Obama Removes God & Insults Mexican Intelligence

On Friday, September 17, our President addressed the Hispanic Caucus Institute where he made two VERY interesting statements. The most alarming was the first.

(Link to speech)

While quoting the familiar beginning of the Declaration of Independence, President Obama said, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights, life and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Did you catch the omission? It’s no small deal.

The actual wording is “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator, with certain inalienable rights...” Nitpicky? Hardly. By changing that line, the basis of the Declaration of Independence is undermined.

When the Founders resisted England by penning and sending the Declaration of Independence, they were justifying their behavior on the FACT that they had certain God-given rights. England, nor any other government, had the dominion over these natural rights, as they had been endowed (given) by God - not man.

If these natural rights were simply endowed, then the question is, by whom? If not God, then it would be left to the government. If you doubt this, read the Constitution. And if the government gives these rights, then it is the government’s dominion to remove them. (Inalienable means, they cannot be removed.)

By omitting that phrase, Obama changes the basis of our country. He, by decree, takes the position of government having the supreme power over your rights. Whereas the Founders declared independence on the foundation that no government can remove natural rights as they were given to men by God; the removal of that phrase removes the sanctity of the rights.

Slip of the tongue, you say? No 8th grader left my class without knowing, memorizing, and reciting that passage (as well as more) of the Declaration of Independence. Obama is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School. He taught Constitutional Law at University of Chicago. He didn’t forget. No, when Obama promised to fundamentally change this country, he meant it.

The second “mistake” in the speech typifies the lack of respect people like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and here, Obama, pay to people of color. They access and maintain power by leading minorities into embracing the victim mentality. Rather than pointing to role models such as Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice, Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Bill Cosby, by saying, “Look, if you work hard enough, you can rise above your poverty, your circumstances, your plight.” Instead they convince the masses that they’ll never be anything without the government taking care of them.

Toward the end of the speech, President Obama said, “Long before America was even an idea, this land of plenty was home to many peoples. To British and French, to Dutch and Spanish, ... (loudly) to Mexican... (applause)...to countless...” Okay, let’s see, Americans declared their independence in 1776. The concept of America was already rooted prior to the Declaration. Mexico declared independence from Spain in 1821 - 45 years after America. At what point does a Mexican become a recognizable national? Americans officially became American when they won the Revolutionary War and formed a nation. Prior to that, they were citizens of the British Empire. The concept of being an “American” started emerging after 1763. So, how is that long before America was even an idea, the continent was inhabited by Mexicans? Does he mean mestizos (a blending of the Spanish and the Indians either taken as wives, or...)? Or was he referring to Criollos - those born in Latin American, who according to the caste system were lower than Peninsulares who were born in Spain, but higher than mestizos, cholos, mulatos, indios, zambos, and at the bottom of their system, the blacks. (Oh, yeah, another inconvenient fact - slavery was introduced and practiced in Latin America first. I wonder why Obama didn’t scold his audience for that? Probably the Reverend Wright did include that part in his sermons, but Obama missed it.) Obama is counting of the Hispanic audience to NOT know their history. The applause he gained by saying this provides his confirmation. Well-played Mr. President; just like a puppeteer.

In one speech, President Obama managed to garner support from a voter block he considers ignorant enough not to catch his historical gambit, while at the same time removing God from the position of being the fundamental benefactor of our inalienable rights. Those rights, once a gift from God, belong in the hands of somebody else, according to our President. Suddenly, the rights don’t seem so inalienable.

Are We Allowed to be America?

Three times I’ve flown from the East Coast to the West. If the cruising altitude is low enough, one can watch the urbanization of the East become the Bread Basket, then climb to the rugged Rockies. Beyond the Rockies, I breathe a sigh of relief as I get back to my beloved West. Things seem much more sane here. That is, until I see the urbanization again.

Don’t get me wrong; I enjoy the fruits of technological progress. I’m not so simple as to think I’d be able to enjoy the comforts I do without the industrialization we’ve experienced. But at the same time, I can’t help but reflect on the relative brief existence of the United States, and the changing landscape that passed from lush forests, barren plains, harsh deserts, unfettered rivers - wild nature, into a harnessed landscape that includes ghettoes, freeways, urban sprawl, graffiti, and housing developments. How could it have been different? I really don’t know. But I always feel sorry for the Indians.

