About Me

Name: thekeenobserver
Email: reallykeenobserver@yahoo.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

No teacher left behind

 

One of the great "holes" in American revisionist history is the lack of recognition for the Know Nothing Party, and its significance before the Civil War.

 

Despite its comedic-sounding name, the party had a profound, lasting effect on American politics with its true agenda-- anti-immigration. 

 

Basically, the Know Nothings were similar to the Freemasons; a near-secret 'society' that thwarted political opponents' efforts to learn of its actual leaders, or any designs of the movement.

 

Thus, whenever queried, "supposed" members would respond..."I know nothing," although there was never a political organization bearing that actual moniker.

 

The Know Nothings actually bore the patriotic name, the "American Party." Its efforts concentrated on electing only native-born Americans to office, and the party "platform" was a 25-year residence qualification for citizenship.

 

The American (Know-Nothing) Party would be a liberal's worst nightmare. They were hell-bent to prevent immigrants from being elected to political office, and sought to deny them jobs, arguing that the nation's business owners were far better off  to employ "true" Americans.

 

Millliard Fillmore (a Whig) after serving in the Whitehouse from 1851 to 1853, later "defected" to the American Party in 1856-- their high point--when the party ran him as their candidate for President. While Fillmore finished last, he received almost 1,000,000 votes out of the approximately four million votes cast in the election.

 

But resulting from the party's neutral stance on slavery, the Know-Nothings had declined precipitously by 1860, when members joined the Republican Party, and most importantly, comprised a large, critical voting bloc that elected Abraham Lincoln.

 

And today, we are witnessing a defacto revival of the party - it can be found in our nations' public schools-- a "duh generation" of students who literally know nothing.

 

In a country that supposedly leads the world, America's educational system more resembles that of a third world nation, where students cannot read with comprehension, write with coherency, nor perform simple arithmetic calculations.

 

Perhaps the fault lies with Texas Instruments; after all, it was they who invented the handheld calculator.

 

The push for classroom calculators was the origin of America's "educational malignancy." Once teachers decided to permit them in class, it was the doorway for the demise of not only arithmetic, but phonics, spelling, reading skills, and in the present day- allowing the distraction of cellphones.

 

Remember the dedication of the "old time" teachers? They would drill-baby-drill each individual student, with endless sessions of flash cards, writing exercises, and phonics, teaching dipthongs, consonants, vowels, hominyms, synonyms, etc.-- hard work indeed.

 

But it was satisfying, knowing that these teachers were giving each of their students a future. 

 

But in the early 70's-- like the decline in morals brought on by "the pill"-- America experienced a similar decline in "teaching morals," as classroom instructors betrayed their students' futures, and took the easy way out-- no more flashcards; no more phonics; no more endless writing exercises on "how to make your loops," or even hold your pencil properly.

 

Instead, it was calculators for math answers, "word association" instead of phonics, and forgoing rote memorization in favor of  "discussion," which promoted a "deeper understanding" of subjects.

 

While it would be unfair to paint them all with the same brush, many teachers now are of the mind..."put in your time, collect your paycheck, and hold on for the "promised land"--that fat teacher's union pension.

 

Meanwhile, our pubilc schools continue to turn out generations of unprepared students, who -- after placing their faith in their instructors to teach them what is "true"-- once graduated, they face a future that is at best, uncertain.

 

What if our military trained their recruits like today's teachers? How long would soldiers last on the battlefield if they had not been drilled endlessly with marksmanship, discipline, and self defense?

 

But today's teachers are sending out legions of know-nothing students, who are destined to fail on life's battlefields, that entail fierce competition in order to have the ability to support oneself with gainful employment.

 

To put it bluntly, many of  of America's students-- having been "systematically" dumbed down -- are unprepared, unqualified, and destined for a life of mediocrity; or worse, the unemployment line, and perhaps, incarceration.

 

But things are unlikely to change anytime soon; the leftists comprising the NEA (National Education Assoc.) have their own agenda.

 

They'll continue to teach the "conventional way"...just dumb down the children, and they'll grow up to be know nothings, unable to question what's really going on around them, particularly in the place where it matters most to our nation's future--- being part of an intelligent electorate .

 

Hence, the results of our leftist classrooms have been predictable:

 

Many high school students now "favor" socialism, lacking the critical knowledge of it's threat to what actually enables them to come to school with their designer jeans, and their flashy I-pods and camera-phones-- free market capitalism

 

To the delight of the left, the NEA professes not science, but global warming; they teach not history, but revisionist thinking, as they instill not love of country, but to be vocally critical of our nation's storied past. 

 

American history is the engine of patriotism; but why bother teaching it when self esteem-- what kids are taught instead--will enable them to "progress" into uneducated, hard-core liberals, and continue dividing the U.S. along partisan age lines: those that went to school when you actually received an education, and those now at school who receive indoctrination. 

 

And worse, what's taking place is a chance for our foreign competitors to continue to make up economic "ground," as we decline in our abilities in math, science, research, innovation, invention-creation, and slowly descend into a third-world-like standard of living. 

 

How many foreigners skilled in chemistry, engineering, physics, math, etc., must we import to perform our nation's vital functions-- R&D, teaching in universities, and those scientific pursuits required in the  private sector-- before we reach the point of "no return"?

 

The Roman empire began its rapid decline when citizens refused to fight in the military, and instead, foreign mercenaries were hired. 

 

And is this any different than what's now taking place, as we hire more and more "mercenary" foreign professionals, to maintain our standard of living within our own American empire?

 

Invariably, one of two things will happen: either the entire system experiences total bottom-up reform, or we continue to import more and more foreigners to fill vital professional positions, jeopardizing our status and living standard as the world's leading nation.

 

Otherwise, we will inevitably decline and fall economic victim to the Chinese and India, as generation after generation of dumbed-down, "duh" students-- now out on their own in the real world-- come to realize..."I know nothing."
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ACORN sprouts fraud in Minnesota recount

 
Yippee! Those dedicated Democratic political partisans...they seemed to have done it again. In the arduous re-counting of over 3 million ballots cast in the Minnesota senatorial contest, the Democrats "transformed" a 725 vote margin for incumbent Norm Coleman into a "final tally" 225 vote victory for challenger Al Franken (aka Frankenstein); or another words, a net change for a reversal of 950 votes.
 
It seems that Frankenstein & Co. (a partisan state canvassing board), were able to transcend all the mathematical odds, and heroically snatched victory from the statistical jaws of defeat. How? Well lets run the numbers.
 
Coleman won statewide in ALL precincts by a statistical margin of only 0.0002%.  Close doesn't even come near describing this election. But magically, in the recount, Franken won almost all challenges presented to the Minnesota State Canvassing Board, and prevailed in some counties by margins as much as 3-1, 4-1, or even higher. But how do you go from .0002% mathematical defeat to a 70% or better margin of victory? Who ya gonna call? VOTEBUSTERS! ( ACORN).
 
What makes all of this ridiculous is that in EACH of the counties that produced challenged ballots, it inured to Franken's advantage, and eroded Coleman's election night lead-- until the Democrat could claim victory. Actually, ridiculous isn't descriptive enough. For the odds to turn so convincingly in Franken's direction, would be statistically IMPOSSIBLE. But where ACORN is involved nothing is impossible when stealing an election is on the line.
 
With ACORN filing more than 43,000 registration forms in 2008 (75 percent of all new registrations in the state), Minnesota was facing vote fraud problems even before the election. Even a small percentage of those registrations resulting in spurious votes may have tipped this election. 
 
And hey- here's a surprise...didja know that Mark Ritchie, Minnesota secretary of State, a staunch ACORN operative, was in charge of the recount? And the recount in Minnesota was chock full of surprises! 133 "forgotten" votes, supposedly left in the trunk of a car by a negligent poll worker, were never found, but were counted anyway. Since these ballots didn't exist anywhere for the recount, most likely they were just run twice by the helpful and honest ACORN workers running the polling place on election day. 
 
But how were they recounted? The canvassing board used the contemporaneous record of the tape from the voting machines .The 133 ballots at issue were from the Dinkytown precinct near the University of Minnesota, and netted Franken 46 votes. Whether they were legitimately-cast ballots or, perhaps, the result of someone running ballots through the machine twice, is the question at issue
 
But wait- there's more. Highly implausible, post-election "corrections" in just three precincts -- Two Harbors, Mountain Iron and Partridge Township -- cost Coleman 446 votes, and netted Franken 504 new votes. The Minneapolis Star Tribune attributed the 446-vote "correction" in Franken's favor to "exhausted county officials."
 
It's manifestly absurd that the 504 total new votes for Franken from just 3 precincts, somehow turned out to be greater than adding together all the changes in the ENTIRE state for the all the other presidential, congressional, and statehouse races combined- a net sum of only 482 votes.
 
By certifying Franken as the final winner by 225 votes, the canvassing board, in effect, was tacitly admitting that they counted fraudulent, duplicate ballots. And the biggest travesty of all was that many absentee ballots, (possibly as many as 3000) mostly from troops serving overseas, were not counted. And surprise-surprise; these are the votes that tend to go Republican by the greatest percentage.
 
The Republican National Lawyers Association is litigating the recount results. They're requesting donations (and any other support they can get) to fund their court case. But the real question at issue here is not contributions, or lawyers, or canvassing board recounts; the real demon lurking beneath all the electoral debauchery is ACORN!
 
By whatever means, subverting the electoral process illustrates that any close election now constitutes an open invitation to try to steal the victory.
 
But that's ACORN's specialty. They are the agents of change-- they can change elections, they can change minds, they even changed the way banks made loans in the 1990's to precipitate the foreclosure crisis. And so far they have already changed the course of political history.
 
In the general election, Barack Obama triumphed by a 53% to 46% margin; but the real story of how he won lies back in the primary states that held caucuses, where ACORN, flying beneath the media radar, was the decided game changer. But how did ACORN manage to be so influential, yet remain so esoteric (secret)? Lets rewind back to Iowa last winter.
 
Recall the improbability of Obama's upset in the Iowa primary: Hillary was far ahead in every poll. But the night of the caucus, there were reports statewide of boisterous groups who had descended upon the caucus locations from nearby Illinois. As they emerged from their buses, they were waving signs wildly, shouting down Hillary supporters, and stood at the entrances where the caucuses were in session. They badgered people into corners, and even bullied people in wheel chairs. They hung around the parking lots.

And gee whiz- what a surprise! Next day in the Des Moines Register..."OBAMA WINS BIG UPSET IN PRIMARY". Sure he won, courtesy of all the hundreds of bussed-in  Illinois ACORN  "volunteers". It was voter fraud on steroids.
.
But even worse, the actual details of the thuggery were not brought to light in many of the local papers or TV stations around Iowa. And certainly no national media outlet dared to pick up the story.
 
Eventually, the Clinton campaign became befuddled. They were getting creamed in EVERY primary state that held a caucus-style election; yet they were winning in the states using traditional balloting.

Naturally, the press covered by saying, "Obama had the superior ground organization in the caucus states". Of course he did...the Obama-trained ACORN mobs had perfected their Iowa thuggery, and just executed this primary-day "strategy" in all the other caucus states, like Nevada, and North Dakota, etc, where Obama would win "convincingly".
 
Presently, back in Minnesota, Mr. Coleman is vowing to defend his turf, (quote) "The eyes of the nation are on the state we love...We need to show that Minnesota has done everything to protect every voter's right" (unquote).
 
TRANSLATION: The Republicans, in their infinite naivete', are setting themselves up for another defeat. Whenever you talk of protecting voter's rights, and apple pie-ish expressions of patriotism, you are basically tipping your strategy..."We're gonna play fair-n-square, and let the lawyers and courts decide everything". Great thinking. Very profound.
 
But the reality remains. Playing fair in the first recount basically was a signal for the Democrats to fix the process 100% in their direction-- BECAUSE THEY KNEW THE MEDIA WOULD LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT!
 
Unless the Republicans wake up and stop playing Pollyanna, the Democrats, by virtue of their ACORN operatives, will continue to run roughshod in all future elections, until the Republicans eventually go the way of the Whig party, and allow themselves to be marginalized into political oblivion.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hello America... Are you still there?


Question: What's the best job in government, where by following the rules, you are virtually guaranteed a lifetime of service, and then retire on a permanent pension with cost-of-living adjustments, and no co-pay health care to boot!

Answer: It's the con job, stupid!  Just be a con-man,  and be rewarded for life.

Nowadays, voters are in a better position than ever to make informed political decisions. They can access the internet, the blogs, and the portals to get election information. Plus there are now many more cable and national news networks like CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, FOX, Bloomberg, etc. all of which carry political programming. And we haven’t even mentioned the traditional news sources, such as the three major TV networks, or the great newspapers like the New York times, Washington Post, and the Chicago Tribune.
 
Yes, nowadays voters have access to more information than at any previous time, to make informed choices before they enter the voting booth-- yet they keep getting fooled over & over again. But why?

Today, Americans are not only more ignorant about their government than ever before, THEY DO NOT CARE! Ask the average American a simple question like, "what are the 3 branches of the federal government?" And 60% cannot answer correctly! And that's just for starters. Over 25% of Americans foolishly believe that the UN, along with the president, determines our foreign policy! This is beyond stupid...it is downright idiopathic, which is stupidity to the point where it becomes dangerous.
 
How dangerous is it to be stupid when it comes to one's knowledge of their government? Duh... just look at the way the average American votes nowadays. But first, a little historical perspective on voting stupidly.
 
In the election of 1976, it was Jimmie Carter, a dangerously inexperienced, peanut-farming, 1-term Georgia governor, who was running against Gerald Ford, who'd served well as an interim president after Nixon resigned. Ford was a long time Michigan congressman, and was an all-American football player at his Michigan University alma mater. But during the campaign, Ford was depicted as a clumsy, bumbling, oafish Republican, while Carter was portrayed as a sincere and confidant liberal reformer, who championed human rights and "would always tell the truth".
 
Of course Carter won because he was the adopted candidate of the liberal media. But in the final long term analysis, what was the REAL reason Carter defeated Ford? Was it because of Ford's blunder in the 2nd presidential debate, as history would tell us? Or was it because the country was ready for a president who would be the antithesis of the lying Richard Nixon, and would always be straight forward with the American people? NOPE! The real reason Carter won was because he had better hair than the shiny-pated Gerald Ford.
 
The one MAIN credential nowadays in major elections is: you cannot be bald. When's the last time America voted in a presidential candidate who was bald? DUH... give up? It was Dwight Eisenhower, who won less because of his popularity, and more because of Truman's unpopularity and rating of 35%. And despite the disastrous 1-term presidency of Jimmie Carter, would Ronald Reagan have succeeded him if he'd been bald? And to further the point, Reagan (fortunately) for his age had the thick hair of a 30 yr old.
 
Today, American political hairmania is pervasive in almost any electoral contest. Thinking about running for governor? Well friend, if you ain't got good hair, then try the school board.  How about senator? i.e. Look at the average serving senator's age, and then look at all the "older" men who serve there with great hair! Are either of the senators from your home state bald? Probably not. Or they had real good hair back when they were elected.
 
It's probably incalculable all the damage these great-haired conmen of our government have done to this country, in lieu of the competent bald men who might have served instead, would it not be the fact that they were scalp-challenged with little or no hair. Americans detest a bald political pate; and comb-overs are verboten in national politics. Maybe we should resurrect the Whig party, and highly-qualified honest candidates who lack hair, could now get elected wearing some well-fashioned toupe'.

Even the Founding Fathers had it figured out back then; they all wore powdered wigs, and all the best men were able to serve. And fortunately, they showed what honest, well-intentioned people of government can actually accomplish when they are free of artificial restrictions such as hair, or how they look on television.
 
Yup-- that's the bottom line and basic reason for America's obsession with voting stupidly-- it's how you look on television. In the recent election, what might have been the outcome if John McCain had been a member of the 'wig' party? Interesting question indeed. And to play devil's advocate here, could Obama have won his 'mandate' if he had hair like Micheal Jordan (shiny bald), or had gap-teeth like Micheal Strahan? If you don’t have great hair, or are 'challenged' facially, you cannot be serious about running for president. Just ask Rudy Julianni, Fred Thompson, or geeky Dennis Kucinich.
 
Would (could) homely Abe Lincoln have defeated Obama if he had been born 130 years later and was alive today? NO WAY! Lincoln wouldn't have been even able to make it into congress. Honesty and politics are like oil and water together.

Example: in the warped politics of today, a gaffe is when a candidate unintentionally "lets down his guard" and reveals his (her) true position. Yes, it's a fact...besides one's physical appearance, a political candidate cannot reveal the truth, lest it may damage their chances to win.
 
How did America get to this point? It's the con job stupid, and the 'rewards' of being dishonest. Today Americans are so lacking in ethics in their daily lives, that they seem to be "more connected to" the candidate who can promise them..."I'll create thousands of new jobs....I'll fight for working families everywhere"...etc.
 
Yes; they'll fight for working families everywhere. But the laws the con men sponsor are those of the special interests, who transform working families everywhere into unemployed families everyplace. And these con-men congress-people collect a HUGE payoff in the form of campaign contributions, so they'll have a "warchest" for their re-election, so they can perpetuate their misery.
 
It's a fine way to elect a government isn't it? And the con-men usually serve for life using this "fail safe" formula: Promise everything ...deliver nothing...and blame the failed policies of your political opponent as the cause. (quote) "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it...the truth is the greatest enemy of the State"... Joseph Goebbels (Hitler's propaganda minister).  “A lie told often enough becomes truth”...Vladimir Lenin. Who he? He founded the communist party during the Russian Revolution in 1917.
 
Can anyone deny that this is exactly the current state of politics in America today? You must be a con man or you cannot win. If you make too many gaffes, and let the truth 'slip out', then that's the kiss of death. During the presidential debates, people look for gaffes, rather than the candidate's true position. Policy matters not. The drama of the "gotcha moment" is what the public lives for in a campaign. And the candidate who provides enough "gotchas" is the inevitable victor; as the media will relive the gotcha moments over and over, and the gotcha candidate's ratings soar higher and higher in the polls.

And where does this all lead to? Well, it's become an American tradition: voting like an idiopathic moron; voting against your own best economic and social interests. Keep perpetuating the misery! Keep returning the conmen back to office! Never mind seeking the truth, it matters little. What's important is going with whatever candidate the media selects, that's how you're virtually guaranteed to elect the least worthy, and most specious person to office.

And what's even more idiopathic is to vote the choice of the comedians. Of course! let the comedy channel choose the "best " candidate. Take the advice of Stephen Colbert, and John Stewart Liebowitz, because they're the ones who're looking out for you. Do your part to make our democracy a joke. Let clowns like Bill Maher, and Lettermen and the the other clowns of comedy to make sure we keep re-electing congressional clowns like Barney Frank, and honest Chris Dodd, the odious Chuck Schumer, and the con man of ways and means, Charlie Rangel, because they always get the last laugh on you once they're done taking away what's left of our fast-disappearing, constitutionally guaranteed right to the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.

And take special note of how our Founding Fathers used the word "pursuit" in the Preamble. Why? The longer we continue to re-elect these malevolent, fat-cat incumbents, we'll never catch up to being happy or feeling free from the ever-encroaching tentacles of our rapidly-expanding federal government; and the onerous regulations that destroy the freedom we have left in our lives to keep our money for ourselves, and to speak and act without the fear of political incorrectness, which will soon become another way for these liberals to control our lives, thus making us more miserable than ever.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »