Barack Obama was elected President in 2008 by the combined effort of skilled community organizers, the expert use of 21st century technology that enabled him to use the internet to raise far more campaign money than any other candidate, and by what Bernard Kalb called "the slobbering love affair of the media." A year later, the glitz has faded. Michelle Malkin explains why in her New York Times best-seller called Culture of Corruption; Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies.
Eagle Forum Legislative Alert:
Monday, November 30, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Patriotic People Hi Caliber
This music video features scenes from TEA PARTY: The Documentary Film coming Thanksgiving 2009. Liberty's march has a new generation of patriots! Find out why at www.TEAPARTYMOVIE.COM
Co-ed dorms linked to increased drinking, sex
November 25, 2009 (WLS) -- If you are the parent of a college student who lives in a co-ed dorm, you may have a reason to be concerned about what goes on behind closed doors.
A new study suggests those college dorms are encouraging young people to drink heavily and have more sex.
What About Those Czars?
One of the most worrisome and expensive features of Barack Obama's administration is his appointment of a long list of czars, accountable to no one except himself. The czars are paid by the U.S. taxpayers but they are not confirmed by the Senate, although they appear to have the authority to override those who are confirmed. Previous U.S. Presidents may have had one or two czars, but Obama has appointed at least 34 czars. Czar is a Russian word and concept, and Obama has appointed more czars than the Russians had in four centuries. Let me read off the awesome list of Barack Obama's czars:
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Thanksgiving -- the Unique American Feast Day
Thanksgiving is the unique American feast day. The Thanksgiving Proclamation signed by President George Washington was the first official presidential proclamation ever issued in the United States. Here are some quotes from George Washington's Proclamation: "Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God. . . . Now, therefore, I do assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, that we may all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country. . . ."
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
‘Affirmative Action’ Turns Against Asian-Americans
In 1996, Californians voted for Proposition 209, which outlawed racial discrimination in college admissions. One way that California universities decide which students to admit is to give automatic admission to the top 12.5% of California high school students based on statewide tests.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
census worker committed suicide
The AP just reported:
FRANKFORT, Ky. – Authorities are saying a Kentucky census worker found hanging from a tree with "fed" scrawled on his chest committed suicide and staged his death to look like a homicide.The death is not Rep. Michele Bachmann's fault after all, as this reporter tried to insinuate.
A news release from Kentucky State Police said Tuesday that Bill Sparkman died at the same location where his body was found Sept. 12 near a cemetery in a heavily wooded area of southeastern Kentucky.
A man who found the body in the Daniel Boone National Forest said the 51-year-old was bound with duct tape, gagged and had an identification badge taped to his neck.
Investigators say Sparkman acted alone in manipulating the scene to conceal the suicide.
The news release says Sparkman had recently taken out two life insurance policies that would not pay out for suicide.
College Entrance Exams Tell Dismal Story
Some people argue that everybody should go to college, but that's not necessarily a good or profitable goal. Our economy provides plenty of jobs for which college is not necessary or even an advantage, and the enormous personal debt that hangs over the head of so many college students is a national scandal. In addition, major college entrance exams show that not very many high school seniors are well-prepared for college. Far too many students have to take so-called remedial courses, which means that we the taxpayers are paying a second time for what those students should have learned in high school.
The scores of one of the two most widely used college entrance exams demonstrate that less than a fourth of high school students had learned the skills in all the subjects they need to do well in college. Students who took the SAT last year averaged only 515 out of 800 in math, 501 out of 800 in critical reading, and only 493 out of 800 in writing.
The other widely used college entrance exam, the ACT, surveys thousands of high school and college instructors about the skills students need to succeed in entry-level college courses. The ACT exam is believed to be is a good predictor of whether a student can earn at least a C in freshman college classes. Only 23% of students met the college-ready cutoff in English, reading, math and science, which means that fewer than one-fourth of high school graduates have a 75% chance of earning a C average as a college freshman.
These low scores are in spite of the billions of new dollars federal and state governments have added to education budgets in the past 25 years. Chester E. Finn of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a widely known scholar and writer about education issues, said: “This is a nearly unrelenting tale of woe and disappointment. If there’s any good news here, I can’t find it.”
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
The scores of one of the two most widely used college entrance exams demonstrate that less than a fourth of high school students had learned the skills in all the subjects they need to do well in college. Students who took the SAT last year averaged only 515 out of 800 in math, 501 out of 800 in critical reading, and only 493 out of 800 in writing.
The other widely used college entrance exam, the ACT, surveys thousands of high school and college instructors about the skills students need to succeed in entry-level college courses. The ACT exam is believed to be is a good predictor of whether a student can earn at least a C in freshman college classes. Only 23% of students met the college-ready cutoff in English, reading, math and science, which means that fewer than one-fourth of high school graduates have a 75% chance of earning a C average as a college freshman.
These low scores are in spite of the billions of new dollars federal and state governments have added to education budgets in the past 25 years. Chester E. Finn of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a widely known scholar and writer about education issues, said: “This is a nearly unrelenting tale of woe and disappointment. If there’s any good news here, I can’t find it.”
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Monday, November 23, 2009
If Voters Had Been Told Before the Election
If Barack Obama had campaigned on what he has actually done in his first 300 days in office, would he have been elected? That's the question so many are asking today. If Obama had told us he would appoint 34 Czars, reporting only to him and not confirmed in the constitutional way, building a powerful unitary executive branch of government, would he have been elected? What if he had told us that his Green Jobs Czar had been a Communist, and that the Science Czar wrote in a college textbook that compulsory "green abortions" are an acceptable way to control population growth?
If Obama had told us he would take over the automobile industry faster than any socialist dictator ever nationalized an industry, fire General Motors CEO and replace him with a Democratic Party contributor, would Obama have been elected? If Obama had campaigned on closing down thousands of profitable car dealers, nearly all Republicans, would we have believed that such financial retaliation against those who didn't vote for Obama could happen in America? If Hugo Chavez, the Communist who nationalized most of Venezuela's industries, had said before the election that "Comrade Obama" would nationalize the U.S. automobile industry and "end up to the right" of Chavez and Fidel Castro, would anybody have believed it? If Obama had told us that his Stimulus package is a fraud because it does not create private-sector jobs (as a tax cut would do), so that the unemployment rate has risen to nearly 10 percent, with 15 million Americans unemployed, could he have been elected?
If Obama had declared during his campaign that his first major speech abroad would be to the Muslim world, and that he would proclaim that the United States is "no longer a Christian nation," would Obama have been elected?
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
If Obama had told us he would take over the automobile industry faster than any socialist dictator ever nationalized an industry, fire General Motors CEO and replace him with a Democratic Party contributor, would Obama have been elected? If Obama had campaigned on closing down thousands of profitable car dealers, nearly all Republicans, would we have believed that such financial retaliation against those who didn't vote for Obama could happen in America? If Hugo Chavez, the Communist who nationalized most of Venezuela's industries, had said before the election that "Comrade Obama" would nationalize the U.S. automobile industry and "end up to the right" of Chavez and Fidel Castro, would anybody have believed it? If Obama had told us that his Stimulus package is a fraud because it does not create private-sector jobs (as a tax cut would do), so that the unemployment rate has risen to nearly 10 percent, with 15 million Americans unemployed, could he have been elected?
If Obama had declared during his campaign that his first major speech abroad would be to the Muslim world, and that he would proclaim that the United States is "no longer a Christian nation," would Obama have been elected?
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Friday, November 20, 2009
What the Light Bulb Dictators Have Done
Big Brother government has decided that the American people must give up using the light bulbs we all have in our homes today. The law now mandates that light bulbs must use less electricity starting in 2012. So, we are all supposed to switch to fluorescent bulbs that meet this standard. The purpose of this law is to help save the planet from overheating.
Now we find that the new fluorescent bulbs contain mercury, a dangerous health hazard. If you drop one of these bulbs and break it, it could poison your child or dog and ruin your rug. The Environmental Protection Agency published instructions about what to do if this mercury spills at your house. This EPA instruction states: "Never use a vacuum cleaner to clean up mercury. The vacuum will put mercury into the air and increase exposure." Then, in parenthesis, the EPA instruction adds, "See . . . below for more specific instructions about vacuuming broken florescent light bulbs."
The EPA instruction then says you will need an evacuation plan. "Have people and pets leave the room, and don't let anyone walk through the breakage area on their way out. Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more." Shut off your heating or air conditioning system. When you can safely return, start throwing away your belongings. "If clothing or bedding materials come in direct contact with broken glass or mercury-containing powder from inside the bulb . . . , the clothing or the bedding should be thrown away." Never clean or wash anything if it has been near a broken fluorescent bulb. Mercury "may contaminate the [washing] machine and/or pollute sewage."
Think about that: the mercury in these new bulbs is even bad for your sewage. The new bulbs are about five times more expensive than the bulbs we are now using, and, of course, they are made in China. I predict that, as the deadline in 2012 approaches, there will be a rush of purchases of the kind of light bulbs we are all using today.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Now we find that the new fluorescent bulbs contain mercury, a dangerous health hazard. If you drop one of these bulbs and break it, it could poison your child or dog and ruin your rug. The Environmental Protection Agency published instructions about what to do if this mercury spills at your house. This EPA instruction states: "Never use a vacuum cleaner to clean up mercury. The vacuum will put mercury into the air and increase exposure." Then, in parenthesis, the EPA instruction adds, "See . . . below for more specific instructions about vacuuming broken florescent light bulbs."
The EPA instruction then says you will need an evacuation plan. "Have people and pets leave the room, and don't let anyone walk through the breakage area on their way out. Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more." Shut off your heating or air conditioning system. When you can safely return, start throwing away your belongings. "If clothing or bedding materials come in direct contact with broken glass or mercury-containing powder from inside the bulb . . . , the clothing or the bedding should be thrown away." Never clean or wash anything if it has been near a broken fluorescent bulb. Mercury "may contaminate the [washing] machine and/or pollute sewage."
Think about that: the mercury in these new bulbs is even bad for your sewage. The new bulbs are about five times more expensive than the bulbs we are now using, and, of course, they are made in China. I predict that, as the deadline in 2012 approaches, there will be a rush of purchases of the kind of light bulbs we are all using today.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Stopping America's Slide Into Socialism
Almost every Act of Congress brings America under more government control. Our society is rapidly exchanging liberty for more and more entitlements, and too many people now rely on the government rather than on themselves to improve their lives. This trend toward socialism can, however, be reversed. That's the argument of U.S. Senator Jim DeMint in his new book called Saving Freedom: We Can Stop America's Slide Into Socialism.
Saving Freedom begins with the story of the Gingerbread Man, who evaded capture until he came to the river and accepted the offer of a fox to take him across. He tried to stay away from the fox's mouth, but as the river waters rose, he had to come closer, until finally the fox ate him. This story is a metaphor for America. We began by valuing liberty above all else, but we increasingly have lost confidence in our ability to succeed without major help from the government.
DeMint believes that the rich do have an obligation to share resources with the poor, but that charity works more effectively when managed by churches and private groups. Socialism promises to spread the wealth, but it actually spreads poverty and imposes the costs on future generations. A particularly interesting section of DeMint's book explains how Christianity's respect for reason led to improvements in science and commerce that have made America so successful and prosperous.
We all recognize that freedom is a good thing, but too many Americans now confuse the blessings of freedom (which are opportunity and prosperity) with the substance of freedom. As individuals and as a country, Senator DeMint believes that we can save our freedom only if we respect the Constitution and take responsibility for our own future rather than expecting government to solve our problems.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Saving Freedom begins with the story of the Gingerbread Man, who evaded capture until he came to the river and accepted the offer of a fox to take him across. He tried to stay away from the fox's mouth, but as the river waters rose, he had to come closer, until finally the fox ate him. This story is a metaphor for America. We began by valuing liberty above all else, but we increasingly have lost confidence in our ability to succeed without major help from the government.
DeMint believes that the rich do have an obligation to share resources with the poor, but that charity works more effectively when managed by churches and private groups. Socialism promises to spread the wealth, but it actually spreads poverty and imposes the costs on future generations. A particularly interesting section of DeMint's book explains how Christianity's respect for reason led to improvements in science and commerce that have made America so successful and prosperous.
We all recognize that freedom is a good thing, but too many Americans now confuse the blessings of freedom (which are opportunity and prosperity) with the substance of freedom. As individuals and as a country, Senator DeMint believes that we can save our freedom only if we respect the Constitution and take responsibility for our own future rather than expecting government to solve our problems.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Eagle Forum Launches Radio Ads to Defeat ObamaCare
As you know, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is expected to unveil his government-run health care bill tomorrow, or sometime soon after. As always, we will provide you with the latest legislative details so you can take action and contact your Senators. While we wait to see what the Reid bill holds, I'd like to draw your attention to our two new radio ads that are currently running in Nebraska and Arkansas:
Listen to the ads, and find out what you can do to help!
Listen to the ads, and find out what you can do to help!
UNESCO Gets Off the Track Again
Why do we allow the United States to pay dues for membership in UNESCO? That stands for United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. One of President Ronald Reagan's many excellent decisions was his 1984 termination of U.S. membership in this United Nations affiliate because it was corrupt, anti-Western, and a vehicle for far-left propaganda. Unfortunately, President George W. Bush put us back in UNESCO in 2003 as part of his devotion to an undefined new world order.
UNESCO has adopted the pretense that it is in charge of prescribing curriculum for schoolchildren all over the world. UNESCO's Director General boasted that one of the goals is to foster "worldwide curricula reflecting UNESCO values.” This fall, UNESCO has been busy writing guidelines for the teaching of sex education, supposedly in order to slow the spread of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. In these guidelines, UNESCO tells teachers in all countries to teach children that abstinence until marriage is "only one of a range of choices available to young people."
The working draft of the guidelines calls for children aged five to eight to be taught in school about same-sex couples, tolerance of different sexual orientations, and specific sexual activity that I'd rather not talk about on radio. Schoolchildren aged nine to 15 are to be given even more detailed discussions. For students starting at age 12, UNESCO guidelines teach enthusiastic "advocacy" of abortion and so-called "emergency contraception."
Public reaction to the UNESCO sex-ed guidelines caused UNESCO to make a few changes before presenting them at the UNESCO meeting in September. However, there was no apology for the explicitness of the sex-ed curriculum; UNESCO asserted that its guidelines are "evidence-informed and rights-based." Time Magazine thought the sex-ed guidelines are just great and went on the attack against what it called "the knee-jerk outrage of conservative pundits."
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
UNESCO has adopted the pretense that it is in charge of prescribing curriculum for schoolchildren all over the world. UNESCO's Director General boasted that one of the goals is to foster "worldwide curricula reflecting UNESCO values.” This fall, UNESCO has been busy writing guidelines for the teaching of sex education, supposedly in order to slow the spread of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. In these guidelines, UNESCO tells teachers in all countries to teach children that abstinence until marriage is "only one of a range of choices available to young people."
The working draft of the guidelines calls for children aged five to eight to be taught in school about same-sex couples, tolerance of different sexual orientations, and specific sexual activity that I'd rather not talk about on radio. Schoolchildren aged nine to 15 are to be given even more detailed discussions. For students starting at age 12, UNESCO guidelines teach enthusiastic "advocacy" of abortion and so-called "emergency contraception."
Public reaction to the UNESCO sex-ed guidelines caused UNESCO to make a few changes before presenting them at the UNESCO meeting in September. However, there was no apology for the explicitness of the sex-ed curriculum; UNESCO asserted that its guidelines are "evidence-informed and rights-based." Time Magazine thought the sex-ed guidelines are just great and went on the attack against what it called "the knee-jerk outrage of conservative pundits."
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Feminists Still Aren't Happy
It's really pretty funny to read all the psychoanalyzing of the feminists by themselves. They just don't understand why all surveys show that women are not as happy as they were in 1970 before the feminist movement got started.
But every now and then, a feminist writer makes a sensible comment. For example, Joanne Lipman, who held several of the biggest jobs in publishing, writes that feminists defined "progress for women too narrowly; we've focused primarily on numbers at the expense of attitudes." She's right about that. Attitude is the problem with feminists; as long as they believe they are victims of an oppressive patriarchy, they will never be successful. Women won't be happy as long as they believe the false slogan that women make only 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. The Equal Pay Law was passed in 1963, but it requires equal pay only for equal work, and women in the labor force don't work nearly as many hours per week as men do, and women voluntarily choose jobs with pleasanter working conditions and lower pay.
Only one sentence in all these feminist articles that have flooded the press in recent weeks confronts the fundamental reason why today's women are not as happy as women were in 1970. Time Magazine admitted: "Among the most dramatic changes in the past generation is the detachment of marriage and motherhood." That's exactly what the feminist movement did to America.
All those impressive statistics about women holding well-paying jobs and receiving college degrees will not produce happy women as long as 39% of children are born to unmarried mothers who lack a loving husband and look to Big Brother Government as provider. And in rejecting marriage, most feminists also rejected the grandchildren who could have provided a significant measure of women's happiness.
Listen to the audio version of this commentary.
But every now and then, a feminist writer makes a sensible comment. For example, Joanne Lipman, who held several of the biggest jobs in publishing, writes that feminists defined "progress for women too narrowly; we've focused primarily on numbers at the expense of attitudes." She's right about that. Attitude is the problem with feminists; as long as they believe they are victims of an oppressive patriarchy, they will never be successful. Women won't be happy as long as they believe the false slogan that women make only 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. The Equal Pay Law was passed in 1963, but it requires equal pay only for equal work, and women in the labor force don't work nearly as many hours per week as men do, and women voluntarily choose jobs with pleasanter working conditions and lower pay.
Only one sentence in all these feminist articles that have flooded the press in recent weeks confronts the fundamental reason why today's women are not as happy as women were in 1970. Time Magazine admitted: "Among the most dramatic changes in the past generation is the detachment of marriage and motherhood." That's exactly what the feminist movement did to America.
All those impressive statistics about women holding well-paying jobs and receiving college degrees will not produce happy women as long as 39% of children are born to unmarried mothers who lack a loving husband and look to Big Brother Government as provider. And in rejecting marriage, most feminists also rejected the grandchildren who could have provided a significant measure of women's happiness.
Listen to the audio version of this commentary.
More Deceptions About Health Care
When President Obama made his big health care speech to Congress, he claimed that the Democratic plan will not set up "panels of bureaucrats" with the authority to withhold life-sustaining treatment from the elderly. But in fact, the whole system is based on having cost-conscious bureaucrats decide what treatments are efficient and necessary.
Obama also claimed that his plan does not jeopardize Medicare benefits which seniors currently receive. However, he admitted he will cut $500 Billion out of Medicare, and we all know this can't be done without reducing benefits. Obama's speech also included the claim that the health care plan will not add to the deficit. The biggest deceit in all these plans is the pretense that the Obama Administration can insure an additional 50 million people without increasing costs and/or without reducing benefits for the other 250 million people who are basically satisfied with their current health care. People are protesting at Tea Parties and Town Meetings because they realize this is not possible.
The Tea Party march up Pennsylvania Avenue on September 12 was not only impressive in its size, but also because of the messages on the hand-made signs they carried. They proved the marchers were authentic grassroots Americans. Here are some samples of the home-made signs that show the rising activism of We The People: "The change I hoped for was freedom." "Recycle Congress." "Don't Tread On Me." "I love my country but I'm scared of my government." "Obamacare makes me sick." "I'm not your ATM." "Nurses Against Obamacare." "Abortion is not health care." "If you have time to read my sign, try reading the legislation." "Read the bill." There was even a sign carried by a two-year-old child that said: "I owe $38,000."
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Obama also claimed that his plan does not jeopardize Medicare benefits which seniors currently receive. However, he admitted he will cut $500 Billion out of Medicare, and we all know this can't be done without reducing benefits. Obama's speech also included the claim that the health care plan will not add to the deficit. The biggest deceit in all these plans is the pretense that the Obama Administration can insure an additional 50 million people without increasing costs and/or without reducing benefits for the other 250 million people who are basically satisfied with their current health care. People are protesting at Tea Parties and Town Meetings because they realize this is not possible.
The Tea Party march up Pennsylvania Avenue on September 12 was not only impressive in its size, but also because of the messages on the hand-made signs they carried. They proved the marchers were authentic grassroots Americans. Here are some samples of the home-made signs that show the rising activism of We The People: "The change I hoped for was freedom." "Recycle Congress." "Don't Tread On Me." "I love my country but I'm scared of my government." "Obamacare makes me sick." "I'm not your ATM." "Nurses Against Obamacare." "Abortion is not health care." "If you have time to read my sign, try reading the legislation." "Read the bill." There was even a sign carried by a two-year-old child that said: "I owe $38,000."
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Feminists Want Taxpayers to Pay for Abortions
When President Barack Obama, in his speech to Congress, said his health care bill will not insure illegal aliens, Rep. Joe Wilson called out "You lie." That was followed by a lot of sanctimonious statements from other Congressmen that reminded me of the Casablanca police chief saying he was "shocked, shocked" to learn that gambling was taking place in the saloon. The American people know that illegals are now getting free health care at emergency rooms, and that the Democrats defeated the amendment to require proof of legal residency in order to be covered by the health care bill.
The big surprise of Obama's speech was that nobody cried "You lie" when he said, "Under our plan no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions." Anyone who follows this issue knows that all Democratic health-care bills do cover abortion funding, and that the Hyde Amendment will not apply to the health care bill because it only prohibits federal taxpayer funding of abortions financed through Medicaid. Obama promised Planned Parenthood that [quote] "reproductive care is essential care. It is basic care, and so it is at the center, and at the heart of the plan that I propose."[close quote] Obama also stated, "We're going to set up a public plan that all persons and all women can access if they don't have health insurance. It'll be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services." Nobody disputes the fact that the term "reproductive services" includes elective abortions.
Obviously, the feminists in Congress knew Obama was lying when he said that no federal dollars will be used to pay for abortions. If they hadn't believed Obama was lying, the feminists from Nancy Pelosi to Barbara Boxer to Barbara Mikulski would have erupted in audible protest. No way will the feminists allow Obama's health care bill to exclude payment for abortions-on-demand.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
The big surprise of Obama's speech was that nobody cried "You lie" when he said, "Under our plan no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions." Anyone who follows this issue knows that all Democratic health-care bills do cover abortion funding, and that the Hyde Amendment will not apply to the health care bill because it only prohibits federal taxpayer funding of abortions financed through Medicaid. Obama promised Planned Parenthood that [quote] "reproductive care is essential care. It is basic care, and so it is at the center, and at the heart of the plan that I propose."[close quote] Obama also stated, "We're going to set up a public plan that all persons and all women can access if they don't have health insurance. It'll be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services." Nobody disputes the fact that the term "reproductive services" includes elective abortions.
Obviously, the feminists in Congress knew Obama was lying when he said that no federal dollars will be used to pay for abortions. If they hadn't believed Obama was lying, the feminists from Nancy Pelosi to Barbara Boxer to Barbara Mikulski would have erupted in audible protest. No way will the feminists allow Obama's health care bill to exclude payment for abortions-on-demand.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Feminists Psychoanalyze Themselves Again
The feminists are going through one of their periodic soul-searching psychological examinations of what the women's liberation movement did or did not do for them, and why they are not happy with the result. We've had several weeks of tiresome articles and reports: Maria Shriver's report called "A Woman's Nation Changes Everything," a Time Magazine cover story headlined "The State of the American Woman," and articles from all the feminist columnists. They all seem scared of their own research because it contradicts much of their gender-neutral ideology. No doubt it was a shock to the feminists to read in Time Magazine that "a majority of both men and women still say it is best for children to have a father working and a mother at home."
These feminist writers long ago identified the major goal of the women's liberation movement as getting more wives out of the home and into the labor force. The chief purpose of the feminists was to make the role of fulltime homemaker economically untenable and socially disdained, and to put down fulltime homemakers as "parasites." The feminists have been strikingly successful with this goal; women are now half the labor force. In the current recession, the majority of workers laid off have been men (especially from construction and manufacturing). Jobs where women predominate have not been much affected.
Feminists are now demanding that workforce rules to be changed to be more female-friendly. They are demanding that the taxpayers provide high-quality daycare and paid family leave. They are demanding that new laws be passed to prohibit employers from ordering women to work overtime (as men are often required to do).
Remember, these are the same feminists who have been saying for years that men and women should be treated exactly the same!
Listen to the audio version of this commentary.
These feminist writers long ago identified the major goal of the women's liberation movement as getting more wives out of the home and into the labor force. The chief purpose of the feminists was to make the role of fulltime homemaker economically untenable and socially disdained, and to put down fulltime homemakers as "parasites." The feminists have been strikingly successful with this goal; women are now half the labor force. In the current recession, the majority of workers laid off have been men (especially from construction and manufacturing). Jobs where women predominate have not been much affected.
Feminists are now demanding that workforce rules to be changed to be more female-friendly. They are demanding that the taxpayers provide high-quality daycare and paid family leave. They are demanding that new laws be passed to prohibit employers from ordering women to work overtime (as men are often required to do).
Remember, these are the same feminists who have been saying for years that men and women should be treated exactly the same!
Listen to the audio version of this commentary.
Friday, November 13, 2009
What Are You Teaching My Child?
Dr. Miriam Grossman has a new book called You’re Teaching My Child What? This book is useful reading for parents because she explains what so-called “comprehensive” sex education really means. One out of four teenage girls now has a sexually transmitted infection, so Dr. Grossman’s exposé of school sex education is very important.
She points out that school instructors and sex-ed materials tell students to go to websites such as “Go Ask Alice.” On that website, teens are told that “The only way to be 100% certain you don’t get any [sexually transmitted] infections" is not to have any kind of sex (and she was very specific about the kinds of sex), but “Alice” reassures anxious teens that “Most people eventually decide to take the plunge and explore the joys of sex.” The website called “Go Ask Alice” presents teens with only two alternatives: dreary lifelong celibacy, or “taking the plunge” and risking some viruses that are mildly inconvenient and supposedly everyone gets eventually, anyway. Teens are told, “Just remember that almost everyone gets HPV at some time."
Dr. Grossman says children should be taught “the medically accurate message that all sexually transmitted infections, and the anguish that accompanies them, are 100% avoidable.” Teens should wait to have sex, find someone who also waited, and then be faithful. In today’s sex ed classes, students don't learn about this alternative, or about the trauma that even the mildest of the two dozen widespread sexually transmitted diseases can cause.
The material in this book is disturbing, but Dr. Grossman is just reporting what teens are routinely subjected to in public schools. She conclusively proves that Planned Parenthood and the leading sex ed organizations present students with a view of sex that is not in teenagers’ best interests.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
She points out that school instructors and sex-ed materials tell students to go to websites such as “Go Ask Alice.” On that website, teens are told that “The only way to be 100% certain you don’t get any [sexually transmitted] infections" is not to have any kind of sex (and she was very specific about the kinds of sex), but “Alice” reassures anxious teens that “Most people eventually decide to take the plunge and explore the joys of sex.” The website called “Go Ask Alice” presents teens with only two alternatives: dreary lifelong celibacy, or “taking the plunge” and risking some viruses that are mildly inconvenient and supposedly everyone gets eventually, anyway. Teens are told, “Just remember that almost everyone gets HPV at some time."
Dr. Grossman says children should be taught “the medically accurate message that all sexually transmitted infections, and the anguish that accompanies them, are 100% avoidable.” Teens should wait to have sex, find someone who also waited, and then be faithful. In today’s sex ed classes, students don't learn about this alternative, or about the trauma that even the mildest of the two dozen widespread sexually transmitted diseases can cause.
The material in this book is disturbing, but Dr. Grossman is just reporting what teens are routinely subjected to in public schools. She conclusively proves that Planned Parenthood and the leading sex ed organizations present students with a view of sex that is not in teenagers’ best interests.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Profs Should Teach Writing—Not Activism
Professor Stanley Fish is known as a liberal, even as a radical literary academic, but he wrote some very sensible things in a recent article in the New York Times. Fish now argues that something must be done about the poor writing skills of college students. He says that most composition classes spend most of the time emphasizing politics and ideology, and universities should rethink how the courses are structured.
Professor Fish says that a few years ago, he became alarmed and curious about the poor writing skills used by his English graduate students in their research papers. Fish thinks that graduate students should write well, since they are responsible for teaching undergraduate students how to write in freshman composition classes. When he investigated this problem, Fish looked at the lesson plans for 104 sections in which graduate students teach composition to undergraduates. He found that in 100 of the 104 sections, “students spent much of their time discussing novels, movies, TV shows and essays on a variety of hot-button issues—racism, sexism, immigration, globalization.” Only four sections emphasized grammar, rhetoric, and the craft of writing well.
Professor Fish wrote, “As I learned more about the world of composition studies I came to the conclusion that unless writing courses focus exclusively on writing they are a sham.” Fish summed up his main argument like this: “Don’t slight the core of the discipline.” Students who don’t write well are not going to write any better after taking a so-called “composition” class that neglects grammar, style, and clarity and instead concentrates on things like multiculturalism and social justice.
Well, good for Stanley Fish. I'm glad that a liberal professor has discovered the truth of what many of us have been saying for years.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Professor Fish says that a few years ago, he became alarmed and curious about the poor writing skills used by his English graduate students in their research papers. Fish thinks that graduate students should write well, since they are responsible for teaching undergraduate students how to write in freshman composition classes. When he investigated this problem, Fish looked at the lesson plans for 104 sections in which graduate students teach composition to undergraduates. He found that in 100 of the 104 sections, “students spent much of their time discussing novels, movies, TV shows and essays on a variety of hot-button issues—racism, sexism, immigration, globalization.” Only four sections emphasized grammar, rhetoric, and the craft of writing well.
Professor Fish wrote, “As I learned more about the world of composition studies I came to the conclusion that unless writing courses focus exclusively on writing they are a sham.” Fish summed up his main argument like this: “Don’t slight the core of the discipline.” Students who don’t write well are not going to write any better after taking a so-called “composition” class that neglects grammar, style, and clarity and instead concentrates on things like multiculturalism and social justice.
Well, good for Stanley Fish. I'm glad that a liberal professor has discovered the truth of what many of us have been saying for years.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Plans to Spread the Wealth Around
When Barack Obama told Joe the Plumber he planned to "spread the wealth around," many people didn't realize that Obama was not talking about spreading the wealth only of the super-rich. Now that Obama is elected, he is moving rapidly to expand welfare handouts for non-taxpayers, running up a tremendous national debt that will inevitably lead to higher taxes on the Middle Class.
The enormity of this transfer of money away from working, taxpaying Americans to non-taxpayers has just been explained in a sensational report by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation. There are not enough superlatives in the English language to adequately describe the colossal amounts of money involved in these shocking cash transfers.
Most people don't realize that the federal budget has become a vast machine for transferring wealth from the upper third of Americans (who pay 90% of federal income taxes) to the lowest third of people who pay no income tax. The size of this massive annual transfer rose by 40% over the last ten years, and is projected to rise to $1 trillion per year by the end of Obama's first term.
Obama didn't invent these means-tested transfers; they mostly started with Lyndon Johnson's Great Society welfare programs. Like most government programs, the cost of these welfare and aid-to-lower-income persons has increased, and Obama demanded vast additional increases, which Congress passed in the Stimulus and Omnibus bills. Welfare spending is 13 times greater today than it was when LBJ started the Great Society in 1964. Means-tested welfare spending then was only 1.2% of our Gross Domestic Product, and now has reached 5%. These programs are now the third most expensive government activity. National Defense ranks only fourth.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
The enormity of this transfer of money away from working, taxpaying Americans to non-taxpayers has just been explained in a sensational report by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation. There are not enough superlatives in the English language to adequately describe the colossal amounts of money involved in these shocking cash transfers.
Most people don't realize that the federal budget has become a vast machine for transferring wealth from the upper third of Americans (who pay 90% of federal income taxes) to the lowest third of people who pay no income tax. The size of this massive annual transfer rose by 40% over the last ten years, and is projected to rise to $1 trillion per year by the end of Obama's first term.
Obama didn't invent these means-tested transfers; they mostly started with Lyndon Johnson's Great Society welfare programs. Like most government programs, the cost of these welfare and aid-to-lower-income persons has increased, and Obama demanded vast additional increases, which Congress passed in the Stimulus and Omnibus bills. Welfare spending is 13 times greater today than it was when LBJ started the Great Society in 1964. Means-tested welfare spending then was only 1.2% of our Gross Domestic Product, and now has reached 5%. These programs are now the third most expensive government activity. National Defense ranks only fourth.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Monday, November 09, 2009
Owens Breaks 4 Campaign Promises in first hour in Congress
GOUVERNEUR, NY - Congressman-elect Bill Owens was sworn in at noon today.
Owens indicated in a press release released shortly afterwards that he was now in favor of the the "Affordable Healthcare for America Act" bill in direct contrast to his earlier position during the election campaign.
According to Politico.com, Mr. Owens assured voters that he felt the public option had no place in the health care reform bill. Contrary to that position, Mr. Owens now indicates that he intends to vote in favor of the bill even though it now contains a public option.
UPDATED: A spokesman for Congressman Owens indicated correctly that Mr. Owens had recanted his solid position against public option later in the campaign, clarifying that he did not wish public option to be a 'litmus test' for the Health Reform bill and that on Oct. 30th, several days prior to the election, in a debate had stated that he generally supported the public option as it was now written (at that time.)
Mr. Owens also indicated during his campaign that he was firmly opposed to cutting Medicare benefits, taxing health care benefits, and increased taxes on the middle class in any way as you can see clearly in the screenshot below, taken directly from Mr. Owens' campaign website.
The Lords of Entitlement
Every medical insurance decision will be subject to rationing by politics.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi defied policy logic and public opinion late Saturday night, ramming through the House a nearly 2,000-page health-care leviathan that counts as the biggest expansion of the federal government since the New Deal. As President Obama likes to say, this was a "teachable moment" about our current government.The vote was 220 to 215, with 39 House Democrats joining all but one Republican in opposition. Mrs. Pelosi had to cajole and bribe her way to the magic 218, and the list of her promises must be stacked to the ceiling.
The lone Republican, Joseph Cao, represents a Democratic-leaning Louisiana district and extracted a promise that Mr. Obama would increase Medicaid payments to his state, and even then he only voted after Democrats had already hit 218. Let no one suggest this was the "bipartisan" health reform that Mr. Obama has long promised.
The bill is instead a breathtaking display of illiberal ambition, intended to make the middle class more dependent on government through the umbilical cord of "universal health care." It creates a vast new entitlement, financed by European levels of taxation on business and individuals. The 20% corner of Medicare open to private competition is slashed, while fiscally strapped states are saddled with new Medicaid burdens. The insurance industry will have to vet every policy with Washington, which will regulate who it must cover, what it can offer, and how much it can charge.
We have little sympathy for the insurers, or for that matter most of the other medical providers who signed on to this process only to claim now to be appalled by the result. The insurance lobby—led by Aetna CEO Ron Williams—made the Faustian bet that it could trade new regulations for more new subsidized customers who would face a tax penalty if they didn't buy their insurance. The Pelosi bill includes the regulation but guts the tax penalty because it's unpopular. Insurers will thus have to cover more sick people with fewer dollars, as healthy folk opt out of coverage until they are sick.
This writing was on the wall months ago, but the insurers chose to play an inside game rather than shape public opinion. Judging by their weekend statement—criticizing the House bill but vowing to seek "bipartisan" reform—they will now throw themselves at the mercy of the Senate. Good luck with that. The real victims are their customers, most of whom will pay more for insurance as the new mandates raise costs. Read more here.
An Anniversary To Teach Us Some History
One of the most quotable statements ever made by President Ronald Reagan was "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this Wall." Those famous words, spoken in 1987 at the Brandenburg Gate of the Berlin Wall, were hurled as a direct challenge to the Soviet Communist Empire, and they changed history. Those words marked the beginning of the end of the vast dictatorship that Reagan had called the "evil empire."
The Berlin Wall was the visible manifestation of the Iron Curtain that divided West from East, freedom from Communist slavery. At the end of World War II, millions of refugees fled from Communist Russia into Germany. The Soviet Union could not tolerate this flight to freedom and ordered East Germany to stop people from escaping. The Soviets ordered the building of a frightening structure of concrete, 12 feet high and 100 miles long, guarded by Communist soldiers who were ordered to kill anyone who tried to cross it. Between 1961 and 1989, a few desperate East Germans managed to escape by ingenious methods — one in a famous hot air balloon — but at least 100 were killed trying to cross the border. They were the 20th century types who would have agreed with Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death."
When the Wall was dismantled in 1990, a few pieces were brought to the United States so we can remember the viciousness of the evil empire. One piece of the Wall stands at the Churchill Memorial in Fulton, Missouri where Winston Churchill made his famous Iron Curtain speech. Another section is at the Ronald Reagan Library in California. In my office at Eagle Forum headquarters, I have a little piece of the Wall that I chiseled out when the Wall was half up and half down in 1990.
We should use the memory of the Berlin Wall, and today observe the 20th anniversary of its fall, to teach young people about the evil of Communism.
Audio version of this commentary.
The Berlin Wall was the visible manifestation of the Iron Curtain that divided West from East, freedom from Communist slavery. At the end of World War II, millions of refugees fled from Communist Russia into Germany. The Soviet Union could not tolerate this flight to freedom and ordered East Germany to stop people from escaping. The Soviets ordered the building of a frightening structure of concrete, 12 feet high and 100 miles long, guarded by Communist soldiers who were ordered to kill anyone who tried to cross it. Between 1961 and 1989, a few desperate East Germans managed to escape by ingenious methods — one in a famous hot air balloon — but at least 100 were killed trying to cross the border. They were the 20th century types who would have agreed with Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death."
When the Wall was dismantled in 1990, a few pieces were brought to the United States so we can remember the viciousness of the evil empire. One piece of the Wall stands at the Churchill Memorial in Fulton, Missouri where Winston Churchill made his famous Iron Curtain speech. Another section is at the Ronald Reagan Library in California. In my office at Eagle Forum headquarters, I have a little piece of the Wall that I chiseled out when the Wall was half up and half down in 1990.
We should use the memory of the Berlin Wall, and today observe the 20th anniversary of its fall, to teach young people about the evil of Communism.
Audio version of this commentary.
Sunday, November 08, 2009
What the Pelosi Health-Care Bill Really Says
Here are some important passages in the 2,000 page legislation.
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
The health bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is bringing to a vote (H.R. 3962) is 1,990 pages. Here are some of the details you need to know.
What the government will require you to do:
• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a "qualified plan." If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a "grace period" to switch you to a "qualified plan," meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there's no grace period. You'll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.
• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a "qualified plan" covers and how much you'll be legally required to pay for it. That's like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.
Associated Press
Protestors wave signs in front of the Capitol on Thursday.
On Nov. 2, the Congressional Budget Office estimated what the plans will likely cost. An individual earning $44,000 before taxes who purchases his own insurance will have to pay a $5,300 premium and an estimated $2,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, for a total of $7,300 a year, which is 17% of his pre-tax income. A family earning $102,100 a year before taxes will have to pay a $15,000 premium plus an estimated $5,300 out-of-pocket, for a $20,300 total, or 20% of its pre-tax income. Individuals and families earning less than these amounts will be eligible for subsidies paid directly to their insurer.
• Sec. 303 (pp. 167-168) makes it clear that, although the "qualified plan" is not yet designed, it will be of the "one size fits all" variety. The bill claims to offer choice—basic, enhanced and premium levels—but the benefits are the same. Only the co-pays and deductibles differ. You will have to enroll in the same plan, whether the government is paying for it or you and your employer are footing the bill.
• Sec. 59b (pp. 297-299) says that when you file your taxes, you must include proof that you are in a qualified plan. If not, you will be fined thousands of dollars. Illegal immigrants are exempt from this requirement.
• Sec. 412 (p. 272) says that employers must provide a "qualified plan" for their employees and pay 72.5% of the cost, and a smaller share of family coverage, or incur an 8% payroll tax. Small businesses, with payrolls from $500,000 to $750,000, are fined less.
Eviscerating Medicare:
In addition to reducing future Medicare funding by an estimated $500 billion, the bill fundamentally changes how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals, permitting the government to dictate treatment decisions. Read more here.
Friday, November 06, 2009
Pelosi's bill rolls medical amnesty for illegal immigrants and abortion on demand into one colossal pile of junk
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 6, 2009
CONTACT: Phyllis Schlafly, President, (314) 721-1213
Schlafly: Pelosi's bill rolls medical amnesty for illegal immigrants and abortion on demand into one colossal pile of junk
Washington, D.C. -– Phyllis Schlafly, founder and president of the leading conservative public policy organization Eagle Forum, made the following statements on the eve of the scheduled House vote on Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) health care reform bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962):
"Less than 24 hours remain for Members of Congress to do the right thing and listen to their constituents who have passionately risen up to oppose this 2,000-page pile of junk policy which Nancy Pelosi is masquerading as health care reform," said Eagle Forum President Phyllis Schlafly. "This bill is stealth amnesty for illegal immigrants and abortion on demand rolled into one."
"H.R. 3962 is the feminists' dream bill because it provides for the largest expansion of government sanctioned abortion since Roe v. Wade in 1973," said Schlafly. "It's unprecedented. It would for the very first time allow direct government funding of elective abortions, and when strident abortion supporters like Rep. Louise Slaughter and Planned Parenthood have no problem with supposed "pro-life" amendment language, like that offered by Rep. Brad Ellsworth, you know something's fishy."
"Who would have believed that after all this time Nancy Pelosi would be the one to prove Joe Wilson correct? Pelosi's bill has done nothing to close those pesky loopholes that existed in the Democrats' first health care bill," continued Schlafly. "H.R. 3962 still allows illegal immigrants open access to the Insurance Exchange, it still provides no reliable verification mechanism, and it still allows that even if only one person qualifies for the family affordability credit, then the entire family is eligible for the pickings."
"Certain Members of Congress may not care much about saving American jobs, but they certainly do care about saving their own," concluded Schlafly. "Whether this bill goes down in the House tomorrow or if it's defeated in the Senate, ultimately, the American people will be heard, just as Virginia and New Jersey voters were heard loud and clear last Tuesday night."
###
TAKE ACTION!
CONTACT: Phyllis Schlafly, President, (314) 721-1213
Schlafly: Pelosi's bill rolls medical amnesty for illegal immigrants and abortion on demand into one colossal pile of junk
Washington, D.C. -– Phyllis Schlafly, founder and president of the leading conservative public policy organization Eagle Forum, made the following statements on the eve of the scheduled House vote on Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) health care reform bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962):
"Less than 24 hours remain for Members of Congress to do the right thing and listen to their constituents who have passionately risen up to oppose this 2,000-page pile of junk policy which Nancy Pelosi is masquerading as health care reform," said Eagle Forum President Phyllis Schlafly. "This bill is stealth amnesty for illegal immigrants and abortion on demand rolled into one."
"H.R. 3962 is the feminists' dream bill because it provides for the largest expansion of government sanctioned abortion since Roe v. Wade in 1973," said Schlafly. "It's unprecedented. It would for the very first time allow direct government funding of elective abortions, and when strident abortion supporters like Rep. Louise Slaughter and Planned Parenthood have no problem with supposed "pro-life" amendment language, like that offered by Rep. Brad Ellsworth, you know something's fishy."
"Who would have believed that after all this time Nancy Pelosi would be the one to prove Joe Wilson correct? Pelosi's bill has done nothing to close those pesky loopholes that existed in the Democrats' first health care bill," continued Schlafly. "H.R. 3962 still allows illegal immigrants open access to the Insurance Exchange, it still provides no reliable verification mechanism, and it still allows that even if only one person qualifies for the family affordability credit, then the entire family is eligible for the pickings."
"Certain Members of Congress may not care much about saving American jobs, but they certainly do care about saving their own," concluded Schlafly. "Whether this bill goes down in the House tomorrow or if it's defeated in the Senate, ultimately, the American people will be heard, just as Virginia and New Jersey voters were heard loud and clear last Tuesday night."
###
TAKE ACTION!
House Health Care Votes to Begin 9 a.m. Saturday!
Federal Abortion Funding Remains in H.R. 3962: Tell Your Representative to Vote NO on the "Rule Vote!"
Lessons We Learn from the Ancients
The enormous government bailouts in today's economy have turned our attention to business and fiscal issues, the corporate world, and its leaders. Steve Forbes and John Prevas have written a book that makes startling comparisons between past leaders and today's CEOs, reminding us that severe challenges have faced every powerful nation. These two authors have bonded the past and the present, displaying the wisdom of ancient civilizations to modern America. The name of this book is Power, Ambition, Glory; The Stunning Parallels Between Great Leaders of the Ancient World and Today and the Lessons You Can Learn.
This book chronicles the lives of six major historical figures such as Julius Caesar and Cyrus the Great, comparing their attributes and leadership styles with Hank Greenburg (AIG), Ray Kroc (McDonalds), Jack Welch (General Electric), and John Chambers (Cisco). This book explains the true components of leadership: a great leader is one who challenges the conventional wisdom of the day and is able to think out of the box to pull off extraordinary feats. Leadership is about remaining focused on the fundamentals, the nuts and bolts of making an organization work, day in and day out. Character matters in leadership, as well as developing and maintaining a proper perspective on yourself. In our era, one might ask, where have all the leaders gone? Everyone seems scared to stand up and lead.
Historian David McCullough writes, "History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are." Those who look at the world today and say that we have never before faced perilous times must have not studied history. This book, called Power, Ambition Glory, offers helpful lessons from the past.
Listen to the audio version of this commentary.
This book chronicles the lives of six major historical figures such as Julius Caesar and Cyrus the Great, comparing their attributes and leadership styles with Hank Greenburg (AIG), Ray Kroc (McDonalds), Jack Welch (General Electric), and John Chambers (Cisco). This book explains the true components of leadership: a great leader is one who challenges the conventional wisdom of the day and is able to think out of the box to pull off extraordinary feats. Leadership is about remaining focused on the fundamentals, the nuts and bolts of making an organization work, day in and day out. Character matters in leadership, as well as developing and maintaining a proper perspective on yourself. In our era, one might ask, where have all the leaders gone? Everyone seems scared to stand up and lead.
Historian David McCullough writes, "History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are." Those who look at the world today and say that we have never before faced perilous times must have not studied history. This book, called Power, Ambition Glory, offers helpful lessons from the past.
Listen to the audio version of this commentary.
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Court Orders Child into Public School
Do you think a judge should decide what school a child must attend? That decision has always been made by parents, not the government. When parents disagree, the just have to work it out and come to some decision or compromise. In our land of liberty, this decision should be made by the parents, not by a judge.
Ten-year-old Amanda Kurowski had been homeschooled by her mother since first grade. Her parents divorced when she was a newborn, and her mother has primary custody. Amanda’s father wants her to go to public school, so he took his complaint to court. In a shocking decision, the court ordered Amanda to go to public school. Amanda is a perfectly well-adjusted, normal young girl. She attends supplemental public school classes and participates in a variety of sports. Even the judge acknowledged that Amanda is well liked, social and interactive with her peers, and intellectually above her grade level.
The judge ordered this homeschooled child into public school after the family court bureaucrats said that Amanda reflected "her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith.” The judge ruled that Amanda “would be best served by exposure to multiple points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior and cooperation in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs.”
Now remember, Amanda is only ten years old. The family court has no business making a ruling about school based on the notion that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any religious points of view other than what her mother taught her. So, Amanda started 5th grade at her local public school in New Hampshire this fall. The Alliance Defense Fund is helping Amanda’s mother to challenge the court order, and we don't know what the courts will finally decide.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Ten-year-old Amanda Kurowski had been homeschooled by her mother since first grade. Her parents divorced when she was a newborn, and her mother has primary custody. Amanda’s father wants her to go to public school, so he took his complaint to court. In a shocking decision, the court ordered Amanda to go to public school. Amanda is a perfectly well-adjusted, normal young girl. She attends supplemental public school classes and participates in a variety of sports. Even the judge acknowledged that Amanda is well liked, social and interactive with her peers, and intellectually above her grade level.
The judge ordered this homeschooled child into public school after the family court bureaucrats said that Amanda reflected "her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith.” The judge ruled that Amanda “would be best served by exposure to multiple points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior and cooperation in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs.”
Now remember, Amanda is only ten years old. The family court has no business making a ruling about school based on the notion that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any religious points of view other than what her mother taught her. So, Amanda started 5th grade at her local public school in New Hampshire this fall. The Alliance Defense Fund is helping Amanda’s mother to challenge the court order, and we don't know what the courts will finally decide.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
700 Million Worldwide Desire to Migrate Permanently, 11-02-09
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Every day, migrants leave their homelands behind for new lives in other countries. Reflecting this desire, rather than the reality of the numbers that actually migrate, Gallup finds about 16% of the world's adults would like to move to another country permanently if they had the chance. This translates to roughly 700 million worldwide -- more than the entire adult population of North and South America combined.
Read entire article
Read entire article
The new show V on ABC TV
The Chicago Tribune TV critic writes:
A blogger also compares:
Imagine this. At a time of political turmoil, a charismatic, telegenic new leader arrives virtually out of nowhere. He offers a message of hope and reconciliation based on compromise and promises to marshal technology for a better future that will include universal health care.The alien leader Anna has the liberal media brainwashed. But she is a short-haired smooth-talking manipulative phony who is not what she appears to be. She is an evil space alien reptile disguised as a human.
The news media swoons in admiration -- one simpering anchorman even shouts at a reporter who asks a tough question: "Why don't you show some respect?!" The public is likewise smitten, except for a few nut cases who circulate batty rumors on the Internet about the leader's origins and intentions. The leader, undismayed, offers assurances that are soothing, if also just a tiny bit condescending: "Embracing change is never easy."
So, does that sound like anyone you know? Oh, wait -- did I mention the leader is secretly a totalitarian space lizard who's come here to eat us?
A blogger also compares:
They come promoting goodness, peace and light – they’re here to help us with their technology, including setting up healing centers where they can easily cure over 60 incurable diseases. The world is “hurting” according to one of the characters, so it seems the vast majority of the population accepts them on their word without much questioning at all. There are small protests breaking out everywhere, but those folks are looked at as rabble rousers who need to get with the program.If this TV show is a parody of Obama, then it is brutal. It portrays the leader as alien, effeminate, publicity-seeking, dishonest, reptilian, tricky, and bent on world domination, and yet somehow lulling the gullible public into subservience with bogus promises.
The aliens are all good looking and about hope and change (their words, not mine) and interestingly when reporters begin to ask hard questions upon Anna’s arrival, the newscaster mentioned above accuses them of being rude(!). ...
During the interview the phrase “universal health care” is actually used in describing what they are offering and why they should be accepted.
There’s an underground group that knows what the Visitors are up to, but they are looked upon as nutjobs and terrorists even though they are in the right and know what the Visitors are really up to.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
"The Battle Hymn" of the President
Parents, do you know how some public school teachers have used classroom time to train children in Obama worship? New Jersey second-graders were taught to sing a praise-Obama song to the tune of the Battle Hymn of the Republic. Here are some of the lyrics: "Mr. President we honor you today!/For all your great accomplishments, we all doth say 'hooray.'/Hooray, Mr. President! You're number one!/Hooray Mr. President, we're really proud of you!/So continue, Mr. President, we know you'll do the trick/So here's a hearty hip hooray, Hip, hip hooray!"
Who's responsible for this outrage? The teacher has retired with full pension, and the principal, Dr. Denise King, defended the controversial song, making no apologies. She touted her trip to Obama's Inauguration in the school yearbook along with Obama campaign slogans and pictures she took in Washington on January 20, and she has posted pictures of Obama in the school's hallways.
Superintendent Christopher Manno issued a written statement that the taping of the song and its distribution were unauthorized, but failed to say whether the singing lesson was approved. State Education Commissioner Lucille Davy directed the superintendent to review this matter but declined to say what the review will cover or if any action would be taken. Some shocked comments from parents included: "I can't believe it's our school. We don't want to praise this guy like he's a god or an idol or a king." Another said: "This is the type of propaganda you would see in Stalin's Russia or Kim Jong-il's North Korea."
This song sung in New Jersey is further proof of Obama's plan to indoctrinate schoolchildren, which was evident in Education Secretary Arne Duncan's instructions to all school principals to use the President's September 8 speech to schoolchildren as a tool to teach them to be cheerleaders for Barack Obama.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Who's responsible for this outrage? The teacher has retired with full pension, and the principal, Dr. Denise King, defended the controversial song, making no apologies. She touted her trip to Obama's Inauguration in the school yearbook along with Obama campaign slogans and pictures she took in Washington on January 20, and she has posted pictures of Obama in the school's hallways.
Superintendent Christopher Manno issued a written statement that the taping of the song and its distribution were unauthorized, but failed to say whether the singing lesson was approved. State Education Commissioner Lucille Davy directed the superintendent to review this matter but declined to say what the review will cover or if any action would be taken. Some shocked comments from parents included: "I can't believe it's our school. We don't want to praise this guy like he's a god or an idol or a king." Another said: "This is the type of propaganda you would see in Stalin's Russia or Kim Jong-il's North Korea."
This song sung in New Jersey is further proof of Obama's plan to indoctrinate schoolchildren, which was evident in Education Secretary Arne Duncan's instructions to all school principals to use the President's September 8 speech to schoolchildren as a tool to teach them to be cheerleaders for Barack Obama.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
More than 3 Million Registered Voters are Dead, 12 Million More Ineligible, Analysis Finds
Regardless of how lively an election season might be, a new study shows that more 3.3 million voters on current registration rolls across the country are dead.
Another 12.9 million remain on voter registration lists in an area where they no longer live.
The analysis was conducted by the Aristotle International Inc., a technology company
specializing in political campaigns, developing software and databases for politicians.
In total that means about 8.9 percent of all registered voters fall under the category of “deadwood” voters on the rolls, the term for voters who should no longer be eligible to vote in a precinct.
Not only does this raise concerns about potential voter fraud, but from the interest of campaign consultants, ineligible or expired voters could lead to a waste of resources, said John Aristotle Phillips, CEO of Aristotle.
“Some states have bigger problems than others,” Phillips said. “With deadwood exceeding one in seven votes in some counties, candidates might as well spend a day a week campaigning in the cemetery.” Read more here.
Another 12.9 million remain on voter registration lists in an area where they no longer live.
The analysis was conducted by the Aristotle International Inc., a technology company
specializing in political campaigns, developing software and databases for politicians.
In total that means about 8.9 percent of all registered voters fall under the category of “deadwood” voters on the rolls, the term for voters who should no longer be eligible to vote in a precinct.
Not only does this raise concerns about potential voter fraud, but from the interest of campaign consultants, ineligible or expired voters could lead to a waste of resources, said John Aristotle Phillips, CEO of Aristotle.
“Some states have bigger problems than others,” Phillips said. “With deadwood exceeding one in seven votes in some counties, candidates might as well spend a day a week campaigning in the cemetery.” Read more here.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Singing Songs to the President in New Jersey
If you send your children to a public school, they may be secretly indoctrinated in Obama-worship. If that's not your plan for your children, you had better act now, before it's too late. Second-graders in New Jersey were taught to sing songs of praise and fidelity to Barack Obama in February and again in June, and parents only found out about this in September.
Public schoolchildren are now forbidden to sing Christmas carols that mention the real meaning of Christmas (only songs like "Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer" are allowed), but in New Jersey, second-graders were taught to sing the spiritual "Jesus Loves the Little Children" in which Jesus' name was replaced with Obama's. The children sang, "He said red, yellow, black, or white/All are equal in his sight/Barack Hussein Obama. Hmm, hmm, hmm." Before Obama's election, it was considered a political no-no for Republicans to use his middle name. Beginning with his inauguration in January, he and his followers use his middle name Hussein to glorify his Muslim heritage and connections.
This song was not some extracurricular playground activity. The video makes clear that the teacher was methodically instructing the children, using one talented second-grader to demonstrate exactly how to sing the song, and coaching students who forgot the words. The teacher also led the children in giving a sort of Obama salute. On cue, they outstretched their right hands, accentuating their community of action in praising Obama.
The New Jersey songs were first taught to the children at Bernice Young Elementary School in February to celebrate Black History Month, and then videotaped in June as part of a Father's Day tribute to Barack Obama. Only after the video was later posted on the internet did parents learn about it.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Public schoolchildren are now forbidden to sing Christmas carols that mention the real meaning of Christmas (only songs like "Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer" are allowed), but in New Jersey, second-graders were taught to sing the spiritual "Jesus Loves the Little Children" in which Jesus' name was replaced with Obama's. The children sang, "He said red, yellow, black, or white/All are equal in his sight/Barack Hussein Obama. Hmm, hmm, hmm." Before Obama's election, it was considered a political no-no for Republicans to use his middle name. Beginning with his inauguration in January, he and his followers use his middle name Hussein to glorify his Muslim heritage and connections.
This song was not some extracurricular playground activity. The video makes clear that the teacher was methodically instructing the children, using one talented second-grader to demonstrate exactly how to sing the song, and coaching students who forgot the words. The teacher also led the children in giving a sort of Obama salute. On cue, they outstretched their right hands, accentuating their community of action in praising Obama.
The New Jersey songs were first taught to the children at Bernice Young Elementary School in February to celebrate Black History Month, and then videotaped in June as part of a Father's Day tribute to Barack Obama. Only after the video was later posted on the internet did parents learn about it.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Monday, November 02, 2009
House Call on Washington
This Thursday, November 5th, at noon on the Capitol Steps, there will be a House Call on Washington, where Americans from all over the nation will demand that Congress defeat the government takeover of healthcare.
“This is our liberty and tyranny moment. This is it,” Bachmann said on “Hannity” Friday. “This is about patriotism and manning up. And if we can get Americans literally by the busload to come to Washington, D.C., next week... [w]e’ll stop this.”
If you cannot be in Washington D.C. on Thursday at noon, call or show up at one of district offices of either your House and Senate members at noon on Thursday.
Look up contact and location information for your representatives here.
Let Your Voice Be Heard!
“This is our liberty and tyranny moment. This is it,” Bachmann said on “Hannity” Friday. “This is about patriotism and manning up. And if we can get Americans literally by the busload to come to Washington, D.C., next week... [w]e’ll stop this.”
If you cannot be in Washington D.C. on Thursday at noon, call or show up at one of district offices of either your House and Senate members at noon on Thursday.
Look up contact and location information for your representatives here.
Let Your Voice Be Heard!
Let Your Voice Be Heard
“This Is Your Moment, Now Is Your Time, Let Your Voice Be Heard”
Go to Eagle Forum's Take Action page to look up contact information for your representatives and media in your area.
The Obama Administration's plan to "change" America involves big changes in the schools. Obama wants the federal government to take control of public school curriculum, and also compile a database of personal information about each student. The President will talk directly to the kids in their schools, and the Department of Education will attach extraordinary strings to the $100 billion of Stimulus funds earmarked for education.
The President's September 8 speech from the White House to every schoolchild in America kicked up a storm of public controversy. The Secretary of Education sent a study plan for Obama's speech written by the U.S. Department of Education to every school ahead of time. That study outline revealed the political motives.
In this study plan, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan instructed all school principals to use this "historic moment" to have their students and teachers watch the President's speech "so they can compete in the global economy." Duncan sent one Menu of classroom activities for PreKindergarten-to-6th-grade and another for grades 7-12.
The PreK-to-6th-grade instructions told teachers to "build background knowledge about the President" by reading books about Barack Obama. The study plan told elementary students it is "important that we listen to the President," to "take notes while President Obama is talking," to "write down key ideas or phrases" from his speech, and to "discuss them after the speech." The instructions for grades 7-12 told teachers to post "notable quotes" from Obama's speeches on the bulletin board, to have students "take notes while President Obama talks," and to identify "the three most important words in the speech." Students should be asked: "What is President Obama inspiring you to do?" and "How will he inspire us?"
Parents should rise up and stop the public schools from teaching schoolchildren to be cheerleaders for Obama and his policies.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
The President's September 8 speech from the White House to every schoolchild in America kicked up a storm of public controversy. The Secretary of Education sent a study plan for Obama's speech written by the U.S. Department of Education to every school ahead of time. That study outline revealed the political motives.
In this study plan, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan instructed all school principals to use this "historic moment" to have their students and teachers watch the President's speech "so they can compete in the global economy." Duncan sent one Menu of classroom activities for PreKindergarten-to-6th-grade and another for grades 7-12.
The PreK-to-6th-grade instructions told teachers to "build background knowledge about the President" by reading books about Barack Obama. The study plan told elementary students it is "important that we listen to the President," to "take notes while President Obama is talking," to "write down key ideas or phrases" from his speech, and to "discuss them after the speech." The instructions for grades 7-12 told teachers to post "notable quotes" from Obama's speeches on the bulletin board, to have students "take notes while President Obama talks," and to identify "the three most important words in the speech." Students should be asked: "What is President Obama inspiring you to do?" and "How will he inspire us?"
Parents should rise up and stop the public schools from teaching schoolchildren to be cheerleaders for Obama and his policies.
Listen to the Audio version of this commentary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
