Tuesday, April 22, 2014

ThornerBy Nancy Thorner - 

Shortly, Congress will be debating the fate of the U.S. Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im). Its authorization — last extended in 2012 — will expire on September 30 unless reauthorized. Ex-Im was first incorporated in 1934 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to finance trade with the Soviet Union. Under the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, Congress established the bank as an independent agency. It provides loans and loan guarantees (as well as capital and credit insurance) to facilitate U.S. exports. Backed up by the full faith and credit of the U.S government, taxpayers are put on the hook.

According to Katherine Rosario writing for Heritage Action on April 1, 2014, “The United States Export-Import Bank is essentially a microcosm of some of Washington’s biggest problems, from the corruption it encourages, to putting taxpayers at risk, to the cronyism it facilitates.”

An example of the cronyism facilitated by Ex-Im to advance political ideologies was in the Bank’s backing of Solyndra, the ailing solar panel company, which received an Ex-Im Bank loan guarantee of $10.3 million. As such the Ex-Im Bank made possible the exchange of political favors under the guise of boosting the economy and growing American jobs.

Those who most benefit for Ex-Im financing are multinational corporations such as the construction and engineering firm of Bechtel (ranked by Forbes as the fourth largest privately held company by revenue), Lockheed Martin, and its biggest beneficiary by far, Boeing. In the banking industry, the U.S. Export-Import Bank is commonly referred to as Boeing’s Bank. According to some estimates, Boeing receives upwards of 80-percent of the Ex-Im Bank’s taxpayer-backed loan guarantees.

The claim is made that Ex-Im financing is essential to fill “gaps” that exist in financing when the economic or political risk to garner private property is too great. This excuse is contradicted with the fact that U.S. exports hit a record high of $2.2 trillion in 2013. This was up from $1.4 trillion five years ago, thus proving that there is no shortage of private export capital.

Because Boeing does not have to compete for financing and enjoys favorable terms, Boeing is able to sell more planes overseas.  The Ex-Im Bank gives money to foreign governments and airlines to buy Boeing products.  In 2013 85% of the Ex-Im bank’s guarantees made to Russian companies were centered around Boeing.  Specifically, $580 million was slated for the purchase of luxury airliners out of total of $639 Russia received.

Other countries like China benefited from Ex-Im bank transactions during 2013 to the tune of $636 million.  Australia’s richest person (reportedly worth $17.7 billion) was more than happy to accept $700 million in American taxpayer backing via the Bank for her company.

Supporters of Ex-Im claim that the bank is necessary to create a level playing field.  If so, how it is that only 2.2% of all U.S. exports last year received Ex-Im financing, while 98% of American exporter had to compete without the bank’s intervention.  And what about all the other domestic businesses that don’t get any Ex-Im funding?

A debate reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank is threatening to further escalate the tension between House conservatives and the Republican leadership.  Eric Cantor, who struck a deal with Democrats in 2012 to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, is now wary of battling conservatives angered by a number of his recent legislative moves.  Cantor has privately told members of the House that he does not intend to get involved this time around.

In a recent private meeting of the conservative Republican Study Committee, Paul Ryan struck the right tone when pushing for the Ex-Im Bank charter to expire.  Why should Republicans support what conservatives consider corporate welfare programs, at the same time cuts are being advocated for individual welfare programs like food stamps?  And what about the earmark ban which Republicans agreed to honor once again in the 113th Congress?  Unfortunately establishment Republicans with upcoming primaries in Georgia, Kentucky and Mississippi seem increasingly willing to disregard the earmark ban and instead brag about bringing home the bacon.

Prior to the 2012 vote by the House reauthorizing the Ex-Im bank charter, Brian Darling set forth in writing “Top Ten Reasons to End The Export Import Bank.” In the same article Darling had the following to say why the Export-Import Bank is bad for America.

There is nothing free market about the idea of the United States government providing loans to private companies for the purpose of completing against other private companies.  Especially when these large corporations are gaming the system with teams of lobbyists pushing Members of Congress to reauthorize this taxpayer funded slush fund or big business.  If the loans don’t pay off, taxpayers have to pick up the tab.

Hear what Senator Obama had to say when on the Campaign Trail in 2008.

I’m not a Democrat who believes that we can or should defend every government program, just because it’s there. There are some that don’t work like we had hoped…[like] the Export-Import Bank that has become little more than a fund for corporate welfare…If we hope to meet the challenges of our time, we have to make difficult choices. As President…I will eliminate the programs that do not work and are not needed.

Corporate welfare to large private corporations is not an easy thing for Democrats to explain to their constituents in an election year, despite President Obama’s pre-election musings.  As for Republicans, should corporate welfare be blessed in an election year when earmarks serving the same purpose are frowned upon and have been theoretically banned?

Instead, Republicans should enact policies that are free market in nature to produce jobs and grow the economy through cutting taxes, reforming the tax code, deregulation, and opening up energy exploration.

Congress must now decide whether it will reauthorize billions of dollars in corporate welfare on the backs of taxpayers or to allow private investors to finance U.S. exports.  This is not a partisan issue. There are good reasons for both Democrat and Republican legislators to allow the crony capitalist Export-Import Bank to expire (sunset) when it comes up for reauthorization.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Saturday, April 19, 2014

No_amnesty_for_illegal_aliens_tee_shirt-rfd6851e5fa3c499cba67b762ef33ae23_8nazo_512By Nancy Thorner - 

On Friday, an Illinois Review article, entitled “Rauner and Illinois GOP leaders to urge Congress to adopt immigration reform,” indicated that the GOP gubernatorial nominee will be joining other business people next Tuesday, April 22 to urge Congress to adopt immigration reform as the “politically smart, economically sound, and morally right” thing to do.

Rosanna Pulido, head of the Minuteman Project, along with independent Tea Party groups and other grassroots organizations, will be holding a “Save The American Worker Rally” at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, April 22 at the corner of Michigan and Van Buren Streets in downtown Chicago.

The rally is being held to protest a gathering of Rauner, Republican politicians, lobbyists, and corporate CEOs pushing amnesty for illegal aliens at the nearby Chicago Club that same afternoon.

It’s outrageous and makes no sense that fat-cat Republican millionaires and corporate CEOs are lobbying for amnesty to give work visas to illegal aliens when Chicago-area unemployment is 9 percent and twenty million Americans cannot find a job.

Unconscionable is that Republican legislative leaders State Sen. Christine Radogno (R-Lemont) and State Rep. Jim Durkin (R-Burr Ridge) have indicated their intention to attend the event.

Participants are encouraged to bring an American Flag and a simple sign – for example, “No Legalization” or “Jobs for Americans, Not Illegal Aliens.”

For further information or to RSVP, contact Rick Biesada at 773-771-3927 or Rosanna Pulido at 815-401-6711 oraimfire2000@yahoo.com.

Amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants before the border is secured once and for all is unacceptable.

It is wishful thinking by Republicans  to believe that once undocumented immigrants, many who hail from south of the border, are made American citizens and can legally vote that they will vote Republican. It is as if the the Republican establishment is comfortable in signing off to the demise of the Republican Party, all for the sake of signing on to cheap labor to please its business community and big donors.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

O-SEN-RON-JOHNSON-facebook

By Nancy Thorner - 

The Lake County Republican Federation held its 52nd Annual Spring Gala with U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) as keynote speaker.

A “Call to Order” was presented by president Larry Falbe, after which the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Don Wilson, Candidate, State Senate 30th District. Daniela Sloan sang the national anthemCarla Wyckoff, Candidate, Lake County Clerk, offered the invocation.

