This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
The Conservative Voice of Henry County
Issue # 365
September 7, 2012
The Shift in Public Schools: From Education to Job-Training K – 12
When President George Herbert Walker Bush decided to change education, he did so from the Executive Branch. In 1991 he created the New American Schools Development Corporation and asked business and industry to support development of his planned “radical, break-themold” schools in each congressional district. Thereby, he created a public-private partnership of federal government and business (PPP), with no room for parents or voters in the board room. Note this fact: PPP is not a principle of the free enterprise system. It’s one of the “isms.” But, within two years, Congress advanced the plan. In 1993 the U.S. House passed the School-to-Work Opportunities Act with no roll call vote and it passed the Senate in 1994. Georgia’s response: In 1996, school-to-work (STW) came to Georgia via the Schrenko-Breeden Youth Workforce Development Plan, an agreement between the Labor Department and the Department of Education to integrate technical education into K – 12 curricula and put 75-80 percent of pupils on career tracks, so graduates will take and remain in local jobs. The Youth Workforce Agreement “Rationale” stated: “Georgia’s primary issue related to education reform is the connection between schools, professional job training, and work.” That agreement between the State School Superintendent and the Commissioner of the Department of Technical and Adult Education transformed the focus of public education, although legislators and parents had no voice in it. The merger of education and labor was reinforced when educators attended the November 21-22, 1996 Georgia Department of Labor Workforce Development conference, focusing on implementation of the Federal Goals 2000 Act, the Improving America’s Schools Act and School-toWork laws. Since then, “seamless education” has been implemented. Sue Ella Deadwyler,
In This Issue:
Page Feature 1 2 3 3 4 7 8 9 9 10 The Shift in Public Schools DNC: “In (Whom) We Trust”? DNC: God met with Opposition JasonPye.com Blog Ending Dumbing Down America God not Removed – He was Replaced
Charter School Amendment
Democrats: Let’s Ban Profits Democrat Debt Solutions
DNC Speeches: Mostly False
Over 58,000 reads at Scribd.com
Do you have a story to tell? Become a Citizen contributor. Submit your opinions, commentaries and articles to firstname.lastname@example.org
View or download at
New post on STELLALOHMANN.COM
DNC Platform “In (Whom) We Trust”?
By Stella Lohmann. September 5, 2012 A Party Platform reveals how it intends to govern. So is removing 'God' from the Democrat National Convention just a precursor of "In Whom We Trust" once BHO has four more years? Think. There is less and less that President Obama can claim that feasible, reliable, much less American as we once knew it to be. With the scrubbing of any reference to Israel's right to exist and "God", Obama and the DNC 2012 Platform are revealing what kind of America they speak of in their speeches and talking points. Look beyond phrases focus groups say will appeal to you and think, really think. He has over-extended Executive Orders to create his 'constitution' of law according to BHO. Government under BHO has grown to include a 'partnership' controlling or blocking private enterprise of energy, banking, housing, healthcare and even social issues--when and where prayers are legal, what is 'hate' speech and bearing arms in our own homes. He campaigned on the hope of changing Iran's quest for nuclear power through making the US 'likeable', 'reasonable' and 'diplomatic' while Iran is now testing missiles aimed at Israel. Translation: there is no lasting anything when the finish line is imaginary (agreement with Iran) and there is no respect (US is second on its list of destruction after Israel). It's not that he doesn't have the intelligence or resources; it's that his agenda is not in America's best interest...at least the one that is a Republic. Viewers and even DNC delegates may not know or maybe care that the DNC Platform has eliminated “God” from their 2012 platform much less the newly vanished reference to Israel. The First Lady told a heartfelt story of her upbringing in modest means and how Obama cares about the struggles Americans face today and ended her speech by saying, “God bless America!” She was appreciative of those who struggled so she and her husband could have a better life. In contrast, Ann Romney and others at the Republican National Convention revealed how Mitt has spent his life helping those who struggle (after refusing the inheritance left to him by his father). And she said, “God bless America!”, too.
