Left Wants Classes Promoting Racism In Arizona Schools

Arizona flag SC Left wants classes promoting racism in Arizona schools

On January 1, 2011, a law banning certain “ethnic studies” classes went into effect in Arizona. The law makes it illegal for a school district to teach courses which “promote the overthrow of the US government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group, or advocate ‘ethnic solidarity’ instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”

But it was not the ever-compassionate, ethnicity-conscious left which wrote and implemented legislation making it a crime to teach violence and racism. Rather, the law was passed by the Republican-controlled Arizona legislature and signed by the State’s Republican governor.

And the left is fit to be tied over it!

According to one liberal professor, the Arizona legislature has committed “ethnocide,” or more properly “ethnonormativity” by implementing a law which hopes to preserve some semblance of sanity in Arizona schools. As the professor puts it, the law “takes the teachings of one culture—the colonizer’s—and makes it the standard version of history while literally banning other accounts, turning the master narrative into the ‘normal’ one…”

In short, the evil “colonizing white man” has once again trodden mistreated Chicanas and Chicanos underfoot, preventing them learning the true history of their struggles with the white devil slave master by making such studies illegal.

No kidding; that’s really what the professor believes as he calls the Arizona statute “a potent example of legislative bigotry and open persecution of people based on…race and class.”

Nor is he alone in ranting over the purportedly ghastly mistreatment of illegal—that is, undocumented–immigrants who simply want value for their taxpayer funded educations.

Throughout the internet, liberals are outraged that Arizona legislators would even consider putting an end to classes simply because they teach the benefits of revolution against the United States or the justifiable hatred of whites.

And apparently, this is precisely what has been going on in classrooms in Tucson and around the state. For on two occasions the law has been tested in court, once last year and again in January. And in both cases, judges have ruled against the Tucson Unified School District, making it clear that evidence introduced by the state of unlawful classroom antics is true.

Clearly, teachers have been promoting racial resentment, suggesting revolt against the government, and instructing children that hatred of whites is altogether justified. And the American left not only applauds such sparkling lessons plans, they are passionate about them continuing!

Were positions reversed and white students taught to hate and resent blacks or Mexicans, would the left furiously lobby to overturn a law passed to correct the situation?

A federal judge has just taken under advisement a lawsuit filed by two Mexican students seeking to have the law declared unconstitutional. Apparently, the left will continue its process of appeal until it has found a dependable, liberal activist in robes who will be pleased to overturn the work of the legislature. And that won’t be anything new, will it?!

Related posts:

  1. Lawsuit: Cincinnati Public Schools Pushing Democrats Three van loads of Hughes High students were taken last…
  2. Will Armed Citizens Finally Secure The Arizona Border? It’s no secret that Barack Hussein Obama and the rest…

The War For Our Minds

Tolerance Ends The War For Our Minds

Photo Credit: Bikes and Books (Creative Commons)

“Tolerance is not, in itself, a virtue. On the contrary, tolerating what is vicious and wicked can be a sign of moral amnesia brought on by making a god of tolerance” – R.R. Reno, First Things.

Tolerance is necessary for a people to live at peace in a pluralistic society.  But tolerance must be defined by limitations.  Enforced tolerance doesn’t reveal the true heart. It simply reveals the heart of those powerful enough to force others to accept it.  The deception is the belief that society is a better place due to the ‘virtuous’ tolerance legislated by the “Gods of the Marketplace” (Rudyard Kipling).  It’s like telling your child to take his cough medicine; he may take it, even without complaint, but you know he hasn’t given his heart to it.

Tom Trinko tells of an old woman of the Baltic States who had lived under the horrible oppression of both the Nazi and Communists governments.  When asked which was worse, Nazism or communism, she stated that communism was worse.  “If you did what the Nazis wanted, they left you alone, but the Communists demanded that you think what they thought.  Essentially the Nazis merely wished to enslave or possibly kill you, but the Communists wanted to steal your soul.” (American Thinker, Tom Trinko)

Men lose their minds when overtaken by the lust for power. The greed for power can cause men to participate in outrageous acts of insanity.  “Power corrupts the few, but weakness corrupts the many.” (Macbeth, Shakespeare)  There are only a few, drunk on their own power, who will try to determine how the many are to think their thoughts.  In the name of the virtue of the times, tolerance, we are being told what we are permitted to think about abortion, pornography, sex, homosexuality, and a variety of other issues that have polarized conservatives and liberals.  True Christians will not get direction on these issues from society, but from the Word of the Living God.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law…abridging freedom of speech.” Our courts have struggled over the years to define just what is and is not free speech. The recent fuss over Rush Limbaugh saying derogatory things about a left-leaning law student and liberal activist, Sandra Fluke, is a perfect example of how difficult it is to draw parameters around what can or cannot be said.  Limbaugh apologized, but his apology was rejected because it was not sincere enough.  I know, you are having thoughts of small children throwing sand at each other in a sand box.

Just when you think things are beginning to calm down, another character rushes on stage. Gloria Allred, a celebrity ambulance chaser if there ever was one, spouts her doctrine of politically correct speech by uttering her shrill cry that Rush Limbaugh ought to be arrested. I know, you are now looking for some men with white coats to enter the stage of this comedy.  Gloria Allred is insane in her desire to be a part of the discussion.  She knows that her best team of lawyers would lose to a rank amateur law student fresh out of law school on these outrageous charges. The government couldn’t prosecute Rush or anyone else for practicing their freedom to speak.

The irony of it is that those who insist that conservatives Christians bow to society’s golden idols of homosexuality and abortion will whip them with the cords of intolerance if they do not bow.  In so doing, they expose their own hypocrisy by violating their own doctrine. Instead of recognizing and respecting the opinion of their opponents, they call for them to be cast into the fiery furnace.

Americans are getting a much clearer understanding of what it might be like to live under Sharia Law where people are severely punished, perhaps killed, if they don’t become a Muslim. Ms. Fluke and Ms. Allred represent a cadre of liberals determined to impose penalties on those who refuse to bow to their gods of liberalism. This is selective tolerance. While flailing Rush Limbaugh for his name-calling, these same accusers declare the young woman who wants to dedicate her life to being a great mother and a loving wife to be a Neanderthal idiot. Gentlemanly males who have been taught to treat women with respect by opening doors for them and using their greater physical strength, not to harm them, but to protect them, are targeted as chauvinist pigs.  Those who refuse to enthusiastically embrace homosexuality are declared homophobes.  Christians have been run out of the adoption business if they refuse to accept homosexual adoption.

The agenda of the liberal left has nothing to do with tolerance. It has everything to do with a lust for power. It is an unbridled desire to control others.  “When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can control the whole animal.”  (James 3:3)  Saul Alinsky would be proud of the progress of the liberal faction in our society. The progressives, just like the communists, are attempting to control the masses by determining what they can and cannot say.

Jesus said, “The things that come out of the mouth come out of the heart.” (Matt. 15:18) The attempt of the thought police to decide what we can or cannot think reveals an outrageous attempt to supplant God. They have decided they are their own source of morality. They get to choose what is the right or wrong thing to say or think. They have written their own set of commandments.  They are vigilant and totally devoted to their cause because they truly believe they are creating heaven on earth (utopia).

Christians must not “defile themselves with a portion of the king’s meat” (Daniel 1:8) by blindly accepting a tolerance and political correctness that is defined by those who discard the Word of God and replace it with their own moral compass. Christians declare themselves children of the Almighty, and they cannot be stolen away by those who would choose thoughts for them.

As Christians, we resent others telling us what to think and say. We look to Christ to guide us and correct us in that area of our lives. “With our tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God’s likeness.  Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing, my brothers, this should not be.”  (James 3:9-10)  Our speech and thoughts must be governed by the truth found in God’s word and the very words of Christ himself.  True Christians have a great desire to say the right things and speak the right words although we often fail.  We don’t take this lightly because “the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart.” (Matthew 15:18)

To those who would like to govern our thoughts and speech, thanks, but no thanks, we already have a God.

Related posts:

  1. Video: Palin, “Our Leaders In Washington Have Lost Their Minds” … Continue to Post…
  2. Video: Documentary Filmmaker Probes The Minds Of Occupy Wall Street Protestors Documentary Filmmaker, Evan Coyne Maloney, walked Zuccotti Park, and probed…

Don’t Mess With Rush

Limbaugh CPAC Don’t mess with Rush

Photo Credit: Robert Huffstutter (Creative Commons)

Carbonite CEO David Friend, is driving the company into the ground. The last straw is letting his political bias (he is a $4000 supporter of Barack Obama) cause him to decide to take his ads off  The Rush Limbaugh Show.

There is little irony that those who believe in politically correct speech desire to curtail freedom of speech and expression for the rest of us. As this article will show, Americans are becoming sick of their game and have begun to fight back.

On Saturday, Friend released a statement on his company’s website declaring that Carbonite had decided to “withdraw” advertising from Rush Limbaugh’s radio show in the wake of his controversial remarks involving Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke because it will “ultimately contribute to a more civilized public discourse.”

“Even though Mr. Limbaugh has now issued an apology, we have nonetheless decided to withdraw our advertising from his show. We hope that our action, along with the other advertisers who have already withdrawn their ads, will drive home the point.”

Advertising on Rush Limbaugh made Carbonite a profitable company. The large percentage of stockholders are conservative, and many are Rush listeners. A large number of investors dumped their positions in Carbonite on Monday; Carbonite stock (NASDAQ: CARB) has plummeted nearly 12 percent, outpacing the drop of the NASDAQ index in that same time period by nine-and-a-half points. It was also one of the biggest decliners on the NASDAQ on Tuesday.

The stock closed unchanged yesterday, for the 12% drop resulted in a $24.41 million loss in market value. Will the shareholders kick David Friend to the curb in the near future?

While The Daily Caller suggests that Rush has lost 28 sponsors, he laughed in a recently penned article today in the LA Times saying, “The loss of ads amounts to a couple of French Fries.”

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it; I’m J.C. and I approve this message.

 

Related posts:

  1. Rush Limbaugh Admitted To Honolulu Hospital Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh is resting comfortably in…
  2. Who Is Libeling Rush Limbaugh? By Jeffrey Lord, American Spectator CNN and others use this…

Admission: The Left Won’t Back Impeachment Because Obama’s Black

Philip C. Restino Jr., OpEdNews

Twenty years ago after U.S. forces had driven the Iraqi military out of Kuwait and back into Iraq, President George H.W. Bush as Commander in Chief ordered the U.S. military to cease-fire on February 28, 1991. Years later, in his 1998 memoir “A World Transformed,” Bush admitted that the reason he chose to order the cease-fire was because he understood that advancing further into Iraq, a country that had not attacked the U.S., and overthrowing its government could easily be seen as an illegal war of aggression and thus warrant a call from the American people for his removal from office by the Constitutional remedy of impeachment. It was the fear of a call for impeachment by the American people that in effect stopped the President from continuing the war.

Since the Presidency of Democrat Bill Clinton during the 1990′s, which immediately followed the Presidency of Republican George H.W. Bush, the American people have allowed a practice of the President acting as a “unitary executive” unaccountable to the rule of law in ordering the U.S. military into unprovoked, illegal wars of aggression and occupation.

During the Presidency of Republican George W. Bush, attempts were made to even re-define the office of the Presidency as a “unitary executive” with literally dictatorial powers beyond the rule of law. Now, because the American people have still not spoken up, the current Presidency of Democrat Barack Obama has allowed the President of the United States to order young Americans to war without consulting the American people’s representatives in Congress or even having to concoct a lie about the U.S. facing a “justifiable” threat to its national security.

President Obama’s ordering of the March 19, 2011, attack on Libya, without even consulting Congress, let alone getting a Declaration of War or other type of Congressional approval for the attack, has led to a good amount of discussion as to how the President could very well be impeached for having unilaterally ordered such an attack. People from both ends of the political spectrum, to include members of Congress, have been quite clear in publicly stating that the President’s attack on Libya is not only an impeachable offense, as per Democrat Representative and 2008 Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich from Ohio, but it also makes him accountable for war crimes, as per Republican Representative and 2012 Presidential candidate Ron Paul from Texas.

Notable legal experts and scholars from both the left and the right, including former Democrat U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, former Republican Deputy U.S. Attorney General Bruce Fein, and Professor of Law Francis Boyle, have publicly offered their services to assist in carrying out impeachment proceedings against President Obama over his unconstitutional and otherwise illegal war on Libya to any member of Congress willing to step forward and introduce Articles of Impeachment.

Let us not forget that it was the former Constitutional Law Professor and U.S. Senator Barack H. Obama who said himself during a December 20, 2007, interview with the Boston Globe that “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

The sovereign nation of Libya posed no such threat whatsoever to the United States, and Obama’s ordering of more than 120 Cruise Missiles fired into Libya on just the first day of his own March 19 “Shock and Awe” is nothing less than another outright illegal U.S. war of aggression similar to the illegal U.S. war of aggression on Iraq launched eight years to the day prior — minus the land invasion — which is the next step in the process if the American people don’t draw the line and call for a stop to it now.

With such a clear-cut case for impeaching President Obama over his war on Libya, along with the legal experts and political figures ready to proceed with a call for impeachment, why has there not been a call from leaders of the national antiwar organizations for impeaching Obama? It is obvious that making such a call now could actually prevent him from going ahead with a land invasion into Libya, and even be enough of a threat to force him to finally end the 10-year U.S. wars and occupations by using his unique ability as Commander in Chief to order a cease-fire.

People involved in national antiwar organizations have told me that the issue of racism is a major factor in their failure to call for impeachment of President Obama for what amounts to the same crimes cited in their former calls for impeachment and present calls for prosecution of President George W. Bush over his war on Iraq. If calling for the impeachment of the first Black American U.S. President for prosecuting illegal wars of aggression is racist, then that first needs to be squared with all the brown-skinned people being killed under his command….

Read more.

Obama Admin Wants to Widen Government’s Gay Indoctrination

Rowan Scarborough, The Washington Times

U.S. Department of Agriculture activists want to impose their intense brand of homosexual sensitivity training government-wide. If accepted by the Obama administration, that move could mean more sessions for military service members already undergoing gay-sensitivity indoctrination.

Critics fear additional gay-oriented training would be an unnecessary added burden for combat troops and encourage some to leave.

USDA officials have asked the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which oversees all federal worker policies, to impose its gay-awareness programs on all federal departments, according to an internal newsletter…

The push for the training is coming from Agriculture Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack, former Democratic governor of Iowa. He has launched a department-wide “Cultural Transformation” that includes the “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender [LGBT] Special Emphasis Program.”

The USDA’s senior training coordinator, Bill Scaggs, has developed a sensitivity program far more extensive than the Pentagon’s training for the anticipated lifting of the ban on open homosexuals in the ranks…

The Agriculture Department described its program in an internal newsletter, “My USDA: A Progress Report for Employees on USDA’s Cultural Transformation”…

The newsletter adds: “Future collaborations with OPM are planned, with the ultimate goal of having LGBT Special Emphasis Programs across the federal government”…

Mr. Scaggs‘ briefing for USDA employees is titled “Including Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Diversity”…

One slide on gender identity states: “Individuals are conscious of [sexual identify] between the ages of 18 months and 3 years. Most people develop a gender identity that matches their biological sex. For some, gender identity is different from biological sex (transsexuals).”

On attempts to change someone from gay to straight, the briefing says: “Usually doesn’t work and may even be harmful. Can produce feelings of depression, hopelessness, shame and anxiety. Some people become suicidal”…

The briefing defines “heterosexism” as an ” ‘ism’ like sexism or racism where one is considered better than others.” It gives as examples the ban on gays serving openly in the military and laws that define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Read more.