No, I’m not going to rant and rave about all the Native Americans being one big happy family that lived peacefully until the white man came and utopia was ruined. At one point, their ancestors migrated into North America. Competing tribes either avoided one another, formed trade alliances (capitalism), or annihilated one another. From torturing one’s enemy to discover how manly he was, to removing scalps while the victim was alive, to fornicating with a variety of men to obtain their spiritual powers - I think SOME Indians had SOME issues. Bottom line? They are human beings - not immune to the same temptations as any other human being, yet capable of the same heroism as other humans.

The point is, they had an established culture with a small enough population base to allow a migratory lifestyle in “paradise.” Between the Spanish and the English, paradise, as the Indians knew it, was lost. While many of the Indians tried to accommodate the European arrivals, others resisted.

Following the French and Indian War (1863), an Ottawa tribal leader, known as Chief Pontiac led an uprising against the English colonists in the Ohio River Valley. Up until that war, the French had a stranglehold on the area around the Great Lakes. The French had formed treaties with the Huron nation, providing firearms so the Hurons could stand up against their fierce enemies, the Iroquois. At any rate, most of the Natives preferred the French over the British because the French fur trappers were not altering the land with European style farming as the British were. Further, France couldn’t entice many settlers to brave the dangers of colonization whereas English colonists were exceeding 2 million in number. With the defeat of France, Pontiac correctly predicted the end of the Indian culture as he knew it. His uprising was an attempt to stave off the onslaught. If I had been an Indian back then, I fancy myself being in the resistance - although I don’t celebrate the brutality.

Today, I feel somewhat like Pontiac. America’s borders are porous. Like then, today’s natives, Americans, can’t agree on the correct approach. The “nice” thing to do is to allow more and more people to come. “America was built upon immigration!” is a familiar defense. “What right do we have to tell others the door is shut?” Interestingly, the reason for the debate has to do with illegal immigration. I’ve never heard anyone attack legal immigration. For me, the question becomes, Does any country have the right to enforce immigration laws? It’s as rhetorical as asking, Do you have the right to determine who comes in your home? Just as the resources in your home were intended to provide for your family, the resources, paid for through taxation, were intended to provide for the American family, as well as those who entered legally as guests to the “home.” It’s not selfish; it’s basic. Stick with the “your home” example. If you arrive home tonight to find 2 intruders there who justify their presence by saying, “We mowed the lawn. That helps your household. You can’t get by without us. By the way, we ate the leftovers and you’re out of toilet paper,” is it fair of you to call the police to have the intruders removed - forcefully if necessary? If not, give me your address? If so, how is it any different for the American family? The principle is the same.

Arizona is being victimized by the federal government. The United States government is not securing its borders - a basic Constitutional obligation. By law, employers can be fined for hiring illegal immigrants, and up until recently, one of the presumed effective methods of controlling the flow of illegals was to crack down on employers who didn’t stick to the high road when hiring. The thought was, if employers wouldn’t hire illegals, the illegals would not be coming for American jobs. So come on, you greedy employers, ante up, and hire legal citizens or those with green card status. But now, Arizona is being sued by the federal government for practicing discrimination by asking for proof of legal status. “Show me your green card” has become an act of hatred and racism. Now back to your home: The cops couldn’t ask the intruders to prove they were members of your family; that would be discrimination.

On another front, our culture is being asked to accommodate Sharia law - even to the extent practiced by the Fundamental Movement and Extremists within Islam. Large numbers of these people will move to a common area or locale, forming a community. No issue so far, as just about every group of ethnic people have done in America since our beginnings. However, many of the practices will run counter to not only American culture, but American law - and in their view, the imam (religious leader) is their authority - not a secular law which runs counter to the Qu’ran. Examples: a person caught drinking alcohol should be whipped; men may beat their wives if the woman is deemed uppity; literal enforcement of an eye for an eye; a thief must have his hand cut off; highway robbers should be crucified or mutilated; execution of homosexuals; execution of Muslim critics of Islam and possible execution for non-Muslims; and adulterers are to be stoned to death. This is not an indictment of Islam; I’m reflecting on Fundamental and Extremists declaring that Sharia Law dictates their culture - within our country. If you follow the news of these communities expanding, you’ll see a recurring pattern: the community will be absorbed, the community claims they are adhering to their cultural practices, cops will be called in to deal with domestic violence or some other form of brutality, the imam and community leaders will scream “Racism” or “Intolerance” and gradually insist that their practices become acceptable - despite flying in the face of existing law. The irony is, that at the root of the most fundamental practices is the tenet that western ideology and culture is bad...evil, and needs to be abolished. The very culture providing a home for the immigrant is seen as the enemy to be eradicated.

Their practice has nothing to do with the great melting pot we learned about in grade school. In that teaching, we learned that a variety of ingredients makes for a great recipe as the blending of strengths, talents, and gifts makes for a stronger nation. In that scenario, the immigrants were coming to America for a better life - looking forward to becoming an American - embracing the values, freedoms, and responsibilities cherished and expected in the United States. Our present situation is more akin to the cowbird - a parasitic bird which moves in on nests made primarily by songbirds, destroys the songbird eggs or just lays her own eggs in amongst the others. The songbird serves as the host, bringing food back for the hatchlings. The cowbird chicks aggressively steal the food, and the songbird chicks starve or are pushed out of the nest. As a species, the songbird then struggles for survival in the habitat taken over by cowbirds, and eventually must find new habitat or perish.

Like that of the Indians, our culture is in danger of perishing. We are being told by the current administration we have no right to determine who enters our home. We are being told that our foundational roots of Judeo-Christian values and beliefs are non-inclusive and even hateful. Our teachers and professors rail from one side of their mouths about the Europeans coming over and wiping out functional, sophisticated, evolved cultures, and from the other side preach that our present culture is exclusive, bigoted, egocentric, and needs to accommodate.

Congress holds the key to real power in this country. For too long we have given them a pass, blithely believing that somehow the balance of power, and checks and balances, would protect us. In November, we have an opportunity to put the brakes on runaway government. It’s not about Republicans vs. Democrats. It’s about preserving American values and culture. If America is to be saved as a nation, we can no longer have “politics as usual.” Congress (and all federal employees and officials) need a wake-up call to remind them that their power comes from the people; that our nation was founded on the belief of government obeying the will of the People. Today, both parties are out of touch with real America. Lobbyists, unions, and select billionaires are running the country - controlling the stock market, pulling the strings of public officials and buying power. This is not the America described by our Declaration of Independence and our US Constitution. It is time to return to the concept of everyday citizens representing their community and state for a limited term, as opposed to a lifetime of tenure in Congress - completely out of touch with the problems of the average taxpayer. America is hemorrhaging, and it’s time for us citizens to put pressure on the wound.

Should a Book Be Judged by its Cover?

Among the highest compliments a teacher can hope to receive is when his student says, “I learned a lot from you.” Talk about a gratifying statement! Surpassing that is when an 84 year-old Stanford educated man with a great deal of wisdom, a female retired school teacher, and a successful businessman who has a voracious appetite for reading each say, “I can’t believe how much I learned from reading your book.”

The book in question was the completed proof (first published draft) I had asked these three adults to read as a favor to me, hoping they’d catch errors I’d overlooked. (The retired school teacher won - by a large margin.) The reason their compliments meant so much to me was because a) I knew they were being genuine, and b) the target audience is teens in the 13-18 year range.

If you’re reading this blog, chances are excellent that you took American History back in the day. What do you remember? How was the material presented? Was your brain and maturity level ready to receive it? When I’ve traveled to Philadelphia, Boston, DC, Mount Vernon, or Williamsburg, which is the population who appreciates the historical display most? Adults. Teenagers are commonly rolling their eyes, ready to buy a t-shirt, and get back to their Facebook. What a shame that we don’t take history classes as adults; it’s then that we have enough patience and experience to begin appreciating it.

Well, here’s your chance - my shameless self-promotion. Using the aforementioned three adults as unintentional guinea pigs, I learned that my writing was enjoyable and educational for adults as well as teens. They genuinely enjoyed reading the book. The 50-something business man told me he had a very difficult time focusing on editing because he got so caught up in the story weaved. Additionally, I asked for the book back before he finished so I might review his corrections and stick to deadlines, and he didn’t want to give it up. Most flattering.

What I tried to capture was the cause and effect story of America, starting with religious roots planted following the split between Christianity and Judaism. We then move to Europe as the Apostle Paul faces trial in Rome. From there, by means of the Catholic Church, Christianity spreads through Europe, assisted by Gutenberg’s movable printing press. Division in the church occurs as Martin Luther challenges the teachings of the Catholic Church, and the king of England sees this as an opportunity to off his wife. However, with the increased liberalism of the Church of England, there is religious backlash, which eventually leads to our Pilgrims. Between the exodus of Separatists and the desire of explorers to find an all-water route to Asia, colonialism is built upon an economic system known as mercantilism, and soon, the monopolized colonial worker bees resent it. That notwithstanding, colonists are fiercely proud of their English heritage - particularly their rights grounded in the Magna Carta and English Bill of Rights. England increasingly views colonists as provincials not worthy of equality - perhaps they are English by heritage, but certainly not the real McCoy. Tensions build as England passes a series of laws designed to keep the colonies under control. Most today remember the famous Boston Tea Party, but do not recall (or perhaps ever learned) of the frustrating decade leading to that protest - a protest which released oppressive wrath from the king and Parliament. Tension builds upon martial law for another 2 years. Blood is shed at Lexington, and an illegal gathering of colonial leaders must decide if turning back is preferable to the likelihood of hanging as traitors if they move forward. At this point, less than half the population was ready to go to war. The book covers the Declaration of Independence and its meaning, the Revolutionary War, the reasons the country almost fell apart after the victory, and the need for the Constitution. The Constitution is included in its entirety, punctuated with explanations in modern day language of each paragraph.

It’s not a glitzy, glossy paged book with color pages. To keep the book affordable, I opted for black and white - although pictures and graphics are included. It’s priced at a mere $12. You can obtain the book by visiting my website: http://jimbrigleb.com and clicking on the link to the book. So brush up on your history. Or buy the book for your son, daughter, grandchildren, or an acquaintance sadly uninformed about the legacy of our country. Maybe you should buy one for your public library, a homeschooler, the American History teacher at your local school who mistakenly learned that all the Founders were a bunch of rich, selfish, slave owners. The book is called: United States History: Roots through Constitution, subtitled Our Disappearing Legacy.

Overwhelming the System

Trying to analyze "the logic" of what's been passed by Congress during the past year, I've come to the conclusion that the actions are not stupidity - they are deliberate with an underlying agenda to dismantle capitalism in America. The following article was forwarded to me, and I'd encourage you to read from a man who attended college alongside Obama.

WAYNE ALLYN ROOT: Overwhelm the system

WAYNE ALLYN ROOT

Barach Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.

Barack Obama is my college classmate ( Columbia University , class of '83). As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University . They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it.

-- Universal health care. The health care bill had very little to do with health care. It had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions). Obama doesn't care that giving free health care to 30 million Americans will add trillions to the national debt. What he does care about is that it cements the dependence of those 30 million voters to Democrats and big government. Who but a socialist revolutionary would pass this reckless spending bill in the middle of a depression?

-- Cap and trade. Like health care legislation having nothing to do with health care, cap and trade has nothing to do with global warming. It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama's biggest contributors. Those powerful and wealthy unions and contributors (like GE, which owns NBC, MSNBC and CNBC) can then be counted on to support everything Obama wants. They will kick-back hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party to keep them in power. The bonus is that all the new taxes on Americans with bigger cars, bigger homes and businesses helps Obama "spread the wealth around."

-- Make Puerto Rico a state. Why? Who's asking for a 51st state? Who's asking for millions of new welfare recipients and government entitlement addicts in the middle of a depression? Certainly not American taxpayers. But this has been Obama's plan all along. His goal is to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.

-- Legalize 12 million illegal immigrants. Just giving these 12 million potential new citizens free health care alone could overwhelm the system and bankrupt America . But it adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted on to support big government. Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children, food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and eventually Social Security.

-- Stimulus and bailouts. Where did all that money go? It went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions -- including billions of dollars to save or create jobs of government employees across the country. It went to save GM and Chrysler so that their employees could keep paying union dues. It went to AIG so that Goldman Sachs could be bailed out (after giving Obama almost $1 million in contributions). A staggering $125 billion went to teachers (thereby protecting their union dues). All those public employees will vote loyally Democrat to protect their bloated salaries and pensions that are bankrupting America . The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful. The ends justify the means.

-- Raise taxes on small business owners, high-income earners, and job creators. Put the entire burden on only the top 20 percent of taxpayers, redistribute the income, punish success, and reward those who did nothing to deserve it (except vote for Obama). Reagan wanted to dramatically cut taxes in order to starve the government. Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition.

With the acts outlined above, Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system.

Add it up and you've got the perfect Marxist scheme -- all devised by my Columbia University college classmate Barack Obama using the Cloward and Piven Plan.

To Blog or Not to Blog?

It’s been 2 months since my previous blog. Why so long? Discouragement mostly. Citizens barraged Congressional telephones and emails in order to send a message. The overwhelming majority of Americans did not want the National Health Care bill passed. Obama, Pelosi, and Reid were determined to pass it anyway, and did.

The techniques used seem so foreign to our Constitution, i.e. - buying off votes from states with outright bribes, exceptions, and promises; using the “Slaughter” rule to “deem” a bill passed; and writing a bill that is so cumbersome, no one really knows what is in it.

So those who opposed the bill mobilized and let their representatives hear - we don’t want this bill. It didn’t matter; they passed it anyway.

I think I must feel a bit like the British colonists did in the 1770s. They’d protest, they’d boycott, and they’d petition. The boycotts worked to a degree, but never did bring about real change. No wonder the Framers included within the 1st Amendment that citizens not only had the right to petition, but to expect a redress of grievances. They went further than saying we had a right to complain; we also had a right to expect their actions to be corrected. Some would argue that the colonial situation was different as they had no representation in Parliament. What’s the difference? The sitting Senators and Representatives may have been duly elected by their constituents, but when they blatantly ignore the opposition of the public which is desperately attempting to contact Congress yelling, “Stop, stop, please don’t destroy our system!” and yet continue to do so, where is the representation?

I attended the Tax Day Tea Party protest, here in Eugene, OR, on April 15. A radio guy interviewed me. The press was out in force, as was the law. The media went on to cover the event as a small but angry gathering. The cops knew their job would be easy. Sidewalks and lawns around the federal building were covered with well-mannered, law abiding folks carrying personalized signs of protest. The was no swearing. There were no threats to passerbys. There was no pushing or shoving. No evidence of littering. Protesters made sure that the sidewalks had ample room for non-protesters to walk through. The vast majority of motorists honked in support. Somewhere around 20 motorists flipped me off in the course of 2 hours. (Personally, I can’t imagine driving past a group of protesters with whom I disagree, such as LGBT, PETA, Greenpeace, Socialists, Neo-Nazis, SEIU, etc, and flipping them off. Call me quick to generalize, but I’m guessing none of the protesters I was gathered with would do so. How do some become so comfortable to yell or gesture that phrase?) At one point, a lady crowded in next to me and blatantly put her sign in front of mine so the motorists would see hers, not mine. I thought, “Wow, this is out of character for this crowd.” Another guy caught my attention due to his shirt which read “F--K Hippies.” I looked at their signs: No Socialism - Close the Public Schools; No Socialism - Close the Public Libraries; No Socialism - No health care for the needy; in each case, the Social part of the sign was in red letters. Ah, I got it. These two were here to get photographed or noticed, trying to make the Tea Party protesters look like heartless jerks who wanted to close schools, libraries, and have no provision for helping others. The next day on the news, my suspicion was borne out with a story about an Oregon teacher who had been suspended from his job for posting a website advocating disrupting the Tax Day rallies with such tactics, and even gathering as much information as possible on the Tea Party protesters, including social security numbers.

Conservatives, Libertarians, and Constitutionalists are looking forward to next November. Elections have proved to be the vehicle of peaceful protests in our country. We look forward to voicing our discontent by unseating representatives who don’t seem responsive. I have my fears though. How many dead people will vote? How many prisoners? How many polling places will be manned by ACORN and SEIU thugs and bean counters? Will Obama appoint an elections czar and make an Executive Order that the czar, and only the czar, can validate election returns? Extreme? It happens in other countries and has happened here on a more limited basis; does wishful thinking protect us?

So far, President Obama has

taken over GM

taken over banking control

taken over mortgage control

taken over student loans and education

taken over health care

wants to take over the internet

wants to take over the decision to give illegal immigrants amnesty

wants to take over the radio airwaves

When he said he would fundamentally change America, he wasn’t kidding. When Bush (not exactly a spendthrift) left office, we had a national deficit of about $450 billion. In less than one year, Obama’s administration, with the cooperation of Pelosi’s and Reid’s Congress, pushed this to $1.85 trillion - quadrupling the deficit. Whereas he promised to have troops out of Iraq within the first 7 months, we are now there 16 months into his term while escalating in Afghanistan - relying on the alliance of Karzai, a leader with known ties to the opium world. As Iran and North Korea become nuclear powers, our President has vowed never to resort to our use of our own nuclear arsenal. Obama bows deeply to Muslim leaders and walks out on an engagement with the Israeli prime minister. Medicare and Medicaid are bankrupt, and now we’re going to model National Health Care after them, legally requiring citizens who don’t have private insurance to buy the government plan (since when does the government have the right to force a purchase of anything?). Is this the kind of change his voting block was hoping for?

So why a 2 month hiatus on blogging? I read this demotivator: “Blogging: Never before have so many people with so little to say said so much to so few.” And I knew I was guilty. People don’t want to be burdened with bad news. As the Declaration of Independence says “...and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” In other words, we will suffer under a bad government because we’ve gotten used to it; even if it means allowing the country to fall apart. But I’m no Thomas Paine, Patrick Henry nor Samuel Adams.

So I think this is my swan song - most likely my last political blog. I may get rejuvenated and change my mind. But until that happens, if it happens, the fat lady has sung, and I will put my pen back in its scabbard.

The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men. Samuel Adams

No Politician Left Behind

Should elected officials, their staff, government appointees, and those who influence public policy be tested?

Having taught in public education for 3 decades, I know the value of assessment. For instance, pre-testing helps an instructor assess what his students know before launching into a particular unit. He or she may discover that much of the material planned needs to be tailored; not a single student needs to cover X, several could use help on Y, and the entire class needs introduction to Z. Post-testing reveals the growth and success of your target learners. Testing following the overall instruction may be a cause for celebration or a sad revelation that nobody really learned much.

By now, most people, not living under a rock, are aware of the standard ushered in by the George W Bush administration, No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The underlying goal of NCLB was admirable: Children in the American public schools should be kept up to standard, and no child should “fall through the cracks” lest he/she get further and further behind – whether due to ethnicity, gender, language, culture, or home life. Who can argue with that? Doing so immediately puts you in the camp of I don’t think children should succeed.

In order to measure the effectiveness of public education, each and every state developed their own yardstick, via a yearly test, which reveals a child’s level of success compared to state developed benchmarks (targets), growth from one year to the next, and provides all the data needed to fill the Grand Canyon by age, gender, ethnicity, language, poverty, district, school, teacher, hair and eye color, number of teeth, one or two parent family, pets or no, dream tendencies, vacations taken, number of ATVs owned, dwelling type, style of clothing, floss or not, brand of computer, MP3 ability, Verizon or AT&T, and, of course, ability to flare nostrils. (Okay, maybe some of those aren’t...) Based on this data, the school and the district may be put on notice that they are not close enough to the standard expected for certain populations, but not to worry, the district will be placed in Safe Harbor, which is code for “Okay, you’re on probation, but next year the Feds expect to see a 10% jump in scores for those populations who are not passing muster.” In other words, the federal government expects to see Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). The ultimate target? Schools are to have 100% of their students at the grade level targets by 2014. Or else? Or parents can move their child to a different school. Or the district doesn’t get full funding. Or the Feds send in a Navy Seals strike team which show the failing teachers how it’s done.

Based on this model, if it works for public education, it should also work for elected officials and their appointees. Therefore, I propose No Politician Left Behind (NPLB). The standard, or benchmark: comprehension of the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution by 2014. This law will apply to all elected officials, those they appoint who have ANY sway over public policy (e.g. speech writers, czars, press secretaries, all federal judges/justices, and possibly interns) AND ALL CANDIDATES SEEKING OFFICE. Unlike public schools, the standards will not change from one year to the next, as the politicians should comprehend the Declaration and Constitution prior to taking public office.

There will be two phases to the test: a) Content knowledge, and b) Application. The Content Knowledge test of NPLB will cover the Declaration of Independence, all Articles of the Constitution as well as the Bill of Rights. Questions will not be True/False. They will be short answer and extended response thereby eliminating guessing. Additionally, test takers will be questioned for understanding of the purpose and intent of Constitutional content.

Sample questions:

1. Cite the portion of Article I which allows a Senator or Representative to be absent for consideration of a bill.
2. Who may be impeached, under what circumstances, and what is the process?
3. Based on Article II, why did the Framers insist the President be a natural born citizen?
4. According to the Declaration of Independence, what is the purpose of government? Explain.
5. According to the Declaration of Independence, from whom or what, do humans receive their unalienable rights? Why are these rights unalienable?
6. How is the process of reconciliation and filibuster consistent with proportional representation?
7. Using the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, defend the concept of Separation between Church and State.
8. Why were the Framers adamant about including the Second Amendment?
9. Explain how life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness applies to a fetus in light of a physician’s obligation to save the fetus in the event of an accident.
10. List which Articles, Sections, or Amendments of the Constitution you personally ignore because it doesn’t really apply to your duties as a sworn public servant and explain your rationale.

Both the content and application tests will be given annually. Remember, NPLB applies to ALL elected and appointed officials, candidates for the same, and any person exercising sway over public policy. The expectation is that by 2014, 100% of said persons will understand and apply the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.

Consequences for not meeting standard will include Safe Harbor for certain populations (e.g. interns molested with cigars, lobbyists who can’t speak English, Secretaries of the Treasury who evaded personal tax liabilities, Candidates who think there are 57 states). However, by 2014, 100% of those described above must meet standard. Or? The government loses its funding. Those in government receive less salary each year until they and their staff are brought up to standard. A Navy Seal strike team steps in and demonstrates how it’s to be done.

Who will be the holder of accountability? I guess that would be you and me. A Republic demands an educated public who holds their government accountable. Therefore, we must know the ground rules – that is, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. By abdicating this responsibility to those we elect, we are assuming they know, and more importantly, will be careful to fulfill their oaths:

Congress: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

President: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Supreme Court Justice: I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.

English historian, Lord Acton, said, Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Do you sometimes wonder how our government has strayed so far from the blueprints set down by the Founders and Framers? All three branches swear to uphold the Constitution. How many actions do these people take, on a daily basis, which are not consistent with that document? Increasingly, actions of our government demonstrate a widespread belief among elected and appointed officials that the public is ignorant, and therefore, they can cleverly get away with just about anything. Are they correct?

Waterboarding, Jack Bauer, and Terrorism

When the article concerning the “real Jack Bauers” came to my attention, I was definitely interested. I’ve watched 24 each and every season, and can definitely say that I’m an ardent fan. That being the case, I was intrigued to hear about the real life guys.

Rather than try to rehash, the entire article, I’d definitely encourage you to visit this link:

“Meet the Real Jack Bauers”

During the Congressional hearings concerning waterboarding, I was pretty much disgusted. Personally, I didn’t care if it involved suffering. During the 9/11 coverage, I forced myself to watch as much of the suffering and destruction as I could handle. It was particularly gut wrenching to watch people jump from the Twin Towers. I kept asking myself what I would do if I were in their shoes, knowing how terrifying it is to stand on the edge of a cliff and think of falling to my death. Every time I’ve been on an airplane since 9/11, I’ve looked around at other passengers and told myself that if something bad happened on this flight, I needed to muster up the courage of a Todd Beamer and the others on United Flight 93. Perhaps somewhat blindly, I trusted our military and CIA to use discretion on who made it to the waterboarding, and if a few “innocent” people had to undergo the process to help our country avoid a repeat of 9/11, in my gut, I was willing to let it happen.

The more I learned about what prisoners at Gitmo were subjected to, the more I realized that Congress and the media had glorified the supposed suffering. The real “Jack Bauers” do nothing akin to what Keifer Sutherland does on 24. I know, I know. Most of you are probably saying, “Well, duh. That’s Hollywood!” But you have to admit, if you watched the dog and pony show led by Pelosi, et al and the mainstream media, we were subconsciously led to believe that real torturing was going on and that renegade agents were apt to take matters into their own hands.

If you bother to visit the link and read the article (assuming you find it credible), you’ll find that the goal of the investigators was to move rapidly from interrogation to debriefing by gaining two objectives: a) freeing the suspect from his moral obligation to Allah through a means explained to the investigators by the terrorists, and b) avoid using techniques involving pain as victims of pain interrogation will say anything thereby rendering the information gained as useless. So, while I may have formed some of my assumptions of what probably was going on by subconscious absorption of story lines of 24, reality was something else entirely - something tame and actually quite civil.

The byproduct of the real life investigations is impressive. I have quoted from the article:

“For example, information from detainees in CIA custody led to the arrest of an al-Qaeda terrorist named Jose Padilla, who was sent to America on a mission to blow up high-rise apartment buildings in the United States.

“Information from detainees in CIA custody led to the capture of a cell of Southeast Asian terrorists which had been tasked by KSM to hijack a passenger jet and fly it into the Library Tower in Los Angeles.

“Information from detainees in CIA custody led to the capture of Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, KSM’s right-hand-man in the 9/11 attacks, just as he was finalizing plans for a plot to hijack airplanes in Europe and fly them into Heathrow airport and buildings in downtown London.

“Information from detainees in CIA custody led to the capture of Ammar al-Baluchi and Walid bin Attash, just as they were completing plans to replicate the destruction of our embassies in East Africa by blowing up the U.S. consulate and Western residences in Karachi, Pakistan.

“Information from detainees in CIA custody led to the disruption of an al-Qaeda plot to blow up the U.S. Marine camp in Djibouti, in an attack that could have rivaled the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut.

“Information from detainees in CIA custody helped break up an al-Qaeda cell that was developing anthrax for terrorist attacks inside the United States.

“In addition to helping break up these specific terrorist cells and plots, CIA questioning provided our intelligence community with an unparalleled body of information about al-Qaeda — giving U.S. officials a picture of the terrorist organization as seen from the inside, at a time when we knew almost nothing about the enemy who had attacked us on 9/11.

“In addition, CIA detainees helped identify some 86 individuals whom al-Qaeda deemed suitable for Western operations — most of whom we had never heard of before. According to the intelligence community, about half of these individuals were subsequently tracked down and taken off the battlefield. Without CIA questioning, many of these terrorists could still be unknown to us and at large — and may well have carried out attacks against the West by now.

“Until the program was temporarily suspended in 2006, well over half of the information our government had about al-Qaeda — how it operates, how it moves money, how it communicates, how it recruits operatives, how it picks targets, how it plans and carries out attacks — came from the interrogation of terrorists in CIA custody.

“Meet the Real Jack Bauers”

If this is true, how sad to see that we were once again duped by Congress, Obama, and the mainstream media. And how sad it is to think of the program being dismantled, and the circus which will now ensue as terrorists are put through civilian courts, only to be freed to the streets of America or sent back to the terrorist country of Yemen. George W Bush may not have hit a home run when it came to remaining as conservative as I would have preferred, but there is no denying he kept America safe during his eight years in office, just as Ronald Reagan sent a clear message to the world, “Don’t mess with the US.” In contrast, Obama and Congress are sending a strong message of “We’re really sorry how evil our country has been. Anything you do to us will be our fault, and if you’re caught, we’ll try you in civilian courts while affording you all the rights guaranteed citizens of our country. We hope you find that to your satisfaction. If not, please tell us how we might improve. Would a billion dollar stimulus package, courtesy of the American taxpayer, help?”

How I wish we could just start with a fresh group of representatives and senators who weren’t elected after kowtowing to the party machines and special interest groups. And once elected, if they were going to second guess the process of Gitmo, they’d first have to experience the processes of investigation utilized by the investigators and then watch the archived videos of what happened on 9/11 along with Daniel Pearl having his head cut off and al-Qaeda film footage of their terrorist training camps. I’m thinking things might be a little different.