.”

Of course, Microsoft is in the “coalition” of “business leaders and philanthropists.” The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the biggest funder for Common Core; all tests must be taken online. The other companies surely appreciate the business, too.

Obama’s Department of Education is redesigning high schools: “We’re working to redesign high schools and partner them with colleges and employers that offer the real-world education and hands-on training that can lead directly to a job and career.” It seems all bases for government control are being covered. Oh, and “real-world education”? It means being trained for a job—only. (See my review of Terrence O. Moore’s book The Story-Killers.)

The feds have not only taken over financing, but they now want to rate colleges. But this is how Obama put it: “We’re shaking up our system of higher education to give parents more information, and colleges more incentives to offer better value, so that no middle-class kid is priced out of a college education.”

The Education Department is appealing to the youth vote by holding “summits,” inviting college “student experts” to weigh in on college “accessibility” and “affordability.” The youth experts have spoken and Obama heard: “We’re offering millions the opportunity to cap their monthly student loan payments to ten percent of their income, and I want to work with Congress to see how we can help even more Americans who feel trapped by student loan debt.”

The scary part came when he used himself and Michelle as examples: “The bottom line is, Michelle and I want every child to have the same chance this country gave us. But we know our opportunity agenda won’t be complete – and too many young people entering the workforce today will see the American Dream as an empty promise – unless we do more to make sure our economy honors the dignity of work, and hard work pays off for every single American.”

Oh, you mean college students should write theses like Michelle Obama’s? Can we all write “Princeton Educated Blacks and the Black Community” and investigate how “attending Princeton will likely lead to my further integration and/or assimilation into a White cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society”?

Education was bad enough back then. As a result, we have her in the White House with her Columbia and Harvard educated husband. It can only get worse when he invokes “widely shared” prosperity, calling on Americans to “toil” together, and summoning “what is best in us, with our feet planted firmly in today but our eyes cast towards tomorrow. . . .”

Boehner and the Republican Scarlet Letter: “A” is for Amnesty

/in , , , , /by

In the 1850 novel The Scarlet Letter Nathaniel Hawthorne tells the story of Hester Prynne, who conceives a daughter through an adulterous affair and struggles to create a new life of repentance and dignity. Throughout the book, Hawthorne explores themes of legalism, sin, and guilt.

Today many believe that House Speaker John Boehner, with the help of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, will conceive an illegitimate daughter named “Amnesty” through an adulterous affair with President Obama. Establishment Republicans believe they must somehow repent by passing amnesty. This is compassionate conservatism writ large.

What Boehner, Cantor and Obama are really doing is legalizing the illegals and both parties could face the consequences in November 2014. They all will be, like Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), wearing the Scarlet Letter: A for Amnesty. Rubio has fallen from grace since he became the Republican face for amnesty in the US Senate. He is still trying to repent and regain some dignity.

The Weekly Standard posted a video of House majority leader Eric Cantor applauded President Obama’s push for so-called immigration reform in last night’s State of the Union Address. Cantor applaudes when President Obama states, “Independent economists say immigration reform will grow our economy and shrink our deficits by almost $1 trillion in the next two decades.  And for good reason:  When people come here to fulfill their dreams — to study, invent, contribute to our culture — they make our country a more attractive place for businesses to locate and create jobs for everybody.  So let’s get immigration reform done this year. Let’s get it done. It’s time.”:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/5A73FvRDSfw[/youtube]

Matthew Boyle from Breitbart reports:

Rep. Steve King (R-IA), a hawk on immigration, told Breitbart News to look at how the vast majority of Republicans in the chamber—with the exceptions of House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), among few others—stayed seated in disapproval of Obama’s push for amnesty.

“It didn’t soar like some State of the Union addresses will,” King said.

It didn’t really challenge us greatly. One of the things I thought was instructive was to watch the Republicans when he brought up the issue of immigration and I thought he got a very tepid response from Republicans. I couldn’t count very many Republicans who were standing at the time. There was Mario Diaz-Balart and Paul Ryan and I’m going to guess some of our leadership that I couldn’t see. But it looked to me like if you were looking for company on that issue you had to look to the Democrats.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), another immigration hawk, told Breitbart News that Obama’s push for amnesty directly contradicts his claim to care for economically hurting Americans.

“His hard stand on immigration was in total contrast to a large portion of his speech where he was dealing with unemployment and giving people raises,” Rohrabacher said.

Gun Owners of America in an email states:

The good thing about anti-gun liberals in Washington is that they are pathologically incapable of keeping their mouths shut.

And, Wednesday morning, shortly before 9:00, MSNBC commentator Dick Gregory announced that House Speaker John Boehner, the day before, had told a private meeting of reporters that he had been talking with Barack Obama “a lot” about pushing immigration reform.

It’s pretty clear why Barack Obama wants a bill which would either legalize or grant citizenship to as many as 11.5 million people who, according to Latinos expressing their opinions in a Pew poll, would cast 88% of their votes for liberals like Barack Obama.

It’s also clear what Speaker Boehner has in mind:  If he sabotages his own party, the liberal media will throw him a “doggie treat.”

But, for other House Republicans, the advantage of having an Obama/Boehner knife in their back is a little less clear.

Will amnesty be the Republican party’s donnybrook? Will they wear the amnesty Scarlet Letter into thee 2014 elections with pride? Time will tell.

TAKE ACTION: If you wish contact your member of Congress on this issue by going here: Contact your Congressman. Note: you must click SUBMIT twice to send your email.

RELATED COLUMNS:

PRUDEN: The Republican suicide strategy on immigration

House GOP wants legal status but no citizenship for illegal immigrants

GOP Crafts Plan to Wreck the County, Lose Voters by Ann Coulter

Buchanan: Push for Immigration Reform Will Spell End of Boehner’s Speakership…Audio…

HOUSE GOP TO OBAMA: LET’S DO ‘YEAR OF ACTION’ TOGETHER…

Ryan plan includes citizenship for illegals… 

Priebus: We need ‘something big’… 

Business execs pressure GOP to pass bill… 

Sessions: Should not cater to the whims of CEOs…