Tag Archives: Bush 2003 invasion of Iraq

May 25 2015

Obama’s Education Secretary Calls for Government Boarding Schools: “There Are Just Certain Kids We Should Have 24/7″


Re-Post from the DC Clothesline Posted on May 21, 2015 by Melissa Dykes

classroom

If you thought the loss of parent’s rights over what level of government brainwashing their child is subjected to within the regular public school system was bad enough in this country, check out the new idea radical Obama Education Secretary Arne Duncan was throwing around last week while speaking at the National Summit on Youth Violence Prevention: public boarding schools.

He was quoted as saying, “That’s a little bit of a different idea — a controversial idea — but the question is do we have some children where there’s not a mom, there’s not a dad, there’s not a grandma, there’s just nobody at home?”

And why exactly is no one home? Because the middle class is being systematically murdered and everyone who isn’t on government welfare or part of the .0001% has to work multiple jobs just to keep a roof over their heads and the lights on these days?

So why not let the government be these kids’ family?

See the whole agenda at work here?

Duncan also proposed even more “after-school programming” as part of the “‘cradle-to-career’ education agenda” via The New American:

Claiming that there are “just certain kids we should have 24/7,” the controversial figure also proposed, citing inaccurate information, turning government schools across America into “community centers” that would offer students even more “after-school programming.” Despite escalating criticism of Duncan and his scheming — one analyst called it “scary” — the proposed plots were hardly surprising considering other elements of what senior officials often refer to as the “cradle-to-career” education agenda.

In essence, according to Duncan in various speeches, government schools, now largely controlled from Washington, D.C., are being used as a “weapon” to “change the world.” With the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as what the education secretary called his “global partner,” public education will also serve as a tool to transform children into what he described as “green citizens.” If Obama’s “Green Jobs” Czar Van Jones had not been forced to resign over his self-declared revolutionary communist views, he could have even placed the newly minted “green citizens” into the “green jobs” Duncan says the feds are preparing them for.

The feds… preparing our nation’s children… as a “weapon” to “change the world.”

Wow.

How very Hitler of them.

Others in our government have been heavily pushing the idea of even longer school days. Last year, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie wanted to extend the school lunch program into a school dinner program to go along with longer school days/years. President Obama has proposed almost the same thing since 2009 – along with a universal daycare program (that’s right, universal) to get even more kids into government education centers at an even earlier age for longer and longer periods of indoctrination.

Government boarding schools, however, takes the indoctrination cake.

Can you just imagine the world our government is building up all around us? The future this country is looking at under the constant government social engineering and “leadership” of these people?

It’s bad enough already that our schools openly teach to the middle, many using convoluted and confusing Common Core methods to further dumb down an already deliberately dumbed down populace where, above all, critical thinking skills are not just downplayed but are actively being stamped out altogether the nation’s children over.

Now the government wants some kids to be completely shipped off Agenda 21-style to government education (read: brainwashing) camps where parents will not only have zero input on what these children are being taught (while the kids are turned into mindless government drones), but the parents will barely even see their children at all.

I bet somewhere in classified government documents the public is not allowed to see, this too is referred to as “national security.”

Reminds me of what social engineer Bertrand Russell once said:

“Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished…. Influences of the home are obstructive; and in order to condition students, verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective…. It is for a future scientist to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it cost per head to make children believe that snow is black. When the technique is perfected, every government that has been in charge will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen.”

Melissa Dykes is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheeple and a co-creator of Truthstream Media with Aaron Dykes, a site that offers teleprompter-free, unscripted analysis of The Matrix we find ourselves living in. Melissa also co-founded Nutritional Anarchy with Daisy Luther of The Organic Prepper, a site focused on resistance through food self-sufficiency. Wake the flock up!

Don’t forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

May 23 2015

The Sources of the Founders’ Ideas


By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

“What, in fact, were the sources of the Founders’ ideas regarding the Constitution?” David Barton responds as follows:

Political science professors believed that this question could be answered by organizing a broad spectrum of writings from the Founding Era with the goals of identifying the sources cited in those writings. The researchers assembled 15,000 representative writings from that period and isolated 3,154 direct quotes back to their original sources, thereby identifying the most frequently-cited sources of the Founding Era. (The results of that study may be found in Barton’s The Origin of the American Constitution.)