Remarks were made by Robert “Bob” Cook, Chairman of the Lake County Republicans; Jim Oberweis, Republican candidate for U.S. Senate; and Robert Dold, former U.S. Representative, and candidate, for Illinois’s 10th Congressional District.

Larry Farber introduced Senator Mark Kirk, calling Kirk “the Favorite Son of Lake County.” Kirk, in turn, introduced Keynote Speaker, Senator Ron Johnson, referring to Johnson as “the embodiment of Mr. Smith goes to Washington.

Senator Johnson spoke highly of Senator Kirk, recalling how inspiring it was to see Kirk walking up the Capitol steps on his first day back to work.  Senator Johnson next spoke of what drove him to get involved in politics.  Asked to speak at a Tea Party event where he was encouraged to run for office, Peterson replied, “I’m not crazy.”  It was, however, a remark made by President Obama about doctors being “greedy and money grabbing and willing to unnecessarily take off a foot or whatever to make a buck,” which raised Johnson’s dander.  Johnson’s daughter was born with a severe heart problem.  He and his wife, Jane, had the freedom to find for their daughter the most advanced surgical procedures of the time.  With the passing of Obamacare in December of 2009, Johnson came to realize how his daughter’s treatment and recovery would have been at risk under Obamacare.  Obamacare would have limited Johnson’s freedom to choose the care his daughter needed.  This cinched Johnson’s decision to run, although he didn’t start running until May 17 of election year.

Senator Johnson believes Obamacare must be repealed.  Also rating high is that America must be made more attractive for business innovation through reforming the tax code and enacting fewer regulations.

Johnson spoke about his power point presentations when home in Wisconsin on weekends.  He reminds his constituents how our Founding Fathers came from a dictatorial form of government, that government was meant to be limited, and that the purpose of government is not to solve our problems.  Instead, as government grew our freedoms receded.  Urgently needed is a restoration of faith in government.  A healthy distrust of government must be engendered, such as our Founding Fathers had of an all-controlling federal government when writing our Constitution.

While all of us share the same goal as a compassionate nation by wanting a prosperous America, Johnson questioned the  $16 trillion spent on the “War On Poverty” when the poverty rate back in 1965 remains unchanged today, still at 15%.  All of the good intentions didn’t contribute to good consequences, but actually destroyed the family.  Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a New Deal liberal who believed in alleviating poverty channeling public money directly to the poor, later criticized the War on Poverty maintaining that marriage, although not a panacea for poverty, is a significant contributor to upward mobility.  Today 41% of all births are out-of-wedlock.

In speaking about a Business Round Table event Johnson attended in Washington, D.C., he remarked that business is not standing today with the American public.   The public has been led to believe that business is evil, and that it’s only fair for the top 1% to pay more.  With this prevailing attitude, what can be done to enable business to work as a positive force in society?  Standing in the way is a University System that has been controlling education and culture for the past 50 – 60 years.  Business must start defending itself by educating the American people.  This said, our nation is in a bad place when the American people must be reminded of what this nation stands for, complicated by a media that is no help at all.

Senator Johnson is not pleased with fellow Republicans who believe the fix to problems is to spend a little more money.  The Left thrives in giving out candy; it’s tasty stuff, and people like it.  Republicans should be serving Novocaine to deal with problems that are threatening this nation’s fiscal stability, but how many Republican are willing to do so when the other side uses money to buy votes?

Republicans, however, do have a victory to point to.  Johnson spoke of the thousands of letters being received from constitutes who are not happy with their health insurance.  Even so Senator Harry Reed had the gall to call all the letter writers liars, as were their complaints, in an attempt to creates victims of us all by a government that has become all powerful.

In commenting about the 9% approval rate of Congress by the American people, Johnson thought it way too high; nevertheless; it does show that the American people are not pleased with what they see in Washington, D.C.  Irregardless, the American people still elected Barack Obama to a second term of office and likewise politicians who are dedicated to growing the state.

A word to candidates running for office:  A message of a broken, out-of-control, and an ineffective government must be taken to constituents.   Do they really want government to continue to grow?  What about the intrusion of government into their lives?  Are they comfortable with government taking over this nation’s healthcare system? Whether a candidate for office or not, it is up to all of us to convince at least 51% of voters that big government and its intrusion into our lives is a bad idea.

Optimism was expressed by Senator Johnson in regard to the coming November General Elections:  “Never has there been a better opportunity for the Republican Party to be successful as at the present time.”  [Not mentioned by Peterson, nor how to deal with it, are those who vote illegally and the election fraud that commonly occurs in large cities across the U.S.]

Senator Johnson spoke with pride about an immigration swearing-in event he attended where 63 individuals from all over the world first announced all allegiance to the place of their birth, followed by their swearing of allegiance to this country.  Johnson believing that this is the greatest country in the world remarked, “Wave after wave of immigrants have come to a land of unlimited opportunity which we have had the privilege to participate in.”

It was when visiting with triple amputees at a rehabilitation center that Senator Johnson was at a loss of words in expressing his awe, inspiration, and his hope for America that continued to linger with him after his visit.   One triple amputee told Johnson that he was shortly planning  to visit those on the floor above who had just been admitted to the rehabilitation center to boast their morale.  As Johnson said:  “When three limbs are missing, there isn’t much left.”

In closing, Senator Johnson spoke of the “Spirit of American” as being alive.  “Although not always visible in some quarters, it is alive in the hearts of you and others so that it will survive for future generations.  May God Bless America!”

The final event of the 52nd Annual Spring Gala was the presentation of the “Bob Milton Award” given to honor a volunteer who has perform admirably during the year.  Recently deceased Ray Card, a much loved and a tireless worker, was last year’s recipient of the Bob Milton Award.  In memory of Ray Card, the Bob Milton Award was renamed the “Ray Card Lifetime Award.”  Chelsea Stanley, Former Executive Director, Lake County Republican Federation, handed out this year’s Bob Milton Award to Nancy Kubalanza of Grant Township.  She was described as fiercely loyal and a hard worker willing to drop everything to help with an event or a mailing.  A flabbergasted Nancy Kubalanza, usually never at a loss for words, was overwhelmed at being so honored.  Nancy downplayed her work, giving credit to her husband who supports her and a daughter who assists her.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Screen Shot 2014-04-14 at 10.27.13 AM

By Nancy Thorner - 

Illinois taxpayers are beginning to paying attention to how their tax dollars are being spent, and Tea Partiers in Northern Illinois were especially interested last week in getting more information on one of the state’s biggest expenditures – state employee retirement benefits.

The Northern Illinois Patriots met at Austin’s in Libertyville, IL, Wednesday, April 9, although the usual meeting night of the organization is every 2nd Tuesday of the month from 6:30 – 9:00 p.m.  Greg Clements is president of the organization. The core beliefs of the Northern Illinois Patriots are Limited Government; Free Market Economy; Pro-family; Choice of Education; and National Defense.

Bill Zettler, Director of Research at the Family Taxpayers Foundation, was on hand as featured guest to speak about the “Illinois Pension Scandal,” also the title of Zettler’s outstanding book.

Prior to introducing Bill Zettler, Clements commented:

1.  Our bond rating is worst in this nation.  The first watch dog group to blow the whistle on Illinois’s pension problem was in 1945.  A promise of promising more than can be paid has been ignored for over 60 years.

2.  Impact on business:  They will not expand.  Small businesses are relocating to bordering states, resulting in the loss of tax revenue.

3.  Personal impact:  It compounds the problems for those who stay through increased and additional taxes levied.  Every 9 minutes someone leaves Illinois.  Illinois ranks third in the number of people moving out of the state.  Only New Jersey and New York win over Illinois in the number of people exiting our state.

Greg Clements was questioned about IRISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act passed in 1974 that sets minimum standards for most voluntarily established pension and health plans in private industry to provide protection for individuals in these plans.  “Just why doesn’t government have to be subject to the same rules as business where at least 80% of their retirement fund must be funded?”  The catch:  In general, ERISA does not cover retirement plans established or maintained by governmental entities.  As government uses the cash method, it can promise payment, but the amount owed doesn’t become a liability until it is paid.

Clements called the 1970 Illinois Constitution a “recipe for disaster” and that “no one deserves a constitutionally deserved retirement.”   Although government pensions in Illinois might be funded at the 57% level, if even at that, commitments already made are outstripping the money being put in.  Three words in the Constitution, “diminished or impaired,” cap a clause that is designed to force Illinois to meet obligations to its retired public sector workers.

On Thursday, April 10, current information about Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s partial city pension overhaul that passed two days before in the General Assembly (Tuesday, April 8) was shared by State Representative Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton).  Representative Ives’ wrote:

Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s partial city pension overhaul passed in the General Assembly on Tuesday. The bill that passed merely scratches at the surface of the problem. In October 2013, Barron’s shed some light on the severity of Chicago’s pension problem in an article that ranked the 20 most populous cities in the US based on their debt as a percentage of government revenue.  Detroit, currently bankrupt, ranked 12th at 372 percent.  Chicago, ranked 20th– last place, at 683 percent. The article exposes that it would require ALL of Chicago’s government revenue for the next seven years to finally pay off the city’s debt and unfunded liabilities for worker pensions and healthcare. 

It is going to get worse.  Politicians eventually must deal with the larger Chicago funds that are in worse shape – police, fire, and teachers.  Rolling out these reforms piecemeal hides the depth of reform needed by masking the entire cost to taxpayers. Hidden during debate is the $600 million in additional pension payments state law requires the city to make to its police and firefighter funds next year and the $600 million in pension payments needed for Chicago teachers at the same time.

Greg Clements introduced Bill Zettler to the assembled patriots.  Zettler’s remarks added immensely to the current pension issue, especially in relationship to the TRS (Teachers’ Retirement System), given his knowledge of the issue as presented in his book: “Illinois Pension Scam.”  Zettler was encouraged to write “Illinois Pension Scam” by Jack Roeser of Champion News in his role as Director of Research at theFamily Taxpayers Foundation

According to Bill Zettler, although the amount of unfunded pension is often given at $100 billion, this is just a guess.  When adding up all future pensions that must be paid by the state’s five retirement funds, it’s more like $170 billion.

Zettler immediately zeroed in on the TRS, as it’s the state’s biggest public pension fund.  According to an article published at “Huff Post Chicago” on October 25, 2013 by Reuters:  TRS said it has never received a full contribution from Illinois since it was created in 1939.  TRS, the 39th largest pension system in the United States, serves 389,900 teachers, administrators and other school personnel and had assets of $40.97 billion as of Sept. 30, 2013.

Madigan was in the House back in 1970 when the “Constitution” was passed guaranteeing pensions, but not funding.

How is it that despite a 13% return on investments in fiscal year 2013, the TRS funding gap rose to $55.73 billion as of June 30, up from $52.08 billion at the end of fiscal 2012, increasing the unfunded liability of the TRS by 7%. With only $40.97 billion of assets, and a funding gap of $55.73 billion, real pension reform is urgently needed in Springfield, not a make-believe fix.

Bill Zettler explained how the ROI (Rate of Investment) has much to do with the way pension debt is mounting.  Using a large mounted tablet Zettler wrote the following simplified example to illustrate why pension debt is increasing:

  • Suppose that $8.00 a year pension is owed and there is $100.00 in the bank.
  • With $100 in the bank, the $8.00 a year pension can be met when receiving an 8% interest rate on a CD.  With this rate the pension can be paid forever.
  • Now let’s suppose in rolling over the CD that the best rate available is 4% for the following year.
  • Now in order to meet the $8 pension there would have to be $200.00 in the bank, as only 50% of the pension would be funded.

The proof is indeed in the pudding!  It matters not how much the amount of debt is.  When interest rates are cut in half, liability doubles.  

Zettler illustrated the nature of the “Defined Benefit Fund” with a pie-chart.   Depicted was how a small amount of money is paid into the fund by the employers and a slightly higher amount by the employees, meaning that the rest of the pie, which is over 3/4 of the whole, must somehow be paid for.  With the amount derived from investments cut in half from 8% to 4%, taxpayers are now liable for half of the amount that investments are no longer covering.

A $5.3 billion contribution would be needed to keep the unfunded liability of the TRS from rising further. As the TRS gave preliminary approval to only a $3.412 billion contribution for fiscal 2014, a further rise in unfunded TRS liability is assured.

High salaries for teachers equals high pensions.  Teachers in Illinois can retire at 55 or 30 years, with an assured 3% cost of living every year until the end of their lives.

Through FOIA requests, Zettler has determined that in Illinois there are 10,000 teachers and 16,000, if you include administrators, whose salaries are greater than $100,000.  In contrast, Wisconsin has one $100K teacher; Indiana (21); Iowa (8); Missouri (11); and Kentucky (0).

A handout by Zettler listed the 50 top pensions as of 2013, ranging in amounts from $439,672 down to $231,110.  Illinois now has its first $500,000 pensioner, anesthesiologist Dr. Alon Winnie, a retiree from the State’s University Retirement System.  His pension during 2013 was $512,964 or $42,747 a month.  His COLA payment of January 1, 2014 amounted to $15,389, raising Winnie’s pension to $528,353 or $44.029 a month.  Dr. Winnie has already collected close to $6 million to date. If he lives a normal life expectancy (80 years per IRS), he will end up collecting over $12 million.

It should be obvious that the defined pension benefit plan where the benefit formula is defined and known in advance and is predetermined by a formula based on the employee’s earnings history, tenure of service and age, as with TRS, is bound to collapse, especially for young teachers coming into the system.  Mandated is the need to shift to a 401K-style retirement system.  Might salaries be frozen for three years, and what about the yearly fixed 3% COLAS?

In closing Mark Miller announced a new endeavor for the Northern Illinois Patriots.  Its leadership team will help members by partnering and then working with them to educate people in their local communities on how to stand up, using facts, to shed light on the situation at hand.

Recommended as a coming event was the 6th annual Chicago/Illinois Tax Day Tea Party rally on April 15, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. at the Arcada Theater in St. Charles, IL.

 

 

By Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil - 

School teachers all over the nation are quitting their profession, often due to being forced to abandon what they considered an excellent education system and change to one they consider inferior.   The faulty system they refer to is the new and highly controversial Common Core.  Susan Sluyter recently provided her reason for resigning after 25 years of teaching. She stated “I have watched as my job requirements swung away from a focus on the children, their individual learning styles, emotional needs, and their individual families, interests and strengths, to a focus on testing, assessing, and scoring young children, thereby ramping up the academic demands and pressures on them.”

One theory for developing Common Core, touted by those who initiated the experimental program, is the advantage of creating a common set of standards for all the states. However, opponents say that this one-size-fits-all approach to education is flawed and robs states of their individuality.  Opponents also state that it isn’t just the standards that are being criticized.  The bigger problem is the curriculum that supports the standards that has parents, teachers, and concerned citizens forming pockets of protests throughout America.

Proponents of Common Core like to portray the opposition movement as one being driven by Tea Party members. While that group may oppose it, the reality is that the firestorm of opposition sweeping through the states is largely being fueled by parents of school children. These are people who had been busy raising their families, without the time or inclination to become involved in politics. Common Core turned them into political activists.

Heather Chappell and Susi Khan are examples of that. They are mothers in Yorba Linda, California and became concerned when Common Core was introduced at their school. They began to ask questions and did not like the answers they received. They took the time to investigate Common Core more thoroughly and discovered many others shared their concerns. Those two Moms found it alarming that most of their friends and neighbors had never even heard of the new education system.

They decided to organize an event to help others learn what they knew.  Forming a small committee comprised of their friends, and with minimal publicity, Heather and Susi left their laundry choirs to plan an event and help others know the facts. About 250 people crowded into a church in their area to hear a presentation about Common Core. It was a huge success, which attracted a variety of people from all walks of life, age groups, and political backgrounds. Those results caused Heather and Susi to know people had a desires and need to know more about Common Core. They quickly put together another event.

But they are not alone! Parents just like them are popping up throughout America to aggressively protest against the controversial education system, causing state officials to take a second look at the problems inherent in Common Core.

Indiana Governor Mike Pence listened to the outrage and reports of problems that continued to plague his office.  He recently decided to drop Common Core and replace it with a state program.  He signed new legislation that made his state the first to opt out of Common Core standards.   Pence unlocked the floodgates for more states to follow Indiana’s move against the ill-conceived federal intervention of Common Core. The two most obvious states are Scott Walker’s Wisconsin and Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal. Other states are concerned about the number and quality of the assessment tests, and have withdrawn from the Smarter Balanced coalition, choosing to use their own testing methods.

The obvious questions being asked are why and how did this controversial system quietly creep into all but five of our states?  The answer to “why” depends upon who you ask.  Promoters claim there needed to be a consistency of standards among all states, and that our education system was lacking when compared to other countries.  Opponents argue each state should decide their own standards, based on their unique needs, and that if our education system is deficient, why are we inundated with students from most every other country who want to be educated here in America?

Opponents to the new system also resent that historical and federal education laws/rules were ignored by the relatively small group who developed and sold Common Core to the states.  Which introduces the question: How did our entire nation, with the exclusion of five states, end up using Common Core? — Texas, Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, and Virginia.

The concept is an old idea whose roots date back to the United Nations and an ultra-liberal by the name of Robert Muller. He spent 40 years quietly working to create the “World Core Curriculum.” The first Robert Muller School was started in Arlington, Texas in 1979 to implement the World Core Curriculum with the objective of making it available to educators around the world.  Muller’s “New Genesis,” published in 1982, sets forth in 27 chapter a blueprint for creating a world that will become a better place live in.

Since then many world leaders, including America’s “elitist,” decided to march in lock-step with the United Nation concept. That plan, which many of the same people embraced, is a “one-world” government and spirituality that includes a one religion, one world education system, one world government, etc.   Actually, their plan includes pretty much the opposite of what our wise forefathers embraced.   Need anything more be said on that subject?  We know the result of our founding fathers’ efforts: The United States prospered beyond anyone’s imagination and developed into a World leader.  So, why would anyone chance making radical changes, based on an agenda formed by the United Nations?

The designers of Common Core had a strategy to sell it to the States.  The Obama administration had $4.35 billion of “Race to the Top” federal funds to offer states if they accepted Common Core.  They also threw in a bonus of allowing states the option of dropping the highly unpopular “No Child Left Behind” program from George W. Bush’s days. Throw in a sales pitch inundated with lofty adjectives and promises of high achieving students, and the states couldn’t sign the dotted line fast enough.  They were so eager to accept the unproven, untested program that some states did not bother to even run it by their Congress.  What about the public comment period? How about examining the material first?  Sorry!  The curriculum wasn’t even developed, let alone available when those contracts were agreed upon.

People have asked if it is possible to have a recall of every state Governor who bought the bribes and who trusted without bothering to verify the promoters’ exaggerated  promises.  The public was not informed of the negative facts surrounding the issue, and the best source to educate the public was our media, but they remained relatively oblivious to these negatives.  Could that be due to their largely liberal leanings and a reluctance to confront Democrats in power?  If so, that is unfortunate, because all segments of our population, including those from every political affiliation, are questioning Common Core.

Were laws bent or broken in this process?  There are lawyers developing a challenge based on that belief, but some claim the only way to defeat Common Core is for “We the People” to rise up and speak out against it.  It will take a tidal wave of concerned citizens demanding the federal government scrap Common Core and return the responsibility for our children’s education to the state and local control.  American citizens are not interested in accepting the U.N. mandates nor have we bought into a one world governing concept.”

Informed parents are not buying into the premise that our education system needed a total revision; just that It may have needed to be “tweaked” in specific areas.  Quite “telling” is that the known problems and reasons for lower test scores were not even touched by the authors of Common Core.  What are they?

Most experts agree that the following aspects contribute greatly to lower test scores in states:

1. Teacher Unions have been able to keep ineffective and low performing teachers from being fired.  When parents become too noisy about a specific teacher’s shortcomings, she/he is moved to a school district in which parents are not as likely to complain: the same school districts most in need of quality teachers.

2. We are a nation of many cultures, some of which demand more of their children and teachers than others.  One example are students in which English is their second language, and most often for their parents as well. With little help at home, those students lag far behind in their classes. Also, students from single family homes, who tragically miss their father and his support, cause Moms to struggle just to survive. There is no time or energy for her to work with her children’s school needs.

It should send chills up our spines knowing liberals managed to slip Common Core into our nation’s schools in such a relatively short period of time, without hardly a smidgeon of advanced warning, and in the absence of any proof it was superior. That was allowed to happen largely because of wealthy people who made huge contributions to promote it. Some question whether those contributions were for the altruistic purposes claimed.  There is no doubt most everyone involved in the implementation of Common Core will be highly compensated in a variety of ways.

The following is a quote from a website that is devoted entirely to exposing the facts, faults, and failures of Common Core, as well as exposing the people who will profit from it.  Please read their conclusion of Common Core very slowly and carefully to get the full impact of their massive research on the subject:

Bill Gates is paying a “nonprofit” already overly involved in federal affairs to ‘help’ the USDOE (United States Dept. of Education) ‘improve’ its operations– and no doubt those ‘improvements’ will coincidentally serve the lucrative, privatizing purposes of the nonprofit-affiliated ‘improvers,’ not the least of which is planting carefully-groomed, privatizer neophytes into strategic governmental positions in order to propagate the corporate reform agenda for years to come.

In short, those with obscene money are paying those wanting to make money to advise those with public money on how to best spend the public’s money.

The important question remaining is what will YOU do to respond to the hijacking of our education system by “elites” who have “gamed” the system for personal profit at the expense of our children’s education.  Will you speak out at a city council or board of education meeting?  Will you contact your local newspaper; possibly write a letter to the editor?  Will you organize an event in your home and invite your friends and relatives?  How about scheduling a meeting with your local state official?  Will you at the very least talk to others about this important issue?

Series of Articles exploring UN Agenda 21 by Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil:

Article 1:  http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2014/03/thorner-oneil-un-agenda-21-designed-to-spawn-a-one-world-government.html#more

Article 2:  http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2014/03/thorneroneil-are-you-under-attack-by-un-agenda-21.html#more

Article 3:  http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2014/03/un-agenda-21-impacts-private-property-rights-and-freedom-article-3.html#more

Article 4:  http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2014/04/preamble-common-core-dates-back-to-the-marxist-socialist-paradigm-of-un-charter.html#more

 

Thorner: F. H. Buckley presents dim view of America’s “Crown Government”

Photo

By Nancy Thorner - 

On Thursday, April 3, The Heartland Institute’s Author Series featured F.H. Buckley, author and foundation professor at George Mason University School of Law with his eye-opening, recently published book titled, “The Once and Future King: The Rise and Fall of Crown Government.”  A citizen of Canada, Buckley will be sworn in as a U.S. citizen April 15.

Buckley didn’t mince words when he shattered just about every myth surrounding American government.  The Constitution, with its separation of powers, was not what the Founders had in mind. They instead envisioned a country in which Congress would dominate the government and in which the president would play a much smaller role.

Buckley offered a clarion warning about the alarming rise of one-man rule in the age of Obama, which he calls Crown government, and which one of our Founders (George Mason) called an “elective monarchy” that was worse than the real thing.

How did this nation arrive at its current state?

Although Buckley is not a Constitutional lawyer, he feels that as an outsider he has a better prospective of what led to American’s transformation to that of an “Imperial Presidency,” a term first coined by Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in a book by the same name, who as an adviser to the Kennedy administration, later condemned Richard Nixon’s abuse of presidential power and accordingly called for a return of power to the congressional branch.

Foremost in Buckley’s presentation was how presidential regimes differ from parliamentary systems of government through his evaluation of both systems:

  • Most worrisome in a presidential system is that the head of government and the head of state are united as one, in contrast to a parliamentary system where control rests more in party leaders.
  • Presidents can hide behind lecterns, but not prime ministers who must respond to questions from the Opposition on a daily basis when Parliament is in session or when the prime minister is in the country. Obama wouldn’t last in a parliamentary form of government where he would have to answer every question directed to him by Republican leaders.
  • Presidents have a fixed term, while prime ministers may be ousted at any time by a majority in the House of Commons.  In 225 years no president has ever been removed from office through impeachment.  Nixon may have saved himself from this fate by resigning.  Clinton was able to slow walk the impeachment process long enough to place the blame on Ken Starr.  Andrew Johnson came close to impeachment but won by a single vote:  35 to convict; 19 to acquit. The “high crimes and misdemeanors” test of our Constitution requires a 2/3 vote in the Senate. Rejected was what was first proposed by George Mason which called for impeachment based on a “maladministration” standard. Madison disagreed with the maladministration standard fearing that presidents under that standard could be removed for any reason.  Evident is that the Framers never anticipated that the presidency would emerge as the dominate branch of the government and that a broad impeachment power might be necessary to keep the executive branch in check.  As observed by Thomas Jefferson in his old age, a judgment seconded by Henry Adams, impeachment, as set forth in the Constitution, was not even a scarecrow!
  • The president is the only person elected by the entire country and has become the principal symbol of American democracy.  While Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution established that the president has the power to run the executive branch of the government, Article II, Section 2 was amended in 1804 through the 12th amendment which set up the Electoral College system which still governs modern presidential elections. This system of electing presidents has given way to the rise of a strong president, helped along by the sick adulation of the president by the media (far better when politicians are considered buffoons!), and a Supreme Court that serves at the whim of presidents.
  • The Electoral College system of electing presidents has ultimately produced a different kind of leader who is subject to public extremes of love and hatred, out of which has developed intense partisanship and gridlock. It hasn’t helped that the media has made rock stars out of the heads of government.
  • The loss of political freedom is associated with the concentration of power at the top in a president; hence, a “Reversibility” problem exists where people are stuck with bad laws and rulings, i.e., Obamacare.  With the power to issue Executive Orders, President Obama is putting in place policies that fit his own agenda if unable to legislate through Congress.
  • Presidential systems are difficult to export to other countries.  It didn’t work when exporting to South America. There are lots of presidents for life, but never a prime minister; however, in these modern times both presidents and prime ministers have gained increased power.

The issue of immigration was touched upon in the context of how population is renewed by birth and immigration.  The intake of immigration in the 1950′s looked like America with 70% from Europe and Asia.  The immigration intake now largely consist of those living south of the Rio Grande. They didn’t come here after reading the Federalist papers!  Many will latch on to the Democrat Party, being used to having power centered in a powerful president with government as their keeper.

Also of concern to Buckley is our criminal law system.  The scope of current law is so broad that its interpretation is often left open to the individual wishing to apply the law.  Buckley’s fear is that those having the incorrect political leaning could be arrested or penalized.

Despite the many drawback of our presidential system, what went so wrong that we now have an elected head of state and president who is behaving like an Imperial President?

As stated by F.H. Buckley, “We’ve had a wonderful run for 235 years.”  As to the age we are living in, we can no longer count on the courts to protect our constitutional liberties.

Unless there is an extremely egregious nominee, the Senate votes to uphold the nomination.  Despite the many scandals that have happened under the watch of Democrats, including Fast and Furious, Bengali, and the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS, because an ineffective Department of Justice and an Attorney General is in place who is tied to the president and not concerned about Constitutional principles, culpability is being denied and justice is not being served.

Then too there is the present Congress whose members are not willing to step up to the plate, but for a few, and take a united stand against Democrat proposals that are wrong for this nation.  Not only did wimpy and frightened Republican recently give in to Democrats while receiving nothing in return when they allowed the debt ceiling to be raised, but in dealing with the $862 billion Stimulus Bill passed in 2009, very little direction was given on how this tremendous amount of money should be spent.

It is easier to change course in a parliamentary regime than in one with an elected president.  For not only is it difficult to amend the Constitution, but a Supreme Court stacked with judges in sync with the views of a president and a media that fawns over the president create additional obstacles.

As the concentration of power becomes more in the hands of one instead of many, the deck becomes more and more stacked against effecting change in Congress through working within the system. An examples of when change happened from outside the system was the tea party’s show of election might when new comers were elected to Congress in 2010, all united on the pledge to shut down the earmark favor factory.

Also deserving of credit by Buckley was the “Republican Contract of America” written in part by Newt Gingrich and introduced six weeks before the1994 Congressional election.  Current Republican members of the House of Representatives and those citizens seeking to join that body, promised not just work to change its policies, but even more so to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives.  The contract enabled New Gingrich to become the first Republican Speaker of the House of Representative in 40 years. The Contract included 8 proposals outlining legislature to get enacted by the House of Representative within the first 100 days of the 104th Congress (1995-96).  All parts of the Contract were passed by the House under the leadership of Speaker Gingrich.

After all the negative views presented, there was something positive news to grab on to.  Noted was that all good things seem to be happening on the Right, such as Students for Liberty, as the Left continues to digs its hole even deeper with policies that take this nation in the wrong direction.  National referendums could be useful but this would require that all legislators come together and speak about the same problem, hardly likely!  Being advocated by Mark Levin and others is a Constitutional Convention.   It was slipped into Article 5 of the Constitution by George Mason as an alternate way for amendments to be proposed which says, “If two-thirds of state legislatures demand a meeting, Congress “shall call a convention for proposing amendments.”

Joe Bast, President of The Heartland Institute, announced that the following dates of importance regarding upcoming Heartland events should be saved.

The 9th International Conference on Climate Change to take place in Las Vegas from July 7 – July 9, 2014.

The 30th Anniversary Benefit Dinner with Michelle Malkin as Keynote Speaker on Friday, September 12, 2014.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Th-1By Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil

The United Nations Agenda 21 has quietly changed the makeup of our cities and rural areas through highly questionable tactics, clothed in lofty adjectives such as “smart growth” and “sustainability,” as we’ve written previously. Agenda 21 activists have quietly initiated laws that allowed the government to confiscate our land, water, private property, and wilderness areas. Their ultimate goal is to strip Americans of personal rights and freedoms, creating a socialist future and eventually a one-world government.  Not a pretty picture!

A necessary path to obtain those desired changes must include the indoctrination of children through education. That explains why our public schools have become increasingly liberal over the past couple of decades. Not enough citizens have challenged the progressive educators and their agenda, even though the changes were radical departures from what our Country had believed appropriate in the past.

A plan to indoctrinate our children with communist ideals has been in the works at least as far back as 1963, and probably longer. One of the first obvious steps was to take prayer and the 10 commandments out of all our public schools. Amazingly, there was little public outcry!  Next, traditional school plays suddenly forbade students to sing familiar, Christmas songs such as “Silent Night.” The cleansing of Christianity from schools escalated when any mention of Christianity by students was discouraged, and in some instances students who even mentioned the name of Jesus on school grounds were disciplined.

Following the absence of Christian values in classrooms, sex education classes became popular, complete with intimate graphics and condoms freely handed out to students.  Stimulated with sexual material, and free contraceptives, a clear message was sent to students that their school expected them to engage in sexual activities, but with instructions to be careful. Still, there was only a mild disapproval from the public.

With so little negative reaction, schools and the liberal movement became even bolder. They defied parental rights by taking under aged teens to abortion clinics, not only without their parents’ permission but without their knowledge as well. The schools had the approval of the state and judicial system to do so. A few young teens had serious problems after their abortions, but because the parents had no idea why they were ill, the young women did not get medical help until it was too late to save their lives. Still, no strong public outcry!

Apparently, the social issues aren’t important enough to energize people to object, but what about concern that many Communist goals have been quietly incorporated into mainstream America through our public schools? Especially guilty of this blatant indoctrination are the thousands of liberal professors in our nation’s colleges, where 63 percent of professors identify themselves as liberal, while only12 percent as conservatives.  Severely outnumbered, the conservatives remained pretty quiet, while the liberals often abuse their positions by forcing their political views on a captured classroom of vulnerable students.

We are reminded of the Communists’ expressed plan to use schools as transmission belts for socialism and Communist propaganda. To succeed they realized the importance of nationalizing our entire school system, allowing liberals to decide school curriculum, controlling the teacher associations, limiting parental involvement, and cleverly inserting the party platform in school textbooks.  We are now seeing many of those goals have been realized.  Recently, the current Administration hi-jacked our public school system and replaced it with the controversial and experimental Common Core system. You guessed it, many of the communist goals now exist in the Common Core curriculum.

How were the progressives able to insert Common Core into all our nation’s schools, when our forefathers wisely assigned the responsibility of education to the individual states?   Officials within the federal government cleverly and quietly side-stepped laws, and aggressively sold this new program to the states, with the help of hundreds of millions of dollars to promote it which came from people who stand to gain substantially from Common Core in time.  Bill Gates was one of the most prolific donors, and obviously he will profit greatly.  Schools will be buying his computers and accompanying products for most every student in America. One can only guess at the massive profit he will be experience.

The original idea for Common Core originated as part of UN Agenda 21, with ideas they borrowed from International Baccalaureate (IB); a group that was founded in Geneva, Switzerland in 1968 as a non-profit educational foundation.  IB World schools were also created here in the U.S.  The International Baccalaureate is recognized today as a globally oriented program and a UNESCO partnership program emphasizing sustainability teaching to children and collectivist, socialist indoctrination.  A network of their schools still exist in 147 countries including the U.S.

Aspects of the Common Core agenda has roots identified in the Center for Educational Renewal (CER) founded in part by John Goodlad in1985 within the College of Education, University of Washington, in Seattle.   Publication of an agenda in 1992 by John Goodlad entitled “Agenda for Education in a Democracy,” deviates greatly in its message from that which our Constitution guarantees to us.  A disturbing quote that verifies just how far this group had deviated can be seen in “Agenda for Education in a Democracy” and the following quote:

“Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now  . . . Parents and the general public must be reached also, otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home.  And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.”

Common Core is a direct result from U.N. Agenda 21, which is evidenced in Chapter 36 which deals with “Education, Public Awareness, and Training.”   It is one part of the comprehensive plan of action adopted and signed on to by more than 168 Governments  — G.H. Bush represented the United States in its signing, while Bill Clinton later embraced Agenda 21  — at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil  June 3 – 5, 1992. The Commission of Sustainable Development (CSD) was created in December of 1992 to ensure effective follow-up.  Education is indispensable for the U.N. to get its agenda established.

Then too, consider the U.N. Constitution which is a Marxist socialist paradigm where world regionalism is spelled out clearly in Chapters 8 through 11.  Those chapters use  terms  such as “regional arrangements, intergovernmental agreements, and metropolitan areas.” The U.N. Charter became effective on June 25, 1945.  President Harry S. Truman signed the United Nations Charter on August 8, 1945, and with its signing the United States became the first nation to complete the ratification process to join the new international organization. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history-truman-signs-united-nations-charter

As stated in the U.N. World Constitution:   “The age of nations must end.  The governments of nations have decided to order their separate sovereignties into one government of which they will surrender their arm.”

Consider also what was expressed by David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations:  “No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer.  No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a LUCIFERIAN initiation. Scary indeed!  This is so far from mainstream America that it should cause us all to shudder.

The goal then became how to insert a national liberal education program into America; one that was in tune with the New World Order expressed in the 1945 U.N. Charter.  First, needed was publicly proclaiming that our system was inferior. The government and our media began releasing reports that our school system needed to be vastly improved. Nobody has a problem with improving our school system. However, Common Core was not the solution, because it changed what did not need changing, while failed to address the known problems that still plague our school system.  Parents and educators complain Common core is proving detrimental in a variety of ways.  Sadly, bright, straight A students who once loved going to school, now dread their classes.  That is creating obvious tension within homes between parents and their children, as well as with teachers, some of whom are so disgusted they are resigning from their loved profession.

Common Core’s plan for our children is a topic of utmost concern, as it is engineering students into a progressive, socialist agenda.  Subsequent articles will explore how Common Core was covertly engineered at the federal level by a relatively small group of far left people, most of whom were not educators; and that the program was not adequately tested.  Our next article will reveal how those involved and associated Common Core stand to make huge profits.  Some believe federal laws have been broken, but at the very least the tradition and intent that the federal government not intrude into the states’ education responsibilities has been compromise.  A subsequent article will go into more depth as we explain how and why states accepted Common Core sight unseen, and who will stand to make huge profits.  Most importantly we will explain what some citizens are now doing to stop Common Core.

Published articles in our series of articles about UN Agenda 21:

Article 1: Agenda 21 designed to spawn a one-world government

Article 2: Are you under attack by UN Agenda 21? 

Article 3: Agenda 21 impacts private property rights and freedom

Th-31By Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil - 

Our last article, “Are You Under Attack by UN Agenda 21,” exposed the “United Nation Agenda 21″ scheme to grab American citizens’ property rights and freedoms. While that information is not exactly going viral throughout America, more and more people are realizing something unusual and troubling is happening in America.

That is good news, because the more citizens become observant and knowledgeable, the better chance we have of stopping what many now believe is an invasive attack upon us. While property rights are a major part of Agenda 21, it encompasses far more areas of our lives, with new laws and adverse changes from our government. We will explain the other tentacles of this odious United Nations agenda in future editions. This article will inform you of more ways it impacts our property and freedom, as well as our natural resources, parks and historic landmarks.

We must deny the assumption that only government can protect nature, air, soil, water, and open spaces. History informs us that all societies run by totalitarian governments experience severe environmental degradation where there is little or no private property and a misuse of resources. The end result is a chasm which develops between the haves and have-nots and a resulting bleak future for individual citizens.

An example of personal property being taken by the government is The Wildlands Project. It dictates how land is to be set aside for non-humans, and if your property happens to be located in one of their designated areas, you become less important than animals. In Kern County, California, there are 400 such areas planned.  The pretense to confiscate the land is that it is national forest land, with the claim “it is good for the people.”There is a definite push to have people become more dependent by relocating them from suburbs into cities, out of private homes into condos, and out of private cars onto their bikes or electric cars.  Bike lanes and bike paths are all the rage right now, as cities and rural areas are being remade in accordance to the sustainable model.  With high density urban developments, parking for cars could be eliminated, as there would be no need for vehicles that sprew forth CO2.  As documented in the Fifth Assessment Report issued by the U.N. International Panel of Climate Change (ipcc) on September 27. 2013, manmade Global Warming was attributed in large part to CO2 emissions.

In 2013 San Francisco Bay Area residents battled city planners on the implementation of “Plan Bay Area and Senate Bill 345″– known as the “smart growth” program — which called for the moving of people from rural communities into the city’s urban sprawl so government would have more control over how they impacted the environment.   Rosa KIoire, a former forensic appraiser and the founder of Democrats Against UN Agenda 21, believes the smart growth plan is more about making people live closer together so government can have more control over them than about any environmental impact.

The Monument Act was originally created to protect America’s historical landmarks and/or structures from being destroyed. That Act is now being used by the federal government to grab land for their own purposes.  Those who designed the Act did not foresee something as odious as Agenda 21, and trusted that our federal government would never use the Act for any other purpose than to preserve our monuments. However, abuses are happening, as the citizens of New Mexico can testify. In December of 2012, President Obama used the Monument Act to grab the area known as the Taos Plateau, even though that area lacked properties that would qualify it for a national monument.  That area of the state has enormous underground resources, such as oil, coal, and uranium, resources that could be providing economic benefits to both the state and its residents.  Rather than create jobs that would benefit the people who live in New Mexico, that land now belongs to the government.

Then there is the Clean Water Act of 1972 where even mud puddles can become wetlands that must be protected.  Should an area be deemed a wetland, the owner is no longer allowed to use or sell it. One of the more mindless abuses of the law happened in California.   Using a provision in the Clean Water Act, which provided for a healthy habitat for fish, California officials purposely diverted the Sacrament River and allowed that essential water supply to flow into the ocean. Sound too incredible to believe?   What would ever cause such a strange action?

A relatively unknown, small SMELT fish was being caught in pumps that supplied water to the valley.  The fish was on the endangered list and citing the Endangered Species Act, a judge ordered the pumps that watered the valley turned off and the water diverted, lest the Delta melt be disturbed   That water supply was needed to irrigate hundreds of thousands of acres  of farm area in California, and without it, farmers were forced to watch once thriving fruit groves to wither and die, as well as other types of crops throughout a huge region in the California valley.  Jobs were lost, lives were destroyed, all because the government chose to protect a fish over peoplewhose lives depended upon their farming their land for a living.  Even when California fell victim to a severe drought, the government would not relent and let the river flow along its normal course.  We now live in a land in which a fish is more important than people.  Certainly this is not what our forefathers intended of the law, but an overreaching government has abused our freedoms.

The erosion of property rights has continued despite public backlash, as it did in the Supreme Court Kelo v. New London decision in 2005, which allowed a Connecticut town to seize private property not just for public use, but also for private development surrounding new offices for the Pfizer Inc. drug corporation. In 2009, New York state’s highest court ruled the state could use eminent domain to seize large numbers of homes and businesses in Brooklyn to make room for a new arena for New Jersey Nets basketball. Even more grievous, in 2005, The Supreme Court ruled that local governments may force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public, even if the property is not blighted and the new project’s success is not guaranteed.

You are probably wondering whom is behind the U.N. Agenda 21 plan. Unfortunately, quite a few world-wide leaders, including many in our own country.   Not surprising, one of the more prominent is George Soros, a billionaire and liberal socialist, who strongly supports Agenda 21.   Soros’ money has been tracked to funding parts of ICLEI, as early as 1997 when his “Open Society” gave ICLEI over 2 million dollars to support a Local Agenda 21 Project.  His billions fund over 90 leftist organizations such as ACORN, SEIU, MoveOn.org, Occupy Wall Street, the ACLU and most any that promote his far-left agenda. In a subsequent article we will discuss how Soros’ Open Society Institute has partnered with the U. S. Department of Education to promote a global education initiative to bring about the nationalization of the American education system known as Common Core, endorsed by Arne Duncan, Obama’s left leaning Secretary of Education.

We can only hope that we can defeat Agenda 21 before experiencing any more government abuses.  One way to stop Agenda 21 from infiltrating American is to vote for Conservative candidates who oppose U.N. Agenda 21.  Oh, and not just vote, but support them in every way possible.  Educate yourself about the candidates and then talk to your friends, relatives, and neighbors …. maybe even your grocery store clerk.  Whatever it takes:  Vote against the slick liberals who make claims they have no intention of keeping.  Look at their records, not their rhetoric.  There is an ongoing war for our future, and we need good men to fight on the side of liberty and freedom.

When the defense of liberty becomes a crime, tyranny is already in force. At that point, failure to defend liberty makes slavery a certainty.

To the Editor:

Isn’t it enough to have one botched government program that adversely affects many more Americans than it promised to help?  The Obama administration is also responsive for launching the highly controversial Common Core.

While everyone has heard about Obamacare, this is not the case with Common Core, a United Nations UNESCO global education agenda.  The Tides Foundation in conjunction with UNESCO and Bill Gates of Microsoft had Common Core prepared prior to Obama’s election, and once elected the funding was incorporated into the stimulus bill of 2009 and funded without knowledge or consent of Congress, as usual.

Most telling is that Arne Duncan, Obama’s Secretary of Education, is a strong proponent of UNESCO.  A “Race to the Top” grant program was used to help persuade the states into signing onto the curriculum sight unseen in 2010.  If states did not agree to implement the Common Core curriculum, the education grant monies for the states was withheld.

With Common Core curriculum, students will no longer be taught math, literature, history, science or social studies the same way we were taught. Also, much of this nation’s history has been distorted or eliminated by the authors of Common Core. It is a one size fits all approach to education which does not address the unique individuality of each child.

Most disturbing is that the progressive movement will flourish through the indoctrination of students, who will be lured into accepting an extreme leftist ideology.  I am not suggesting that this will happen in the U.S., but millions of German young people were won over to Nazism in the classroom. The indoctrination of students is not new; it has happened in Germany and continues in Middle Eastern countries today.

As with most every government program, there are those who stand to make substantial profits from it.  Realizing the escalating controversy over Common Core, those who will benefit from it have begun promoting it through expensive advertisements. They are countered by pockets of parents and concerned citizens all through America who are demanding their state legislators stop implementing Common Core.

Perhaps most significant is the growing number of teachers who are highly critical of the Common Core curriculum and have begun speaking out against it. Their concern forced the attention of the National Education Association (NEA) president Dennis Van Roekel, who recently made the startling confession that Common Core was indeed botched. The battle rages on.

It was on February 19, 2014, when NEA president Dennis Van Roekel posted a letter to union members at NEAToday.org, breaking with his administration pals by admitting that Common core implementation had been botched. This followed intense teachers’ representative dissatisfaction with Common Core during the 2013 NEA convention at which delegates from the floor introduced two measures, both of which failed to pass.  The measures condemned Obama’s education policies outright and were critical of Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.

Teachers, parent and concerned citizens knew several years ago that Common Core was seriously flawed, but no one wanted to hear those complaints. Those who did complain were often labeled as extremists, malcontents and nut-jobs. Obama’s Secretary of Education Arne Duncan even said he found it “fascinating” that Common Core opponents were “white suburban moms who all of a sudden discovered their child isn’t as brilliant as they thought they were. . . .”  Some wonder if Duncan is equally as fascinated now that the one finding fault with Common Core is his union ally.

In his letter Van Roekel maintains that “scuttling these standards” is a bad idea, but still maintains that “the union wants to make a strong course correction and move forward.”

Van Roekel further suggests allowing teachers “time to field-test the standards in classrooms to determine what works and what needs adjustment.”  As standards have started to be implemented in 46 states and the District of Columbia, doesn’t it seem a little late to be field testing?

According to the NGA (National Governors Association) the CCSSO (Council of Chief State School Officers), and their agent, Achieve, Inc., teacher input had been included.  Not so claims Van Roekel who wrote:

“The very people expected to deliver universal access to high quality standards with high quality instruction have not had the opportunity to share their expertise and advice about how to make [CC] implementation work for all students, educators, and parents.”

Van Roekel’s letter ends with this proclamation:

“There’s too much at stake for our children and our country to risk getting this wrong.  That is exactly what Common Core opponents have been saying for years.”

On March 26, State Rep. Dwight Kay (R-Glen Carbon) will present HR 543 before the House Elementary & Secondary Education Committee in Springfield. This resolution urges the Illinois State Board of Education to delay the implementation of Common Core standards until a study is conducted showing the costs associated with Common Core.

What are the chances Illinois will opt out of the Common Core curriculum as was announced by Governor Mike Pence of Indiana on Tuesday, March 25?  The chances, slim to none.

Illinois accepted Common Core sight unseen in 2010.  Endorsed wholeheartedly by the Illinois Education Union, Common Core is now being implemented across the state.

Abraham Lincoln is credited with the warning:  “The philosophy of the classroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.”

Vladimir Lenin, a notorious Russian communist, knew the power of controlling schools and once said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”

Heed Lenin’s declamation and take action if you care about the future of this nation. It is imperative that you take an interest in how and what your children are learning.  If you don’t have children of school age, attend board meeting, ask questions, and be ready to confront school administrators and school boards with facts about the progressive Common Core experiment which was never tried or tested before using children as guinea pigs.

Nancy Thorner

Lake Bluff, Ill.

This entry was posted in Arguments, Letters to the Editor. Bookmark the permalink.
http://madisonrecord.com/arguments/263591-common-core-is-a-botched-government-experiment

UN-Agenda-7-7-7-Agenda-21By Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil

You may be one of the unlucky Americans that have already experienced the heavy hand of government intruding on your personal property rights. However, today most Americans remain unaware of the planned and unprecedented power grab, inflicted on Americans by a relatively “quiet” agreement our government made with the United Nations, known as U.N. Agenda 21.

It is thought by many to be more of a scheme, with the claim it is being initiated in order to save the world by creating a sustainable environment. If allowed to continue, the plan will change America in many ways. Many of our treasured freedoms and rights will be systematically removed. Many see Agenda 21 as the ultimate goal to gain world-wide control and create a one-world-governing body.

What would it involve and how would it impact American citizens? Forget your dream of a two story home on your own piece of land. Instead the plan is to force us to settle for a nightmare. Conjure up an image of China … specifically a city like Beijing with few private homes and massive apartment buildings. A place where people will likely live in zones connected by congested freeways, and all controlled by an untouchable government.

It was George Washington who said, “Private property and freedom are inseparable,” with John Adams affirming that “Property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist.”  Those wise words are no longer embraced by members of the Agenda 21 group, some of whom are America’s top leaders.

How close is this plan to creating an environment much like that of a Communist state?

Well, Communism is defined as a system of social organization in which economics and property are controlled by the state, offering its citizens few rights or freedoms. One would think that since such a system has never prospered, it would not be attempted again, and certainly not in a country like the United States, one of the most successful countries in the world. America had the good fortune of forefathers who gave us an amazing Constitution, Bill of Rights, and a   form of government that is the envy of the World.  We have prospered and welcomed others to embrace and enjoy it with us. We have been blessed with the ability to own property; our very own piece of chosen land, which can be passed on to our heirs. Why would we risk losing our freedoms?  Who would willingly hand over their property and lose our many freedoms, due to a United Nations Agenda?

The powers behind Agenda 21 knew most people would resent being manipulated by the government into drastic changes in their life style. They did not expect us to easily give up our homes and move to newly designed, massive apartment complexes in a different neighborhood, and raise families in cramped housing units.  They know we want the freedom to choose the car we enjoy driving, where and when we want to travel, and the size of family we choose to have.

They needed to devise a clever way to convince Americans to surrender their rights and basic freedoms granted them by our wise forefathers. Thus, we began to hear reports of man-made global warming, which included dire warnings of calamities likely to occur as a result.  They claimed man was causing icebergs to melt, potentially causing oceans to overflow onto our shores.  They warned we must make drastic changes in our lives to survive the tragedy. They claimed it to be “proven science”.  It was not; in fact quite the contrary. Evidence began emerging indicating the World had actually been in a cooling phase for the past couple of decades.

Soon, a growing number of scientists and climatologists began refuting claims of global warming.  When massive ships became stuck in thick ocean ice packs and whales became trapped under large ice pockets off the Canadian coast, Agenda 21 masterminds and global warming enthusiasts quickly changed their terminology to “Climate Change”, a much safer title so that any change in our climate can be blamed on you and me, and thus justify laws that dictate those radical changes.

The Heartland Institute, located in Chicago, IL, Joe Bast, President, was called "the world's most prominent think tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change" by The Economist, May 26, 2012. Due to be released by The Heartland Institute in April are Climate Change Reconsidered II:  Biological Impacts and Climate Change Reconsidered II:  Human Welfare, Energy and Policies. The reports are produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel of Climate Change (NIPCC), which counters the reports of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warning of dangerous and catastrophic human effects on climate based largely on CO2 emissions. ]

Without the threat of oceans warming and flooding our land, what might entice people to make the uncomfortable changes dictated by Agenda 21?   Possibly one or a combination of the following might work:  Create a downward economy and/or economic crisis, cause jobs to be scarce, create further economic woes through escalating gasoline costs, and higher taxes.  Then develop amazingly attractive advertisements of high rise apartments, with low rental fees that are located close to one’s place of employment.  That plan worked in China, and is currently a theme in colleges throughout America.

As documented in our introductory article on the U.N. Agenda 21 published Sunday, March 23, “U.N. Agenda 21 designed to spawn  a one-world-government,” a non-governmental organization called the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) is tasked with carrying out the goals of Agenda 21 worldwide.  It is currently being implemented locally through ICLEI USA which was launched in 1995 and now has a solid network of cities, towns and counties.  Their agenda has not received much attention in the media, so don’t feel badly if the name is new to you.  The organization has  gradually and quietly been making changes within our cities, often clothed in clever phrases, such as “smart growth”, “clean energy”, “sustainability”, “redevelopment”, “high density urban mixed use development” and “intelligent cities”.

Has ICLEI invaded your county or city yet?  Not sure?  Check for the “buzz” words on the agendas of your city council meetings. Better yet, begin attending city and county board meetings

An example of how ICLEI operates in our cities and counties was recently evident in a semi-rural area of Santa Rosa, California; a beautiful and quiet area in which family homes and properties are located with a creek running through their property.  The residents had never heard of Agenda 21, ICLEI, sustainable development, or any of the other language associated with Agenda 21, until they received a post card in the mail from a concerned citizen, suggesting they attend a City Council meeting where the officials were expected to vote for a law that would take a specific amount of land on each side of the river (100 feet) and claim what was private property to be designated as government property.  Shocked, the residents all marched to the meeting, determined to stop the plan to rob them of their property.  Surprised by the overwhelming number of furious residents, the Council put their vote on hold.  It has not been put on the City’s agenda since.

The action of one knowledgeable citizen saved those Santa Rosa residents’ property rights.  If we are to save our cities and our rights, we too must become educated on all the tentacles of United Nations Agenda 21.   Watch for our next edition, as we will provide you with more facts about another facet of this insidious plan.