Kurt Nimmo
April 6, 2013

In the video below, college professor and MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry says your children are not yours – they are owned by the community. She says public education has failed because we have not allowed the state to confiscate more of our money.



“We have to break through our private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families,” says the professor of political science at Tulane University, where she is founding director of the Anna Julia Cooper Project on Gender, Race, and Politics in the South. Kids belong to whole communities, she insists, and once we realize this we’ll make “better investments” in government indoctrination of children.

Melissa Harris-Perry is regurgitating the Obama “you didn’t build that” meme. “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that,” Obama said during a campaign stop in Roanoke, Virginia. “Somebody else made that happen,” it was not the result of individual initiative. “The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.”

“Like most people of his ideological bent, Obama either cannot or will not distinguish between society — which is created through peaceful commerce and other forms of private cooperation — and the state — an anti-social artifact built on conquest, coercion, and confiscation of wealth,” writes William Grigg. “Government produces nothing; it is an exercise in pure consumption and, usually, the destruction of capital. As Nietzsche famously said, everything the State has is stolen.”

Stephan Kinsella argues that the primary social evil today is a lack of respect for the fundamental right of self-ownership. Obama and Harris-Perry represent the other side of this argument. They believe, as do all Marxists and socialists, that the state, what Harris-Perry calls the “community,” owns the individual.

Harris-Perry urges us to “break through” the “private idea” that individuals own themselves. Like Marx, she believes the individual is a “communal being” and all human worth is intractably linked to the community, the collective, and the state is the ultimate manifestation of the collective will.

Harris-Perry’s homage to the state was part of a two-year long, multi-million dollar advertising campaign by MSNBC. The network, created through a merger between Microsoft and the death merchant General Electric, has long provided ideological fodder for president Obama, the proud Marxist (as Yuri Maltsev, former advisor to Mikhail Gorbachev, characterized him). “We can go backward, or we can keep moving forward,” he said during a speech at Carnegie Mellon University. “And I don’t know about you, but I want to move forward.”

It’s no mistake Obama’s handlers and MSNBC adopted the slogan. The word “forward” has a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It was frequently used as a name for socialist and communist newspapers and periodicals in the 20th century. “The slogan ‘Forward!’ reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism,” writes Victor Morton.

It seems incomprehensible that a multinational corporation like MSNBC would embrace communism. In fact, as Gary Allen noted, it is quite natural.

“If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of superrich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all,” he wrote. “Instead it becomes the logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism, or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite.”


“The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people” – Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf





by Linda Schrock Taylor

March 3, 2003


“When an opponent declares,
‘I will not come over to your side.’
I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to us already…
What are you? You will pass on.
Your descendants, however,
now stand in the new camp.
In a short time they will know nothing
else but this new community.'”

~ Adolf Hitler


Each day I am reminded that the collectivist agenda behind public ‘schooling’ is not a myth, and that it has accomplished more of its goals than we would want to believe. We must remember that the ‘project’ began around 1840 and realize that my generation — my nearing-retirement generation — may be the last adult citizens with a real understanding of the Original Intent for this nation, and any comprehension of the deceptiveness and evil that drives this global plot to ensnare and enslave our children for mindless service in the global vision for a Brave New World.

If we hold any hopes for a return to the America of our Founding Fathers, and to accurate interpretations of the US Constitution, we must act now, each of us teaching and leading as Elders, as in The Giver, and take back our educational decision-making roles. If we fail in the mission to force the federal STATE to release its unconstitutional strings and control over our local educational decisions — and, rest assured, we will fail in such an attempt — then we must opt for euthanasia and assist the school monolith in dying as quickly, and as painlessly, as possible. We might name our mission, “Hospice for Government Schooling.”

If we have thoughtfully prepared for, then succeed in bringing about THE END of public education, we can request cremation, hold a quick funeral, then build or support, in each community, schools that educate our children for free lives in a free America, rather than for mental and physical enslavement in a world of global, national, state and local Hitler-types.

We really have no other choice, if we care about the futures for our children and grandchildren. We must act, even if it means giving up our luxuries; our second properties; our false reassurances that “I don’t see it affecting my life because my standard of living has only gone up during my lifetime.” We must discipline ourselves to look further than the noses on our faces; our social security; our ease in retirement. Our heirs will not have good things in life if we allow the collectivist remaking of our values to continue.

Just yesterday, with reading and math scores plummeting across the nation; with both student and teacher motivation and effectiveness at embarrassing lows, I was invited to a workshop — “Shaping Character: Creating a Culture of Virtues in Our Schools.” This title seems to me incongruent in light of their claim that “You have been entrusted with the future. We know how important that is to you. That is why our seminars offer only the best classroom-tested teaching methods — not trendy, theory-based fads.” Maybe I am just getting too old, for I interpret “shaping character” and “creating a culture of virtues” as fads; I interpret “teaching methods” as ways to teach the Three R’s; to teach them effectively; and to teach them NOW. I believe that the teaching of character and values belongs in the homes and in the churches, not in schools, and certainly not with the goal of ‘reshaping’ any of our children.

The brochure promises “100% Satisfaction Guaranteed!” and notes that this institute “offers dozens of seminar topics in hundreds of locations all over the United States.” (I wonder if they offer any seminars on how to actually teach reading, or on how to choose and implement, math curriculum and instruction, which can raise the test scores that have been lowered by the Chicago Everyday Math; the University of Chicago math books; and/or all of their clones? I may inquire…) It crossed my mind than I could attend this seminar, as a representative of those self-proclaimed curmudgeons among us. It might be rather fun to be the person with the questions, who already knows the real answers — those answers which, in all likelihood, will be avoided in such a workshop as this.

This workshop caught my attention, not because of any direction towards educational and academic goals, but because of its offer to train teachers in how to remold your and my children. The flyer promises that attendees “will learn:

  • The simple elements of character honored by all cultures and spiritual traditions — 52 basic virtues!
  • How to use the ‘Language of Virtues’ to draw out the best in your students.
  • Proven methods to create a culture of virtues and reduce violence in your school!
  • 5 practical strategies to bring out the best in ALL students
  • Success stories from educators throughout the world”(Bold print is theirs from the flyer.)

Certainly I want, as we all do, for children to have spiritual values that assist them in self-control, and motivate them to learn. However, I believe that these outcomes can usually be brought about by simply teaching every capable child to read, spell, speak, and write accurately, prior to their entry into third grade, then by offering them the libraries, the wisdom of the ages, and productive careers available to knowledgeable, competent, well-read persons. My radar for ‘collectivist goals’ begins to hum when I read that two of the five strategies of “Shaping Character” are: — “Honor the spirit — how to help students find purpose and meaning. — Practice the art of Spiritual Companioning to really listen and encourage moral choices.” (Again, bold lettering is from the advertisement flyer.)

My fear is that, with all of the learning, materials and products being promised and guaranteed, attendees will decide to implement the information in their classrooms, in place of remediating delayed reading and math skills. Attendees are promised “a wealth of ideas you can implement immediately” but it appears that all of the ideas will be on how to ‘reshape’ students, rather than how to educate them according to academic standards and goals.

The workshops will be offered in Wichita, Kansas; Cleveland, Ohio; and Grand Rapids, Michigan. Take a moment to wonder how many of your children’s teachers will attend this workshop, or one of the many others offered by this organization, or other seminars offered by any of the numerous organizations with similar agendas. “Staff development and in-service” offerings are big business, and although many appear to offer solutions to the corruption, and seem to offer assistance in a realignment of American educational misdirection, many, in fact, use the fortunate (for them) state of miseducation to earn speaking fees and sell books, rather than to present and champion true corrective measures.

After looking at examples of the training offered to public school teachers, you may well decide to again refigure your family budget; to further assess and define your educational priorities for your children. You may decide, this time, to actually begin checking out the private and parochial schools in your area, or the materials and support available for homeschooling.

If each of us withdraws our children and our grandchildren from the public schools, the repercussions will bring about the death of these unhealthy centers for ‘childhood indoctrination.’ In certain medical cases, if one continues to feed a terminal patient, death and suffering are only prolonged. We are facing such a quandary in regards to the disease that has taken over government schooling. However, if we, family-by-family, pull our children out of the public schools, the state and federal dollars to those schools, based as they are on ‘head count,’ will be reduced accordingly, allowing the institutions to atrophy and eventually close their doors due to loss of interest and their lifeblood — taxpayer money.

It appears to be the kindest decision we can make, not only for our children who bear the burden for the future of America, but also for our teachers who are frustrated and saddened by the level to which schooling has sunk in this nation. In addition, the economic benefit will be great, for our tax burden will be lessened, bringing much-needed financial relief in this era of a constricting economy.

The Departments of Education in all fifty states and at the national level can be closed, lifting even greater tax burdens from the shoulders of present and future taxpayers. Individuals will be able to freely decide which types of schooling they choose to support with their newly available monies.

We can save America, and the Original Intent for this nation, by returning total control of education for our future generations; our future leaders; to those closest to them — their families, their churches, their neighborhoods. All of these decisions can, in turn, reestablish states’ rights to their lawful position in the power structure of the United States of America, as detailed and specified in the United States Constitution. That document and its guiding principles were created for free Individualists; certainly not for totalitarian collectivists. We must stop, then reverse, the process that Hitler so clearly recognized, applauded, and in which he placed his faith for the future of the world.




By Brandon Smith |
April 11, 2013

Mankind has faced a bewildering multitude of self-made catastrophes and self-made terrors over the past few millennium, most of which stem from a single solitary conflict between two opposing social qualities:  individualism vs. collectivism.  These two forces of organizational mechanics have gone through evolution after evolution over the years, and I believe the long battle is nearing an apex moment; a moment in which one ideology or the other will become dominant around the world for well beyond the foreseeable future.

The assumption often made amongst academia is that the philosophy that appeals most to our “natural survival imperative” and caters to our desire for innovation will eventually win the day.  That there is no “right or wrong” side; only the effective, and the less effective.  The advanced and the outmoded.  The transcendent, and the archaic.

It should come as no surprise then that most academics and prominent mainstream talking heads often sing the praises of collectivism as the inevitable champion in the war between cultural engines.  Collectivism always presents itself with the flair and sexiness of the “new”, or the progressive, while individualism tends to wear the unpleasant battle scars of hard earned principles and heritage.  Collectivism is the hot looking but mentally unstable bombshell blonde making promises of excitement and long term comfort she has no intention of keeping.  She is so seductive not because she has any profound inner qualities, but because she has a knack for letting you believe she is exactly what you fantasize her to be.  Only when it’s too late do you realize she’s a psychopathic pill popping man-eater…

Collectivism is, in fact, a bastardization of a more useful human condition; namely community.  Inherent in all people is the need for meaningful connection with others, and thus, the world around them, without being forced to sacrifice their own identities and their own souls in the process.  The best representation of this model is the idea of “voluntary community”, where individuals seek out each other and facilitate their own connections.  However, if they can’t find meaningful connection, many people will settle for whatever they can get.

Collectivist structures thrive by shutting down free cultural avenues, manipulating public media, encouraging fear, repression, and bias, and destroying our ability to relate to others in a natural and voluntary way.  Collectivism’s first goal is to distract and ISOLATE individuals from one another, so that honest community is difficult to build.  Its second goal is to then offer a false community; a cardboard cutout or proxy that entices the public with fabricated and superficial connections that barely satiate our inner hunger for relationship with our fellow man (Facebook, anyone?).  It uses our thirst for understanding against us, and lures us into a system of psychological enslavement where no understanding will ever be found.

Karl Marx is famous for stating that “religion is the opium of the people”, a belief that communists like Mao Zedong adopted.  But, Mao was not opposed to “opiates for the masses” per say, only citizen organizations that could not be control.  Mao simply replaced the various deities of the Chinese people with the religion of the collectivist state.

Like any opiate, collectivism instills addiction.  The feeling of belonging to something bigger than oneself (even if it ends up being false) creates ecstatic euphoria, a euphoria that weakens as time passes unless the addict commits himself even deeper into the hive mind.  Soon, every original aspect of the person’s character is forgotten and replaced entirely by his hyper-obsession with the collective.  The whole of his identity becomes a shallow product of the state and he may even defend that state, no matter how corrupt, to the death.  He now treats any criticism of the system as a personal attack on himself, because everything he is has been given to him by the collective.  If the collective is a sham, then so is he.

Collectivism as a philosophy is a perfect tool for oligarchy.  The men who dominate such systems rarely if ever actually believe in the tenets they espouse.  They sell the idea of single-minded society as a nurturing light that will create group supremacy, prosperity, and perfect safety.  But the truth is, they couldn’t care less about accomplishing any of these things for the masses.  They are only interested in exploiting the promise to galvanize the population into a fraudulent community, a dystopia in which the citizens police each other in the name of the state, giving the elites total dominance.

The most vital aspect of the collectivist process is convincing the public that the individual citizen is not sovereign, but is actually the property of the group.  Many readers have already witnessed the statements of MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry, who believes your children are not yours to raise, but products of the collective to be molded.

But this is only a taste of collectivist zealotry at work.  Here are just a few of the most prominent disinformation tactics and methodologies used by centralization cultists to twist the fabric of nations and enslave individuals.

1) The Blank Slate

Blank slate theory stems from the Freudian model of psychology and has been adopted and refined by modern mainstream clinical psychiatry.  The theory contends that all psychological processes and character traits of an individual are merely products of repetition and memory derived through environmental experience.  Psychiatry extends the theory into biology in the belief that all human behavior is nothing more that a series of reactionary chemical processes in the brain that determine pre-coded genetic responses built up from the conditioning of one’s environment.  The foundational assertion of blank slate theory is that human beings are born empty.  That we are bio-computers; soft machinery, just waiting to be programmed.

The blank slate argument is essential to the philosophy of collectivism.  If every person is born without inherent characteristics or spirit, and all people are manufactured by environmental conditions alone, then, collectivists contend, there is no such thing as true individualism.  Programmed people cannot act, they can only react according to their conditioning.  Therefore, they have no inherent ability to choose, or to determine their own destinies.

If a society can be convinced that this theory is fact, then the inner self (the source of individualism), no longer bears any meaning.  The environment is then seen as the only determinant that people should care about.  Environment becomes the sole master of their lives, and whoever controls the environment, controls them.

The problem is, blank slate theory has been proven time and time again to be absolutely false.  From the work of MIT professor Steven Pinker, to the psychological studies of Carl Jung, to the linguistic studies of Noam Chomsky, as well as numerous studies in mathematics, quantum physics, and anthropology; every field of science has produced more than ample evidence that human beings are not born as blank slates.  Rather, they are born with the very building blocks of thought, language, mathematics, and even predispositions towards certain personality traits.

The most important of all of these discoveries though is attributed to Carl Jung, who found that moral conceptions are in fact inborn.  The existence of “psychological dualities” at birth (including an unconscious sense of good and evil) means that all people come into the world with the ability to CHOOSE.  Environment only determines our lives if we allow it to.  This is why the worst of men sometimes come from the most sheltered and safe environments, while the best of men often come from broken and terrible homes.

Collectivists have struggled desperately for ages to deny or destroy the concept of inherent individualism.  They want us to believe that everything that we have was “given to us” by them.  As long as we know they have given us nothing, they can never truly win…

2) Individualism Is The Same As Selfishness

Collectivists repeat this lie Ad nauseum.  The suggestion is simple – even the smallest individual actions “affect everyone”, thus, everyone is culpable for the problems of the whole.  And, if everyone is responsible for the problems of the whole, then everyone must take responsibility for everyone else.  The job of society then, at least in the opinion of collectivists, is to keep every individual member of that society in line.  One unruly cog could bring the entire machine to a halt.  Anyone who refuses to submit to the directives of the group is bound to hurt the group, and is, therefore, selfish, or even criminal.

The insanity of this way of thinking should be obvious.  First of all, it assumes that the directives of the group are always logically and morally sound.  It assumes that because the majority of people have come to a particular conclusion, that conclusion must, by default, be correct.  The fact is, history has shown that at any given moment the majority is wrong about something, if not most things, and these mass trespasses against reason and conscience always end up being stopped by a minority of individualists.  The greatest social achievements of mankind are the result of the ingenuity and courage of individuals who in turn inspired others.

Perhaps the best possible thing is for the machine to be sabotaged at times by “selfish individuals’.  Perhaps individuals are actually more necessary to the survival of the group than the group is to the survival of individuals…

3) The Family Unit Cannot Be Trusted To Raise The Next Generation

In the quest for a collectivist system, all competing interests must be debased.  The individual must have nowhere to turn for guidance or comfort but the system itself.  Children become a highly sought after target, because their inborn personalities are easier to oppress, and because they are always dependent on someone for their survival already.  The collective (usually in the form of government) desires to be that “someone” the child depends on, and so, the role of the parents has to be diminished.

Collectivists in the U.S. use the “It Takes A Village” approach in order to marginalize the family unit and paint parents as secondary figures in the development of their own offspring.  Under this philosophy, each subsequent generation is seen as a kind of “commodity”, a resource that belongs to the group and that must be “protected” from the damaging ideologies of the parents.  One has only to examine the extreme politicization of American public schools today to see this process in action.  The goal is to push the idea of family into obscurity, while forcing children into indoctrination factories that instill specific behaviors through fear, shame, and propaganda.

No one, and no entity, however, has the capacity to care for any child more than that child’s own parents.  Some parents do fail in their responsibilities, but what kind of role model does government really make in their place?  Governments lie, cheat, steal, rape, murder, and mass murder in order to get what they want.  Government has nothing worthwhile to teach anyone, including our children.

4) Global Problems Will Be Solved By Collectivism

I find in my examinations that the opposite is true.  Most global problems are CAUSED by collectivism, not solved by it.  The greater good is always subjective.  The group will always be an abstract illusion held together by nothing more than the whims of the individual.  And, in the grand scheme of things, only individuals make any difference in the course of human cultural development.  The collectivist strategy requires the suppression of individualism, otherwise, they cannot obtain power.  That means, the very bedrock of their philosophy is a threat to the security of the future.  In their obscene quest to control tomorrow, they ensure that tomorrow dies.

They promise community, and they give you isolation.  They promise prosperity, and they give you servitude.  They promise safety, and they give you a land of perpetual terror.  They promise purpose, and give you insignificance.  They promise peace, and they foment war after war after war, reaping turmoil all around us, as well as within us.

Our only hope is to maintain the integrity of our heart, and our will.  The proclamation that the individual is subject to the necessities of the collective is a con.  There is no such prerogative.  In the end, there is no power over us but that which we give away.  The state doesn’t matter.  The group doesn’t matter.  The “greater good” doesn’t matter.  All that matters is the life of the individual.  Each individual.  For when all men rediscover their individualism, only then will we be able to move forward as a whole.



Exclusive: Joseph Farah blows giant hole in MSNBC host’s collectivism argument

By Joseph Farah | World Net Daily

“We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”

– MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry

Much has been said about Melissa Harris-Perry’s claim that kids don’t belong to their parents and families but rather to the community at large.

It’s worth pointing out that this statement, which agrees entirely with the philosophy of genocidal tyrants from Adolf Hitler to Josef Stalin, was not just the spontaneous raving of one crazy, irresponsible, thoughtless cable TV show host. It was a calculated, well-considered statement, edited and approved by MSNBC’s management and marketing team and used as a network promotional ad.

So maybe we should examine the consequences of the irrational and inconsistent philosophy behind it.

Melissa Harris-Perry and the corporate network for which she works promote abortion on demand.

They do so by claiming it is appropriate to kill unborn babies because it’s a “woman’s right to choose.”

Yet, they believe once those babies are born, they belong collectively to all of us; thus we’re all responsible for them and their well-being.

Do you recognize the intellectual incoherence? Do you see the cognitive dissonance?

Perry expanded on her thoughts recently, adding:

  • “I stand by that statement. Families have first and primary responsibility for their children. The private sphere of our homes and families deserves great deference in policy and in practice … but I believe our children are not our private property, they are not just extensions of ourselves. They are independent, individual beings.”
  • “This is about whether we as a society, expressing our collective will through our public institutions, including our government, have a right to impinge on individual freedoms in order to advance a common good. And that is exactly the fight that we have been having for a couple hundred years.”
  • “Our kids who will inherit our nation belong to all of us and we have a collective responsibility to them. I hit a nerve with a 30-second promotional ad, and the nerve that I hit is connected to the central nervous system of our democracy, at the synapses of civic engagement is the electrical current that forges our more perfect union.”

She meant what she said and she said what she meant. And the corporate media network for which she works stands behind her.

It’s obvious this is not a person who has the least respect for the Judeo-Christian and American tradition of individual rights.

Yet, she and her network believe an individual woman has an absolute right to extinguish the life of an unborn child for any reason or no reason whatsoever.

How can it be that individuals have the perfect right to kill preborn children (and many like her, including Barack Obama, would include post-born children as well), but their rights with regard to children end at some point thereafter – at which point they become wards of the state?

Does that make any sense?

Let’s pretend, for a moment, we agree with Harris-Perry that children belong to all of us collectively. How can an individual decision be made to snuff out the life of a child either in utero or shortly after birth?

If all kids really belong to everyone, then the logical conclusion is that no individual has the right to take the life of any child – born or unborn. You can’t have it both ways.

But, then again, the post-modern notion that the state has the power to invent “rights” for the purpose of dividing society into groups for the purpose of empowering government has always been intellectually, spiritually and morally bankrupt.

It leads only to totalitarianism and genocide.



by Dave Hodges –

Where will it all end? Where does the power of the state cease and individual rights begin? According to the banksters that have hijacked our government and our media, there is no end in sight.

Under these criminal banksters, they have participated in the MERS fraud which has led to wrongful foreclosure on three million properties. They have also looted the funds of MF Global investors. The banksters are planning to come after our pensions as they have done in Greece and Spain.  These same criminals plan to seize our 401K’s, IRA’s and will loot our bank accounts as they have in Cyprus. Additionally, Obama and his thugs are coming to steal our guns. They won’t stop until they own everything.

All of the banksters egregious transactions pale in comparison to what they have planned for American parents.  As most already know, MSNBC has long been the mouthpiece for the banksters on Wall Street and the Federal Reserve. I never anticipated that these animals would go this far, but these proven criminals now want to steal children from their parents. Yes, I mean literally take them away without cause.Does this also mean that you and I own Harris-Perry’s children as well? It is obvious that she is bucking for a position on the CFR for espousing the philosophy of Agenda 21.

Harris-Perry, who is also a columnist for The Nation and a professor of political science at Tulane, is presently declining all interview requests on this issue, as is MSNBC.

It is a frightening consideration that this woman is teaching impressionable young men and women at a major university. Perhaps, Senator Joe McCarthy was correct that America has been taken over by communists back in the 1950′s. Even bombastic talk show host, Rush Limbaugh, and that “spooky” commentator, Glenn Beck are referring to these misguided statements as being of a communistic origin.

Perry-Harris outrageous comments remind me of the ridiculous book that Hillary Clinton wrote entitled It Takes a Village to Raise a Child. Both works popularize the notion that we view all people as property of the state. I for one am sick of it. I do not exist for the benefit of Rockefeller and Rothschild. It takes a Village Idiot to say that children belong to the state.

When is enough, enough, America?



by Dave Hodges |

August 17, 2013

There is presently a massive conspiracy designed to separate you from your children and give the government complete control over your children.

To put it simply, Human, Health and Services (HHS)  and their state level emissary, Children Protective Services (CPS) are engaged in a conspiracy which will culminate in (1) the Agenda 21 designed breakdown of the family; (2) the eradication of any semblance of parental authority over children; and, (3) unbridled and unfettered access to seizing children from the home in unlimited quantities for whatever nefarious purposes which might dictate the volume of child seizures.

The Plot Is International Begins with the UN

This program emanates from a partnership between various United Nations organizations and ICF, acting on behalf of HHS, CPS and Obamacare (i.e. The Affordable Health Care Act). The evidence in this article, along with the included links, will demonstrate that when Obamacare is fully operational, our families, specifically our children will be living in a Romanian type of a Ceausescu hellish nightmare.

Romanian dictator, Nicolae Ceausescu, seized hundreds of thousands of children from stable families under the pretense that these children had disabilities which could only be treated by the government. In reality, this madman planned to use the seized children, raised in government orphanages, for military and state purposes. Three hundred thousand children were raised in these state run orphanages (Romanian Had Ceausescu survived, the vast majority of these children would have been useless to him because there were functionally retarded due to severe neglect.

After reviewing HHS, CPS and UN documents I have no doubt that Obamacare has the same goals and intentions as Ceausescu. What is being presently reported in the alternative media is merely the tip of the iceberg with regard to HHS’ intentions toward the ultimate outcome of the children in this country. After reviewing the documents, there is no doubt that Obama is representing international interests which will seek to remove as many children as possible from the homes of their parents in the spirit of Ceausescu. I freely admit that what I am about to reveal here has made me lose sleep and for the first time contemplate the real possibility of a revolution against the bankers who have hijacked our government. I cannot see parents submitting to this tyranny without a fight.

But first let me quickly review the recent revelations of the HHS/CPS/Obamacare intention to conduct what I have dubbed as “home invasion interventions.”

Obamacare Home Invasions and Interventions

According to a previously unreported Obamacare regulation, that has managed to escape “scrutiny” from the mainstream media, millions of American families will be targeted for home invasion by the forces of the Federal government in the name of preventing parental neglect resulting in disabilities in their children. And the Fourth Amendment be damned, after January 1, 2014, Federal officials may enter your home without a warrant in order to “intervene” for the purpose of saving “high risk” children. 

Obamacare’s Definition of High Risk

The exposure of the extreme and intrusive nature of Obamacare through home invasion visits is finally seeing the light of day in the alternative media. However, this exposure is grossly understated. As a starting point, I will briefly review what is making the rounds in the alternative media. According to Human Health Services, your family is eligible for this Soviet style for “intervention” in the following situations:

1. Families where mom is not yet 21.

2. Families where someone is a tobacco user.

3. Families where children have low student achievement, developmental delays, or disabilities.

4. Families with individuals who are serving or formerly served in the armed forces, including such families that have members of the armed forces who have had multiple deployments outside the United States. 

5. Although this is not being widely reported, homeschoolers and their families will be targeted for “interventions” as will be families who object to having their children take vaccines.  

There is no question that all of the above categories, will warrant a home invasion followed by “remediation.”  The visits will not be conducted by HHS officials as has been reported in several publications. The home invasion visits will be conducted by CPS on behalf of HHS.

HHS has designed a detailed 110 page policy manual which focuses on the criteria constituting child neglect. This policy manual which is the guide created by HHS for CPS’ home intervention visits makes the above criteria, presently being reported in the alternative media, look tame by comparison.

HHS, CPS and the Criminalization of Parenthood 

In the 110 page HHS/CPS manual, the variables which comprise child neglect, worthy of government intervention is frightening beyond any words I can find to express their undisguised intentions. This entire document which will serve as the field manual by CPS in support of Obamacare undermines parental authority to a level that is beyond belief.

"We are from HHS and we are here to help you."

“We are from HHS and we are here to help you.”

How many of you were ever grounded by your parents and not permitted to play outside with your friends? This is now illegal under the HHS/CPS policy manual. They label the treatment as neglect by isolation. There are not time frames set forth which constitutes isolation and it is left to the field representative. This obviously erodes parental discipline.

If your child is judged to be underachieving in school, this is referred to as educational neglect and is worthy of governmental intervention. Further, if your child is absent for five days in any one month from school, the same allegation would be made against the parent.

If your child has ADD or ADHD, you could be accused of neglect because the document details how this can be somehow caused by poor nutrition, although the variables associated with the cause are not specified.

The document goes out of its way to specify that poverty and neglect are not inextricably linked. Then the document goes out of its way to link poverty with child neglect. Read between the lines America. As we already are aware, many poor children who go missing from scandals such as the Second Mile Foundation, the Franklin Scandal and the latest scandal with the 78 missing wards of the state in Oklahoma, frequently end up being put into child sex trafficking rings operated and funded by such notables as DynCorps and HSBC bank.

Of course, no Obama inspired program would be complete without an attack upon the Second Amendment. Obamacare is no exception as one of the criteria for child neglect  are parents who are also gun owners.    

The presence of alcohol in the home is a trigger for an allegation of neglect and subsequent “intervention.” Of course, alcoholic parents can present a clear and present danger to a child’s well-being. However, in the policy manual the conditions for concern over alcohol do not detail the amount and percentage of the family resources involved necessary to obtain alcohol. In other words, one can of beer in the home can be considered to constitute child neglect by the Obamacare CPS fieldworker.

If your child has engages in any type of illicit or criminal behavior, your family is at risk. Raise your hands if you ever smoked pot before the age of 18, or drank as a teen, or engaged in any kind of sexual activity before the age of 18, ever stayed out past curfew, or ever shoplifted? IF your children ever engages in these and a multitude of other transgressions, you are in danger of losing your children. This also means that if your child is ever involved in a fight in school or is assigned detention, the school will be required to report the behavior to the HHS/CPS and you can expect to have a “home invasion intervention” session with your friendly Obamacare CPS fieldworker.

If you are ever late picking up your child from daycare or from school aftercare, you will be reported.

If you have ever been depressed or have been treated for any mental disorder (e.g. PTSD, anxiety, etc.), you are at risk for losing your children.

Even illegal immigrant families are not immune from this insanity. Children are judged by the field worker to not be fully acculturated, do not properly speak the language, exhibits signs of being homesick and is judged to have not formed an unspecified number of friends and formed a cohesive social network, allegations of neglect can be made.

I could literally write 10 more pages on what CPS/HHS, on behalf of Obamacare, considers to be parental neglect. I would invite the reader to spend some time reviewing the document which will be serving as the policy manual for the forced home inspections. Please note that when the reader gets beyond the flowery language and professed concern for children, that the language is written so broadly that virtually any human condition, any family circumstance or child’s behavior can be interpreted as child neglect.

The important thing to note is the use of language by this manual. Parents who are deemed by an Obamacare CPS field worker, operating under the HHS flag, to be neglectful towards their children are considered to have created “disabilities” within their children. As the reader will soon discover, the use of the term “disabilities” is key to understanding how far this administration is willing to go to seize children for some nefarious purpose.

Sadly, this is still only the beginning. There is far more to be concerned about beginning with who is ultimately responsible for these outrages.

Meet the Creators of the State Sponsored Child Kidnapping Rings

The primary author for this insane manual for HHS/CPS and their designed home invasion interventions is Diane DePanfilis, Ph.D., M.S.W.  She is the Associate Dean for. Research and an Associate Professor of Social Work at the University of Maryland.  More importantly she is a co-editor of the Handbook on Child Protection Practice. In other words, DePanfills has been a major player in the unconstitutional practices we see in CPS in all 50 states. As if this is not concerning enough, all of the other contributing authors have their professional origins and affiliations with the same organization.

Lindsay Ritter Taylor      from Caliber, an  ICF  International Company

Matthew Shuman, M.S.W,  A consultant with Caliber, an ICF International Company

Jean  Strohl,  A consultant with Caliber, an ICF International Company,

Jeannie Newman, M.S.W,  M.I.B.S.,  A consultant with Caliber, an ICF International Company

It was at this point, I smelled a rat. We have the primary author being a CPS author designed to teach their field operatives on the methods of how to abuse parents and undermine parental authority. And all of the contributing authors come from the exact same corporation, ICF. At this point, it is prudent to ask the question, who is ICF?

ICF Is the Biggest Player That You Have Never Heard Of

ICF International partners with government and commercial clients to deliver consulting services and technology solutions in climate change, energy, environment, transportation, social programs, defense, and homeland security markets. In my mind, this established ICF as a major player in the introduction and implementation of the globalist agenda by designing matching Federal programs. And as it turned out they are a major player in Obamacare through their subsidiary acquisition, Caliber Associates.

Caliber is an “established leader in providing research, consulting, and innovation in human services and human resource issues.” ICF acquired Caliber in 2005 in order “to serve HHS, the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the U.S. Department of Education.”  Caliber Associates and their four contributing authors to the HHS/CPS field manual, which will be used to enforce child welfare regulations, was the undeniable link to Obamacare through this field manual. But as I discovered, the rabbit hole went even deeper.

After I found the co-authors of the HHS/CPS policy manual which will guide these forced home inspections, I smelled the distinct odor of the United Nations and Agenda 21 and sure enough, this was exactly what I found.

The United Nations and Obamacare

At times, I feel that I have the globalist playbook and I am able to often anticipate their next move. Please allow me to briefly illustrate how the globalists have operated in another area, education, and then draw the parallel to how the UN is deeply involved in Obamacare.

The Common Core Curriculum, which is sweeping the nation’s education system, was the product of “Education for All.”  Education for All comes from the United Nations education arm, the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Common Core went from UNESCO to the National Governors Association who in turn farmed out the development of the details to various NGO’s which in turn sent the standards to each state for implementation. This is the standard model that the globalists follow when implementing a controversial program and Obamacare follows a similar pattern as did Common Core.

There is no doubt that the provisions of allegedly protecting children in Obamacare, originated with the United Nations

Why do they want our kids?

Why do they want our kids?

In the United Nations document entitled, Human Rights, Persons with Disabilities, ICF and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Training toolkit), implementation for programs designed to help people, children in particular, with disabilities, came from the World Health Organization (WHO) [Page  36], UNESCO [Page 37], the International Labour Organization (ILO) [Page 36] and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)[Page 38]. As one can see from the title, ICF and the UN have partnered to protect people/children with disabilities.


Please remember that earlier in the article, I made the point that the HHS/CPS field manual referred to neglected children as children who have disabilities. It is quite apparent that any of the conditions listed in the HHS/CPS manual will produce children who have disabilities. And in the case of Ceausescu, in which he seized hundreds of thousands of children who had “disabilities” and planned to use them for purposes of the state, the same picture is beginning to emerge with regard to Obamacare and the home invasion visits. I can draw no other conclusion than Obamacare is state sponsored child slavery.

Under Obamacare, virtually every aspect of parenting is criminalized. Any child can be considered to have a disability for which the state is the only legitimate treatment source. When Obama was first running for President in 2008, he promised to build a civilian security force that “was just as strong, just as well-funded as our military.” And when one combines this conspiracy with Obama’s Executive Order 13603 which calls for a mandatory civilian conscription to complement a coming military draft, it is clear that this lunatic is planning to enslave a large segment of the population and he will obtain many of his conscripts from Obamacare. And many of you who are familiar with Agenda 21 and their expressed views toward parental rights and the rights of children, do not need me to make connect the dots, you already have done so.

My advice to all parents, don’t answer the door on New Year’s Day on 2014 when Obamacare begins to be implemented. 

I cannot see any way out of this dilemma than to resist through the use of force. The Obamacare goons will NOT gain entry into my home while I am still breathing. I predict that HHS/CPS will soon be armed because they will, and should, meet massive resistance from the citizens.

America, we must resist this heinous tyranny with every means at our disposal.

Some will undoubtedly say that violence is not the answer and I have agreed with that sentiment in every case, until now.  I will fight to defend and protect my family. Will you?



by Dave Hodges |

September 4, 2013

The Department of Homeland Security and FEMA have interjected themselves, and appropriately so, into the area of school safety. This article explores the premise behind the cooperation between DHS, FEMA and your child’s public school. Most of the policies and procedures make a great deal of sense and should be followed as a matter of course. However there are some very concerning elements which have surfaced with regard to school safety procedures, your rights as a parent and the safety of your child.

The Prime Directive of School Safety

The first mandate for teachers and administrators in the public school setting is to keep students safe. This prime directive supersedes any other mission requirements related to the functioning of a public school. Teachers and administrators as well as support personnel have a moral, professional and legal obligation to tend to children who are in physical and/or emotional distress. The Department of Homeland Security and FEMA have prepared disaster related documents detailing the professional responsibilities for school personnel in disaster related scenarios.

In the furtherance of this mission, public schools are required to participate in various safety exercise drills such as lockdowns and bus evacuation drills. Both functions serve a legitimate purpose and parents should feel a measure of comfort that schools have taken steps under the direction of the government to help keep our children safe. However, some plans no matter how well-intentioned have pitfalls and some of the details of these plans should be concerning to parents of school-aged children.

The following paragraphs detail a previous disaster drill, held in Denver, in which the procedures should raise the hair on the back of the neck of all parents

Operation Mountain Guardian

Nearly two years ago, on September 23, 2011, the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA conducted a disaster drill in Denver, Colorado that they called Operation Mountain Guardian. The plan was all-inclusive and basically shut down the Denver metropolitan area including Denver international Airport, many malls, many schools and several other public venues including Sports Authority Field where the Denver Broncos play professional football.


Where will they take the children? Will you get them back and when?

Where will they take the children? Will you get them back and when?


As a part of the drill, several busloads of school children were taken to Sports Authority Field along with their teachers. Surrogate parents were hired by FEMA to attempt to pick up their children at the stadium. The training was apparently a desensitization exercise for security personnel designed to refuse demands to pick up their children from these “pretend” parents. The real parents of these children were not properly notified that their children would be transported to the stadium and would be a part of this disaster drill. As a parent, I would have a major problem with the non-notification of the relocation of children.  I find this ironic, because before a school child is allowed to go on a field trip, their parents and teachers are required to fill out a multiple list of permission forms that must be signed by the parent or guardian of the child.

I have no quarrel with moving children in an emergency situation to a location of safety. However, I have a major issue when government officials refused to release children to their parents because the authority over a child belongs to the parent, not to a government agency.

In the latter part of the event, as parents discovered that some of their children were likely transported to the stadium, some parents attempted to go to the venue and secure their children.  When they did so, at least initially, the children were not released to the parents. Again, who is the sovereign, the government or the people?

It goes without saying that most major terror attacks have coincided with “drills” used to confuse and distract first responders not privy to the inside plan has been heavily documented, with the 7/7 attacks in London and 9/11 attacks in New York City being prime examples. The aforementioned statement is not conspiratorial, these are the facts surrounding these previous terrorist attacks and every parent, teacher, administrator, police officer, firefighter, EMT and the federal government would be wise to be cognizant of this fact.

DHS, FEMA and the Safety of Students

FEMA has published a training manual which serves as the rough draft model for school safety to be enacted by all 50 versions of the State Department of Education, in times of an emergency. Of particular importance and relevance is a document  from the Arizona Department of Education entitled “Staff Skills Survey and Inventory“, which is located on page 76 of their school safety manual.

In the aftermath of the disaster scenario, it would be prudent for school officials and assisting public officials to know which of the school staff members are first aid certified, have experience in EMT operations, can perform CPR, can assist in triage functions and can help with food preparation.  Certainly, acquiring a database of people who possess these skills, would be extremely critical in meeting the potential needs of children in the context of a dangerous set of circumstances.

However, on the checklists and procedures form, there are other skills on this FEMA inspired document, which has filtered down from the Federal government to the State level.  I have subsequently acquired a document from the Arizona Department of Education which attempts to assess staff skills in times of emergency. The document is listed at the bottom of this article.

In the document, it asks teachers, administrators and other support personnel within a school setting if they possess skills which seem to be out of place for disaster scenario responding in a school setting. For example, the document asks school personnel if they have experience in construction, shelter management, emergency management, structural engineering, firefighting, electrical wiring, plumbing, carpentry, journalists, HAM radio operation and a recreational leader.

Why would schools have the need for people that can do construction as well as plumbing, electrical work, climbing and shelter management? What in the world are schools under stress going to be building? At this point, I would invite you to go to the bottom of the page and scan this FEMA inspired document to familiarize yourself with all of the skills that are being assessed by the various departments of education around the country.

I have asked a number of people to look at this document and explain to me their interpretation of the skill set solicitations. Descriptor terms such as conscription, commandeering and drafting have come out of the mouths of people that I know. People that know nothing of the New World Order and know nothing of Operation Mountain Guardian were concerned when I showed them the document. If one considers this questionnaire within the context of Obama’s Executive Order 13603 in which the President can seize control over all resources including people; I would like to think that these two variables are not connected. However, in these perilous times, it is difficult to not be suspicious.


These events beg the question, are we to understand that school children and school personnel are going to be forced to construct their own residential facilities in some unknown and undisclosed location from which a bus will transport them to? I don’t have a definitive answer, but I know a number of you who are reading these words are thinking what I have thought. Am I going to be constructing our own detention facilities? Will parents be separated from their children?

Is this how Rex 84 and Presidential Directive 51 be implemented? At one time, making these connections might have been considered to be ridiculous. However, in the present context, these questions demand answers.

From Page 76 of the Arizona Department of Education



YOUR NAME  ______________________________

SCHOOL        _______________________________

ROOM            _______________________________


During any disaster situation, it is important to be able to draw from all available resources.  The special skills, training and capabilities of the staff will play a vital role in coping with the effects of any disaster incident.  These will be of paramount importance during and after a major or catastrophic disaster.  The purpose of this survey/inventory is to pinpoint those staff members with equipment and the special skills that may be needed.  Please indicate the areas that apply to you and return this survey to your administrator.


Please check, circle, or add expertise or training that you may have. 





First Aid (yes/no)current card


CPR (yes/no current)




Shelter Management


Emergency Management


Structural Engineering



Survival Training & Techniques

CB Radio

Law Enforcement


Search & Rescue

Food Preparation

Mechanical Ability (electrical, plumbing, carpentry, etc.)


Bus/Truck Driver

(yes/no, Class 1 or 2 license,)

Recreational Leader





EMT or Paramedic


Waste Disposal


Ham Radio Operator






Multi-lingual (yes / no,    what language (s)  






DO YOU KEEP A PERSONAL EMERGENCY KIT? _____________ in your car? _______ in your room? _______



(i.e., athletic bibs, traffic cones, carpet squares) _________ Yes _________ No




Please list equipment and materials.






















Published on Apr 7, 2013

Alex Jones breaks down the collectivist authoritarians openly admitting their agenda is a state takeover of the role of parenting, as well as Vice President Biden once again calling for a New World Order. Spread the word of revolution against tyranny now.




Joseph Stalin was the de facto leader of the Soviet Union from the mid-1920s until his death in 1953.  Under Stalin’s rule, the concept of “socialism in one country” became a central tenet of Soviet society. He replaced the New Economic Policy introduced by Lenin in the early 1920s with a highly centralized command economy, that coincided with the imprisonment of millions of people in Soviet correctional labour camps[3] and the deportation of many others to remote areas.[3] The initial upheaval in agriculture disrupted food production and contributed to the catastrophic Soviet famine of 1932–1933, known as the Holodomor in Ukraine. Later, in a period that lasted from 1936–39, Stalin instituted a campaign against alleged enemies of his regime called the Great Purge, in which hundreds of thousands were executed.



Published on Apr 6, 2013


Historically,when tyrants take over they come for the children. The enemy is moving on all fronts, the fact that they are so bold is key. This is a hot take over. The Cold War against liberty is ending! America is in the hands of cold blooded techno criminals. They are coming for it all! They want your guns, your home, your land, your money, and your children! Warn everyone you know, make preparations now!


MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry says your children are not yours — they are owned by the community. She says public education has failed because we have not allowed the state to take control over your children and confiscate more of your money.








By Hollie McKay |

APRIL 9, 2013

LOS ANGELES –  Parents and media critics were aghast after a host for MSNBC called for collective care of a community’s children instead of parents taking care of their kids themselves.

MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry recorded a commercial for the network in which she stated that children do not belong to their parents, but are instead the responsibility of the members of their community.

“We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we’ve always had kind of a private notion of children. Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very collective notion of these are our children,” she says in a spot for the network’s “Lean Forward” campaign. “So part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”

Harris-Perry’s views ignited a firestorm of anger and disbelief.

“The notion that children belong to a state government rather than their own flesh and blood is the most disturbing statement made in recent political times. Melissa Harris-Perry is dead wrong. It’s unfathomable that any true American could make such a pretentious and naively ill statement,” media communications expert, and parent, Angie Olszewski told FOX411’s Pop Tarts column. “The government can’t properly run their own budgets schools and public systems. Why would anybody think they could rear children?”

The Media Research Center’s Director of Media Analysis, Tim Graham, called the MSNBC spot “frightening.”

“It’s bad enough that ‘Lean Forward’ already sounds like an ad for Mao’s Little Red Book, then to have your network’s hosts talk about your children being part of the Collective is just spooky,” he said. “I think most parents disappoint MSNBC with their traditional beliefs that their children are theirs to love and raise as they feel is best. They don’t want to surrender their parental rights to the ‘village.’ It’s this same contempt for education beginning in the home that spurs many parents into home-schooling.”

Political pundit Glenn Beck condemned the clip during his radio show Monday, calling it an almost “parody of reality so far beyond what we have ever thought as a nation.” He also said there were plenty of people enamored by the MSNBC host’s theory, who would gladly “hand over” parenting responsibilities.

However, there are also those who argue that Harris-Perry’s comments are a step in the right direction when it comes to tackling the issue of improving education.

“I totally agree that ‘it takes a village.’ Although parents have the greatest influence on their children, society and its messages are powerful. It is up to us as educators and concerned community members to do what we can to make sure those messages are the ones we want our children to hear,” explained school administrator and founder of, Dr. Janet R.Wojtalik. “Unfortunately not all of our families have the ‘know how’ or the resources to do what is best for their children. They need support.”

D.C.-based political lawyer Margaret Cone concurred, noting that her own family – like most at her own childhood school – actively participated in school activities.

“I was very close to the parents of my childhood friends. They watched out for me,” she continued. “It is society’s responsibility to ensure that the next generation is equipped to handle the ever-changing world. Educating our children is a responsibility that has been grossly ignored to our detriment.”

The clip has received almost half a million YouTube views since it was posted last week, and has drawn quite a mixed bag of responses.

“Excellent example of elitists who think they know how to raise your kids better than you,” commented one while another weighed in: “You nailed it.”



Kurt Nimmo
April 9, 2013

Our story on Melissa Harris-Perry’s collective ownership of children has prompted the MSNBC host to post a Twitter response. On Monday afternoon, she posted the following straight out of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount:




The verse reads: “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.”

It seems odd that Ms. Harris-Perry would cite one of the most important verses in the New Testament in an effort to discount the arguments of her critics, including Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. Is she aligning herself with Matthew and the early Christians who suffered persecution under the Romans?

Ms. Harris-Perry philosophy – the collectivization of children – is closer to that of Mao, who specifically rejected Matthew 5:44 as impossible until the capitalist class system was destroyed.

Mao’s Red Guard specialized in turning millions of children against their parents and indoctrinating them in hardcore communism. Instead of universal love, Mao declared “the sign of a true revolutionary was his desire to kill.”

Mao put this into practice. He killed nearly 80 million people.



By Christopher Goins |

The Communist Party USA and the Democratic Socialists of America don’t see what the big deal is when it comes to MSNBC Host’s Melissa Harris-Perry’s latest 30-second spot advocating for society to move beyond its “private idea” of kids belonging to parents and families and to the notion that they belong to “whole communities.”

“How is she saying that? She doesn’t say that at all,” said Libero della Piana, who is one of the Vice Chairs of the Communist Party USA, when asked if he thought Harris-Perry was advocating the idea of children belonging to the government.

“She’s not saying children are the property of the community or anything else. She’s saying that they are our responsibility. I think that’s something most people would agree with. That’s why we have public education. I don’t think that’s a communist idea. Communists certainly support it,” he told Politic365.

(On a historical note, the tenth plank of the Communist Manifesto reads: “Free education for all children in public schools.”)

Della Piana, who also serves as the communications director for CPUSA, said that her quote didn’t seem “to deal with the Communist Party or Communism” at all.

“I don’t quite see what people are getting at,” said CPUSA’s communications director. CPUSA does encourage its members to read Karl Marx’s and Friedrich Engel’s Communist Manifesto. But the CPUSA official added “its also quite old and a lot of it doesn’t apply although the principles [do].”

Chapter 2 of the Communist Manifesto reads:

“The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parents and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.”

Still, della Piana didn’t see a connection when read this passage.

“First of all, what Marx and Engels were talking about–what they were saying that its capitalism that dehumanizes and commodifies children and that they speak about the family but in fact children become another commodity and this was the era of child labor,” he said. “The era of arranged marriages and property rights being transacted that way.”

He added that “in that framework children are reduced to nothing.” Rather, he believes that Harris-Perry was saying something most Americans could agree with.

“It seems to me that she’s sort of reflected the basic idea that the vast majority of people would agree with that society has some collective responsibility for children. That’s something everybody agrees with that’s why we have public education. That’s something the vast majority of people support.”

His comrade agreed.

“I don’t get what the big deal is,” said Roberta Wood, Secretary Treasurer of CPUSA, adding that she didn’t think Harris-Perry’s comments had anything to do with communism or socialism.

“You know it seems like they’re talking about society taking responsibility for all the children and as far as I know that’s the way to look at people to see how human beings should be,” she told Politic365.

Even the Democratic Socialists of America didn’t interpret the MSNBC host’s comments the way many conservatives did.

“The idea that it takes a village to raise a child, essentially that a nurturing community cares about all of it’s children, is certainly not socialist (though we would agree with the sentiment),” wrote DSA National Director Maria Svart in an email to Politic365.

“Democratic socialists do believe that socially created wealth (in other words, wealth created through the cooperative, collective endeavor of people working together) should be democratically invested, rather than largely going to the 1% and being used however the 1% sees fit,” she continued.

“We believe that when people have a voice in how public resources are invested, they want many of those resources invested in education and other programs that help kids.”

Conservatives, however, found Harris-Perry’s comments chilling–and didn’t interpret the MSNBC host’s words as those in the Communist Party of the United States and Democratic Socialists of America did.

The most controversial quote in the 30-second spot was where Harris-Perry said “we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”

That statement to many conservative observers was tantamount to saying kids belong to the state. That is, to the government.

Radio host Rush Limbaugh took on the ad on his show on Monday.

“What she is saying, Melissa Harris-Perry, what she is saying here is as old as communist genocide,” said Limbaugh. “But, the fact that it is said in America on a cable news channel, and is considered fairly benign is what has changed.”

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin tweeted that the ad was “Unflippingbelieveable.”

“Apparently, MSNBC doesn’t think your children belong to you,” she tweeted on Sunday.

Harris-Perry “doubled-down” on her statements on Tuesday in a post on MSNBC. She said her e-mail inbox swelled with “hateful, personal attacks” the day prior, and that she agrees with pro-life advocates that “kids are not the property of their parents.” Additionally, she says that her message “was a call to see ourselves connected to a larger whole,” adding “I don’t want your kids.”

According to a 2012 Gallup poll conducted between August 9-12, 39 percent of adults nationwide said the federal goverment should be more involved in education and 36 percent said it should become less involved.

Only 24 percent said it’s involvement should stay the same.

And a 2012 PDK/Gallup poll found that the most common challenge Americans thought faced public schools was their funding, a sentiment the annual poll found went back a few years.

Historically, the United States federal government hasn’t always been so involved in public education.

There is precedent in the United States where people were distrustful of parents and legislatively attempted to do something about it–historical facts that would resonate with conservatives.

“As an 1851 article in The Massachusetts Teacher reported: “In too many instances the parents are unfit guardians of their own children … the children must be gathered up and forced into school,” writes the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute in a timeline called “A Brief History of Education in America.”

Between 1865 and 1900, the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction wrote, “The child should be taught to consider his instructor, in many respects, superior to the parent in point of authority … [T]he vulgar impression that parents have a legal right to dictate to teachers is entirely erroneous,” according to the same timeline.

A transcript of Harris-Perry’s ad called “Collective Responsibility” is below.

“We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we’ve always had a private notion of children, your kid is yours and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very collective notion of these are our children.

So part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.

Once it’s everybody’s responsibility and not just the household’s we start making better investments.”



Todd Starnes
Fox News
April 9, 2013

The father of a Connecticut child is furious after discovering that his son’s school is teaching students that Americans don’t have a Second Amendment right to bear arms.

“I am appalled,” said Steven Boibeaux, of Bristol. “It sounds to me like they are trying to indoctrinate our kids.”

Boibeaux’s son is an eighth grader at Northeast Middle School. On Monday his social studies teacher gave students a worksheet titled, ‘The Second Amendment Today.’



“I am willing to give up some of my constitutional rights in order to be safer or more secure.”

Steve Watson
April 12, 2013

A father was shocked to find a note in his 4th grader son’s bag that indicated his teachers had instructed children at the school to accept that they should be willing to give up some Constitutional rights in order to be more safe.

Aaron Harvey from Florida found a note scrawled in Crayon in his son’s back pack that read “I am willing to give up some of my constitutional rights in order to be safer or more secure.”

When the father questioned his son on the matter, the boy told him that his teacher, Cheryl Sabb, had said the statement out loud and instructed the children in the class to write it down, following a lesson on The Bill of Rights and The Constitution.

Mr Harvey noted that he asked other children in the class, at Cedar Hills Elementary in Jacksonville, for an explanation and received the same answer.

The Story was first reported by TheBlaze, and has since gone viral online.

“Everybody has their opinions,” Harvey said. “I am strongly for proper education, for the freedom of thought so you can form your own opinion and have your own free speech in the future… [but] the education is, ‘when was the Constitution drafted, when was it ratified, why did this happen, why did we choose to do this…all these things, why did they particular choose those specific rights to be in our Bill of Rights.’” he added.

“I believe in our Constitution. I am a veteran, I served for six-and-a-half years proudly and I served to protect our rights,” Harvey said. “Now whenever I have someone coming in and trying to pollute my child’s mind with biased opinions…there’s no education in that.” he urged.

The statement is particularly bizarre, given that perhaps the most famous line that founding father Benjamin Franklin ever uttered was “He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.”

The Blaze notes that the school are “checking into” the incident following a separate complaint from another parent. A spokesperson for the school said that they were unsure why the teacher had instructed the children to write such a statement.

It is precisely because of incidents like this that more and more parents are turning to home schooling. Indeed, constitutional expert and former Congressman Ron Paul recently announced the launch of his own home schooling program that promises to center heavily around The Constitution and how it “has been hijacked.”



A Batavia High School teacher’s fans are rallying to support him as he faces possible discipline for advising students of their Constitutional rights before taking a school survey on their behavior.

They’ve been collecting signatures on an online petition, passing the word on Facebook, sending letters to the school board, and planning to speak at Tuesday’s school board meeting.

Students and parents have praised his ability to interest reluctant students in history and current affairs.

But John Dryden said he’s not the point. He wants people to focus on the issue he raised: Whether school officials considered that students could incriminate themselves with their answers to the survey that included questions about drug and alcohol use.

Dryden, a social studies teacher, told some of his students April 18 that they had a 5th Amendment right to not incriminate themselves by answering questions on the survey, which had each student’s name printed on it.

The survey is part of measuring how students meet the social-emotional learning standards set by the state. It is the first year Batavia has administered such a survey.

School district officials declined to provide a copy of the survey to the Daily Herald, saying the district bought the survey from a private company, Multi-Health Systems Inc., and the contents are proprietary business information.

They did provide the script teachers were to read to students before the test.

It does not tell students whether participation is mandatory or optional.

An April email communication to parents said their children could choose not to take the survey, but they had to notify the district by April 17.

The survey asked about drug, alcohol and tobacco use, and emotions, according to Brad Newkirk, chief academic officer.

The results were to be reviewed by school officials, including social workers, counselors and psychologists.

The survey was not a diagnostic tool, but a “screener” to figure out which students might need specific help, Newkirk said.

Superintendent Jack Barshinger said teacher support for doing a survey grew after several suicides by students in recent years. Students and staff typically said they had no idea those teens were in distress.

“We can’t help them if we aren’t aware of their needs,” Barshinger said.

The results will also be compared from year to year, to see if interventions offered work, he said.

School officials have already reviewed the surveys and have talked to some students about their answers.

Day of the survey

Dryden said it was just “dumb luck” he learned about the contents. He picked up surveys from his mailbox about 10 minutes before his first class. Seeing students’ names on them, unlike past surveys, he started reading the 34 questions.

“Oh. Well. Ummm, somebody needs to remind them they have the ability not to incriminate themselves,” he recalled thinking. It was particularly on his mind because his classes had recently finished reviewing the Bill of Rights. And the school has a police officer stationed there as a liaison, he pointed out. Barshinger said the results weren’t shared with police.

“I made a judgment call. There was no time to ask anyone,” Dryden said. If the survey had been handed out a day or two before, he said, he would have talked to an administrator about his concern.

Instead, he gave the warning to his first-, second- and third-block classes. The test was given to all students during third block.

He suspects it was a teacher who told the administration about what Dryden had done, after the other teacher had trouble getting all the students to take the survey.

But he had also spoken afterward with administrators about the questions. “So I was already on the radar,” he said.

Dryden faces having a “letter of remedy” placed in his employment file. He said this week he is negotiating the matter with district authorities.

Only a school board can issue a letter of remedy, which informs teachers their conduct was improper and could have consequences up to dismissal, according to state law.

Barshinger declined to speak about Dryden’s specific situation. The board will discuss the matter in closed session Tuesday. Any action, however, would have to take place in open session.

Dryden mentioned his situation to a former student, Joe Bertalmio.

The campaign

Bertalmio was outraged. The 2002 graduate, who took one class with Dryden, credits him with teaching him how to examine positions and make logical arguments, no matter where one stands politically.

“Back it up — give me evidence,” is what Dryden taught, Bertalmio said.

Bertalmio posted the news on Facebook, where it was noticed by fellow graduates. Parents of current students have also joined in. There are more than 1,000 signatures on the “Defend and Support John Dryden” petition at the, although many seem to be repeats. He has also urged people to write letters to the Batavia school board, plans to speak at the board’s meeting, and may have a rally before the meeting. A Batavia alderman told the city council Monday he plans to attend the meeting in support, and encouraged other people to do so.

Stick to the issue

But Dryden doesn’t want this seen as him vs. the administrators. He said he knows they were acting in what they thought was the best interests of the students.

“These are good, professional, smart people on the other side who want to do what is right by kids,” he said.

He would rather focus the discussion on the survey.

“I have asked people (the supporters) to talk about the survey. I think I am a sideshow,” he said. “This (the survey) was rushed and it wasn’t vetted.”

“I’m not a martyr,” he said. “I’m trying to refocus people’s attentions. Calm down.”



By Jake Dean

Ellie Rubenstein, a teacher from Highland Park, Illinois, submitted her resignation in a speech on YouTube last week, in which she denounced the campaign to dismantle public education and victimize teachers. The video received hundreds of thousands of views, as well as hundreds of supportive comments from teachers, parents, and students.

Rubenstein said she and two other teachers had been informed they would be transferred to another school for opposing attempts to replace curriculum with standardized testing and slash resources available for students.

On one of the last days of the school year, Rubenstein and two other teachers were called in over the loudspeaker and informed that they were being transferred because they were contributing to a “negative climate,” which she interpreted to mean their opposition to replacing curriculum with preparations for standardized test preparation.



After being publicly humiliated, she felt like she had no choice but to resign in protest. “This inhumane, insensitive transfer is an attempt to silence my voice, but I cannot and will not remain mute where my students and fellow colleagues are concerned.”

She added that her involuntary transfer was part of the continuous attacks on her fellow teachers. “This year alone I have been a helpless witness as half a dozen dedicated, hardworking teachers were reduced to tears, shame, and desperation after they were handed concern forms filled with false accusations,” which formed the grounds for not renewing their contracts.

Later in the video, she denounced the stripping of funding for public education and the dismantling of high-quality curriculum. “Many exciting learning opportunities have been cut by our district, field trips, guest speakers, exciting events, in-class simulations are no longer allowed,” Rubenstein said.

She added, “Authentic literature has been replaced by dry uninteresting reading texts and teachers are being forced to do away with constructive projects in order to fit in all those mandates, instructional minutes, and assessments.”

She said she felt completely abandoned by the organizations that were supposed to defend her. “I have been painfully aware that neither my principal, administrator, not even my union will protect my rights or stand by me. There is no where to turn for support and unless you are a yes man, you will soon find out that your only choice is to become one or leave.”

Her conclusion that the union would do nothing to defend her is entirely justified. Chicago, only 23 miles south of Highland Park, this week approved the largest shutdown of public schools in US history after the Chicago Teachers Union orchestrated the sellout of last year’s one-week strike by 26,000 teachers.

Last September, Democratic Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced plans to shut down 61 schools, a proposal that would require 13 percent of the district’s students to travel longer distances and cost the jobs of 1,000 teachers. This brought the teachers to strike in opposition to the plan, but the Chicago Teachers Union leadership managed to end the strike by pushing through a concessions contract that paved the way for the school closings.

The attempt to humiliate, abuse, and discredit teachers is part of the drive to dismantle public education in the United States.

Since 2008, over 336,000 state and local education jobs have been eliminated. As a result of the latest round of “sequester” budget cuts, 70,000 children will be kicked off Head Start, more than 7,200 staff for special education would be eliminated, and 10,000 more teachers will be at risk of losing their job, according to the White House.

The sequester also imposes a $740 million reduction in the federal Title I program, which provides financial assistance to poor school districts, and a $644 million cut to special education assistance allocated under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Special education teachers and para-professional support staff are facing mass layoffs and the elimination of their programs in many districts.

The poorest districts are easy targets for draconian cuts and the implementation of privatizations, takeovers, and “turnaround” policies under Obama’s Race to the Top program.

Earlier this year, Washington, D.C. public schools chancellor Kaya Henderson released a list of 15 public schools to be closed in the District of Columbia for this year and next, eliminating 10 percent of all public schools along with an estimated 140 teaching positions.

Just last week, 19,500 California teachers received pink slips, while numerous school districts in Michigan have issued mass layoff notices.



Written by  Michael Tennant | The New American

An Illinois high school teacher was disciplined for giving his students a real-life lesson in how to apply a subject they had just studied: the Bill of Rights.

On April 18, Batavia High School in Batavia, Illinois, asked teachers to distribute a “social-emotional learning survey” to their students. “The survey is part of measuring how students meet the social-emotional learning standards set by the state,” reported the Arlington Heights Daily Herald. “It is the first year Batavia has administered such a survey.”

As if it weren’t bad enough that the school was delving into students’ personal lives, the survey — each copy of which had a student’s name printed on it — asked questions about students’ drug and alcohol use. When social studies teacher John Dryden, who had just finished teaching a unit on the Bill of Rights, was given the surveys to hand out to his class, he began reading the questions and realized there was a problem: If a student admitted to using drugs or alcohol, he could be incriminating himself, something the Fifth Amendment was designed to prevent. This, he thought, was particularly important in light of the fact that there is a police officer stationed at the school.

Having no time to check with administrators — he’d picked up the surveys 10 minutes before his first class, and they were to be administered that day — Dryden told the Herald he “made a judgment call” to remind his first three classes of their constitutional rights. (The survey was completed during the third class period.) He said he would have discussed the matter with administrators had he received the surveys or been informed of their contents in advance and that he did raise the issue with them afterward.

“I advised my students that they had a Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate themselves,” Dryden told reporters prior to a May 28 school board meeting to review his actions. “It was not my intention for them not to take the survey.”

Dryden suspects another teacher informed the administration of what he had done when the students in that teacher’s class balked at responding to the survey.

For reminding his students of their rights, Dryden was reprimanded by the Batavia school board. He received a “letter of remedy, which outlines certain actions he must do or face more consequences,” the Herald wrote following the board meeting. In addition, the 20-year veteran of Batavia High School “said he was docked a day’s pay,” according to the Kane County Chronicle.

This occurred despite an outpouring of support for Dryden from current and former students, parents, teachers, and other members of the community. Many took to Facebook, e-mail, and even an online petition site (the petition has over 8,800 signers as of this writing) to protest Dryden’s treatment. The Chronicle reported that “dozens” also turned out to speak on his behalf at the board meeting. “Several” of them, said the Herald, told the board that “rather than being disciplined, Dryden should have been praised for reminding students they have the right to not incriminate themselves.”

“These kids need to know that the U.S. Constitution is there for them,” Batavia alderman Alan Wolff told the board.

Saying Dryden is an excellent instructor, “able to break through student apathy like no other teacher I know,” fellow Batavia High School teacher Scott Bayer informed the board, “Every teacher I talked to addressed students in the same way.”

“We as teachers were put in a situation where we were forced to react,” he explained. “Things were not communicated very well, students were apprehensive and had questions, and we couldn’t give answers.”

According to the Herald, “Several parents said they had not received notice from the district that they could choose to not have their child take the survey,” a notice that was sent by e-mail and required parents to notify the district by April 17 if they wanted their children excused from the survey.

“I was not made aware a survey was going to be issued to my son, and basically was not given any opportunity to protect his privacy rights,” Meg Humphrey, a biology teacher at the school and parent of one of its students, told the board. She also had privacy concerns because the company that sold the survey to the district is privy to students’ responses.

Emily Farrell, another parent, argued that the survey was “a complete invasion of personal information” that asked “very personal questions.”

None of this swayed the members of the school board — save one, Jon Gaspar, who voted not to reprimand Dryden but declined to elaborate on his reasons.

“The board will not support any employees giving students false impressions about those who come here every day” to work for their best interests, board president Cathy Dremel told reporters.

Likewise, Superintendent Jack Barshinger, in a statement issued following the board’s decision, said:

District teachers, social workers, guidance counselors, psychologists and others worked together for over a year to select a data-gathering instrument that could be used to determine what social or emotional issues our high school students are experiencing, and whether individual students could benefit from new or increased supportive intervention by our staff. These purposes were shared with our parents and our teachers.

The issue before the Board tonight was whether one employee has the right to mischaracterize the efforts of our teachers, counselors, social workers and others; and tell our students, in effect, that the adults are not here to help, but that they are trying to get you to “incriminate” yourselves.

However, as Reason’s Jacob Sullum observed:

Barshinger seems to think it is inconceivable that there could be anything wrong with the survey, since people with good intentions worked on it for “over a year.” Yet the survey forms that Dryden picked up from his mailbox 10 minutes before his first class on April 18 not only asked about illegal behavior; they had students’ names on them, thereby destroying any assurance of confidentiality. Even if the people who selected the survey were not trying to get students to incriminate themselves, that was the inevitable result if students who had broken the law by drinking or using illegal drugs answered the questions candidly. What guarantee did they have that their answers would not be used against them, if only to pressure them into accepting the “supportive intervention” deemed appropriate by the school? As Ronald Reagan was fond of saying, much damage can be caused by people from the government who are “here to help.”

In fact, school personnel did review students’ responses. (Otherwise, what would be the point of the survey?) “Those whose answers raised red flags were called in to the school’s student services workers, including social workers and counselors,” penned the Herald. Sullum’s — and Dryden’s — concerns are therefore well-founded.

One assumes the school district will be more open about the survey next year, if only to avoid another incident like this. Better still, the district should just scrap the whole thing and mind its own business.



Activist Post

Real teachers, the ones who care about their students, the ones who teach kids to think critically and not just recite things by rote, are being targeted. Why?

Because our public indoctrination centers, also known as schools, don’t want children to think.

They want children to learn specified “facts” in order to pass standardized tests, thus creating perfect little worker bees. They want to produce adults who will not question authority or the status quo, but merely assimilate what they are told as truth, and act accordingly.

Because of this, the school system is losing those teachers who could make a real difference in the future of our country.

Ellie Rubenstein is such a teacher, and she made a video of her resignation from the school system, saying, “Everything I loved about teaching is extinct”. She exposes the entire system, and continues,

I thought I’d be a teacher the rest of my life. But I no longer feel I’m doing anything meaningful. I have to get out before my sense of self and self-worth is completely obliterated. Unless you are a ‘yes’ man, you will soon find out your only choice is to become one or leave.

Much to Rubenstein’s astonishment, her video was so warmly received by many YouTube viewers that it got nearly half a million hits in the first day.

She wrote:

The outpouring of love and support is overwhelming. I originally intended for this video to be watched by my administrators and my community; I had no idea it would reach so many. The thousands of stories already shared with me from around the globe that mirror my own are both critical and heartbreaking. I cannot change the system from within, so I leave to allow myself to continue teaching in my way, on my terms. I never planned on giving up, and I never will. If you are interested in learning more about me and my future educational endeavors, feel free to visit I have the deepest respect and gratitude for those whose voices join with mine, and for those who are still fighting to find their own.



Parents oblivious to predators preying on their kids

by Joseph Farah | World Net Daily

We’ve almost become immune to the everyday horror stories perpetrated on innocent children in government schools.

Too many parents are oblivious to the predators in and around their children – many of whom are paid with their tax dollars.

But last week WND noticed the trend is reaching epidemic proportions – from teachers providing sexually explicit material to students to same-sex rape to torture to kidnap to delivering drugs to students to rigging test scores for cash.

  • The disturbing series of reports starts in Utah, where a high school teacher is accused of sexually abusing a 17-year-old student. Both are female. There’s been a huge increase in sexual abuse of both male and female students by female teachers – something nearly unheard of a decade ago before “gay” became cool. Gaile Kristine Supp, 24, of Deseret, Utah, was accused of abusing a student in her West Haven home. The Clearfield High School instructor allegedly invited the student to her home to help her with her homework, authorities said, but instead showed her a movie with a sex scene and then assaulted the student. The charge filed against her was object rape.
  • It also came to light that 26-year-old teacher, Nadia Diaz, escaped being jailed for having sex with a 15-year-old student after the student pleaded for her freedom.
  • The torture allegations came out of Indiana, where several high school track coaches were asked to resign. Officials in Mill Creek Community School Corp. said they suspended several unidentified Cascade High School coaches after they allegedly ordered male and female team members to perform “bear crawls” on an asphalt running track. That’s an exercise that requires students to walk on all fours, but several suffered blisters on their hands. The coaches allegedly ordered the exercise because some students missed practice to attend a meeting related to the school’s prom.
  • In California, authorities said they arrested a third-grade teacher at a Union City elementary after at least nine girls reported he had interacted with them inappropriately. Police spokesman Ben Horner said Michael Howey, 47, was arrested on a long list of counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14 and even more counts of annoying and molesting a child. The 14-year veteran of the New Haven Unified School District was jailed on $1.5 million bail after police said officers found a total of nine students with similar complaints.
  • In Atlanta, the motive apparently was profit. Former Atlanta Superintendent Beverly Hall and several others pleaded not guilty to counts alleging they cheated on standardized tests. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Jerry Baxter warned that the case could be so big and involve so many people that the judiciary may have to move proceedings to a larger building. The former Atlanta educators are accused of artificially inflating test scores to gain bonus money and keep their jobs. A state investigation found educators cheated on the 2009 Criterion-Referenced Competency Test by erasing incorrect answers and prompting students to change them. Charges in the case include racketeering, theft, making false statements and influencing witnesses. Estimates are that there could be more than 1 million pages of evidence.
  • In Alabama, the charge was kidnapping. Officials said that high school teacher Jesse Mae Pollard of Northport, Ala., was being held without bond for allegedly kidnapping a 6-year-old girl.
  • In Denver, it was the use of a roll of tape that created trouble for a teacher. The second-grade teacher – whose name was not released – was accused of taping her students’ mouths shut.
  • In Philadelphia, a teacher has gotten into serious trouble for providing a copy of an erotic book to a student to read in class. Philip Aidoo, an instructor for Eastern University Academy Charter school, allegedly bought the “racy” “Fifty Shades of Grey” for a ninth-grade student.
  • In Florida, police allege that it started out with a text-message relationship between Stranahan High band director Martin Anthony Brown, 33, and a 17-year-old student. It didn’t end until there were “make-out sessions during school hours and marijuana-fueled sexual trysts at his Hollywood home.” The teacher has been charged with sexual assault and other counts.
  • Also in Florida, “nearly a dozen teachers in Broward and Palm Beach counties have either been arrested for allegedly having sex with students, or been sentenced to terms ranging from two years of house arrest to 15 years in prison.”

If all this weren’t horrendous enough, in Texas, a controversial school curriculum management system that once included a description of the Boston Tea Party as terror, and has referenced Islamic terrorists as freedom fighters, now has been found to be trying to charge parents hundreds of dollars to see the instructional materials being used by their own children.

The program is CSCOPE, and Amy Zimmerman, a mother in the Collinsville Independent School District, asked to see the seventh-grade CSCOPE science lessons used between September 2012 and May 2013, citing her “parental right” under state law.

And, still, the vast preponderance of Americans unthinkingly send their children off to government indoctrination and internment camps for seven or more hours a day assuming it’s the best alternative to see them “educated.”

Honestly, I don’t know what’s more deplorable – the fact that predators, con artists, anti-American activists and moral relativists are running the schools or the negligent parents who willingly turn over their kids to them.



LOS ANGELES ( — The Los Angeles Unified School District is taking part in a program to educate middle and high school students about how to share their HIV and STD statuses with their cell phones.

Health teachers in grades 7 through 12 had access to information regarding the services provided by since the program debuted earlier this year, LAUSD officials said.

Described by district officials as a sex education prevention resource accessed by secondary health teachers, allows users to obtain, store and privately share their health records and HIV/STD statuses.

While it is not part of the district’s health education curriculum, the website is being offered as an added sex education resource by displaying posters in classrooms to encourage students to utilize the tool as a supplement, officials said.

One of the methods used to educate students on Qpid’s services is a three-minute YouTube video that shows how to obtain STD results for former Miss California 2009 Tami Farrell.

After urging students to take out their phones, the video’s narrator asks, “How often are you allowed to use your cell phone in class?”

Students are then shown how users can text message a code to receive information that, in this case, shows Farrell tested negative for HIV, and chlamydia.

The free service allows students as young as 12 years old to find a “teen-friendly” testing location, access their results online, and then confidentially share their status if they choose.

State law allows for children 12 or older to consent to medical care involving the prevention of sexually transmitted disease without parental consent.

Some Los Angeles school campuses that have partnered with Qpid include Lincoln High School, Metropolitan High School, Roosevelt High School, Jefferson High School, and Holmes Avenue School, according to the company’s website.

Tim Kordic, Program Manager for the LAUSD HIV/AIDS Prevention Unit, said the program allows school officials to capitalize on emerging technology to engage students in sex education.

“They not only want this type of resource; they are excited about it,” said Kordic. “We have the opportunity to avoid misuse and take advantage of the technology so it works for us.”

A CDC study released in 2011 found that 39 percent of high school students had sexual intercourse at least once, with 6 percent of students doing so for the first time before turning 13 years old.



More and more US schools have police patrolling the corridors. Pupils are being arrested for throwing paper planes and failing to pick up crumbs from the canteen floor. Why is the state criminalising normal childhood behaviour?

By Chris McGreal | The Guardian

Male police officers supervise and keep an eye on students in South Texas high school
A policeman on the beat in a school in southern Texas. Photograph: Bob Daemmrich/Alamy

The charge on the police docket was “disrupting class”. But that’s not how 12-year-old Sarah Bustamantes saw her arrest for spraying two bursts of perfume on her neck in class because other children were bullying her with taunts of “you smell”.

“I’m weird. Other kids don’t like me,” said Sarah, who has been diagnosed with attention-deficit and bipolar disorders and who is conscious of being overweight. “They were saying a lot of rude things to me. Just picking on me. So I sprayed myself with perfume. Then they said: ‘Put that away, that’s the most terrible smell I’ve ever smelled.’ Then the teacher called the police.”

The policeman didn’t have far to come. He patrols the corridors of Sarah’s school, Fulmore Middle in Austin, Texas. Like hundreds of schools in the state, and across large parts of the rest of the US, Fulmore Middle has its own police force with officers in uniform who carry guns to keep order in the canteens, playgrounds and lessons. Sarah was taken from class, charged with a criminal misdemeanour and ordered to appear in court.

Each day, hundreds of schoolchildren appear before courts in Texas charged with offences such as swearing, misbehaving on the school bus or getting in to a punch-up in the playground. Children have been arrested for possessing cigarettes, wearing “inappropriate” clothes and being late for school.

In 2010, the police gave close to 300,000 “Class C misdemeanour” tickets to children as young as six in Texas for offences in and out of school, which result in fines, community service and even prison time. What was once handled with a telling-off by the teacher or a call to parents can now result in arrest and a record that may cost a young person a place in college or a job years later.

“We’ve taken childhood behaviour and made it criminal,” said Kady Simpkins, a lawyer who represented Sarah Bustamantes. “They’re kids. Disruption of class? Every time I look at this law I think: good lord, I never would have made it in school in the US. I grew up in Australia and it’s just rowdy there. I don’t know how these kids do it, how they go to school every day without breaking these laws.”

The British government is studying the American experience in dealing with gangs, unruly young people and juvenile justice in the wake of the riots in England. The UK’s justice minister, Crispin Blunt, visited Texas last September to study juvenile courts and prisons, youth gangs and police outreach in schools, among other things. But his trip came at a time when Texas is reassessing its own reaction to fears of feral youth that critics say has created a “school-to-prison pipeline”. The Texas supreme court chief justice, Wallace Jefferson, has warned that “charging kids with criminal offences for low-level behavioural issues” is helping to drive many of them to a life in jail.

The Texas state legislature last year changed the law to stop the issuing of tickets to 10- and 11-year-olds over classroom behaviour. (In the state, the age of criminal responsibility is 10.) But a broader bill to end the practice entirely – championed by a state senator, John Whitmire, who called the system “ridiculous” – failed to pass and cannot be considered again for another two years.

Even the federal government has waded in, with the US attorney general, Eric Holder, saying of criminal citations being used to maintain discipline in schools: “That is something that clearly has to stop.”

As almost every parent of a child drawn in to the legal labyrinth by school policing observes, it wasn’t this way when they were young.

The emphasis on law and order in the classroom parallels more than two decades of rapid expansion of all areas of policing in Texas in response to misplaced fears across the US in the 1980s of a looming crime wave stoked by the crack epidemic, alarmist academic studies and the media.

“It’s very much tied in with some of the hyperbole around the rise in juvenile crime rate that took place back in the early 90s,” said Deborah Fowler, deputy director of Texas Appleseed, an Austin legal rights group, and principal author of a 200-page study of the consequences of policing in Texas schools. “They ushered in tough, punitive policies. It was all part of the tough-on-crime movement.”

Part of that included the passing of laws that made the US the only developed country to lock up children as young as 13 for life without the possibility of parole, often as accomplices to murders committed by an adult.

As the hand of law and order grew heavier across Texas, its grip also tightened on schools. The number of school districts in the state with police departments has risen more than 20-fold over the past two decades.

“Zero tolerance started out as a term that was used in combating drug trafficking and it became a term that is now used widely when you’re referring to some very punitive school discipline measures. Those two policy worlds became conflated with each other,” said Fowler.

In the midst of that drive came the 1999 Columbine high school massacre, in which two students in Colorado shot dead 12 other pupils and a teacher before killing themselves. Parents clamoured for someone to protect their children and police in schools seemed to many to be the answer.

But most schools do not face any serious threat of violence and police officers patrolling the corridors and canteens are largely confronted with little more than boisterous or disrespectful childhood behaviour.

“What we see often is a real overreaction to behaviour that others would generally think of as just childish misbehaviour rather than law breaking,” said Fowler. Tickets are most frequently issued by school police for “disruption of class”, which can mean causing problems during lessons but is also defined as disruptive behaviour within 500ft (150 metres) of school property such as shouting, which is classified as “making an unreasonable noise”.

Among the more extreme cases documented by Appleseed is of a teacher who had a pupil arrested after the child responded to a question as to where a word could be found in a text by saying: “In your culo (arse)”, making the other children laugh. Another pupil was arrested for throwing paper aeroplanes.

Students are also regularly fined for “disorderly behaviour”, which includes playground scraps not serious enough to warrant an assault charge or for swearing or an offensive gesture. One teenage student was arrested and sent to court in Houston after he and his girlfriend poured milk on each other after they broke up. Nearly one third of tickets involve drugs or alcohol. Although a relatively high number of tickets – up to 20% in some school districts – involve charges over the use of weapons, mostly the weapons used were fists.

The very young are not spared. According to Appleseed, Texas records show more than 1,000 tickets were issued to primary schoolchildren over the past six years (although these have no legal force at that age). Appleseed said that “several districts ticketed a six-year-old at least once in the last five years”.

Fines run up to $500. For poorer parents, the cost can be crippling. Some parents and students ignore the financial penalty, but that can have consequences years down the road. Schoolchildren with outstanding fines are regularly jailed in an adult prison for non-payment once they turn 17. Stumping up the fine is not an end to the offending student’s problems either. A class-C misdemeanour is a criminal offence.

“Once you pay it, that’s a guilty plea and that’s on your record,” said Simpkins. “In the US we have these astronomical college and university expenses and you go to fill out the application to get your federal aid for that and it says have you ever been arrested. And there you are, no aid.”

In Austin, about 3% of the school district’s 80,000 pupils were given criminal citations in the 2007/8 school year, the last date for which figures are available. But the chances of a teenager receiving a ticket in any given year are much higher than that because citations are generally issued to high-school pupils, not those in kindergarten or primary school.

The result, says the Appleseed report, is that “school-to-prison pipeline” in which a high proportion of children who receive tickets and end up in front of a court are arrested time and again because they are then marked out as troublemakers or find their future blighted by a criminal record.

From her perch on the bench in an Austin courtroom, Judge Jeanne Meurer has spent close on 30 years dealing with children hauled up for infractions, some serious, others minor. Some of the difficulties faced by teachers can be seen as Meurer decides whether a parade of children should be released to await trial or held in custody. Meurer switches between motherly and intimidating depending on what she makes of the child before her.

“Some of them are rough kids,” she said. “I’ve been on the bench 30 years and you used to never have a child cuss you out like you do now. I appreciate the frustrations that adults have in dealing with children who seem to have no manners or respect. But these are our future. Shouldn’t we find a tool to change that dynamic versus just arresting them in school and coming down with the hard criminal justice hammer?”

Many of those who appear in front of Meurer have learning problems. Children with disabilities are particularly vulnerable to the consequences of police in schools. Simpkins describes the case of a boy with attention deficit disorder who as a 12-year-old tipped a desk over in class in a rage. He was charged with threatening behaviour and sent to a juvenile prison where he was required to earn his release by meeting certain educational and behavioural standards.

“But he can’t,” she said. “Because of that he is turning 18 within the juvenile justice system for something that happened when he was 12. It’s a real trap. A lot of these kids do have disabilities and that’s how they end up there and can’t get out. Instead of dealing with it within school system like we used to, we have these school police, they come in and it escalates from there.”

Sometimes that escalation involves force. “We had one young man with an IQ well below 70 who was pepper-sprayed in the hallway because he didn’t understand what the police were saying,” said Simpkins. “After they pepper-sprayed him he started swinging his arms around in pain and he hit one of the police officers – it’s on video, his eyes were shut – and they charged him with assault of a public servant. He was 16. He was charged with two counts of assault of a public servant and he is still awaiting trial. He could end up in prison.”

Austin’s school police department is well armed with officers carrying guns and pepper spray, and with dog units on call for sniffing out drugs and explosives.

According to the department’s records, officers used force in schools more than 400 times in the five years to 2008, including incidents in which pepper spray was fired to break up a food fight in a canteen and guns were drawn on lippy students.

In recent months the questionable use of force has included the tasering of a 16-year-old boy at a high school in Seguin, Texas, after “he refused to cooperate” when asked why he wasn’t wearing his school identification tag. He then used “abusive language”. The police said that when an officer tried to arrest the boy, he attempted to bite the policeman. The youth was charged with resisting arrest and criminal trespass even though the school acknowledges he is a student and was legitimately on the grounds.

Such cases are not limited to Texas. In one notorious instance in California, a school security officer broke the arm of a girl he was arresting for failing to clear up crumbs after dropping cake in the school canteen. In another incident, University of Florida campus police tasered a student for pressing Senator John Kerry with an awkward question at a debate after he had been told to shut up.

Sometimes the force is deadly. Last week, Texas police were accused of overreacting in shooting dead a 15-year-old student, Jaime Gonzalez, at a school in Brownsville after he pointed an air gun, which resembled a real pistol, at them outside the principal’s office. The boy’s father, also called Jaime, said the police were too quick to shoot to kill when they could have wounded him or used another means to arrest him. “If they would have tased him all this wouldn’t have happened,” he told the Brownsville Herald. “Like people say there’s been stand-offs with people that have hostages for hours … But here, they didn’t even give I don’t think five minutes. No negotiating.” The police say Gonzalez defied orders to put the gun down.

Meurer says she is not against police in schools but questions whether officers should regard patrolling the playground the same way they go about addressing crime on the streets.

“When you start going overboard and using laws to control non-illegal behaviour – I mean if any adult did it it’s not going to be a violation – that’s where we start seeing a problem,” she says. “You’ve gradually seen this morphing from schools taking care of their own environments to the police and security personnel, and all of a sudden it just became more and more that we were relying on law enforcement to control everyday behaviour.”

Chief Brian Allen, head of the school police department for the Aldine district and president of the Texas school police chiefs’ association, is having none of it.

“There’s quite a substantial number of students that break the law. In Texas and in the US, if you’re issued a ticket, it’s not automatically that you’re found guilty. You have an opportunity to go before the judge and plead your case. If you’re a teacher and a kid that’s twice as big as you comes up and hits you right in the face, what are you going to do? Are you going to use your skills that they taught you or are you going to call a police officer?”

But Allen concedes that the vast majority of incidents in which the police become involved are for offences that regarded as little more than misbehaviour elsewhere.

“Just like anything else, sometimes mistakes are made.” he said. “Each circumstance is different and there’s no set guideline. There’s also something called officer discretion. If you take five auto mechanics and ask them to diagnose the problem of a vehicle, you’ll come up with five different solutions. If you ask five different doctors to diagnose a patient, a lot of times you’ll have five different diagnoses. Conversely, if you ask five different police officers if they would write a ticket or not for the same offence, you possibly have five different answers.”

Jennifer Rambo (left) and her daughter Sarah Bustamentes, who was charged with 'disrupting class' Jennifer Rambo (left) and her daughter Sarah Bustamentes, who was charged with ‘disrupting class’. Photograph: Chris McGreal Parents who have been sucked into the system, such as Jennifer Rambo, the mother of Sarah Bustamantes, wonder what happened to teachers taking responsibility for school discipline.

“I was very upset at the teacher because the teacher could have just stopped it. She could have said: OK class, that’s enough. She could have asked Sarah for her perfume and told her that’s inappropriate, don’t do that in class. But she did none of that. She called the police,” she says.

Politicians and civil liberties groups have raised the same question, asking if schools are not using the police to shift responsibility, and accountability, for discipline.

“Teachers rely on the police to enforce discipline,” says Simpkins. “Part of it is that they’re not accountable. They’re not going to get into trouble for it. The parent can’t come in and yell at them. They say: it’s not us, it’s the police.”

That view is not shared by an Austin teacher who declined to be named because he said he did not want to stigmatise the children in his class.

“There’s this illusion that it’s just a few kids acting up; kids being kids. This is not the 50s. Too many parents today don’t control their children. Their fathers aren’t around. They’re in gangs. They come in to the classroom and they have no respect, no self-discipline. They’re doing badly, they don’t want to learn, they just want to disrupt. They can be very threatening,” he says. “The police get called because that way the teacher can go on with teaching instead of wasting half the class dealing with one child, and it sends a message to the other kids.”

The Texas State Teachers Association, the state’s main teachers union, did not take a position on ticketing at the recent debate in the legislature over Whitmire’s proposal to scrap it. But the association’s Clay Robison says that most teachers welcome the presence of police in schools.

“Obviously it looks as if some police officers are overreacting at some schools. I’m a parent and I wouldn’t want my 17-year-old son hauled in to court if he and another student got in to an argument in a cafeteria. Police officers need to exercise a little bit of common sense but the police are what they are. They enforce the law,” he says. “At the same time, years ago, at a school in one of the better neighbourhoods of Austin, a teacher was shot to death in his classroom. It’s still a very rare occurrence but it does happen. Anything that increases the security of the teacher is good so they don’t have to worry about personal safety and they can concentrate on teaching the kids. We get complaints from some teachers that the police aren’t aggressive enough at moving against some of the older juveniles, those that they feel actually do pose a danger to the teachers or the other students.”

Because of Sarah Bustamentes’s mental disorders, a disability rights group took up her case and after months of legal battles prosecutors dropped the charges. Ask her how she feels about police in schools after her experience and she’s equivocal.

“We need police in school. In my school it can get physical and it can turn out very bad,” she says. “But they should stop issuing tickets. Only for physical stuff or bullying. Not what you do in class.”



J. D. Heyes
Natural News
August 27, 2013




There is something to be said for wanting to keep our children safe from harm. It’s as natural an emotion for a parent as there is. But at some point we have to ask ourselves as a society if we’re going to let abject fear take over our lives or if we’re going to stand up and overcome our fears by being proactive and solutions-oriented.

I’m talking in particular about new security policies implemented by a number of schools in North Texas, beginning this year. According to CBS Dallas-Fort Worth, new tradition-killing rules prohibit parents – parents, mind you – from walking their kids to the front door of their school.


All of the extra security is in response to what happened nearly nine months ago at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. It was December of last year when a gunman opened fire at the school, killing 20 students and six adults.

You, parent – stay by the curb

In the Hurst-Euless-Bedford (HEB) Independent School District, the report said, parents will have only the first week to walk their young ones to class. The new “security” policy will go into effect after that. But that’s only because registration and enrollment is taking place that first week.

The new policy is just another way public schools are injecting themselves into the traditional parent-child relationship. This horrible policy is sending the message to kids that their parents can’t keep them safe – only the school can.

It’s upsetting more than a few moms and dads, and rightfully so.

“I really want to take my son to class. Since it’s his first time in school,” Tamera Moore told the local CBS affiliate. “They may have security, but I want to know where my kid is going at all times.”

Others are perfectly willing to allow their role to be subjugated.

“As long as I can see him walk in that building that will be fine. Because once he’s in that building they’ll take care of him,” Angela Shamblin said.

That’s right, mom. Just stay by the curb. We’ve got it from here.

Outsourcing our children’s safety

Refresh my memory – was it a parent that killed all those kids at Sandy Hook? No. I seem to recall it was some deranged little psycho who was most likely wigged out on prescription antidepressants.

More from CBS-DFW:

For years, parents were given clearance to walk their children directly to their classroom, if they wished. But enhanced security measures on public school campuses include the elimination of parents walking their children to classrooms, after the first week of school.

The Richardson ISD, for example, hasn’t allowed parents to walk students to classrooms for years.

HEB officials say it’s no big deal; they’re just doing what lots of other overreacting school boards are doing.

“It’s very busy on a campus first thing in the morning, dropping off kids arriving for the day,” said district spokesperson Judy Everett Ramos. “So, being able to know who’s in the building, who’s in front, who’s deeper into the building, is very important in keeping our kids safe.”

“It don’t surprise me a bit,” one parent said. “All the security going around, all the things going on, it doesn’t surprise me at all.”

It doesn’t surprise me either, it just disappoints me. When we have become a society that requires parents to outsource the safety of their children to others – especially unarmed school officials – something is deeply, deeply wrong. If anything, schools ought to be allowing armed parents to take their kids to class. That is a “security measure” with teeth.




By Michael Snyder | The American Dream
August 26th, 2013

Would you willingly send your kids into a war zone?  No way.  Would you willingly send your children into a federal prison?  Of course not.  So why would you send them to a public school?  In America today, kids are being killed on the way to school, at school and on the way home from school.  Mass shootings are becoming increasingly common, the influence of gangs in our schools is on the rise and sometimes the biggest threat of danger comes from the teachers and the security officials that are supposed to be there to “protect” our children.  But violence is not the only thing for parents to be concerned about when it comes to our public schools.  The truth is that public schools in the United States have become government indoctrination centers, and many teachers are constantly looking for opportunities to inject as much propaganda as they possibly can into classroom instruction.  After a dozen years of this, many students leave high school virtually brainwashed and nearly incapable of thinking for themselves.  This is one of the reasons why so many high school students seem like they are dumb as a rock.  Our young people spend most of their young lives in prison camps where they are constantly being told what to think instead of being trained how to think.  Why would anyone want to subject their children to that?

When it comes to their children, safety is the number one priority for most parents.  They expect that their children will be kept safe going to school, while they are at school, and coming home from school.

Unfortunately, school is becoming an increasingly dangerous place to be for our children.  And I am not just talking about the mass shootings that have happened in recent years.

For example, 260 school children have been killed in the city of Chicago alone over the past three years, and now things are about to get even worse.  The following is an excerpt from a recent article about the impact that budget cuts and school closings are having on school safety in Chicago…

Most of Chicago’s cuts have taken place in the predominantly poor, African-American and Latino south and west sides, which is also where the majority of the city’s record 506 murders occurred last year.

The city has created 600 “safe passage” routes manned by adults and meant to try to ensure the safety of students crossing gang territories. But in recent weeks at least two people have been killed on those paths. One incident saw four injured and one dead after a shooting in front of a church. Another saw a 54-year-old man shot on the safe passage route that leads to Drake Elementary in Bronzeville.

Lillian Allen, a mother of two students at Drake, said the violence was “nerve-racking”.

Meanwhile, Annie Stoball will on Monday walk her nine-year-old granddaughter Kayla four blocks to her first day at Chicago’s Gresham Elementary, traversing the territory of two different gangs. She felt much safer taking Kayla across the street to Morgan Elementary.

The grandmother said: “This is dangerous. We’re going right into the heart of the gangs.”

In recent years, the number of gang members in the city of Chicago has absolutely exploded.  It is estimated that there are now approximately 100,000 gang members living in the city, and not even the “safe passage” routes for school children are safe now

The eyes of the city were on Chicago Public Schools “Safe Passage” routes Monday morning as a 28-year-old man was shot along one of the routes and a 14-year-old boy was shot to death near another one, the day before school starts.

The 14-year-old boy was shot and killed within a block of a welcoming elementary school, Melody Stem School , 3937 W. Wilcox. It’s at least the third fatal shooting along or near a Safe Passage route since mid-August.

In other areas of the country, gang activity is not a major problem yet, but concern about school violence is still a huge issue.

The state of Connecticut has one of the highest per capita incomes in the entire country, but the mass shooting that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School less than a year ago has caused schools all over the state to adopt extreme security measures

In Enfield, each of the town’s 14 public and parochial schools will have an armed guard at the door when they open for the year Sept. 3. Enfield Police Chief Carl Sferrazza said he believes armed guards are the best deterrent for an “active shooter” like Adam Lanza in Newtown.

“These people are homicidal and suicidal individuals. Their intent and their planning is all geared toward killing as many people as they possibly can,” Sferrazza said.

All Glastonbury schools also will have guards at the doors when school starts Aug. 29. The high school and Smith Middle School already had guards stationed there, and the town added seven additional guards at a cost of $315,000 for the school year.

Other school districts have chosen to add cameras, door buzzers, card-swipe entry systems or other, less drastic, security measures.

But sometimes it is actually the “security officials” that end up brutalizing the kids.  The following are just a couple of examples of the kinds of things that happen in public schools in America every single day…

*A security thug at one school in California actually fractured the arm of one 16-year-old girl because she left some crumbs on the floor after cleaning up some cake that she had spilled.

*In Allentown, Pennsylvania a 14-year-old girl was tasered in the groin area by a school security thug even though she had put up her hands in the air to surrender to him.

And if your kid does something to be considered a “security threat”, he or she could be taken out of school in handcuffs and hauled off to prison or to a mental institution.  The following examples are from one of my previous articles

#1 At an elementary school in Baltimore recently, three nine-year-old girls and an eight-year-old boy were arrested for fighting and marched out of their elementary school in handcuffs.  The police department defended handcuffing those kids….

“It’s our policy, regardless of the age, when a suspect is arrested by police, they’re handcuffed. And the reason is just not for the suspect’s safety but also for officers’ safety,” Det. Jeremy Silbert of the Baltimore City Police Department said.

#2 In New Haven, Connecticut a 10-year-old boy was actually arrested by police for giving another student “a wedgie” on a school bus.

#3 Just last year, a 5-year-old boy at a public school in Stockton, California was arrested by police and handcuffed with zip ties because he was committing “battery on a police officer“.


How much damage can a 5-year-old kid really do to a police officer?

The boy was ultimately sent to a hospital and forced to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

#4 A 6-year-old girl down in Florida was “throwing objects, hitting administration personnel and screaming uncontrollably” so police handcuffed the 40 pound little girl and shipped her off to a mental institution for evaluation.

#5 In San Mateo, California a few months ago a 7-year-old special education student was blasted in the face with pepper spray because he would not quit climbing on the furniture.  Police were then able to subdue the boy and he was “committed for a psychiatric evaluation”.

#6 Down in Florida, an 11-year-old student was arrested by police, thrown in jail and charged with a third-degree felony for bringing a plastic butter knife to school.

#7 In Texas, a 12-year-old girl was recently arrested by police for spraying two bursts of perfume on her neck.  She was formally charged with a misdemeanor.

#8 A 13-year-old boy at a public school in Albuquerque, New Mexico was recently arrested by police for burping in class.  The police marched him out of school and hauled him over to a juvenile detention center.

#9 Back in 2010, a 12-year-old girl at a school in Forest Hills, New York wrote “I love my friends Abby and Faith” on her desk.  The police were called out and she was marched out of her school in handcuffs in front of all her friends.

#10 A teenage couple down in Houston, Texas poured milk on each other during a squabble while they were breaking up a while back.  Instead of being sent to see the principal, they were arrested by police and sent to court.

Of course these days virtually no place is safe for young children.  If you take your eyes off of them for even a moment they could be taken by predators.

For instance, just check out what just happened at a Best Buy down in Florida

A Florida man tried to kill a 9-year-old girl in a Best Buy bathroom, jamming a plastic bag over her head and stuffing her face in a toilet before employees intervened, authorities said.

Another customer heard the girl screaming and crying inside the women’s restroom at the Jacksonville store and notified store staff. An employee looked under the stall and discovered a horrific scene.

James Tadros, 29, had kicked and beaten the girl bloody and was forcing her head inside the toilet, the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office said in a statement.

But physical violence is not the only threat that parents need to be concerned about.  If you allow your children to go to public schools or if you allow them to get into the “wrong crowd”, there is a very high probability that they could be sexually corrupted or sexually violated.  The following examples are from one of my previous articles entitled “21 Signs That U.S. Public Schools Have Become Training Centers For Sexual Deviancy“…

#1 There is a raging epidemic of sexually-transmitted diseases among our young people.  According to the latest figures released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, there are 20 million new sexually-transmitted infections in the United States every single year, and Americans between the ages of 15 and 24 account for approximately 50 percent of those new sexually-transmitted infections.

#2 Many of our teens are catching diseases that they can’t even pronounce correctly.  There were more than 1.4 million cases of chlamydia reported in the United States in 2011.  An astounding 33 percent of those cases involved Americans that were younger than 20 years of age.

#3 At this point, one out of every four teen girls in the U.S. has at least one sexually transmitted disease.  How high does that number have to go before we admit that there is a problem?

#4 Apparently, all of the propaganda about “safe sex” is not really working very well.  According to one survey, 24 percent of all U.S. teens that have an STD say that they still have unprotected sex.

#5 When you take morality out of public life, the results are predictable.  In the United States today, approximately 47 percent of all high school students have had sex.

#6 Many of our young people seem to not understand the value of waiting until marriage to become a mother.  Amazingly, one out of every five teen girls in the U.S. actually wants to be a teenage mother.

#7 When I was growing up, I don’t remember a single girl being pregnant at my high school.  But today all of that has changed.  A couple of years ago it was being reported that 86 teen girls at one high school in Memphis, Tennessee were either pregnant or had recently given birth.

#8 If you can believe it, the United States has the highest teen pregnancy rate on the entire planet.  In fact, the United States has a teen pregnancy rate that is more than twice as high as Canada, more than three times as high as France and more than seven times as high as Japan.

#9 Increasingly, oral sex is being promoted to our young people as a “safer” form of sex.  According to shocking research conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, approximately two-thirds of all Americans in the 15 to 24 year old age bracket have engaged in oral sex.

#10 Sex “education” has become much more about “indoctrination” in recent years.  One recent example of this trend was detailed in the New York Times

IMAGINE you have a 10- or 11-year-old child, just entering a public middle school. How would you feel if, as part of a class ostensibly about the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, he and his classmates were given “risk cards” that graphically named a variety of solitary and mutual sex acts? Or if, in another lesson, he was encouraged to disregard what you told him about sex, and to rely instead on teachers and health clinic staff members?

That prospect would horrify most parents. But such lessons are part of a middle-school curriculum that Dennis M. Walcott, the New York City schools chancellor, has recommended for his system’s newly mandated sex-education classes. There is a parental “opt out,” but it is very limited, covering classes on contraception and birth control.

#11 Sexual “experimentation” among our teens is reaching heights never seen before.  According to one recent study, sexual contact between teen girls in the United States is now at the highest level ever recorded.

#12 In America today, sex in public school hallways has become a common occurrence.  In a recent article about Detroit, I shared a quote from one of my readers that actually attended one of the “best” public schools in Detroit…

The school was a new seven story building just a couple of years old. The bathrooms would often lack toilet paper & soap beyond the second floor (the main floor), the bathroom sinks would often not work. The water fountains on north side of the building on from the third floor & up did not work. The elevators would constantly break down. I even got stuck on the elevator before. I almost tripped down a half a flight of stairs because the elastic seal (it was the metal bar at the front of a treader of I don’t know the name of it.) the stairs was not properly installed.

Students would often have sex on the stairs & throughout the school. Parents actually called the school many times & reported kids having sex on the stairs because all of them had glass windows 270 degrees.

#13 Would you feel okay about your teenage girl sharing a bathroom with boys?  In the state of Massachusetts, boys will now be able to freely use girls restrooms and girls locker rooms if it makes them feel more “comfortable”.

#14 One of the results of our “culture of sex” has been an explosion in the number of babies being born outside of marriage.  For women under the age of 30 living in the United States today, more than half of all babies are being born out of wedlock.

#15 Being a single parent is incredibly hard, but more U.S. children are being raised by just one parent than ever before.  At this point, more than one out of every four children in the United States is being raised by a single parent.

#16 Thanks to our “sexual revolution”, men and women are having a harder time than ever relating to each other in a meaningful way.  Our young people are being taught that marriage is a “burden” and that they should delay it for as long as possible.  Today, an all-time low 44.2 percent of all Americans between the ages of 25 and 34 are married.

#17 There is an epidemic of sex between teachers and students in the United States.  In fact, for some teachers one student is just simply not enough.  For example, a 33-year-old art teacher down in Arizona was charged with having sex with four of her male students.

#18 A former high school English teacher down in Texas has that teacher beat.  She has been accused of having sex with five different male students.  The most disturbing part of her story is that she is a mother of three children and her husband is serving this country in the U.S. Army.

#19 But a high school teacher down in Georgia has both of them beat.  She was recently charged with having sex with seven of her students.

#20 Sometimes even teachers that have been convicted of having sex with a student cannot stop themselves.  For example, there was one case where a probation officer found a student that a teacher had been convicted of having sex with previously hiding in her closet

Lisa Lavoie, the former Holyoke teacher who plead guilty after having a relationship with a student, has been charged with violating her probation after the student she had a relationship with was found hiding in her closet.

Back in February 2009, Lavoie ran off with one of her students, who was 15-year-old at the time. Lavoie was a teacher at the Donahue School on Whiting Farms Road in Holyoke.

The pair was found several days later in a motel room in West Virginia. Lavoie pleaded guilty to three counts of statutory rape and one count of enticement of a child in January 2011. She was sentenced to five years probation.

Unfortunately, our young people don’t have much of a chance with role models such as Miley Cyrus running around.

The fabric of society is coming apart at the seams, and our public schools have become cesspools of corruption, sex and violence.



Written by  Alex Newman | The New American

August 8, 2013

One of the most troubling aspects of the “education reforms” currently being advanced by the Obama administration and its allies is the unprecedented monitoring and tracking of students — invasions of privacy so pervasive George Orwell might blush. Everything from biometric data to information on children’s beliefs and families is already being vacuumed up. Opponents of the “reform” agenda have highlighted the cradle-to-grave accumulation of private and intimate data as among the most compelling reasons to kill the whole process.

Aside from data produced by the looming Common Core-aligned national testing regime, most of the data-mining schemes are not technically direct components of the plot to nationalize education standards. However, the vast collection of personal information and the accompanying data-mining are intricately linked to the federally backed standards in multiple ways, not to mention myriad other federal schemes. Despite protestations to the contrary, the new standards and the data collection go together hand in hand.

Efforts to portray the data gathering via Common Core-aligned testing as a “state-led” plot notwithstanding, the Obama administration is reportedly considering raising phone taxes by executive decree to help subsidize the necessary technology. Why federal tax increases would be needed to pay for education and data-mining schemes that the federal government is supposedly not involved in has not been explained by officials, but experts and analysts say the reason is obvious.

Implementing Intrusions

Already, there are numerous systems being used and deployed across America aimed at compiling unprecedented amounts of data on students. Some are run by private organizations with government assistance; others are operated by authorities directly. All of them are extremely controversial, however, with parents and privacy advocates outraged.

Among the data schemes that have received a great deal of attention in recent months is “inBloom.” As with the new national education standards called Common Core, it is also funded by Bill Gates and the Carnegie Corporation. With at least nine states participating in the $100 million program already, the non-profit entity, which shares data with whomever authorities choose, is quickly gobbling up vast quantities of information.

Respected experts such as attorney Michael Farris, president of, pointed out that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child committee has repeatedly pressured governments to create similar national databases on children, albeit using different pretexts. Even liberals have expressed opposition. “Turning massive amounts of personal data about public school students to a private corporation without any public input is profoundly disturbing and irresponsible,” said New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna Lieberman, slamming authorities for failing to disclose the scheme or offer parents an opt-out.

In conjunction with inBloom, other systems are being funded and largely directed by the federal government itself. Using the same unconstitutional process as the one used to foist Common Core on state governments — a combination of federal bribes, waivers, and more — the Obama administration all but forced cash-strapped states to start monitoring and tracking student information, or to expand their existing systems.

Previous administrations and U.S. lawmakers also contributed to the problem, with the foundations having been laid dec­ades ago. Before Obama, the Bush-era No Child Left Behind Act, for instance, among myriad other demands, called on states seeking federal funds to create “unique statewide identifiers” for each student. Under Obama, the process has accelerated at an unprecedented rate.

The stimulus-funded “Race to the Top,” a so-called school improvement scheme demanded by Obama, only distributed taxpayer funds to states that agreed to build and expand data systems, with the secretary of education specifically requesting interoperable databases to facilitate the collection and transfer of data. Massive bribes to states from the $50 billion “State Fiscal Stabilization Fund” conditioned on acceptance of Common Core and expanded data tracking, also part of the “stimulus” package, were critical in advancing the plot as well.

Boasting about the “stimulus”-funded coercion of state governments on data regimes during a speech to UNESCO, the deeply controversial UN “education” agency, Education Secretary Arne Duncan lauded the program.

“More robust data systems and a new generation of assessments can assist teachers and principals to improve their practices and tailor their instruction in ways that were largely unthinkable in the past,” Duncan continued. “We have advanced data systems that we are constantly improving.” Duncan wants other governments and the UN to follow the Obama administration’s lead on data gathering, he explained.

The administration helped pay for expanding “state” systems with an eye toward integrating them. Some $315 million in federal grants, for example, were used to bribe state governments and help them comply. However, the specific grant scheme, known as the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) program, actually began handing out taxpayer money in 2005.

As of 2009, the latest year for which figures are available on the Department of Education’s website, 41 states and Washington, D.C. had been awarded federal SLDS grants to expand their data systems on students. Experts say all 50 states now maintain or are capable of maintaining huge databases on the vast majority of American kids.

According to the Department of Education, the goal of the SLDS grants is to have states “expand their data systems to track students’ achievement from preschool through college.” The Education Department’s National Center for Education Statistics offers slightly more detail about the SLDS scheme online: “Through grants and a growing range of services and resources, the program has helped propel the successful design, development, implementation, and expansion of K12 and P-20W (early learning through the workforce) longitudinal data systems,” it explains. “These systems are intended to enhance the ability of States to efficiently and accurately manage, analyze, and use education data, including individual student records.”

Cradle to Career Data Collection

Of course, all of the data collected must be shared with the U.S. Department of Education and other entities within and outside the federal government. Acting unilaterally, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan even purported to overrule federal privacy laws by promulgating new “regulations” gutting the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Some lawmakers expressed outrage, but the process continues.

“As part of what you described as a ‘cradle to career agenda,’ the Department of Education is aggressively moving to expand data systems that collect information on our nation’s students,” wrote Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.), now chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee, in an early 2010 letter to Duncan. “The Department’s effort to shepherd states toward the creation of a de facto national student database raises serious legal and prudential questions.”

As Kline points out in the letter, there is good reason to believe that the administration is again flouting federal law. “Congress has never authorized the Department of Education to facilitate the creation of a national student database,” he explained. “To the contrary, Congress explicitly prohibited the ‘development of a nationwide database of personally identifiable information’ … and barred the ‘development, implementation, or maintenance of a Federal database.” Despite no mention of the Constitution, multiple federal statutes are cited in the correspondence.

Apparently, the administration does not take kindly to having its alleged violations of the law exposed. While it couldn’t fire Rep. Kline, the Education Department did reportedly dismiss its top privacy official, then-Family Policy Compliance Office chief Paul Gammill. According to a 2010 report in Inside Higher Ed, Gammill was fired after he “argued in internal meetings and documents that the department’s approach to prodding states to expand their longitudinal student data systems violated the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.” The Education Department refused to comment on the case, though it openly admits that one of the long-term goals of the SLDS program is to “make education data transparent through Federal and public reporting.”

According to the Department of Education, grants awarded to states under the program are aimed at supporting the creation and implementation of systems “that have the capacity to link individual student data across time and across databases” and “promote the linking of data collected or held by various institutions, agencies, and States.” Among the data to be included are the yearly test records of individual students mandated under the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act. “States are encouraged to include additional information in their longitudinal data systems,” the department continued.

In another Education Department document offering “guidance” on the SLDS schemes, further insight is offered into what sort of information authorities are seeking and collecting. Among the “Personally Identifiable Information” outlined in the report: name, parents’ names, address, Social Security number, date of birth, place of birth, mother’s maiden name, and more.

Other private and protected data that might be collected, the document suggests, include the “political affiliations or beliefs of the student or parent; mental and psychological problems of the student or the student’s family, sex behavior or attitudes; illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating, and demeaning behavior; critical appraisals of other individuals with whom respondents have close family relationships; legally recognized privileged or analogous relationships, such as those of lawyers, physicians, and ministers; religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs of the student or the student’s parent; or income.” While the collection of such data in surveys and questionnaires funded by federal tax dollars requires parental consent under federal law, state-level collection does not. Plus, experts say there are numerous other potential loopholes as well.

So Much for Student Privacy

Much of the information vacuumed up at all levels of government already makes its way into a national Department of Education scheme known as “EDFacts.” The department describes it online: “EDFacts is a U.S. Department of Education (ED) initiative to collect, analyze, report on and promote the use of high-quality, kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) performance data…. EDFacts centralizes data provided by state education agencies, local education agencies and schools.” Under EDFacts, state education agencies submit some 180 data groups. The federal National Center for Education Statistics, meanwhile, describes over 400 data points to be collected.

The U.S. Department of Labor, separately, admits that it is working to “integrate workforce data and create linkages to education data.” According to the department’s “Workforce Data Quality Initiative,” the SLDS will “enable workforce data to be matched with education data to ultimately create longitudinal data systems with individual-level information beginning with pre-kindergarten through post-secondary schooling all the way through entry and sustained participation in the workforce and employment services system.” When combined with information from the IRS, ObamaCare, the NSA, and countless other federal data-collection schemes, the picture that emerges has critics very nervous.

As technology advances, the federal government’s Orwellian data gathering will — without action to stop it — almost certainly expand beyond most people’s wildest nightmares. In fact, it already has. Consider, for example, a February 2013 report by the Department of Education dubbed Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century. Included in the 100-page report is information about technology already being used in an Education Department-funded tutoring program.

“Researchers are exploring how to gather complex affective data and generate meaningful and usable information to feed back to learners, teachers, researchers, and the technology itself,” the report explains. “Connections to neuroscience are also beginning to emerge.” (Emphasis added.) The technological tools already being used by federally funded education schemes to probe students’ minds and “measure” the children include, as described in the report, “four parallel streams of affective sensors.”

Among the devices in use today through a federally funded tutoring scheme is a “facial expression camera” used to “detect emotion” and “capture facial expressions.” According to the report, the camera is linked to software that “extracts geometric properties on faces.” There is also a “posture analysis seat” and a “pressure mouse.” Finally, the report describes a “wireless skin conductance sensor” strapped to students’ wrists. The sensors collect “physiological response data from a biofeedback apparatus that measures blood volume, pulse, and galvanic skin response to examine student frustration.” Again, these systems are already being used in government-funded programs, and with technology racing ahead, developments are expected to become increasingly troubling.

Another Education Department report, entitled Enhancing, Teaching and Learning Through Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics, acknowledges similarly alarming schemes. “A student learning database (or other big data repository) stores time-stamped student input and behaviors captured as students work within the system,” it notes. “A predictive model combines demographic data (from an external student information system) and learning/behavior data from the student learning database to track a student’s progress and make predictions about his or her future behaviors or performance.” (Emphasis added.)

All across the country today, Big Brother-like technological developments in biometrics are also making schools increasingly Orwellian. Earlier this year in Polk County, Florida, for example, students’ irises were scanned without parental consent. “It simply takes a picture of the iris, which is unique to every individual,” wrote the school board’s “senior director of support services” in a letter to parents. “With this program, we will be able to identify when and where a student gets on the bus, when they arrive at their school location, when and what bus the student boards and disembarks in the afternoon. This is an effort to further enhance the safety of our students. The EyeSwipe-Nano is an ideal replacement for the card based system since your child will not have to be responsible for carrying an identification card.”

In San Antonio, Texas, meanwhile, a female student made national news — and exposed what was going on — when she got in a legal battle with school officials over her refusal to wear a mandatory radio-frequency identification (RFID) device. The same devices are already being implanted under people’s skin in America and abroad — albeit voluntarily. Also in the biometric field, since at least 2007, children in states like Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and New Jersey have been fingerprinted at school under the guise of “school lunch” programs and other pretexts.

Despite fierce opposition, the trend toward using biometric data to identify and track students while collecting unimaginable amounts of information is accelerating. The federal government is helping lead the way toward abolishing any vestiges of privacy, and aside from NSA spying on virtually everyone, students appear to be among the primary targets. Without major resistance, experts predict that someday — perhaps even in the very near future — biometric identification will become ubiquitous. Combined with all of the other data being collected, the federal government may finally achieve what was sought by tyrants throughout history: detailed 24/7 information on everything, about everyone.



CBS Cleveland

August 7, 2013

LAWRENCEBURG, Ind. (CBS Cleveland/AP) — A southeastern Indiana school is distributing kits so parents can test their children for drug use.

WCPO-TV reports organizers hope to make an impression on fifth and sixth graders at Sunman Dearborn Intermediate School because children often start experimenting with drugs around age 13.

Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard obtained grant money to pay for the kits and created a Facebook page to boost the idea. Negangard says he has tested his own children.

“The idea behind preventative drug testing is premised that you start talking to your child on a regular basis about substance abuse issues,” Negangard told WCPO.

Each kit contains a vial for a urine sample and instructions on how to read the results. The kits test for marijuana, methamphetamines, cocaine, painkillers, and other drugs.

Bright Christian Church family life director Linda Hutchinson says 600 people visited the church when it distributed the kits in May.

“It’s a chance to give your children an out under pressure,” Hutchinson said.




























From Greg Swank

You are about to read a list of 45 goals that found their way down the halls of our great Capitol back in 1963. As you read this, 39 years later, you should be shocked by the events that have played themselves out. I first ran across this list 3 years ago but was unable to attain a copy and it has bothered me ever since. Recently, Jeff Rense posted it on his site and I would like to thank him for doing so.

Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963


Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

At Mrs. Nordman’s request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following “Current Communist Goals,” which she identifies as an excerpt from “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen:

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a “religious crutch.”

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.



by William Norman Grigg

We must remove the children from the crude influence of their families. We must take them over and, to speak frankly, nationalize them.

~ Instructions given at a congress of Soviet educators in 1918 (cited in Separating School & State: How to Liberate America’s Families, by Sheldon Richman, pg. xv).

[The Soviet family] is an organic part of Soviet society. Parents are not without authority … but this authority is only a reflection of social authority…. In our country he alone is a man of worth whose needs and desires are the needs and desires of a collectivist…. Our family offers rich soil for the cultivation of such collectivism. –

Soviet family theorist Anton S. Makarenko, The Collective Family, A Handbook for Russian Parents, pgs xi-xii, 42.

If we want to talk about equality of opportunity for children, then the fact that children are raised in families means there’s no equality…. In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them. –

Dr. Mary Jo Bane, Assistant Secretary of Administration for Children and Families at the US Department of Health and Human Services, 1993-1996; currently Thornton Bradshaw Professor of Public Police and Management, Harvard Kennedy School; quoted in “The Family: It’s Surviving and Healthy” by Dolores Barclay, Tulsa World, August 21, 1977.

Whenever a progressive refers to “investments,” he or she is referring to confiscation of private wealth.

Whenever a progressive invokes the “community,” that term refers to a state-engineered collective in which the individual has no rights.

Whenever a collectivist refers to “public education,” that phrase is shorthand for the process of destroying a child’s developing sense of self-ownership and indoctrinating them in the notion that they are the property of the “community.” This process is also known as “socialization,” which is the indefinable value-added element that supposedly makes “public education” superior to homeschooling.

Whenever an advocate of “public education” refers to “our children,” conscientious parents should take a quick inventory of their arsenals.

Melissa Harris-Perry, a slogan-spewing news reader for the Stalinist media outlet called MSNBC, ran the table of these collectivist nostrums in a recent installment in the network’s “Lean Forward” ad campaign. The “Lean Forward” spots feature various MSNBC luminaries holding forth like Communist Party functionary exhorting the cadres at a “struggle session” in the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

Harris-Perry is a collectivist of such passionate conviction that she regards opposition to Obama’s radical centralization of power to be a species of sedition. She considers private firearms to be a pestilence, but embraces a vision of social engineering that would require a great amount of gun-related violence by state functionaries.

Although – or perhaps because – Harris-Perry is a credentialed academic, she has the odd and annoying habit, so common among adolescents, of ending every statement with a vocal inflection that suggests a question. In her “Lean Forward” ad, she uncorked this specimen of unfiltered collectivist cant:

“We have never invested as much in public education, because we’ve always had a sort of private notion of children – your kid is yours, and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very collective notion of, ‘These are our children.’ So part of it is that we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it’s everybody’s responsibility, and not just the household’s, then we start making better investments.”

Harris-Perry’s disdain for parental authority is wedded to a denial of the idea that the individual child has a right to self-ownership. During an MSNBC discussion about a North Dakota law that would ban abortion after six weeks, she used the expression “this thing” to refer to the developing fetus and warned that “if this turns into a person, there are economic consequences.”

It’s important to understand that Harris-Perry’s commitment to legalized abortion doesn’t grow out of a misapplied commitment to individual liberty, but rather her devotion to the collective management of the human population. It’s akin to the view expressed in the early 1970s by then-Rutgers professor Ruth Bader Ginsburg that the Roe v. Wade ruling was a product of “concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations we don’t want too many of.”

Belief that the unborn human child has a right to be protected against lethal aggression, according to Harris-Perry, is a “faith claim … not associated with science.” However one views that moral proposition, the humanity of the developing individual is an incontestable scientific fact. The existence of the invisible, intangible abstraction called the “state” is based entirely on faith claims that Harris-Perry is willing to impose through coercion.

In an essay she wrote for The Nation magazine three years ago – then, as now, she wore her surname fashionably parted in the middle, but in a slightly different style – Harris-Perry described how she catechizes her unfortunate students in the gospel of the Almighty State:

“I often begin my political science courses with a brief introduction to the idea of ‘the state.’ The state is the entity that has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, force, and coercion. If an individual travels to another country and kills its citizens, we call it terrorism. If the state does it, we call it war. If a man kills his neighbor it is murder; if the state does it it is the death penalty. If an individual takes his neighbor’s money, it is theft; if the state does it, it is taxation.”

In addition to instructing other people’s children in the fear and admonition of the Divine State, Harris-Perry is eager to see its heretical enemies put to the torch.

“The Tea Party is a challenge to the legitimacy of the U.S. state,” Harris-Perry insisted. “When Tea Party participants charge the current administration with various forms of totalitarianism, they are arguing that the government has no right to levy taxes or make policy. Many GOP elected officials offered nearly secessionist rhetoric from the floor of the Congress [during the debate over nationalizing health care]. They joined as co-conspirators with the Tea Party protesters by arguing that this government has no monopoly on legitimacy.”

The overt act that made that impious “conspiracy” a prosecutable crime, according to Harris-Perry, was an anti-Obamacare protest in which Tea Party activists heckled Georgia Rep. John Lewis. As an elected official, Lewis is not merely a human being, according to Harris-Perry, but an “embodiment of the state” – or, to use appropriate creedal language, al living image of the invisible deity.

“When protesters spit on and scream at duly elected representatives of the United States government it is more than an act of racism,” snarled Harris-Perry, making a de rigueur – and entirely gratuitous – reference to Lewis’s ethnic background. “It is an act of sedition.”

String up the barbed wire, sharpen the guillotine, ready the basement cells of the Lubyanka: There are “seditionists” to be dealt with!

Like many others of her ideological persuasion, Harris-Perry is a stranger to concision. In describing the totalitarian state’s proprietary claim on children, someone who represented a slightly different strain of collectivism – albeit not as different as Harris-Perry would insist – stated the matter much more tidily almost exactly eighty years ago:

“When an opponent declares, ‘I will not come over to your side,’ I calmly say: ‘Your child belongs to us already…. What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in this new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”

Those words were spoken on November 6, 1933 by the community-organizing, civilian-disarming, socialized medicine-promoting, government stimulus-peddling, unitary executive who presided over Germany’s National Socialist government. When Harris-Perry and her comrades demand that we “Lean Forward,” that’s the direction they have in mind.











J. D. Heyes
Natural News
May 3, 2013

Whenever he can, President Obama likes to poke fun at anyone who suggests that he’s a closet socialist because that’s what socialists do – they ridicule anyone who tries to “out” them. And yet, every policy he pursues takes a page right out of the socialist/Marxist playbook, and one of them is to ensure that the government controls all forms of education.

Right now, of course, there are thousands of private schools and institutions of higher learning in the U.S., so the government doesn’t control all education, per se. But left-wing career education bureaucrats in government, along with compliant socialists in the teachers unions, do indeed control the vast majority of primary public school education, and it is here where the Obama regime is consolidating its control through a Department of Education program known as Common Core State Standards .

‘Inappropriate overreach’

From the Common Core website:

The standards clearly communicate what is expected of students at each grade level. This will allow our teachers to be better equipped to know exactly what they need to help students learn and establish individualized benchmarks for them. The Common Core State Standards focus on core conceptual understandings and procedures starting in the early grades…

Essentially, what Common Core consists of is a standardized block of instruction on all the major subjects – Math, English and Language Arts – per standards that government bureaucrats devised. Initially, 45 states and the District of Columbia signed on, but as more states found out the curriculum is decidedly slanted to a particular point of view (socialism), a number of states are now working on legislation to bail out. And they are designed to allow controlling statists to get their claws into your kids as early on in their academic careers as possible.

New legislation introduced by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, would prohibit federal funds from being used to finance Common Core implementation around the country. He has also introduced criticized the CCSS, calling them an “inappropriate overreach to standardize and control the education of our children.”

He’s far from being alone in rejecting the CCSS. According to an assessment of the core by the Washington Policy Center, scores of education experts have also rejected them, saying one of the biggest problems with the program is that it will stifle classroom innovation, which comes primarily from individual states.

“Local control of public school curriculum and instruction has historically driven innovation and reform in education. A one-size-fits-all, centrally controlled curriculum for every K-12 subject threatens to close the door on educational innovation, freezing in place an unacceptable status quo and hindering efforts to develop academically rigorous curricula, assessments, and standards that meet the challenges that lie ahead,” says an assessment of CCSS by the center.

In addition to rejection of the standards by federal lawmakers, many states are considering or have introduced measures to repeal the standards.

SB403, introduced by Alabama state Sen. Scott Beason, “would prohibit the State Board of Education from adopting and the Department of Education from implementing the Common Core State Standards developed by the Common Core State Standards Initiative,” says a summary. “The bill would also prohibit the State Board of Education, the Department of Education, and other state bodies from compiling or sharing data about students or teachers, except under limited circumstances.”

No state development or involvement

In Indiana, HB1427 states, “The state board may not continue to implement as standards for the state or direct the department to implement any common core standards developed by the Common Core State Standards Initiative…The legislative council shall establish a legislative study committee to study issues relating to common core standards.”

Similar legislation has been introduced in Missouri as well.

The Obama Administration is claiming the standards were developed by the states but, according to Diane Ravitch, a former assistant U.S. secretary of education who was appointed to office by both Clinton and George H.W. Bush, that’s a bogus claim.

The standards “were developed by an organization called Achieve and the National Governors Association, both of which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. There was minimal public engagement in the development of the Common Core. Their creation was neither grassroots nor did it emanate from the states,” she writes in the Washington Post.



Written by  Alex Newman | The New American

August 8, 2013

If something is not done soon, the vast majority of American K-12 school children will be taught using dubious, federally backed national education “standards” that have come under fire from across the political spectrum. America’s kids, as well as their parents, will also be monitored and tracked in unprecedented ways from early childhood into the workforce. Opposition is growing by leaps and bounds, but government officials are not yet backing down.

The controversial “standards” scheme, known informally as “Common Core,” is being foisted on state governments all across the country with a combination of taxpayer-funded bribes, outright deception, and federal bludgeoning. Despite America’s long traditions of local governance and separation of powers, the Obama administration and its establishment allies in both parties are determined to get the standards rolled out nationwide. So far, their progress has been remarkable.

Even with the backing of billionaire Bill Gates and the U.S. Department of Education, the entire “Common Core State Standards Initiative,” as it is referred to officially, was developed and rolled out with almost no serious media attention. The eerie silence, of course, helped proponents avoid scrutiny in the early phases, when it would have been much easier for critics to derail the scheme that will essentially nationalize education — along with the minds of America’s youth, and therefore, the nation’s future.

Education and policy experts who spoke with The New American blasted the standards themselves, the centralization and federalization of schooling, the long-term agenda behind the plan, and the nefarious tactics used to advance it. One critic, Tennessee Liberty Alliance co-founder Glenn Jacobs, even suggested in a column that Common Core proponents were seeking to produce what Russian communists referred to as “New Soviet Men.” Others are calling the program “ObamaCore.”

With the federal government handing out massive grants only to state governments that comply, some 45 states and Washington, D.C., have already signed up to implement the full plan. Among the few states that have not jumped completely on the bandwagon, only Texas appears to be standing firm, with Minnesota, Nebraska, Virginia, and Alaska all reportedly flirting with various elements of the scheme.

Even the states that refuse to join — not to mention homeschoolers and private schools — may find themselves ensnared in the program due to national testing, college admission requirements, and more. However, experts expect resistance to accelerate.

The Standards

To avoid a national outcry, advocates of the national standards started out by focusing just on mathematics and English, two subjects expected to be the least controversial among the voting and taxpaying public. Even in those fields, however, critics have already slammed the curricula as woefully inadequate and a step back in terms of properly educating children. Meanwhile, standards for science and social studies are already in the works.

Common Core proponents continually use vague language about “excellence” in education, “raising the bar,” and getting America’s children “ready for the workforce” as the reason the standards should be implemented. For critics, however, the standards, which are copyrighted by the Washington, D.C.-based National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and were only released in mid-2010, represent a major step backward. If something is not done to stop it, opponents say, a vast educational experiment will begin soon.

Among the most common criticisms leveled at the English and Language Arts Common Core standards is the emphasis on reading dry, technical writing — government documents and technical manuals, for example — as opposed to literary classics. At least 50 percent of reading assignments under the new standards will be “informational” texts. Consider, for instance, some of the “suggested” texts students are expected to read: “Recommended Levels of Insulation” by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Department of Energy, or Executive Order 13423: Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management. While for some students, such as those on a vocational track who will not go to college, reading manuals may be appropriate, critics say a one-size-fits-all approach for the nation is worse than counterproductive.

Opponents, even among those involved with the standards, have been quick to lambaste the guidelines. “The major problem is the 50/50 division of reading instruction from K-12 — 10 standards for informational text and nine for literature — meaning that literary study is reduced and the opportunity for kids to develop critical thinking skills is reduced,” Dr. Sandra Stotsky, the 21st-century chair in teacher quality at the University of Arkansas’s Department of Education Reform, told The New American about the new standards.

Dr. Stotsky, who refused to sign off on the standards as a member of the largely for-show “Common Core Validation Committee,” said the English Language Arts (ELA) standards do not compare well with existing standards in places such as Massachusetts, for example. Numerous experts have pointed out that Massachusetts has actually been forced to water down its existing, relatively successful standards to conform with Common Core. In English, an estimated 60 percent of the classic literature, poetry, and drama previously required, such as Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, has been stripped from the standards, according to reports.

Despite all of the talk about “internationally benchmarked” standards being met, Common Core falls short again. Common Core doesn’t “compare with the kind of reading required for the Irish school-leaving exam or for school exit literature exams in Alberta and British Columbia,” Dr. Stotsky continued, adding that the standards are neither rigorous nor research-based. “They were written hastily by people who didn’t care how poorly written they were so long as informational text was about 50 percent of the reading curriculum.”

While she is not opposed to national ELA standards per se, assuming they are “first-class” and include state-relevant material, the existing Common Core standards have got to go, Stotsky said. “They need to be drastically revised, and written by people who have taught in K-12, know how to write ELA standards, and/or are literary scholars or well-trained high-school English teachers,” she explained, adding that the standards should be “rejected.”

Of course, criticism of the math standards has been abundant as well. Another member of the Common Core Validation Committee, Stanford professor Dr. James Milgram, refused to sign off on the mathematics component. “The Core Mathematics Standards are written to reflect very low expectations,” he said, calling them “as non-challenging as possible” with “extremely serious failings.” In a letter outlining his concerns, Dr. Milgram even pointed to “actual errors” in sixth- and seventh-grade discussions about ratios and rates — “they are neither mathematically correct nor especially clear.”

Again, as with the English standards, some state governments have had to lower their expectations to fall in line with Common Core. In Minnesota, officials refused to adopt the math standards because “ours were more rigorous and matched where kids were mastering those (skills) in their content areas,” according to state Education Commissioner Brenda Cassellius. Because of Common Core in California, students will no longer be required to take Algebra I by eighth grade. Massachusetts will also soon have students taking Algebra I in ninth grade or later rather than eighth, as currently required.

While English and math are the first subjects to be nationalized through Common Core, the aim is to eventually extend it to other areas as well — social studies, science, history, and more. High-school history teacher Thomas R. Eddlem summarized some of the issues he sees with the scheme in a note to The New American:

The real problem is that states have adopted history standards that are entirely process standards, with no subject content standards. For example, there’s nothing in Common Core about being able to explain why America seceded from Britain, or how the Constitution fulfills the ideal outlined in the Declaration of Independence of protecting God-given rights. It’s all process, such as: “Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including analyzing how an author uses and refines the meaning of a key term over the course of a text.” As well, nearly all of the curriculum map — the unit goals, essential questions, resources used and assessment methods — is yet to be written. States that have adopted the vaguely worded standards have done so without the slightest clue as to how they will be implemented. Once the “public-private partnership” that created the standards fills in the details, that’s where the bias of the authors will show their real teeth.

Some Common Core critics have found fault with the “suggested” textbooks, as well. In history, for example, is A History of US, by Joy Hakim, a comprehensive textbook series on American history almost universally regarded as having a strong liberal bias — and worse. “Examination of Hakim’s material discloses many errors (including errors of fact, of chronology and of terminology) as well as unjustified assertions and some displays of bias,” explained author and historian Alice Whealey in a scathing analysis of the book series for the Textbook League, which reviews educational material for accuracy. “Joy Hakim should not attempt to write about Western history, particularly the history of Europe, because she obviously hasn’t had enough training in these subjects. It is a shame that Oxford University Press has let her get away with so many falsehoods and with such extreme exhibitions of bias.” Soon, however, children all across America will be reading the books.

In terms of science, the Common Core shortcomings and controversies have received even more attention from critics. Known as the “Next Generation Science Standards,” the scheme will force American students to learn a steady stream of controversial propaganda on everything from the theory of evolution to largely debunked theories advanced by UN global-warming alarmists about supposed human impacts on “climate change,” opponents say.

“Human activities, such as the release of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, are major factors in the current rise in Earth’s mean surface temperature (global warming),” the elementary-school standards claim, despite the fact that even climate alarmists admit there has been no “global warming” in over 15 years and that CO2 released from fossil fuels represents a tiny fraction of the greenhouse gases present naturally in the atmosphere. Evolution is also heavily emphasized as “fundamental” in the controversial standards, even though more than half of Americans reject the theory in scientific polls and, to date, there is no fossil record showing one type of animal morphing into another, despite millions of fossils collected.

Aside from the blatant propaganda and the obvious political agenda in the standards, however, critics say the real problem is in the centralization. Even if the standards were radically revised to be better than any in existence, or had been devised by people with whom one may agree with politically, they can always be changed. In fact, the organizations behind Common Core admit that explicitly: “The Standards are intended to be a living work: as new and better evidence emerges, the Standards will be revised accordingly,” says the official website for the standards.

While proponents of Common Core point to some countries with national standards that do better than the United States academically as evidence of why the United States needs them as well, the vast majority of nations where students perform more poorly than Americans have nationalized education, too. Top-down, one-size-fits-all education will not improve outcomes, but it will almost certainly be used to control and manipulate children, rewarding those who faithfully follow government dogma. The problem with Common Core, then, aside from the poor standards themselves, is largely philosophical and principled: Government should not have such power in the first place.

The Real Agenda

Totalitarian leaders from Hitler to Stalin and everywhere in between have always sought to centralize and control education. The reason is simple: Whoever molds the minds of the youth can eventually dominate the population, even if it takes a generation or two. That is why tyrants in recent centuries have demanded compulsory, government-led education. Hitler made clear that he wanted to use “education” as a tool to mold German children in accordance with the National Socialist regime’s despotic and murderous ideology. So did Stalin, and numerous other infamous tyrants and mass-murderers. As Karl Marx noted in his Communist Manifesto, government-controlled schooling is essential to achieving the goals of socialism.

In his masterpiece On Liberty, renowned British philosopher and parliamentarian John Stuart Mill succinctly explained the inherent problems with government schools. “A general State education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another; and as the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the predominant power in the government … it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by natural tendency to one over the body,” he wrote.

In the United States, though, people are starting to wake up. On the Left and on the Right, criticism of Common Core standards, methods, and the entire agenda continues to grow louder and louder. From the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute to the establishment’s liberal-oriented Brookings Institution, the scheme is coming under assault. Increasing numbers of teachers, experts, and more are speaking out, too.

Criticism of the standards and the expected results has grown so loud that even some establishment media have finally been forced to report on the controversies. On April 6, for instance, the Washington Post published a public-school teacher’s resignation letter that lambasted the program. In his now-public resignation letter to school officials, social studies teacher Gerald Conti of New York said recent developments could no longer be tolerated.

“‘Data driven’ education seeks only conformity, standardization, testing and a zombie-like adherence to the shallow and generic Common Core, along with a lockstep of oversimplified so-called Essential Learnings,” Conti wrote in his letter, which has “gone viral” on the Internet. “Creativity, academic freedom, teacher autonomy, experimentation and innovation are being stifled in a misguided effort to fix what is not broken in our system of public education.”

Even more alarming, perhaps, is what opponents of the plan say is an agenda to essentially brainwash students. Countless examples have been provided by experts such as  Dr. Stotsky and others on how texts and “analysis” are used to guide students’ thinking toward a pre-determined outcome. Much of the agenda involves what is euphemistically referred to as preparing students to live in a “global community.”

Mary Black, a veteran educator, has been sounding the alarm about Common Core for months in public seminars about the standards. Having spent almost four decades teaching students of all ages before becoming curriculum director at FreedomProj­ect Education, an independent K-12 online classical school, Black knows what works and what does not. She warned The New American that Common Core and its poor standards are part of a much broader agenda, one that represents a “significant threat.”

The standards, of course, are highly problematic in and of themselves. “My review of the Common Core standards indicated that they were designed to teach students what to think and not how to think,” Black said, echoing concerns expressed by numerous analysts who have investigated the scheme. “The literary classics have been stripped and replaced with books promoting a socialist agenda…. It is certain that it will leave students unable to think for themselves.”

However, there may be even more pressing problems, Black continued. “As an educator, I admit the poor standards are not my major concern,” she said. “It is what comes along with the standards that is most concerning.” Among her examples, Black cited the fact that special interest groups, such as tax-funded abortion giant Planned Parenthood, which participated in writing the “National Sexuality Education Standards,” will be given access to American children. Pointing to some of the controversial material­ — such as asking students to identify different types of “family structures” and discuss ways of “showing respect” toward them, for instance — she urged parents with children in school to read the standards for themselves. After all, this goes against beliefs that both liberals and conservatives hold dear. For conservatives, such teaching will often fly in the face of moral strictures they want to instill in their children. For liberals, the standards, which require that teachers demean and belittle the beliefs of a great majority of students, should smack of bullying and intolerance that they so often preach against.

Black also noted that because Common Core is copyrighted, it cannot be altered by anyone other than the owners of the copyright. As such, any special interest group that finds favor with those in charge will be able to gain instant access to America’s students. Concerned parents, meanwhile, will be left with few-to-no options to prevent it.

According to Black and other experts, documentation also shows Common Core is actually a step in the process toward achieving a longtime goal of the United Nations and its supporters: a one-world education system. The UN, of course, has long sought to harmonize global educational standards. And billionaire Bill Gates — one of the primary figures behind Common Core — has expressed devotion to a similar agenda.

“Quite simply, control is the real goal,” Black continued. “Read about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, David Coleman, Sir Michael Barber, Arne Duncan, and the reality will become very clear. These people are socialists and globalists. The goal is not education but the production of compliant, dependent, uneducated citizens. This is the citizenry needed to implement the United Nation’s Agenda 21 with the help of UNESCO’s Education for All program. Not surprisingly, Common Core and Education for All are very similar because Bill Gates has been involved with both and is a proponent of UN-directed education.”

Indeed, Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan even admits openly that the Department of Education is cooperating with groups such as the UN, often dubbed a “dictators’ club,” to “improve” education in America. Speaking to UNESCO in late 2010, Duncan confirmed — albeit subtly and couched in nice-sounding terms — elements of what he called the “cradle-to-career education agenda” with goals that “can only be achieved by creating a strong cradle-to-career continuum that starts with early childhood learning and extends all the way to college and careers.”

“Education is still the key to eliminating gender inequities, to reducing poverty, to creating a sustainable planet, and to fostering peace,” he said, with “sustainability” being UN-speak for central planning and global government. “Today, education is a global public good unconstrained by national boundaries…. It is no surprise that economic interdependence brings new global challenges and educational demands.”

Probably unintentionally, Duncan acknowledged against interest the top-down structure of the new standardization, rather than bottom-up and directed by parents. He continued by telling UNESCO about the “unique opportunity to transform our education system”: “I’ve said that America is now in the midst of a ‘quiet revolution’ in school reform,” Duncan continued. “Before the 1960s, almost all policymaking and education funding was a state and local responsibility. The Obama administration has sought to fundamentally shift the federal role, so that the department is doing much more to support reform and innovation in states, districts, and local communities.”

Quoting former South African President Nelson Mandela, Duncan noted that education “is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” “The United States provides over a billion dollars annually to partner countries working on educational reform,” Duncan boasted, as the federal government racks up trillions in debt. “Our goal for the coming year will be to work closely with global partners, including UNESCO, to promote qualitative improvements and system-strengthening.” (Emphasis added.)

Non-CC States, Homeschoolers, and Private Schools

Despite the growing outcry surrounding Common Core, analysts say that without a significant change in course, it is only a matter of time before the nationalized education scheme ensnares virtually every student in America. Homeschoolers, private-schooled children, and even kids in states that have refused to participate will likely all be impacted by the standards, sometimes without even being aware of it. Consider, for example, the rush by virtually all major publishers to align their textbooks with Common Core. Most parents have no idea of the major changes taking place.

Meanwhile, a national testing regime based on the new standards is already being rolled out, with the Common Core-aligned tests planned for introduction by 2014. Two “consortia” receiving hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars from the federal government, Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC), were put in charge of developing standardized tests to go along with Common Core. Students will be tested regularly from the third grade to ensure that their Common Core-based education is proceeding smoothly. All of that private data will be available in perpetuity to the federal government and other as-yet unknown parties.

Even students who do not live in one of the states using Common Core-aligned standardized tests may ultimately be forced to learn from the same set of standards. Consultant David Coleman, widely regarded as the “architect” of Common Core, became president of the College Board last year — all but ensuring that the SATs, which are produced by the College Board, will be aligned with the new standards. Of course, SATs are used nationwide in admissions to higher-learning institutions.

If the testing regimes and the flood of Common Core-aligned textbooks are not enough to guarantee that all American students learn from the same set of controversial standards, there are other means being pursued as well. While countless well-intentioned conservatives and libertarians have pushed the idea of tax-funded “vouchers” for private schools, the use of taxpayer money for private education may be a Trojan horse to ensure government control. In the state of Wisconsin’s application for a waiver from No Child Left Behind, as just one example, that was illustrated clearly.

“The Accountability Design Team developed a statewide accountability framework that specifically includes all state schools, including traditional public schools and charter schools, regardless of Title funding, as well as private schools participating in Parental Choice Programs (PCP),” reads page 48 of Wisconsin’s ESEA Flexibility Request. “All schools receiving state funds will be part of the state accountability and support system.” (Emphasis added.)

Separately, Catholic schools across America are getting ready to deal with Common Core as well. The National Catholic Education Association (NCEA) has not “officially” endorsed the standards. However, it is already working to help Catholic schools prepare to implement the program, according to news reports. “What we have done at NCEA is develop what we call the Common Core Catholic Identity Initiative,” said Presentation Sister Dale McDonald, director of public policy and educational research at the NCEA. Critics say despite not offering an “official endorsement” of the standards, the NCEA is actively promoting Common Core. Other religious schools are reportedly hopping on the bandwagon, too.

Even when state governments say no, that does not necessarily mean the end of Common Core. “In my home state where legislators responded to constituent demand and halted implementation of CCSS [Common Core State Standards], some teachers have publicly stated that they know best about education and because they think it is best to teach to these standards, they intend to do so,” FPE’s Mary Black said. “The arrogance and elitism of the proponents of CCSS are apparent as they ignore the will of the people, including many parents, which was duly exercised through legislative procedure.”

While the controversial school-standardization scheme does not directly apply to home educators yet, experts and advocates say the effects are already starting to be felt. The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), a non-profit organization dedicated to defending and advancing the constitutional right of parents to direct the education of their children, is on the front lines of the battle. According to the HSLDA, which has been expressing concerns about “Common Core” for years, the controversial scheme is problematic for several reasons.

“Our concern with the Common Core is twofold,” HSLDA Director of Federal Relations William Estrada told The New American. “The first is that the success of homeschooling shows that kids do best when parents are in control of educational decisions. Common Core centralizes what kids are taught, how they are taught, and what they should learn, in the hands of a few educational bureaucrats at the national level — completely cutting out parents, teachers, and local school boards.”

“The second major concern is that a national curriculum and national standards will eventually be broadened to include homeschoolers, which would eliminate the ability of parents to tailor their educational message to each specific child,” said Estrada. A wide range of organizations and activists have expressed similar fears about the national education scheme.

Indeed, the first symptoms of the “Common Core” problem are already being felt by the homeschooling community. Among the most serious: An increasing number of home education-related companies have started aligning their curricula and learning materials with the national program. In fact, at least 10 popular homeschool curricula produced by various companies now conform to the national scheme. There are probably many more. With the advent of testing next year, those numbers are expected to keep growing, too.

How It Happened

The U.S. Department of Education was created by an act of Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter in 1979, and it has been gradually increasing in power since then. Leaving centuries of history aside, the modern effort to nationalize education picked up steam in the 1990s, when a coalition of establishment-minded governors and corporate titans came together to push the centralization agenda under the guise of improving standards. In 1996, Achieve, Inc. was born, giving a major boost to the plan and to longtime proponents of smashing state and local sovereignty in education, while centralizing control over schools at the federal level through a byzantine “public-private partnership” labyrinth.

The overarching agenda was summarized neatly in a 2008 column on “education reform” for the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) by former IBM CEO and current “Achieve” Chairman Emeritus Louis Gerstner, Jr. A prominent member of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Bilderberg summit attendee, Gerstner co-chaired Achieve until 2002, when he formed the Teaching Commission with a list of prominent establishment figures.

In the WSJ column, Gerstner offered what he described as a “prescription for leadership from the Obama administration.” Among the myriad recommendations: “abolish all local school districts” and “establish a set of national standards for a core curriculum.” Also on the agenda were extending the school day and the school year.

In 2009, the Washington, D.C.-based National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers — both non-profit organizations despite official sounding names — quietly announced their intent to create new standards. Achieve and its cohorts were put in the driver’s seat. After hiring supposed “experts” to design the scheme, the virtually unknown coalition quietly got to work drafting and pushing the agenda to nationalize education.

Forces Behind Common Core

That critics claim that one of the primary agendas behind Common Core is not-before-seen social engineering should come as no surprise, considering the process and forces behind the standards. Laboring in secret, faceless bureaucrats with little to no experience in relevant fields — identified publicly only after a major public outcry — put together the scheme with funding from trade groups and massive tax-exempt foundations. A for-show “Validation Committee” was set up, though criticism from the committee’s experts was largely ignored.

The most high-profile foundation to bankroll Common Core — and reportedly the biggest single source of funds — was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a Rockefeller-allied organization with a dubious history of financing everything from population control and pro-abortion forces to various United Nations agencies and schemes. In 2010, the Gates Foundation even received the “Population Award” from the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), which was exposed in Congress for facilitating the Communist Chinese dictatorship’s barbaric “one-child policy” and coerced abortions. Other UNFPA award winners include Planned Parenthood, also financed by Gates.

Speaking to the National Conference of State Legislators, billionaire Bill Gates, who made his fortune in computer software, explained one of the long-term goals of Common Core. “We’ll know we’ve succeeded when the curriculum and the tests are aligned to these standards,” he said. In a nutshell, that is the endgame: a national educational system run from the shadows by unaccountable forces that will ultimately capture the minds of America’s youth at an early age.

In addition to the Gates foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, also close to the United Nations and a big funder of “sustainability” causes, helped fund the development of Common Core as well.

Another controversial non-profit involved in Common Core is the Carnegie Corporation of New York, an establishment powerhouse that funds everything from the Council on Foreign Relations to the Atlantic Council.

Unsurprisingly, the CFR itself has been a staunch proponent of the standards.

Federal Carrots and Sticks

Almost immediately following the public announcement on Common Core, the Obama administration and the federal leviathan it leads began the push to ensure compliance nationwide. Indeed, widespread acceptance of Common Core thus far has been almost exclusively attributed to the taxpayer largess offered under various programs. One key element in getting states to comply was the $50 billion “State Fiscal Stabilization Fund,” part of the 2009 “stimulus” bill, which distributed funds to state governments that agreed to adopt Common Core and create or improve systems to track students (see “Orwellian Nightmare: Data-mining Your Kids”).

Obama’s controversial and unconstitutional $10 billion “Race to the Top” program was also crucial. Billions of federal dollars have been awarded to state governments from a fund for the scheme, which was also established with $4.5 billion under the 2009 so-called stimulus bill. With federal aid, of course, comes federal control. And to be eligible for the massive grants, state governments were forced to adopt Common Core or other “internationally benchmarked standards” while creating “data systems” to track students. Some $350 million was set aside “to help fund common assessments for states that adopt common international standards,” the Department of Education announced, referring to the national testing regime set to be rolled out as early as next year.

Unveiled at a 2009 event at U.S. Department of Education headquarters was an array of other federal grants worth billions of dollars — much of it from the “stimulus” bill — aimed at usurping control over education and America’s youth from families and communities. Among the programs outlined in a Department of Education press release: a $650 million “Investing in Innovation Fund,” a $297 million “Teacher Incentive Fund,” and more. Another $3.5 billion in “School Improvement Grants” was earmarked for states to support “efforts to reform struggling schools.”

Another key element in getting state governments to agree to the national standards was the issuance of waivers from the Bush-era “No Child Left Behind.” Without authority from Congress, the Department of Education announced in 2011 that it would grant waivers from NCLB to state governments in exchange for obedience to various federal decrees and the adoption of Common Core or other standards approved by the administration. Acceptance of Common Core-aligned testing was also required.

More than a few members of Congress and state officials feigned outrage by the waiver-in-exchange-for-obedience-to-Obama scheme, but the administration went forward anyway.

Local school districts are in the administration’s crosshairs as well. In May of 2012, the U.S. Department of Education began offering huge taxpayer-funded incentives to school districts that adopted the controversial scheme.

“This district-level program is a full-scale assault on state sovereignty,” explains the group Truth in American Education, which opposes the Common Core plan. “It is a power-grab through which the federal government will skirt citizens’ elected statewide bodies and negotiate directly with school districts to embrace federal policy. It will also undermine the state governmental structure by grouping school districts together on policy decisions and thereby making it more difficult for the group to disengage from federal programming.”

Skirting the Law and the People

Proponents of Common Core continue to downplay concerns about the controversial scheme by incessantly parroting two primary lines: the standards are “state-led” and “voluntary.” Because multiple federal laws specifically prohibit any federal direction, control, or supervision of curricula, programs of instruction, and instructional material in elementary or secondary schools, the whole scheme would be unlawful — not to mention unconstitutional — if the standards were not, in fact, “state-led” and “voluntary.”

However, the idea that Common Core is being driven by state governments is easily shown to be bogus — neither legislators nor elected officials played any significant role in developing the scheme, and in fact, states had to agree to the standards in 2009, before the standards were even published, to be eligible for federal bribes. Instead, as even establishment analysts have admitted, Common Core is a set of national standards pushed by the federal government and created by “consultants” funded by unaccountable billionaires.

Dr. Sandra Stotsky explained that when “states signed on to common core standards, they did not realize … that they were transferring control of the school curriculum to the federal government.” Even if it were truly a “state-led” initiative, however, critics say it would still be a bad idea, as parents and local school districts continue to lose control over education.

Are the standards voluntary? For now, the argument could be made that they are technically not mandatory, since no state government can be forced to comply. However, the fact that the federal government is bribing state governments with taxpayer money to go along with the plan — not to mention the federally funded national testing regimes — virtually ensures that American students will have to submit to some elements of Common Core whether they want to or not.

Political Opposition

Despite the fact that Common Core has been in the works for years and already spread its tentacles far and wide under the radar, Americans are gradually waking up to the plot. Opposition to the standards is soaring, as well. In Congress, lawmakers are making various moves to stop the scheme. At the state level, more than a few state governments are working on efforts to withdraw.

The powerful Republican National Committee (RNC) adopted a resolution calling on the GOP to stand firm against the centralization plot. Heavy-hitting organizations and grassroots activists across America are getting fired up, too, organizing protests and working with policymakers at all levels. Even Big Labor is calling for a moratorium on implementing some parts of the scheme.

In the U.S. Senate, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) has been leading the opposition so far. With outrage growing nationwide about Common Core, Grassley began circulating a letter among his colleagues calling for a prohibition on the Department of Education’s bribes to state governments. If approved, the proposed measure would also stop federal funding of the nominally private entities working to develop the standards.

The Grassley letter, dated April 26, was sent to the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Education Subcommittee leadership. It was signed by eight other senators: Mike Lee (R-Utah), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas). The coalition of senators sought an amendment to the appropriations bill funding the Department of Education that would restore state decision-making.

“The decision about what students should be taught and when it should be taught has enormous consequences for our children,” the senators wrote. “Therefore, parents ought to have a straight line of accountability to those who are making the decisions. State legislatures, which are directly accountable to the citizens of their states, are the appropriate place for those decisions to be made, free from any pressure from the U.S. Department of Education.”

In the House of Representatives, lawmakers were also working to stop Common Core. Led by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Mo.), a coalition including over 30 congressmen sent a letter to Education Secretary Arne Duncan outlining their concerns. The lawmakers also suggested that the Obama administration was moving forward with “education policy reform” without authorization or input from Congress.

“Such an action is, at best, in contravention with precedent,” the representatives wrote, noting that the authority to move forward with some of the administration’s schemes ended in 2008 without congressional reauthorization.

“As representatives from states across the nation, we understand the diverse cultures and state-specific education needs that exist in America,” the House letter to Secretary Duncan explains. “Moreover, we believe that state-based education policies are vital to the successful education of a child. As with most one-size-fits-all policies, Common Core standards fail to address the specific needs of our states.”

More recently, the House of Representatives passed a bill on July 19 aimed at reducing the unconstitutional federal role in education while restraining the administration’s abuse of “No Child Left Behind” waivers as a tool to coerce state governments. However, the legislation is not expected to go far in the Democrat-controlled Senate. Plus, Obama has reportedly already threatened to veto the House measure, dubbed the Student Success Act, all but ensuring its demise.

At the state level, policymakers in some 20 states are working to stop Common Core, too, according to data compiled by researchers. Aside from all of the other major controversies surrounding the centralization of education and the standards themselves, the expected costs to taxpayers are reportedly starting to raise some eyebrows in state capitols. According to estimates cited by the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation, which has blasted Common Core on multiple fronts, the implementation of the new standards could cost cash-strapped state governments some $16 billion.

More than a few states have started fighting back. In Indiana, for example, the legislature passed a bill putting Common Core implementation on “pause” pending a proper review of the standards, the costs, and more. “I have long believed that education is a state and local function and we must always work to ensure that our students are being taught to the highest academic standards and that our curriculum is developed by Hoosiers, for Hoosiers,” declared Republican Gov. Mike Pence in May when he signed the legislation. The state has also reportedly stopped participating in the national testing regime, too — at least for now. Michigan and South Carolina have targeted the scheme, as well.

Multiple other state legislatures also have bills to withdraw from Common Core. Separately, several states have also withdrawn from the national testing consortia. School districts, too, are taking action, with the Douglas County, Colorado, district, for instance, recently approving a resolution unanimously rejecting Common Core in favor of its own higher-quality standards. Experts say this is just the beginning of the resistance.

At the grassroots level, citizens all across America are rallying to stop the new standards in their states. Online rallies on Twitter organized by Parent Led Reform and Truth in American Education in April and May reached millions of people. With organizations nationwide such as The John Birch Society, Eagle Forum, Heritage, Cato, FreedomWorks, the Heartland Institute, the Pioneer Institute, American Principles Project, and countless others expressing firm opposition, the groundswell of activism is expected to keep growing. In the media, more than a few heavyweights, such as Glenn Beck, have been helping to stir opposition as well.

In a series of interviews with The New American, Joy Pullmann, education research fellow with the non-partisan Heartland Institute, outlined resistance to Common Core. In late July, she said that despite summer typically being slow for legislation, there had been several noteworthy developments. Among the most important: The number of states dropping or considering dropping Common Core tests is growing. In Florida, for example, the state’s top lawmakers issued a strongly worded letter calling on the Sunshine State to quit the Common Core-aligned testing consortium. Oklahoma, Alabama, and Utah have already done so, and North Dakota just dropped its membership in one of the testing groups. “Because the tests are the linchpin and capstone of Common Core, and to me the very worst of the whole edifice, I’d say this is a big deal and will accelerate,” Pullmann concluded.

It appears to analysts that Common Core is the final step in the decades-old process of nationalizing education — a longtime goal of virtually every totalitarian regime in recent history. With the minds of the youth and the future of America at stake, it is time to turn the tide and get government out of the way. With the groundswell of opposition continuing to expand, it is certainly possible. A good place to start would be getting the federal government out of schools entirely and immediately by shutting down the Department of Education.



by Ron Paul

In addition to shredding civil liberties, launching a utopian global war for democracy, and going on a spending spree that would make LBJ blush, the so-called “conservative” Bush administration dramatically increased federal control over education via the “No Child Left Behind” act. During my time in Congress I heard nothing but complaints about this law from teachers, administrators, and, most importantly, students and parents. Most of the complaints concerned No Child Left Behind’s testing requirements, which encouraged educators to “teach to the test.”

Sadly, but not surprisingly, instead of improving education by repealing No Child Left Behind’s testing and other mandates, the Obama administration is increasing national control over schools via the “Common Core” initiative. Common Core is a new curriculum developed by a panel of so-called education experts. The administration is trying to turn Common Core into a national curriculum by offering states increased federal education funding if they impose Common Core’s curriculum on their public schools. This is yet another example of the government using money stolen from the people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates.

Critics of Common Core say it “dumbs down” education by replacing traditional English literature with “informational texts”. So students will read such inspiring materials as studies by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, the EPA’s “Recommended Levels of Insulation,” and “Invasive Plant Inventory” by California’s Invasive Plant Council. It is doubtful that reading federal reports will teach students the habits of critical thinking and skepticism of government that the Founders considered essential to maintaining a free republic.

Like Obamacare, Common Core (now dubbed “ObamaCore” by some) has sparked a backlash in the states, leading some to propose legislation forbidding state participation in the scheme. I hope these efforts lead to states not just opting out of Common Core, but out of No Child Left Behind and all other federal education programs as well.

Parents can also effectively “opt out” of programs like Common Core by seeking alternatives to government education. It is no coincidence that, as federal control over education increases, the quality of public education has declined and more parents have chosen to homeschool.

To support these parents, I have established my own homeschool curriculum. Unlike Common Core, we do not dumb down any of our offerings. Instead, the goal is to provide students with a rigorous education in history, math, English, foreign languages, and other core subjects necessary to a well-rounded education. Unlike the top-down model of nationalized education, the homeschool curriculum is deigned to encourage maximum input from parents and students. While the curriculum will reflect my belief, and interest, in Austrian economics, libertarian political theory, and the history of the struggle against state power, the curriculum is being carefully designed to not show bias toward any one religion. I hope all parents of any faith – or no religious belief at all – will feel comfortable using the curriculum.

I believe it is important for those of us concerned with education and liberty to fight our battles locally. We must oppose further encroachment on the autonomy of local public schools and work to roll-back existing interference, while encouraging and supporting the growth of homeschooling and other alternative education movements. The key to restoring quality education is to replace the bureaucratic control of education with a free-market in education. Parents should have the freedom to select the type of education that best suits their child’s unique needs.



by Dave Hodges |

Following the scourge of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) the American public education system continues to slide and our children are the victims of these failed nationally mandated programs.

At this point, I thought it prudent to interject a snapshot of the net effect of the education system following NCLB, along with an identification of some disturbing trends, before continuing the discussion of the merits of the Common Core curriculum which is sweeping the country complete with the unwarranted heralding of the merits of this unproven system of education.

Make no mistake about it, both NCLB and the “new” Common Core are highly centralized approaches which parallels a Soviet style of collectivism. Before reading the following paragraphs which provides some measure of how the American education system is doing, ask yourself where has a highly centralized system ever worked in the history of mankind other than for military purposes?

Cursory Report Card

There are children who will excel in school this fall thanks to the guiding hands of caring teachers and administrators. However, the following numbers should not inspire pride. It should serve as an impetus to change course and decentralize education. Instead we are moving from one highly centralized approach to a highly centralized approach on steroids. What is the definition of insanity? If something does not work, keep doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

  •  Only 43% of all U.S. high school students have any idea the Civil War was fought in the 19th century.

  • ·More than 65% of all U.S. high school students cannot find Great Britain on a map.

  • Twelve percent of U.S. high school students cannot find the United States on a map.

  • More than 25% of all U.S. high school students thought that Christopher Columbus made his famous voyage across the Atlantic Ocean after the year 1750.

  • About 33% of all U.S. high school students do not know that the Bill of Rights guarantees freedom of speech, religion and due process.  

  • Only 55% of all U.S. students can name the Vice-President.

The Educational Gains In Several Developing Countries Are Superior to the US Educational Performance

Students in Latvia, Chile and Brazil are making gains in academics three times faster than American students  and those in Portugal, Hong Kong, Germany, Poland, Liechtenstein, Slovenia, Colombia and Lithuania are improving at twice the rate states a recently published by Harvard University’s Program on Education Policy and Governance. The Harvard researchers estimate that the educational gains made by students in those 11 countries equate to about two years of learning.

Spend, Spend, Spend and Learn Less, Less, Less

education cost 1A Harvard study found no relevant correlation between increasing the per-pupil spending and gains in test scores. In 2009, the U.S. spent more than $10,000 per student, ranging from $6,356 in Utah to $18,126 in New York.  Utah graduates a higher percentage of its students than does New York. Yet, school funding is the number one reason given by government officials to support the need to impose a property tax on American citizens. Property tax is one of the planks of the Communist Party. As an aside, property taxes are the reason you never really own your home. You are tenants-in-common with the government in the ownership of your home. Therefore, you can never stop generating income (i.e. tax revenue) or you will lose your home as we embrace more Soviet style philosophies across the board with regard to taxation, healthcare and now, education.

Home Schooling Defeats Government Schooling and It Is Not Close

homeschoolingEric Rudner (1999) analyzed the test scores of over 20,000 American home-schooled students and found them to be exceptionally high with the median scores of homeschoolers placing  in the 70th to 80th percentile. This is a mean difference of about 25% between home-schooled children and children educated in the government schools. Twenty five percent equates to three grade levels. Do you remember the Harvard study in which our foreign competitors were two grade levels ahead of American schools? If we extrapolate meaning from the Rudner study, we would be better off closing the government schools, save a lot of money and leave education to the parents. This is not meant to imply that teachers and administrators are incompetent. The vast majority are not, but they are handicapped by knowing what students need to be successful as opposed to the educational end products created by anonymous bureaucrats with largely nonsensical and unvalidated notions of what constitutes a quality education.

There are wonderful teachers and very competent administrators who sincerely try and better the lives of our children. Through educators partnering with the parents, many children will receive a quality education and possess the skills necessary to contribute to society and achieve a level of self-fulfillment. However, if you ask a principal or a teacher their private opinion on how well the bureaucratic system works which throws one failed federal program after another at the children, they will honestly tell you that they have to outsmart the system in order to serve our children efficiently.

Propaganda Factories for Pseudo-Science

Government schools are increasingly propagandizing our children. For example, the new unproven religion being worshiped in the government schools is environmentalism and global warming. Oops, I meant to say climate change, not global warming. I almost forgot that the global warming crowd changed their name when they got caught committing scientific fraud three years ago from hacked emails at East Anglia University in which researchers admitted, through their hacked emails, that global warming was a hoax. Yet, this is the new religion of the American educational system and the facts be damned. And we should all come to understand the net effect of this pseudoscience, a lower standard of living. And a life with significantly less material comforts is what is being presented to the children in the name of saving the planet. For those of you who doubt these words, just Google cap and trade as well as carbon taxes. After reading a cross-section of the articles on these topics, you will come to realize that American consumerism is in the crosshairs of climate change people. If you would like to see the application of climate change to a society, just look at what is happening to California where businesses cannot leave fast enough. And if it wasn’t for uncontrolled illegal immigration, California would be experiencing a dramatic negative population growth. In short, the people and businesses of California are voting with their feet. This is what our children are being taught to accept.

If we truly believe that climate change is an extinction level event as Al Gore states, we must accept that cap and trade policies clearly spells out a clear intention for the deindustrialization of the United States. The first proposed cap and trade legislation, which failed in the Senate, called for an 80% reduction of energy use. If you truly want to gauge the impact of this lunacy, consider if you can survive driving 80% less, or use 80% less energy to heat or cool your home, or cook 80% less, etc. The net effect would be skyrocketing utility prices, gas prices and subsequently food and clothing prices because everything in our economy is shipped. Obama has already closed 30 coal plants. What has happened to your utility bill in the past four years?  This is what your children, both directly and indirectly are taught to accept as a way to “save the planet.”

As the government schools are conditioning our children to accept a lower standard of living and to pay tribute to the global elite through carbon taxes, universities like Arizona State University are now offering graduate degrees in sustainability based upon this pseudoscience. It is interesting to note that the President of Arizona State University is CFR member, Michael Crow. Crow is also an ex-CIA operative. Crow stands in lockstep with Obama in this facade of science. This is just one small example of who is running the government schools at the supposed elite level. Former DHS head, Janet Napolitano, now runs the California university system. Courtesy of “Big Sis” can we anticipate that California’s college students will accept microchips, RFID student identification cards and TSA pat downs before attending class? What does Napolitano know about running an education system? Crow also had no previous credentials which would endorsed him for this position as well. I smell an agenda, as in Agenda 21.

Global warming is happening throughout our solar system. I guess the Martians are driving their cars too much.


In today’s educational system, your child can still learn and move on to a productive life. However, they will have to overcome onerous federal meddling in order to do so. Schools used to work best when local school boards made the curriculum decisions and teachers were held accountable by administrators for carrying out the mandates. Instead, we have abandoned what once worked, a decentralized system of education, in favor of Soviet style of central planning. Nowhere in the history of the planet has such a system ever worked for the masses and it is not working here.

As we separate from one failed program, No Child Left Behind, and embrace a totally unproven system, Common Core, we can clearly see in the interim that many children are not getting their educational needs met.

The next part in this series will examine how the science curriculum of Common Core is designed to be less rigorous than its predecessor as the Common Core blueprint for science parallels what we found in math. Additionally, I will share with the readers who conceived the ideas behind Common Core and this opens up a whole different can of worms.



by Dave Hodges |

There is a Trojan Horse within our midst and it is called Common Core. I did a cursory analysis of the program as the implementation came down which stated that implementation was imminent.

Finding information on this program has been difficult to say the least. The vast majority of teachers know next to nothing about the program. School administrators have many unanswered questions about Common Core’s implementation strategies, policies and regulations. This portion of the Common Core series focuses on the baseless and even false claims that Common Core will improve the majority of the students academic performance and ready them for college.

College Ready?

common coreIsn’t it interesting that our government says that is their goal to get students ready for college while at the same time overseeing an increase in college tuition which is eight times greater than the inflation rate as well as running a corrupt student loan program which is making debt slaves out of college students.

I laugh at the Common Core advocates who say the program is designed to get students ready for college because there is not one legitimate shred of proof to back up the claim. In fact, all of the credible research maintains that educational achievement will go backwards under Common Core.

It is very disturbing that it remains unclear what governance structure will be created in the future to address issues related to the Common Core Standards. What is clear is that the Standards are owned and copyrighted by nongovernmental (NGO) entities unaccountable to parents and students in individual states.

The Impact of Common Core on Math

The educational mantra of the federal government is that they wish for our students to lead the world in math and science. My son is an excellent math student and this was impetus and motivation for me to investigate Common Core’s claims that math skills of students will be enhanced by following this novel program. Subsequently, I have examined and re-examined the impact of Common Core on math.

The standards require the teaching of geometry to follow an experimental method, which has never been used successfully anywhere in the world. And despite the claims made by Common Core advocates, the Common Core standards are not internationally bench-marked.

In fact, exclusion of key math concepts is commonplace under Common Core. The Pioneer Institutes examination of Common Core revealed the following deficiencies:

·         “Common Core fails to teach prime factorization and consequently does not include teaching about least common denominators or greatest common factors.

·         Common Core fails to include conversions among fractions, decimals, and percents, identified as a key skill by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

·         Common Core de-emphasizes algebraic manipulation, which is a prerequisite for advanced mathematics, and instead effectively redefines algebra as “functional algebra”, which does not prepare students for STEM careers.

·         Common Core does not require proficiency with addition and subtraction until grade 4, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.

·         Common Core does not require proficiency with multiplication using the standard algorithm (step-by-step procedure for calculations) until grade 5, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.

·         Common Core does not require proficiency with division using the standard algorithm until grade 6, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.

·         Common Core starts teaching decimals only in grade 4, about two years behind the more rigorous state standards, and fails to use money as a natural introduction to this concept.

·         Common Core fails to teach in K-8 about key geometrical concepts such as the area of a triangle, sum of angles in a triangle, isosceles and equilateral triangles, or constructions with a straightedge and compass that good state standards include.”

 Additionally I found more examples of Common Core taking student achievement backwards through delaying when children which type of math.

  • The mathematics standards place Algebra I in ninth grade, rather than in grade 8 where it has traditionally been taught. This fact guarantees that the majority of students will not reach calculus in high school.

  • The standards require the teaching of  geometry to follow an experimental method, which has never been used successfully anywhere in the world. And  despite the claims made by Common Core advocates, the Common Core standards are not internationally bench-marked.

  • Common Core excludes certain Algebra II and Geometry content that is currently a prerequisite at almost every four-year state college.

In fact, exclusion of key math concepts is commonplace under Common Core. The Pioneer Institutes examination of Common Core revealed the following deficiencies:

·         “Common Core fails to teach prime factorization and consequently does not include teaching about least common denominators or greatest common factors.

·         Common Core fails to include conversions among fractions, decimals, and percents, identified as a key skill by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

·         Common Core de-emphasizes algebraic manipulation, which is a prerequisite for advanced mathematics, and instead effectively redefines algebra as “functional algebra”, which does not prepare students for STEM careers.

·         Common Core does not require proficiency with addition and subtraction until grade 4, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.

·         Common Core does not require proficiency with multiplication using the standard algorithm (step-by-step procedure for calculations) until grade 5, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.

·         Common Core does not require proficiency with division using the standard algorithm until grade 6, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.

·         Common Core starts teaching decimals only in grade 4, about two years behind the more rigorous state standards, and fails to use money as a natural introduction to this concept.

·         Common Core fails to teach in K-8 about key geometrical concepts such as the area of a triangle, sum of angles in a triangle, isosceles and equilateral triangles, or constructions with a straightedge and compass that good state standards include.”

The aforementioned facts speak for themselves and require no further elaboration.

Please tell me how our children are better off under these circumstances? They are not!  Recently, I unsuccessfully tried to enroll my son in one of the Basis charter schools. I asked some very pointed questions about Common Core and how it was impacting their instructional strategies and course offerings. After the administrators wiped away their smiles, I was told that Common Core is something that they do not worry about because their curriculum and student expectations are so much higher that Common Core is not a factor in the education of their students. Unfortunately, my son was “wait-listed” and he did not get in because of over-crowding. Fortunately, we feel that our second choice, a specialized public school is promising and we have high hopes.

Class Warfare

Also at issue here is the perpetuation of class warfare. If my kid gets a quality education and your kid doesn’t, then your kid is going to work for my kid and on my kid’s terms. If the elite’s kids are going to be attending schools like Basis, or some affluent school that a middle class family cannot afford or gain entry to, this perpetuates a bifurcation of future opportunities. And when programs like Common Core are imposed on the public schools, the class differences related to education are exacerbated. All education should be free to all, as education can be the great equalizer. However, that would not serve the need to dominate by the elite of this country and this is another discussion for another article.

The aforementioned facts beg the question, how many parents actually look into these factors such as Common Core? How many parents simply entrust their neighborhood schools to provide an education that will make the children university ready? Would you write a blank check to pay your electric bill or to purchase a new car? Of course you wouldn’t. Then why would you write a blank check to your neighborhood school when so much is at stake? 


There are still excellent teachers and outstanding principals who pay lip service to the “standards,” and go above and beyond to provide quality opportunities to enhance the education of their students. What kind of school does your child go to? It might behoove you to investigate your child’s school, just as if your child’s future may depend upon it, because it does.



Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
August 28, 2013

In South Dakota, Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for k – 12 have new expectations and schemes for educations that cost the state government $6.7 million to train schools faculty to ready the district.

Students will be given assessment testing next spring to evaluate the new standards. For now, testing is tallied for practice and not determination of efficiency.

State officials and residents are pressuring educators to perform well. The South Dakota Department of Education (SDDE) has paid for new training for 5,000 teachers from 151 public school districts.

Kansas and 44 other states are adopting CCSS while lawmakers decry that these new governmental regulations on education are proof of a federal takeover of education.

The general population has not heard of CCSS. Of the 4 in 10 Americans that know about the new education guidelines, the belief is that CCSS will make future generations in the US more competitive globally.

The Badass Teachers Association (BTA) are bringing awareness in Tallahassee, Florida with regard to CCSS. Members of BTA attend town hall meetings and inform the public about the dangers of government controlled standardized testing.

BTA is comprised of union leaders, activists and Democratic officials, Tea party members and libertarians.

Mark Naison, professor at Fordham University and co-founder of BTA said : “The liberal critique of Common Core is that this a huge profit-making enterprise that costs school districts a tremendous amount of money, and pushes out the things kids love about school, like art and music.”

Pennsylvania approved CCSS in 2010; however concerns caused parents to question whether or not there would be national statewide testing, new reading lists and data collection made on students attending public schools.

State House Representative Seth Grove asserted that “the community is screaming that we need career-ready kids.”

Teachers in Idaho will be using approved “strategy cards” to teach students how to drill for a math quiz. The idea is that students will be inspired to find the answer, rather than show children how to work through a math equation.

Memorization is the center of this new way of educating children with a focus on visualization to understand relationships between numbers. This is a technique that supposes the child will eventually come to the correct answer to the question.

By using deduction, the CCSS standard is part of the uniform “what every child should know curriculum.”

In Wisconsin, CCSS has is being fought against by teachers and Tea Party members alike. CCSS is described as a “kind of monstrosity that’s spreading across the country without much input from the town boards, school boards.”

Being touted as a path for academic mastery, CCSS focuses on emotional attribution to problems and downplays the necessity of critical thinking and analytic skills.

The National Governors Association (NGA) and Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) have discussed CCSS; including sitting with a panel of experts from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).

Joy Pullman, research fellow at the Heartland Institute (HI) said that CCSS are “unproven education theories, embedded in an Orwellian control system in which we have had no voice.”

The support for CCSS originates with Arne Duncan, secretary of the Department of Education for the Obama administration. Funding comes from the Race to the Top (RT) grant and monies from the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) waivers.

The Republican National Committee (NRC) say that CCSS is an “an inappropriate overreach to standardize and control the education of our children” and that this is a “collection of personal student data for any non-educational purpose without prior written consent.”

Supporters of CCSS claim that the scheme “itself does not require any data collection” and that the data on students shared with the federal government cannot be attributed to specific students.

CCSS provides nationwide standardized testing for students so that every child in every classroom across the country is learning the exact same lessons simultaneously.

The theory is that real-world settings will engage the children. Teachers are encouraged to have children write their own math problems to solve.

When the child chooses what they want to learn, their interests can be accessed and translated into data given over to the federal government for profiling purposes because the assurance is that student’s curriculum can be shaped around their individual learning needs.

Homework has turned into simple questions with the child being asked to justify their answers.

Teachers become facilitators, rather than educators. CCSS states that this will give the children more of an incentive to thinking independently; especially when they realize that there are no wrong answers.

Accessing historical figures such as George Washington for their leadership skills become the crux of the lesson.

Teachers focus on connecting the student’s to those persons to inspire the children to want to learn more.



Mac Slavo
August 19, 2013

Earlier this year President Obama detailed his new educational initiatives aimed at “closing America’s school readiness gap.” As with all things Obama, it seems that “readiness” is yet another doublespeak term that suggests exactly the opposite of the traditional definition.

At a recent school meeting in Grayslake, Illinois curriculum director Amanda August discusses the new federally mandated Common Core education standards, which are currently being implemented into school districts across the nation.

Here’s how we’re readying America’s children for a highly competitive globalized marketplace:

But even under the new Common Core… even if they said 3 X 4 was 11, if they were able to explain their reasoning and explain how they came up with their answer, really in words and in oral explanations, and they showed it in a picture but they just got the final number wrong, we’re really more focusing on the how and why.

It’s no matter if a student comes to the conclusion that 3 x 4 = 11. So long as they can explain how they made this erroneous determination they go home with an ‘A’.




Is it any wonder that, as Michael Snyder notes, our high school students are as dumb as a rock, failing to answer the most basic of questions? A study conducted by none other than Common Core shows just how far we’ve fallen at America’s pedagogic institutions:

- Only 60% of students knew that WWI was fought between 1900 and 1950 — they only had to guess the half century!

- One in four high schoolers think Columbus discovered the New World after 1750

- On the multiple choice test, less than half of high schoolers knew when the Civil War was fought. They didn’t even need to know exact dates, just that it was sometime between 1850 and 1900.

- 40% of students could not identify the name of the ocean on the eastern side of the United States.

- Nearly 60% of students could not identify the two major political parties.

- When asked who is in charge of the Executive Branch of the United States, 70% of high school students got the wrong answer.

- Fully 75% of high school students failed to identify the First President of the United States

If you think we’re just picking and choosing, watch the following video from Lunch Scholars, which asks typical American high school students to answer a series of common questions covering topics such as American history, geography, and politics.

- In which war did our country win its independence?

- Who is the Vice President?

- Which countries border the U.S.?

- How many stars on the flag of the United States?

- Can you name a country starting with the letter “U” ?

Via The Daily Sheeple:



Though “experts” argue that the new Common Core standards will improve our education system and prepare America’s children for a brave new world, it should be obvious that this is nothing more than another Federal power grab, complete with tax-payer funded bribes, that’s designed to add another layer of control for the State:

Dr. Ron Paul:

Sadly, but not surprisingly, instead of improving education by repealing No Child Left Behind’s testing and other mandates, the Obama administration is increasing national control over schools via the “Common Core” initiative. Common Core is a new curriculum developed by a panel of so-called education experts. The administration is trying to turn Common Core into a national curriculum by offering states increased federal education funding if they impose Common Core’s curriculum on their public schools.

This is yet another example of the government using money stolen from the people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates.

Critics of Common Core say it “dumbs down” education by replacing traditional English literature with “informational texts”. So students will read such inspiring materials as studies by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, the EPA’s “Recommended Levels of Insulation,” and “Invasive Plant Inventory” by California’s Invasive Plant Council. It is doubtful that reading federal reports will teach students the habits of critical thinking and skepticism of government that the Founders considered essential to maintaining a free republic.

American exceptionalism is being dumbed-down from cradle to grave on every level.

It should be obvious that the long-term plan is not to improve the lives of Americans, but rather, to create a slave-based society through (mis)education, consumerism, and government dependence.



By Lee Duigon
March 14, 2013

City University of New York officials raised some eyebrows last week when they revealed that 80 percent of the high school grads who enroll in CUNY can’t read, write, or do basic arithmetic. If you’re a New York City high school grad, that means eight out of ten.

Not to worry: tests administered by the U.S. Dept. of Education show that, nationwide, only 30 percent of eighth-graders in the public schools—that’s just three out of ten—can read like eighth-graders.

Do you still wonder why Obama’s president?

Meanwhile, what does it cost us to mal-educate whole generations of Americans?

As of 2009, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, New York City spent $19,000 per illiterate student per year. If you had to pay that much tuition for a private school, and your kid could barely read a bubble-gum wrapper, you’d think you were being ripped off.

But it’s not just New York. In ten years, Wisconsin doubled its per-pupil spending on the public schools, from just under $5,000 in 1998 to over $10,000 in 2008. Government tests, though, find that only 32 percent of the kids in Wisconsin’s public schools can read properly. On the other hand, these kids do know how to demonstrate against the state’s evil plan to make teachers pay a wee bit of their own pension and health care costs. So it’s not like they’re learning nothing at all.

Public school kids learn a lot of cool stuff that has nothing to do with reading, writing, or arithmetic. They learn that you can be any “gender” you want, on any given day. They learn all about the evils of capitalism (it causes Global Warming, you know) and the ineffable goodness of socialism. They learn an enormous amount about homosexuality as a universal good. They learn that the Holy Bible is hate literature, that their parents’ Christian beliefs are obsolete and wrong, and that “religion” in general—except when it’s used by Democrat politicians to justify abortion, sodomite mockmarriage, and class warfare—is something vaguely obscene that must be rigorously kept out of public discourse.

They simply don’t have time to learn to read.

As for those arcane and esoteric realms of knowledge, like history and literature and civics—well, really, there’s just no need for it. You don’t need to know that stuff to get food stamps and yack on your Obama phone. That’s the kind of learning that only unsettles the common herd and makes like difficult for the rulers. It’s so much better to teach that redistribution of wealth makes everybody happy.

Let’s face it, America. You have handed over your whole posterity, your country’s future, to anti-Christian teacher unions, theorizers, homosexual activists, and politicians-for-hire who despise your country and want to “transform” it into something else—a lot of Hugo Chavez wannabes. Oh, and they despise you, too.

Nineteen grand a year for a high school education (I use the term loosely) that doesn’t include acquiring an ability to read proficiently—are you out of your minds, agreeing to a deal like that? Because you have agreed, folks. By sending your children to those costly but inept schools day after day, year after you, you have consented to be swindled.

“Oh, my school district’s not like that!” Are you serious? We’re talking national findings here, from sea to shining sea. The odds are two-to-one that your school district’s failing. If you live in New York City, it’s four-to-one your local public school’s a dud.

So we’re training up tomorrow’s citizens and voters to be dullards at best, and corrupt, lazy, and immoral bastards at worst, if they get the whole public education smorgasbord of sex, socialism, and self-esteem.

So we’re training up tomorrow’s citizens and voters to be dullards at best, and corrupt, lazy, and immoral bastards at worst, if they get the whole public education smorgasbord of sex, socialism, and self-esteem.

Yes, I know: probably you don’t believe it. “They aren’t proselytizing for gay marriage in my son’s school!” Don’t bet on it. Schools never release the details of their sex education curriculum unless forced to by a lawsuit. They don’t let the kids take the classroom materials home with them, and most kids are embarrassed to discuss these lessons with their parents. The school doesn’t even hire a substitute if the sex ed teacher is absent.

If the schools were as guiltless as you think they are, our country wouldn’t be as confused, confounded, and as broke as you can see it is.



By Lyndsey Layton | The Washington Post

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Despite the Great Recession of 2008 — which focused the nation’s attention on the economy — high school seniors on average showed no significant improvement in their understanding of economic issues between 2006 and 2012, according to new testing data released Wednesday by the federal government.

In 2012, about 10,900 12th-grade students in 480 public and private schools took the economics exam as part of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, known as the “nation’s report card.” Their scores were compared with those from 2006, the first year that economics was tested as part of NAEP.

The exam was designed to test knowledge and understanding of markets and national and international economies.

While overall achievement was flat, federal officials saw gains in scores of Hispanic high school seniors and students performing at the lowest levels. The average score for Hispanic students on the 300-point test rose from 133 in 2006 to 138 in 2012. The average score for students in the lowest-scoring group rose from 104 to 109.

There was a persistent gender gap in performance, with boys consistently scoring higher than girls. And students attending private high schools consistently outscored those attending public schools.

In 2012, students reported getting more of their information about the economy from the Internet and less from newspapers and magazines than they did in 2006.



Travis Holte
April 29, 2013

Not long ago, one bread winner could support a family, put the children through college, and have enough savings left over to comfortably retire. But then a funny thing happened on the road to serfdom. Suddenly there was a “sexual revolution” and before you knew it both parents were in the workforce, both paying income tax, both struggling to survive. And in all this, their children increasingly became wards of the State. How fortuitous for the oligarchs, hellbent on world domination?

Which leads me to today’s news. In Nazi York, under the rule of Führer Bloomberg, a pilot program is set to begin in middle schools under the auspices of combating abysmal failures in such basics as reading. It calls for an additional 2 ½ hours of incarceration per day. I kid you not. While there are homeschoolers sending their children to college by the age of 12, the State is bamboozling the booboisie into thinking this will do anything but make their kids better Prussian soldiers. Not surprising, most tax-slaving parents, happy to have a babysitter, are “on board.”



Quote by Greatest Mass Murderer in History Pushed on NCES “Kids’ Zone” Website

Melissa Melton
March 22, 201

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) “Kids’ Zone” website quoted mass murderer Chairman Mao Zedong for its “The Quote of the Day” earlier today.

Buzzfeed posted a screenshot of the initial quote:

The Dept. of Ed quoted a mass murderer to our nation’s kids today. Great.

Apparently, NCES took the quote down after news of it went viral on social media networks like Twitter. First the quote was memory-holed with the message, “Sorry there is no quote of the of the today” (the typo here likely a signal of their rush to take it down):

No more quote “of the of the” for you, kids.

Then the quote was briefly replaced with one by Abraham Lincoln. Now the entire section has been removed from the page:

Following the incident, Buzzfeed reported that NCES Press Secretary Daren Briscoe issued this statement:

“The Kids’ Zone website hosted by the National Center of Education Statistics earlier today featured a poorly chosen quote, intended to highlight the importance of teaching and learning, in the ‘Quote of the Day’ feature. This feature, which automatically generates one education-related quote per day from a database of quotes last updated in 2007, has been temporarily suspended pending a review of the database’s contents.”

So the quote was just “poorly chosen?” Really?

During China’s communist revolution, it is estimated Zedong was ultimately responsible for murdering nearly 40 million people, but some have even estimated that number at 80 million or more.

How, of all departments, the U.S. Department of Education failed to realize they were quoting one of the greatest mass murderers in human history specifically to our kids is inconceivable.

Who are they going to quote next? Adolf Hitler? Joseph Stalin?

For those who still aren’t clear on the reality that America’s education system has been purposefully set up to systematically destroy millions of children’s minds with the ultimate goal of indoctrinating them into a socialist one-world government, check out former Senior Policy Advisor for the U.S. Department of Education Charlotte Iserbyt’s book, “The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America” available in the Infowars Shop.



Take a look at sample questions from the new “back-to-basics” grammar test to be sat by 11-year-old pupils from next summer in primary schools.

Details of a new ‘back to basics’ test of spelling, punctuation and grammar to be sat by up to 600,000 primary school students next summer were unveiled today by the Department for Education.

The new tests include a 45-minute grammar exam, in which 11-year-old pupils will be expected to answer 45 questions testing their ability to use nouns, verbs, adverbs, prepositions correctly, as well as the proper use of tenses and pronouns “I” and “me”.

The Department for Education has released seven sample questions from the new exam.

Enter our poll below to share your thoughts on the new assessment…


1. Circle all the adverbs in the sentences below:

Excitedly, Dan opened the heavy lid. He paused briefly and looked at the treasure.

2. Circle the adjectives in the sentence below.

The local baker regularly makes fresh bread.

3. Insert three commas in the correct places in the sentence below.

I need to pack a swimming costume some sun cream a hat sunglasses and a towel.

4. Circle all the nouns in the sentence below.

The leaves on our tree turned orange as the weather became colder.

5. A prefix is a letter or a group of letters added to the beginning of a word to make a new word. For example, unhappy.

Put a prefix at the beginning of each word to make it mean the opposite.




6. Which ending would make this word an adverb? Quick

– quickness

– quickest

– quicker

– quickly

7. Circle the preposition in the sentence below.

She waited until 10 o’clock.


1. i) Excitedly ii) briefly

2. i) local ii) fresh

3. I need to pack a swimming costume, some sun cream, a hat, sunglasses and a towel.

4. i) leaves ii) tree iii) weather

5. misbehave, incorrect, impossible

6. quickly

7. until


Is the new grammar test a step forward? (Poll Closed)
Yes, our children will benefit from being able to write properly  62.48%  (1,417 votes)  


No, they are already over tested and this won’t improve standards  15.52%  (352 votes)  


It doesn’t go far enough – the questions are too easy  22%  (499 votes)  



Total Votes: 2,268



By Terence P. Jeffrey


August 30, 2013( -The Chicago Public Schools this year are mandating that the district’s kindergarten classes include sex education, fulfilling a proposal President Barack Obama supported in 2003 when he served in the Illinois state senate and later defended when he ran for president in the 2008 election cycle.At a Planned Parenthood convention at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, D.C., on July 17, 2007, a teenage girl who said she worked as a sex-education “peer educator” in the D.C. public schools asked then-U.S. Sen. Obama what he would do to encourage the teaching of “medically accurate, age-appropriate, and responsible sex education.”Obama first noted that he had worked with Planned Parenthood to push a sex education bill when he served in the Illinois state legislature.

Then he said: “I remember Alan Keyes—I ran against Alan Keyes—but I remember him using this in his campaign against me, saying, ‘Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergartners.

“And you know,” said Obama, “I didn’t know what to tell him. But it is the right thing to do, to provide age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in the schools.” published a story about what Obama told Planned Parenthood. It carried the headline: “Sex Ed for Kindergartners ‘Right Thing to Do,’ Says Obama.”

To explain Obama’s position further to ABC News, Obama’s campaign pointed to an Oct. 6, 2004 story in the Chicago Daily Herald about a speech Obama had given at a Catholic college in Illinois. This story carried the headline: “Obama clarifies sex ed views at Benedictine.”

“Nobody’s suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,” Obama is quoted as telling the children. “If they ask a teacher ‘where do babies come from,’ that providing information that the fact is that it’s not a stork is probably not an unhealthy thing. Although again, that’s going to be determined on a case by case basis by local communities and local school boards.”

To further clarify Obama’s position on sex ed for kindergartner’s, Obama’s campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, pointed MSNBC to the “curriculum for those in kindergarten” produced by the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS). This curriculum suggested discussing same-sex relationships—in non-graphic terms–with kindergartners.

In response to a campaign ad that Sen. John McCain later put out focusing on Obama’s support for sex education for kindergartners, SIECUS itself published an explanation of the Illinois state bill Obama had supported. SIECUS explained that the bill Obama supported did indeed extend sex education to kindergartners in Illinois. At that time, Illinois mandated sex education only for children in grades six through 12. SIECUS also said the bill would have removed all mention of “marriage” from sex education in the state’s public schools.

“The ad is referring to Senate Bill 99 (SB99), which was assigned to the Health and Human Services Committee in the Illinois Senate in 2003,” said SIECUS. “At the time, State Senator Barack Obama was Chairperson of the committee. He did not sponsor the bill, but he did vote in favor of it.

“SB99 proposed to make changes to Illinois’ existing sex education law which requires instruction in grades six through 12 that includes teaching about the prevention, transmission, and spread of AIDS,” said SIECUS. “Illinois law also states that schools much teach ‘honor and respect for monogamous heterosexual marriage.’ SB99 would have eliminated all references to marriage in the Illinois sex education code, and required that all material used in classrooms be age- and developmentally appropriate and medically accurate.

“It would also have expanded sexuality education to students in kindergarten through fifth grade and mandated that students be taught the age of consent, positive communication skills, and that they [the pupil] have the power to control behavior,” said SIECUS.

Despite Obama’s support for it, the bill did not pass and did not become Illinois law.

According to a report published yesterday by the CBS affiliate in Chicago, the new sex education program mandated in Chicago public schools will—like  the SIECUS curriculum—instruct kindergartners about same-sex relationships.

“Students will also take a look at the different family structures that exist in today’s society,” said the CBS report. The report then quoted Stephanie Whyte, the chief health officer of the Chicago Public Schools: “Whether that means there’s two moms at home, everyone’s home life is different, and we introduce the fact that we all have a diverse background.”



Written by  Raven Clabough | The New American

According to administrators at Chicago Public Schools (CPS), children as young as five years old should be receiving sex education. This year, mandatory sexual and health education have been added to the kindergarten curriculum.

CBS local news reports, “CPS insists the curriculum will use language children understand and focus on topics like bullying, correct names for external body parts and the difference between appropriate and inappropriate touching.”

The new policy calls for 300 minutes of instruction, amounting to approximately 30 minutes per month.

Stephanie Whyte, the CPS chief health officer, elaborates, “As you identify body parts, you talk about should you be touched here or not. And if someone touches you, and it’s uncomfortable, you should tell a trusted adult.”

Whyte also states that the curriculum will allow the students to look at different family structures.

“Whether that means there’s two moms at home, everyone’s home life is different, and we introduce the fact that we all have a diverse background,” said Whyte.

Some parents, however, are opposed to such lessons being taught in schools. For instance, parent Brook Lyon told CBS News, “If he [her son] has questions, I’m happy to answer them, but I’m not sure it belongs in a classroom setting.”

Perhaps even more astounding is that the curriculum change dates back to a proposal issued by Barack Obama in 2003 when he served as Illinois state senator. He later defended his position during his 2008 presidential run.

Life News recalls:

At a Planned Parenthood convention at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, D.C., on July 17, 2007, a teenage girl who said she worked as a sex-education “peer educator” in the D.C. public schools asked then-U.S. Sen. Obama what he would do to encourage the teaching of “medically accurate, age-appropriate, and responsible sex education.”

In response, then-Senator Obama stated that he worked with Planned Parenthood to advocate a sex education bill during his tenure in the Illinois state legislature.

He then went on to say, “I remember Alan Keyes — I ran against Alan Keyes — but I remember his using this in his campaign against me, saying, ‘Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergartners.’”

“And you know,” Obama continued, “I didn’t know what to tell him. But it is the right thing to do, to provide age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in the schools.”

Speaking directly to the young lady who asked him the question about sex education, he said, “You, as a peer, can have enormous power over your age cohort but you’ve got to have some support from the schools. You certainly should not have to be fighting each and every instance by providing accurate information outside of the classroom because inside the classroom the only thing that can be talked about is abstinence.”

“Keep in mind: I honor and respect young people who choose to delay sexual activity,” Obama continued. “I’ve got two daughters, and I want them to understand that sex is not something casual. That’s something that we definitely want to communicate and should be part of any curriculum. But we also know that when the statistics tell us that nearly half of 15- to 19-year-olds are engaging in sexual activity, that for us to leave them in ignorance is potentially consigning them to illness, pregnancy, poverty, and in some cases, death.”

Chicago schools also appear to be fully aligned with curriculum standards proposed by the United Nations. According to 2010 guidelines set by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in a report entitled “International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education,” “It is never too early to start talking to children about sexual matters.”

According to the report, “Preparing young children and young people for the transition to adulthood has always been one of humanity’s great challenges, with human sexuality and relationships at its core. Today, in a world with AIDS, how we meet this challenge is our most important opportunity in breaking the trajectory of the epidemic.” The report goes on to say that “inadequate preparation leaves [children] vulnerable,” and encourages parents to teach their children about sexuality from birth.

What’s worse is that the 2010 guidelines, as absurd as they seem, were in fact a revision from earlier guidelines introduced the year before that were even more controversial, including those that encouraged abortion and masturbation to be taught to children as young as five.

As a result of the revisions, some of the more explicit language found in the guidelines had been changed, but the majority of the controversial suggestions remain, including a sex-education curriculum for children from birth to age five. One such suggestion encourages parents to buy anatomically-correct dolls and inform their children of diverse sexual relationships.

Likewise, the curriculum encourages parents to be supportive and open-minded to gender identity and sexual orientation, and discourages them from enforcing traditional gender identities: “Confusion about these issues and fear of homosexuality (homophobia) has caused many parents and other adults to limit how girls and boys express themselves.”

Chicago’s curriculum seeks to do just that. It is becoming increasingly clear that some seek to virtually eliminate and replace the role and discretion of the parents.

Besides the obvious reasons for why Chicago schools should avoid teaching sex education to kindergartners, notes that it represents an inexplicable misdirection of priorities:

Is there really no other subject (or subjects) teachers could focus on instead of “sexual and health education”? After all, roughly 80 percent of eighth graders in the city are not “grade-level proficient” in either reading or math. Wouldn’t it therefore be wise for teachers to spend additional time with young children, say, teaching them how to read and solve math problems?

Or perhaps preparing children for high school and college has lost its allure, since little to no jobs await them after they’ve graduated anyway.



Written by  | The New American

As opposition continues to mount against an Obama-backed scheme known as “Common Core” to standardize education across America, lawmakers and activists determined to stop the radical agenda are turning up the heat. In Congress, senators and representatives are taking action. State lawmakers are too. Among the grassroots, meanwhile, advocates for educational freedom are hosting gatherings in numerous states while planning another online “Twitter Rally” on May 2 to stop Common Core before it is rolled out nationwide.

Over 45 state governments have already agreed to adopt the extremely controversial program in exchange for taxpayer-funded “Race to the Top” bribes and “No Child Left Behind” waivers offered by the Obama administration. However, as awareness of the scheme grows, opposition is surging, too. Just last month the Republican National Committee (RNC) unanimously adopted a resolution slamming Common Core as “an inappropriate overreach to standardize and control the education of our children.” GOP lawmakers at the state and federal level took notice as public pressure to stop the agenda balloons.

In the U.S. Senate, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) has been leading the opposition so far. Shortly after the Republican Party adopted its pro-educational freedom resolution blasting Common Core, Grassley began circulating a letter among his colleagues calling for a prohibition on the Department of Education’s controversial bribes to state governments that accept Common Core. If approved, the measure would also stop federal funding of the nominally private entities working to develop the widely criticized national standards.

The Grassley letter, dated April 26, was sent to the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Education Subcommittee leadership. It was signed by eight other senators: Mike Lee (R-Utah), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas). In the document, the coalition of senators asked that an amendment be added to the next appropriations bill funding the Department Education to restore state decision-making and accountability on academic standards.

“The decision about what students should be taught and when it should be taught has enormous consequences for our children,” the senators wrote. “Therefore, parents ought to have a straight line of accountability to those who are making the decisions. State legislatures, which are directly accountable to the citizens of their states, are the appropriate place for those decisions to be made, free from any pressure from the U.S. Department of Education.”

In the House of Representatives, meanwhile, lawmakers were also working to stop Common Core. Led by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Mo.), a coalition including over 30 congressmen sent a letter to Education Secretary Arne Duncan outlining concerns surrounding recent developments. In the document, the lawmakers also suggested that the Obama administration was moving forward with “education policy reform” without authorization or input from Congress.

“Such an action is, at best, in contravention with precedent,” the representatives wrote, noting that the authority to move forward with some of the administration’s schemes ended in 2008 without congressional re-authorization. “In addition to expressing our concern with the Department’s circumvention of Congress to reform education policy, we are writing to express our concerns with the implementation of Common Core standards and changes to federal data collection and disbursement policies.”

Both of the letters — one from the House, the other from the Senate — also pointed out that Common Core has been touted as a “voluntary” and “state-led” scheme. In reality, however, the Obama administration has played a key role in developing the controversial education program and foisting it on state governments using federal “incentives,” lawmakers explained. Of course, U.S. law specifically prohibits federal involvement in school curricula.

“In addition to the serious concerns we have regarding the [Education] Department’s aforementioned coercion of states to opt-in to Common Core standards, many of which continue to have serious budgetary constraints and issues with existing education policies, we have become increasingly concerned over the development of Common Core standards themselves,” the congressmen wrote. “Though initially promoted as state-based education standards, Common Core standards, as they have been developed over the last few years, are nothing of the sort.”

Among other problems, the letter from House members highlights the federally funded national testing scheme that will replace state-based tests. Also under fire are changes in Education Department policies surrounding the gathering and sharing of student data, which The New American recently exposed in depth. According to lawmakers, the Obama administration circumvented Congress to avoid privacy protections in U.S. law and is using more federal bribes to coerce state governments into collecting vast amounts of private, sensitive information on students and parents.

“As representatives from states across the nation, we understand the diverse cultures and state-specific education needs that exist in America,” the House letter to Education Secretary Duncan explains. “Moreover, we believe that state-based education policies are vital to the successful education of a child. As with most one-size-fits-all policies, Common Core standards fail to address the specific needs of our states.”

Meanwhile, at the state level, Common Core is encountering serious resistance as well, with Indiana becoming the latest seeking to put the brakes on the controversial program as the legislature passed a bill to stop its implementation. “This movement against Common Core started with citizen involvement. Our success with this legislation would not have been possible without the concerned Hoosiers around the state taking action,” said Indiana State Sen. Scott Schneider. “Education decisions should be made by Hoosiers and not ceded to unelected bureaucrats many miles away.”

Before that, lawmakers in Michigan targeted the scheme as well, with the House passing legislation to defund implementation. Multiple state legislatures also have bills to withdraw from Common Core. In addition, despite the loss of federal taxpayer-funded bribes handed out by the Obama administration, independent-minded states like Alaska and Texas refused to adopt the standards from the start. Experts say this is just the beginning of the resistance.

Citizens are also rallying to stop Common Core, with the outcry spreading across America like wildfire as activists learn about the program, its costs, and what it means for education, state sovereignty, local self-governance, liberty, and more. One of the organizations fighting the program, known as Parent Led Reform, is hosting another “Twitter Rally” on May 2 at 9 p.m. Eastern time using the tag #StopCommonCore.

The online effort, which follows a similar “rally” held on April 16 that reached almost 2.5 million Twitter users, is also being organized with Truth in American Education, one of the leading groups trying to stop the controversial standards. It will feature a panel of experts answering questions including Shane Vander Hart with Truth in American Education, attorney and Director of Federal Relations William Estrada with the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), the Heartland Institute’s Education Research Fellow Joy Pullmann, Ben DeGrow with the Independence Institute, and the American Principles Project’s Emmett McGroarty.

“We are thrilled about the amazing turnout to share awareness of the concerns of Common Core standards,” said Parent Led Reform spokesperson Karin Piper in announcing the latest rally. “Parent Led Reform opposes a lock-step approach to education that takes the focus away from the student and decisions away from the parent and so pleased to work in collaboration with organizations, parents, educators and citizens across the country to share these concerns.”

Meanwhile, the roster of prominent voices joining the chorus against Common Core continues to grow. Conservative pundit Glenn Beck, for example, said the scheme would push parents and states out of education while giving federal bureaucrats control of America’s children. Another conservative heavy-weight, columnist Michelle Malkin, has also been actively opposing the Obama-backed nationalization of education standards despite vicious attacks from Common Core supporters.

Eagle Forum chief Phyllis Schlafly even said that the effort should be considered unconstitutional. “This process bypasses parents and state and local school boards, and will fundamentally transform education by dictating what every child will learn and not learn,” she explained, adding that Common Core was a “dictatorial” part of the president’s effort to “fundamentally transform” the nation. “Obama Core is a comprehensive plan to dumb down schoolchildren so they will be obedient servants of the government and probably to indoctrinate them to accept the leftwing view of America and its history.”

A prominent organization advocating for the rights of parents to be enshrined in the U.S. Constitution has also come out swinging. “ is still researching the details of the Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI), but there is no question that we oppose the de facto takeover of education by the federal government and unaccountable private organizations,” said Director of Communications and Research Michael Ramey in an e-mail to supporters, calling it an “underhanded move” by the Education Department that should be opposed by both parties. “By shifting the power to set school standards and curricula away from the states, CCSSI would rob parents of the right to hold accountable those planning the education of their children in public schools.”

While proponents of Common Core try in vain to demonize critics as “extreme” or “right-wing,” more than a few so-called progressives are speaking out as well. Countless teachers, too, are publicly blasting the national standards and calling for an end to the deeply controversial plan. In fact, even the most ardent supporters of nationalized education standards are warning that the effort to foist Common Core on America is now in total disarray.

“The Common Core is in trouble,” admitted Randi Weingarten, head of the American Federation of Teachers union described by the Washington Post as a “strong supporter” of the Obama-backed program. “There is a serious backlash in lots of different ways, on the right and on the left.” According to Weingarten, the new standards are being poorly implemented, requiring a “mid-course correction” before the entire dream of supposed education reformers crumbles. Among other concerns, the union boss said state governments were rushing out the Common Core-based tests without preparing teachers or designing new curricula to incorporate the national standards.

With the opposition to Common Core continuing to expand as citizens become aware of what has happened, experts tell The New American that the easy phase for its proponents is now behind them. As lawmakers at the state and federal level join with outraged citizens across America, advocates of educational freedom and constitutional government remain hopeful that, with enough public pressure, the administration’s effort to foist national standards on the nation’s children will ultimately fail. How long that may take remains to be seen, but liberty-minded activists say they are encouraged by their progress so far.



Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
September 9, 2013
Maine Governor Paul LaPage is rethinking his support of Common Core State Standards (CCSS).LaPage said: “I don’t believe in Common Core. I believe in raising the standards in education.” Standards for CCSS implemented from kindergarten to high school came to fruition with the finalization of the scheme in 2010.After this new theory of education was enacted, a report produced in 2012 showed that 39% of high school students who took the ACT proved to be college-ready.

LaPage signed an executive order (EO) reiterating that public schools in Maine are locally controlled that student’s personal information will not be shared with corporations and federal agencies.

The EO states that “the Department of Education shall not adopt any educational standards, curricula or instructional approaches that may be mandated by the federal government. That the Department of Education shall not apply for any federal grant that requires, as a condition of application, the adoption of any federally-developed standards, curricula or instructional approaches.”

CCSS is directed at teaching children to gauge their decision-making abilities on the whims of their emotional state by emphasizing personal analysis through consistent multiple-choice testing.

The CCSS is an initiative sponsored by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. For the last two decades the accountability movement has held students under the thumb of test achievement that is used to demonstrate the CCSS that American citizens are expected to know to become successful in the workplace.

CCSS aspires to “have set new goals for student learning” and require “effective tools and resources to ensure students meet those goals.”

Under the CCSS, new standards of learning have been implemented with the expressed purpose of dumbing down the population. These include:

• Basic knowledge of the “classics” without a focus on reading comprehension
• Reinvention of writing skill to focus on keyboard and typing skills for college and career readiness
• Learning how to speak improperly by integrating slang and other alternative modes of communication
• Using media as a form of learning to train students to become dependent on mainstream media for their information while de-emphasizing personal research and independent thought
• Replacing cursive writing with courses on keyboard and focus on improving typing skills
• Replacing cognitive thought facilitated by mathematics with the broad belief system that illegitimates logic and reasoning

As CCSS spread throughout the state educational system it reset the foundation by which math and English were going to be taught. The guise was presented as a way to adapt curriculum to the needs of the students.

However, this style of teaching appeals to the lowest denominator in the group and restructures the lessons and difficultly levels.

In racially-motivated schools districts, this manifested as lowering the curriculum achievement expectations in low-income African-American and Latino neighborhoods.

For example, the logical structure of mathematics is replaced with the emotionally driven subjective comprehension of the ideology. This new emphasis turned student’s attention from logic and reasoning – to now implant the idea that meaning was more important than facts.

The grading scale under CCSS now focuses on setting out what a child can understand based on age, and grade level.



August 26th, 2013

Obama is touring the country preaching an insane “solution” to the doubling of college costs over the recent period — the same insane Obama “solution” to the collapse of public education — withhold funds from schools which don’t meet nationally defined standards. At the University of Buffalo Thursday, Bloomberg reports, Obama said he has directed the Education Department to create a new government ranking of colleges that would factor in cost, student debt, and graduation rates, among other criteria.

Obama in Syracuse, NY.

Like his “No Child Left Behind” attack on failing schools in the U.S., leading to mass layoffs of teachers and closing of schools in poor areas for lack of funding, Obama has proposed that Congress pass legislation that would tie federal financial assistance to those ratings. The White House said the new ratings would be based on such measures as access, including the percentage of students receiving Pell grants, affordability, scholarships, and loan debt; and outcomes, such as graduation and transfer rates, earnings of graduates, and graduates’ advanced degrees.

The federal government now provides more than $150 billion a year in federal student aid, awarding it based on the number of students who enroll, rather than the number who earn degrees or what they learn, the White House said.

Bloomberg acknowledges that there is strong opposition to this scam, as the “unintended consequences might include discouraging colleges from accepting and giving aid to students from low-income families because of the risk that they might hurt the school’s rankings.”



by Hunter Lewis | Mises DailyAugust 30, 2013

The president gave a speech on August 22 in Buffalo outlining his proposal to “reform” the student loan program. He acknowledged that the program has some problems, but assured the audience they are easily fixed. Just take the principles behind Obamacare and apply them to education. The president personally “guaranteed” that his proposals would make college more affordable.

Here’s the plan. The government will rate colleges based on fees (the lower the better) and graduation rates (the higher the better) and student success in finding a job. Then student loan funds will be allocated to schools according to the rating. Students will also be guided to the best-rated schools via government web sites. And schools will get more funding if they set up demonstration projects to reduce costs. This will all encourage more “competition” among schools. Yes, you heard that right: more government control of colleges will increase market “competition.”

We don’t have a 2,000 page bill in Congress yet, but it’s all quite familiar: government will take even tighter control of higher education just as it has taken even tighter control of medicine, and use Obamacare as its operating manual. Of course, Obamacare not only rated medical insurance policies; it mandated what would be in them at what prices, which in effect put government in charge of defining what healthcare is. Presumably, the government rating of schools will in due course also lead to mandates and the government defining what higher education is. Obamacare also set up government sites where people would be steered to buy government approved policies, and set up demonstration projects, even though the history of government-inspired healthcare demonstration projects has been dismal.

There is a lot more in common between Obamacare and Obamaschool than these superficial characteristics. Obamacare came into being because of a crisis in medical care. As usual, that crisis had been caused by earlier government interventions in medicine, especially price controls. At present, Medicare price controls about 7,500 medical procedures. Because payment varies by location and practitioner (e.g., doctors employed by hospitals get paid more than other doctors), it has been estimated that Medicare price-controls six billion medical transactions at any one time. As government has come to dominate medicine and price-control it, prices have inevitably risen at a rate that threatens to bankrupt the economy. Obamacare has doubled down on the price controls, mandating allowed price increases under Medicare and installing a price control board. All of this will no doubt lead to the kind of legislation recently passed in Massachusetts where any “material” change in a medical practice, in either prices or services, must be approved by the state.

Obamaschool is coming into being for similar reasons. In this case, the government set up a student loan program which was ostensibly designed to subsidize students. But whenever government subsidizes demand without increasing supply, prices inevitably rise, and this was no exception.

As President Obama pointed out, “Over the past three decades, the average tuition [and fees] at a public four-year college has gone up by more than 250 percent. 250 percent. Now a typical family’s income has gone up 16 percent. That’s a big gap.” Yes it is.

In reality, both the 250 percent and the pitiful 16 percent have been caused by government policies, especially price manipulations and controls. The 250 percent increase in fees (mitigated somewhat by increases in student aid) has specifically been driven by government’s mistake in flooding schools with student loan money. That money did not help students; it enabled schools to keep raising fees. What students mostly got out of the loan program was an early initiation into massive debt. If leaving school with heavy debts is not exactly slavery, it certainly represents some kind of indentured servitude.

Obama was more than a bit mendacious about this debt burden. He took credit for keeping student interest rates down. He even said that “government shouldn’t see student loans as a way to make money; it should be a way to help students.” But the reality is that his administration is currently borrowing money at negligible interest rates and then relending it to students at much higher rates. The difference is booked elsewhere in the federal budget under “deficit reduction.” If that isn’t a clear case of using student loans as a way to make money, then what is?

What will really happen if the federal government completes its takeover of higher education pricing? The certain result will be even higher prices, which will then lead to calls for a complete federal takeover, just as advancing prices under Obamacare are now leading to admissions by Senator Reid and Congresswoman Pelosi that it was only intended to be a stepping stone to a “single payer” system in which government in effect nationalizes all healthcare. Nationalizing healthcare would make the crisis worse, not better, but Reid and Pelosi don’t understand that.

The president’s specific proposals for student loans will have some other presumably unintended effects as well. If schools get more federal money as their graduation rate increases, they will simply stop taking students who are more likely to drop out. That of course means they will stop taking disadvantaged students who need help the most.

The administration says that it will get advice from schools in devising the rating system. This is all we need: closed door meetings in Washington between the government and special interests with the consumer excluded. This is exactly how Mussolini ran Italy and Roosevelt tried to run the U.S. with the National Recovery Act. The results of dismantling a consumer-driven market economy will be no better now than they were then.



Onetime ticket to secure employment no longer seen as goal

By John Aman

Is college worth it? More and more recent graduates – and their parents – are asking that question as they send out resumes, wait tables, and live at home – all while paying off hefty student loans.

It’s long been believed that a college degree is a ticket to secure, financially rewarding employment. Back in 1974, Jacob Mincer’s Schooling, Experience and Earnings came up with what is called “the rate of return to education,” estimated by researchers at 6-10 percent. Every year of additional education is said to pad annual salary by 6 to 10 percent.

Try telling that to the bartenders across America with high-priced bachelor’s degrees.

“There are 80,000 bartenders in the United States with bachelor’s degrees,” says Richard Vedder, author of “Going Broke by Degree: Why College Costs Too Much.” He told consumer columnist John Stossel that 17 percent of baggage porters and bellhops, and 15 percent of tax and limo drivers have bachelor’s degrees.

Michael Bledsoe earned a creative writing degree in 2010 but wound up working for a bit over minimum wage at a Seattle coffee house, according to an Associated Press report.

“I don’t even know what I’m looking for,” he told the AP. Employers noted his lack of experience and questioned the value of his major. “There is not much out there, it seems.”

The Federal Reserve reports that 44 percent of recent college grads are underemployed, languishing in jobs they could have stepped into with a high school diploma.

While graduates in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) as well as health care and accounting tend to do well, the value of a college degree overall is down sharply.

Nowadays, four years of college is more likely to leave students deeply in debt than well-educated with marketable job skills. One third of recent college grads take jobs that don’t require a college degree. Just 16 percent of college graduates were “very prepared for the workforce” according to a 2011 survey of one thousand hiring managers.

And this is not a new phenomenon. In 2000, 41 percent of college grads were underemployed or jobless.

But the idea persists that everyone should go to college. Despite good alternatives, the faddish and nonsensical nature of much higher education, and, most of all, the dismal return on investment, college enrollment and student debt are soaring.

  • College enrollment jumped 25 percent from 14.7 million in 2004 to 18.5 million in 2012.
  • Total student loan debt is now a staggering $1.1 trillion, up 25 percent since 2010 and more than four times its 2003 level of $241 billion. The total college student loan balance now exceeds U.S. credit card debt.
  • Two-thirds of graduates leave school burdened with an average of $26,600 in student loans

Despite all this, tuition is up 27 percent over the last five years at public colleges and universities. And that’s not a blip but a long-term trend. A Bloomberg analysis found that tuition and fees have exploded by 1,120 percent since 1978, four times faster than the growth in the consumer price index. The average one-year cost at public college for tuition, fees, and room and board is now $17,860. The cost at private four-year schools is $39,518.

The average starting salary for students earning bachelor’s degrees in 2013 is $45,000. The high is $66,000 for engineering students while humanities and social science majors bottom out with average starting salaries of $37,000 – if they find work.

There is a better way.

One option is not to attend college. That worked out okay for Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Michael Dell, and Mark Zuckerberg.

Aaron Clarey gives students useful and entertaining advice in his book, Worthless: The Young Person’s Indispensable Guide to Choosing the Right Major. He lists college degrees “that cost you roughly $30,000 in tuition, their much cheaper replacements, and the savings you’d realize:”

For example, instead of foreign languages, replace it with language software, and save $29,271. Instead of philosophy, replace it by reading Socrates and save $39.980. Replace women’s studies with watching daytime TV and save $30,000. Replace journalism with starting a blog and save $30,000.

Another option is to attend a two-year college. Data posted on for Arkansas, Tennessee, Virginia, Colorado and Texas shows that inexpensive community colleges compare favorably to high-priced private and state four-year colleges. Among the findings:

  • Two-year graduates in health professions from Dyersburg State Community College in Tennessee earn an average of $5,200 more their first year out of school than students who take four years to earn a health professions degree from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville.
  • Students with technical associate degrees in Texas have median first-year earnings of more than $50,000, which is $11,000 more than bachelor’s degree program graduates in Texas.
  • Those who graduate from high-paying certificate programs in Texas such as health care and construction enjoy median first year wages above $70,000, which is $30,000 more than the median bachelor’s degree salary in Texas.
  • The technical and career-oriented Associate of Applied Sciences (AAS) programs in Colorado prepare students with skills wanted by the labor market. Students with AAS degrees take home nearly $7,000 more on average one year after graduation than bachelor’s degree students across the state of Colorado.

Another reason to think long and hard before taking four years and shelling out thousands to earn a bachelor’s degree is what William J. Bennett, co-author of “Is College Worth It?,” call the “nonsense on stilts” found in the humanities and social science departments at many schools.

Sex has supplanted Shakespeare as a dominant element of the English Department curriculum of many schools where professors fail to note Freud’s famous dictum about cigars and find sexual metaphors in almost anything. Many classes are devoted to “gay” and lesbian concerns, including:

  • UCLA: M101A – Lesbian and Gay Literature before Stonewall; M101B – Lesbian and Gay Literature after Stonewall
  • California State University at Northridge: Erotic Literature, Male Sexuality, Gay Literature, and Lesbian Literature and Poetry
  • University of Arkansas: Literature and Eros
  • Dartmouth College: Topics in Literary and Cultural Theory: Feminist Theories, Queer Theories
  • University of Chicago: Problems in Gender Studies
  • Williams College: Queer Literatures in English: An Introduction

Plus, with the possible exception of engineering and math departments, college today is an incubator for virulent liberalism. Radio host and columnist Dennis Prager supplies a few of the “lessons” given to students in exchange for the $20,000 to $50,000 (or more) they or their parents will pay. These articles of liberal faith taught in higher education include:

  • The United States is no better than any other country, and in many areas, it’s worse than many. On the world stage, America is an imperialist country, and domestically, it mistreats its minorities and neglects its poor while discriminating against non-whites.
  • There is no better and no worse in literature and the arts. The reason universities in the past taught Shakespeare, Michelangelo and Bach rather than, let’s say, Guatemalan poets, Sri Lankan musicians and Native American storytellers, was “Eurocentrism.”
  • God is at best a nonissue, and at worst a foolish and dangerous belief.
  • Christianity is largely a history of inquisitions, crusades, oppression and anti-intellectualism. Islam, on the other hand, is “a religion of peace.” Therefore, criticism of Christianity is enlightened, while criticism of Islam is Islamophobia.
  • Israel is a racist state, morally no different from apartheid South Africa.

And so on.

Bennett, a former Secretary of Education under President Ronald Reagan, argues that college is not for everyone.

“Better high schools, trade schools, and apprenticeship programs should take the place of overpriced and underperforming colleges and universities,” he writes in “Is College Worth It?”

The Internet promises to disrupt the bricks-and-mortar education cartel and extend the real benefits of higher educations to millions. Massive open online classes, or MOOCS made their debut in fall 2011 and make courses taught at elite schools like Stanford available for free at sites such as Udacity and Coursera, the latter of which now has three million users. Transparent, market driven, and available to the masses, online learning is bringing competition and efficiency back into higher education.



by Thomas Sowell

While it is not possible to answer all the e-mails and letters from readers, many are thought-provoking, whether those thoughts are positive or negative.

An e-mail from one young man simply asked for the sources of some facts about gun control that were mentioned in a recent column. It is good to check out the facts – especially if you check out the facts on both sides of an issue.

By contrast, another man simply denounced me because of what was said in that column. He did not ask for my sources but simply made contrary assertions, as if his assertions must be correct and therefore mine must be wrong.

He identified himself as a physician, and the claims that he made about guns were claims that had been made years ago in a medical journal – and thoroughly discredited since then. He might have learned that, if we had engaged in a back and forth discussion, but it was clear from his letter that his goal was not debate but denunciation. That is often the case these days.

It is always amazing how many serious issues are not discussed seriously, but instead simply generate assertions and counter-assertions. On television talk shows, people on opposite sides often just try to shout each other down.

There is a remarkable range of ways of seeming to argue without actually producing any coherent argument.

Decades of dumbed-down education no doubt have something to do with this, but there is more to it than that. Education is not merely neglected in many of our schools today, but is replaced to a great extent by ideological indoctrination. Moreover, it is largely indoctrination based on the same set of underlying and unexamined assumptions among teachers and institutions.

If our educational institutions – from the schools to the universities – were as interested in a diversity of ideas as they are obsessed with racial diversity, students would at least gain experience in seeing the assumptions behind different visions and the role of logic and evidence in debating those differences.

Instead, a student can go all the way from elementary school to a Ph.D. without encountering any fundamentally different vision of the world from that of the prevailing political correctness.

Moreover, the moral perspective that goes with this prevailing ideological view is all too often that of people who see themselves as being on the side of the angels against the forces of evil – whether the particular issue at hand is gun control, environmentalism, race or whatever.

A moral monopoly is the antithesis of a marketplace of ideas. One sign of this sense of moral monopoly among the left intelligentsia is that the institutions most under their control – the schools, colleges and universities – have far less freedom of speech than the rest of American society.

While advocacy of homosexuality, for example, is common on college campuses, and listening to this advocacy is often obligatory during freshman orientation, criticism of homosexuality is called “hate speech” that is subject to punishment.

While spokesmen for various racial or ethnic groups are free to vehemently denounce whites as a group for their past or present sins, real or otherwise, any white student who similarly denounces the sins or shortcomings of non-white groups can be virtually guaranteed to be punished, if not expelled.

Even students who do not advocate anything can have to pay a price if they do not go along with classroom brainwashing. The student at Florida Atlantic University who recently declined to stomp on a paper with the word “Jesus” on it, as ordered by the professor, was scheduled for punishment by the university until the story became public and provoked an outcry from outside academia.

This professor’s action might be dismissed as an isolated extreme, but the university establishment’s initial solid backing for him, and its coming down hard on the student, shows that the moral dry rot goes far deeper than one brainwashing professor.

The failure of our educational system goes beyond what they fail to teach. It includes what they do teach, or rather indoctrinate, and the graduates they send out into the world, incapable of seriously weighing alternatives for themselves or for American society.



By Sean Coughlan | BBC News education correspondent

An integral part of the American Dream is under threat – as “downward mobility” seems to be threatening the education system in the United States.

The idea of going to college – and the expectation that the next generation will be better educated and more prosperous than its predecessor – has been hardwired into the ambitions of the middle classes in the United States.

But there are deep-seated worries about whether this upward mobility is going into reverse.

Andreas Schleicher, special adviser on education at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), says the US is now the only major economy in the world where the younger generation is not going to be better educated than the older.

“It’s something of great significance because much of today’s economic power of the United States rests on a very high degree of adult skills – and that is now at risk,” says Mr Schleicher.

“These skills are the engine of the US economy and the engine is stuttering,” says Mr Schleicher, one of the world’s most influential experts on international education comparisons.

Lack of opportunity

The annual OECD education statistics show that only about one in five young adults in the US reaches a higher level of education than their parents – among the lowest rates of upward mobility in the developed world.

carA steelworker in Ohio in 1950 drives away his new Dodge, paid for with a $320 monthly wage. The steelworks have shut and the town is now in the “rust belt”

For a country whose self-image is based on optimism and opportunity, the US is now a country where someone with poorly-educated parents is less likely to reach university than in almost any other industrial country.

It’s the opposite of a Hollywood ending.

And about one in five young adults in the US are now defined in educational terms as “downwardly mobile” – such as children who have graduate parents but who don’t reach university level themselves.

When the global story of higher education is so much about rapid expansion and the race to increase graduates, it’s almost counter-intuitive to find a powerhouse such as the United States on the brink of going backwards.

It’s easy to overlook the dominance of US higher education in the post-war era – or how closely this was linked to its role as an economic, scientific and military superpower.

The US had the first great mass participation university system. The GI Bill, which provided subsidies for a generation of World War II veterans, supported three times as many people as are currently in the entire UK university sector.

An American born in the 1950s was about twice as likely to become a graduate than in the rest of the industrialised world.

As the cars ran off the production lines in Detroit, the graduates were leaving the universities to become part of an expanding middle class.


But the US university system is no longer the only skyscraper on the block. It’s been overtaken by rivals in Asia and Europe.

President Obama has promised that by 2020 the US will regain its position as the global leader in the proportion of young people becoming graduates

Today’s young Americans have a below-average chance of becoming a graduate, compared with other industrialised economies.

The US Education Secretary Arne Duncan, in a speech a few weeks ago, asked how the US had in “the space of a generation” tumbled from first place to 14th in graduation rates.

So what’s gone wrong?

The spiralling cost of higher education in the United States is often cited as a barrier – and the collective student debt has exceeded a trillion dollars.

But Andreas Schleicher argues that a deeper problem is rooted in the inequalities of the school system.

He says that the level of social segregation and the excessive link between home background and success in school is “cutting off the supply” between secondary school and university.

The meritocratic, migrant energy in US culture is no longer operating in the school system.

“If you lose the confidence in the idea that effort and investment in education can change life chances, it’s a really serious issue,” says Mr Schleicher.

Middle-class squeeze

A US Senate committee examined this sense of imperilled optimism, in a hearing called Helping More Young People Achieve the American Dream.

The economist Miles Corak was among the expert witnesses – and he says the US education system reflects a wider picture of the “hollowing out” of the middle class.

“What you’re seeing is the inequality of the labour market being echoed in education.”

Prof Corak describes a polarising jobs market, with the very rich and very poor diverging – and a collapse in jobs in the middle ground, such as clerical or manufacturing jobs.

For such families, sending their children to college had once been a “defining metaphor for the country”.

But it seems that the education system is no longer holding the door open to the brightest and the best, regardless of background.

The Philadelphia-based Pew research group compared the outcomes of young people in 10 western countries, in a project called Does America Promote Mobility as Well as Other Countries?

It found the US had the strongest link between family wealth and educational success – and the lowest mobility. Advantage and disadvantage were being further amplified in education.

Research manager Diana Elliott says in the US “income has a pervasive hold on mobility”.


Another study by Pew, against the backdrop of recession, examined the phenomenon of downward mobility and found that a third of adults classified as middle class would slip out of that status during their adult life.

While the US has slipped down in graduate numbers, individual universities remain at the top of international university league tables

It reflected a modern sense of insecurity, where families could no longer assume their children would be as prosperous. In fact, about a quarter of children born into the middle class were expected to slip downwards.

None of this matches the image of the US as a place for fresh starts and self-made millionaires. Modern American history almost assumes an upward incline.

But evidence of this downward drift has been gathering in recent years. A study by the University of California, Berkeley, showed that school leavers in California in 1970 were more likely to stay on to higher education than their counterparts in 2000.

In terms of international education, that’s like finding out that athletes were running faster 40 years ago.

Such current difficulties should not be mistaken for any kind of end-of-empire zeitgeist, says Philip Altbach, director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College.

Instead he says it’s a more practical question of money. The rising cost of higher education is a deterrent. And there is a wider question of finance for higher education at state level.

He also says there is another “dirty little secret” of US higher education – that too many people who enrol at university fail to graduate – which pushes down the graduation rate in international comparisons.

Bouncing back

Andreas Schleicher also says there are reasons for optimism. Almost more than any other country, he says the US has the financial resources, the capacity and the flexibility to change course quickly and to catch up.

There are already plans to recover lost ground. President Barack Obama has been re-elected with a promise that the US will regain its global first place in graduation rates by 2020.

And as part of this drive, the American Association of Community Colleges, in a project called Reclaiming the American Dream, has an ambitious plan to create five million more college places.

But it’s an aspiration against a gloomy background.

“The American dream has stalled,” the association’s report says, describing a society where typical family incomes having been falling for more than a decade.

“A child born poor in the United States today is more likely to remain poor than at any time in our history. Many other nations now outperform us in educational attainment and economic mobility, and the American middle class shrinks before our eyes.”

It’s as if It’s A Wonderful Life had been remade – without the happy ending.



Charlotte Thompson Iserbyt served as the head of policy at the Department of Education during the first administration of President Ronald Reagan. While working there she discovered a long term strategic plan by the tax exempt foundations to transform America from a nation of rugged individualists and problem solvers to a country of servile, brainwashed minions who simply regurgitate whatever they’re told.

Part one of our exclusive interview with Iserbyt breaks down how conditioning/training under a corporate agenda has replaced traditional education, leading to a deliberate dumbing down of Americans. Iserbyt further explains how Reagan signed agreements merging the U.S. and Soviet systems under the United Nations banner, turning over education and many other areas of public policy to global control.

This 74 minute exposé is a must see for anyone who wants to truly know why the education system is deliberately crafted to produce human drones with no critical thinking whose only skills are to be subservient, trust authority and follow orders.


Visit Iserbyt’s website at





Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
March 20, 2013

inBloom is a database funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that has been given permission by school board officials in several states such as Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, North Carolina, Massachusetts and Louisiana to use personal information on students in an effort to create a national database.

Student’s names, addresses, test scores, learning disabilities, attendance and disciplinary records will be uploaded into this $100 million database for use by private corporations contracted by individual school districts.

BMGF collaborated with Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp to develop this electronic portal. Federal grants have helped assist in the partnering of inBloom to begin categorizing and storing this personal data in October of this year.

inBloom will give city officials, educators, students and their families the ability to view student information to facilitate the production of teaching tools such as text books to tailor them to the specific needs of students.



Education officials claim that this data will not be sold to corporations, however it is an outright invasion of privacy and should this data be “compromised” there would be no recourse.

State officials contend that they already compile information to create student demographics and give corporations permission to review the data. inBloom is promised to be restricted to educational corporations that supply teaching materials for students.

inBloom would like to have specific data on every student; claiming that each one “is an individual, with unique knowledge, abilities and learning needs. But the technology used in most K-12 schools today can make providing personalized instruction time-consuming and cumbersome for teachers.”

The purpose of inBloom is to correctly adhere to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) which “have set new goals for student learning” and require “effective tools and resources to ensure students meet those goals.”

They claim to work “on the behalf of the public good” while endeavoring to violate student’s rights to privacy by storing sensitive data on each student. The coercion between inBloom and state education departments have created a precedent beyond the reach of parents of students who want to opt-out of the initiative.

The CCSS is an initiative sponsored by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. For the last two decades the accountability movement has held students under the thumb of test achievement that is used to demonstrate the CCSS that American citizens are expected to know to become successful in the workplace.

By tracking students, inBloom offers educators progress suggestions while school districts can assess each student’s ability to comply with cookie-cutter programs and adherence to national standards which supersede local parameters.

By monitoring students, inBloom can:

  • Offer states and districts secure technology infrastructure to integrate data, services and applications that work together to support personalized learning
  • Partner with education technology companies, content providers and developers to support the creation of products compatible with this infrastructure
  • Work with states and districts to help them use this infrastructure to support educators and students

Technological providers have collaborated with inBloom to data mine students with the assistance of state education officials. Those involved include:

  • Amazon
  • Dell
  • PBS
  • Scholastic

inBloom claims that in order to have “personalized education” student must submit to having their personal information stored by their corporation and given to education corporations that provide “curriculum content and tools”.



In 2011, The Shared Learning Collaborative (SLC) which connects states, districts, educators, philanthropic foundations and educational content providers to utilize technology.

The SLC “aims to accelerate the progress of U.S. public schools toward personalized learning by creating a set of shared technology services that will help existing and future instructional technology investments in states, districts and schools work better together.”

inBloom is “an independent, nonprofit organization” that was designed to carry out the vision of the SLC with funding from BMGF and the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Under the CCSS, new standards of learning have been implemented with the expressed purpose of dumbing down the population. These include:

  • Basic knowledge of the “classics” without a focus on reading comprehension
  • Reinvention of writing skill to focus on keyboard and typing skills for college and career readiness
  • Learning how to speak improperly by integrating slang and other alternative modes of communication
  • Using media as a form of learning to train students to become dependent on mainstream media for their information while de-emphasizing personal research and independent thought
  • Replacing cursive writing with courses on keyboard and focus on improving typing skills
  • Replacing cognitive thought facilitated by mathematics with the broad belief system that illegitimates logic and reasoning

CCSS removes the necessity for teaching students about the Constitutional Republic we live in while replacing these facts with globalization as a benchmark of across-the-board learning between K-12.

National standards for learning have facilitated the systematic dumbing down of Americans while claiming to represent the highest policy for education. By redefining what the student needs in the coming employment temperament, children are trained to be workers who will contribute to the workforce rather than encourage independent thought which would be combative to creating a working slave society.

Globalization reinstitutes students to have more concern with events happening in other parts of the world, rather than pursuing the continuance of our Constitutional Republic.


March 5, 2013

Lenore Skenazy, a columnist, author, and reality show host who gained national notoriety when she let her then-9-year-old son take the New York City Subway home alone, talks to Katherine Albrecht about the school system conditioning our kids to become loyal subjects.




By John W. Whitehead | The Rutherford Institute

OCTOBER 20, 2012

“[P]ublic school reform is now justified in the dehumanizing language of national security, which increasingly legitimates the transformation of schools into adjuncts of the surveillance and police state… students are increasingly subjected to disciplinary apparatuses which limit their capacity for critical thinking, mold them into consumers, test them into submission, strip them of any sense of social responsibility and convince large numbers of poor minority students that they are better off under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice system than by being valued members of the public schools.”—Professor Henry Giroux

For those hoping to better understand how and why we arrived at this dismal point in our nation’s history, where individual freedoms, privacy and human dignity have been sacrificed to the gods of security, expediency and corpocracy, look no farther than America’s public schools.

Once looked to as the starting place for imparting principles of freedom and democracy to future generations, America’s classrooms are becoming little more than breeding grounds for compliant citizens. The moment young people walk into school, they increasingly find themselves under constant surveillance: they are photographed, fingerprinted, scanned, x-rayed, sniffed and snooped on. Between metal detectors at the entrances, drug-sniffing dogs in the hallways and surveillance cameras in the classrooms and elsewhere, many of America’s schools look more like prisons than learning facilities.

Add to this the epidemic of arresting schoolchildren and treating them as if they are dangerous criminals, and you have the makings of a perfect citizenry for our emerging police state—one that can be easily cowed, controlled, and directed.



American students are educated to be consumers

By Henry A. Giroux and Kourosh Ziabari | Global Research

American philosopher and cultural critic Henry A. Giroux believes that under the influence of the government, the higher education system in the United States has moved toward silencing progressive and alternative voices which try to challenge the U.S. militarism and its expansionistic policies. He also believes that the American students are not trained to be critical thinkers.

“I think many students are weary of America’s expansionist policies but there is not enough dissent among college students over such policies at the present time to actually challenge them. Many American students are educated largely to be consumers not critical thinkers and those who do escape the strangulating grip of a poisonous market driven neo-liberalism are suffering under the burden of debt while facing a future in which they will be underemployed or unemployed,” said Prof. Giroux in an exclusive interview with Tehran Times conducted last week.

Prof. Henry A. Giroux is a cultural critic and one of the founding theorists of critical pedagogy who is best known for his contributions to cultural studies, youth studies, higher education and critical theory.

Seven books written by Giroux have been chosen as significant books of the year by the “American Educational Studies Association.” He has authored 33 books the latest of which is “Twilight of the Social: Resurgent Publics in the Age of Disposability” which was published in 2012.

He has served as the Director of the Waterbury Forum in Education and Cultural Studies. He moved to McMaster University in May 2004, where he currently holds the Global Television Network Chair in English and Cultural Studies and currently runs the Public Intellectual project. Giroux is also a member of Truthout’s Board of Directors.

What follows is the text of Tehran Times’ interview with Prof. Giroux.

Q: What the majority of people around the world have heard about the United States is that it is a beacon of freedom in which everybody, is free to express his viewpoints, even if that certain viewpoint is not much favorable according to the mainstream discourse. What’s the reality? Are the leftist professors in the universities, for example, really free to express their unconventional opinions, in such cases as the special Israeli-American relationship, or other similar matters?

A: Academic dissent has been under attack for a long time in the United States. Its more notable moments came in the 1920s, the 1950s, and more recently after 9/11. What is new is that right wing elite, religious fundamentalists, and corporate groups have changed their strategy in limiting dissent. Instead of simply attacking, firing, and shaming intellectuals who criticize mainstream policies such as the Israeli-American relations–though that still happens–the more sophisticated approach is to prevent such intellectuals from getting tenure, influencing who gets hired, and finding ways to actually shape what is taught in the classroom.

For instance, some major donors are now demanding that particular books be read in classes. In one case, a donor demanded that Ayn Rand’s right wing book, “Atlas Shrugged,” be required reading in the class. In other cases, billionaire and mega corporate donors are trying to shape curriculum and hiring procedures as part of their gifts to higher education. This is not simply reactionary but undermines every noble principle that education embodies.

The other strategy is to increase the number of non-tenured professors in the profession so as to not only make them powerless in setting policy but also to keep them suspended in a state of fear over what they say in order not to jeopardize their paltry paying jobs. Over 70 percent of academics in higher education is either on a non-tenured track or is hired part-time. This is a form of indentured labor that undercuts a culture of questioning, dissent, and makes a joke out of academic freedom. As higher education becomes more expensive, corporatized, and devalued as a social good, there is also less and less room to teach subjects or create and sustain academic fields not tied directly to occupational training. In this instance, training is substituted for any viable form of critical education and the formative culture necessary for an educated citizenry withers.

Q: What do the new generation of American students and the foreign students who come to the United States for pursuing their studies, think about the U.S. foreign policy? Has the academia begun to challenge the American militarism, its hegemony and expansionistic policies? Does debate on such subjects take place in the American universities smoothly?

A: I think many students are weary of America’s expansionist policies but there is not enough dissent among college students over such policies at the present time to actually challenge them. Many American students are educated largely to be consumers not critical thinkers and those who do escape the strangulating grip of a poisonous market driven neo-liberalism are suffering under the burden of debt while facing a future in which they will be underemployed or unemployed. The present bears down on many American students as a burden as inequality and social disparities grow day by day. America has become the land of downward mobility for an entire generation of young people and not simply for a few. Under such circumstances, time becomes a burden and dissent a luxury, though within the last few years dissent has been growing. This movement is promising, but it does not have the reach and scope to make a real difference in power and control by the rich, mega corporations and financial elite. But its success remains to be tested.

Q: One of your perennial concerns, as reflected in your writings, has been social injustice. The United States last year witnessed the most unprecedented nationwide protests at the growing rift between the rich and poor and the social inequality in the framework of the Occupy Wall Street movement. What do you think about this movement and its achievements? Has it realized the objectives it was pursuing from the outset?

A: I think many young people in the Occupy Movement are changing the nature of the public conversation about politics, power, pedagogy, and hope. Young people are rejecting a future of debt, a society dominated by market values, militarism, a survival of the fittest ethic, and finance capital.

What they have made clear is that in order for democracy to become meaningful, all citizens, old and young, should be equally entitled, if not equally empowered, to shape the society in which they live. This is a message we heard from the brave students fighting tuition hikes and the destruction of civil liberties and social provisions in the Occupy Wall Street movement. The Wall Street Movement has already won a decisive battle in producing a new language for how to talk about inequality, class and racial injustice, and the shape of a real democracy. For such a movement to succeed, progressives, educators, workers, middle-class professionals, and others need listen to the Wall Street Movement and young people all over the world who are insisting that the relationship between knowledge and power can be emancipatory, that their histories and experiences matter, and that what they say and do counts in their struggle to unlearn dominating privileges, productively reconstruct their relations with others, and transform, when necessary, the world around them. More importantly, they need to join students in engaging in a practice of freedom that points to new and radical forms of pedagogies that have a direct link to building social movements in and out of the colleges and universities.

Q: What’s your analysis of the popular uprisings in the Arab countries of the Middle East? The whole scenario started with a Tunisian street vendor putting himself on fire in protest at the humiliation he had suffered, and the economic difficulties he and his family were subject to. Then the protests were extended to the rest of Arab world and engulfed the whole Middle East. Can we interpret these upheavals in the light of a set of revolutions aimed at realizing confiscated political, social and economic rights?

A: All of these protests emerge out of different religious, economic, political, and historical situations. What they have in common is the demand for an expansion of religious, social, political, and personal rights. They collectively signify a historical watershed in which the burning desire for democracy can no longer be contained. Young people, as a result of the new electronic and screen technologies, have immediate access to modes of knowledge, values, and social relations that point to the possibility of a future free of economic, political, and social injustice. Ideas can no longer be contained as they were under modernity. Borders are collapsing in the symbolic sense, knowledge flows, passions bleed into different bodies, public spheres, populations, and nations. Domination and domestic state terrorism can no longer isolate itself from the rest of the world. Democracy can no longer be contained, hidden behind walls, and contained by real and symbolic weapons of mass destruction. Democracy has become an aphrodisiac and tonic merging passion and a kind of wakefulness to the possibility of a new future, a new life, and new hopes. 

Q: In your writings, you’ve spoken of the concept of economic Darwinism and called it one of the root causes of unbridled individualism which leads to the erosion of social responsibility, public values and community. Would you please share with us your insight on this concept and the impact it has had on the American lives?

A: Social Darwinism is the value system that drives the American economy. It is an ethic dominated by a war against all ethos which celebrates a radical individualism, extreme form of competitiveness, and separates actions from moral considerations. It is a poisonous worldview that views politics as an extension of war. In essence it is a form of domestic terrorism. It is a form of terrorism because it abstracts economics from ethics and social costs, makes a mockery of democracy, works to dismantle the welfare state, thrives on militarization, undermines any public sphere not governed by market values, and transforms people into commodities. Neo-liberalism’s rigid emphasis on unfettered individualism, competitiveness and flexibility displaces compassion, sharing and a concern for the welfare of others. In doing so, it dissolves crucial social bonds and undermines the profound nature of social responsibility and its ensuing concern for others. In removing individuals from broader social obligations, it not only tears up social solidarities, it also promotes a kind of individualism that is almost pathological in its disdain for public goods, community, social provisions, and public values. Given its tendency to instrumentalize knowledge, it exhibits mistrust for thoughtfulness, complexity, and critical dialogue and in doing so contributes to a culture of stupidity and cruelty in which the dominant ethic is organized around the discourse of war and a survival of the fittest mentality. Neo-liberalism is the antithesis of democracy.

The consequences of this worldview are everywhere in American society. Deregulation, privatization, atomization, and commodification now rule American institutions turning over the commanding heights of power to mega corporations, the defense industry, and ideological fundamentalists. America is a hugely rich country marked by massive poverty, inequality in wealth and income, and a political system controlled by big money. Its cultural apparatuses are controlled by mega corporations and its political system is now largely controlled by the apostles of finance and militarism. It is a country that is on the brink of a very dark historical period in which the winds of authoritarianism are posed to destroy all remnants of a claim to democracy.

Q: What do you think about the function of the multinational corporate media, their interests and their long-term objectives? Is it possible to have a sincere and ethical journalism while there are certain people in the power hierarchy who specify the direction and set the policies of the mainstream media?

A: A democracy cannot survive without a formative culture to support it. That culture is shaped in the commanding educational apparatuses in which knowledge is produced and subjects and identities are constructed. The mainstream media in the U.S. is largely controlled by 5 mega corporations that have abandoned their responsibility to act as a fourth estate, to make power accountable and offer critical analyses of American foreign and domestic policy. Instead, we have a mainstream media that trades in either an endless commercial bombardment of the American public, raises an insipid celebratory culture to the status of a state religion, and substitutes the obligations of real citizenship for the demands of consumerism and shopping. On the other hand, the new media is increasingly providing new public spaces for oppositional voices to be heard from a wide variety of sources, ranging from students and teachers to labor organizers and a range of new public intellectuals. There is no hope for the mainstream media. It has sold its soul to the market place and has largely become an inept source of legitimation for corporate and political sovereignty.

Q: What’s your viewpoint regarding the gradual decline of the U.S. imperial power and the weakening of its political, economic hegemony over the developing world? It seems that such countries as Brazil, China and Russia are emerging as serious contenders of the American economy and political power. Would you please share your viewpoint on that with us?

A: There are many other people who can speak to this issue more forcefully than I can. I am thinking particularly of Noam Chomsky, Andrew Bacevich, and Glenn Greenwald, among others. But what is clear is the U.S. is now facing a political and economic challenge unlike anything it has faced in the past. Politics is now local and power is global and that means that the U.S. has no way to challenge, within the usual rules, the power of multinational corporations that now write the rules for domestic and foreign policy. Moreover, this power is global and has no allegiance to the nation state except to use it to further its own financial interests. Hence, the full-fledged attack on the welfare state, women, minorities of class and color, public servants, and the institutions that do not buy completely into market driven values. As the power of the state crumbles, the state is reconfigured largely as a punishing state used increasingly to criminalize the behavior of those caught in dire social problems such as homelessness, debt servitude, unemployment, poverty, and various disabilities. Moreover, the model of the prison and its culture are seeping and spreading into schools where young people are now arrested for trivial behaviors such as dress code violations. How can a country that substitutes prisons for schools, revels in a culture of massive inequality and cruelty, and arrests huge numbers of its citizens make any claim on the future or for that matter even have one?

Q: And finally, what’s your prediction for President Obama’s upcoming second term? Will he yield to the pressures by Israeli lobby and comply with their demands in such cases as a possible military strike against Iran, the continued blockade of the Gaza Strip and settlement constructions, etc? Is there any way for Obama to evade being pushed by Israel?

A: One would hope that Obama would show some courage in his second term and rule according to the precepts of justice rather than political pragmatism. I think that it is important to note that during his first time Obama moved the United States closer to the dictates of an authoritarian state. He initiated the National Defense Authorization Act, which allows him to kidnap and hold indefinitely without judicial rights anyone deemed a terrorist (a vague and abusive term); he has implanted targeted assassinations, which has included at least two American citizens living abroad; he has implemented what might be called an unaccountable surveillance state, and he has expanded the use of sinister drones to conduct a new and more ruthless type of warfare, which more often than not has resulted in the needless killing of innocent civilians. Obama has helped to create a Golden Age for executioners, revealing the grisly and gruesome side of state power committed to death through the use of cold, calculating machines run by automatons. Obama is not a liberal. He is not even progressive, but a conservative centrist who leans heavily towards the extremist elements in the Republican Party. He is inflexible around Israel’s repressive policies towards Palestinians and he has done nothing to address what it would mean to bring peace to the region.

But change is not made by people in power. It is often made by people in the streets. It is made by social movements who refuse to become the excess, disappeared, and disposable populations produced by authoritarian regimes. I am not optimistic but at the same time history is open and I would hope that as the Occupy Movement and other progressive social movements develop in the U.S. under the strain of severe political and economic conditions that Obama may find his footing and exhibit the kind of moral and political courage that is necessary to dismantle the allegiance to militarism that now characterizes its expansionist policies.





by Ron Paul

A common feature of authoritarian regimes is the criminalization of alternatives to government-controlled education. Dictators recognize the danger that free thought poses to their rule, and few things promote the thinking of “unapproved” thoughts like an education controlled by parents instead of the state. That is why the National Socialist (Nazi) government of Germany outlawed homeschooling in 1938.

Sadly, these Nazi-era restrictions on parental rights remain the law in Germany, leaving parents who wish greater control over their children’s education without options. That is why in 2006 Uwe and Hannalore Romeike, a German couple who wanted to homeschool their three children for religious reasons, sought asylum in the United States. Immigration judge Lawrence Burman upheld their application for asylum, recognizing that the freedom of parents to homeschool was a “basic human right.”

Unfortunately, the current US administration does not see it that way, and has announced that it is appealing Judge Burman’s decision. If the administration is successful, the Romeikes could be sent back to Germany where they will be forced to send their children to schools whose teaching violates their religious beliefs. If they refuse, they face huge fines, jail time, or even the loss of custody of their children!

The Administration’s appeal claims that the federal government has the constitutional authority to ban homeschooling in all fifty states. The truth is, the Constitution gives the federal government no power to control any aspect of education. Furthermore, parents who, like the Romeikes, have a religious motivation for homeschooling should be protected by the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.

The federal government’s hostility to homeschooling is shared by officials at all levels of government. Despite the movement’s success in legalizing homeschooling in every state, many families are still subjected to harassment by local officials. The harassment ranges from “home visits” by child protective agencies to criminal prosecution for violating truancy laws.

Every American who values liberty should support the homeschoolers’ cause. If the government can usurp parental authority over something as fundamental as the education of their children, there is almost no area of parenthood off limits to government interference.

Homeschooling has proven to be an effective means of education. We are all familiar with the remarkable academic achievements, including in national spelling bees and other competitions, by homeshcooled children. In addition, homeschooled students generally fare better than their public school educated peers on all measures of academic performance.

It makes sense that children do better when their education is controlled by those who know their unique needs best, rather than by a federal bureaucrat. A strong homeschooling movement may also improve other forms of education. If competition improves goods and services in other areas of life, why wouldn’t competition improve education? A large and growing homeschooling movement could inspire public and private schools to innovate and improve.

When the government interferes with a parent’s ability to choose the type of education that is best for their child, it is acting immorally and in manner inconsistent with a free society. A government that infringes on the rights of homeschooling will eventually infringe on the rights of all parents. Homeschooled children are more likely to embrace the philosophy of freedom, and to join the efforts to restore liberty. In fact, I would not be surprised if the future leaders of the liberty movement where homeschooled.

I believe so strongly in the homeschooling movement that I have just announced my own curriculum for homeschooling families. Please visit this revolutionary new project at





Here, you and your children can get an education in liberty like no other. I invite parents to take courses and participate on forums — to get the education they never had. Parents do not pay for the individual courses that they purchase for their children.

Here, students learn the basics of Western Civilization and Western liberty — how it was won, how it is being lost, and how it will be restored. (Not can . . . will.)

Students also learn the basics of American history, the United States Constitution, and American geography.

They get two courses on free market economics. They get two courses on government, including a how-to course on reclaiming America, one county at a time.

Students get mathematics, either through calculus or statistics or both.

They get the basics of science: earth science, biology, chemistry, and physics.

They also learn how to start a home-based business. Here is the story . . . in under five minutes.



New York Times bestselling author Tom Woods introduces his new website,, which teaches the history and economics you didn’t learn in school.





Join today! Learn real history and economics from the liberty movement’s best scholars, get your questions answered by the experts, and become a skillful defender of liberty!



Please visit for more information.


Other subjects include Algebra 1 and 2, Basic Math, Trigonometry, Pre-Calculus, Pre-Algebra, Calculus, Statistics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Organic Chemistry, and Computer Science.

-All lectures are broken down by individual topics
-No more wasted time
-Just search and jump directly to the answer







by Linda Schrock Taylor

When I read headlines like “School District Returns to Traditional, Methodical, Instruction,” I will have some hope for American schools, but for now too many in the educational community treat schooling failures as merely bubbles that can be popped, blown away or ignored; too many educators choose solutions that are more dream than substance. For far too many decades now, costly fads have been the preferred curricular choices and while low-scoring (See here) administrators and teachers retain control of the schools, rarely-to-never will there be any decision to restructure failing policies and retrain teachers to provide appropriate and skilled instruction to all students.

An interesting article was up at Drudge, but before I could type “Phonics,” the article was taken down. How odd. The piece may be evidence of yet another dreamy tactic for dealing with real problems within the educational mega-structure.

New York City To Try Longer School Day In 20 Middle Schools. NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – The school day is about to get longer for some New York City school kids – and we’re not talking a couple of minutes. It’s about to be two and a half hours longer. If scores go up, the plan could be extended city-wide, CBS 2’s Marcia Kramer reported Monday.”

The article quotes City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who apparently has some sentence structure problems, “It’s where the achievement gap really seems to grow, in New York City about three-fourths of seventh and eighth graders. Three-fourths of seventh and eighth graders do not read at a proficient level.” Hopefully, the reporter just misquoted her.

My instant reaction was to think of (Is it not still running in the background?) Hilary Clinton and Marc Tucker’s plan to get kids…heck, to get entire communities!…into the confines of their local schools for that “Cradle to Grave” ‘education’ + supervision by STATE-indoctrinated agents and authorities. (Reading suggestion: None Dare Call It Education by Dr. John Stormer)

I agree that school days in America are too short, cheating children of educational time and complicating life for working parents, but what besides resentment can be gained by increasing school days by 2½ hours in one fell swoop? I am especially concerned because I have no reason to trust that the additional 2½ hours will be spent in carefully reconstructing proper and solid foundations for learning so that the students actually will be able to become successful in all subject areas.

The most important foundation for learning in America is the ability to precisely understand, speak, use, and read English. Most often, poor students neither speak nor read English accurately and fluently. Unless students are taught phonics and how to use phonetic skills to break the phonetic code in which the phonetic language of English is recorded phonetically…individuals of all ages generally face insurmountable educational hurdles in all academic areas. But for some inexplicable reason, this level and type of logic will confuse and anesthetize most of those who passed through teacher training programs. The rational graduates have either left the schools, physically and/or spiritually, having quit or retired; or remain in the schools but spend their days ultimately frustrated and bitterly unhappy.

I would very much like to explain to school board members across America that accurate, complete, methodical phonics instruction not only teaches students of all ages to read, but is the only way to teach anyone to read a phonetic language like English. Throughout my long teaching career, I repeatedly advised school administrators and school boards to drop the Failing-Fad-Following and return to phonics instruction but only one school, Northern Michigan Christian in McBain, was willing to listen to the Truth and decide to change their entire approach to reading instruction based on that unbreakable Law of Phonetic Languages. The results have been remarkable. My tide-turning question to that school board may have been, “Why would any parent pay $X,X00 a year for their child not to learn to read at NMC…when that same child can…not learn to read over at ‘public’ for free?”

Not only do individuals learn to read a phonetic language once they are taught the phonetics of that particular language, they quickly develop the skills to do so. Remember “Dick & Jane” and the devastation that the sight word, word-calling method brought to America? It is with frustration and despair that I report the following: “Dick & Jane” have not left the premises. “Dick & Jane” have simply been renamed “Dibbles, Memorize & Hurry.” The misbegotten method is still firmly entrenched in the collective psyche of the American mis-educational cartel. (Aside: See the difference between the reading levels of WW-II recruits [pre-sight words] and Korean War recruits [post sight words] here.)

No, Reyna Franco, there is not “…a great need for additional education and resources,” unless those additions would consist of correct methods with tried and true curriculum.

Believe me, ‘longer days’ spent without the receipt of the right kind of corrective reading instruction will quickly become frustrating and counterproductive ‘endless days’.

Other reading:

Education’s Dunces and Whipping Boys

What Do They Think Will Happen?



by Margot Peppers | Daily Mail

A mother who home-schools her ten children in Montgomery, Alabama, has opened up about how six of them began their college degrees by the age of 12.

Those of the Harding siblings who have already graduated from college have gone on to become a doctor, an architect, a spacecraft designer and a master’s student. Another two – 12- and 14-years-old – are still finishing up their degrees.

But despite the Hardings’ incredible achievements at such young ages, their parents – Mona Lisa and Kip – insist they are a family of ‘average folks’ who simply find and cultivate their children’s passions early on.

Hannah was the first to take her college entrance exams – at the young age of 12. ‘I didn’t expect to pass,’ the 24-yead-old told ‘So I started crying, because I was thinking, “Now what?”‘

She passed the exam and, at just 17, became Auburn University Montgomery’s youngest ever graduate, obtaining a BS in mathematics.

Hannah went on to get master’s degrees in math and mechanical engineering, and she was designing spacecraft by the age of 22.

The other Harding siblings, spurred on by their parents’ encouragement and their older sister’s success, were quick to follow suit.

Seth, 12, is the latest to begin at college. At seven, he announced that he wanted to be a military archaeologist. He is now a freshman at Faulkner University, where he studies the Middle Ages.

Just down the hall is Seth’s 14-year-old brother Keith, a college senior with a passion for music who is studying finite mathematics.

His ambitious younger sister Katrinnah, ten, plans on taking her college exams next year.

Still, despite the exceptional talents of her brood, Mona Lisa – who studied to become a nurse before staying at home to educate her kids – said: ‘I don’t have any brilliant children. I’m not brilliant.’

The mother-of-ten also explained that her husband, who flew helicopters in the army and didn’t graduate college until 25, is not brilliant either. ‘We’re just average folks,’ she insists.

People who know them, however, would beg to differ.

Seth’s assistant professor Grover Plunkett, for instance, said of the 12-year-old, who lives at home rather than in a dorm: ‘He’s got the highest average in the class.’



‘Big Brother’ mentality ‘has no place in a free society’

By World Net Daily

The nation’s leading homeschooling organization is warning parents that the federal government is advancing its aim of identifying and tracking students throughout their school careers, from birth through college graduation.

In an online statement, William Estrada, director of federal relations for the Home School Legal Defense Association, acknowledged statistics on student achievement are helpful to researchers and parents.

But there’s really no need for the government to track such data, he insisted.

“A national database of student-specific data is very concerning for many reasons,” he wrote. “The national databases being created now include detailed records of students, including race, gender, birth information, learning disabilities, detailed academic records, and much more. This information is being collected soon after birth, all the way through graduation from college.”

Estrada said the more personal the information, “the greater the danger to the student’s privacy and safety if the data is breached.”

“Will certain data make it harder for students to get into higher education? Will it be disclosed to government employers, or even private employers?” he asked.

He said HSLDA believes “each student is unique, with far more to offer society than just the sum of their academic years.”

“Government tracking students from soon after birth until they graduate from college is Orwellian and seems like a ‘Big Brother’ mentality, and has no place in a free society,” he said.

Estrada said his organization takes the position “there are very little reasons for the government to track student-specific data.”

WND reported just days ago on a massive $100 million public-school database spearheaded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The files already contain details such as name, address, Social Security number, attendance, test scores, homework completion, career goals, learning disabilities, hobbies and attitudes on millions of public school students.

Claiming that the national database will enhance education, the main funder of the project, the Gates Foundation, entered the joint venture with the Carnegie Corporation of New York and school officials from a number of states. After Rupert Murdoch’s Amplify Education, a division of News Corp, spent more than a year developing the system’s infrastructure, the Gates Foundation delivered it to inBloom ‒ a nonprofit corporation recently established to run the database.

Estrada said that project is one that the organization is continuing to check out.

“This database has the ability to track students, their educational progress and a vast degree of personal information about every student. This database is run and operated by a company called inBloom, and nine states (Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, New York, North Carolina, Massachusetts) have already uploaded student information into this database,” he said.

Already, he added, New York City is also providing details on homeschool students.

Estrada said HSLDA long has opposed a national database of student-specific information.

“We believe that such national databases threaten the privacy of students, could be abused by government officials or business interests that may gain access to the data, threaten the safety of young people if their data is breached, and are not necessary in order to educate young people.”

He said the federal government’s strategy appears to require statewide databases to qualify for federal grants. Those state information files “are aligned between the states, and … are becoming a de facto national database.”

“We believe that as national databases grow, it will become increasingly difficult to protect the personal information of homeschool and private school students,” he wrote.

Estrada explained much of the impetus comes from the 2009 stimulus bill that created the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund program of nearly $54 billion under which the Department of Education grants money to states in exchange for student databases.

The stimulus granted $4.35 billion to “Race to the Top,” which calls for “data systems that measure student growth and success.”

“Under RTTT, states that receive the grants are required to set up data systems where every public school student from early childhood programs to college will be identified in a system by a bar code showing student enrollment, demographics, transfers, teachers, test records, and transcripts,” Estrada explained.

In fact, the legislation specifies no database, no grant.

The links between states and the federal agency granting money “are leading to a de facto national database,” he said.

“As a result, we are seeing before our eyes the creation of a ‘national database’ where every single public school student’s personal information and academic history will be stored,” he said, even though federal law bans national student databases.

Efforts such as the Gates strategy already are stirring controversy.

“It’s a lot of smoke and mirrors,” contended Electronic Privacy Law Center Administrative Counsel Khaliah Barnes in a statement to the New York Daily News. “What happens if a company using the data is compromised? What happens if the company goes out of business? We don’t know the answers.”

To counter Gates’ school database project,, which addresses the rights and responsibilities of the basic family unit, urges Americans to sign a petition supporting the Parental Rights Amendment, which will codify the fundamental right of parents in the U.S. Constitution to direct the upbringing, education and care of their children.




by Dale Hurd | Spread Liberty News

APRIL 30, 2013

Recently, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said that home schooling is not a parent’s right. It is a statement some are saying should frighten American parents.

Nations like Germany and Sweden show that when governments take away home schooling rights, it’s a slippery slope to no parental rights.

America the Refuge or Not

The Romeike family came to the United States from Germany five years ago hoping to find refuge. They wanted to home-school their children in freedom and a federal judge granted them asylum.

But now the Obama administration has been trying to deport them, arguing that home schooling is not a right. The case is currently before a federal appeals court.

Uwe and Hannelore Romeike began home schooling in Germany because they didn’t want their children exposed to things like witchcraft and graphic sex education that are taught in German schools.

“There were stories where [school children] were encouraged to ask the devil for help instead of God and actually the devil would help (in the story),” Uwe said.

“When we found out what’s in the textbooks, it’s exactly the opposite from what the Bible tells us and teaches us, and we wanted to protect [our children],” his wife Hannelore added.

But home schooling is illegal in Germany, except in rare cases. And many home schooling parents are persecuted with fines, jail, or the loss of their children.

Homeschoolers Going Into Exile?

Most home-schoolers in America are left alone. But what if state politicians and the federal government started to move against it?

Two of the worst nations for home-schoolers are Germany and Sweden. If you want to see what things might be like if home schooling was banned in America, travel to Sweden, where the government controls education and the home schooling movement has been crushed.

In fact, the head of the Swedish Homeschooling Association, Jonas Himmelstrand, had to take his family into exile. They fled to Finland.

“We’re in exile. We were forced out of our country and that makes a stronger impact than I can imagine,” he told CBN News. “This was our country. This was where we had our friends and business relationships and a whole lot of things and now we’re pushed away from it.”

Attorney Michael Donnelly, the Homeschool Legal Defense Association, called the situation “incredible for a nation like Sweden that calls itself a free nation, a democracy, so to speak.”

Ruby Harrold-Claesson, President of the Nordic Committee for Human Rights, went even further, branding Sweden a dictatorship where social workers tell parents what to do.

“Sweden claims to be a democracy but it’s far from it. It’s a dictatorship,” he said. “You have the social workers dictating how people are to live. You’re not supposed to be different. You’re not supposed to be different from anyone else in Sweden. Everyone is supposed to be uniform. They want to have these cookie cutter children.”

Claesson is also the lawyer representing Christer and Annie Johansson, who have lost custody of their son Domenic, because of home schooling. After Domenic was abducted by Swedish officials, Annie’s health began to fail.

Christer said the stress of the ordeal is killing his wife.

“If we cannot solve this issue soon, Domenic won’t have a mother anymore,” he said.

Russia, A Home Schooling Haven

Nations like Germany and Sweden could learn a thing or two about parent’s rights from, of all places, Russia, which is one of the freest nations in which to homeschool.

“We have complete freedom of home education in Russia, in terms of legality,” Pavel Parfentiev, a family rights advocate in Russia, said.

“The Russian Federation is sort of a champion of human rights in this particular area, so of course I think it is a good example for both Germany and Sweden where home educators are persecuted,” he said.

Among the persecuted, German home-schooler Juergen Dudek has been taken to court every year for the past 10 years by the German Jugendamt, or Youth Office.

“The Youth Office, I used to call it the ‘Gestapo for the Young.’ As soon as they step in, as soon as they get hold of you, you’ve really got problems,” Dudek said.

German homeschooler Dirk Wunderlich and his wife have lost custody of their children, although they are still allowed to live with them. He also told CBN News he expects to be sent to jail, but said he will never stop homeschooling.

“But I’m not afraid of this. I’m only sad for my family. I will go (to jail) laughing. You can do what you want but my children will not go to school,” he said.

America Safe for Homeschoolers?

In America, a red flag went up earlier this year when the Justice Department argued in the Romeike case that home schooling is not a fundamental human right.

A source close to the case said the White House cares more about relations with Germany than about a family seeking political asylum.

Asylum for the Romeikes might open a floodgate of refugees from Germany, further embarrassing the German government.

Uwe Roemike, who makes his living as a piano teacher, knows what to expect if they’re deported.

“First they would fine us with increasingly higher fines and they would threaten to take away custody,” he explained.

“There might be jail time, too, but the main threat is the aspect of custody because then, of course, the children are taken away from you completely and that’s what no family wants,” he said.

Uwe said the fact the White House would be willing to deny homeschooling freedom to his family, should make all American home-schoolers concerned.



By Dale Hurd | Global Research
MAY 6, 2013

Recently, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said that home schooling is not a parent’s right. It is a statement some are saying should frighten American parents.

Nations like Germany and Sweden show that when governments take away home schooling rights, it’s a slippery slope to no parental rights.

America the Refuge or Not

The Romeike family came to the United States from Germany five years ago hoping to find refuge. They wanted to home-school their children in freedom and a federal judge granted them asylum.

But now the Obama administration has been trying to deport them, arguing that home schooling is not a right. The case is currently before a federal appeals court.

Uwe and Hannelore Romeike began home schooling in Germany because they didn’t want their children exposed to things like witchcraft and graphic sex education that are taught in German schools.

“There were stories where [school children] were encouraged to ask the devil for help instead of God and actually the devil would help (in the story),” Uwe said.

“When we found out what’s in the textbooks, it’s exactly the opposite from what the Bible tells us and teaches us, and we wanted to protect [our children],” his wife Hannelore added.

But home schooling is illegal in Germany, except in rare cases. And many home schooling parents are persecuted with fines, jail, or the loss of their children.

Homeschoolers Going Into Exile?

Most home-schoolers in America are left alone. But what if state politicians and the federal government started to move against it?

Two of the worst nations for home-schoolers are Germany and Sweden. If you want to see what things might be like if home schooling was banned in America, travel to Sweden, where the government controls education and the home schooling movement has been crushed.

In fact, the head of the Swedish Homeschooling Association, Jonas Himmelstrand, had to take his family into exile. They fled to Finland.

“We’re in exile. We were forced out of our country and that makes a stronger impact than I can imagine,” he told CBN News. “This was our country. This was where we had our friends and business relationships and a whole lot of things and now we’re pushed away from it.”

Attorney Michael Donnelly, the Homeschool Legal Defense Association, called the situation “incredible for a nation like Sweden that calls itself a free nation, a democracy, so to speak.”

Ruby Harrold-Claesson, President of the Nordic Committee for Human Rights, went even further, branding Sweden a dictatorship where social workers tell parents what to do.

“Sweden claims to be a democracy but it’s far from it. It’s a dictatorship,” he said. “You have the social workers dictating how people are to live. You’re not supposed to be different. You’re not supposed to be different from anyone else in Sweden. Everyone is supposed to be uniform. They want to have these cookie cutter children.”

Claesson is also the lawyer representing Christer and Annie Johansson, who have lost custody of their son Domenic, because of home schooling. After Domenic was abducted by Swedish officials, Annie’s health began to fail.

Christer said the stress of the ordeal is killing his wife.

“If we cannot solve this issue soon, Domenic won’t have a mother anymore,” he said.

Russia, A Home Schooling Haven

Nations like Germany and Sweden could learn a thing or two about parent’s rights from, of all places, Russia, which is one of the freest nations in which to homeschool.

“We have complete freedom of home education in Russia, in terms of legality,” Pavel Parfentiev, a family rights advocate in Russia, said.

“The Russian Federation is sort of a champion of human rights in this particular area, so of course I think it is a good example for both Germany and Sweden where home educators are persecuted,” he said.

Among the persecuted, German home-schooler Juergen Dudek has been taken to court every year for the past 10 years by the German Jugendamt, or Youth Office.

“The Youth Office, I used to call it the ‘Gestapo for the Young.’ As soon as they step in, as soon as they get hold of you, you’ve really got problems,” Dudek said.

German homeschooler Dirk Wunderlich and his wife have lost custody of their children, although they are still allowed to live with them. He also told CBN News he expects to be sent to jail, but said he will never stop homeschooling.

“But I’m not afraid of this. I’m only sad for my family. I will go (to jail) laughing. You can do what you want but my children will not go to school,” he said.

America Safe for Homeschoolers?

In America, a red flag went up earlier this year when the Justice Department argued in the Romeike case that home schooling is not a fundamental human right.

A source close to the case said the White House cares more about relations with Germany than about a family seeking political asylum.

Asylum for the Romeikes might open a floodgate of refugees from Germany, further embarrassing the German government.

Uwe Roemike, who makes his living as a piano teacher, knows what to expect if they’re deported.

“First they would fine us with increasingly higher fines and they would threaten to take away custody,” he explained.

“There might be jail time, too, but the main threat is the aspect of custody because then, of course, the children are taken away from you completely and that’s what no family wants,” he said.

Uwe said the fact the White House would be willing to deny homeschooling freedom to his family, should make all American home-schoolers concerned.



Kurt Nimmo
May 11, 2013

Taken on its own, the KOMO 4 News report below out of Seattle paints a stark and frightening picture of police battling “angry parents” in a simulated shooting at a school. The practice of police training to take on everything from homeschoolers to patriots and constitutionalists – “rightwing extremists” in government parlance – is anything but a rarity. Such exercises are now a prominent feature of the expanding police state.



Obama admin insists family return to Germany to face attacks

by Bob Unruh | World Net Daily

An appeal is planned for a family of homeschoolers the Obama administration wants to deport to their home country of Germany to face persecution from education officials there who seek fines and jail for such individuals.

The word comes today from officials with the Home School Legal Defense Association, who have been arguing on behalf of the Romeike family since they fled Germany in 2008 and were granted asylum in the U.S.  in 2010 by Immigration Judge Lawrence O. Burman.

The Obama administration was unhappy with that decision and appealed, and the grant was rescinded by the Board of Immigration Appeals in 2012.

A panel from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently heard arguments on the dispute, and ruled today that the asylum request should be denied.

“We believe the Sixth Circuit is wrong, and we will appeal their decision,” said Michael Farris, HSLDA founder and chairman. “America has room for this family, and we will do everything we can to help them.”

The court said that the Romeikes had not made a sufficient case, and that the United States has not opened its doors to every victim of unfair treatment.

While the judges admitted the U.S. Constitution recognizes the rights of parents to direct the education and upbringing of their children, they refused to concede that the harsh treatment of religiously and philosophically motivated homeschoolers in Germany, including fines, jail and the loss of custody of their children, amounts to persecution within the laws on asylum.

“Germany continues to persecute homeschoolers,” said Mike Donnelly, HSLDA director of international affairs. “The court ignored mountains of evidence that homeschoolers are harshly fined and that custody of their children is gravely threatened – something most people would call persecution. This is what the Romeikes will suffer if they are sent back to Germany.”

WND has reported on the case since its inception. Just weeks ago, HSLDA officials launched a petition on a White House website to seek help. They White House policy is to provide a response to petitions that collect more than 100,000 signatures, but nothing has been heard from the Oval Office even though it passed that threshold more than a month ago.

“While has seen petitions ranging from serious to comical – including creating a ‘Death Star’ and requesting congressmen to wear sponsorships like NASCAR drivers – HSLDA believes that the Romeike petition is of utmost importance because a family’s human rights are at stake,” the HSLDA said in an announcement about the effort.

Farris warned of the positions being adopted by Obama.

“When the United States government says that homeschooling is a mutable choice, it is saying that a government can legitimately coerce you to change this choice,” Farris said. “In other words, you have no protected right to choose what type of education your children will receive. We should understand that in these arguments, something very concerning is being said about the liberties of all Americans.”

“I’m glad Obama wasn’t in charge in 1620,” Farris said in an appearance on Fox and Friends. “The government’s arguments in this case confuse equal persecution with equal protection and demonstrate a serious disregard for individual religious liberty. I really wonder what would’ve happened to the Pilgrims under this administration.”

Donnelly said the organization got involved after learning that the Romeikes were being fined thousands of dollars – and plans were made by the government to put a lien on their home.

“I knew that this was only a starting point, and that it was very likely that very severe action would soon follow. Homeschooling is not tolerated in Germany and Uwe [Romeike] said he might have to leave the country. We are privileged to represent these modern day Pilgrims.”

The German Supreme Court said because of the issues of socialization, the state, not parents, decides how children are educated.

“This is dangerous precedent. One that Americans ignore at their peril,” Donnelly said.

“This is the nightmare of German parents – even non-homeschooling parents have suffered by being fined and sent to jail seeking to exercise reasonable discretion over their children’s education such as opting them out of certain objectionable presentations of material that violates their convictions. German states don’t tolerate differences in education – they just want uniformity. But fundamental human rights and even international law requires Germany to respect the superior right of parents over education of children.”

WND has reported on the trials of the Romeikes since police officers appeared on their doorstep in Germany in 2006 to drag their children to a local public school.

HSLDA has created an online information page with details about the fight, opportunities to donate and a petition to the White House to halt the deportation.

Attorneys for the Justice Department argued before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that a government has every right to demand that parents send their children to public schools, even if the school’s teaching conflicts with the family’s religious beliefs.

Farris found the position adopted by the Obama administration startling.

The administration contends subjecting children to those teachings for several dozen hours a week doesn’t violate any religious or human rights, he noted.

“Does anyone think that our government would say to Orthodox Jewish parents, we can force your children to eat pork products for 22-26 hours per week because the rest of the time you can feed them kosher food?” he wrote in a website commentary.

He warned that while the case involves German homeschoolers, there’s an application for Americans.

“The prospect for German homeschooling freedom is not bright. But we should not reserve all of our concern for the views of the German government. Our own government is attempting to send German homeschoolers back to that land to face criminal prosecutions with fines, jail sentences, and removal of custody of children,” he said.

“We should understand that in these arguments by the U.S. government, something important is being said about our own liberties as American homeschoolers. The attorney general of the United States thinks that a law that bans homeschooling entirely violates no fundamental liberties.”

Farris pointed out the asylum law allows a refugee to remain in the U.S. due to the threat of persecution for any of several reasons, including for religious reasons or being part of a “particular social group.”

But Attorney General Eric Holder’s official position is that the family doesn’t qualify, even though the Supreme Court of Germany already publicly declared the purpose of the German ban on homeschooling was to “counteract the development of religious and philosophically motivated parallel societies.”

The Obama administration position is that it is irrelevant that the children were “bombarded with negative influences” in the German public schools that included “alleged teaching of evolution, abortion, homosexuality, disrespect for parents, teachers, and other authority figures, disrespect for students, bullying, witchcraft, disrespect for family values and ridicule of Christian values.”

The German goal, Farris explained, is “to prohibit people who think differently from the government (on religious or philosophical grounds) from growing and developing into a force in society.”

“It is thought control. It is belief control. It is totalitarianism dressed up in politically correct lingo,” he said.

But he said the what should be alarming for Americans is the “state of the position of our government at a very high level.”

He said the executive branch is arguing that it’s no problem to ban homeschooling.

“There are two major portions of constitutional rights of citizens – fundamental liberties and equal protection. The U.S. attorney general has said this about homeschooling. There is no fundamental liberty to homeschool. So long as a government bans homeschooling broadly and equally, there is no violation of your rights.

“A second argument is revealing. The U.S. government contended that the Romeikes’ case failed to show that there was any discrimination based on religion because, among other reasons, the Romeikes did not prove that all homeschoolers were religious, and that not all Christians believed they had to homeschool.

“The central problem here is that the U.S. government does not understand that religious freedom is an individual right. One need not be a part of any church or other religious group to be able to make a religious freedom claim. Specifically, one doesn’t have to follow the dictates of a church to claim religious freedom – one should be able to follow the dictates of God Himself,” Farris wrote.

“The United States Supreme Court has made it very clear in the past that religious freedom is an individual right. Yet our current government does not seem to understand this. They only think of us as members of groups and factions. It is an extreme form of identity politics that directly threatens any understanding of individual liberty.”

Germany is notorious for its attacks on homeschooling families. In one case several years ago, a young teen was taken from her family and put into a psychiatric ward because she was homeschooled.

Fines and even jail terms are common for those who offend the mandatory public school indoctrination there.

But WND previously reported on a law journal article that undermines the arguments from the Obama administration.

The article, “Germany Homeschoolers as ‘Particular Society Group’: Evaluation Under Current U.S. Asylum Jurisprudence,” was written by Miki Kawashima Matrician and published in the 2011 Boston College International and Comparative Law Review.

The journal article said, “”The BIA should find that all German homeschoolers comprise a ‘particular social group,’ regardless of whether the Romeike family successfully established a claim of ‘well-founded fear of persecution.’”

The problem is that a Nazi-era law in Germany in 1938, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, eliminated exemptions that would provide an open door for homeschoolers under the nation’s compulsory education laws.

Wolfgang Drautz, consul general for the Federal Republic of Germany, previously wrote on the issue in a blog, explaining the German government “has a legitimate interest in countering the rise of parallel societies that are based on religion.”

As WND reported, the German government believes schooling is critical to socialization, as is evident in its response to another set of parents who objected to police officers picking up their child at home and delivering him to a public school.

“The minister of education does not share your attitudes toward so-called homeschooling,” said a government letter. “… You complain about the forced school escort of primary school children by the responsible local police officers. … In order to avoid this in future, the education authority is in conversation with the affected family in order to look for possibilities to bring the religious convictions of the family into line with the unalterable school attendance requirement.”



By Krista Kapralos | Religion News Service

(RNS) A German family seeking asylum in the U.S. so they can home-school their children lost their appeal in federal court on Tuesday (May 14), but their lawyers say they’re prepared to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case.

The German government persecuted the Romeike family for their faith, said Mike Donnelly, a lawyer with the Home School Legal Defense Association, a religious organization that is representing the Romeike family.

“It is treating people who home-school for religious or philosophical reasons differently,” he added.

The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagrees. The U.S. grants safe haven to people who have a well-founded fear of persecution, but not necessarily to those under governments with laws that simply differ from those in the U.S., Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote in the court’s decision.

“The German authorities have not singled out the Romeikes in particular or homeschoolers in general for persecution,” he wrote for the three-judge panel in the case, Uwe Romeike v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Uwe Romeike said in an email on Wednesday that his family began home schooling to protect their children from bullying and teachings they didn’t agree with.

“As we were confronted with opposition to our choice we began to feel more and more that our faith required us to homeschool our children,” he said.

Uwe and Hannelore Romeike moved their five children to Tennessee (a sixth child has since been born) in 2008 to escape thousands of dollars in fines and increasing pressure from local police and education officials to enroll their children in school. All German parents are required by law to send their children to a state-recognized school, whether public or private.

The Romeikes are evangelical Christians, and say they should be allowed to keep their children home to teach them Christian values. Before they left Germany, the police forcibly escorted the older Romeike children to school one day. Other German families have lost custody of their children because they persist in home schooling.

An immigration judge in Tennessee granted the Romeikes’ bid in 2010, but the Board of Immigration Appeals tossed that ruling in 2012, arguing that religious home-schoolers don’t face any special consequences that aren’t applied to other families whose children don’t attend school.

The 2012 decision sparked an outpouring of support for the Romeike family among conservative U.S. Christians. More than 120,000 people signed an online petition urging President Obama to let the family stay. Conservative talk show host Glenn Beck described the case as evidence of crumbling religious freedom.

The Romeikes’ legal team plans to request an en banc hearing, which would present the case before the 6th Circuit’s entire 15-judge panel. Approval for such a hearing is unlikely, Donnelly said, adding that the Romeikes are already preparing to fight for asylum in the U.S. Supreme Court.



by Dr. Susan Berry | Breitbart

As dissatisfaction with the U.S. public school system grows, apparently so has the appeal of homeschooling. Educational researchers, in fact, are expecting a surge in the number of students educated at home by their parents over the next ten years, as more parents reject public schools.

A recent report in Education News states that, since 1999, the number of children who are homeschooled has increased by 75%. Though homeschooled children represent only 4% of all school-age children nationwide, the number of children whose parents choose to educate them at home rather than a traditional academic setting is growing seven times faster than the number of children enrolling in grades K-12 every year.

As homeschooling has become increasingly popular, common myths that have long been associated with the practice of homeschooling have been debunked.

Any concerns about the quality of education children receive by their parents can be put to rest by the consistently high placement of homeschooled students on standardized assessment exams. Data demonstrates that those who are independently educated generally score between the 65th and 89th percentile on these measures, while those in traditional academic settings average at around the 50th percentile. In addition, achievement gaps between sexes, income levels, or ethnicity—all of which have plagued public schools around the country—do not exist in homeschooling environments.

According to the report:

Recent studies laud homeschoolers’ academic success, noting their significantly higher ACT-Composite scores as high schoolers and higher grade point averages as college students. Yet surprisingly, the average expenditure for the education of a homeschooled child, per year, is $500 to $600, compared to an average expenditure of $10,000 per child, per year, for public school students.

The high achievement level of homeschoolers is readily recognized by recruiters from some of the best colleges in the nation. Home-educated children matriculate in colleges and attain a four-year degree at much higher rates than their counterparts from both public and private schools. Schools such as Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard, Stanford, and Duke Universities all actively recruit homeschoolers.

Similarly, the common myth that homeschoolers “miss out” on so-called “socialization opportunities,” often thought to be a vital aspect of traditional academic settings, has proven to be without merit. According to the National Home Education Research Institute survey, homeschoolers tend to be more socially engaged than their peers and demonstrate “healthy social, psychological, and emotional development, and success into adulthood.”

From the report:

Based on recent data, researchers such as Dr. Brian Ray ( “expect to observe a notable surge in the number of children being homeschooled in the next 5 to 10 years. The rise would be in terms of both absolute numbers and percentage of the K to 12 student population. This increase would be in part because…[1] a large number of those individuals who were being home educated in the 1990’s may begin to homeschool their own school-age children and [2] the continued successes of home-educated students.”



Home School Legal Defense Association Home School Legal Defense Association is a nonprofit advocacy organization established to defend and advance the constitutional right of parents to direct the education of their children and to protect family freedoms. Through annual memberships, HSLDA is tens of thousands of families united in service together, providing a strong voice when and where needed.

HSLDA advocates on the legal front on behalf of our members in matters which include conflicts with state or local officials over homeschooling. Each year, thousands of member families receive legal consultation by letter and phone, hundreds more are represented through negotiations with local officials, and dozens are represented in court proceedings. HSLDA also takes the offensive, filing actions to protect members against government intrusion and to establish legal precedent. On occasion, HSLDA will handle precedent-setting cases for nonmembers, as well.

HSLDA advocates on Capitol Hill by tracking federal legislation that affects homeschooling and parental rights. HSLDA works to defeat or amend harmful bills, but also works proactively, introducing legislation to protect and preserve family freedoms.

HSLDA advocates in state legislatures, at the invitation of state homeschool organizations, by assisting individual states in drafting language to improve their homeschool legal environment and to fight harmful legislation.

For more information please visit:

HSLDA advocates for the movement by commissioning and presenting quality research on the progress of homeschooling. Whether it’s in print, from the podium, or on the air, HSLDA provides insightful vision and leadership for the cause of homeschooling.

Home School Legal Defense Association . . . tens of thousands of American families working together with HSLDA to preserve each other’s right to homeschool . . . together, “Advocates for Family & Freedom.”



Jason Charles
April 14, 2013

It seems once again Ron Paul is being attacked by big publications like the Guardian and others.  Even in retirement he simply can’t promote liberty without the internationalists taking an issue. So what is the tactic they are using this time? Apparently his Homeschool Curriculum is being written by…Evangelical Christians. (gasp!)

Don’t Change the System, Create a Better One

If you haven’t heard he recently just announced from his brand new radio platform the Ron Paul Homeschool Curriculum. In his genius he is starting a schooling alternative that totally bypasses the establishment indoctrination camps, mislabeled as public education in here in America.

It is no secret he opposes public education as being unconstitutional and a dismal failure. In fact in the 2012 Presidential Debates he put forth a proposal to cut spending by 1 Trillion Dollars, and in that proposal right at the top was ending the Department of Education. Ron Paul is a purest in every since of the word and his congressional record proves it.

This clip from the 2012 debates demonstrates superbly how far our politicians have gone from the values in the constitution and the oath to office they swore to uphold.



The homeschooling curriculum can be lauded as a masterstroke. There can be no question that international elite have taken over the minds of our children in this country through the co-opting of finance, government, and the public education system. They know that the vast majority of adults and students that make up the Ron Paul Revolution have gone through the public education system. A system that has absolutely rejected and even mocks the principles of the Constitution and the moral instruction found in the Bible.

Now the majority of these young libertarian/constitutionalists that have been inspired by Ron Paul’s message have un-indoctrinated themselves towards liberty, but they sure have retained their hate for anything resembling Biblical values.

Essentially the tactic is this, we have major media going after some of the writers, mainly Gary North, Tom Woods and obviously Ron Paul for their Christian beliefs. For example the article in the Guardian is insinuatating that they are embedding Christian fundamentalist beliefs into the educational curriculum, in the form of Reconstructionalism.

“Paul’s advocacy of home-schooling is not just about getting kids out of what home-schoolers disparagingly call “government schools”. It’s not just about teaching them that government should be small and largely inconsequential. It’s based on the idea that the government is largely illegitimate, and that one must create a society in which the populace will follow “moral” (that is, biblical) laws, rather than the laws created by an overzealous, tyrannical government.”

This approach is clever because it indicates a thorough understanding of the demographic of the Liberty movement and the people who have aligned themselves ideologically with Ron Paul. Most of them are avowed Atheists and hate Biblical Christianity as the internet flavor of the month.

It is true, but what is ironic is the vast majority of young libertarians will tell you how much they hate the fed, and big government, and even the public educational system, but they will defend the social darwinistic ideals that have been spoon fed them from their youths by public schools. Hand to mouth, shoveling information arranged and codified into our public education system by the very elitist ruling class they profess to hate.

This is an example of double think at it’s finest. It demonstrates that even though libertarians everywhere have totally grasped and embodied the finest principles enshrined in the Constitution they refuse to talk about, recognize or even admit that these principles exist because of the Bible and the Reformation.

There simply would never have been an enlightenment period with out the Reformation, the two go hand in hand. We would of never had a Lexington Green, Concrod Bridge, American Revolution, Bill of Rights, or Constitution. None of it would exist without a profoundly logical expression of our God given natural rights by that founding generation. See for yourself our founding fathers in their own words time and time again reiterated that Biblical Christianity and moral instruction is foundational to our form of government.

Founders quotes on the religion and government compiled by Pastor Chuck Baldwin.

“Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all the combinations of human society. ~ John Adams”

So what the elite are doing is exploiting this ignorance within the movement. It is nothing more than a divide and conquer tactic. If they can get libertarians to reject Ron Paul’s curriculum on the grounds it has a religious bent then they win and prevent this remarkable idea from taking root as a very real way to assure that liberty principles are taught inside the family for generations to come.

Remaining Loyal to Liberty

The charges in this article are laughable, and shows just how desperate the establishment is at disrupting the growing liberty movement.

Ron Paul will remain committed to keeping his religious beliefs private, as he always has you can be assured. Even in the undertaking of writing a homeschool curriculum, I am positive he will maintain neutrality. How one can expound upon ALL of the the principles of liberty and not touch on the impact the Christian faith has had isn’t really possible, but I am sure it will be addressed in an all inclusive way.

If Ron Paul taught us anything it is this, the Constitution and liberty principles is a very big tent that everybody from every walk of life can seek refuge and knowledge in as truth. We, the ones who hold these truths as self evident need to remain loyal to these principles, especially when confronted with information or beliefs that you may not adhere to or like. After all isn’t that what Liberty protects?

Do not fall for this tactic, regardless of how you feel about the Christian religion recognize that the elite love splitting popular movements along religious and ideological lines. Keeping factions at one anothers throat means they can continue to rule unimpeded towards a global tyranny called the New World Order. Let’s simply not give them that pleasure and abandoned public education in favor of homeschooling this next generation of children under the Ron Paul Homeschool curriculum, and take the minds of our children back.



by World Net Daily

Officials at Ball State University in Muncie, Ind., have decided to censor what their science teachers and instructors say, ordering them not to discuss the evidence of intelligent design during science classes, according to a report from the Discovery Institute, which monitors such battles.

“In a blatant attack on academic freedom and the unfettered consideration of scientific viewpoints, the president of Ball State University in Muncie, Ind., has imposed a gag order on science faculty forbidding their discussion of the theory of intelligent design in science classrooms,” the organization announced this week.

The school had been in the headlines since the Freedom from Religion Foundation, which wants to eradicate references to faith in the public sphere and on university campuses, demanded an investigation “into whether Ball State physicist Dr. Eric Hedin had informed his students about the theory of ID,” the Institute said.

Hedin’s interdisciplinary honors course “Boundaries of Science” included a “Partial Bibliography” listing books favorable to, and others critical of, intelligent design.

The Institute said the order came from BSU President Jo Ann Gora, who declared ID is a “religious” idea at variance with “the consensus of science scholars” and may not be discussed in science classes, since that would be a violation of “academic integrity.”

Get to the truth of evolution, in “Darwin’s Deadly Legacy,” as well as “How to Know God Exists.”

“Students and the public are owed a genuine evaluation of the merits of ID, touching as the theory does on ultimate questions of life’s origins,” said Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of Discovery Institute’s Center for Science & Culture. “However, when scientific discussion is censored by a university, fair-minded evaluation becomes impossible.”

Added Dr. John West, associate director of the Center for Science & Culture, “In the Orwellian world of Ball State’s president, academic freedom apparently means only the ‘freedom’ to support the majority’s view. This is exactly how the academic ‘consensus’ against the theory of intelligent design is maintained – by intimidation, fiat, and legal threats.”

Under the concept of intelligent design, the complexity of observable and testable features in living creatures and nature are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an unguided process such as natural selection.

WND reported earlier when thousands of people signed a petition urging officials at BSU to defend academic freedom in the case.

The petition by the Seattle-based Discovery Institute was sent to Gora and the school’s board of trustees.

The controversy erupted when FFRF objected to Hedin’s elective seminar called “The Boundaries of Science,” which according to the syllabus explores evidence of intelligent design in nature as well as the limits of scientific knowledge.

Officials at the school have confirmed the bibliography for the course includes distinguished scholars such as Oxford University mathematician John Lennox, Harvard astronomer Owen Gingerich, Oxford mathematical physicist Roger Penrose and physicist and Anglican priest John Pokinghorne.

“Questions about the evidence for design in the universe and the boundaries of science are perfectly legitimate topics for a university seminar,” the Discovery Institute said in support of the professor. “Indeed, these topics have provoked scholarly interest and discussion during much of the history of Western civilization, and the scholars cited in Hedin’s bibliography are some of the leading voices in these discussions.”

The school responded to FFRF’s demands by launching a review.

The Discovery Institute noted at the time that among the review team members are three people “publicly connected to groups explicitly opposed to [intelligent design].”

The members were Catherine Pilachowski, who is part of a group that denounced ID in 2005; Gary Dodson, who signed an anti-creationism petition by a pro-evolution organization; and Richard Fluegeman, who has spoken at “Darwin Day” conferences organized by anti-Christian freethought groups.

“Can panelists publicly connected with groups like the National Center for Science Education, the Clergy Letter Project, and the Ball State Freethought Alliance really be fair or impartial when investigating?” Discovery Institute experts asked.

The petition states: “We, the undersigned, urge the administration of Ball State University to support Prof. Eric Hedin’s academic freedom to discuss intelligent design and related issues in the classroom. We call on you to reject demands by the Freedom from Religion Foundation to censor or punish Dr. Hedin for exercising his right to free speech.”

Academic groups in general insist that professors must have freedom to work with their own curriculum but largely have remained silent on the Hedin case. Hedin’s critics have accused him of violating the so-called separation of church and state and claim that his teachings are illegal.

In a report by Inside Higher Ed, Hedin’s immediate supervisor, Thomas Robertson, the chief of the Department of Physics and Astronomy, dismissed the Freedom From Religion Foundation concerns.

“The syllabus published was approved by our department Curriculum and Assessment Committee,” he said. “We review faculty performance regularly through student and peer/chair evaluations. I receive complaints and concerns from students familiar with faculty performance in their classes and investigate when appropriate. Given the totality of information available to me at this time, I do not share the opinions expressed on the websites cited below. We will continue to monitor our faculty and their course materials and practices and take appropriate action when deemed necessary.”

Get to the truth of evolution, in “Darwin’s Deadly Legacy,” as well as “How to Know God Exists.”



R. C. Sproul interviews Ben Stein in light of his documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.



Ben Stein’s “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” is a movie about the freedom of speech suppression to which Intelligent Design proponents are being subjected to by the atheistic American academic dictatorship.



In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. – Genesis 1:1










Historian, Founder and President David Barton of Wallbuilders, talks about America’s Godly Heritage, and its role in American education.  This short course will open your mind to the lost and forgotten facts, history and information about America.
















  3. Pingback: sreaves32

  4. mama says:

    Kids do not need to hear this right now what type of trouble this is going to cause when a kid comes home now from school and says mommy i dont belong to you and daddy are they going to take us away . what is wrong with america now and why upset kids in the world today they have enough to deal with and now this ..





  9. Pingback: THE TAKEDOWN OF AMERICA | sreaves32



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 79 other followers

%d bloggers like this: