Public Schools Are Training The New Secret Police -- Your Kids

Public Schools systems have an agenda. They want your kids.

Across America, some conservative parents have been undergoing a "great awakening". School choice programs, charter school programs, and homeschooling associations are on the rise if not in actual practice, then in the political debates. Why?

One reason is that Teachers' Unions want continued profits from your tax dollars, through mandatory payments by the teachers and administrators themselves. If they get educators and administrators a contractual raise, their cut is larger. School Choice legislation takes those tax dollars and allocates the students' share towards the school the children attend. If that is a charter school, that school gets more taxes. In many states, those teachers at charter schools are mostly not members of the unions. So the union doesn't get a slice. With vouchers for private schools, it's the same thing. Some states are even extending tax breaks to parents who home-school. In Indiana, if your kid works his or her butt off and graduates a year early, those funds allocated for the child's senior year go into a college fund. It's money out of unions' pockets. They hate it.

They hate it not only for the obvious reduction of the wad in their purses. They hate it because it means lower funds to use to push their political agendas. It means a lowered account used to lobby for things such as "green energy" or dump into campaign funds and Political Action Committees for their socialist candidates. (From 1989-2012, the National Educators Association and the SEIU have donated $71.1 MILLION to Socialist AKA Democratic Party Campaigns. Those funds originated from your tax dollars then paid to salaries from which NEA and SEIU extracts their dues. So, these are, basically, your tax dollars going to these candidates. Imagine the school supplies and education materials that money could have been better spent on! But those increases in education spending are "for the kids", right? Wrong.)

Dating back into the sixties with the advent of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and other "student led" groups (Such as the domestic terrorist group, the Weatherman and the Weather Underground) allegedly supporting "free speech", several organizations seeking a "revolution" began organizing. Marcuse-ian ideology, Frankfurt School indoctrination, and Alinsky Tactics became the main academic pursuits on college campuses. Those pursuits advocate Marxism, Fascism, Maoism and other tyrannical socialist (under the euphemism of "Democracy", "Liberalism", and "Progressive") agendas. These were embraced by such lovely people as Derrick Bell, William Ayers (former Weather Underground terrorist leader turned collegiate indoctrinator), and other advocates of the overthrow of the US Constitution. Many of these "forward thinkers" are now college professors, teachers' union organizers, and other various influential personalities in "education".

Among many teachers, administrators, and school boards, you have public employees who hold a very frightening and scary common ideology they don't want you to know. They believe they own your kids from the second they step onto school property until they sign them back over to you to go home and sleep. Some will even go as far as to believe  they own your kids form the second school starts on the first day of the school year until the dismissal bell on the final day. Some localities and states have even enacted policies and regulations affirming such.

They believe that because they are legally responsible for the welfare of your child while you entrust them with the education and care for those few hours that it extends to a pecuniary ownership. These days, parents are fined, watched, and investigated if they teach their own kids things that don't fall in line with the socialist ideological narrative the teachers feed the kids. They inspect lunches brought from home and fine parents if the food brought from home doesn't meet their specifications. If your child does independent research for an assignment and essay contest and finds data and proof  that the propaganda pushed by the school is false, your child get persecuted and expelled.

They are not your kids. They belong to the state during the school year. The teachers and administrators are the ones the state has given the authority to minister to your kids. "It takes a village". So "the village" has more a right than the parents.

The "village" is not the parents. You have people such as the head of the national council of principles who honestly believe that parents are too stupid to raise their own kids. Yes, even if both parents have graduate degrees (on of them specializing in child psychology), they know less than somebody with a BA in elementary education. Pay no attention to the fact that a BA in elementary education is one of the less challenging undergraduate degrees to acquire, at least when compared to engineering, business, applied sciences, or even something as "useless" as philosophy.

The curricula in public schools contain classes in worshiping socialist leaders, to include Obama. They include learning from skewed and incorrect history textbooks by socialists such as H. Zinn. They preach that "fairness" means those who have worked and acquired more should be forced to give their earnings to those who are "less fortunate" (which is usually less industrious, motivated, and productive). They learn that Ho Chi Minh was a pretty good guy. They learn that Lenin was a great guy who was looking out for the "common people" (despite the fact he jailed or murdered more "common people" than the Czar did). In High School, nihilism is touted as beneficial while Napoleon Hill's Think and Grow Rich is vilified as a subversive text used by the "evil rich" who "won't share". The tyrannic pigs in Animal Farm are spun to be heroes and not metaphors of  the evils perpetrated by Lenin and Stalin. The kids are taught lies about global warming and "green energy" that contradict actual scientific studies. the kids are taught that it is the government's job to take care of them. They are not taught to be individual free-thinkers who strive for self-sufficiency. It's even gotten to a point where competition is looked down upon (to include keeping score at sporting events) and cooperation for the good of the class (state, oligarchy, ruling class) are lauded. 

Now these kids are being trained to spy on their own parents and report them to their socialist nannies. Questions on state and federal level standardized testing are now asking students to spill their guts and report on their home-life. It is bad enough that a teacher will report a parent to CPS if the kid falls off her bike while learning to ride it on Saturday and still has a bruise on Monday morning. Now you have essay question on standardized tests in New Jersey asking students to discuss a "Secret from home they had to keep" and "how keeping that secret affected them". It amounts to "give us the dirt on your parents" because reporting them to your state-appointed nannies is better than "honor[ing] thy mother and father".

