Thorner: New chapter in global warming debate realized at Heartland’s ICCC-12

Heartland Institute’s President and Founder Joe Bast

By Nancy Thorner – 

The Obama administration used concern over “global warming” as a false flag operation to advance it’s left-wing agenda to “transform” the country’s energy sector. This makes global warming policy — not global warming itself — the greatest threat facing this nation. This was one of the themes of The Heartland Institute’s Twelfth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-12), held in Washington D.C. on March 23-24, 2007.

According to Heartland President Joseph Bast in opening remarks, the election of Donald Trump on November 8 opened a new chapter in the global warming debate, creating hope that a new pro-environment, pro-energy, and pro-jobs agenda will be created to benefit the American people.  ICCC-12 was the first major conference on climate change to take place after Trump’s election, and its 40-some speakers presented the science and economics that are the foundation of that new agenda.  Speaker after speaker rejected the policies and claims of President Barack Obama and showed optimism about the possibility of dismantling these policies now that Donald Trump is in office.

Of note is that four special awards were presented to those who had made huge contributions to the Climate Debate.

• Col. Walter Cunningham is best known as pilot of Apollo 7, the first manned flight test of the Apollo Program to land a man on the Moon. 

• J. Scott Armstrong, Ph.D., a professor at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, was applauded for his research on forecasting.

• Myron Ebell, director of energy and environment policy for the Competitive Enterprise Institute and chair of the Trump administration’s EPA transition team.

• Dr. John Barrasso, M.D. (R-WY) is chairman of the Senate Committee on Environments and Public Works (EPA).  Unfortunately Barrasso was unable to attend to receive his award in person because of the House debate on replacing Obamacare.

Three Republican legislators were scheduled to appear at ICCC-12, but only Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) could attend in person.  Senator Barrasso, M.D., a reward recipient, received his award In absentia, while Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma made his remarks through a video presentation. Unfortunately, many legislators were tied up in their respective Chambers during ICCC-12, House members with repealing Obamacare and Senate members in dealing with Chief Justice nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch.

Joseph Bast, president and CEO of The Heartland Institute welcomes guests

Joseph Bast, president and CEO of The Heartland Institute, welcomed an enthusiastic group of 300 attendees. The meeting included eleven panels and five plenary sessions offering views on such topics as climate science, environmental economics, and the relationship between fossil fuels and human prosperity, the environment; human health; and world peace.

On Heartland’s agenda was an impressive group of keynote speakers including Lord Christopher Monckton for his wit and humor as well as mastering of mathematics and statistics; Patrick Michaels, a climate scientist with the Cato Institute who has written numerous books on the subject; Roger Helmer, a member of the European Parliament; and Heartland Science Director Jay Lehr, who delivered a presentation he and others at Heartland had prepared to deliver to President-elect Trump in person.

Bast related how EPA Director, Scott Pruitt, recently remarked on CNBC that human activity is not the primary activity of the global warming that we see. More good news followed when Bast recounted a remark made by Trump’s budget director when announcing that global warming activities were not going to be funded because the president doesn’t think the issue is important. 

Climate “realists” have won the public opinion debate, Bast claimed. He cited survey data showing most Americans don’t believe human activity is responsible for most global warming, further stating that “42% of Americans don’t want to spend a dollar more to prevent global warming.”  Bast then related how the Trump administration has proposed cutting EPA funding by 1/3, and how the subsidies shoring up the wind and solar industry are soon to be on the cutting block. Without those subsidies, wind and solar energy would be unaffordable. Britain, Spain, Germany, and Australia are all cutting back on their sustainable energy funding, Bast said.

Breakfast, Thursday, March 23:  Keynote Address, Jay Lehr, Ph.D., Senior Fellow and Science Director of The Heartland Institute  

Following opening remarks, Joe Bast spoke about the 20-minute presentation The Heartland Institute was asked to prepare and present to explain global warming to President-elect Trump. Jay Lehr, PhD. was selected to share Heartland’s compilation of facts based on sound scientific research to President-elect Trump. Lehr’s direct presentation never happened, but Heartland’s message was shared with others in the Trump administration.   

With this in mind, Mr. Bast called Dr. Jay Lehr to the podium to present Heartland’s slide presentation as prepared for President-elect Trump. Lehr, who delivers one or two addresses a week all across the country, was described by Bast as the most popular speaker expressing climate change realism in the country today. 

Dr. Jay Lehr’s Powerpoint Keynote Breakfast presentation addressed the elimination the EPA and turning its functions back to the states to legislate.  Dr. Lehr playfully suggested that he might be paying penance for a 1971 crime, for when joining the Nixon administration he helped create the EPA. As Dr. Lehr remarked:  “For 10 years the EPA did some good work, but since 1980 no good has come from the EPA.” 

As to devolving the EPA, Dr. Lehr states the following reasons:

• The states are eminently capable of, and should be responsible for, the protection of our air land water.

• His plan migrates that responsibility from the EPA to the states over a 5-year plan, and thereby materially alters the existing structure of the EPA, which is worthy of serious consideration.

Lehr went on to explain how there are 14 separate offices within the EPA, each having their own staff and budgets, but only 5 of the offices deal with the environment:  1) Office of Water; 2) Office and Air and Radiation; 3) Office of Chemical Safety and Emergency Response; 4) Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response; and 5) Office of Research and Development. 

What’s more, two of the offices belong in the Bureau of Indian Affairs 1) Office of American Indian Environmental Affairs and 2) Office of International and Tribal Affairs, while seven more of the offices within the EPA are entirely non-scientific in nature: (Office of Policy; Office of General Council; Office of Chief Financial Officer; Office of Environmental Information; Office of Administration and Resource Management; Office of the Enforcement and Compliance Management; and Office of the Administrator).

According to Dr. Lehr, only 4 useful pieces of EPA legislation were created in its first ten years of existence from 1971 to1980.  They are:  

1.  Water Pollution Control Act (later renamed as the Clean Water).

2.  Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recover Act, Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (which covers deep mining too).

3.  Clean Air Act, Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). 

4.  Comprehensive Environmental Response compensation and Liability Act (Superfund).

As to the reach and size of the EPA, Lehr cited 15,000 employees spread between Washington DC and 10 regional offices and a few research centers, with a total budget of $8.2 billion.  Most importantly, what are taxpayers getting for the $8.2 billion budget of the EPA?  No actual environmental protection is produced.  This is all done by the 50 State Agencies. 

Given such a dismal record by the EPA, these stated conclusions are sound and need to be implemented by the Trump administration:  

• We must aggressively trim, restructure and eliminate multiple programs within the federal system that have any association with the god of Sustainability, especially and starting with the EPA. 

• It is incumbent upon use to strive to deliver the truth to the American people with good science, properly constructed legislation, and policy-making that is grounded in the Iron Law of Regulation.

Dr. Lehr asked each participant to set a target to change the minds of 5 people in a year who believe in global warming. With 200 individuals in the room, 1,000 individuals would be reached.

An addendum to article  

President Donald Trump on Tuesday, March 28, 2017, issued an “energy independence” executive order to undo several of the Obama administration’s climate change regulations. 

Happening so soon after Heartland’s successful ICCC-12 event in Washington, D.C., Trump’s sweeping executive order on Climate Policy, sorely needed, was greeted with much acclamation and applause.   

• Orders the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review and repeal, or revise, the Clean Power Plan is the backbone of President Barack Obama’s climate agenda, requiring states to transform their electricity mix away from conventional fuels toward renewables.

• Eliminates the use of the “social cost of carbon.” This figure, called the “social cost of carbon,” is a dollar amount that federal agencies apply to different regulations to calculate the “climate benefit” of abated co2 emissions. In 2015, the social cost of carbon was said to be $36 per ton.

• Rescinds moratorium on new coal leases and methane emissions from oil and gas operations on federal lands. Under Obama, the Department of Interior would not issue new coal mining leases on federal lands until the agency conducted a more comprehensive environmental review that included the estimated effects the lease would have on global warming.

• Repeals guidance on agencies taking global warming into account when conducting National Environmental Policy Act reviews.  The National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to conduct comprehensive environmental assessments for a wide range of projects, including permitting of infrastructure.

Live stream archives:  All sessions and speakers at ICCC-12 can be viewed here at Heartland’s Live Stream Archives.

Future articles by Nancy Thorner dealing with Heartland’s ICCC-12 will cover Fossil Fuels and Human Prosperity, Fossil Fuels and World Peace, Climate Politics and Policy, and Sustainability.

Friday, March 31, 2017 at 08:49 AM | Permalink

Thorner: Conservative Burt Prelutsky’s satire “Angels on Tap” soon to be film

Burt Prelutsky

 

 

It was on Monday, February 20, 2017, that I introduced Illinois Review readers to California-based Burt Prelutsky, a conservative commentator and writer with a sense of humor. Although, as a writer, Burt Prelutsky lacks the fame of other conservative authors such as Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Dinesh D’Souza, etc., his writing is certainly on a par with theirs.  I would suggest it’s superior because it’s so richly leavened with humor.

 

As a freelancer, Burt Prelutsky has written for the New York Times, Washington Times, TV Guide, Modern Maturity, Emmy, Holiday, American Film, and Sports Illustrated.

 

For television, he has written for Dragnet, McMillan & Wife, MASH, Mary Tyler Moore, Rhoda, Bob Newhart, Family Ties, Dr. Quinn and Diagnosis Murder. In addition, he has written a batch of terrific TV movies. View Burt’s IMDB profile.

 

Mr. Prelutsky’s recently published book, Angels on Tap, is undoubtedly unlike any book you have ever read in your life.  Its sixteen short chapters weave together a wonderful story that is overflowing with humor, with an equal number of “food for thought” moments.  Each chapter has its own story to tell.  And it is soon to be a major motion picture with a heavenly cast, including Ed Asner, Marion Ross, Jamie Farr, Alan Rachins and Ron Masak.  

 

About Angels on Tap

 

The book starts out simply enough. A newspaper reporter’s car breaks down. Noticing a bar close by, he decides to call the auto club and have a beer while waiting. Now imagine the reporter’s surprise when he discovers that all the customers in the bar are angels, complete with wings, and that the bartender is a guy named Gabriel.  It doesn’t take long for the reporter to discover that these are angels with attitude and are only too willing to vent about all the ways that the human race falls short.

 

The book should appeal to a wide breadth of readers, whether young or old. Within Angels on Tap you’ll discover religious overtones; social norms; historical knowledge; accounts of ancient philosophers; wisdom; and extremely witty dialogue. I’ll make a wager that after reading Angels on Tap once, you’ll re-read it again in order to be able to quote from it.

 

You will become acquainted with sixteen angels, each of whom is responsible for overseeing some specific aspect of human life, ranging from the fine arts to politics, from entertainment to psychiatry. 

 

Their one-on-one interviews with the stranded reporter are filled with misgivings and disappointments over what has evolved through the years. Sadness, regret and a sense of failure, is expressed as the angels find themselves unable to fulfill their individual assignments. What the angels do impart is wisdom, truth, and common sense with a heavy dose of humor to make reality easier to recognize, if not always to accept.  It is, in fact, Burt Prelutsky’s mission to make his points humorously, while at the same time being deadly serious about those things he and the angels think important.

 

Upon finishing the last page of the 98-page Angels on Tap book, I was left desiring more pages to read and enjoy, as many of the angels spoke to me in ways that I could relate to. Readers will likewise find themselves reflected in whole or in part with many of the angels, all of which represent aspects of life which are common to most. Humor, however, does require brevity and can’t be stretched out the same way that drama can. Can you imagine a funny book running on the way that “War and Peace” or “Gone With the Wind” do?  One thing Angels on Tap isn’t is a romantic comedy!  Hopefully, Mr. Prelutsky will write a sequel to Angels on Tap.

 

I made the mistake of trying to read too much into the rather surprise ending of Angels on Tap.  When speculating to Burt Prelutsky about my response to the book’s ending, he responded accordingly: 

I’m reminded of a story I once heard about F. Scott Fitzgerald attending a class at the invitation of his friend, the English professor.  The class assignment was to interpret The Great Gatsby. At the end of the session the professor asked Fitzgerald what he thought of their interpretations.  The author admitted he was flabbergasted; he hadn’t intended to write any of the things the class insisted they discovered in its pages. 

While ordering Angels on Tap book at Amazon, why not check out seven other outstanding books published by Mr. Prelutsky? All in all, a rather amazing output for someone who didn’t get around to writing his first book until he was 66-years-old!

 

Before I forget, in Sixty Seven Conservatives You Should Meet Before You Die, published in 2012, among those interviewed by Burt were Kellyanne Conway and Tucker Carlson. 

 

Subscribing to Weekly Doses of Burt’s Humorous Political Commentary

 

Burt Prelutsky started writing humorous political commentary in 2001. For years, Burt’s commentaries were carried by Breitbart, WorldNetDaily, the Patriot Post, Bernard Goldberg.com and on his own website.  But, as he came to realize, even maintaining a website costs money.  So, as of Sept., 2015, he began a subscription service. 

 

Presently, Burt writes 3-5 commentaries every week that are generously leavened with humor.  As he says, “If you take politics too seriously, you’ll soon go mad.”  Anyone who might be interested in reading the man Bernard Goldberg refers to as the modern Mark Twain can contact him at Burtprelutsky@aol.com for guidelines to subscribing.

 

To whet your appetite, consider these four samples:

• Ron Paul Is Dating Cassandra — Saturday, March 25, 2017
• The Lunacy Persists — Monday, March 20, 2017
• The Meddling Media — Saturday, March 18, 2017
• The Kremlin Connection — Monday, March 13, 2017

Angels on Tap, produced by Burt Prelutsky, is soon to be a major motion picture with a heavenly cast, including Ed Asner, Marion Ross, Jamie Farr, Alan Rachins and Ron Masak.   

 

Monday, March 27, 2017 at 09:12 AM | Permalink

Tags: Burt Prelutsky, comedy, Illinois Review

Thorner: Will the FDA ‘Deeming Rule’ spell the demise of the Vaping Industry?

By Nancy Thorner – 

Vaping: How Government Regulation Can Kill Innovation was the topic of The Heartland Institute’s continuing series of Wednesday evening events that are available free to the public. Featured speakers were Dr. Brad Rodu of the University of Louisville and Pamela Gorman of Smoke-Free Alternative Trade Association (SFATA). They discussed vaping from a scientific and industry perspective. 

Dr. Rodu is a professor of medicine at the University of Louisville, where he is a member of the James Graham Brown Cancer Center and holds an endowed chair in tobacco harm reduction research.  He is also a senior fellow at The Heartland Institute.  For the past two decades Dr. Rodu has been in the forefront of research and policy development regarding tobacco harm reduction.