The individual cited most often in the writings of the Founding Era was the political philosopher Charles Montesquieu, with 8.3 percent of the quotes being taken from his writings. Legal scholar William Blackstone was next, with 7.9 percent of the quotes, and … John Locke was third, with 2.9 percent. These were the three most frequently-cited individuals during the Founding Era, but the single most-cited was the Bible, with 34 percent of the quotes coming from the Scriptures.

Significantly, that percentage is even higher when the source of ideas used by individuals such as Montesquieu and Blackstone are identified and included… [for they themselves] had used the Bible to help arrive at their own conclusions.

American scholars, even of classical Greek orientation, have ignored this evidence, having read America’s Founding Fathers with Lockean glasses.

 

May 23 2015

END THIS TYRANNY


Tyranny is defined in the Merriam Webster Dictionary as:  cruel and unfair treatment by people with power over others; a government in which all power belongs to one person.  Escaping the tyranny of a monarch was the reason America was founded.  Our Declaration of Independence from another country, England, states: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”  Our forefathers fought a war to earn America’s freedom from tyranny.

Our Founding Fathers wanted to be sure that America would remain the country of free people.  To that end, they provided a legal, peaceful method within our Constitution to strip an internal tyrant of power.  It is the tool of Impeachment defined in the Constitution, Article II, Section 4:  “The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”  The House of Representatives issues the impeachment charges and the Senate conducts the trial.

Two American Presidents have been impeached.  Andrew Johnson, the 17th President, was impeached on grounds of disregarding the Tenure of Office Act of 1867.  It prohibited a President from dismissing office holders without the Senate’s approval.  He was impeached by the House of Representatives for trying to throw Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War, out of office.  The Senate was one vote short of the two-thirds majority needed to convict him and he was acquitted May 26, 1868.  Political maneuvering is cited as the reason there was not a conviction.

William J. Clinton, the 42nd President, was the second impeached.  He was charged with four crimes and impeached in the House of Representatives on two of those, grand jury perjury and obstruction of justice.  Again, the Senate failed to secure the two-thirds majority needed to convict and he was acquitted February 12, 1999.  Again, political maneuvering is cited as the reason there was not a conviction.

Also, Richard Nixon, the 37th President, had three articles of impeachment issued by the House of Representatives on July 20, 1974.  Nixon resigned his office on August 9, 1974, before the House voted to impeach him.

In all three instances, the Constitution did its job.  What the Founding Fathers did not foresee was that people elected to represent the citizens would thwart our country’s guiding document, the Constitution, for personal or party gains.  America has evolved into two parties, the Democrats and the Republicans.  For too many of those elected to our Congress, the desire to keep their individual power and to maintain their party’s control over spending our tax dollars is more important than ensuring that the Constitution is enforced. 

Another safeguard in the Constitution to protect us against tyranny is the assignment of specific powers to three separate branches of the Federal Government, the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches.  No branch may infringe on the powers of the others.  By not taking the appropriate action, impeaching Obama, the Congress has subjected us to having a Tyrant, not a President, heading the Executive branch of the Federal government. 

In August, 2013, Business Daily listed several laws Obama has broken.  He chooses what laws do and don’t suit his needs and ignores the latter.  He is usurping the law-making power the Constitution gives solely to the Legislative branch of the Federal government, the Congress. 

Obama circumvented the immigration law, deciding not to deport illegal immigrants under the age of 30.  He unilaterally has and continues to change Obamacare.  These are only two examples on a very long list.  After Congress enacts a bill and the President signs it, it is the law of the land.  It can not be changed arbitrarily.  Changes are legal only when they are introduced and approved by the Congress as a revocation of or an amendment to the original law.

