TELLING IT LIKE IT IS !

How is it that our universities, once the envy of the world, have become staging grounds for demonstrations in support of Hezbollah and Hamas and against Israel and America?

How have our classrooms become bizarre laboratories for radical feminists who insist that sex differences result from brutal male oppression? For Marxist ideology, when Marxism is dead and discredited everywhere other than on our campuses? For divisive propaganda about white racism when America has never been more color blind?

How, in short, did indoctrination replace education in our once-proud institutions of higher learning?

In the course offerings of 12 major academic institutions, from Columbia University on the east coast to the University of Southern California on the west coast, that comprise a representative picture of higher education in America. There are more than 150 courses that were pure indoctrination. Here are some of the examples from One Party Classroom:

• A “Whiteness Studies” guilt curriculum at the University of Colorado, featuring classes such as “Remedial Education for White Folks,” “Whiteness: The Power of Privilege,” and “The History of Whiteness.”
• At Arizona State University, the sociology department offers a course in “Collective Behavior and Social Movements” where students are given credit by the instructor for participating in protests organized by local gay, feminist, and pro-illegal immigration groups. If they don’t participate they fail.
• At the University of California at Santa Cruz, a course on “The Politics of the War on Terrorism” informs students that the Bush administration lied to make the case for the war in Iraq and denies that the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center were carried out by Al Qaeda. (“How did Bush and Cheney build the fiction that al Qaeda was a participant in the 9/11 attacks?” the course description asks).

If these were only isolated examples … but alas they are the rule, not the exception. At the Columbia University Teachers’ College, for instance, prospective primary and secondary school teachers are force-fed a series of books on “Teaching for Social Justice” edited by former Weatherman Bill Ayers.

There are some 10,000 college courses in American universities and colleges teaching students to hate America, support her enemies and work for a “revolution.” Ten thousand courses devoted to indoctrination, not education.

The chance you have to turn the tables on the tenured radicals who have turned their classrooms into indoctrination chambers is by hitting the universities who ignore or enable them where are most vulnerable – in their pocketbook. Let school presidents and boards of regents know you are sick over a curriculum of indoctrination. Appalled they are teaching hatred of America and the west with malicious fictions that encourage racial, ethnic and gender division.

Similar indoctrination is rampant in the public school system. The major reason due to the teachers being education by indoctrination themselves.

Abortion Activist Chosen to Lead Federal Health Department

President Barack Obama has nominated Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to lead the Health and Human Services Department.  There is nobody in America that is more radically sold out to the abortion lobby than Kathleen Sebelius.  If confirmed, the pro-abortion governor would be in a position to profoundly influence federal and state policies on abortion, rights of conscience, bioethics and end-of-life issues.

She also would be instrumental in distributing federal funding to abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood.  “Health care” will now become an oxymoron like “Planned Parenthood” became a code word for abortion supplier.

Appointing someone who is the most pro-abortion governor in this country to be the person in charge of health care for our entire country is really just outrageous.  Sebelius’ record speaks loud and clear as she has said herself that “certain inalienable rights are not applied in utero.” (The Wichita Eagle)

As a state representative, she voted to weaken or eliminate parental-notification and informed-consent measures.  As governor, she has routinely opposed or vetoed abortion-accountability bills, including clinic-regulation legislation.  In 2008, she vetoed a measure that would have strengthened the state’s parental-notification law.

Perhaps most shocking is her support for notorious late-term abortionist George Tiller.  Sebelius honored Tiller and his friends and employees at the Governor’s Mansion in 2007.  Tiller stands trial this month on 19 counts of illegally performing late-term abortions.

There is nobody in America that is more radically sold out to the abortion lobby than Kathleen Sebelius.

State governors – looking down the gun barrel of long-term spending forced on them by the Obama “stimulus” plan – are saying they will refuse to take the money. This is a Constitutional confrontation between the federal government and the states unlike any in our time.