Pamela Gorman is executive director of SFATA, the largest trade group representing and protecting the interests of the vapor industry. She has worked in the vaping and tobacco industries for nearly a dozen years. As an elected official in Arizona, Ms. Gorman served terms in both the state House and Senate.

What are E-cigarettes?

E-cigarettes are becoming an increasingly popular alternative to traditional combustible cigarettes.  Many countries around the world (such as England) are recommending these vapor products as a tobacco harm reduction solution, while the United States government and local authorities have been trying to regulate these products out of existence. 

Health professionals have long known that the smoke created by combustible cigarettes, rather that the nicotine, is what makes smoking harmful.  Smokeless tobacco and e-cigarettes provide a much safer and healthier alternative delivery system for nicotine.  

Dr. Brad Rodu introduced by Jim Lakely, Director of Communication at The Heartland Institute

A slide presentation was used to address the following issues:

1.  Poison reports by the American Association of Poison control Centers in 2015, showed that out of 547,286 reported exposures submitted, E-cigarettes came in very last at 0.5%.  At the high end were Cosmetics and personal care products (26%) and Household cleaners (21%).  

2.  Claims about E-cigarettes are exaggerated, such as, they are not loaded with toxins; they are not poisoning our children; they are not a gateway to teen smoking; they do help smokers quit; and indooteens.

• Important to promote use as widely as possible as a substitute for smoking.
• Passive exposure:  no evidence of signifir bans are not necessary. 

  3.  E-cigarette vapor contain nicotine, at various levels or none; water; propylene glycol and /or vegetable glycerin (both are in many consumer products and are FDA approved).  Propylene glycol is used to create artificial fog in theaters, concerts.

  4.  Nicotine and Caffeine are both addictive, but they can be used safely.  Both enhance concentration, performance levels, provide a sense of well-being and elevate mood.  Neither cause intoxication, nor are they not linked to any major disease.  We consume caffeine in coffee, tea and cola drinks.  Nicotine is delivered through smoking cigarettes and E-cigarettes, but it is the smoke created by combustible cigarettes smoking, not the nicotine that is dangerous.

  5. Medication to rid addition to combustible cigarettes provides only a temporary bridge to abstinence; it’s expensive; the very low dose of the medication is unsatisfying for smokers; there is only a 5% success.

  6.  The British are more informed than Americans about the use of E-cigarettes, which has led to a differing treatment of E-Cigarettes in the US.   The FDA, CDC, and the NIH all claim:

• No evidence that e-cigs help smokers quit.
• No evidence that e-cigs are less hazardous than cigarettes.
• E-cigs might renormalize smoking and make it e a gateway to smoking among teens.
• Only safe, effective methods should be used or quitting smoking.
• E-cigs to be regulated exactly as cigarettes.

7.  The Royal College of Physicians & Public Health in England in 2015 found the following: 

• Effective as aid to quit smoking.
• E-cigs are not renormalizing smoking or serving as a gateway to smoking among

• cant harm to bystanders. 

Pamela Gorman kicked the smoking habit with E-cigs

Once a smoker herself, Ms. Gorman’s used E-cigarettes to quit smoking.  She is now fighting for the free market principles in the vaping industry.  Like Pamela Gorman, nine million individuals have chosen to put down combustible cigarettes and instead use E-cigarettes.  Gorman put aside cigarettes in 2013, never picked one up again, and would find turning back distasteful.  

It was on June 22, 2009 when the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) was signed into law.  It granted the FDA authority to regulate the manufacture, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products, as a way to protect the public and create a healthier future for all Americans. 

Restrictions created by the Tobacco Control Act:

• Restricts Tobacco Marketing and Sales to Youth
• Requires Smokeless Tobacco Product Warning Labels
• Ensures “Modified Risk” Claims are Supported by Scientific Evidence
• Requires Disclosure of Ingredients in Tobacco Products
• Preserves State, Local, and Tribal Authority

The Tobacco Control Act does not:

The law makes clear that FDA’s role is to regulate and protect the public health, but it places a few restrictions on FDA’s powers. FDA cannot:

• Require prescriptions to purchase tobacco products.
• Require the reduction of nicotine yields to zero.
• Ban face-to-face sales in a particular category of retail outlets.
• Ban certain classes of tobacco products.

The Deeming Rule 

A big blow came to the vaping industry when almost overnight action taken by the Food and Drug Administration on 04/25/2014, to be made effective August 8, 2016, classified E-cigarettes in the same category as cigarettes (a combustible product) to be regulated like a tobacco product.  Called the Deeming Rule”, overnight E-cigarettes became tobacco rolled in paper.  The Facts on the FDA’s New Tobacco Rule.

According to Ms. Gorman, the vaping industry has a lease on life until August 8, 2018, when the FDA will prohibit 99.9%+ of vapor products on the market,” then all will go dark unless something is done. The new regulations are of concern for the e-cigarette industry, as approval of products offered will cost small companies millions of dollars that they cannot afford. 

If the FDA’s current approach is implemented, producers would be required to remove every single product from the market and submit expensive and burdensome applications for the chance to allow their products to stay on the market after the August 8, 2018 date.  There are 3,200 separate products and each one must go through separate testing that could cost $300,000 per application.  Then too, some of the studies required could take as long as 8 years. The Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association says the average vape shop makes $26,000 in monthly sales, which doesn’t leave a lot of room for new costs to be incurred.

As to the effectiveness of E-cigarettes, a report published on the National Center for Biotechnology Information’s website showed that vaping has helped decreased the smoking rates among 21 to 35 year-olds. 

Help solicited from public

Federal level: A new bill (HR 1136) has been introduced by Reps. Tom Cole (R-OK) and Sanford Bishop (D-GA) that would change the predicate date in the FDA’s deeming regulations. The legislation is called the FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2017.  Changing the predicate date will not prevent the FDA from having approval authority over products introduced after the new predicate date, but it allows all current products to remain on the market without applying for marketing approval. Existing products will still have to meet safety and marketing standards imposed by the agency.  Co-sponsors are needed. 

Join  CASAA.org (Consumer Advocates for Smokefree Alternatives Association).

Heartland publication:  Vaping, E-Cigarettes, and Public Policy Toward Alternatives to Smoking by Brad Rodu, DDS; Matthew Glans, and Lindsey Stroud.  Pdf download available. 

The Smoking Status quo is unacceptable.  Although the American anti-smoking campaign is 51 years old, according to the CDC there are 39 million smokers in the U.S., with 480,000 deaths every year in the U.S.

If the status quo continues, in the next 20 years 9.6 million Americans will die from smoking.  All will be adults over 35 years of age.  None of them are now children. 

Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 10:00 AM | Permalink

Tags: e-cigarettes, Heartland Institute, Illinois Review, vapor

Thorner: Will a resurrection of American higher education emerge from its demise?

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Thorner: Will a resurrection of American higher education emerge from its demise?

By Nancy Thorner –

Dr. Richard J. Bishirjian was the featured speaker at a continuing series of free Wednesday night Heartland events on March 1, 2017 from 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. The Heartland Institute is located at 3939 N. Wilke Road, Arlington Heights, Illinois 60004. Joe Bast is president and CEO of The Heartland Institute, a 33-year-old national nonprofit research center located in Arlington Heights, Illinois. According to a recent telephone survey, among state elected officials The Heartland Institute is among the nation’s best-known and most highly regarded “think tanks.”

Dr. Richard J. Bishirjian was Founding President and Professor of Government at Yorktown University from 2000 to 2016. The vision of Yorktown University was to establish a presence on the Internet for scholarship on free enterprise, market economics, the philosophical ground of a free society, the principles and history of the American Founding, and the history and philosophy of education, religion, and culture.

Bishirjian earned a B.A. from the University of Pittsburgh and a Ph.D. in Government and International Studies from the University of Notre Dame under the direction of Gerhart Niemeyer. While a graduate student at Notre Dame, and later as a member of the Faculty of the University of Dallas, he studied under Eric Voegelin. After completing graduate work at Notre Dame, he did advanced study with Michael Oakeshott at the London School of Economics. Dr. Bishirjian taught at universities and colleges in Indiana, Texas and New York.

Of note is that Dr. Bishirjian, after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, worked with close associates of Poland’s President, Lech Walesa, to assist them to reap the rewards of the collapse of the Soviet Union. For six years Dr. Bishirjian engaged in financing development projects in Poland. That led to launch of American Academy of Privatization, an Internet-based distance learning program offering free lectures. The Poland experience led to the formation of Yorktown University, a for-profit Internet university offering courses in Government, Business and Economics, that operated from 2000 to 2016 when it lost its accreditation. The vision of Yorktown University was to establish a presence on the Internet for scholarship on free enterprise, market economics, the philosophical ground of a free society, the principles and history of the American Founding, and the history and philosophy of education, religion, and culture.

Bishirjian’s newest book, The Coming Death and Future Resurrection of American Higher Education describes how the education establishment erected bureaucratic barriers made it as difficult as possible for him to found the online Yorktown University as a low-cost-regionally, accredited, high-tech institute of higher education, a battle that resulted in the loss of millions of dollars of investors’ equity and 12 years of work and sacrifice on the part of Dr. Bishirjian. Another notable book by Bishirjian published in 2015, The Conservative Rebellion published in 2015, was offered for sale at the event by the author.

Introduction of featured speaker by Lennie Jarratt

View here the youtube of Dr. Bishirjian’s lecture: Higher Education: The Need for Reform. 

Dr. Bishirjian exposed the failing American higher education system through his thoughtful and honest expose of what really constitutes higher education in this nation, where both parents and students are forced into crippling debt due to high tuition costs. His thoughts follow: View here the youtube of Dr. Bishirjian’s lecture: Higher Education: The Need for Reform.

One of the most intrusive federal control leading to Federal Control was the “Negotiated Rulemaking Act 1990”, which allows representatives from a government agency and affected interest groups to negotiate the terms of a proposed administrative rule, without Congress.

According to the Consumer Price Increases from 1980 – 2012, the cost of a college education (college tuition and fees) went up by 89.3%, while the next highest increase came in Medical Care at 45%. Is it any wonder that student debt is exploding? Federal Student Aid in 2016 totaled $1,292 billion. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, January 18, 2017: “Revised Education Department numbers show that at more than 1,000 schools, at least half of students defaulted or failed to pay down debt within 7 years.”

Critiquing Colleges and Universities

About the colleges themselves, they lack intellectual diversity. According to a University of Oregon Eugene Study, when the voter registration files of 506 faculty members were checked, there were only 25 registered Republicans.

Also missing is an absence of Required Curricula where “Western Civilization” is taught. There are only 24 universities where Western Civilization is taught, among them are Hillsdale College, Texas Tech University, University of Houston, Liberty University, Ave Maria University, and Carthage College. This means that out of 3,000 colleges and universities in this nation, there are 2,976 colleges where Western Civilization is not taught.

One of the 10 worst college for Free Speech (FIRE) includes Northwestern University, located here in Illinois, which ranks second on Dr. Bishirjian’s list. Other colleges listed are Mount St. Mary’s University; Louisiana State University; University of CA, San Diego; Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota; University of Oklahoma; Marquette University; Colorado College; University of Tulsa; and Wesleyan University.

Given that Dr. Bishirjian ranked Northwestern University second as the worst college for freedom of speech, I was pleased to read that recently (March 15, 2017) the student government of Northwestern University had passed a series of resolutions aimed at bolstering “viewpoint and intellectual diversity.”

Not only do 99.51% of the contributions made by top liberal arts professors go to Democrats, but in 2015 – 2016 the National Education Association gave almost a combined $21 million to Democrats and Liberal Groups.

Ways to Salvage Higher Education

What can be done to salvage higher education? Suggested were: 1) the removal of bad textbooks; 2) develop new textbooks in American History; 3) create online courses and Certificate Programs; 4) when regulations improve, create new, high tech, universities; 5) return to “The West”; and advocate political reforms.

Recommended as a new textbook for History (Howard Zinn’s A Peoples History of the United States must be abandoned!) is Patriot’s History of the United States: From Columbus’s Great Discovery to the War on Terror, published February27, 2007, by Larry Schweikart (Author), Michael Allen (Author).

The American Academy of Distant Learning, founded in January of last year. American Academy of Distant Learning now has in development a series of college level MOOC courses in Free Market Capitalism, which comprise the following five courses, all modestly priced at $29.95.

Econ 100 – Microeconomnics
Econ 101 – Supply-side Economics
Econ 102 – Intro to Political Economy
Econ105 – History of Economic Thought
Bus 200 – Entrepreneurial History of the United States

Many businessmen are likely to give preference to prospective employee who can successfully demonstrate that they know those principles that create economic opportunity.

Suggested Political Reforms

Dr. Bishirjian advocated Thirteen Political Reforms. Several of these are:

1. No longer require institutions not participating in Title IV programs to adhere to U.S. Department of Education title IV regulations. Because of Title IV regulations, a university of just Internet courses is practically impossible to establish.
2. Prohibit members of Congress and congressional staff from employment with colleges and universities.
3. Lower the percentage of three-year default rates from 30% to 20%. Institutions with three-year default rates will immediately lose access to Title IV programs
4. Shift Title IV funds to the States to block grants.
5. Encourage the States to subsidize corporation and create training programs.
6. Abolish the Department of Edcation.

According to Dr. Bishirjian, abolishing the Department of Education would be impossible because many of the programs handled by the Department would be shifted to other agencies.

Dr.Bishirjian did express concern about Trump’s first line-up of Education Appointment. Only one appointee has “education” experience; one worked in both the Bush and the Obama administrations, Jim Manning; another. Josh Venable, worked on Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign and the Foundation for Excellence in Education founded by Jeb; and yet another, Jason Botel, was executive director of the Maryland education advocacy group MarylandCAN, financed by Bill Gates, and which has a long history of supporting Common Core.

Wednesday, March 29
Crossroads for Liberty: Recovering the Anti-Federalist Values of America’s First Constitution
5:30 PM – 7:30 PM Arlington Heights, Illinois

Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 10:40 AM | Permalink

Tags: Illinois Review

Thorner/Ingold: Trump’s honoring of Andrew Jackson’s Hermitage angers liberals

By Nancy Thorner & Ed Ingold –  

The liberals are incensed over Trump’s visit to President Andrew Jackson’s house in Tennessee, The Hermitage, on Wednesday, March 16, and his apparent veneration of Jackson before his Nashville rally later that same day. 

Jackson followed the presidency of John Quincy Adams as the seventh President of the United States.  He further founded the Democratic Party, serving from 1829 to 1837. Before being elected to the presidency, Jackson served in Congress and gained fame as a general in the United States Army.  As president, Jackson sought to advance the rights of the “common man” against what he saw as a “corrupt aristocracy” and to preserve the Union.

Trump was the first sitting president to visit since Ronald Reagan.  Trump toured Jackson’s mansion, walked to his tomb saluting and laid a wreath as taps played in the background — all marking the 250th anniversary on Wednesday of Jackson’s birth.  Jackson’s populist politics have resonated with Trump. Upon moving into the White House last month, the new president hung a portrait of Jackson in the Oval Office. 

Trump gave a 10-minute speech to as many as 400 people from the steps of the mansion, saying he was a “big fan” of Jackson. Among those attending were nearly 100 Tennessee lawmakers. Trump noted the portrait in the Oval Office and the magnolia tree outside the White House that came from Tennessee.

“Andrew Jackson was the people’s president and his election came at a time when the vote was finally being extended to those who did not own property,” Trump said.

“Jackson didn’t want government corruption. He expanded benefits for veterans and battled financial powers that bought influence at the expense of citizens,” Trump said.  “And the current president,” said Jackson “imposed tariffs on foreign countries to protect American workers.”

There is good reason why Democrats looked upon Trump’s visit to Heritage in such hatred.

Jackson’s career was marked by many “interesting” incidents.  He fought a duel with a man who insulted his wife. He was spared because his thin frame was concealed in a heavy coat. The bullet passed through the coat but missed him. His adversary, Charles Dickinson, was not so fortunate.

Jackson was viciously attacked during his campaign, impugning his character and that of his wife, Rachel. Political slander is nothing new, and was particularly rampant during the early 1800’s. The press was continually dogging Jackson during his tenure as President. On leaving office, he bought his own newspaper in order to bring his case to the public. Called a “jackass” by his opponents, the animal became the symbol of Jackson’s party – the Democrats.- late in the 19th century.

At the request of his predecessor, President James Monroe, Jackson invaded Spanish held Florida to suppress Cree and Seminole tribes who were raiding the U.S. He negotiated with the Spanish, at bayonet point, to cede Florida to the U.S.

When gold was discovered in Georgia, settlers rushed to claim their share of the riches, overrunning land held by the Cherokee Indians. The Cherokee, highly Westernized, sued Georgia, and eventually won their case in the Supreme Court. Jackson disagreed, and famously said, “John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it.” The Cherokee were forcibly removed from their land, and marched to Oklahoma, an event known as “The Trail of Tears.” 

This was not his only confrontation with the judicial system. After defeating the British in New Orleans in 1814, Jackson kept the militia in his service and established martial law in Louisiana. Among his solders was a judge named Dominic Hall. Another state judge, Joshua Lewis, ordered Hall’s release from service with a writ of habeas corpus. Jackson had Lewis arrested. Before the affair was settled, Jackson also arrested a state legislator, a Federal judge and a lawyer.

In the election of 1829, no candidate received a majority of the Electoral vote. Subsequently Jackson was elected

President by the House and the Senate elected John C. Calhoun, as Vice president. A political enemy, Calhoun worked tirelessly against Jackson and his appointees. 

Instead of political operatives, Jackson chose a cabinet composed of businessmen. Most of his other appointments followed the same line, establishing Jackson as a “man of the people.” Infighting and gossip led Jackson to fire his entire Cabinet. As Vice President and President of the Senate, Calhoun was able to block their replacements. Jackson gathered associates he trusted, forming a defacto government, known as the “Kitchen Cabinet.” On reelection, Jackson chose Martin van Buren as his running mate. Van Buren proved to be an interesting if not particularly effective successor. That’s another story.

Trump stood at Jackson and Rachel’s tomb at The Hermitage, and saluted, as shown in a widely distributed photograph.

Any thoughts why?

Friday, March 17, 2017 at 11:58 AM | Permalink

Thorner: Be Wary of Slick Computer Scam Artists

By Nancy Thorner – 

Few traumas can be worse for a writer than when a computer crashes. My situation was the result of a computer scam which I fell for. Those who are conducting scams are very good at what they do. It’s been four days since I was scammed, and I’m just now recovering from the shock and shame of falling for outright fraud.

My unfortunate scam experience began on Saturday night, March 11, at around 9:30 p.m.   Earlier in the evening I had been unable to access my Xfinity account on my main computer with my usual password.  Authentication was required.   I called my local computer technician for help, but not hearing back from her was understandable, as it was Saturday night and I knew Sunday was her day off from computer work.  I wasn’t too dismayed because I knew my technician would call back promptly on Monday morning. After all, I did have my working laptop sitting next to me on a computer table.  Although I’m more comfortable using my laptop to type, I knew I wouldn’t have to miss a beat with what I was writing.

The Scam Begins 

While typing on my laptop, all of a sudden a frightening warning filled my screen. There were flashing lights and a woman’s voice telling me over and over again to call the number listed to get help.  I hesitated at first, but when I couldn’t remove the warning off my screen or stop the annoying voice commanding me to call the listed number, further realizing that my  computer was frozen and couldn’t be shut down (I didn’t think of pulling out my computer plug!), I called the number out of desperation. As it now stood, both of my computers were inoperable, and nothing could be done to get me back on-line until Monday (March 13) at the earliest.  What would I do in the meantime?  How would I finish what I had committed to write over the weekend? 

The person who responded was extremely courteous, telling me that I had been alerted because my Comcast network wasn’t protected and needed a Network Security Firewall installed.  He even showed me a list of names of those who were attempting to gain access to my computer. I asked numerous questions, some several times, as to how I was to know that the person I was speaking with was really a Comcast technician?  Each time the phony technician assured me of his Comcast status.  I even inquired about the technician’s foreign sounding voice, which all to often has become the norm when seeking advise by phone. Additionally, I brought up the fact that only a few weeks before I had had my own computer technician install Malwarebytes Premium on my both computers and that I was further protected by Norton.   

The dye was cast!

Against my better judgment at the time, but desperately wanting my both computers fixed, I made the grave mistake of sharing my password with the phony technician.  The technician then took over both computers, one after the other,  telling me that he would fix my computers and also install a Network Security Firewall and MCafree Antivirus.  During the three next two hours I was told not to touch my computer.

My phone rang just before midnight on Saturday, March 11.  It was the technician calling to inform me that his work was finished and that all had been installed and fixed on my computer. Both of my computers were now were working. How relieved and happy I felt!   But when I was informed that my password had to be changed and the technician then picked one out for me, an alarm bell went off in my mind.  Why would I want the technician I was speaking with to have possession of my password?  I was promptly informed that passwords were erased after conversations with clients ended.

A second alarm went off in my mind when I was asked how I wanted to pay for the work done and the installation of Network Security with its seven layers of protection. I offered to pay by credit card but was told that a check was the preferred payment option.  Following instructions, I scanned one of my checks and signed it when it appeared on my computer screen.  It was a really dumb thing to do, not comprehending at the time that the person who gave me technical support now had my bank account information.

Print-out of services rendered added authenticity 

What made the transaction seem legitimate is when a receipt for the services rendered, etc., appeared on my screen to print out.  The print-out even included the number to call again when I needed help. 

NETWORK SECURITY:: 7 LAYER OF PROTECTION

TOTAL::  PERSONAL 

SUPPORT::  3 YEARS

EMAIL PASSWORD::  PERSONAL 

NAME OF THE TECHNICAL SUPPORT TEAM::  I FIX PC

TOLL FREE::  #1-855-811-6366

NAME OF TECHNICIAN:: NICK

EXTENSION::  2051

Realization that I had succumbed to scam

Sunday, March 12, was a good day for me. Both computers were working well, and what I had done the night before seemed about board to me; that is, until earl Monday morning my own computer technician called to inquire whether I was able to resolve my computer problem.  Confessing what I had done that past Saturday night, my technician informed me that I had been victim to a slick computer scam artist and that most likely both my credit card and bank account had been compromised.  

Realizing how upset I was, my technician helped me void my current credit card and request that a new one be issued; assisted me in contacting my bank to request a new bank account and checks; helped me change my Xfinity password; and checked over the systems of both computers, removing many unwanted items that were put on my computer and deleting some that should not have been removed by “I FIX PC.”   By the way, I was told by my technician that the Network Security 7 Layer of Protection that I paid handsomely to have installed on my computer as a Network Security Firewall had never been installed.   

The Aftermath

I’m hoping that the check I used to pay I FIX PC for their so-called services will not be honored when presented for payment, as the check used was written from my now closed bank account. 

MasterCard’s fraud department did report the computer scam I was privy to to authorities.  Notwithstanding, as fast as scam artists are shut down they start up again.

Hopefully my own written account will prevent at least one person from being scammed as I was.  As a rule of thumb, don’t open or click on any message where the sender is unknown.  I’ve certainly learned my lesson the hard way.

Avoidance of being scammed is not all that easy to do, especially if you are an honest person and tend to trust people by taking them at their word. 

Wednesday, March 15, 2017 at 03:22 PM | Permalink

Comments

Ed Ingold said…

Thanks for posting this, Nancy. Many would find it humiliating to be scammed in this manner, and keep to themselves. the 855-811-6366 virus is targeted at unsuspecting adults, frequently the elderly, who haven’t grown up with computers. It preys on Windows computers, but Mac computers are not immune to attacks of this sort, just more resistant.

Reply Wednesday, March 15, 2017 at 09:59 PM

Thorner: Follow the money behind effort to revise the U.S. Constitution

Thorner: Follow the money behind effort to revise the U.S. Constitution

Conservative billionaires Charles and David Koch are heavily invested in criminal justice reform

 

Given the number of responses noting interest in my ConCon article published at Illinois Review on March 2, 2017, One state after another reject Convention of States’ efforts, another Con Con update seemed timely and appropriate. 

 

A national convention will only happen if 34 states, a two-thirds majority, sign onto the idea.  So far in 2017, 10 out of the 10 states targeted have rejected ConCon (Convention of States), the latest state being Idaho:  Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. 

 

In state after state, real conservatives have rejected the big money pushing the Convention of States, as real conservatives defend the Constitution instead.  Consider this:  The U.S. Constitution has only been amended 27 times since it was ratified in 1788.

 

The latest state, Idaho, on Wednesday, March 1, after nearly three hours of debate that stretched through the lunch hour where turns were taken taking either pushing the need to rein in the growing federal debt or warning that a convention could veer off into hot-button social issues, the Senate voted against SCR 108 by a resounding rejection of 11-24, effectively killing the bill that called for Idaho to petition for an Article V Convention to amend the U.S. Constitution to add a balanced budget amendment.  

 

Although the sponsor of Idaho’s SCR 108, Sen. Marv Hagedorn, R-Meridian, argued, “We are either going to control our addiction or it will be controlled for us”, Senate Minority Leader Michelle Stennett countered with, “The founding fathers did phenomenal work in creating this lasting governing document and I don’t consider it a wise move to cut it up, especially considering the polarized political climate we are living in.”  

 

As to the status of ConCon in Texas, even though the Texas Senate on Tuesday, February 28 voted in favor of measures calling for a convention of states, which was adopted on a party-line vote, 20-11, the issue is not yet settled.  The vote, however, did officially advanced one of Texas Gov. one of the emergency items for Texas Governor Greg Abbott in this legislative session.  Abbott applauded the Senate’s passing of Senate Bill 21, saying that he looked forward to the House’s approval, which seeks amendments that place restraints on the federal budget and check power and enact term limits for U.S. officials.    In the recent University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll, only 27 percent of those surveyed said a convention of states was needed to amend the U.S. Constitution, while 53 percent said the document has held up well.    

 

It is no secret that mega-donors, probably including the Koch brothers, are involved in pushing for a ConCon in Texas, which attests to its unconditional support by both Gov. Abbott and Lt. Gov. Patrick, even though Texas senators were informed before their vote on February 28 that a vote for SJR2 (Convention of States) would amount to a black mark on any conservative politician’s careers, and, most importantly, that a duty exists for each to defend the Constitution against all its enemies, foreign and domestic.  And that meant to reject SJR21.

 

Texas senators were enlightened further how the Republican national platform committee voted nearly unanimously against an Article V convention last July in Cleveland; Justice Scalia called an Article V convention a “horrible idea” in the last year of his life; Phyllis Schlafly said it is playing Russian roulette with the Constitution; the legendary Solicitor General under Reagan, Rex Lee, explained that constitutional conventions cannot be limited; and Chief Justice Warren Burger likewise expressed the same sentiment. 

 

A lengthy article in the Dallas Morning News on Tuesday, February 28, 2017, connects this recent action by the Texas Senate in passing the Convention of States to massive donations by Tim Dunn, a wealthy oilman from Midland, Texas, and the Koch brothers.  Unlike most states, Texas has no limits on donations to the campaigns of state officials.  The Dallas newspaper explains:

 

Contributions to lawmakers from Tim Dunn and Empower Texans (which is primarily funded by Tim Dunn), 2010-2016:

 

Gov. Greg Abbott – $30,000 (Abbott put the Con Con/COS on the emergency calendar)

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick – $649,546 (Patrick pushed the Con Con/COS through the Texas Senate)

Sen. Brian Birdwell – $25,234 (Birdwell was its primary sponsor)

Total Dunn contributions – $946,898 (other Texas Republican Senators fell in line on the Con Con/COS)

Total Empower Texans contributions- $3,965,725 (other Texas Republican Senators fell in line)

 

The Dallas Morning News explains further:

 

Lawmakers are also acutely aware of the agenda of the Koch brothers, billionaire conservatives who have spent heavily to support Republican candidates nationwide. Eric O’Keefe is a Citizens for Self-Governance board member who lives in Wisconsin and has a long history of political and financial ties to the wealthy brothers. The Koch brothers and related groups have given Texas lawmakers more than $900,000 since 2010. Abbott received $132,000 from the Koch brothers in 2013 and 2014. …

 

Donations to Dunn and O’Keefe’s Citizens for Self-Governance group indicate that its Constitution amending project is gathering steam, both politically and financially. According to tax records, contributions to CSG have grown from $1.8 million in 2011 to $5.7 million in 2015. …

 

CSG also operates at least two “dark money” groups, the Alliance for Self-Governance and Convention of the States Action. Those groups are not required to disclose the sources of their funding.

 

Charles Koch, of the notorious multi-billionaire Koch brothers — who heads Koch Industries and basically funds Republican candidates who are willing to advance globalist goals — has let it be known that he is eager to reform the criminal justice system.  

 

With deep money pocket behind passing ConCon in Texas, it won’t be easy to keep ConCon from passing the Texas House.  Fortunately, Texas has the U.S. Constitution and grassroots conservatives on its side, if they are not too intimidated to speak out and make their voices heard.

 

As a warning to legislators who are so disposed to vote for a Constitution Convention in their state, having been persuaded through the presentation of glowing ConCon rhetoric and/or the promise of contributions, they will be guilty of playing games with the Constitution.  It would open the door to repealing the Second Amendment, requiring taxpayer-funded abortion, repealing the Electoral College, and even changing our system of government into a European-style parliamentary system.  It means giving the media influence over changing the Constitution.

Monday, March 13, 2017 at 10:00 AM | Permalink

Thorner/O’Neil: Conservative university students face unprecedented bias

By Nancy Thorner & Bonnie O’Neil –  

Many parents are in the process of visiting schools with their college-bound children trying to decide which one is a good fit. It is an exciting time, but also can be quite discouraging. Parents quickly learn most every college and university have increased tuition costs, often not affordable to the average family. Also, in general, these schools are inundated with liberal teachers and administrators that believe it their responsibilities to preach political opinions to their students, and they make little attempt to hide this fact. They not only preach their doctrines, but unfortunately, it is not unusual that they also bully and even use grades to persuade students to their leftist political opinion.  

How do students respond to these often blatant efforts? Those who have not been interested in politics are easy targets for such persuasion. Others who come from conservative homes try to maintain their political views, but soon learn their grades are impacted by any assignments that allow the teacher’s judgment to determine the grade.  Considering the high cost of tuition, most of these students aren’t willing to stand their ground and risk retaliation. They want to graduate with grades that will attract high paying jobs.  Considering students and/or parents are often forced to borrow money for their tuition, students understand the need to secure a job quickly upon graduation to pay back the loan. Thus, their priority becomes pleasing teachers and working for good grades.

As recently as the early 1990s, most students did not take out college loans. Contrast that to today, when nearly 71% of students must borrow to pay for college. It is fitting to suggest this needs to be investigated and facts exposed. What caused the unreasonable tuition rate hike to happen in such a short period of time? Some speculate schools are providing free or near free educations to large numbers of low income students, thus the need to charge some students more. 

Dr. Richard Bishirjan in his book, The Coming Death and Future Resurrection of American Higher Education,  exposes and confirms the higher education establishments impose tuition costs that force parents and students into crippling debt. In Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America’s Youth, Ben Shapiro also addresses this subject.  There is a need for more investigations and suggestions for ways to reduce the costs so that all students have the ability to receive the education that seek. 

Another problem, equally disturbing, is that the administrations and teaching staff have become exceedingly, blatantly liberal. 

My co-writer, Bonnie O’Neil, was at first hesitant to relate a personal example of a college’s hypocrisy after her grandson, Caleb O’Neil, faced an unfortunate situation as a freshman at Orange Coast College in California. However, after Caleb’s story went viral on the Internet with articles receiving a huge number of hits, O’Neil relented. After all, there is something appealing about a student standing up to a radical Liberal teacher blatantly preaching her political views. If a college freshman is willing to stand up to liberal professors who use their position of authority to indoctrinate students, shouldn’t we all do our best to expose known problems?  

Burt Prelutsky, Southern California-based political commentator, offered his own unique take on the kangaroo court proceedings against Caleb at Orange Coast College:

We have all witnessed the signs of the anti-Trump virus that has run rampant across America. We have all seen the various elements of the biased media join forces to delegitimize his administration. We have all seen Chuck Schumer and his trained seals in the Senate slow-walk Trump’s cabinet choices through their hearings. We have all seen the Soros-financed rioters going through their paces in the streets and on college campuses.

But something that may have slipped under the radar is the anti-Trump kangaroo court that recently doled out injustice at Orange Coast College. Although most of us were privy to what initially led to the legal lynching, you may not have been aware of the unfortunate, but not too surprising, conclusion to the story. 

Several weeks ago, a professor, Olga Perez Stable Cox, under the guise of conducting a class, said, among other things: ‘I will not tolerate any person in my life that voted for Trump,’ ‘I’m not going to Utah where my family lives because of their views on Trump,’ ‘President Trump is a white supremacist,’ ‘Vice-President Pence is one of the most anti-gay humans in the country,’ ‘I know you’re stuck in homes, you’re stuck in families, you’re stuck in places of employment where you’re surrounded,’ ‘It’s scary living in Orange County because so many people are hateful,’ ‘I hope that we can counter what this new administration is going to do.’

Because he was so outraged by the hatred spewing from the mouth of this self-identified lesbian, Caleb O’Neil taped her and made her screed a matter of public record.

You would have thought Ms. Cox would have been suspended or fired for wasting class time with her partisan bellyaching. But that would only prove that you were a visitor from a past era who had landed in 2017 thanks to your time travel machine. Instead, the administration decided that Mr. O’Neil was the one who needed to be disciplined. His crime?

‘Recording a class session without the permission of the instructor.’ 

His defense — although one shouldn’t be necessary because every teacher should be taped or recorded (what do they have to hide from the people who pay their salaries?) — was that he didn’t record the entire session, but only the 15 minutes or so after she went off the rails and abused her authority.

In the meantime, I have written the following letter to Dean Lugo: “I have read of the disciplinary action you have taken against young Mr. O’Neil. The part that grabbed my attention is that you asked him how he felt about his video having damaged the College’s students, faculty and staff. It seems to me that if a 15-minute video of Prof. Cox in action could be that damaging to your school’s reputation, the problem rests with her and not the student. How is it you don’t see it that way?

Evaluating the Outcome

Thanks to Burt and similar media sources, Caleb’s situation went viral.  Represented legally by a non-profit conservative group, Freedom X, and massive public support, School authorities decided to drop their suspension of Caleb. However, similar cases have not ended well for students who overtly express their Conservatives viewpoints.

Did the school and/or Ca. Teachers Union learn anything from the unfortunate problem that happened on the Orange Coast College campus in Costa Mesa, California?  Apparently not!  According to Teacher Union representative, Rob Schneiderman who stated: 

“The Coast Federation of Educators is deeply disappointed that administrators have capitulated to individuals and groups who threatened and bullied students, faculty, and administration.”

Mr. Schneiderman chose to ignore the improper behavior of the teacher and instead accused the student and those who supported him. This Teachers Union Representative did not offer any evidence of bullying by supporters of Caleb, unless he is referring to the thousands of people who disagreed with the school’s decision to punish this student with a suspension and contacted the school to express those views.

No action was taken against the teacher in question, causing the public to believe the Teachers Union and O.C.C. school officials have no problem with a teacher who spends15 minutes, off-topic, to express her personal political views which included maligning our new President and all who voted for him.   

Perhaps this incident explains why schools have a rule prohibiting students from recording a teachers’ lecture without his/her permission.  This  secrecy rule is not acceptable!   Lectures should be recorded in every high school and college classroom that accepts government funding.  It is time to assure the public that schools are teaching and not indoctrinating our children.  

This is just one of the many blatant examples of Liberal bias in colleges/universities throughout America.  There are many more areas in need of revision. Teacher Unions have become way too powerful, as they protect bad teachers at our children’s expense. Investigations need to be initiated in order to analyze why the cost of a college education has skyrocketed. Fair hiring practices should be enacted, but they are not enforced.  Diversity is a positive, which most schools welcome. However, that does not seem to extend to teachers’ political positions.  Students deserve to know the differences among us as well as what unites us in order to be better prepared for the World they will encounter.  That simply is not happening today.

We now have a President who wants to hear from those of us who have not had a voice for quite some time.  Let’s use this gift to demand fairness of representing all political views, equality, and more reasonably priced tuition in our schools. 

Friday, March 10, 2017 at 09:05 AM | Permalink

Thorner/Ingold: The Russian Conspiracy: Fact or Hogwash?

By Nancy Thorner and Ed Ingold – 

Disclaimer:   This article is, of course, moot if evidence is revealed showing collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. However, this is unlikely because such evidence would have been gathered early in the inquiry and used to deny Trump the presidency. This article is therefore an attempt to show the gaps in the logic posed by the Democrats, which may otherwise fool non-logically trained voters.

In case you have been wondering what Henry Waxman has been doing since he retired from Congress, wonder no longer.  Like every other hack who has ever come down with a case of Potomac fever, he opened an influence-peddling outfit called Waxman Strategies.  Henry is the Chairman; his son Michael is the President and CEO.

Waxman exemplifies why Trump’s efforts to drain the swamp, no matter how sincere, are doomed to failure.  Even though Trump will do everything in his power to prevent ex-office holders from hanging out a shingle as a registered lobbyist, the riffraff will simply hire themselves out as lawyers, consultants or strategists.  Whatever the title, the coin of the realm is the access to their former colleagues they can offer their well-heeled clients.

Speaking of President Trump, the Democrats keep calling for an investigation into Russian influence with this administration, but nary a scolding word did they or the media ever utter about the fact that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton turned over 20% of America’s uranium to the Kremlin in exchange for a bribe to the Clinton Foundation.

In the meantime, Rep. Maxine Waters and some of her colleagues are calling for Trump’s impeachment because foreign dignitaries might book rooms at his Washington hotel.  Oh, really?  They’re worried that the President is going to sell out America for the price of a hotel reservation?  Or are they really that concerned that if Putin comes to town, he might get a few extra mints on his pillow?

How quickly Democrats forget that just a few short years ago they and their supreme leader, Barack Hussein Obama, were ridiculing Mitt Romney for even suggesting that Russia posed a threat to the U.S.

Are you surprised that the media and Democrats are constructing a false syllogism out of Trump’s relationship with the Russians which goes like this:

• All birds have wings
• A crow is a bird
• Therefore a crow has wings

Whereas a false syllogism on the same topic would be

• All Birds have wings
• A crow has wings
• Therefore a crow is a bird (Hint: insects have wings, but are not birds)

Even with sound logic, a syllogism fails if either premise is false. In the case in point:

• The Russians hacked the DNC emails to benefit the Trump campaign (their motive is at this point, speculation)

• Members of the Trump campaign corresponded with Russian “agents” (Most Russian officials and many businessmen have Intelligence backgrounds or connections, in addition to more conventional activities.)

• Therefore the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians (no proof of collusion has been revealed)

Obama seems obsessed with the idea that any dialog with the Russians is criminal in nature. This is because of his toxic relationship with Putin, which follows Obama’s weak response to the rebellion in Syria, and before that, in Ukraine. Putin clearly despises Obama, and has taken many measures to humiliate him publicly. To Obama, any attempt to normalize our relationship with Russia is an attack on his “legacy.” The perceived involvement with the election is merely a convenient excuse to poison Trump’s diplomatic efforts, and to excuse Hillary’s loss in her badly implemented campaign.

The key to a resolution is evidence that collusion did, in fact, occur between Russia and the Trump campaign. The fact that no such connection has even been leaked during the last 10 months is telling. On the other hand, if there is evidence that Obama spied on the Trump campaign without legal cause, it would constitute a conspiracy well beyond the level of Watergate. There is (so far) anecdotal evidence that Obama reduced the security level of these intercepts and disseminated them to 16 or 17 agencies. This action almost guarantees leaks, and makes the source very difficult to trace. In the non-Obama world, this information would be highly restricted (eyes only), and shared with the FBI if actionable.   https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/04/donald-trump-accuses-obama-of-wire-tapping-his-office-before-election

Thursday, March 09, 2017 at 03:48 PM | Permalink

Thorner: Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch may not be what pro-lifers hope for

 

By Nancy Thorner – 

Democrats keep banging the same drum against President Trump, which harkens on his perceived Russian connections and his labeling as a racist maniac, as unhinged Democrats continue to grab at all the straws they have to wrest control of this nation from Trump and his millions of supporters. 

But what about Republican “leadership” that can ruin Trump by hamstringing everything he wants to do, or by goading Trump into breaking his promises, which are mostly the promises of the Republican platform.

The “American Thinker” featured a blog by Fran Fawcett Peterson on March 3, 2017, entitled, Trump’s Senate soboteurs.  The article blamed the Republican-controlled Senate for only 17 Trump confirmations so far, and how Trump has a number from 500 to 1,242 individuals needing Senate approval for different positions in his administration to replace Obama appointee holdovers.  Given the amount of time the Senate is in session, the figure of 500 appointees would take nearly two years of round-the-clock work!

Not only are there Senate soboteurs, they also exist in the U.S. House.  Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan is not in tune with the president’s agenda, but instead seems to be marching to the beat of lobbyists, big business, Republican elite, and big donor Republicans on the issue of Obamacare.  The health care plan Ryan is pushing has been called “Obamacare Lite” and is being looked upon as a partial repeal that would be met with anger by Trump voters.  So is the way Speaker Paul Ryan views the illegal immigration issue.  

Might it be time for those House and Senate members who can’t support Trump’s policies, which enabled many of them to be elected on his coattails, to follow this well-known comment of General Patton:  “Lead me, follow me or get out of the way”?

A crucial Trump promise on the campaign trial, which he repeated at every campaign rally, is that he would appoint a Supreme Court Justice in the mold of Justice Antonin Scalia.  Scalia’s pro-life position helped Trump become president, as millions of Evangelical Christians voted for Trump as single issue voters.  What would happen if Judge Gorsuch were confirmed because Trump advisors, and now Senate members, are being led to believe that Gorsuch’s pro-life credential mirror those of Scalia?

Nominee Gorsuch Spills the Beans Politico

Very disturbing is that nominee Neil Gorsuch told Senator Susan Collins that Gorsuch would be the fifth vote to uphold Roe v. Wade, rather than overturn it.  As explained by Politico :

When [Gorsuch] met with Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) earlier [in February], she pressed him on his views on judicial precedent: If five current justices disagree with a previous Supreme Court decision, is that sufficient grounds to overturn the ruling? Gorsuch said no.

“It’s important to me generally, but it also is important to me because of Roe v. Wade,” Collins, who supports abortion rights, said of asking Gorsuch about precedent. “It’s an important principle.”

David Souter and Anthony Kennedy used the same excuse to perpetuate Roe v. Wade in 1992 in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.  I doubt Senate Republicans will eliminate the filibuster rule just to accommodate Gorsuch, and Democrats have enough votes to filibuster him.  So the Senate may block Gorsuch.

As to why Judge Gorsuch was highly recommended to Trump by his advisors?  It is easier to confirm a nominee who has a pro-life record because he would have a strong base of support. No one would feel deceived by him.  The record is 5 out of 5 in confirming pro-life nominees:  Scalia, Rehnquist (to Chief Justice), Thomas, Roberts and Alito.  Democrats are less likely to filibuster a nominee who has strong support, which Gorsuch lacks.  There are many fine pro-life candidates, such as Sen. Mike Lee and Judge Janice Rogers Brown, who have political support and would be confirmed.

President Trump was misled by the Federalist Society strategy of nominating someone who lacks a pro-life record for the unborn and who believes in adhering to mistaken liberal precedent.  But the unborn may get a second chance, and we should speak out to help Trump honor his pro-life pledge.

Wednesday, March 08, 2017 at 08:12 AM | Permalink