Immigration Shame

 Essays  Comments Off
Aug 232014
 

The simple process of immigration, a process that all other countries handle with simple procedures and low level bureaucrats without having any problems at all; has somehow turned into a humanitarian disaster on the southern border. Is this because America cannot do anything right anymore, or has a divided congress turned America into an open territory where anybody can come and go as they please without security checks or other procedures that may inconvenience them, regardless of intentions being peaceful or not?

Contrary to what the news media may be saying, many of the children coming over the border are not helpless babies in diapers, that age group is usually accompanied by an adult who is using the old “anchor baby” trick to get into America, the land of welfare checks and other goodies. There is also a large group of teenage kids who seem to be traveling by themselves or in groups of other kids. But this is a cause of concern because all these groups are being exposed to dangerous deserts and the most ruthless people humanity has ever produced. This danger to these people is caused by what seems to be the current American way of having no clear policy, or conflicting policies, or ignoring laws. Or so it seems.

Washington’s politicians are treating this issue as if the immigrants are the problem, when they are just the symptom to a deeper problem. That main problem is government corruption in Mexico, The United States and the South American countries involved. These governments have reached new lows in depravity and a total lack of respect for the law.

Mexico and many South American countries are controlled by special interest groups, large monopolies, drug lords and rich powerful landowners. In these countries, politicians represent only these rich special interest groups, not the middle class or the poor. So, like most corrupt governments, these governments are fixing the problem illegally, by not giving the poor the social services they need. They are instead dumping their poor people on the United States where stupid American politicians then have the American tax payers – pay the cost of housing and feeding the thousands of poor from these South American countries. Half of current illegal immigrants wind up on welfare and about 40% are in the underground economy and pay no taxes.

The reason the United States is allowing illegal immigrants over the border, is old fashion vote rigging. Politicians think they can win votes by doing favors for illegal immigrants, but what America is really doing is supporting those rich special interest groups in Mexico by reducing the number of poor Mexicans who would vote against them.   If  adult Mexicans that are in America are sent back to Mexico they can then vote for politicians who will represent their interests and so create opportunities for them to make a decent living, and those that are not able to work can get help from the government. Then and only then can this problem of illegal immigration to America be solved. The current direction America is on will only continue the disastrous situation on the border.

The rich in Mexico do not like competition so they have the government put up barriers to any Mexican citizen who wants to start a business that may give them some competition. These barriers, take the form of regulations and taxes to make it impossible to make any profit. This is why about half the people in Mexico live in severe poverty, often in dirt floor shacks without running water or electricity. One of the reasons the poverty is not higher in Mexico is the 18 billion dollars sent to Mexico from Mexicans living in America, it is in fact the 10th largest source of income in Mexico.

It will be noted that Mexico has little, and in some cases, no border control on the border with America. This proves that Mexico wants the poor to move to America. In fact, the Mexican government gives the poor who want to leave, instructions on how to go to America and what to do once they get here.

While Mexico is pushing out these poor people; America is attracting them with free education, welfare checks, food stamps and many other social services. Just to get their votes and cheap labor.

The children are definitely the ones suffering the most with the border disaster, but another serious victim of the border mess is the American tax payer. Over the last 30 years they have had millions of their jobs sent over seas. Many of them lost their homes and savings in the 2008 government engineered housing bust. Now, they have to pay higher taxes to support foreigners, many of whom just want to take advantage of American tax payers. Clearly, the southern border mess is part of a war on the American tax payers.

If adult Mexicans would face their responsibility and fix their government instead of running away to America, there would be no problem on the southern border.

So, the whole immigration issue is pure corruption and a total lack of any morality, and this goes for all parties involved, the governments and the adult immigrants themselves.  It’s just rigging elections, while the children and American tax payers are getting hurt by this. This problem has existed for years, but as long as this problem has existed, it has never reached the lows in depravity it has now reached by exploiting childern and the already suffering American tax payers. It’s disgusting.

One point of view nobody is talking about is that Mexico today is like France just before the revolution of 1789, in that a very rich upper class is walking all over the poor. If Mexico has a revolution it most likely will end in a communist state. There are many active communist groups in Mexico working just for this.

And you thought we have problems with Mexico now! Just wait for communist Mexico!

So is the immigration mess just a pressure relief valve for Mexico to just keep things quiet, I doubt it, it’s still vote rigging the way I see it, and that’s doing enough damage all by itself. To head off this disaster of a communist Mexico, it’s not enough to just send illegal Mexicans back, they  must take the illegal Mexicans into a class room and explain that they have the responsibility to fix the corruption problem in Mexico by getting politically active and voting the bums out, then send them back.

Mexico has a population of 116,220,947, about 59 million are poor, if half of them move to America this means an additional 29 million Mexicans to the 11 million already here. The cost of social service to these Mexicans and other South Americans will most likely push America over the edge into bankrupticy. But I don’t think the politicians care about this, as long as they win votes to stay in office. America, wise up.

Jose Lugo, editor, ddtv.org

lugo@ddtv.org

www.ddtv.org

 

Jul 142014
 

The Continental Congress, being the first government of what was to become the United States of America, was able to assemble, without undue influence by the British government, though contrary to the law of the land.  That Congress (like the many Committees of Safety) was created in violation of British law.  The British Parliament often, subsequently, passed specific laws to criminalize some of the actions taken by the colonists.

Ultimately, based upon a political philosophy (see Sons of Liberty #14), a Declaration of Dissolution of Government, more commonly described as the Declaration of Independence from British rule, was signed on July 4, 1776.

The arduous efforts of the colonists, prior to that Declaration, were, without question, based upon illegal acts.  Some of those acts were reacted to by the Parliament, with additional acts, making even more laws, which were soon to also be violated.

Beginning in 1765, with the Stamp Act, destruction of both personal, and government property held by the Crown or its representatives was conducted, in violation of the law.  Personal injury was imposed on individuals, either because of their government office, or because of their violation of certain illegal agreements of non-importation.

The British continued to enact laws making certain activities, construed by the colonists as rights, illegal.  This culminated in the seizure of arms and munitions by the British, as well as the colonists, coming to that final flash point on April 19, 1775, at a country village named Lexington.  Within hours, tens of thousands of militiamen were converging on the area around Boston, ready and willing to break even more laws.

Today, we have many laws that denigrate the rights both fought for, and purchased at great cost, by those colonists of two centuries ago.  We are facing the same proliferation of laws enacted to reduce, restrict, or otherwise deny our rights, redefining some as criminal and thereby subjecting Americans to incarceration and/or loss of property.  We also see that laws enacted to protect our country from invasion, by force under arms, or by use of the “Trojan Horse” whereby invaders are placed within our communities, only needing the access to “cached arms”, are being ignored.  Those arms possibly even held by government entities, to aid an invasion, from within, in order to render moot, and destroy that Great Experiment, known as the United States of America.

Is it possible to reclaim our birthright — that United States of America be returned to its intended form, and proper Glory — if we continue and abide by the very laws that were enacted to destroy it?

