Dear Richard Hoffman: You can rejoice now that Lakota’s teachers have agreed to a three-year freeze in step raises and a much less comprehensive health care plan. Or, is that not going far enough? Oh, that’s right…you believe our teachers are overpaid, even though 100 percent have bachelor’s degrees, and 68 percent of those have master’s degrees. I guess with six-hour workdays and summers off, they really aren’t deserving, huh? Those daily lesson plans and graded papers must magically appear on their desks each morning.
I have friends who are teachers, and let me tell you, they are worth every penny they earn. Not only are they educators; they are counselors, role models, mediators, chaperones and disciplinarians. They perform a balancing act every day in the classroom, having to be assertive yet compassionate; formidable yet sensitive; strict yet respectful.
Instead of recognizing the commitments to our children put forth by Lakota staff members, you, Mr. Hoffman, are spending all of your time blaming unions, threatening school board members and charging “overpaid” teachers with taxpayer abuse. Your arguments are weak at best, accusing school administrators and board members of mismanaging school funds when it is well-documented that Lakota only spent $9,806 per pupil during the 2009-10 school year — less than most other comparable statewide districts. As a matter of fact,Westervilleschool Superintendent Dan Good was quoted in a February 2011 article as saying, “We’re going to be looking at what’s going on in those communities (Lakota and Fairfield) that’s allowing them to keep those high ratings along with such a low-cost per pupil.”
Our school system relies solely on levies being passed so that our teachers can be compensated. The reason for Lakota’s continued success is because of our teachers. They should be lauded, not punished.
Doc Thompson of 700 WLW discusses all the various ways politicians are misspending our tax dollars.
This is a rich country. We have plenty of money, and if you don’t believe me, ask Halliburton. There’s plenty of money out there; don’t fall into the trap of this whole deficit argument. The only question is how to spend it.
Van Jones, Former Obama Administration Green-Jobs Czar
1. A member of the lowest feudal class, attached to the land owned by a lord and required to perform labor in return for certain legal or customary rights. 2. An agricultural laborer under various similar systems, especially in 18th- and 19th-century Russia and eastern Europe. 3. A person in bondage or servitude.
Here’s the guy we’ll put in place of that silly fellow, a guy that much more clearly represents what the United States is all about.
So hang tight Israel, and the other 50% of the country. We have found a good candidate to go up against Obama in 2012, then we can begin to fix things back to the way they should be.
Senate Bill 5 will start the process of taking the shackles off the State of Ohio that confine it by collective bargaining. The rhetoric provided by the sector of the population that is “addicted” to collective bargaining which has grown in influence since 1983, so long that many of those people don’t know any other form of life, is sickening. So sickening it makes me question completely the validity of public education, because these people didn’t learn the basics of American life. Their basic premise seems to be that if you can get a job, have a union protect that job for your life-time, then they are willing to sacrifice a life-time of freedom for some mundane “average” life. I personally find their view of the world repulsive and un-American. What I see in those crowded halls of protest at the State House is a group of people protecting their right to be “average.”
Old college professor hippies such as Francis Pivan, who has spent her entire life perpetuating progressivism is upset at the countries sudden desire to turn back to the Constitution, now that we know we’ve been scammed by people like her for decades.
Pivan is an old lady but she was around in the early days of all this change and she’s always been active in politics. And she opened herself to these name calling tirades when she said. “The strange stories that Glenn Beck creates with his chalkboard gain traction with Americans, who are made anxious by the large changes that have overtaken the United States, including the election of a black president and the increasing racial diversity of the population, deindustrialization and the decline of American power abroad, as well as cultural changes in sexual and family norms.”
Who are these people that I’m talking about? Is it just people like me, Doc Thompson, Ray Warrick, Glenn Beck or anybody else? No. It’s people like the comment below. This comment came to me from a woman that only knows me from these epic pages. And her comment speaks volumes of who exactly those Americans are that have now been awakened and will not sleep so soundly again. She was commenting on an article I did about John Meyer.
There are people in my life that move me. I mean…REALLY move me. They are few. My father, who gave me the tools to navigate through life..now and then as he was right when he said what I believe would waiver with experience. So right. My husband for letting me move in the direction that drives my heart and soul no matter what. Glenn Beck. Say what you may…he’s my people. He’s been saying what I’ve felt for years. Yes..I cry. All the time. And Rich, who has given strength and voice to those of us out there that share his passion and need for serious change on so many venues. We need you and those that stand by you in the fight for the simple morale and values we were taught to respect. I never thought in a million years I would be here. Last but not least…to John. Kudos to you for just handing it to them. I’m honored that you live in my county and Country. God Bless. You ARE a Warrior! Today..I am blessed.
Who is behind the Egyptian uprising? Well, Glenn Beck has done some great reporting about the New Caliphate, which people who understand history, and don’t think everyone in the world “behaves” with a European mindset, can see clearly. And there are forces that want to perpetuate the advancement of rival factions and strengthen their world grip so conflict can occur that will weaken the resolve of those forces true enemies. In this situation with Egypt its capitalism, and Jewish influence that are seen as the enemies. But behind that simple explanation it’s the United States that is the influence that must be overcome.
Watch Glenn’s excellent coverage from Friday here:
Why Obama has to get Egypt right By George Soros Thursday, February 3, 2011
Revolutions usually start with enthusiasm and end in tears. In the case of the Middle East, the tears could be avoided if President Obama stands firmly by the values that got him elected. Although American power and influence in the world have declined, our allies and their armies look to us for direction. These armies are strong enough to maintain law and order as long as they stay out of politics; thus the revolutions can remain peaceful. That is what the United States should insist on while encouraging corrupt and repressive rulers who are no longer tolerated by their people to step aside and allow new leaders to be elected in free and fair elections.
That is the course that the revolution in Tunisia is taking. Tunisia has a relatively well-developed middle class, women there enjoy greater rights and opportunities than in most Muslim countries, and the failed regime was secular in character. The prospects for democratic change are favorable.
Egypt is more complex and, ultimately, more influential, which is why it is so important to get it right. The protesters are very diverse, including highly educated and common people, young and old, well-to-do and desperately poor. While the slogans and crowds in Tahrir Square are not advancing a theocratic agenda at all, the best-organized political opposition that managed to survive in that country’s repressive environment is the Muslim Brotherhood. In free elections, the Brotherhood is bound to emerge as a major political force, though it is far from assured of a majority.
Some have articulated fears of adverse consequences of free elections, suggesting that the Egyptian military may seek to falsify the results; that Israel may be adamantly opposed to a regime change; that the domino effect of extremist politics spreading to other countries must be avoided; and that the supply of oil from the region could be disrupted. These notions constitute the old conventional wisdom about the Middle East – and need to be changed, lest Washington incorrectly put up resistance to or hesitate in supporting transition in Egypt.
That would be regrettable. President Obama personally and the United States as a country have much to gain by moving out in front and siding with the public demand for dignity and democracy. This would help rebuild America’s leadership and remove a lingering structural weakness in our alliances that comes from being associated with unpopular and repressive regimes. Most important, doing so would open the way to peaceful progress in the region. The Muslim Brotherhood’s cooperation with Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel laureate who is seeking to run for president, is a hopeful sign that it intends to play a constructive role in a democratic political system. As regards contagion, it is more likely to endanger the enemies of the United States – Syria and Iran – than our allies, provided that they are willing to move out ahead of the avalanche.
The main stumbling block is Israel. In reality, Israel has as much to gain from the spread of democracy in the Middle East as the United States has. But Israel is unlikely to recognize its own best interests because the change is too sudden and carries too many risks. And some U.S. supporters of Israel are more rigid and ideological than Israelis themselves. Fortunately, Obama is not beholden to the religious right, which has carried on a veritable vendetta against him. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is no longer monolithic or the sole representative of the Jewish community. The main danger is that the Obama administration will not adjust its policies quickly enough to the suddenly changed reality.
I am, as a general rule, wary of revolutions. But in the case of Egypt, I see a good chance of success. As a committed advocate of democracy and open society, I cannot help but share in the enthusiasm that is sweeping across the Middle East. I hope President Obama will expeditiously support the people of Egypt. My foundations are prepared to contribute what they can. In practice, that means establishing resource centers for supporting the rule of law, constitutional reform, fighting corruption and strengthening democratic institutions in those countries that request help in establishing them, while staying out of those countries where such efforts are not welcome.
The writer is chairman of the Soros Fund Management and the Open Society Foundations, which support democracy and human rights in more than 70 countries.
So what’s the real problem? If you look at the problem with the benefit of history you can trace back the hostilities in the Middle East to The Treaty of Versailles which concluded World War l and divided up Europe and the Middle East to the victors. One of the territories broken up was the remains of the Ottoman Empire. Watch video of the situation here:
I will put that entire series at the end of this post so you can watch the whole thing. I will say this; Beck is right about the Caliphate idea. Such is the glue that holds together the minds of Muslim radicals. But politically, the moderates in the Middle East desire to undo the damage done to them by the Treaty of Versailles and to return their lands to what it was during the Ottoman Empire.
The situation is actually much more serious than anyone cares to ponder. In that letter from Soros is a gentle warning to President Obama that he was elected president, supported by people like Soros, to achieve things like this Egyptian issue.
You have to read between the lines to see the menace behind the smiling faces and the seemingly patriotic terminology in that letter of “US.” Make no mistake that the coordination which occurred on Facebook and other social networking sites of this massive riot had the seeds planted by the same people who author letters like the one listed above. And the crop they hope to grow is a world with even less United States influence and a return of the land to the people of the Ottoman Empire which will then be a force to unseat the powers that currently reside in Europe.
My wife and I were discussing over dinner the fact that in the times of Lincoln, Washington DC actually had liveries in town to tie up their slaves like horses. I thought about how far we’ve all come since then, and I thought about how instrumental Lincoln was in changing those opinions people had, on the “culture” of slavery. Lincoln was an uneducated white man, and he used the Constitutional rights of the great United States to put in front of people the fact that American society wanted slavery because they wanted to protect their pocket books. Lincoln wrote and spoke about that issue to a huge degree, and it made him very unpopular for a while, because it was affecting people’s comfort level. But history shows the result. Lincoln was openly hostile about slavery in his letters and over time he came to realize how terrible slavery was as an institution, and eventually, under his watch, slavery was abolished, and the United States has lead the way to religious and racial tolerance all over the world since then
But that’s not what you hear among our radical press that has an agenda for a political power grab. Civil rights, even though we all agree is the right thing to think about is big business, and power grabs for the party that rides the wave of emotion behind it.
Religion, like race relations is one of the longest forms of political power grabs known to mankind. Doc Thompson did a great bit of radio poking fun at Katie Couric’s suggestion of creating a television show based on the Muslim faith.
What a lot of people have a hard time understanding is how devious some political, and religious groups are in achieving their personal goals. We’ve studied how communism and other socialist principles have grown under our collective watchful, yet naive eyes. The same thing occurs under the umbrella of religious fervor.
A great example of this is the current Islamic possession of the Temple Mount while Jews resort to their practices at the Wailing Wall and the continuous tension that exists between those two religions at the Temple.
To a guy like me, I look at those religious icons and I see the artifacts of King Solomon’s Temple. It is a baffling concept that one particular religious entity or another would even consider “fighting” over rights to such things. But that is the state of our minds.
And that is why we can’t even joke about certain religious issues, such as the mosque in New York, because the debate is not one of life after death. It’s about control and power while here on earth. Our current debate on whether or not we should have a mosque in New York is really just a diversion to weaken an enemy, and to many in the world that crave power, the United States is an enemy to their goals.
It is difficult for many people to get their minds around devious concepts, even though many people unconsciously participate in devious behavior. So it is hard for people to see that there are still, in the 21st century, groups of people that want power, and they hide their desire for that power behind religion in order to unite the minds of their armies to help them achieve those goals. So I’m going to put this situation in a way that people can understand, because virtually everyone can relate.
Family is one of the most basic building blocks we all share with one another. Family problems are a great way to personalize some of these larger religious, and sensitivity issues, because we all have those problems. So let’s look at a hypothetical situation that occurs in many families and explore the hidden motives behind those actions so as to comprehend how religious leaders and civil rights advocates manipulate our emotions for the same basic end result.
Marriage is supposed to be a wonderful institution where typically a woman marries a man who is the son of someone. Usually, the mother of that man will look at the new woman as her “replacement” and because she has never in her mind made the correct breaking away from her son, still craves the love of her son over his wife. Now that new wife may actually like the brother of that husband, but that brother is already married to another woman. This “like” may not be sexually based, but just might be some deep seated psychological reaction because the brother is very similar to her husband, but benefits from having the traits the wife likes, but not the disadvantage that living with the husband has, so myths are allowed to form in the mind of the wife about the brother because she doesn’t live with him, and she sees the brother in a holier-than image.
Now this wife may actually be quite pretty, so the father who is married to the mother may be jealous of this son, the husband to the new wife. This might occur because the son is not his biological son, and is a bad memory of the man that came before him. Of course around the dinner table he is friendly, but his insecurities are great being the “second” man. Seeing his wife’s son marry a beautiful woman and having a fresh start in life with a fresh and unmolested “new” woman is enough to drive him to private madness, so he eats more, drinks more, and in general craves the attention of women half his age. The mother knowing that the husband feels this way deep down inside resents even more the new wife because she is a convenient target. This being her second marriage, she isn’t ready to admit to herself that her second husband is a creep. Because such a revelation may actually reveal to her extended family that she makes bad decisions, and the real problem may actually originate deep inside her and her desire to affiliate with bad people. So the mother befriends the brother’s wife to conspire against the new wife. Not openly mind you, but subtly.
Now our new husband and wife live well for a couple of years. The husband gets a few promotions and is making decent money which causes jealousy with his brother who hasn’t had such good luck. So he starts befriending the husband of his mother, who is just a step-father to him. And this step father uses this young man’s jealously to incite anger, and get the brother to do his bidding, so that his own wife doesn’t discover that he is trying to bring secret harm to her favorite son. A couple of kids are born to the son and his wife, and the wife has maintained her figure while the brother’s wife gets fat with boredom. The new wife dislikes the brother’s wife because she sees that the woman’s weight is embarrassing to the brother and she can see that the brother she likes so much isn’t enjoying sex because he has a fat wife, so she feels sorry for him and develops more anger at the brother’s wife.
The whole family has a get together to celebrate the 5th birthday of the oldest child of this marriage. The brother and his wife don’t really want to come, because they’ve been trying to have kids for a while, but can’t. The real reason they don’t have children yet is they don’t have sex enough because the brother isn’t interested in his own fat wife. The brother’s wife knows this, and resents her husband and her brother-in-law’s children more each time she sees them.
To make matters worse for the sister-in-law, and the mother, is the son’s wife has managed to find a way to stay home with her children so she has time to make a cake for her child’s birthday. The cake is a really fancy and personal cake that you couldn’t get in a bakery, because it’s actually made with love. Now you’d think the mother would be proud of her son for finding a wife that could and would make a cake for their child on their 5th birthday, but that’s not the case. Unfulfilled dreams and the mother’s own past mistakes of having her first marriage fail permeates her thoughts when she sees the cake, so in private she decides to instigate the brother’s fat wife into talking about what a prissy little bitch her son’s wife has become. Feeling empowered, the fat brother’s wife makes fun of the color of the cake right in front of the son’s wife, which breaks the heart of the wife who truly wants the appreciation of her mother-in-law. But what she sees in that moment of grief is great joy on the mothers face at the pain the son’s wife experienced at the antagonism of the brothers wife.
And the two women have a vicious argument right in the kitchen.
Meanwhile the son comes to break it up, and he insults his brother’s wife by calling her a spiteful, fat bitch! That gives his brother the opportunity to seize his anger that had been built up by his step-father, and now brother and brother fight it out right there in the kitchen.
The children are horrified to see all this going on. And the child that is turning 5 never forgets the images of everyone fighting, and makes the personal proclamation to never marry.
20 years later the elderly mother is asking her favorite son why he doesn’t come around more often, and that she misses him. The son doesn’t want to hurt his mother’s feelings and explain how destructive her beliefs have been to the family. His brother had long since divorced his fat wife. His mother lost her second husband to a chubby woman that was 21 who worked at the Waffle House. And he just didn’t have the heart to explain to his mother that her only grand children did not want to have children of their own, because they believe all families are dysfunctional.
The kids move out and the son and the wife live on alone, because the family had never really bonded. They tried over the years to go through the motions, but in the end, nobody really liked each other, so everyone found themselves alone and unhappy in the later years, meeting only in weddings and funerals.
Now what’s the point of that story? Well, the mother created the original sin by wanting power over her son. She didn’t want to face her own mistakes, and she desired to shape the lives of those around her to hide her own deficiencies from herself. The result of her divine leadership is she basically ruined the lives of everyone attached to her.
The same thing happens politically for much the same reasons. Our inability to see through the intentions of our enemies or to even name an enemy to our nation often allows corruption to migrate and fester over a long period of time into something that could ruin our lives. And it happens because we won’t even allow ourselves to be critical of something.
The resistance to slavery was because so many people made money off slavery. Lincoln did the good work of making people look at themselves, and that’s where slavery ended, in people’s hearts. It wasn’t just legislated. It changed inside people and it happened in America by a Republican.
Religion is supposed to be a personal thing, so you always have to be cautious when a religious group desires to “impose” itself on society. Because when they do, they are looking for power not spiritual understanding. And when they get caught doing so, they deserve to be ridiculed for the potential corruption they could bring to our society.
Call it what it is, so you can avoid a lifetime of pain.