In the first five weeks of his presidency, Barack Obama has acted so rashly that at least 11 states have decided that his brand of “hope” equates to an intolerable expansion of the federal government’s authority over the states. These states – “Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, [Minnesota]…Georgia,” South Carolina, and Texas – “have all introduced bills and resolutions” reminding Obama that the 10th Amendment protects the rights of the states, which are the rights of the people, by limiting the power of the federal government. These resolutions call on Obama to “cease and desist” from his reckless government expansion and also indicate that federal laws and regulations implemented in violation of the 10th Amendment can be nullified by the states.

When the Constitution was being ratified during the 1780s, the 10th Amendment was understood to be the linchpin that held the entire Bill of Rights together. The amendment states: “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.”

The use of the 10th Amendment in conjunction with nullification garnered much attention in 1828, when the federal government passed a tariff that southerners believed affected them disproportionately. When the 1828 tariff was complemented by another in 1832, Vice President John C. Calhoun resigned the Vice Presidency to lead his home state of South Carolina in pursuit of an “ordinance of nullification,” which was no less a declaration of the sovereignty of each individual state within the union than the declarations now being made.

Calhoun was simply exercising what he recognized to be his state’s right to defend liberty within its borders by rejecting the dictates of an overbearing central government. While his efforts culminated in a tense affair referred to as the “nullification crisis,” which witnessed everything from threats of a federal invasion of South Carolina to an ongoing and near union-rending debate over national power vs. state’s rights, they also succeeded in turning back the tariffs that had been passed in spite of the Constitutional limits on federal power.

This time around, in 2009, appeals to the 10th Amendment are not based on tariffs but on unfettered government expansion in Obama’s “stimulus bill,” federal mandates on abortion that violate state laws, and infringements on the 1st and 2nd Amendments, among other things.

For example, Family Security Matters reports that Missouri’s “House Concurrent Resolution 0004 (2009) reasserts its sovereignty based on Barack Obama’s stated intention to sign into law a federal ‘Freedom of Choice Act’, [because] the federal Freedom of Choice Act would nullify any federal or state law ‘enacted, adopted, or implemented before, on, or after the date of [its] enactment’ and would effectively prevent the State of Missouri from enacting similar protective measures in the future.”

The resolution in Montana grew out of concerns over coming attacks on the 2nd Amendment, thus its preface describes it as, “An Act Exempting From Federal Regulation Under The Commerce Clause Of The Constitution Of The United States A Firearm, A Firearm Accessory, Or Ammunition Manufactured And Retained In Montana.”

New Hampshire’s resolution actually references certain federal actions that would be nullified within that state were they pushed by Obama’s administration, according to americandaily.com. Among these are “Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press, [and any] further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition.

Regardless of the specific reason behind each of the resolutions in the 11 states, all of them direct the federal government to “cease and desist” in its reckless violation of state’s rights. In this way, South Carolina’s resolution is typical of the others issued to date:

“The General Assembly of the State of South Carolina, by this resolution, claims for the State of South Carolina sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution…

Be it…resolved that this resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as South Carolina’s agent, to cease and desist immediately all mandates…beyond the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally delegated powers.”

What these state assemblies and congresses have hit upon here is key to our entire conservative interpretation of the Constitution, for these states understand that the Constitution limits the federal government, not the people. Or to put it another way, it guarantees the freedom of the people by limiting the government.

Every conservative should relish the call for the federal government to “cease and desist all mandates that are beyond the scope of [its] constitutionally delegated powers.” In this way, we honor the Constitution that enumerates a number of our liberties yet also guarantees us other liberties that are neither enumerated nor denied in the document.

Liberals don’t respect the Constitution, and liberals in Congress don’t hesitate to propose legislation that would clearly violate it. The current push to give Washington, D.C. a voting representative in the House of Representatives is a good example; even liberal Prof. Jonathan Turley told a Congressional hearing that this bill is patently unconstitutional. But they press on with it.

Our Constitutional system of checks and balances is always thought of as enabling two of the three branches of the federal government to keep the third within its constitutional bounds. But there is a fourth check, the states, which also have a Constitutional function. It is to them this burden now falls. The states can choose between allowing the federal government to impose untenable conditions on them if they accept the stimulus money, or to reject it.

These eleven states have the right to reject the stimulus plan. And they must.

There is no other option. For this federal expansion will not stop unless we stand in its way with courage in our hearts and the Constitution in our hands.

Christianity has become taboo in American schools. “God” has become the new four-letter word in most public schools in the United States. This has come to pass due to an elite segment of society that views God as irrelevant that has come to predominate.

What has happened is that these elitists – the people who seem to be manipulating American society, from the public education system to certain governmental institutions and figures – have basically decided that God is irrelevant to public discussion.

In doing this they ignore 120 million-plus people in America who take their faith seriously, who practice it, and who pay taxes to support institutions like the public schools. What that does is deny these people their religious rights and their free-speech rights.

The issue is not separation of church and state – an argument frequently cited by those who assume the secular viewpoint. The issue in such instances is the religious believer versus the secular state. It is a denial of everything this country stands for in terms of the freedoms of speech, religion, and a respect for moral tradition.

What exists now in America is akin to the old Soviet Union and China, where it is religious believers being persecuted by the state.

Only hours after President Obama’s national speech on being responsible with money, Congress is already pushing their $410 billion omnibus spending bill loaded with pork! The bill’s 8,570 “disclosed earmarks” will cost another $7.7 billion! Here are some of the absolutely necessary projects:

$900,000 to fight flies in Nebraska

$400,000 to combat bullying in Montana

$200,000 for tattoo removals in California

$4.5 million for the Center for  Grape Genetics

What happened to a new era of financial discipline?

Reuters reports this morning …

Expanding energy exploration and production to U.S. offshore areas that were off limits until recently could result in more than a trillion dollar government windfall and millions of new jobs, a report said on Monday.

Oil and natural gas development in newly opened offshore areas will generate $1.7 trillion in federal tax revenue and almost $600 million in state and local taxes throughout the life span of the new fields, according to the study conducted by the American Energy Alliance.

The increased offshore energy production would also support 1.2 million jobs annually.

“Those benefits would be realized without any increase in direct government spending,” the report said. “Rather, increased OCS output would refill national, state, and local government coffers – currently depleted by real estate and credit crises – with additional government outlays.”

The Democrats continue to hold our oil and natural gas hostage from drilling which in turn continues to hold America hostage to self-sufficiency from South America and the Middle East.

Bloomberg has this story, “Arctic Sea Ice Underestimated for Weeks Due to Faulty Sensor” …

A glitch in satellite sensors caused scientists to underestimate the extent of Arctic sea ice by 500,000 square kilometers (193,000 square miles), a California- size area, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center said.

The error, due to a problem called “sensor drift,” began in early January and caused a slowly growing underestimation of sea ice extent until mid-February. That’s when “puzzled readers” alerted the NSIDC about data showing ice-covered areas as stretches of open ocean, the Boulder, Colorado-based group said on its Web site …”

Surprise … surprise!

During the 2008 presidential campaign, candidates Barack Obama and John McCain fought vigorously over who would be toughest on congressional earmarks. “We need earmark reform,” Obama said in September during a presidential debate in Oxford, MS. “And when I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.”

Then came the un“Stimulus Bill” a spending bill of pork and earmarks with very little stimulus but a lot of pet Democrat projects. Obama didn’t go line by line like he said …virtually nobody did! The vast majority didn’t even read the bill that was scared through Congress.

Now President Barack Obama and Congress prepare to unveil another spending bill on top of this recent 1.3 trillion of taxpayers’ money spent. A $410 billion Omnibus spending bill that’s riddled with thousands of earmarks is on its way, despite Obama’s calls for restraint. I guess he meant restraint for the taxpayers but all-out spending for the government.

This new bill will contain about 9,000 earmarks totaling $5 billion, congressional officials say. Many of the earmarks – loosely defined as local projects inserted by members of Congress – were inserted last year as the spending bills worked their way through various committees.

So while Obama was slamming earmarks on the campaign trail, his House and Senate members have been hypocritically slapping them into spending bills … the “Stimulus” Bill and now the Omnibus Bill … followed by who knows?

“It will be a little embarrassing for the president if he signs a bill with that many earmarks on it,” said Stan Collender, a veteran Washington budget analyst.

I tend to disagree as I really don’t think he cares especially in light of many of the decisions he has already determined.

The public has no chance to challenge questionable spending, but too often powerful interests who know how to work the system get favorite measures inserted.

For instance, Congressional Quarterly reported recently that more than 100 House members got earmarks for clients of the PMA Group, a lobbying firm with close ties to Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) who heads the powerful defense spending subcommittee. The CQ Politics analysis said that in the 2009 defense spending bill, which Congress approved last year, PMA clients got about $300 million.

The CQ study came after reports that the FBI is investigating the possibility of illegal campaign contributions by PMA to Murtha and other lawmakers. A Murtha spokesman said earlier this month that the FBI probe has nothing to do with Murtha. A PMA spokesman declined to comment on the probe.

Earmarks cause a loss of voter confidence in the whole political picture because they reek of deception.

These are the facts … you decide.

1.) Fannie May and Freddie Mac – two financial institutions created by the government to make more money available for home mortgages.

2.) Jimmy Carter who signed the Community Reinvestment Act – a law requiring that mortgages must be given to minorities who lacked “credit worthiness” (i.e., a proven ability to repay the loan).  This law was opposed by most all banks but championed and coerced into being by guess who? – ACORN.

3.) Bill Clinton further increased the federal money available for these “sub-prime” mortgages and also lowered the standards for obtaining these mortgages.  Coincidently, Clinton’s point man on this was Franklin Delano Raines, Director of Office of Management & Budget, who left Fannie Mae to serve in Clinton’s administration and returned to Fannie Mae as its CEO in Clinton’s last year in office.  (Remember the name, Franklin Delano Raines, in case Obama tries to slip him into a financial position.)

4.) In 2003 when George W. Bush was president new regulators found that Fannie & Freddie executives overstated their profits by nearly $11 billion to pump up their bonuses.  Bush proposed sweeping regulatory changes; the Senate Democrats killed Bush’s reform plan.  At that time, the House Financial Services Committee Chairman, Rep. Barney Frank, (D-MA), emphatically stated that Fannie & Freddie ‘were not facing any kind of financial crisis.” (he’s already infamous).

5.) Senator John McCain, in 2005, sponsored a Fannie & Freddie reform bill.  At the time, McCain warned that if “Congress does not act – the  housing market and overall economy” is in peril.  Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, said McCain was just trying to impede the Fannie & Freddie mission.  McCain’s bill was defeated.

In 2008 John McCain’s concern and predictions came true.  The housing market collapsed and the economy went into a downward spiral and continues …

6.) There appears to be a definitive history of Democrats seeking to accomplish their social agenda and increasing their base – through manipulation of our financial institutions.

P.S. – Obama’s newly named White House chief-of-staff, Rahm Emanuel, was on the Board of Directors of Freddie Mac when the SEC accused it of deceiving its shareholders about its profits.  No conflict of interest here!

A group with pedophilia ties may be too extreme for the United Nations but not for the Obama State Department.  In a fiery debate this week, the U.N.’s Economic and Social Council voted 8-6 to deny official non-governmental (NGO) status to a radical gay advocacy group from Brazil which supports sex with children. The committee that reviews NGO applicants includes several major member nations, including the U.S., which voted in favor of Brazil’s Association of Gays, Lesbians and Transgenders.

While Christians and conservatives may find it outrageous that the Obama administration is unconcerned with pedophilia, we are not surprised. After all, this is the same White House that has nominated a liberal extremist like David Ogden to the nation’s second-highest justice post. Ogden, whose Senate vote was delayed after thousands of calls and emails, represented purveyors of hard-core pornography in court, including those who did not want to take the trouble to verify that their “actors” weren’t underage.