Democrats' Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met With Loud Opposition
View the video:
This issue is not about party affiliation. Democrats in general are not Godless heathens. The Democrat Leadership, however, has moved to the far Left of anything our parents or grandparents could have guessed. In fact, it was the Greatest Generation under Democrat president and majorities in Congress that fought, bled and died to prevent this kind of MarxistCommunist regime across the globe. Today's challenge is no less arduous - they must be stopped. After they took heat for OMITTING ANY REFERENCE TO "GOD" in their platform and for ELIMINATING LANGUAGE from the 2008 platform that identified Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Democrats tried to add the language back into their party platform with a voice vote. When Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the convention chairman, came to the podium to ask for the approval of the delegates, those who shouted opposition to the language change were as loud, if not louder, than those who voiced their support. Villaraigosa, in what quickly became an awkward moment, asked for the voice vote three times in all. After the second time, he paused for several seconds and looked behind him for guidance from a convention staffer -- possibly a parliamentarian -- before turning back and asking for a third vote. Even though the no's were again as loud if not louder than the aye's on the third vote, Villaraigosa said he had determined that two thirds of those present had voted in favor. Boos filled the arena in response. Even though video of the platform amendment vote shows a chaotic scene, many people booing and hollering in protest, Wasserman Schultz argued that “there wasn’t any discord” during the vote. After watching the interview from the CNN studio, the always fair Cooper said: “I mean, that’s an alternate universe.”
Jason Pye's work has taken him into the far reaches of political analysis and we all wish him well in his future endeavors. Read the announcement.
JASONPYE.com, an aggregate of political and social blogging for seven years, is closing down.
This blog served as the starting point for several opportunities, but it’s time to move on. You can still catch my rants at UNITED LIBERTY and PEACH PUNDIT. I’ve also started A TUMBLR, where I’ll occasionally post pictures or promote stories. You can also continue to follow me at @JASELIBERTY on Twitter or ON FACEBOOK.
the deliberate dumbing down of america
By Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt
Readers of The Citizen, this section of the newsletter is quite lengthy but I hope you will read through it. The insights and information about our educational system in the United States clarifies and illuminates the core and basis of a failing America. The book, the deliberate dumbing down of america, is available at Amazon.com. The E-book version is free to all at HTTP://WWW.DELIBERATEDUMBINGDOWN.COM/MOMSPDFS/DDDOA.SML.PDF.
This book will forever change how you look at your child’s education.
From The Preface
There are many talented and respected researchers and activists who have carefully documented the “weird” activities which have taken place “in the name of education.” Any opposition to change agent activities in local schools has invariably been met with cries of “Prove your case, document your statements,” etc. Documentation, when presented, has been ignored and called incomplete. The classic response by the education establishment has been, “You’re taking that out of context!”—even when presented with an entire book which uses their own words to detail exactly what the “resisters” are claiming to be true. “Resisters”—usually parents—have been called every name in the book. Parents have been told for over thirty years, “You’re the only parent who has ever complained.” The media has been convinced to join in the attack upon common sense views, effectively discrediting the perspective of well-informed citizens. The desire by “resisters” to prove their case has been so strong that they have continued to amass—over a thirty- to fifty-year period—what must surely amount to tons of materials containing irrefutable proof, in the education change agents’ own words, of deliberate, malicious intent to achieve behavioral changes in students/parents/society which have nothing to do with commonly understood educational objectives. Upon delivery of such proof, “resisters” are consistently met with the “shoot the messenger” stonewalling response by teachers, school boards, superintendents, state and local officials, as well as the supposedly objective institutions of academia and the press.
the deliberate dumbing down of america is also a book for my children, grandchildren, and great-
grandchildren. I want them to know that there were thousands of Americans who may not have died or been shot at in overseas wars, but were shot at in small-town “wars” at school board meetings, at state legislative hearings on education, and, most importantly, in the media. I want my progeny to know that whatever intellectual and spiritual freedoms to which they may still lay claim were fought for—are a result of—the courageous work of incredible people who dared to tell the truth against all odds. I want them to know that there will always be hope for freedom if they follow in these people’s footsteps; if they cherish the concept of “free will”; if they believe that human beings are special, not animals, and that they have intellects, souls, and consciences. I want them to know that if the government schools are allowed to teach children K–12 using Pavlovian/Skinnerian animal training methods—which provide tangible rewards only for correct answers—there can be no freedom. Why? People “trained”—not educated—by such educational techniques will be fearful of taking principled, sometimes controversial, stands when called for because these people will have been programmed to
speak up only if a positive reward or response is forthcoming. The price of freedom has often been paid with pain and loneliness. In 1971 when I returned to the United States after living abroad for 18 years, I was shocked to find public education had become a warm, fuzzy, soft, mushy, touchy-feely experience, with its purpose being socialization, not learning. From that time on, from the vantage point of having two young sons in the public schools, I became involved—as a member of a philosophy committee for a school, as an elected school board member, as co-founder of Guardians of Education for Maine (GEM), and finally as a senior policy advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) of the U.S. Department of Education during President Ronald Reagan’s first term of office. OERI was, and is, the office from which all the controversial national and international educational restructuring has emanated. Those ten years (1971–1981) changed my life. As an American who had spent many years working abroad, I had experienced traveling in and living in socialist countries. When I returned to the United States I realized that America’s transition from a sovereign constitutional republic to a socialist democracy would not come about through warfare (bullets and tanks) but through the implementation and installation of the “system” in all areas of government—federal, state and local. The brainwashing for acceptance of the “system’s” control would take place in the school—through indoctrination and the use of behavior modification, which comes under so many labels: the most recent labels being Outcome-Based Education, Skinnerian Mastery Learning or Direct Instruction.4 In the 1970s this writer and many others waged the war against values clarification, which was later renamed “critical thinking,” which regardless of the label— and there are bound to be many more labels on the horizon—is nothing but pure, unadulterated destruction of absolute values of right and wrong upon which stable and free societies depend and upon which our nation was founded. In 1973 I started the long journey into becoming a “resister,” placing the first incriminating piece of paper in my “education” files. That first piece of paper was a purple ditto sheet entitled “All About Me,” next to which was a smiley face. It was an open-ended questionnaire beginning with: “My name is _____.” My son brought it home from public school in fourth grade. The questions were highly personal; so much so that they encouraged my son to lie, since he didn’t want to “spill the beans” about his mother, father and brother. The purpose of such a questionnaire was to find out the student’s state of mind, how he felt, what he liked and disliked, and what his values were. With this knowledge it would be easier for the government school to modify his values and behavior at will—without, of course, the student’s knowledge or parents’ consent. That was just the beginning. There was more to come: the new social studies textbook World of Mankind. Published by Follett, this book instructed the teacher how to instill humanistic (no right/no wrong) values in the K–3 students. At the text’s suggestion the teacher was encouraged to take little tots for walks in town during which he would point out big and small houses, asking the little tots who they thought lived in the houses: Poor or Rich? “What do you think they eat in the big house? ...in the little house?” When I complained about this non-educational activity at a school board meeting I was dismissed as a censor and the press did its usual hatchet job on me as a misguided parent. A friend of mine—a very bright gal who had also lived abroad for years—told me that she had overheard discussion of me at the local co-op. The word was out in town that I was a “kook.” That was not a “positive response/reward” for my taking what I believed to be a principled position. Since I had not been “trained,” I was just mad! Another milestone on my journey was an in-service training session entitled “Innovations in Education.” A retired teacher, who understood what was happening in education, paid for me to attend. This training program developed by Professor Ronald Havelock of the University of Michigan and funded by the United
States Office of Education taught teachers and administrators how to “sneak in” controversial methods of teaching and “innovative” programs. These controversial, “innovative” programs included health education, sex education, drug and alcohol education, death education, critical thinking education, etc. Since then I have always found it interesting that the controversial school programs are the only ones that have the word “education” attached to them! I don’t recall—until recently—”math ed.,” “reading ed.,” “history ed.,” or “science ed.” A good rule of thumb for teachers, parents and school board members interested in academics and traditional values is to question any subject that has the word “education” attached to it. This in-service training literally “blew my mind.” I have never recovered from it. The presenter (change agent) taught us how to “manipulate” the taxpayers/parents into accepting controversial programs. He explained how to identify the “resisters” in the community and how to get around their resistance. He instructed us in how to go to the highly respected members of the community—those with the Chamber of Commerce, Rotary, Junior League, Little League, YMCA, Historical Society, etc.—to manipulate them into supporting the controversial/non-academic programs and into bad-mouthing the resisters. Advice was also given as to how to get the media to support these programs. A good example with which most of us can identify involves property taxes for local schools. Let us consider an example from Michigan— The internationalist change agents must abolish local control (the “Thesis”) in order to restructure our schools from academics to global workforce training (the “Synthesis”). Funding of education with the property tax allows local control, but it also enables the change agents and teachers’ unions to create higher and higher school budgets paid for with higher taxes, thus infuriating homeowners. Eventually, property owners accept the change agents’ radical proposal (the “Anti- thesis”) to reduce their property taxes by transferring education funding from the local property tax to the state income tax. Thus, the change agents accomplish their ultimate goal; the transfer of funding of education from the local level to the state level. When this transfer occurs it increases state/federal control and funding, leading to the federal/internationalist goal of implementing global workforce training through the schools (the “Synthesis”). This war has, in fact, become the war to end all wars. If citizens on this planet can be brainwashed or robotized, using dumbed-down Pavlovian/Skinnerian education, to accept what those in control want, there will be no more wars. If there are no rights or wrongs, there will be no one wanting to “right” a “wrong.” Robots have no conscience. The only permissible conscience will be the United Nations or a global conscience. Whether an action is good or bad will be decided by a “Global Government’s Global Conscience,” as recommended by Dr. Brock Chisholm, executive secretary of the World Health Organization, Interim Commission, in 1947—and later in 1996 by current United States Secretary of State Madeline Albright. Much of this book contains quotes from government documents detailing the real purposes of American education: • to use the schools to change America from a free, individual nation to a socialist, global “state,” just one of many socialist states which will be subservient to the United Nations Charter, not the United States Constitution • to brainwash our children, starting at birth, to reject individualism in favor of collectivism • to reject high academic standards in favor of OBE/ISO 1400/90007 egalitarianism
• to reject truth and absolutes in favor of tolerance, situational ethics and consensus • to reject American values in favor of internationalist values (globalism) • to reject freedom to choose one’s career in favor of the totalitarian K–12 school-to-work/ OBE process, aptly named “limited learning for lifelong labor,” coordinated through United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. Only when all children in public, private and home schools are robotized—and believe as one—will World Government be acceptable to citizens and able to be implemented without firing a shot. The attractivesounding “choice” proposals will enable the globalist elite to achieve their goal: the robotization (brainwashing) of all Americans in order to gain their acceptance of lifelong education and workforce training—part of the world management system to achieve a new global feudalism.
God was NOT Removed from the DNC Platform — He Was Replaced
Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/09/god-was-not-removed-from-the-dnc-platform-he-wasreplaced/#ixzz25dM3GBjO
You’ve been reading that God’s name was removed from the Democratic National Committee platform. This is how the 2008 platform read in its reference to God: “We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.” In the 2012 platform “God-given” has been removed. The paragraph reads as follows: “We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth — the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.” Here’s what a lot of people do not understand. There is no such thing as religious neutrality. The rejection of the true God means that a new god replaces Him. In the case of the Democrats (and some Republicans) government is the new God. Rousas J. Rushdoony makes this point in his book Foundation of Social Order: When the State claims religious neutrality, it is either self-deception or a deception of the people, and it merely means a neutrality towards its old faith in order to prepare the way for the establishment of the new faith. The State is no less a religious organization than the church, and in some societies more so. In Christian society, church and State are both religious orders, the church as a ministry of grace and the State as a ministry of justice. In pagan society, the State takes priority as the religious order: the temple or the shrine then become aspects of the state’s life and function. Religion can no more be abstracted from the State than from the
church. Churches and States may forsake a religion and abandon their creed, but only in order to adopt a new one. This is exactly what the Democrats have done. Not to let the Republicans off the hook, but too many of them give lip service to the true God while worshiping at the altar of their new god — the Messianic State.
The statement in a DNC video that “The Government is the only thing we all belong to” pretty much sums up the creed of the Democrat Party. I should add, however, that striking at the image of God by promoting abortion on demand and redefining marriage are also indicators that the Democrats have become their own God.
Historic and philosophical reference:
Found in Nietzsche's work Thus Spoke Zarathustra (German: Also sprach Zarathustra), which is most responsible for popularizing the phrase: "God is dead and we have killed Him." God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
The Charter School Constitutional Amendment
The Citizen Editorial
Georgians will vote in November whether to change the state constitution to allow creation of an appointed board to authorize and fund state charter schools without influence, control or oversight by local school boards. Some folks are saying they know how to “fix” public schools. The rationale ranges from removal of federal mandates and programs to the ease of un-electing local board members. In fact local school boards exist as rubber stamps for federal and state mandates. To act otherwise jeopardizes the almighty dollar, which feeds the appetite for growth through social engineering. Public (government) schools are no longer about educating young minds. Folks my age graduated high school in the early 1970s - college a few years later. The experiences we had in public school were far removed from today's bloated bureaucracies. When a student has a problem grasping the changing and evolving mathematics curriculum, parents are forced to hire outside tutors. Parent-Teacher-Student conferences are not allowed. A meeting must be scheduled with three counselors, the principal and the math teacher.
The discussion involves (1) assigning more unsupervised math homework, (2) writing a daily journal, and (3) protecting the teacher (and school) from any responsibility to educate the student. Applying the same guidelines proposed for charters to public schools cannot happen because of the monopoly local boards know they possess. Local boards decry austerity funding although Georgia perstudent funding has increased 10% since 2003. Local boards refuse to approve any competitive school, charters are at their mercy. School attendance numbers equal $Dollars, so the allowance of competitive venues for education cannot happen. State charter schools can sidestep, or waive, local and state authorities under the mandate for academic excellence and less adherence to “public school doctrines.” Moving control from the local tax base, where at least we 'think' we have some control, to state funding and control appears to offer some measure of relief from the social engineering factories we call schools. But, charter schools cannot waive federal laws, rules, policies and regulations, which many agree is the root of decline in our educational system. Many would like to see a termination of the US Department of Education. It is a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And the agenda has been clear for decades. Public (government) schools are no longer about educating young minds. With the state and federal domination of the money that local school boards thrive on, and no change from within appearing possible, what is the general public to do? Viewing the pro and con, the money – all the money – is taxpayer funded. Whether the traditional public school system gets it, or a public state charter school gets it, it is still our tax dollars. On the one hand we know the traditional “throw money at it” public schools are not working. To quote a speaker at a recent political convention, “When they don’t do the job, we gotta let ‘em go.” State funded and approved charters may not be a silver bullet, but the prospect of competition may be worth the effort.
Posing as an anti-business crusader, Peter Schiff found a number of DNC delegates and attendees who support explicitly outlawing profitability. We deliberately avoided speaking with the occupy protestors camping outside in tents to get a more "mainstream" Democratic perspective
Democrats: Let's Ban Profits!
JERRY ROSS WROTE: This is by far the most disturbing political video I have ever
seen. Many of these people being interviewed are Democrat delegates in Charlotte. Is it any wonder that Marxism is spreading like a wild fire across our fruited plains?
Is it any wonder that the Obama administration is clueless regarding the basic principles taught in Economics 101? These people are dumber than a box of rocks and have no understanding of how the free market, free enterprise system works. These people are the poster children for the dismal failure of American education over the past fifty years. These people are not the exception, but the rule among delegates at the Democrat National Convention.
Democrat Debt Solutions: Tax the Rich, Spend More Money
Nashville Tea Party shared the following link:
As the national debt finally passes the $16 trillion mark, are Democrats serious about addressing deficit spending? Several Democratic delegates and supporters that Reason TV spoke with at the 2012 Democratic National Convention said that Democrats care deeply about the debt, but when it came to offering solutions, they said that serious reductions in government spending would actually be counterproductive. Instead, many suggested increasing public works spending to stimulate job growth, despite the fact that President Obama's first stimulus still hasn't moved the economy above 8 percent unemployment. They also defended Obama's proposal to raise taxes on anyone earning more than $200,000 a year, even though this won't even come close to closing the annual budget deficit.
At the Democrat Convention
I do believe that HELL HAS FROZEN OVER! The Huffington Post, of all outlets said Michelle Obama lied about jobs creation during her speech. Technically they said "it is not exactly true". When the Huffington Post won't support her lies, the liberals are in big trouble! MAYOR JULIAN CASTRO: Despite incredible odds and united Republican opposition, our president took action. And now we’ve seen 4.5 million new jobs. FACT: There are 316,000 less people in America working today than the day Obama took office.
GOP House members tried to redefine rape, Democratic Rep. Gwen Moore says HTTP://WWW.POLITIFACT.COM/WISCONSIN/STATEMENTS /2012/SEP/06/GWEN-MOORE/GOP-HOUSEMEMBERS-TRIED-REDEFINE-RAPE-DEMOCRATIC-R/
BILL CLINTON: “During this period, more than 500,000 manufacturing jobs have been created under President Obama. That’s the first time manufacturing jobs have increased since the 1990s.”
FACT: If you count from the beginning of Obama’s term, Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that manufacturing jobs have declined by more than 500,000. Manufacturing jobs have been on a long steep decline since the middle of Clinton’s term, with some 2 million jobs lost during the recession that started at the end of George W. Bush’s term.
“There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” ― Will Rogers
The Citizen Newsletter is provided by
Henry Citizens for Responsible Government Larry Stanley, Editor Please report broken links or other problems
To Unsubscribe: send email to HC Citizen Write UNSUBSCRIBE in Subject: line
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.