The Chicago Public Schools this year are mandating that the district’s kindergarten classes include sex education.

The continued dismantling of the prevailing Judeo-Christian ethic and empowering the state with responsibilities belonging to families.

To further clarify Obama’s position on sex ed for kindergartner’s, Obama’s campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, pointed MSNBC to the “curriculum for those in kindergarten” produced by the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS). This curriculum suggested discussing same-sex relationships—in non-graphic terms–with kindergartners.

“Students will also take a look at the different family structures that exist in today’s society,” said the CBS report. The report then quoted Stephanie Whyte, the chief health officer of the Chicago Public Schools: “Whether that means there’s two moms at home, everyone’s home life is different, and we introduce the fact that we all have a diverse background.”


The Left is Killing King’s Dream

Michael Schaus

The spectacle of the pro-Obama rally yesterday, disguised insufficiently as a tribute to one of America’s civil rights heroes, was rife with an undercurrent of unintentional irony. After all, it was the Democrat Party that led the Confederacy in the Civil War, opposed the civil rights legislation throughout the 20th Century, and used the federal government to intimidate would-be civil rights activists. The event, however, did awaken a renewed interest in the words of Martin Luther King Jr. for many Americans. One line, above all else, from his 1963 Address at the Lincoln Memorial speaks today as a testament to Liberalism’s callous, and repeated, failings in the black community.

The string of speakers yesterday were darlings of the Left. Organizers even felt it necessary to exclude the Nation’s only black US Senator, because before his name is the letter “R”. Despite the fact that the Democrat party supported the KKK, instituted Jim Crow laws, fought for “separate but equal” segregation laws, and opposed Martin Luther King Jr.’s march on Washington, They felt only theirchampions could bring justice to the day’s events. Apparently if you don’t tow the Party line, you’re no friend to their interpretation of MLK’s Dream.

Standing before a crowd that had clamored for a message of hope, and individual rights, Dr. King rang out the warning, that “We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro’s basic mobility is from a small ghetto to a larger one.” A half century later, it would seem Liberalism has successfully managed to contain the Negro in the slums of Chicago, New York, LA, and Detroit. In America’s most liberal cities, the black community lives with violence, crime and poverty unmatched throughout most of the rest of the nation.

It seems appropriate then, to ask the question, what has happened to King’s Dream?

I also had a dream for America. I had a dream that one day this nation would rise up, and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” Alas, the Democrat Party has convinced much of the nation that such a creed is not possible in today’s America. Minorities, according to the Modern American Left, are incapable of achievement without the helpful hand of government. Black men and women, according to the Democrat Party, can only find prosperity through the use of Food stamps, urban housing programs, and affirmative action programs in federally funded higher education

“I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they are not judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” And yet we live instead in a nation where the Liberally-inclined media uses the term “white-Hispanic” in their racially sensationalized news coverage. We also live in a nation where dozens of black children are shot every week in the war zone of Chicago without so much as a whisper on the nightly national news, or from the first “white-black” President in American history.

Most of America has a dream. It is the same Dream that King articulated so emotionally 50 years ago on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. And the progressive brand of Obama’s Democrat Party has spent the last fifty years suffocating this dream under empty promises and government programs. Just like the plantation owners of the pre-war south, the Modern Democrat Party promises black America a roof, food, and protection from the risks of freedom. . . And the brave few who dare to champion the forgotten cause of individualism are ridiculed among the Left; called traitors to their race; and are said to not know their proper place – as voters in the Democrat plantation.

Beyond the hypocrisy, the message that was absent from yesterday’s commercialized remembrance of King’s speech, was by far his most important message. Our rights, as King Preached, are not gifts given to us by the government. Our prosperity should not hinge on a governor’s attitude, or the President’s signature, but on our own initiative; for only without the oppressive hand of government will men and women of any race be able to say those powerful words that closed Martin Luther King’s historic speech:

Free at Last. Free at Last. Thank God Almighty, I am Free at Last.”

The “freedom” that the Left proposes serves only to harm, and eventually destroy, the productive classes in society – the people who build, grow, and advance our society through their efforts.

There have been self-styled “progressives” and socialists as far back as the last half of the 19th century who have seen natural rights and the Constitution as an impediment to their plans.  The notion of using the government to make people do certain things “for their own good” or “to help others” is not new.  Neither are the virulence and the destructiveness of these efforts when put into practice – the more vigorously they are implemented, the more human lives and freedom are obliterated.

And let’s face it – force, coercion, the threat of punishment for non-compliance, these are the tools of today’s modern liberal. 

Left-wingers are the ones who passed the law that will destroy America’s health care system, all the while forcing you to purchase increasingly expensive health insurance – a mandate that you can only opt out of by paying an onerous fine.  The statists are the ones who tell you what you can and can’t do with your land.  They’re the ones perennially trying to outlaw speech that they don’t like from the radio and other broadcast media.  The Left is the side that thinks it’s fine to force business owners to operate against their personal convictions.  They’re the people who think that if you think the wrong way, it’s legitimate to punish you for it.  They’re the people who think it’s fine for the government to spy on all Americans, for “security.”

Liberals believe in what is termed “positive liberty.”  This means that “liberty” is the use of government to give to people things that they do not have, or at least which they don’t get for free.  “Liberty” means “positive action” where you have to do something for someone else.  In the liberal mindset, if you are “freeing” people, it is by giving them free goodies of some sort or another, paid for by other people.  This is why left-wingers speak of “the right to free health care” or “the right to free housing.”  Refusing to contribute the funds to pay for these “rights,” then, is described by liberals as “oppression.” 

Liberals hate the idea of negative rights for two reasons.

First, their view of “positive rights” emphasizes dealing with people as groups, tribes, constituencies, and so forth, while the “negative rights” view looks at us as individuals.  The word “individual” is a dirty word to most left-wingers.  Liberals love it when people think of themselves in terms of some mass of humanity larger than themselves.  Incidentally, this is why radical Islam and modern liberalism get along so well, despite the many seeming points of disagreement they would have: both act to dehumanize the individual and subsume him into a greater whole that negates his own individuality at the expense of the tribe.

CNN devoted nearly a year to Trayvon Martin–but how much will they devote to the horrible killing of Chris Lane, or the murder of an 88 year old World War 2 vet named Delbert Belton? Or a young girl murdered over her bike? Or the ongoing case of a couple raped and mutilated over a course of several hideous days?

From here on in, we should shine our flashlights on each and every sickening case – tweet them to people like me, and demand the same consideration from our political leaders and media mavens that was given to the Martin case. I never knew about the horrible, horrible Knoxville torture/murder case (in which Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom were savagely killed) until I was inundated with tweets about it. It was so unreal, I went to Snopes (a website that debunks urban legends) to check it out. And sadly, it checked out. I so wanted it to be false; to be an urban legend that could be easily dismissed and forgotten.

Call it race poker. I call it fair, and right.

As much as I know it will repulse you (because it repulsed me, and kept me up nights pondering the worthlessness of this planet), I urge you to read up on the Knoxville case. I would not read it before bedtime, and I’d have a scotch handy. The story will scar your brain, forever. It did mine. And I do not scar easily.

The only sliver of a silver lining to that ghastly case is that the victims are no longer enduring the hell they endured–and also that, as my friend Michael Moynihan said, “These kinds of things are rare.” He is right. They are rare, but they still happen. And we do little to prevent it, or combat the circumstances that lead to such heinous acts. Because there are no flashlights in the media, even as they are employed as weapons by thugs in Delbert’s case.

Is there a silver lining to the Trayvon Martin case? No. But it was the case that galvanized a media bent on pumping up racial tension, and it is that coverage that now must justify its scope by covering every hate crime, every murderous deed, equally.

Without Martin, would we now be able to openly discuss the crimes I mentioned above? Without Martin, would we still be able to turn a blind eye to not just White/Hispanic on black violence, but all violence? Talk about putting MSNBC in a tight spot.

So, what do you do now, flingers of the race card? Your slip is showing. Your deliberate blindness to other problems in the world is exposed.

Trayvon Martin started the “race” conversation Eric Holder said we were too cowardly to have. I imagine this isn’t how he wanted the conversation to unfold. But it’s a conversation, to be sure. 

So, Holder, what you holding? Something tells me you’d rather not play the game at all, unless you’re winning. And that sucks for blacks and whites, equally.

Colorado has become too communistic for Moffat County

Moffat County commissioners are giving voters the option to secede from Colorado.

The commissioners voted 2-1 to put secession on the ballot at their Tuesday meeting. Moffat County Commissioner Chuck Grobe was the only one who expressed dissent. He said the proposal had been pushed forward too hastily.

But County Commissioners Tom Mathers and John Kinkaid have been enthusiastic about the idea of a secession referendum since Kinkaid brought it up at last week’s meeting.

The majority in the packed meeting room Tuesday stood up to voice their support.

Untethered to Natural, Moral or Biblical Law, Progressivism implants Androgeny into the legal code

Europeans on the move to disestablish gender identification!

You can get married without being Mr. & Mrs. and you can state your child is indeterminate rather than male or female. It might sound like Aldous Huxley but it’s a permanent member of the UN Security Council and a leader in the G20.

The French passed genderless marriage legislation earlier this year and are now leaning on their school system to impose the concept ideologically. The French women’s rights minister is initiating the “ABC of gender equality” in lessons for children aged six to eleven, the top primary school teachers union has called on all members to read the book ‘Daddy wears a dress’, while the French Education Minister has told faith schools to be silent on their opposition to gay marriage.

France’s socialist government is obsessed with foisting gender theory on its students. This is the idea that the differences between boys and girls are the result of what society has taught them and ignores actual differences in biology and brain chemistry.

Le Figaro reports that French education ministry inspectors found that teachers treat boys “in a preferential manner while remaining convinced they are being totally fair”. Could it be that the education ministry inspectors are pre-disposed to bias with an agenda to advance, and the teachers actually are fair?

This is what you get with an unprincipled government who reject God and distrust anyone with faith. Confidence in natural male leadership is abandoned and replaced with an attempt to replace it by turning the world into an estrogen sandwich.

Meanwhile in Germany parents, starting in November will not have to put male or female on the birth certificate of their child. In legislation that has already gone forward in Australia, German parents will be allowed to say their child has indeterminate gender allowing them to choose for themselves later in life.

Things are moving much too fast for some people who are alarmed at the radical changes being thrust on society in recent years. But for the left wing ideologists change can’t come fast enough. The march toward calling everything unusual normal, so that it can be given special protection continues.

Silvan Agius, policy director at human rights organization ILGA Europe – the European chapter of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association told German newspaper Der Spiegel “Things are moving slower than they should at the European level, though Brussels has ramped up efforts to promote awareness of trans and intersex discrimination, I would like to see things speed up. Germany’s move will put more pressure on Brussels. That can only be a good thing.”

Despite Cooling, Warmists Haven’t Cooled on Global Warming

Perhaps we could say that old mistaken theories never die — they just keep pace with government funding. A case in point is the vaunted scientists of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They cannot explain why the Earth, defying their climate models, hasn’t warmed now in 15 years, but they’re still “‘95% sure’ humans are to blame for climate change,” writes the Daily Mail.

If the dulled masses, schooled in the evils of capitalism these last forty years, don’t wake up in time to the connection between free market principles and the genius of American medicine, the progressives’ long yearned for single-payer system, already in the works, will become a reality

Samantha was very sympathetic to the plight of the poor and their need for assistance.  Moreover, she felt her boyfriend didn’t understand the situation with this segment of the population which would be unable to survive without help from the government.

After one month of doing her job registering 45 ER Medicaid patients daily for various reasons like STD’s, painkillers, child abuse, infected fingernails from having their nails done, old gunshot wounds, and pregnancy tests for as young as 12 years old, Samantha was visibly on the verge of a breakdown or a breakthrough, I couldn’t tell which.

By the end of 90 days, Samantha told me what really affected her was the cold reality that most of the Medicaid patients treated her like dirt.  They showed no gratitude for the fact that Samantha’s taxes were going to help them.  On top of their sense of entitlement, Samantha noticed many welfare mothers and fathers mistreated their children while the kids were the ones waiting to be seen!

She witnessed many, many  Medicaid patients slap, spank, push, pull and yell obscenities at their children as young as 2.  If that’s not egregious enough, the mostly black perpetrators had no problem yelling at Samantha.  They called her “stupid,” and told her repeatedly “you don’t know what the hell you’re doin’.”

Read more:

When EXPOSING a CRIME is treated as committing a crime, you are ruled by criminals.

When CRIMES go unprosecuted …
(Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, IRS Scandal, Frank/Dodd contributing to the 2008 international financial collapse, Obama’s violations of the Constitution) …
you are ruled by criminals.

Jon Corzine will not be cuffed over MF Global’s improper handling of customers’ funds leading up to the commodity brokerage firm’s spectacular collapse in late 2011 and loss of 1.6 billion dollars.

The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic


In Chapter One of the Book, “Restoring the American Republic (also the subtitle of the book itself), Mark lays out his case that judicial precedent and politics have in effect altered the Constitution the framers intended us to have, and restoring a constitutional republic as originally envisioned is going to require some extensive amending. Fortunately, Mark has posted this chapter online for all to read. I urge readers to click on the link and see the case that Mark makes.

An Amendment to Establish Term Limits for Members of Congress

An Amendment to Restore the Senate (repeal of the 17th Amendment establishing direct elections, provisions for replacement of senators before the end of their terms, and establishing the right of a state legislature to remove a senator upon a two-thirds vote).

An Amendment to Establish Term Limits for Supreme Court Justices and Super-Majority Legislative Override

Two Amendments to Limit Federal Spending and Taxation (limiting the federal government to outlays not exceeding 17.5% of GDP, and limiting total federal tax collections from any source to no more than 15% of a person’s income). I must confess that I found reliance on specific numbers troubling here and in a few other amendments because there is so much room for manipulation in calculating GDP and income, or in determining the value of certain dollar amounts included in other amendments.  But Mark makes very clear his is not the last word on this or any other subject, but merely a proposal to get people thinking about an entire package that counteract the transformation of the federal government into a colossus never imagined by the founders.

An Amendment to Limit the Federal Bureaucracy (automatic sunset for all department and agencies if they are not legislatively reauthorized, mandatory congressional authorization of any regulation imposed by bureaucrats if the economic burden exceeds $100 million).

An Amendment to Promote Free Enterprise (redefining the Commerce Clause to a specific grant of power limited to preventing states from impeding commerce among the states, and preventing Congress from regulating commerce within a state).

An Amendment to Protect Private Property (curbing abuses under the Takings Clause).

An Amendment to Grant the States Authority to Directly Amend the Constitution (allowing two thirds of the states, voting for the exact same language, to amend the Constitution, and providing a six year time frame within which the passage must be secured).

An Amendment to Grant States Authority to Check Congress (three fifths of the state legislatures may overturn acts of Congress or larger impact executive orders, within 24 months, with no judicial review permitted).

An Amendment to Protect the Vote (requiring photo ID for voting in person or via mail ballot and prohibiting electronic voting).

Liberalism Makes It Easier to be Bad

My sense was that the radicals’ commitment to “humanity,” to “peace,” and to “love” gave them license to feel good about themselves without having to lead a good life. Their vocal opposition to war and to racism provided them with all the moral self-esteem they wanted.

If a married — or even unmarried — conservative congressman had texted sexual images of himself to young women he did not even know, he would have been called something Anthony Wiener has not been called — a hypocrite.

Why? Because conservatives — secular conservatives, not only religious conservatives — are identified with moral values in the personal sphere, and liberals are not. Liberals rarely called Bill Clinton a hypocrite for his extramarital affair while president. George W. Bush would have been pilloried as such.


Conservatives have missed many opportunities to rise up against imposed secular humanism from our socialist government.  Because so, now the government is totally violating its documented founding principles and Constitution. If you’re not fighting it your complicit in the dismantling of Judeo-Christian ethics from our society.

“A new government healthcare mandate says that our family business MUST provide what I believe are abortion-causing drugs as part of our health insurance.”

Leading Western philosophers during the period 1600-1800 A.D. undercut rational metaphysics and faith and promoted a destructive skepticism – thereby setting the stage for a rising liberal tide and a long-term cultural decline after 1800 A.D.

Read the entire excellent article:

During the same period, a series of great men laid the foundations of modern conservatism. Although Western conservative principles and ideals are ancient, as outlined in parts 1-3 of this series, new foundations were needed to ensure a tough and resilient conservatism that could weather the intellectual, moral, and spiritual storms of modernity, and which could be a robust competitor of liberalism. This essay (part 5) is about a few of the founders of modern conservatism who lived from 1600-1800.

In 1955, William F. Buckley, Jr., wrote that the purpose of his newly-founded magazine National Review was to “stand athwart history yelling stop.” The phrase belongs to modern conservatism, which defies the dark, incoming tide of liberalism. Interestingly, only one of the conservative heroes mentioned in this essay, Edmund Burke (1729-1797), had the self-conscious idea that he was standing athwart the tides of history. That is one reason why he was the first truly modern conservative.

Burke took a look at the French Revolution and realized that the tide of the times was flowing in the wrong direction. Before the Revolution, France had a brilliant culture and provided cultural leadership to the West. The Revolution inflicted such profound damage to the culture and social fabric of France that French society and culture never entirely recovered its former glory and brilliance. For those who cared about civilization and high culture, the French Revolution was a catastrophe.

Although Burke pronounced bitter anathemas on the French revolutionaries – who destroyed a culture in the name of abstract theory – he was sympathetic to the American Founding Fathers, who fought to preserve the rights of Englishmen. He used his influence as a member of parliament to promote conciliation with the American colonies.