Business Daily also lists actions Obama has taken that usurp the power the Constitution gives only to the Judicial branch of the Federal government.  This tyrant ignores court decisions.  Re-imposing a moratorium on off-shore drilling after the courts struck down his original moratorium and refusing to remove his appointees to the National Labor Relations Board after those appointments were ruled unconstitutional are only two examples of his illegal actions. 

It is time for Congress to follow the rules; it must act and do what the Constitution demands.  Breaking laws and usurping power are not allowable actions for any President.  It is time to impeach and to try the forty-fourth President, Barack Obama.  This tyrant must be stopped in order to preserve America as it was intended to be, a country of free people without a tyrant or a central power controlling her citizens.  

This time, politics can not be allowed to over-ride the Constitution.  Those in Congress who value their individual power and their party’s control over spending our tax dollars more than working for our best interests must be stopped.  Use your voice, your vote, your power as citizens.  Demand that Congress represent our interests by impeaching and convicting the tyrant in the Executive Branch.  Save America from Obama by stripping him of his office.  Return control of America to her citizens. 

Unfortunately, Americans face an intentional lack of education in our public-school system to teach our youth how America is governed and their role and responsibility as citizens.  So, citizens must educate themselves.  Read the Constitution.  It is readily available on line or in many libraries.  Before you vote again, prepare to cast an informed vote.  Know what candidates have achieved and what their actions demonstrate about their belief in protecting our individual rights and freedoms.  Research candidates yourself; make your own decisions.  Elect those who will live by their job description as it is defined in our Constitution.  That job is to represent us.          

Kathleen M. Dynan

May 21 2015

The Most Highly Educated Citizens of America


Post By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Americans spend an enormous amount of money for the education of their youth. Hardly anyone draws a connection between the content of this education, as articulated in the social sciences, the humanities, the law schools, and America’s decline as a world power. Let me illustrate this phenomenon by means of the character of President Barack Obama.

If Mr. Obama is rightly called an “Empty Suit,” this may be construed to mean that Obama is a deceptively “Invisible Man” in a visible suit. What made him invisible from the beginning is that he has no obvious or substantive national identity. Has he not called himself a “cosmopolitan,” a man without a country?

Has he not been rightly denominated as a “post-American” president? What does this mean in depth, in truth, and not in journalese? It means that Obama lacks any moral or intellectual attachment to America’s two foundational documents, the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution.

Moreover, since the definitive and pivotal concept of the Declaration of Independence is “the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” which are obviously universal and immutable. Obama has effectively defined himself as a multicultural moral relativist, which means that Obama is a functional atheist or pagan nihilist.

Unsurprisingly, this defines the mentality of his Supreme Court appointments. Like Obama, the Court has ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, which is rampant in the Third World, especially in Africa with which Obama is very much identified. Obama, wherever he was born, is anything but a “red, white, and blue” American.

Indeed, his denial of “American Exceptionalism” is consistent with his multicultural moral relativism. But this relativism is nothing more than a euphemism for atheism, more precisely, nihilism. Nihilism has been rampant in American higher education for many decades, as may be seen in my essay, “Intellectual and Moral Anarchy in America Society,” which was published in the Congressional Record (Senate) in 1968.

We must therefore conclude that Obama represents the mentality of most university professors (roughly 80%), and that his election to the highest office in the land may be attributed primarily to America’s most highly educated citizens and opinion makers!

May 21 2015

Waco “Twin Peaks” Shooting Updates: 14 Police Officers Fired “thousands of rounds” on 200 Bikers Killing 9, Wounding 18 – Two Thirds Of Those Arrested Had No Prior Criminal History…


It sounds like a lot of BS to me!

May 19 2015

Time is like a river. You cannot touch the water twice, because the flow that has passed will never pass again.


This post was written by a USMC Vet. (I can’t argue with any of it. Passing it along as it was received.)

Franklin   Graham was speaking at the First Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Florida a few weeks back when he said America will not come back.  He wrote:

The American Dream ended (on November 6th,  2012 ) in Ohio . The second term  of Barack Obama will be the final nail in the coffin for the legacy of  the white Christian males who discovered, explored, pioneered, settled and  developed the greatest Republic in the history of  mankind.