Parents, it's time to take back your kids. Go to those school board elections and vote for those who advocate your rights as parents. Remember the 10th Amendment. Of course, this means you can no longer be lazy and let the teachers and administrators just do what they feel best (it isn't). You have to make the time to get involved. Get up 15 minutes earlier and make that lunch for your kids. Look at their homework. Read the textbooks being used. Attend school board meetings and voice your opinions and rights. What's more important, after all, that team-building cocktail hour for work or the kids you work to provide for in the first place?

While there, remind those intrusive spies for the US Communist Party of the Privacy Act of 1974. Don't be afraid to take them to court over the issue. The last thing  they want is for these things to end up before a court that actually supports the US Constitution. Of course, this is why they try to indoctrinate your children in socialist ideology while giving their union dues over to socialist candidates in the first place. They want to instill that socialist state where neighbors spy on neighbors, sending each other to gulags and re-education camps for wanting to exercise free-thought and desiring liberty and prosperity.

Evolving Definition of a Term ("Nutjob")

I've seen the term "nutjob" tossed around quite a bit lately. Mostly, I see the term used as some form of insult regarding conservatives:  "Right-Wing Nutjob" or "RWNJ".

Curious about the origins, I did a little research. Actually, it's been a pet project for a few months now. When bored and not inspired to pick up my guitar, read a philosophy or economics book, watch  a movie, tend my bonsai, go hiking, or any of the other hobbies I enjoy, I will pick some topic to research. I have often been nicknamed "the walking encyclopedia". See, I've had this nasty habit of researching trivia since I was a child. It's quite amusing how this "trivia" becomes important knowledge every so often. For example, knowing the proper cooking temperature and folding ("pulling") techniques for making taffy came in quite handy for building rapport with an Iraqi military commander. Knowing the chord progression for "Smoke on the Water" broke the ice with one insurgent detainee, allowing the interrogator to actually glean some information. So, it has come in handy in some circumstances one would never consider such "trivia" useful.

Combining one hobby concerning the etymology of words, phrases, and jargon with an interest in obscure military facts and history led to a rather amusing thread of research:  the term "nutjob".

Today, many so-called experts on slang will attempt to tell you that a "nutjob" is when somebody stimulates you, sexually, to climax. The "nut" part is the ejaculation, the "job" being the act leading to it. However, the term "nutjob" predates the slang use of "nut" as a euphemism for semen. That term actually derives from the slang use of "nut" as a testicle. That is another misnomer on the meaning of "nutjob". Some will try to tell you it is manual or oral stimulation of the testicles and scrotum.

One thing many agree upon is that the term "nutjob" refers to somebody who is a little "off". It is a slang term for somebody who is not to be taken seriously because their ideas are a little unfounded. Here we do get a little closer to the origin of the term.

In World War One (WWI), the US Army Air Corps sent aviators to Europe. The planes in those days were much more rickety and far less sophisticated than today's aircraft. In fact, until timing chains were employed with the machine guns, pilots and/or gunners often shot off their own propellers. These aircraft had few instruments, sometimes not even a working fuel gauge. The better pilots learned the "feel" of their aircraft and the responsiveness through contact forces between their bodies and the aircraft. Hence you have the derivation of the phrase "by the seat of your pants".

These pilots were already a bit brazen. Many of them were extreme adrenaline junkies. In the thick of an air battle, many would land, refuel, and get back in the air as fast as possible.

Ground crews and mechanics knew the benefits of regular maintenance in keeping the planes flying. These Preventive Maintenance Checks and Services (PMCS) were considered necessary between flights and often during refueling periods during brief landings. Sometimes the mechanics would want to ground the plane to fix something that could end up being a larger problem. Remember, these aircraft were a lot more rickety than today's jets. The vibrations of the engine, the guns, and the forces at work producing lift and torque often caused screws, nuts, and bolts to loosen.

So when the pilots landed to refuel, the mechanics would run out to check over the planes while they were refueling. If they noticed something, the amped-up pilots impatient to get back into battle would tell the mechanics to "just give her a nutjob", meaning to tighten down loose nuts and bolts, tape up holes, and get the plane ready to fly with the least work necessary. Sometimes this meant delaying work on more serious problems that could cause the aircraft to fail in the middle of the battle.

Of course, this led to many planes flying and landing "on a wing and a prayer", another term dating back to WWI.

Soon, the mechanics started using the term "nutjob" to refer to the adrenaline-junkie pilots who would do a "slam and scram" and order that minimal maintenance. So, these pilots would often go back into the fray with at least a "loose screw". Sometimes they would be in such a rush, they'd tell the mechanics to forgo the "nutjob" and would would themselves become the "nutjobs" flying with a "screw loose".

So a "nutjob" is either, in reality, a hasty bit of work, just enough to start a project without full preparation; or it is somebody crazy enough to accept taking a few unnecessary risks in order to attempt to accomplish a mission/task.

Taking into account the origin of the term "nutjob", one can only assume that the true meaning of a "right-wing" or "left-wing" "nutjob" is one that has the nuts and bolts tightened on that given wing. So, a "right-wing nutjob" (RWNJ) is somebody who has at least some facts from the right side of the political spectrum tightened down, well. However, that would mean that the "left-wing" has a few "screws loose".

The same applies the other way. I have no "screws loose", so I avoid calling somebody on the totalitarian-oligarchy-minded left-wing a "nutjob".


One final thought, kids:  the one who laugh last was too clueless to get the joke.

Our Kids, Our Future, Civics & Education

Growing up in a Chicago Suburb in Illinois, back in the early 1980s, there was a state law. In order to get into High School, a student had to pass tests on both the Illinois and US Constitutions. Three years later, in junior year of High School, that same law applied with a more comprehensive test on each that a student was required to pass in order to graduate from High School. If those tests still exist, it appears they have been greatly diminished in their requirements.

I encounter college students these days who cannot even name the three men who wrote under the pseudonym "Publius" (Madison, Hamilton and Jay). I have encountered college graduates who believe the Declaration of Independence starts with "We The People, in order to form...". They further quote the Preamble of the US Constitution as "Four score and seven years ago...".

My junior high civics class involved cursory knowledge on the history and meaning of each article of each constitution. Most recent college graduates I encounter would fail the US Constitution portion of the test, today. It was a test at the Seventh Grade level. I even had one 30-something with a graduates degree confess that she has never read the US Constitution. It is only 26 standard-book pages long. The high school test went a little deeper into the foundations and meanings, discussing excerpts from the various Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers.

In too many schools these days, kids learn from textbooks written or heavily influenced by Howard Zinn, a dedicated socialist. He wrote books that challenged what was conventional historical perspectives. In doing so, however, he failed to remove historical bias, as he claimed he was doing. Instead, he omitted many key historical facts and altered history towards a pro-Marxist and Frankfurt School propaganda device. His books are now commonplace in government school classrooms.Unfortunately, this is the current "box" of which we need to teach our kids to think outside. Government educators will try to tell you otherwise.They will also attempt to tell you that it isn't a parental responsibility to educate their own kids, especially if it involves ideas contrary to their indoctrination curricula.

These days, in High School, our kids do not get a foundation in US Civics. Instead they have teachers such as the one in San Antonio, TX that I discussed in an earlier article. This comprachico went so far to confuse the definitions of political ideologies to compare a conservative TEA party group to the ideological left-wing oligarchic philosophy of the National Socialist Party. If he did his proper job in educating the students, they would know that the two are polar opposites.


Personal political philosophy evolves over one's life. It should grow as one receives further education and thinks critically on the subjects. Experience is the greatest of all teachers, and usually the harshest. Practical development is necessary. If your kids claim to be rebellious and "rage against the conventional machine", challenge them to do so by seeking facts and thinking for themselves.

In my own growth towards conservatism, I went through many stages. I was a rebellious punker as a teen and through college. However, I was lucky. I was taught to seek facts and definitions before moving into critical thought. If you don't have a common definition of terms, you cannot think critically. Words have meanings just like arithmetic phrases do. I have had people give me different answers for simple mathematical phrases such as 3+2 x 8 / 4 -1 . They try to debate their answers as "subject to interpretation". However, the rules state there is an order of precedence for the operands. Yes, there is exactly one correct answer. In philosophy, there may or may not be such a clear answer. That makes it even more important to stick to the standard/accepted definitions of terms. These days, our kids are graded, as early as 1st grade, in their critical thinking abilities before they are even taught the basic foundations and rules. You cannot learn to "think outside the box" until you are capable of understanding what the box is.

My own tale illustrates how self-education, experience, and direct parental influence helped me to think independently and critically. True liberty comes first from self-realization and independent thought. Our kids need to know it is "cool" to make up their own mind and not to just parrot somebody else for praise and acceptance. They will find those who agree instead of being peer-pressured to accept collectivist "party line".

In that rebellious youth of mine, experience taught me some hard lessons. I was lucky that the greatest teachers I had for those were my father and grandfather. I would adjust the belt on my big-boy pants and try to debate with them. My father was a bit more benign. He'd usually say "I'm not sure. You may want to go back and research that some more. Go read it again. Have you read somebody who disagrees?". My grandfather, however, loved to play the game with me. His favorite phrase was "You may be right. Until you can prove it, you are wrong. Get some proof and we'll come back and talk about it more." Even if I had some proof, he'd counter with some reference I never heard of, then utter the same phrase. He would do this even when I was agreeing with him! He challenged me to seek data, facts, and reputable analysis. I loved that man.

However, even though I liked a lot of Reagan's policies and detested many of Carter's, I refused to consider myself a "conservative". I mean, I was young, rebellious, and a free-thinker. I wore my father's old jungle boots, held together by duct tape. I was a young punker, out to prove the world wrong. I was a Democrat, by Jove. I was more liberal than even they were. I was an "Anarchist"!

It's humorous to look back upon those days. In striving to rebel so hard against the system, I was more of a conforming cliche of the times than the hippies from the early 70s. I even rebelled against my "young punker" label by becoming a "goth"! But why did I grab so hold to that label of "Anarchist"? Well, I wanted the government out of my life. Of course, I did the worst thing imaginable with that sort of attitude, I joined the Illinois Army National Guard to help pay for my college. (4 years or so later, I went a step further and went into the active Army). I was a "true patriot". I recalled waving my little flag around as an almost-8-year-old on our Nation's Bi-Centennial. I was sure the government had it wrong.

Those ideas actually changed a little bit while I was in college. Most of my closer fraternity brothers were in ROTC. They were also "punkers". I remember my "black-ball trial" during "hell week". I was asked why I was an "anarchist". I responded with what remains the core of my political philosophy. The brother who asked the question responded with another. "Do you believe there needs to be some law?". I answered "Of course!". Then I went into a rant about the US Constitution and its intended design to limit the federal government to only those few laws "necessary and proper". I went into Natural Rights and the importance of individual rights over collectivism. Sound familiar? No, I wasn't an "anarchist" at all. It just sounded cool. But Brother Bill D. did inspire a desire for further research, introspection, and critical thought.