In recent discussions, the “rights” of those southern border invaders, under somewhat absurd laws, and contrary to the immigration laws of other countries, seem to have the “weight of law” in the minds of those individuals who should defend this country from invasion; Whether the children should be let in or, whether the parents should be let in, if they accompany their children; Whether we should allow those with provable or admitted criminal backgrounds, because of their youth, to be let in; Whether we should allow those in who have contagious, and often terminal, diseases, though by so doing, we expose our own children to those diseases, and bear the economic burden of care, form entry to grave, of those so infected, to be let in; Are the questions that we must answer, for ourselves, not according to the “law”.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is to leave in the hands of the people, the first, and the most important, defense of nation, state, community, and family.  Does that defense require a blessing from a higher authority than the people, themselves?  Laws enacted by the Congress, or rules promulgated by executive agencies, have removed the right of the governors of these states from protecting the states from invasion.  They have not removed that right from the people, regardless of what laws they may enact in an effort to do so.  Reserving the right to determine if it is an invasion to those who have enacted the laws, removing their responsibility to even make such a determination, and leaving it solely in the hands of the Executive, who has steadfastly refused to enforce existing immigration laws, defies logic.  These Executive actions defy the very purpose of the inclusion of Article IV, Section 4, of the Constitution, and the Ninth and Tenth Articles in Amendment to the Constitution

Whatever the government (federal or state) uses to excuse the destructive activity currently going on along our southern border, does not remove from the people the rights embodied in the Constitution.  Simply because Congress ignores our petitions and the state governments acquiesce to the unlawful influence of the federal government does not nullify immigration law.  It is time for the People to enforce those immigration laws.

Do we not, as citizens of the various states of the Union, retain those rights protected by the Constitution?  Do we have the inherent right to repel invasion?  Are we required to restrict our actions simply because the federal government fails to enforce those laws?

Let’s ask ourselves some hard questions:

  • If armed foreign invaders were coming into our country, do we have the inherent right to protect our state and country? 
  • If invaders, with the full potential of coming into your country, or state, unarmed, having arms readily accessible to them, by “law” (no criminal record in this country) or from stored arms caches, do you have the right to shoot them?
  • Do you have an obligation to risk your life to separate those who are a potential threat from those who are not a threat, or only to endeavor to not shoot those who appear not to be a threat?

Let’s look at the war strategy of the federal government in the non-wars that they are fighting, throughout the Middle East.  Smart bombs and missiles do not discriminate between good and bad, though we have this corrupt government insisting that we must abide by their laws, while their practices defy bounds of decency.  The federal government’s wartime strategy is to shoot everyone, indiscriminately, around a single designated threat.  Are we allowed to use the same strategy to protect our own borders?

The federal government has violated state, federal, and international law by providing arms, knowing that they will cross both international boundaries and go into the hands of the drug cartels, or possibly to caches on this side of the border.  They have now opened the borders in an attempt render our sovereign nation status moot.  It should be no surprise to anyone that arms and ammunition provided by the federal government has metastasized into wholesale violence in both of those nations.  It does appear that the federal government is more than willing to allow those arms to be turned against American citizens, all the while pretending that we are blind to its actions, and will only see a “Humanitarian Crises” involving children, using Main Stream Media propaganda to berate Americans for being cruel and heartless because we insist the laws be enforced.

We are left with the choice of Liberty and our Responsibility, as intended by the Founders, or, laws, dictated by “the Crown”, which are self-serving and contrary to OUR Constitution, our rightful sovereign nation status, and  individually, the right to the fruits of our labor.  We have a decision to make, much the same as the decision made by those who bequeathed this great nation to their posterity, to apply the Laws of Nature, rather than the edicts of kings and princes, so that we may restore Constitutional Government, protecting our nation from assured destruction.

Has the time come for us to determine to break those laws, for failure to do so will, most certainly, lead to the destruction of our country?

Suggested Reading:
Tuberculosis
Murrieta
Information Blackout
Illegal Immigration: Diseases
MSM cover-up

This article can be found on line at Liberty or Laws? — Dealing with the Current Invasion

The past is infinitely important. However, it pales in importance to the future.

Jul 092014
 

Judica me, Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta.

Mario Draghi, chief psychopath of the European Central Bank went full-stupid on June 5th and announced mandated NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES on the excess reserves of European banks held and the European Central Bank  (which is the equivalent of the Federal Reserve Bank in the U.S.).  What does this mean?  It means that when a European commercial bank deposits excess cash reserves with the ECB, the commercial bank must PAY the ECB to store that money.  The commercial bank does not earn any interest income on that money, it in fact has a percentage of its deposit CONFISCATED from its account every month by the ECB.As you can see in the article linked above and countless others, the publicly stated rationale behind this negative interest rate paradigm is “stimulus”.  If the banks have to pay to store cash, they will instead lend their excess cash out to customers rather than have a percentage  confiscated every month.  This is utter bee-ess on multiple levels.  These top-tier central bankers know that negative interest rates have NOTHING to do with stimulus, and will, in fact, lead to exactly the opposite.  In fact, they know that the inevitable outcome of negative interest rates is the complete nationalization of the banking sector and total governmental control of all capital flows – which means today a CASHLESS ECONOMY.  Yup.  If you’re interested, I’ll walk you through the chain of events and differentiate between the propaganda that will be used to justify this evil and the reality of how the world actually works.Banks today are sitting on huge cash reserves because the economy sucks and banks have rightly discerned that lending money into a sucky economy is NOT IN THEIR BEST INTERESTS.  If the economy sucks, then lending money to Joe Schmoe to start a business is likely going to end up in default.  So, if YOU were a bank and your choice was between losing one percent by depositing money at the Central Bank at negative interest, or losing FIFTEEN percent on your loan portfolio because the economy sucks and a high percentage of your borrowers would default on their loans, which would you do?  Well, duh.  You would opt for the SMALLER loss of ONLY one percent, and you would continue to hold cash reserves and be VERY stingy with your loan portfolio.

Okay.  That’s easy to understand, right?  Well, the propaganda coming from the Banksters and willingly regurgitated by the useful idiot class is that negative interest rates will absolutely, positively result in increased lending by banks and thus “economic stimulus”.  And bear in mind, they have been bleating EXACTLY the same line of crap in regards to “quantitative easing”.  They have been saying for YEARS that all of the money printing done by the Federal Reserve and European Central Bank would provide “stimulus” in the form of increased lending.  And, as we all know, that didn’t happen.  All that has happened is that the Banksters have taken the “new money” printed by the Central Banks and pumped it into the stock and derivatives markets, thus blowing a massive, unprecedented bubble.  But Joe Schmoe still can’t get a loan to open a business.  The evil, malignant Banksters KNOW that the whole stimulus meme is a lie.  The useful idiots are so indescribably stupid that they can’t comprehend simple logical progressions even when they have a current experiential dataset right in front of their faces that clearly demonstrates the fallacy: not only does QE and other forms of synthetic “liquidity boosting”NOT stimulate the economy, it actually depresses it even more.