A coalition of Blacks, Latinos, Feminists,  Gays , Government  Workers, Union Members, Environmental Extremists, The Media,  Hollywood , uninformed  young people, the “forever needy,” the chronically unemployed, illegal aliens  and other “fellow travelers” have ended Norman Rockwell ‘s America . The Cocker Spaniel is off the front porch… The Pit  Bull is in the back yard. The American Constitution has been replaced with  Saul Alinsky ‘s “Rules for Radicals” and Chicago shyster, David Axelrod , along with international Socialist George Soros will  be pulling the strings on their beige puppet to bring us Act 2 of the New World  Order.

Our side ran two candidates who couldn’t even win their  own home states, and Chris Christie helped Obama over the top with a glowing “post  Sandy ” tribute that  elevated the “Commander-in-Chief” to Mother Teresa status. (Aside: with the way the polls were  run, he didn’t need any help!) People like me are completely politically  irrelevant, and I will never again comment on or concern myself with the afore mentioned coalition which has surrendered our culture, our heritage and our traditions without a shot being fired.

You will never again out-vote these people. It will take  individual acts of defiance and massive displays of civil disobedience to get  back the rights we have allowed them to take away. It will take Zealots, not  moderates & shy not reach-across-the-aisle RINOs to right this ship and  restore our beloved country to its former status.

Those who come after us will have to risk their lives,  their fortunes and their sacred honor to bring back the Republic that this generation has timidly frittered away due to “white guilt” and political  correctness… An American Veteran……… Semper-Fi

Got the guts to pass it on? You  betcha!

You betcha I’m a former Green Beret

May 18 2015

Was the 2003 Bush Invasion of Iraq a “bad” decision?


This question seems to be popping up in all the media interviews of all the Republican candidates for the Republican Party’s potential nominee for the 2016 Presidential election next year. How these candidates answer this question should have been discussed in their planning sessions but it has obviously not done them any good since it is a question that cannot be answered much as the older version of, “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?” cannot be answered with a yes or no. Since most of these candidates are attorneys their ability to give a proper answer is a surprise.

A loaded question or complex question fallacy is a question which contains a controversial or unjustified assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt in this case). Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner’s agenda. This is not a legitimate question and must therefore be answered very carefully or not at all.

The current version of this type of question, “Was the 2003 Bush Invasion of Iraq a “bad” decision?” which is usually followed by a statement such as, “If you knew then what we know now.” There is no possible logical answer that can make any logical sense to a question like this. The person or candidate for office should state that this is not a valid question at any level and here are three reasons why.

Number one is. Since there is no way to know the outcome of any decision the justification for any decision must be based on the knowledge and experience of the person making the decision. Since, in this case, President Clinton three years before 9/11 advocated taking out Saddam’s WMD’s based on his knowledge of Saddam’s having WMD’s and refusing to get rid of them. Then, in 1998, and continuing until 2003 there was no disagreement in any of the intelligence communities that Saddam had WMD’s, and since he had used WMD’s against the Iranians and the Kurds in his country this was not an unreasonable conclusion.

Number two is. Since time travel is not possible asking a question that requires that is not valid. Since there is no way to give a person in the past knowledge of the future than what is the point of this question?

Number three is. The biggest fallacy to this question which is it “assumes” that the outcome of not doing the 2003 invasion would be better than what happened by doing the invasion. The problem is that there is no way to know what the outcome of not invading would have been. This would require an alternative universe a fiction of science fiction fans. However it is possible to speculate on a probable outcome of not invading; which could be an emboldened al-Qaeda since the initial efforts to capture bin Laden in October 2001failed. So what if bin Laden had got WMD’s from Saddam in say 2005 (some were later found in Iraq and that came to light in 2004 to 2006) and he had gotten some of the Mustard Gas into New York City and released it. There was enough found to kill more people in New York City than were killed in 9/11 and there is no way to prove that this would not have happened.

Giving answers like this by all the candidates would stop this line of questioning.