In High School, I discovered the realm of science fiction. One of those authors I found fascinating was Robert A. Heinlein. Heinlein wrote about socio-political ideals I liked. I discovered "libertarianism". That was it. I was not a "conservative". I must be a "libertarian". I became a huge advocate of "volunteerism" and "meritocracy". These were ideals that got me through the earlier years of military service. I knew the harder I worked and the less credit I begged for would lead to personal success. To this day, my record stands for itself.

I have given insight into my own personal journey. I do so just to illustrate an example of what parents (and teachers worth their paychecks) need to do in order to rescue our children. We need to challenge them to go outside the curricula. We need to engage them with debate. We need to inspire them to research, define, and get facts then come back and discuss. When they have their facts wrong, we need to show them where they are wrong. We need to let them explore things for themselves. Let them read things from RA Heinlein to The Hunger Games. we need to inspire them towards their own individual pursuits of the truth. the sources of information, these days, are so vast it is also imperative we help them develop filters: "yes, no, maybe-- need to look more into that".

The "great bridge" across that "generation gap" parents encounter while trying to educate or deprogram our children is built with facts, the truth. The foundations they build stand eons of time. While some truths are not evident until later generations, they remain true from before they are discovered until well after they are dismissed and ignored. Gravity has always existed. Natural Law and Natural Rights have always existed. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal... endowed with their Creator with certain inalienable rights:  Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness". The indoctrination machine of today tries to twist the meanings of those words, giving them "modern" definitions. When examined by the vernacular of the day they were scribed, the truth and facts remain constant. Many of today's "educators" don't want our kids to understand this premise. 

I discussed my grandfather's love of debate. He would play devil's advocate, as would my father. Do this with your kids. Yes, they will find you frustrating. That is part of what will break those barriers. Of course, that means you need to know the other side in order to debate it. Make them read writings from both sides. Do that reading yourself. You cannot defeat an enemy you don't know. Indoctrination of our children in socialist ideology is the enemy. (Our kids are not! They are what we fight for!)


Our kids do get inundated with what seems like too much collectivist philosophy these days. Kant's theories are regaled in school while Rand and Locke may get cursory mention, if at all. I have read Locke, Montesquieu, Hegel, Marx, Engels, and Marcuse. I have read Rand, Heinlein (yes, he wrote non-fiction as well), Friedman, Laffer, and Moore (both Steven and Sir Thomas). To make up one's mind, to seek the truth, you need to know all sides. Encourage kids to read all of the above and discuss the practicality of them. Do not be afraid to play devil's advocate. Do not be afraid to challenge them to think. However, challenge them to actually learn, get the facts (as many as possible), and know the definitions of terms. No, kids, definitions are NOT a matter of perspective. 10 + 8 / 4 - 3 x 2 = 6 .

It Was Just a (Pretty Amazing) Job

Almost 25 years ago I made a hard decision. I was a college student with a single college loan. I was looking at my future. I have always despised being in debt and having just one loan over my head at such a young age bothered me. I knew I could not afford to continue my education on my meager part-time job and student loans. So, I went to a National Guard recruiter.

I was a rebel back then. I embodied punk rock and gothic rock. I was among the earliest people I knew to embrace the "industrial rock" movement, listening to Skinny Puppy, Throbbing Gristle, and early Ministry. I strove to make my non-conformity even non-conformist. I have stated before that, looking back, I was more of a conformist to the sub-cultures of my youth than I would have ever admitted at the time. Joining a structured organization was very much counter to my ideology. Then again, I had also joined a fraternity, how cliche?

During my earlier college years, I had worked for the college radio station. That put me in a position to meet a few interesting personalities to include the then relatively unknown local musicians such as The Lemonheads, among others. I  thought it was cool to score the occasional backstage pass or release party invite.

But then I joined the National Guard. I cut my hair. I became a soldier. One may think that led to losing the ability to meet all sorts of "cool" people. One would think that, 4 years later, joining the active duty Army would have driven that Nine Inch Nail further into that coffin.

I have met and socialized with some amazing people during that career. No, donning the uniform did not halt my momentary brushes with celebrity.

While stationed in Berlin, I met several "rock stars". I will tell you that the ones I met were just as enamored with Soldiers as we were of them. I drank a few glasses of Guinness at a 23-hour Irish pub with Danny Loehner. Danny has been with the bands Skrew, NIN, and A Perfect Circle. He's done some solo work that is pretty amazing (original music for the first Underworld movie). I chugged a hurricane at the Berlin Hard Rock Cafe that was bought by Layne Staley of Alice in Chains. Those are but a couple of examples.

While stationed at Fort Lewis, I was heavy in the goth-industrial scene around Seattle. I could name-drop several acts I hung out with in private after-hours goth clubs. Most are people my readers wouldn't recognize unless they were heavy into the Goth scene. Later, when stationed in Kansas, I connected with the scene through various alt.goth newsgroups that led to an invitation and all-access pass at a Projekt-Darkwave convention in Chicago. It didn't hurt that I was one of 3 goth DJs in the greater Manhattan Kansas area. 

Name-dropping aside, the people I met I am most amazed by include some other people. These are people famous in military circles, political circles, and the like. Some are not famous at all, but should be. Some are infamous, such as Bradley Manning. (No, I am NOT a fan of his. I am among those who hopes he rots in a cell for eternity.) Others are heroes such as Christopher Seifert, Yari Mokri, Schuyler Hanes, and Derek Dobogai. I will probably expound more upon those individuals (and others) for my annual Memorial Day article.

Among those I met was a short Texan. His name is George W. Bush. My earliest introduction to the then Texas Governor was when I was stationed in Bauholder, Germany. Our unit wanted to have our own collection of state flags for ceremonies. On my commander's behalf, I wrote to state officials requesting state flags. We were attempting to garner as many as donations as possible before buying any with unit funds. I contacted the Texas Secretary of State, whose name I do not recall. However, the responses I received all came directly from Governor Bush. Included in these letters was one thanking the Soldiers of my unit for all their hard work, particularly in Macedonia and Albania the year prior. He also sent two autographed pictures, one for my shop, and the other for our Battalion. Seconds after his inauguration as President, we were the first unit in our Brigade (possibly in our Division) to change out the CinC photo on our Chain-of-Command wall.

It came as a surprise that, in July 2001, I would be sent on an augmentation mission to Kosovo. The augmentation mission itself was not a surprise. I tended to be "lent out" quite often. During my 40+ month tour in Germany, I spent a total of 93 days in my own bed. I had requested a 30-day TDY to Kosovo to help with tracking down a few not-so-nice people. The response was a 60-day extendable TDY with mission details not included in my orders. I had received orders as such before and expected long hours in a windowless building or to be stuck in the middle of nowhere. I did have a number of days in that role during that deployment. However, I was actually given a different mission, one I had not anticipated.

The details are not important. In summary, my first few weeks were spent assisting in threat analysis and security advising for an "important visitor". I helped to organize additional security details, inspections, and the like as well as writing assessments and analysis. That visitor was none other than President Bush.

Remember when I stated I met some interesting people while stationed in Berlin? Among those people were Hilary and President Clinton. I state this for a matter of comparison.

President Clinton gave a speech in Berlin that received little fanfare from the Soldiers and the audience. We followed protocol, regulations, customs and courtesies. However, among the fellow Soldiers with whom I discussed the visit, there was little admiration of the man.  Hilary made matters worse by remarking "You don't deserve to look at me" during the reception line. I will say that Bubba is charismatic and likeable. But he didn't command that innate respect.

In contrast, President Bush was adored. Though security protocols did screen and limit contact and proximity to the POTUS, he was met with cheers and applause every stop he made during that trip. Every Soldier he met, he thanked for the service they were doing "for our Nation". He never said "on my behalf".

In Iraq, every briefing I had to attend (usually through secure teleconference) that included President Bush, he generated respect. He did not demand it. He didn't have to. Even today, President Bush goes out and attends events for wounded warriors and veterans. He still meets that respect. Why? He treats us as equals. He had his tough job to do, making decisions. We had ours. Neither could have been successful without the other. To this day, there are some decisions he made I am not in agreement with. However, they were his decisions to make. They were his responsibility. He accepted that and never deflected that responsibility. As far as credit, I have yet to hear him take credit for any of the successes. He credited the Military Service Members with each one. Of all the things about his Administration, that is the one thing I will remember most fondly.

Ignoring The War On Terror Doesn't Stop Terrorism, It makes Us Victims

 By Michael Ramirez - May 10, 2012

The above cartoon is even more humorous when we find that the bomber was actually a CIA source who turned himself and the technology over to US authorities. Why is that more humorous? The whole event took place a little over a week after Obama declared the "War on Terror" over.

Obviously various terrorist groups around the globe have a different opinion.



Given my former profession, I do have a bit of insight into terrorism and threats to US interests that average Americans (even average US Military Service Members) lack. I have studied and analyzed al-Q'aida and other groups dating back to 1996 (looking at historical data dating back to the 1960s, or 1060s, in some cases). Town Hall Magazine, Town Hall Online columnist, and STRATFOR analyst Stewart Scott gives very cursory insight in a recent article, for those seeking a little enlightenment.

Within the intelligence community, it is no secret that CAIR supports groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Q'aida. The reasons that the Taliban formed an alliance with AQ are clear. They share a similar ideology. They share a common hatred of "The West". They support Islamic Caliphates and tyrannical theocracies such as the one in Iran, even though Iran is mostly Shia'a and AQ/Taliban/etc. are mostly Sunni-sects (such as Wahabbiasm).

Most Americans no longer see the threat to our home turf. The attacks from Sept. 11, 2001 are over a decade in the past. Other attacks, such as the attempted Times Square bombing, have been thwarted. In addition, a terrorist attack conducted by an infiltrator was written off as "workplace violence". The Fort Hood terrorist attack at the pre-deployment processing center should form a warning of how far these dishonorable enemies are willing to go to spill our blood.

Those were two infiltrators. Recently, Jose Padilla, an Islamic convert who aligned himself with AQ, attempted a bombing at the Chicago O'Hare (ORD) airport, attempted to sue the US Government. After his attempted attack, he was labeled as an enemy combatant. The results of his law suit were that the courts upheld that enemy combatant status. It was the correct decision. He was not just a criminal. His allegiance was not with our country. His allegiance is to our nation's enemies.

Another infiltrator named Hasan Akhbar murdered my dear friend, CPT Christopher S. Seifert in Kuwait just hours prior to our necessary invasion of Iraq. This traitor never filed "conscientious objector" status. In fact, he refused to do so. His intent was to conduct this attack in order to weaken his unit as they prepared to cross that border. His allegiance was not with the US, the US Army, or his unit. It was with Islamic Extremists.

American born and raised, "Jihad" John Walker Lindh left the US to join AQ and the Taliban to fight along side of his "brothers" against his country. He has been directly linked to the attempted shoe-bombing of Flight 63. The shoe-bomber, Richard Reid, was recruited by Usama bin Laden. Do not allow yourself to be complacent or ignorant that there are potentially many more out there, waiting for the order or opportunity to attack.

Mexican drug cartels, human traffickers, and weapons smugglers work with various terrorist groups. Among those groups is the FARC. However, they also have direct dealings with Islamic terrorist groups, including AQ and the Taliban. They help traffic weapons to these groups, including US weapons coming from operations such as Fast and Furious. The drug smugglers deal in opiates supplied by AQ and the Taliban, assisting in financing these threats to our country. AQ and other terrorist groups have helped these criminal groups by training them in various tactics and bomb-making skills. The human traffickers bring sex-slaves both into the US, for profit, and out of the US, for sale or abuse by these extremists. These same traffickers help terrorist operatives to infiltrate our borders and implant themselves into our communities.

Despite what certain politicians and bureaucrats lead the public to believe, not all of the illegal immigrants coming across our southern border are Mexican. The last estimates available indicate as many as 18% of those who cross the border are from Islamic countries. If, say, 1000 were to cross into Arizona on a given night, approximately 10% may be caught. That means 900 get through. Of them 160 or so will be Middle Eastern. If 1 in 10 is aligned with an Islamic terrorist group, that would be 16 terrorist sleeper-cell enemy combatants infiltrating our country a night. Of them, 1-3 will be a potential direct action terrorist while the other 13-15 will become support personnel (spies, financiers, propagandists, logistics experts, planning & operations personnel).

Not all Middle Eastern immigrants are Islamic. Several are Coptic Christians. Of those who are Muslim, most are not allied with terrorist groups. Many, in fact, are fleeing that oppression. I know several, personally, who served with US Military personnel as sources or interpreters. They are devout in their faith. However, none of them want to see a caliphate or Shari'a law imposed in the US. They left those oppressive regimes to embrace US liberty and our Constitutional Republic. Those who do embrace Shari'a or the idea of a Caliphate are the minority. However, they are the dangerous minority. Their rhetoric can easily inflame "the good ones" to their side if we, as a society, don't embrace them into our way of life. That doesn't mean our female citizens should start wearing burqahs and abayas (or our males wearing dishdashas). It does mean we should have some amount of respect for their traditions of modesty. We have other religious groups in our country that have similar practices:  Amish, Mennonites, and Hasidic Jews, for example. 

Demagogues and propagandists will have you believe that the war is over because Usama bin Laden is dead. Anybody who believes them has no idea how these terrorist groups operate. They believe in their cause, not in just a single individual. These groups are not a group of snakes. They are a pack of multi-headed hydra. Not only do they not have, in each, a single point of failure in a figurehead leader; each leader that dies has another ready to take his place. Usama bin Laden was once the heir apparent of the EIJ before he formed AQ. The leader of EIJ became Usama's second in command of AQ. Having once been a network commander, Ayman Zawahiri, is just as viable a threat as Usama was. He now has Usama's connections as well as his own. Releasing their faithful isn't a sign of good faith. They do not honor the Geneva Convention and its stipulations that a freed prisoner of war not return to fight against his former captors. No, they do go back into the fight. I saw it time and time again in Iraq. 

This war is far from over. Reducing our defensive posture and failing to engage in necessary offensive operations just enables these enemies of the US and the rest of the civilized world to regroup, strengthen, and do worse in the future. If we don't reverse this trend, soon, our country will face another crisis, if not disaster.

The American Definition of Marriage

James Madison warned of the "Tyranny of the Majority" in Federalist 10. Many could argue that to be the very case in regards to the same-sex marriage debate. However, going back to the base definitions of marriage, it is that very majority that sets the traditions and laws governing the topic.

The dictionary (base definition) of "Marriage":

1a : the state of being united to a person  in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law or the accepted traditions of a given society.

1b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock

1c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage 

2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected. 

3: an intimate or close union 

Most people who subscribe to Christian or Jewish faiths will use the definitions of marriage dictated by the laws, dogma, and scriptures of their faith. However, if, in the USA, we used religion to define marriage it could easily violate the First Amendment. Any form of definition of marriage would then be a form of dictating a chosen state religion. However, if the 1st Amendment were strictly obeyed, then states would not be able, constitutionally, define marriage. They would not be allowed to issue marriage licenses. Courts would not be allowed to determine the division of assets and property in the cases of divorce. It would be up to the religious organizations. This would pose a particular difficult  problem in cases of mixed-religion marriages. Even two sects of the same faith may not have the same religious rules. Logically, the second definition does not work in our country.

I firmly believe in marriage as a union between two people as determined by the rites of their religion. (Definition 2). My religion and faith have no bans or taboos on same-sex marriage. Within my faith, gay couples can be married to each other. I am not a Christian, though I was raised Catholic. My faith blesses any union between two consenting adults regardless of sexual orientation. So, a religious argument against same-sex marriage is an automatic loss with me.

Because of religious freedom in our country, marriage has to be a legal matter, not a religious one, in our society. Put another way, marriage in the United States is not defined by religion. It is defined by common law combined with accepted societal tradition (Definition 1). In using definition 1 (above), there is no violation of the First Amendment.

Recently, it has come to our society to formulate its legal definition of marriage, according to its laws and traditions. At the forefront of this debate is the concept of same-sex marriage. It is a non-partisan question. It is also a hinge decision for our society. Right here, right now, we get to decide what "marriage" means in the USA. Given that it is a legal status and not a religious one, in our society, why not allow gay marriage?

That was the question posed to citizens of North Carolina this past Tuesday. The citizens of the state voted, by referendum, to amend their state constitution to define marriage, in their society, as between one man and one woman. That amendment passed by an overwhelming majority. That overwhelming majority chose that its society will adopt that definition. It is now the legal one for North Carolina.

An anthropological and sociological study of the history of our species reveals that marriage has, traditionally, been a contract between a man and a woman to manage a household and raise a family. Science dictates that a woman cannot impregnate a woman, nor a man a man. That is the primary basis of North Carolina's recent amendment. Agree of disagree with holding the historical tradition that dates back to the earliest days our species walked the Earth; it is a fact.

Modern technology and science allow for a redefinition of those terms. Adoption and artificial insemination make way for same-sex couples to raise a family. This, again, begs the question: Why not same-sex marriage?

Based upon the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution, that is a decision to be made by the individual states. Each one needs to settle on its definition. Despite various religious-based arguments, it really comes down to each society defining it, by law, for itself. So far 31 of 50 states have voted to amend their constitutions to adopt the "one-man and one-woman" definition. 37 states have a statute, constitutional amendment, or both upholding that definition.

It appears that the legal definition based upon the will and traditions of our society have spoken, at least in those 37 states. Love it or hate it, that is the decision of our society. Until society changes its mind, the "Tyranny of the Majority" rules. To quote one of the favorite slogans of the Occupy Movement:  "This is What Democracy Looks Like".  "We the People" have decided, for better of for worse.

More Socialist (Mental) Disability Handouts

Picture By Gary Varvel - May 08, 2012

In February, I wrote this article discussing how many unemployed file for Social Security Disability (SSDI) at week 100 of unemployment, when the unemployment handouts run out. At the time, 43% of those claimants filed for "mental disability" due to depression and anxiety (and, I'm guessing, laziness).

The recent U3 unemployment figures came out claiming a drop in the unemployment rate to 8.1% (before the adjustments come out in a couple of weeks). However, the news is not good news. 169,000 more unemployment claims were filed than job positions filled last month. Once again, this drop in the rate is due to a decline in the workforce participation rate.The rate saw its greatest decline in 2009 after the Obama Administration took over. Those policies instituted by this administration in conjunction with the PPACA (Obamacare) have brought us to a point where of the participation rate of those of legal age and status to work is now at 63.6% That means more than 1 in every 3 people who could work are choosing NOT to. Combine that with the fact that now approximately 49% of the population is dependent upon government handouts, this is disgusting. This is NOT prosperity.

People have given up. The trend of people to claim "disability" once they hit week 100 unemployed has continued. There are now 2.2 million citizens on SSDI. Once on SSDI, people are removed from the workforce participation rate. They are, by law, limited in the number of hours they can work and income, if any. If they violate that amount, they are taken off of SSDI and lose those handouts. 43% or more of those are due to "mental disability". With counseling, medication, desire, and will, they could be part of the workforce. However, they have grown accustomed to living on government handouts instead of striving for self-sufficiency. Of course, many of them will vote for those who will keep them enslaved to those handouts. They have given up incentive to work and traded it to be enslaved to a nanny state. They are not truly disabled. They are stealing from the Social Security fund that hard-working citizens contribute into in hopes of receiving their share of the fund upon retirement.

"I've been out of work for 99+ weeks now. I'm depressed because my 'gender studies' degree won't land me a $100k a year job. I have anxiety that I will have to learn a skill and work my way up to a $50+K a year job. Here's a doctor's note. Give me my handout. I give up trying."

Out of the approximately 8.65 million people claiming SSDI, there are legitimate disabled people who did work and contribute. Many of them do still work those part-time hours. They should be outraged at those who file these fraudulent claims and steal from this fund. there are about 946,000 of them. The average monthly payment is $1,110. That is $1.05B a month in these payments, over $12.6B a year. (By my calculations, that amounts to $1,105 or one payment a year for each of these individuals each working taxpayer has to cough up.) Add that to the $4.2B in average fraudulent earned income tax credits paid to illegal immigrants utilizing forged and stolen ID and we have $16.8B we can cut from the budget just from actually enforcing the current laws. Of course, this is before we calculate Medicare and Medicaid fraud into the numbers.

It's (not) About Cinco de Quatro (Mayo) Comrade!

The Obama-Biden 2012 campaign has released it is officially kicking off its re-election campaign with several rallies scheduled on Saturday May 5th. This will come as a huge surprise since he has been campaigning for re-election since 2007.

I'm sure that his propagandist politburo will spin this as solidarity with "Latin-Americans".

Of course, if you look at his site, the elements of divisive Critical Race Theory are more than obvious. He even has a tab "Groups" that is mostly about labeling and categorizing various ethnic backgrounds. 

A little research reveals another, more likely, purpose for choosing this particular date. On May 5th 1818, one of Barack's favorite heroes was born:  Karl Marx.

Karl Marx is credited with the birth of the tyrannic oligarchy form of economic-political philosophy known as "Communism" (also known as Marxist Socialism). His most famous work is "The Communist Manifesto".

Barack Obama's chosen campaign slogan is "Forward", another link back to Marx. Throughout 1844, Marx published a propaganda paper every two weeks entitled "Vorwarts", German for "Forward".

If  there was any doubt in Obama's devout Marxist ideology before, it should now be more than obvious.

We fought the Cold War against these ideals. Marxism failed the USSR within 75 years. Our Republic based upon Natural Rights with a capitalist economic system based upon the economic philosophy of Adam Smith has lasted over 200. Do you really want to pick a system that is a proven failure over what we know works?

"Ready to Go"? Yes, Mr. Obama, we are ready for you to go. We are ready for you to "go forward" towards your next job, as long as it as far away from our White House. You have failed. It's time for the adults to take over and fix the damage you've done.

It's Election Year! What Is Your Vote Worth?

Regardless of your political views, if you legally qualify to vote, I urge you to go out and register. If you want your vote to count and be legitimate, I urge you to register using your state's voter registration form.

When you register, if you can make it to a polling location instead of voting absentee ballot, I urge you to do so. Make your vote count. If you vote absentee or through a Permanent Early Voter List (PEVL), your ballot may get contaminated. Follow all of the instructions. Make your signatures match. If possible, notify your election officials and send that ballot through registered mail.

In some states, that will not matter. States such as Illinois count absentee and mail-in ballots only when the race is close. In others, such as Indiana, your ballot may be cast in your name, and for candidates other than those you would have selected. Recently, the Mayor of Austin, IN, Douglas Campbell, and some of his cronies were charged with felony-level voter fraud. They went door-to-door "assisting" voters by collecting early ballots and absentee ballots for them. Of course, they most likely submitted only those that they found favorable; altered or destroyed those they found unfavorable.

Arizona's Voter-ID law was recently upheld with one stipulation: no ID is required on federal voter registration forms. In addition, there is no longer a requirement for a notarized registrar to verify voter registration forms. Anybody can go door-to-door and register people. In states with Voter ID laws, these "volunteers" (many of them paid) use the federal form that does not require Identification to submit.

The DNC and the Obama-Biden campaign have a program to have these "volunteers" canvass neighborhoods to register voters. They plan to canvass cities such as Tucson and Phoenix seeking a minimum of 150K new voters. They are using the federal form and not checking ID. These volunteers are not versed in election law. But they are told to say "it's ok, you can still register. If you don't qualify, they just won't send you the card". They also try to convince these people to register for the PEVL, then suggest they can help advise people on filling in the ballots (then mail them for them) when they arrive in the mail.

Keep this tactic in mind as you consider that the DNC and the Obama-Biden PAC are doing the same type of thing in other "red states" as well as "swing states". One such "red state" is Indiana. There are "volunteers" blogging on the Obama-Biden campaign site bragging about how easy it is. 

We do need voter integrity laws. If you review the Supreme Court decision for Gore v Bush, there is no constitutional right to vote in a presidential election. However, many states determine their electoral votes by the state's popular vote.

However, if you are eligible to vote, know the US Constitution, value your Natural Rights, and prefer individual rights & liberty over slavery to a statist oligarchy; then you need to register to vote, cast your ballot, and make sure it is counted, legally.

I Will Be Avoiding Louisiana Until Further Notice

I am a broken, sick, and demented individual. I have "lots of issues". I am a threat to society and unwanted. I don't deserve the benefits I earned through my 24 years of military service. At least not in the State of Louisiana.

Why? Because I am a war veteran. I am disables, though still awaiting the percentage to be awarded by the Veterans' Administration. I was diagnosed with Post-Combat-Stress also known as "Combat PTSD" in 2010. My doctors determined that my coping skills remained high despite the obvious ticks and continuous "hyper-vigilance" I exhibit. I also suffer chronic migraine headaches. In addition, I suffer joint problems due to an auto-immune disorder that eats at my Vitamin-D reserves. That disorder is due to exposure to several things in Iraq. It is aggravated by arthritis that is also a product of my military service.

I loyally served to support and defend the US Constitution. I obeyed all lawful orders issued. Those very few that were not lawful, I stood up to and challenged, in a tactful manner. I put my life and safety before that of others.

I do not ask for anything more than what I have already earned.

Dr. Phil has called me a "monster".

Now, Louisiana State Representative Ortego says that my fellow veterans and I are not welcome in his state.

Mr. Ortego, I am not homeless. I am not without an "income". I do a lot of charity work. I stand up for what is right. I am not a violent person, by nature. I will defend myself, my property, my family, and the rights of others. Yes I am willing to put my life on the line, still, and do so. I am a hard worker. I have demonstrated that I can withstand hardships and hard work. I do not give up easily. I study and read on my own, soaking up information like a sponge, even when the classes that I take do not grant collegiate credit. I have taught at the graduate level, in fact.

Most states would welcome upstanding citizens, veterans, such as I, with wide-open arms. They would know I do not ask for handouts. I ask for only what I am owed, what I earned. They would know I do so in order to continue to serve that oath I first took 24 years ago, and hold dear to my heart. Most veterans and military retirees that I know are much the same. We took that sacred oath. On our honor and integrity, we continue, even after taking off the uniform. Mr. Ortego, do you know what honor and integrity are? You would do well to have some. 

Yet, according to your statements in the Louisiana capitol, I am somehow a lower human. I have done things that I challenge you to attempt. I don't know your list of accomplishments, but it is clear you do not know mine. Yet you seek to judge me and my brothers and sisters. You call us "sick". You claim I am "prone to mental illness". Perhaps you need a class on PCS/PTS. It is an injury, not an illness.

My words do not stand as the thoughts and opinions of the US Army, in which I served for 24 years. I am not a spokesperson for any veterans' or service members' group. I speak only for myself and any who agree with my words.

Mr. Ortego, you have deemed me unwelcome in your state. That is fine. You are not welcome on my property, either. I will gladly respect your wishes. I will not visit your state. Any trip I make, I will avoid your state. I will inform other veterans of your words and let them know you do not want us there. I will advise them to do the same.

When you come up for re-election, I will support and endorse the GOP candidate that opposes you. I will urge all the veterans unfortunate enough to live in your state to do the same.

Without knowing me, you judged me. However, your statements were made public. You offered yourself up for my judgement in doing so. Your actions speak loudly. You have shown us you are scum who is unworthy of the honor and privilege to represent your constituents.