So now banks will be even more incentivized to offload cash by plowing it into relatively “safe” paper that has a higher interest yield than the negative rate at the Central Bank.  What does this imply?  Increased demand for Sovereign debt (bonds issued by nations), and derivatives on Sovereign debt.  Now here is where it gets positively sick.  Very soon, banks will be able to borrow money from the “discount window” at the Central Bank at either zero, or at a NEGATIVE rate.  Think about that.  The Central Bank, because the interest rate is negative, actually pays banks to borrow money from them.  And this utter PERVERSITY is the root of the whole satanic mess.  The first mover in all of this is the evil, perverse Central Bank.  The Central Banks are completely content to pay banks to borrow money – a perversity – because the Central Bank doesn’t give a shit.  It can just “PRINT” as much money as it “needs”.  And, as we have discussed at length, the “printing” of money, money being a proxy for the human capacity to labor and create through time, is simply the leveraging of HUMAN LIFE, specifically at this late hour not just the life of every man, woman and child alive today OUTSIDE the oligarch class, but now generations upon generations of human beings who DO NOT YET EXIST, and are thus utterly powerless to object or mount a counter-revolt.

Okay, so now Bank A goes to the discount window and borrows “new money” from the Central Bank at NEGATIVE one percent, which means the loans generates a yield TO THE BORROWER.  Then, Bank A turns around and plows that money, which is already generating a yield in and of itself, into French Sovereign bonds that yield 1.5%.  Bank A does this because it is certain that France will never be allowed to default – the Central Bank will just keep printing money and printing money to keep France (or any other country) from defaulting on its debt.  So, What is the total yield to Bank A?  The one percent yield on the money borrowed at negative interest from the Central Bank, PLUS the 1.5% yield on the French bonds = +2.5%.  Do you see why this dynamic INCREASES DEAMND for sovereign debt?  It incentivizes governments not to PAY DOWN their debt, but to in fact EXPAND their balance sheets by going deeper into debt.  And because the demand for sovereign debt is increased because there is more money chasing after it, the interest rates are driven DOWN (a lower interest rate is the same thing as higher price on bonds), and thus the politicians tell the people that not only is more government debt good, it is extremely good because “the interest rate is so low”.  And the glassy-eyed sheeple nod passively and return to their tee-vee shows.

This will also increase demand for derivatives on sovereign debt (i.e. repurchase agreements and credit default swaps), again, because the banks are quite confident that the Central Banks will never permit a sovereign default.  And who, pray tell, are the main counterparties on almost all sovereign debt derivatives?   J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Deutschebank.  Uh-huh.  And where do ALL of the people come from who populate the Central Banks, both in the U.S. and in Europe?  J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Deutschebank. Uh-huh.

Kids, this isn’t terribly complicated.  Really.

Now, to YOU, the people who PAY FOR ALL OF THIS.

Negative interest rates will be a cost to YOU is two ways.  First, the obvious: you will have a confiscatory tax levied on your bank deposits every month – that’s what a negative interest rate is, sweetie.  It is a TAX on the PEOPLE, NOT the banks, because the banks will pass through to the customers the cost for the bank to store reserves at the Central Banks PLUS a margin.  Next, in an economy that is perceived to be relatively stronger or safer (of which the former United States is still at the top of the list because of its size, both economically and militarily) capital will flow IN to that economy, thus causing ASSET BUBBLES and CONSUMER PRICE INFLATION.  Been to the grocery store lately?  Looked into buying any farm ground lately?  Uh-huh.  So when consumer prices inflate, what do banks do to interest rates in order to cover the resulting increased risk in lending to consumers who now are having a much more difficult time making ends meet?  Yep.  They RAISE interest rates to borrowers.  And so therefore a negative interest rate at the Central Bank not only does not stimulate the economy, it increases the contraction and deepens the depression (because let’s face it, if your economy is at the point that the Central Bank is going NEGATIVE on interest rates, honey, yo’ ass is already in a DEPRESSION, not a recession).

Now to the big ugly.  Since the Central Bank is, despite any and all lying propaganda to the contrary, a government entity backed fully by the government and thus ultimately backed by the people, and since the Sovereign bond market is also a pure function of the government and thus ultimately backed by the people, when banks receive payment on both their capital borrowed from the Central Bank at negative interest AND receive a positive interest yield on their government bond holdings, that means that THE PEOPLE are PAYING THE BANKS… ON BOTH SIDES.

This is a backdoor way of confiscating collateral from the people and using it to RECAPITALIZE THE BANKS.  And also pay the bankster oligarchs’ eight and nine-figure salaries and compensation packages, which, let’s be honest, is their top priority.  

So now you may be thinking that this will cause a feedback loop to occur and rates will continue to be driven more and more negative.  Yes.  Absolutely.  Because the Central Bank will have to keep adjusting its rate down to stay “more negative” than the Sovereign bond and other money markets.  What happens when customer deposit rates go sufficiently negative so as to compel normal people to withdraw their cash from the banks and hold it in cash?  The answer is, the oligarchs will enact government policies outlawing the use of cash.  Think I’m crazy?  Have you tried paying your car insurance bill with cash lately?  Cash.  As in hundred dollar bills.  How about your phone or utility bill?  Guess what.  You can’t.

One of the big reasons why I had to move into the “Van Down by the River” was because I simply COULD NOT FUNCTION using cash.  When I was foreclosed upon because I could not provide the bank with a tax return (because I have declared a tax strike), I began investigating possible rental scenarios in preparing to move.  Kids, you CANNOT rent an apartment “above the table”, pay the utilities on said apartment, insure a vehicle and scores of other necessary expenses in the former U.S. using cash today.  Between IRS liens and mortgage foreclosures, my credit score is destroyed, which also disqualifies above-board rental.  If you think that cash controls and the move to outlaw the use of cash is crazytalk, just stop and think about all of the myriad ways that IT IS ALREADY IMPOSSIBLE to pay with cash.  We’re already 75% of the way there.

So, there would be increased economic depression causing new lending to crater and thus squeezing commercial banks’ margins and causing them to demand a way to dump ALL consumer debt, including business loans, car loans and credit cards, off on the government in the form of guarantees (this is precisely what already happened in the real estate market with almost all mortgages being bundled and dumped onto Fannie and Freddie).  Couple this with the confiscatory tax on deposits AND the paying of banks to borrow from the discount window by the government (aka the people) in order to recapitalize the banks, and what you have is nothing less than the COMPLETE NATIONALIZATION OF THE BANKING SECTOR.  This will inevitably require the outlawing of sovereign currency (cash), which will inevitably lead to the REJECTION of the sovereign currency, and the emergence of a “black” alternative.  We are talking, ladies and gentlemen, about nothing less that the final, complete destruction of the economy, which will inevitably lead to the total collapse of the extant government and what scattered vestiges remain of the Rule of Law.

This, and nothing less than this, has been, is, and will continue to be the explicit goal of the oligarchy that has already overthrown the former United States.  This is part and parcel of the Cloward Piven Strategy.  And it is all happening RIGHT NOW, and given the ignorance and cowardice of the broad populace will not be stopped excluding supernatural intervention, of which we are utterly undeserving.  Get ready, and don’t you dare say you weren’t warned.  And please, spare me any droolingly stupid emails telling me how lending money at interest is evil.  A positive interest rate is ESSENTIAL.  What is immoral, and what actually constitutes the lion’s share of USURY, is UNSECURED lending with no collateral against it.  Well, actually there IS collateral against an unsecured loan:  the future LIFE and productive capacity of the borrower.  THAT is usury.  All Central Bank money printing is therefore USURIOUS because, as we discussed above, it is simply the leveraging of the lives of the people, both present AND future, who comprise the sovereign entity that backs the money of said nationstate.  In other words:  YOU and your descendants for multiple generations hence.

I hope this helps you understand the utterly critical and thoroughly evil concept of negative interest rates.

Ann Barnhardt

Craig Bolton at it Again

 Essays  Comments Off
Jun 042014
 

Dear Hernando Today Newspaper

On May 28, 2014 you published an essay by Craig Bolton in your Voices Page A4. The essay was very critical of hunters and I believe this was not fair.

Craig Bolton made some comments that give us a good look at the liberal way of thinking. It seems to come from out of nowhere, but if you look at it closely, it starts to look like he only uses one source of information to base his opinions on. Namely, the liberal media.

For example he says:

“All hunters are knuckle-dragging Neanderthal cowards because they shoot animals who can’t shoot back”.

First of all, he insults people he most likely never met or made any effort to understand. This is something most liberals criticize conservatives for. But he goes on to show that he seems to live in a world where all animals are the type you see on Disney movies where all they do is hang out and talk stupid stuff, smell the daisies and never hurt a fly. In the real world animals like wolves, bears, fox, bobcats, lions, coyotes are alive only because they are professional killers. Yes, they kill for a living, it’s natures way. Did you ever hear the story that all creatures in the sea don’t die of old age because they are all food for each other? This is how nature keeps itself in balance. If not for the predator, the prey would overpopulate the world and eat up the whole food supply, then they would all starve to death.

Somehow Mr. Bolton seems to think hunters are cowards if they follow natures way.

He looks at all hunters in a stereotype way, to him they are all 300 pound bearded bruits who stalk the woods with full auto cannons and grenades to track down and murder Rockey the Flying Squirrel. And if Rockey should pull out a full power sling shot and fire an acorn back at that hunter, the hunter would scream and run home to mommy to kiss the boo-boo.

A more realistic view of hunters may sound something like this:

Back in the day when America had families instead of welfare recipients, many fathers would give their sons a 22 cal rifle before they even had any facial hair; I mean not even peach fuzz. A year later that kid would pop Rockey the Flying Squirrel in the head at 100 yards. Not that he hated squirrels, he in fact loves squirrels right next to his mashed potatoes and string beans with lots of gravy. You see, squirrels are delicious because they eat mostly nuts that give them a delicious nutty flavor. I mean, really good eating.

But the thing that Craig says that I find most objectionable is when he says that hunters are not willing to hunt if the prey would shoot back. Consider that later in life when most kids that learn how to hunt when they are young, often hear the call of their country due to some emergency, like terrorist attacks that killed many Americans or Pearl Harbor. These kids would then join the Army and leave that squirrel gun home and pick up an Army issued rifle, it would be a natural transition from squirrel gun to Army rifle since they already know the basics of shooting. Then off they go to the war zone; currently, that’s Iraq and Afghanistan. When they get there, they do not find Rockey the Flying Squirrel armed with a full auto sling shot loaded with 30 acorn mags, instead they find Al-Qaeda and the Taliban; tough professional killers armed with  AK-47 assault rifles,  rocket propelled grandees, 50 Caliber machine guns  and they are masters at planting booby-traps with hi-explosives. And YES, Al-Qaeda and the Taliban do shoot at those American kids who grew up hunting. And YES those American kids do return fire. Often, those American kids would get shot themselves, but they still shoot back, if they lost an arm or a leg, they would still shoot back. If they run out of ammo, they would use a bayonet, a rifle butt or theirs fists.

So, yes Mr. Bolton, hunters will still hunt if the prey shoots back, if you doubt this, just ask the Taliban or Al-Qaeda.

Why do so many American kids fight like they do, it’s to protect the freedoms and liberty that their fathers gave them when they give their sons those little 22 cal squirrel guns. And, believe it or not, it’s also to protect the freedom of speech guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States. Even for people like Craig Bolton no matter what kind of stupid stuff they say.

It’s clear that liberals want to disarm America, but they just do not realize that by doing this they will not make us any safer. Look at it this way. On average, 8,500 people are killed with guns every year, but from one million to over two million criminal acts are stopped by guns every year. Clearly this means that if guns are removed from America, the murder rate can easily go up to over two million. So, the solution to the murder problem is to get guns away from people with a mental illness, and to keep law abiding citizens fully  armed.

Since I listen to Left Wing and Right Wing news sources, I have become convinced that the liberal media wants to disarm America using lies and distorting facts, because it’s the only way to impose socialism on America. It has to be realized that socialists taking over a country is not new, it happens all the time, but it can not be done with armed citizens.

Graig you have to open your mind.

Jose Lugo, founder DDTV.ORG

Lugo@ddtv.org

www.ddtv.org

 

Apr 182014
 

Malaysian Flight 370 continues to be a tragic mystery, but some hard facts to deal with are the fact that the flight transponder was deliberately turned off and the recently located “ping” from the black box voice recorder has been heard from ships in the Indian Ocean; so it’s time to speculate that this may have been a terrorist act. If the plane had a structural failure or some other kind of mechanical failure, the transponder would not have been turned off. So, terrorism is the prime suspect.

The implications of this are enormous.  If it’s true that the pilot and/or co-pilot shut off the transponder, then all security measures that have been adopted for anti-terrorism reasons have  been defeated. It may still be a possibility that an onboard passenger was a terrorist and forced his way into the cockpit; but this is unlikely because of the bullet proof doors that are placed on all aircraft these days. So, all evidence points to the pilot as a suicidal terrorist. However, it must be said that the recovery of the cockpit voice recorder is the only definite way to establish what actually happened — until then it’s only speculation. As of now, the facts do point to a pilot terrorist act.

Now to understand how problematic this is, you have to consider a very old saying that states:

“Under perfect laboratory conditions, any security equipment one person puts together, another can take apart”.

This breaks down to the Spy vs. Spy drama where each needs to get a better weapon or method to defeat the enemy. History clearly shows this as better weapons are constantly created to defeat other weapons. At first there were rocks, then clubs, then spears, then slings and arrows, then guns, then missiles; and this just goes on and on.

The latest methods to stop terrorists has been scanners, passenger pat downs, sniffing dogs and bullet proof doors on passenger jets. The terrorists defeated all this by developing a new method to get around these tools by just putting the terrorist in the pilot seat to do the deadly deed. Malaysian Flight 370 may show that this deadly technique was effective with the deaths of 239 passengers.

Since Flight 370 may prove that all anti-terrorist technology developed to date is useless against these terrorists, where does this leave us? Well, some may say that we should let them into our homes to show them our humanity, and develop friendships with them; this failed because the 911 terrorist acts and the Boston Marathon bombings were committed by terrorists who lived among us and even went to our schools. This was a total failure on 911 because they went to our schools to learn how to fly the very airplanes they used to attack the World Trade Center and Pentagon where 3,000 Americans were killed.

Some people will now say that we must screen the pilots more carefully; this also can not work because the Muslims have developed communities in America so that there are many Muslims who are native American, they can not be screened out.

This situation with Islam is developing into anger and revulsion that can lead to a major war. This is not acceptable because it may spread to Russia, Asia, Europe, America and get many other countries involved with massive losses on all sides. Also, there are about a billion Muslims in the world today, and so the war will go on for a long time and most likely turn nuclear with unmanageable horrible  results.

A method that has been in use since 911 has been to find and get rid of the terrorists by throwing them in jail or killing them. This limited war has not worked as proven by Iraq and Afghanistan, whereas many as we kill, there are always more in increasing numbers to carry on the fight. The reason is revenge for family members killed. Also, the hate they learn in their schools and their Holy Book the Quran teaches that they must get rid of non-believers and they will be rewarded in heaven for their sacrifice.

One method that has not been tried is to inflict massive casualties on them to the point that they realize it’s a no-win situation for them. But this can not be used because it’s politically incorrect and may lead to the before mentioned major war. It also has to be realized that problems with Muslims are not new. President Thomas Jefferson fought a war against Muslims in Tripoli from the year 1801 to about 1815. And we all know about the Crusades that lasted about 500 years. The question here is, did the Crusades really end, or was there just a 600 year truce that ended with the establishment of Israel in 1948? It must be realized that during most of the history of the Mid East, there was no terrorism, just the usual turf wars that are common to the chaos of the human condition. But there was no terrorism until after the establishment of Israel, so what we call terrorism is really attempts to cut off the supply lines from America to Israel. So, a way to stop terrorism would be to establish peace between Israel and the Palestine people; but many people have tried and failed.

Basically, all the Israeli and Palestine people really want is a home they can call their own; the problem is they both want the same home. But if you add up all the costs of terrorism, it may be worth it if all the nations of the world got together and arrange a homeland for them all. Where I don’t know. It will be a massive undertaking, but well worth it if it ends terrorism.

The last option to counter terrorism would be to have effective leadership that can counter the terrorist threat, but since we do not have effective leaders, there is no solution to terrorism in sight, except maybe to get them all a homeland.

Jose Lugo

lugo@ddtv.org

Party Time For Russia

 Essays  Comments Off
Mar 092014
 

The world is a very dangerous place with Russia back at their old tricks of invading countries on their borders. But is this all Russia’s fault, or did America give them the green light?

Consider American policy in Afghanistan, a country on the Russian border, and how America deals with Hamid Karizai, President of Afghanistan. American politicians claim they do not like what he is doing, but American politicians do not seem to realize that they leave Karzai no other choice.

Among the decisions made by Karzai are his refusal to sign the Bilateral Security Agreement that would have left American forces in Afghanistan and their not being subject to Afghan law in case of injuries to Afghan citizens. Also, (and the most important) is the release of 65 Afghan Taliban prisoners from jail, some of whom have killed Americans and are known bomb makers.

To anybody who has any common sense it is quickly apparent that Karzai had no choice, but to make these decisions like he did, if he wants to save his own skin after the American forces leave at the end of this year. Clearly it will be him and the Taliban alone, after the Americans leave, and he knows that the Taliban are very good at assignations of political hacks they do not like. This is why it was so wrong for Obama to unilaterally announce the American troop withdrawal at the end of the year, they forced Karzai’s hand. Also, it should be clear as day by now that Karzai is in fact a Taliban himself. His loyalties are to the Taliban, not America. Karzai’s problem is that he wants American money, but definitely not the Americans. In fact, the only reason he is still alive is because he has convinced his fellow Taliban that he is on THEIR side, and to make the best of the American occupation of his country; in other words, get American money!

This is why America has been using a policy that is all wrong. One minute America is acting like a door mat, just letting all kinds of nuts walk all over us, but then giving them money at the same time. Then demand that they accept American style democracy as their life style and form of government. It was apparent a long time ago that muslim countries do not want American style democracy. They want a society based on religious values that involves worship of their God and strong family values. They look at America with declining religious values, legal aboritions, open promotion of irresponsible sex, high divorce rates, one parent families and they react in horror at us. Clearly, they do not want American style democracy. In fact the only thing America has accomplished with this misguided foreign policy is to give democracy a bad name, a historic first!

The Russians clearly see this really dumb American policy in Afghanistan that’s right on their border and decided to take advantage of it. Other examples of American diplomatic incompetence are the Libya situation, where a American ambassador was killed and nothing was done by America, then there was the Syria situation where America said, “Don’t cross the Red Line and kill civilians with poison gas”, but Syria crossed the Red Line and nothing was done until the Russians stepped in and solved the problem for America.

If you look at American policy with Russia during the Cold War, you will not see any American foreign aid, military intervention or America acting like a door mat. What happened was that a policy of MAD (mutual assured distruction) was used, in other words; you attack us, we distroy you. It worked great. There was no nuclear war, communism fell in Russia and their economy is progressing along nicely. Sure they have an annoying dictator, but this will pass and they will develop a better society as the years pass, all by themselves without American intervention. America on the other hand is not doing well at all. American politicians have adopted the same policy that caused the fall of  Ancient Rome and many other countries since then. The new/old American domestic policy is the old buying votes to gain power, free cell phones and rent free housing have proven effective in doing this; but the cost is sending America to bankruptcy and causing a crippling social rot to take hold.

The American response to the Russian invasion of Crimea is a lot of talk and sanctions. This will not work because Europe will not go along with sanctions, if they do, Russia will cut off their oil and gas supply. Besides, boycotts don’t work, Cuba has been boycotted by America for over 50 years with nothing accomplished.

Will another election of the lesser of two evils solve American problems; not likely. A slight majority of narrow minded Americans are in love with socialism (free stuff that other citizens pay for) and negative social values, all of which have historically led to the distruction nations.

America has to restructure the government to get special interests out of government, term limits, fire all unproductive teachers in the schools and enforce the Constitution, not minimize it. In a historically short period of time of 225 years, the Constitution made America the richest country the world has ever seen, it provided the highest standard of living for the largest percentage of the population. No other country has achieved this. On the other hand, the socialist path America has taken has proven in other countries that it destroys nations in about 63 years (using the Russian example). So we have 58 years to go before the end of America and hard times before the end. That is, if we don’t wise up.

In the mean time, the Russians see all these strange goings on in America and so decided to take advantage of it. The result is that they are really having a great time.

Jose Lugo, founder Direct Democracy TV

lugo@ddtv.org

 

 

Feb 132014
 

Article V Conventions and Nullification are NOT mutually exclusive, nor is one the magic pill for all our federal problems. Each is a legitimate Constitutional solution, but each has a different aim and application. Each plan has its inherent problems and there are legitimate concerns that should be considered and dangers guarded against. They can be used together in the defense of Liberty as long as we understand each in its own context and consider the pitfalls involved. It must be noted that we are having this discussion because of the very fact that we have stepped so far out of the Constitutional boundaries given to this government that we are operating practically in a post-Constitutional America. At this point, it is unlikely that any solution will be perfect or without peril.

Two different animals:

Article V Convention is a long term fix aimed at making corrections at the federal level. Nullification is an immediate defense at the state level. Article V aims to make structural changes or further clarifications to the operations of the federal government and its relation to the states by amending the Constitution. Nullification aims to make no changes to the current Constitution, but is simply an assertion by the individual sovereign states of the authority they already possess and a declaration of the limitations to federal power already defined by the Constitution. Article V convention in the current context seeks to fix what is assumed to be broken or lacking in the federal system and is to be used in the rarest of circumstances. Nullification, as intended by the framers, was to be a part of “republican maintenance,” whereby the central government was to be continually kept in check by its masters, the states.

Both have their merits and their dangers. Let us take a look some problems that we should keep in mind so we can work TOGETHER to defeat the common enemy…TYRANNY.

Some of the problems with Article V:

WHO are the delegates and what is their motivation?

According to James Madison in Federalist 49, one significant problem with conventions is – WHO will be the delegates? Madison discusses two options for choosing delegates: either through the Legislators or through popular vote of the people. In each case he believed there was cause for concern.

In modern terms, when delegates are chosen by the legislators, what we could see are appointments based upon party loyalty rather than upon Constitutional expertise and dedication to Liberty principles. When the delegates are chosen by popular vote, typical election dynamics could determine the outcome. Voters would vote based upon party popularity and perhaps even a “lesser of two evils” and the same corrupt politicians would now be “fixing” the very problems they created. The ultimate result of both options would be, as Madison states, “The same influence which had gained them an election into the legislature, would gain them a seat in the convention… They would consequently be parties to the very question to be decided by them.”

According to Madison, the real difficulty with delegates boils down to “motivation”. What will be the motivating force behind the delegates and their amendments? Madison recognized that the only reason we have our current Constitution is that the framers had just come from a bloody revolution that kept the delegates focused upon LIBERTY and that forced them to set aside their party politics and personal motivations:

“We are to recollect that all the existing constitutions were formed in the midst of a danger which repressed the passions most unfriendly to order and concord; of an enthusiastic confidence of the people in their patriotic leaders, which stifled the ordinary diversity of opinions on great national questions; of a universal ardor for new and opposite forms, produced by a universal resentment and indignation against the antient government;” ~ James Madison Federalist 49

Madison seems to be telling us that without some overriding and unifying motivation, the convention would likely degrade into another Republican vs. Democrat drama. If we cannot get delegates that are properly constitutionally minded rather than driven by political gain and greed, this will never benefit us.

WHEN will it be done?

One big difference between nullification and convention is the time each takes to implement. Any advocate of Article V must admit that this is a LONG TERM goal and not a quick fix. To call convention, choose delegates, agree on amendments, an Article V convention could take several years, possibly 5 to 10 years. Adding to the time frame is the Article V requirement of 3/4 ratification by the States. That means EVERY AMENDMENT must be agreed upon (debated), individually, by 3/4 of the States to ratify. During such a time frame, it would be prudent to use nullification puts the brakes on at the state level until corrections (if truly needed) can be made at the federal level.

What will be the scope and impact?

Probably the most debated aspect is the notion of a “runaway convention.” Some say the ¾ ratification is a check on a runaway convention, that ¾ of the states would never go along with a total rewrite of the Constitution or the addition of harmful amendments. Of course, ¾ of the states DID ratify the very harmful 16th and 17th amendments. Tinkering with the foundation is always risky business. SO at the end of the day it may well come back to the main issue of the motivation, focus and education of the people and their delegates.

Nullification:

First, Nullification is a constitutional solution not because it is enumerated, but because the Constitution is a contract (technically a compact) among the States that created the federal government. The States are the parties to the Constitutional Contract and the federal government is the PRODUCT of that contract. Inherent in EVERY contract is the right of the parties to that contract to control the product of the contract. The States are the representatives of the people in this contract and have a DUTY to maintain the federal government within its constitutional boundaries and thus protecting the rights of the people. Nullification is that act of the PEOPLE through their States to maintain the federal government within in its “limited and defined” boundaries and should be as regularly carried out as an oil change in your car. Madison states this principle again in Federalist 49:

“As the people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power, is derived; it seems strictly consonant to the republican theory, to recur to the same original authority, not only whenever it may be necessary to enlarge, diminish, or new-model the powers of government; but also whenever any one of the departments may commit encroachments on the chartered authorities of the others.”

This is not the forum for explanation of Nullification. If you are unfamiliar with this term or have in the past heard that it is not an option available to the States for a myriad of reasons, please take the time to read the FACTS about nullification before you give in to any one position.

Fear of Nullification

The first problem with nullification is fear and ignorance. For some, nullification’s association (rightly or wrongly) with the Civil War and slavery (despite the fact that it was used to resist slavery) throws a veil of fear over the entire issue. Many mistruths and misconceptions regarding this Liberty solution must be overcome in order to even utilize this option. Retorts such as “the South lost the war,” “SCOTUS says no,” or “it’s the law of the land” are common among those ignorant of the concepts of State sovereignty and nullification.

Even as nullification happens all around us today with, States legalizing marijuana and same sex marriage; states denying the federal government power to enforce the indefinite detention provisions of NDAA 2012 and Obamacare; local and state governments refusing to enforce federal gun restrictions, some will still say that nullification is an obscure and outdated concept. With more than 100 years of distorted history, overcoming the ignorance and fear surrounding Nullification is no easy task.

Participation by the States:

Whereas Article V requires 3/4 of the States to ratify any amendment, Nullification can be achieved on a State by State basis. But again, education of the States in this liberty option is a problem to State participation. Many state legislators do not understand the true nature of the states’ relationship to the federal government and they understand the states’ right and duty to interposition even less.

Federal Enforcement of Unconstitutional Acts:

One more roadblock to nullification is the federal government‘s attempt to bully the States into compliance with unconstitutional acts. The most obvious attempt at forced compliance will be through the withholding of federal funds. Any State who intends to maintain their supremacy over the federal government will have to be able to become self-sufficient in the face of federal funding withdrawal. In an arena where it’s all about the money and in a political system where politicians climb the ladder of power by giving and receiving favors this is a significant obstacle.

Runaway Nullification:

Sometimes opponents of nullification characterize the concept as “ignoring laws you don’t like.” The question at issue in nullification is not whether we like the law or not, the question is whether the law is constitutional or not. A possible danger is that states may wish to “nullify” inherent natural rights, such as those protected in the bill of rights from the abuse of the federal government. When such tyranny arises on the state level, the citizens must be ready to resist this tyranny as well, or else choose to live as slaves.

The REAL Solution lies within the operation of BOTH methods!

What Article V conventions cannot do to stop tyranny now, nullification can accomplish with near immediate effect. Where Nullification ends, Article V provides a long term solution to strengthening the restraints on the federal government, if done by the right people for the right reasons in the right way. If we DO NOT engage in Nullification now, we will never survive as a republic long enough for the Article V Convention to have any hopes. If we just engage in Nullification and do not follow through with shoring up the established boundaries, I believe we will dissolve into individual sovereign States and the Republic will die.

We will not succeed if we are so caught up in our own causes that we have to defeat everyone else’s. That is egocentric and immature. Truth be told, we will not succeed without all the efforts of all the people working together in the defense of Liberty. We need nullification daily to maintain the Republic, yet if we continue to allow the foundation to erode, we may indeed need a convention to right the ship.

So let’s approach the defense of Liberty like grown-ups. Let’s work together instead of trying to punch each other in the eye to elevate ourselves.

I have confidence that when all is said and done, our future will look back and say, “Coming up with a new and better form of government was nearly impossible. The original Constitution itself was not the problem; it was the ignorance of the people that lived under it.”

By KrisAnne Hall

About KrisAnne Hall

KrisAnne Hall is an attorney and former prosecutor, fired after teaching the Constitution to TEA Party groups – she would not sacrifice liberty for a paycheck. She is a disabled veteran of the US Army, a Russian linguist, a mother, a pastor’s wife and a patriot. She now travels the country and teaches the Constitution and the history that gave us our founding documents. KrisAnne Hall does not just teach the Constitution, she lays the foundations that show how reliable and relevant our founding documents are today. She presents the “genealogy” of the Constitution – the 700 year history and five foundational documents that are the very roots of American Liberty.

Unfair Compensation

 Essays  Comments Off
Feb 082014
 

I think the vast differences in compensation between victims of the September 11 casualty and those who die serving our country in Uniform are profound. No one is really talking about it either, because you just don’t criticize anything having to do with September 11. Well, I can’t let the numbers pass by because it says something really disturbing about the entitlement mentality of this country.

If you lost a family member in the September 11 attack, you’re going to get an average of $1,185,000.The range is a minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million. If you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed in action,the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit, half of which is taxable.

Next, you get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get $833 a month until you remarry. And there’s a payment of $211 per month for each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a screeching halt.

Keep in mind that some of the people who are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 million are complaining that it’s not enough. Their deaths were tragic, but for most, they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Soldiers put themselves in harms way FOR ALL OF US, and they and their families know the dangers.. (Actually, soldiers are put in harms way by politicians and commanding officers.)

We also learned over the weekend that some of the victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11 families are getting. In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the embassies are now asking for compensation as well.

You see where this is going, don’t you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over 50 years of entitlement politics in this country. It’s just really sad. Every time a pay raise comes up for the military, they usually receive next to nothing of a raise. Now the green machine is in combat in the Middle East while their families have to survive on food stamps and live in low-rent housing. Make
sense?

However, our own US Congress voted themselves a raise. Many of you don’t know that they only have to be in Congress one time to receive a pension that is more than $15,000 per month. And most are now equal to being millionaires plus.

They do not receive Social Security on retirement because they didn’t have to pay into the system. If some of the military people stay in for 20 years and get out as an E-7, they may receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who placed them in harm’s way receives a pension of $15,000 per month.

I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they start cutting out benefits and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.

“When do we finally do something about this?” If this doesn’t seem fair to you, it is time to forward this to as many people as you can.

By Rush Limbaugh

Feb 022014
 

This powerful speech was written and delivered by Frank Sutliff to a crowd of concerned citizens and educators at the Oneonta (New York) Forum on January 18, 2014. Sutliff is a Principal and is also the President of SAANYS (School Administrators Association of New York State).

He said:

I appreciate the opportunity I have been given to speak here today. Although I am the President of the School Administrators Association of New York State, better known as SAANYS, I am not here today representing this organization of over 7000 administrators. Instead, I am here as a veteran Principal with 26 years of experience running a junior-senior high school, as well as having been in education over 30 years.

“here is one main issue for me with the APPR, the common core, and what I call the corporate takeover of American public education. That issue is the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on something that is of questionable benefit to children in any way, shape, or form. This hysteria over college and career readiness is a manufactured crisis based on data that compares apples to oranges, a crisis designed to enrich the coffers of publishing companies. The illusion that children in the United States are ill prepared and that they will never be competitive in a world market has manifested itself in many ways. I will concentrate on three of these issues today- the corporate takeover of education, high stakes testing, and the questionable data gathering in New York State via InBloom.

“Recent announcements out of the Governor’s office state how students are being “put first” in improving and reforming education and that education funding has been increased by $1.8 billion over the last two years.

Let me talk about how students are being “put first” in my district the last two years. I am sure that many of you here in the audience have seen the same thing.

• Is cutting 14 courses so that some students sit in so called “study halls” or the senior lounge for five periods a day “putting students first”? We no longer offer Computer Graphic Design, Construction Systems, World War II, or History and Digital Media just to name a few courses lost to cuts to teaching positions.

• Is the end of all professional development, including curriculum mapping and data analysis “putting students first?”

• Is cutting a guidance counselor as students’ academic and emotional needs increase “putting students first”?

• Is the cutting of numerous sports, clubs, and activities “putting students first”?

In this state and across the country, where we have been sold a bag of goods with Race to the Top, we are supposedly “putting students first”. In my district, we could “put students first” by providing them with needed and desired courses, providing their teachers with professional development, and providing these students with services and activities. Instead, on the Friday before Christmas, I received yet another huge shipment of common core modules where kindergarten students can learn about Mesopotamia, fifth graders can do close reading of passages from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and high school students can close read documents from the Federal Reserve Bank. As I sorted and distributed these boxes of material, I could see my senior lounge where students sit period after period due to the lack of course offerings. However, the millions and millions of dollars for Expeditionary Learning and Common Core Inc. continue to flow unabated.

“I am encouraged by the efforts of groups such as yours and I feel that grassroots efforts such as those done by the “Oneonta Area for Public Education” are well worth the effort in trying to effect change.

“I would like to share an email that I wrote about these issues and then sent to my teachers a few months ago. I believe my email sums up where we now are in this fight to restore sanity to our schools and how groups such as yours came to be.

“As the wasteful APPR system came into being with hundreds of millions foolishly allocated through Obama’s Race to the Top, there was little public outcry against it. Any objections were mainly from educators and the public could have cared less due to the disdain spewed against teachers and administrators by our governor and others. When the common core came in with it, there was little outcry against it, as no one understood the implications- a few “shifts” here and there and a few billions for testing and publishing companies. Again, no one outside of education really cared as criticisms were viewed as just those of whiny teachers and self serving administrators.

During this time, various educational groups formed to fight back against these initiatives, particularly on Long Island and in Western New York. However, these were isolated pockets and the public took little or no interest, nor did the legislators.

However, when students returned to school and began to have hours and hours of homework with the expectation that parents would help with things they did not know and when young elementary students started saying that they hated school, things began to change quickly. The final straw was when the test results were sent home; parents who had previously been told that their children were above average and doing well found out that their children were instead, barely achieving and in need of AIS. This is when the heat got turned up, resulting in common core forums where parents (“special interest” groups according to Commissioner King) got involved and heatedly voiced their opinions. As we know, this resulted in the cancellation of these forums by King and a public outcry.

What Commissioner King does not understand and has not dealt with in his limited experience as a school administrator is the vehemence of parents when it comes to defending their children. Any administrator with experience understands this and this is when the top down and forced compliance of the APPR/common core debacle thankfully went off the track. When parents got involved because their children were treated as lab experiments and started to voice their opinions as well as contact their legislators, the “revolt” against this nonsense found its voice.”

This is the voice with which you are all now speaking- speaking out against all of the testing, all of the squandered resources, and the decisions being made by corporate leaders with no experience in public schools. I look at my own district and try to find one positive thing about the APPR and the common core and I find none. However, when I look at the negative impact it has brought us, I see morale at an all time low, teachers reluctant to share their practices with colleagues due to concerns about their “score” and money spent on purchasing tests that could be spent on students. This is my own experience; to be fair, I know colleagues in other districts and within my own professional organization who appear to be quite pleased with the so called reform agenda, particularly the common core. My question to them would be the same- could these hundreds of millions have been better spent by providing services and opportunities to students instead of being spent in a top down experiment?

I would like to take a few minutes to talk about the testing. I have been giving 3-8 assessments (in my case 7-8), as well as Regents exams for years and years. I never had a problem with these tests before, other than a few blips along the way (a 2004 fiasco with Algebra being a prime example). Overall, it was an excellent system with tests of relatively high quality administered from district to district. What we did at my school with the 3-8 assessments in particular was to invite K-12 teachers as a group to scrutinize and study them in the following year. We looked for strengths and weaknesses, not to get better test scores, but to inform instruction. In fact, leading these data groups was one of the highlights of my professional career- to have 3rd grade teachers discussing math standards with the trig teacher is a wonderful use of educators’ time. However, with no money for professional development and the secretive nature of the tests now, this activity no longer occurs.

Now as part of “putting students first” and the mantra of college and career readiness, we give 3-8 tests that are longer than the law boards and include concepts and topics never taught. This is part of the now famous State Ed analogy of “building the plane in the air.” However, as we “build the plane in the air”, we not only fail children, we fail their teachers in the quest to make teaching an activity that can be assigned a number.

Another thing associated with testing that I find truly disingenuous is the notion put out from Albany that all of the additional SLO testing is the fault of districts and the APPR plans they adopted. The fact that we spend money purchasing these tests for the so called non-core courses and then waste students’ time giving them came directly from State Ed as they instituted the APPR. This testing, given for no other reason than to give teachers who do not get a NYS growth score a number, comes right out of Albany’s directives and their inability to answer simple APPR questions with one consistent and correct answer. To suggest otherwise and to blame districts for this is disingenuous.

I am not going to go into specifics about the common core due to time limitations today; I will leave that better said by others. However, as a former librarian, it is hard to see the little regard with which fiction is held as we are given mandated acceptable levels of nonfiction. As a child growing up in Gloversville, my books came from the Gloversville Free Library and so did much of my education. I know that I loved reading due to the worlds that it opened; I also know that our so called close readings of prescribed documents and passages will not open up that same love of literature in today’s students.

Everywhere I turn the common core rears its head. One of the most disappointing recently was on the Kindle Free Time product that Amazon.com offers. My soon to be four year old granddaughter enjoys this feature of the Kindle with all of its games, activities, books, and videos; it really is a wonderful product. Recently Amazon tweeted out “Kindle Free Time launches Learn First and Bedtime Educational Features.” I saw the tweet and thought great, a good product getting even better. I clicked on the link and saw the following- “Now with thousands of educational titles- hundreds of common core aligned level readers and supplemental readers.” Enough is enough- preschool?- can’t kids just have fun?

Finally, I want to discuss one other area of Race to the Top that is very concerning to me and should concern you as parents and educators- InBloom. This is the data system New York State has bought into where students’ confidential information is stored by private companies in the cloud. In fact, this data system is so concerning that some districts are returning Race to the Top funds in an attempt to not have their children’s private data stored in this way. One example is the Pearl River School system; on October 31 they voted to opt out of Race to the Top, due to concerns about privacy. Their Superintendent, Dr. John Morgano, was quoted as saying “However, we learned from the State Education Department that they will be collecting individual student discipline data and sending it to InBloom. There is no need for a private company to possess a child’s disciplinary history so that it is potentially available to prospective colleges and employers. I will not be a party to this infringement of privacy rights.” Kudos to Superintendent Morgano and I second this, as should each of you. I have handled all the student discipline in my school for the past 26 years. I send a form or letter or a certified letter home, depending on the incident, and then put a copy in my desk for future discarding, never in the student’s permanent file.

Although I know my way around data, computers, and student systems, I do not put discipline in digital form in our student system for just that reason. I have no problem reporting out to State Ed that I suspended 20 students out of school last year; however, I can think of no reason why they or a private company needs the name of these students. This assault on privacy, which is all too commonplace in our country today, should concern each of you.

In closing, I received a memo dated October 24, 2013 from our Education Commissioner, as did most of you working in schools. This memo detailed changes in testing, continued the illusion of our failures as educators, and ended with the statement “Teaching is the core.”

Of course, “teaching is the core” but making a difference in the life of a child should be more of the core. Learning and motivating children to develop their full potential is the core art of teaching. I could stand here the rest of the afternoon as could each of you and mention a teacher or adult who has impacted our lives. For me it was Zane Peterson from Gloversville High School, Dr. Wayne Mahood at SUNY Geneseo, and Esther Tasner, Children’s Librarian at the Gloversville Free Library. For you, the names are different but the idea is the same.

An anonymous public school teacher in Delaware wrote the following which appeared in a blog site on Washington.com; it was then quoted in an article by Valarie Strauss and I would like to share it with you. “They assume the best teaching and best learning can be quantified with tests and data. Yet I’ve never once had a student compliment me on my academic knowledge or my data collection skills. I’ve never had a student thank me for writing insightful test questions or staying up late to write a stunning lesson plan. But students HAVE thanked me for being there, for listening to them, for encouraging them, for believing in them even before they could believe in themselves.”

In our field of education, these stories happen every day. Just a few weeks ago, my ninth grade English teacher spent hours of each day helping a young lady who had previously met with very little academic success in her life. This teacher worked with her as she prepared her speech for a local oratorical contest, and this same student placed and went on to the next levels. To see the hugs and the high fives for this girl’s success and to see her beaming with pride is really what it is all about. This young student, years from now, won’t recall her close reads or the scripted lessons that have resulted from the state’s fabricated illusion of our failing students and failing educators. However, she will recall the kindness of this teacher helping her to be successful; this kindness is not quantifiable, data driven, or able to be reported to the state. Really, at the end of the day and at the end of a career, isn’t it all about helping a child to be successful?

Thank you for allowing me to share some thoughts with you this afternoon and I thank you for your efforts on behalf of all of our children.

Written by: Diane Ravitch

Jan 272014
 

It is beneficial to remind ourselves periodically of the realities in the struggle between Constitutionalism, Capitalism and Marxism-Leninism. It is a continual struggle, whether we acknowledge it or not. And the enemy of America as a constitutional republic with a capitalistic economic system is Marxism-Leninism, whether it be characterized as communism, socialism, progressivism, leftism, statism, or liberalism (in its current state).

Historically, we can consider the birth of the fusion between Marxism and Leninism to be in 1917, when Vladimir Lenin first took power as the leader of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, later to be known as the USSR. Lenin was the leader of the Bolshevik Revolution that gave the world its first taste of socialism, established as Communism. He transformed the political philosophy of Marxism into his own brand, Marxism-Leninism. Here are a few of his famous quotations1:

“The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.”

“One man with a gun can control 100 without one.”

“A lie told often enough becomes the truth.”

“Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”

“The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them in parliament.”

“The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency.”

“The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.”

“Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism.”

>”Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.”

“There are no morals in politics; there is only expedience. A scoundrel may be of use to us just because he is a scoundrel.”

“Democracy is indispensable to socialism.”

“It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.”

Joseph Stalin took over leadership of the new USSR after Lenin’s death. He was ruthless in crushing dissent, killing thousands of counter-revolutionaries and political opponents through military actions and political purges. His singular achievement was in killing seven million Ukrainians by starving them to death, a triumph of socialist collective power over political opposition known to history as the Holdomor.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook