Fire!! FIRE!!!!

Everybody who has heard of this organization please raise your hand: the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)........ I see only one raised hand.

How many of you have heard that a program proposed at the University of Minnesota would result in required examinations of teacher candidates on "white privilege" as well as "remedial re-education" for those who hold the "wrong" views? The term "remedial re-education" carries with it the stench of Communism. Why would I say such a thing? Because it's true.

1. After the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese men, from former officers in the armed forces, to religious leaders, to employees of the Americans or the old government, were rounded up in reeducation camps to "learn about the ways of the new government." They were never tried or convicted of any crime. Many South Vietnamese men chose to flee on boats, but others had established lives in Vietnam, so did not flee but entered these camps in hopes of quickly reconciling with the new government and continuing their lives. The Hanoi regime defended the reeducation camps by placing the "war criminal" label on the prisoners. A 1981 memorandum of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam to Amnesty International claimed that all those in the reeducation camps were guilty of acts of national treason as defined in Article 3 of the 30 October 1967 Law on Counter-revolutionary Crimes (enacted for the government of North Vietnam, now imposing its will on South Vietnam) which specifies punishment of 20 years to life imprisonment or the death penalty.

2. Re-education Camp is a favorite phrase of Communist nations, and is a euphemism for "concentration camp" or "political gulag".

Interestingly, Minnesota State Representative Michelle Bachman said on Minnesota radio station KTLK-AM (podcast) recently (in reference to The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, a proposed expansion of the AmeriCorps program that Obama has since signed into law):

"It’s under the guise of — quote — volunteerism. But it’s not volunteers at all. It’s paying people to do work on behalf of government. I believe that there is a very strong chance that we will see that young people will be put into mandatory service. And the real concerns is that there are provisions for what I would call re-education camps for young people, where young people have to go and get trained in a philosophy that the government puts forward and then they have to go to work in some of these politically correct forums."

Of course, the socialist-"progressive" leftists have dubbed Ms Bachman a "right wingnut", for daring to verbalize the obvious. Personally, I believe the extended Americorps concept smacks of Hilter's Jugend - his "Youth Corps" - and the fascism Hitler instilled therein. Young minds were indoctrinated to believe in his way, and only his way. They were trained to spy and inform upon friends, family and neighbors should their attitudes or words indicate deviation from the governmentally approved (Nazi) doctrine. They were especially observant of the inferior ethnic deviants (Jews) who could potentially pollute the gene poll of the "Master Race".

"Recruiting and training a Youth Brigade"... how about that? If you have been paying attention during the last several decades, you are undoubtedly aware that the halls of academia - especially the "institutes of higher learning" - have long been a bastion of left wing thought and indoctrination, and those ideologies have naturally trickled down into our primary and secondary government-supported public educational system. After all, the new teachers have been well indoctrinated at those colleges and universities. It is therefore no surprise that the University of Minnesota is considering requiring examinations of teacher candidates on "white privilege" as well as "remedial re-education", and re-educating those who may disagree with the views of the University. A discussion of "white privilege" comes at the end of this post.

Indoctrinate the younger generations if you wish to impose your personal will upon the country - they don't know enough to challenge you. Besides, it's so much easier than trying to re-educate an older and wiser generation.

WHITE PRIVILEGE

Rather than get sidetracked on peripheral information, I chose to devote this section to a distracting subject. Inasmuch as I am not a product of one of those institutions, I cannot personally comment on the concept of "white privilege", but I can supply a definition of the term - courtesy of Kendall Clark, (a man who seems to have some race issues of his own):

1. a. A right, advantage, or immunity granted to or enjoyed by white persons beyond the common advantage of all others; an exemption in many particular cases from certain burdens or liabilities.
b. A special advantage or benefit of white persons; with reference to divine dispensations, natural advantages, gifts of fortune, genetic endowments, social relations, etc.

2. A privileged position; the possession of an advantage white persons enjoy over non–white persons.

3. a. The special right or immunity attaching to white persons as a social relation; prerogative.
b. display of white privilege, a social expression of a white person or persons demanding to be treated as a member or members of the socially privileged class.

4. a. To invest white persons with a privilege or privileges; to grant to white persons a particular right or immunity; to benefit or favor specially white persons; to invest white persons with special honorable distinctions.
b. To avail oneself of a privilege owing to one as a white person.

5. To authorize or license of white person or persons what is forbidden or wrong for non–whites; to justify, excuse.

6. To give to white persons special freedom or immunity from some liability or burden to which non–white persons are subject; to exempt.

If I were defining "white privilege", I would probably have defined it as "wealthy white privilege", or at the very least, "moneyed white privilege". You know the old saying, "Money talks...". Being a white, middle-aged (if I live to be 132 years old) male, from a working-class background I am unaware of any particular "privilege" that simply being Caucasian has bestowed upon me. But I am of an age that I can remember the beginnings of the civil rights movement in the United States. Rosa Parks, Julian Bond, George C. Wallace, Selma Alabama, Martin Luther King Jr., Medgar Evers, et al. -these were the names in the news at that time. I am also certain that there were many hundreds of "unsung heroes" during that time. Young people who sacrificed their lives in the furtherance of civil rights, and older people who simply disappeared from the face of the Earth.

However, the only "privilege" I can remember having access to simply for being "white", was not suffering the many social indignities that were visited upon many people of color. I did have to ride in the back of the bus. I did not have to learn the "survival shuffle". I did not have to be off the streets - or out of town - by a certain time... other than that prescribed by my parents.

I did have to use a separate restroom, a separate drinking fountain, and attend separate schools from "colored" people. I did see the signs proclaiming "Colored Only" on restrooms, at drinking fountains, and in public waiting rooms. I did not see these things as particular "privileges" for whites, but more as an indignity for colored people. It was the living explanation of the term "equal but separate", and I never really questioned why - it was just "the way things were" at that point in time. A child's mind doesn't normally dwell on things like social inequity. Had I asked "Why?", and gotten an answer from anybody - including the Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan or Huey Newton, founder of the Black Panther Party - my child's curiosity would have been satisfied, and I would have returned to riding my bicycle, or shooting marbles, or whatever other child-like activity I was involved in prior to my inquiry. The vast majority of children are as apolitical as they are asexual! It's the unfettered "pursuit of happiness" (or, sad though it may be - in some cases, it is the avoidance of unhappiness) that occupies the waking hours of a child.

I am not responsible for the social conditions that existed when I was a child, but I am a product of those times. Having looked into my family's history to the early 1730's I feel safe in saying that neither I nor any of my forebears have owned, or been involved in the buying or selling of, slaves. I am aware that several of my ancestors shared the prevalent prejudices of the citizens of the southern states, even into the 1950s - which is nothing to really brag about, but it is philosophically superior to believing that any human being has a right to own another human being as if he/she were nothing more than livestock or a tool. There is no such thing as human property.

I cannot say with any certainty that I have been afforded any true "privilege" based on my lack of skin color. On the other hand, I can say with great certainty that until the early 1960s, people of color - not just black Americans - were, to a very large degree, denied their dignity and any sense of social or legal justice in the southern United States.

But, does denying something to one group of people truly instill "privilege" upon those with the power to impose and enforce that denial? For some time as a child, I thought black people were "privileged". After all, they had their very own special drinking fountains, bathrooms and schools!

All Praise To Our Glorius Leader, May He Reign One Thousand Years... Yeah, right...

The recent disclosure of an incident at the B. Bernice Young Elementary School, in Burlington, New Jersey, wherein second grade children were being indoctrinated into the Obama cult, has raised the ire of citizens nationwide.

The better-known of the two songs being taught to these children is the one sung to the tune of "Jesus Loves the Little Children", where Jesus' name is replaced with Obama's: "He said red, yellow, black or white/All are equal in his sight. Barack Hussein Obama." The lesser-known song follows this paragraph, with my comments in parentheses. (Such glorification/deification of a human being reminds me of something that takes place daily in Communist China and Communist North Korea... enforced leader-worship.) Here's song number two...
__________________________________________________
"Hello, Mr. President we honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all doth say "hooray!" (Great accomplishments? Name ten... or five............ three?)

Hooray, Mr. President! You're number one! (And your job performance is number two!)
The first black American to lead this great nation! (Black? Did he only have ONE parent? As I recall from art and science classes, a mixture of black and white produces gray.)

Hooray, Mr. President we honor your great plans
To make this country's economy number one again! (By nationalizing health care and the automotive industry, increasing the national debt, and devaluing the U.S. dollar? I can't wait to see him pull the rabbit out of the hat...)

Hooray Mr. President, we're really proud of you! (A few are... for some obscure and unknown reason)
And we stand for all Americans under the great Red, White, and Blue! (No... you only stand for those Americans who can't see what's happening right under their collective nose!)

So continue ---- Mr. President we know you'll do the trick (Now we're back to the "rabbit out of the hat" thing, and the Grand Finale will be to make the Democratic Republic of the United States of America disappear.)
So here's a hearty hip-hooray ----

Hip, hip hooray!
Hip, hip hooray!
Hip, hip hooray!"

__________________________________________________

In a statement, New Jersey Education Department spokeswoman Beth Auerswald said the commissioner has directed the school's superintendent to review the matter. Auerswald said the commissioner wants to ensure that students can celebrate Black History Month without "inappropriate partisan politics in the classroom."

That sounds appropriate to me! But, just out of curiosity, how does one celebrate "Black History Month" without the inclusion of references to Little Black Sambo, Uncle Tom's Cabin, the slave trade, and the formation of the KKK. All are primarily depictions of negative experiences in black history, but they are, nonetheless, a part of black history. I guess liberal revisionist history will have to suffice...

I could be wrong about the way I see this whole thing, but not at this point in time.

REALITY BYTES! - aka: Things I've Thought About Recently

Or, reality BITES! Take your choice. It's your call, because it's your reality. I am aware that, more often than not, I tend to sound like the voice of doom in my blog. But, that's my reality, and it's the only reference point I have for my world. I do, from time-to-time, post the realities that others have shared with me, either directly (conversations, email, etc.) or indirectly (media reports, etc.). But, even then, what you see is my reality's take on their reality.

Although reality is an individual concept, nobody's reality is absolutely theirs... not if they live with or around other human beings. Our "personal realities" are colored by the society/culture in which we live, and begin at a chronological age that predates understanding. Those influences are parents, teachers, religious leaders, peers, tribal leaders/politicians, celebrities, media, and personal observations.

In a very general sense, the people of a given culture tend to share probably 85% (I just pulled that statistic out of my butt... hence the "probably") of a very similar personal reality. How widely and deeply the remaining 15% of their reality varies from the norm, determines how the individual is classified within that society. In some instances - people such as Jesus Christ, Alexander the Great, Rasputin, Adolf Hitler, and Mother Teresa - the individual deviation from the norm is so great that there is an historical record of it, and their accomplishments are known around the world.

In an attempt to ensure a homogeneous society, cultures establish centers of social indoctrination which we refer to as the "educational system". The purpose of the "educational system" is to indoctrinate the students in the expectations of the culture through modification of whatever "personal blueprint" the student may have been born with. For example, in the "educational" system of the USA, the indoctrination has been noticeably moving to the left for at least four decades. Prior to that, the shift to the left was more insidious - more clandestine. The result of that shift in indoctrination became most obvious with the election of an inexperienced, unvetted, junior senator from the corrupt Illinois political machine as the POTUS. The man who can say nothing better than anybody, easily mesmerized the majority of voters between the ages of 18 and 45 because they had been conditioned to accept empty promises from the left, and to believe that socialism is a good thing. (But, I must remind you once again - that is the perception from MY reality.)

Remember, that which we perceive as real is a function of how our mind processes information. Processing which has been influenced by those whose opinions and attitudes we respect, and our own previous life experiences. (Also, the mind is not a physical attribute - it is, itself, a function of electrical responses traveling through the circuitry of our synapses. What we call the "mind" is simply information processed, evaluated, and stored in compartments of the physical brain. A mind cannot exist independently of the brain. That would take an entire separate blog for me to discuss in detail.)

As I usually say... I could be completely wrong in my perception of reality... but then, so could you.

Dissent Not Permitted: The Assault on Our First Amendment Rights

A quick review of Amendment I to the Constitution of the United States of America reveals the intent of our Nation's founders was very straightforward:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Emphases added for clarification)

Now, let's play the Bill Clinton game... "it depends on what abridge means". Here we go:

abridge

Pronunciation:

\ə-ˈbrij\

Function:

transitive verb

Inflected Form(s):

abridged; abridg·ing

Etymology:

Middle English abregen, from Anglo-French abreger, from Late Latin abbreviare, from Latin ad- + brevis short — more at

Date:

14th century

1 archaic : deprive b: to reduce in scope : diminish 2: to shorten abridges distance>3: to shorten by omission of words without sacrifice of sense : condense

synonyms see shorten

Now that we all know the human definition of "abridged" (as opposed to the expectedly complex and mind-boggling legalese definition) we can proceed.

The abridging of our "freedom of speech" began ever-so-innocently with what was humorously referred to as "political correctness", or PC. To be politically correct meant that certain long established phrases were now considered insensitive, and we could no longer use honest, straightforward language to express our thoughts. We could no longer "call a spade a spade", as it was now more PC to call it a manually operated entrenchment device. While we're on that subject, let's look at the etymology, or origins, of that particular phrase - to "call a spade a spade":

spade (1)

"tool for digging," O.E. spadu, from P.Gmc. *spadon (cf. O.Fris. spada, M.Du. spade, O.S. spado, M.L.G. spade, Ger. Spaten), from PIE *spe- "long, flat piece of wood" (cf. Gk. spathe "wooden blade, paddle," O.E. spon "chip of wood, splinter," O.N. spann "shingle, chip"). To call a spade a spade "use blunt language" (1542) translates a Gk. proverb (known to the Romans)

It means to use blunt language - a definition that was established over 450 years ago! The racially charged, derogatory use of the word didn't come about until 1928, and today, most people still understand the phrase to mean use blunt language. As laughable as we may find the implied necessity to use idiotic euphemisms to express honest thoughts, it was the beginning of the assault on free speech. However, that assault is only in effect toward those who disagree with positions of the radical left-wing liberals.

Speaking of radical left-wing liberals... Supreme Court Justice Souter has announced his plans to retire from "The Bench", and B. Hussein Obama is considering about eight frothing-at-the-mouth radical lefties as Souter's replacement. Among these are Hillary Clinton (no additional comment necessary), four actual sitting judges at various levels of the judiciary, and the lesser-known Cass Sunstein. Sunstein's claim to fame is that he's an "old friend" of Obama's, and a notoriously left-wing but "brilliant constitutional law professor".

There's an old saying, "Those who can, do - those who can't, teach." This brilliant constitutional law professor is considered "brilliant" primarily because he's far left politically, and has an unusual view of the First and Second Amendments. Sunstein has been an outspoken proponent of tough restriction on gun sales and ownership, a ban on hunting, animal rights and what has been characterized as a "Fairness Doctrine" for the internet! According to Sunstein "the Internet is anti-democratic because of the way users can filter out information of their own choosing." Excuse me, but where is it written that the Internet is supposed to be "democratic"? You can link all the opposing opinion sites "until the cows come home", that doesn't mean anybody would click on them... or would that be mandatory surfing behavior also? The word is FREEDOM! Freedom of speech, of expression, of thought, and of action (within the law) even if others believe the manner in which you choose to exercise those freedoms to be insensitive, or otherwise wrong (i.e. - not PC). That's what "freedom" IS - the right of the individual to CHOOSE!

Here's another example of Sunstein's brilliant wisdom - "A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government," he wrote. "Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom's name." Apparently he has redefined the word "democratic" to exclude any and all thought outside the left-wing box. If it weren't FOR those freedom's he so cavalierly discredits, there would be NO democratic process in our REPUBLIC!

Sunstein's nomination to the powerful new position will require Senate approval. He is almost certain to face other questions about his well-documented controversial views. Here are a few more examples of Sunstein's "brilliance":

• In a 2007 speech at Harvard he called for banning hunting in the U.S.
  
  
• In his book "Radicals in Robes," he wrote: "[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right, then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms."
  
  
• In his 2004 book, "Animal Rights," he wrote: "Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives …"
  
  
• In "Animal Rights: A Very Short Primer," he wrote "[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, in scientific experiments, and in agriculture."

The radical left has long desired to silence those with opposing viewpoints. They present themselves as "the tolerant ones", but they only tolerate that with which they agree! What exactly have they attacked? Anything in conflict with their world view. Religion, via "hate speech" legislation, which equates the quoting of the Scriptural detestation of homosexuality as "hate speech" - which is a matter they should take up with God instead of the Legislature. They attack "freedom of the press" when that freedom is extended to include all media reportage. Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, or any media reflecting the expression of conservative thoughts, principals, or ideals. They attack freedom of expression by attempting to marginalize activities such as the recent nationwide Tax Day Tea Party - with well over one million participants - as "Republican backed", and "radical extremists that bear close watching", and "the uneducated masses blindly serving the interests of big money". These are descriptive phrases denoting their FEAR! The left FEARS opposition, simply because their emotional arguments have no basis in a realistic world view, and are too weak to withstand intelligent, objective scrutiny.

I still support freedom of the press, regardless of the fact that 95% of the media are biased toward the left. The news is no longer reported. It's manufactured, or otherwise modified, by the left-wing publishers who require their "reporters" to insure that any story with political implications has the proper "I own this company, and you work for me" slant. I hope (against hope) that someday they will see the error of their ways, but it is not likely.

The thirst for power is the great motivator. Gaining personal power through the use of increasingly powerful connections. Personal, political and business connections that are untiringly networked toward the goal of high degrees of personal influence within a society. That "society" can be anything from a small commune to an international society - the level at which the leaderships of nations ostensibly operate.

The media has power over what information, and in which manner, it is delivered to the people. The leaderships of churches, synagogues, and mosques have power over influencing how people think about questions of morality, and their beliefs in obedience to whatever deity that particular entity supports. The public school boards have power over the primary and secondary "education" (read: social indoctrination) of the vast majority our children. Power feeds their greed. Yes, greed is a strong word, but it exists in most of us. Almost all people, of almost all modern societies, are acquisition oriented. For many, it is simply the acquisition of the basic necessities for sustaining life. For others it is how they gain the respect - and in some cases the adulation - of their peers, and the confused fear of those significantly "beneath them" in the social hierarchy. And for still others, power is reflected in big homes, fancy cars, expensive designer clothing, television appearances, magazine interviews - anything which that person feels is an outward sign of significant success, and may attract other like-minded people to their side, is power.

If we sit silently as our Constitution is marginalized, minimized, ignored and obstructed, we deserve whatever the outcome may be... and it won't be the least bit enjoyable!

There is a remote chance that I could be wrong about this ... any thoughts?

"States Rights" Is What Keeps America Free... Along with the 2nd Amendment

At last count, 30 states had reminded the Federal Government that the feds could not dictate to them, and that they were sovereign powers within the united structure. The only thing better than that would be if all 50 states perform that same act of sovereignty. Now, don't make the mistake some people have and confuse a declaration of sovereignty with secession. There has been no act of secession by any state .... yet.

What are "States Rights"? The first ten amendments to the Constitution are collectively known as "The Bill of Rights", and the Tenth Amendment proclaims: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

As you can see, although it doesn't jump right out at you, that short sentence says that unless it is specified in the constitution as a Federal power, that power, by default, belongs to the States, or the people! Of course, the Constitution isn't worth the paper it's written upon if we, the people, don't insist on its application in all government affairs. If we do not "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic" we deserve to wear the yoke and chains of socialist enslavement!

We have a definite and obvious threat to all our founding documents in Washington D.C. - a left-wing, socialist administration (which was put there primarily by a complacent "silent majority"), coupled with a left-leaning, socialist-inclined Congress. Disaster is imminent when there are no checks and balances between the legislative and the executive branches of Government.

The President's Cabinet consists primarily of tax dodgers, inexperienced incompetents heading critical Federal functions (CIA, Treasury, Homeland Security, etc.) and those who embrace the "One World" fantasy. As much as you may like to believe in the "One World" concept, it is nothing more than a fantasy. We are not all brothers and sisters riding this big blue marble. There are many millions of people around the world who either envy, resent, or simply hate the United States for reasons frequently beyond our understanding. Reasons - real or imagined - which reinforce their desire to bring about our failure and/or demise as a Democratic Republic. Remember that our individual reality is based on how we personally interpret what we see going on in our world. Reality has nothing to do with what the person on either side of us, or the person standing across the street from us sees - reality and truth are individual concepts!

As a "Conservative-Traditionalist" this is the basis of my reality:

1. The United States has accomplished more in 233 years than any other culture has in 2,000+ years, yet our left-wing Government wants us to emulate the great left-wing socialist countries of Europe. (Yeah... that makes sense, considering how successful they've been! Without our assistance, Europe would have been a territory of Germanys Third Reich for the past 60+ years! And their socialized health care works well too... for those who live long enough to actually get some medical care.)

2. Our foundational documents - the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of the United States of America - and the ideals and well thought out philosophies contained therein, are responsible for the aforementioned success, and have stood us in good stead since their creation. (I believe in the axiom, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", and that protecting those ideals and philosophies is a personal responsibility, and one well-worth fulfilling.)

3. I see no need, nor any Constitutional authority for any Government - Federal or State - to create "hate crimes". Relatively few crimes are committed out of a sense of love, or even mild fondness. The crime is in the act, not in the motivation or thought behind it. All true "crimes" are already covered by a myriad of Federal and State laws, and local ordinances. Why would "hate crimes" not fall under the existing category of "crimes of passion":

"Usage: When any feeling or emotion completely masters the mind, we call it a passion; as, a passion for music, dress, etc.; especially is anger (when thus extreme) called passion. The mind, in such cases, is considered as having lost its self-control, and become the passive instrument of the feeling in question." Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary

Hatred and rage are simply anger in extremis - at the far negative end of the "love-hate continuum".

4. The use of the word "homophobe". Along the same line as "hate crimes" homophobe is a misnomer in most instances. I would suggest that word be replaced by homocontemnor, one who finds homosexual behavior to be contemptible or viewed with great disdain. Although homosexual behavior was once tolerated in some ancient societies, it is generally regarded as sexually deviant behavior in the American culture.

5. Our Government, in its passage of legislation, rarely reflects the expressed will of "we the people", but, rather, the expressed will of corporations and other moneyed interests. Essentially, we have "the best government that money can buy." We need to resurrect our Constitution, and replace our legislators in a manner that best serves the people of our once great nation. This is supposedly taken care of at the voting booth... but that only happens when every eligible voter actually votes! We are at that juncture in history where personal and collective indecisiveness and complacency will destroy us from within our own borders.

6. Tax abuse by our Government is rampant. We can tell there are few Jews in our Government by the proliferation of PORK! "Pork" another euphemism for the euphemistic "earmarks" that Barack Obama pledged to eliminate if he was elected as our President. "Earmarks" are nothing less than uncontrolled Government waste of our tax dollars. Yet one of his first actions was to rubber stamp an Omnibus Spending Bill with around 9,000 various cuts of swine in it! Is it the will of the people that failed banks and corporations be "bailed out" with our tax dollars? No, it's not - 74% of the people are against such actions, but our Government - in its infinite wisdom - has chosen to ignore what we the people want.

7. As for the Second Amendment, it pretty much speaks for itself... and in plain English. An armed people are a free people - citizens - an unarmed people are more properly called "subjects".

I could go on for a very long time about the insufficiencies of our current government, and I may do that in a future posting, but, for now this seems sufficient.

There is a possibility that I could be completely wrong about this... but I'm not an illegal alien who doesn't read and comprehend the English language. I was born and raised in this country, and educated - as opposed to indoctrinated - in that language. I consider myself fortunate to have received my education while the youth of our country were still being taught HOW to think, instead of WHAT to think... as they are today.

Political Plums Being Harvested Already - Leon Panetta To Head CIA ... Was Sean Penn Unavailable?

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President-elect Barack Obama has chosen former White House chief of staff Leon Panetta to lead the CIA, which has been widely criticized for harsh interrogation of terrorism suspects..."

I don't know who to feel the most sorry for - Obama for his stupid choice for CIA Director; Panetta for being so far out of his element; or the American people ... for having to suffer a fool in either office! Kiefer Sutherland, based on his "experience" as Agent Jack Bauer in the TV show 24, probably knows more about the internal operations of the CIA than does Leon Panetta. Panetta is best known as President Bill "Zipper" Clinton's Chief of Staff, and as a budget expert who tamed deficits in the Clinton White House. I'm confused ... how do either of these positions - or anything else in Panetta's résumé - qualify him him to oversee the largest single intelligence function of the United States Government?

So far, it appears that not only do we get a President with no proven qualifications, now he has shown himself to be foolish enough to surround himself with equally unqualified cabinet members. Or, does his Cabinet provide a buffer zone of deniability, selected by careful design to insulate Obama from policy failures? Is there more treachery afoot than meets the eye?

Obama's first really big mistake will be to turn his back on Israel. I could be wrong ... but I'm NOT!

Monsanto Chemical: Buys Government, Scares Press, and Sells Out Public!

Where is the hue and cry from all the government agencies that "protect" us, or from the so-called independent press, that supposedly is "looking out" for us.  Monsanto (previously Monsanto Chemical) - the folks that brought us the unforgettable Agent Orange, among others - like the relatively innocuous Roundup weed killer.  However, what happens when you start manipulating the market to eliminate the competition?  How do they do that?

First you start by genetically modifying produce - like corn, soybeans, or wheat - to make them resistant to Roundup and similar products.  Next you back-engineer one of your other products - like fertilizer - to include Roundup in it.  Something like Monsanto's "Asgrow Roundup Ready" or "Roundup Ready 2 Yield Soybeans."  From the Monsanto website: "This is a new proprietary seed treatment from Monsanto which will be commercialized in conjunction with the launch of Asgrow Roundup Ready 2 Yield Soybeans."  Monsanto offers "Simple, flexible and dependable weed control you expect from the Roundup Ready system.", and "Powerful genetic trait combinations created through our advanced breeding process deliver higher yield potential than other brands."  Yes, ladies and gentlemen, what we're talking about is Frankenfood!  And it's not just soybeans ... Monsanto has genetically modified corn, wheat, and God only knows what else to resist Roundup.  Can you see where this is going?  Modify the seeds to resist a weed poison, then include the poison in either the pod or the fertilizer, to kill those pesky weeds.  So far, so good!

But, there's an unanswered question here too - How does the Roundup not get absorbed into the produce it's protecting from weeds?  It doesn't!  We are unknowingly and trustingly ingesting toxic materials with almost every item we are being sold as food!  Have you eaten a nice steak, or enjoyed a good hamburger recently?  If so, then you should familiarize yourself with the acronym BGH - Bovine Growth Hormone.  Have you wondered why your 10 year old daughter is sprouting breasts already?  There's your answer - BGH!  Monsanto's Bovine somatotropin (abbreviated bST and BST) is also called bovine growth hormone, or BGH.  BST can be produced synthetically, using recombinant DNA technology. The resulting product is called recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST), recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH), or artificial growth hormone. It is administered to the cow by injection and used to increase milk production. Currently Monsanto is the only company that markets recombinant bovine somatotropin, under the trade name Posilac.  According to Monsanto, approximately one-third of dairy cattle in the U.S. are treated with Posilac; approximately 8,000 dairy producers use the product. It is now the top-selling dairy cattle pharmaceutical product in the U.S.  Use of the recombinant supplement has been controversial. While it is used in the United States (though not without reaction), it is banned in Canada, parts of the European Union, Australia and New Zealand.  Is there a reason for this ban?  Are they perhaps more concerned with the welfare of their citizens, than our government is for OUR personal well-being?

Monsanto's lawyers scared Fox television affiliate, WTVT/Fox-13 in Tampa, Florida so badly, the station manager fired two staff members who had done an investigative reporting piece after they refused to modify the story to appease Monsanto.

Monsanto is running roughshod over our citizenry in their (thus-far successful) attempt to bribe, intimidate, threaten and otherwise leverage those who would question the negative human health factors of Monsanto-produced  Frankenfoods.  Our complacency as a nation will be our undoing.  I could be wrong ... but, I'm NOT!

No Child Left Behind

It's a wonderful sentiment! But, it is also a sad reality that not all children are capable of keeping up. Some are simply destined to be left behind, regardless of the best efforts of parents, educators, and the Federal Government. Education is like any other competition, there are some winners and some losers. Just as all children are not equipped with the physical strength, speed and stamina to win a foot race, not all children are equipped to excel at intellectual endeavors. To increase the chances of the slower students reaching some acceptable level of academic achievement, our government has instituted an unrealistic policy of "No Child Left Behind". The implementation of this policy is simply nothing more than "special" education, and another unwarranted lowering of the educational standards by which we used to measure varying levels of achievement. We are falling short of much of the world in the areas of science and mathematics. Our educational system, with the able assistance of the Federal Government, has reduced the emphasis on what were once referred to as "the hard sciences", and insinuated classes on various "diversities" instead. Education is gradually being replaced by indoctrination.

Who pays the ultimate price for this folly? The high school graduates themselves, and the business world into which they are thrust, or the institutes of higher learning.

Businesses complain that high school graduates are not prepared to enter the work force, because they lack the basic skills to be successful. The business world must either "go begging" for acceptable employees, or invest large sums of money in remedial education for new hires, or 'in-source' employees from outside the country. Colleges have lowered the minimum acceptable SAT entry scores for certain "minority groups", and must provide even more basic 101-level (perhaps 100-level?) courses, to insure that many students stand even the slightest chance of completing their degree.

Potential employers want people who can do the job they are being paid to do. If the employees feel good about themselves that's an added bonus, but it's not what they're being paid for - ability is what they need to bring to the workplace. Whether or not Heather has six mommies, and Tommy has 3 dads doesn't mean diddly-squat to the people who pay the wages and salaries!
What they want, require, and deserve, is a good return on their investment in the employee.

All people are NOT created equal! Accept that as a fact, and perhaps we can get back in the education game. Only a few will be captains of industry, several will attain upper management positions, quite a few will be middle management, many will achieve supervisory status, and the vast majority will be production workers. Our society needs more blue collar workers than we do white collar workers. We need mechanics, police officers, military personnel, mail carriers, custodians, farmers, ranchers, sales associates, bus drivers, truckers, and technicians of all types. Our society needs them much worse than we need politicians, CEO's and CFO's. It is the production worker that keeps our country mobile, fed, healthy, entertained, and communicating! But, those production workers must have a practical education. They need to master those hard sciences in order to be effective in their chosen field(s) of endeavor!

But, complacency seems to be the motto of the majority of Americans. Social indoctrination is the order of the day, and education has been relegated to the category of "nice to have, if we can work it in". Nothing is free, and we will soon pay the price of complacency.