Obamacare is an evil invasion driven by ancient communist sentiments intending total government control of the greatest healthcare system in the world. It is a giant attack on everything that America has stood for, and is a progressive Trojan horse into the lives of every citizen in The United States. It is a terrible, dastardly intrusion upon the lives of every living being—and is sold to the public under the guise of smiling faces and social benefit. The corrosive practices that Obamacare is forcing upon the innocent are the same which advance school levies for public education—exploitation of the weak, in order to erode the freedoms of the many. My good friend Matt Clark during his radio show on WAAM in Ann Arber, Michigan has done an excellent job of breaking down why my comment above is valid. Some reading my opening statement that aren’t so well-informed might think that it is merely the rhetoric of a right-winged activist. However, Clark does an excellent job of exposing the many crimes of Obamacare in the below video from a radio interview with a medical professional who worked previously within the Canadian health care system. The bottom line is that Obamacare is an attack on the free market and an attempt to create more medical monopolies that will provide fewer options rather than more, and medical innovation as America as become accustomed will halt. The pain will be evident to American culture within months and as the years pass, the medical system that everyone has taken for granted will be terribly missed. Evil has been sold to the masses with the usual good intentions under the slow erosive agreement of a complacent society. Watch carefully:
Matt dug up a lot of those old clips showing Obama, Pelosi and many others doing everything they can to lead America to a single payer system—which will lead directly to complete government control of medicine. That is what they are after, and they do not care if they mislead the masses to accomplish it. The politicians and pundits advocating a single payer insurance system tend to be secular, so they do not care about being cast into Hell for lies, and they tend to support socialism—which is soft communism of the European model. Under the premise of communism the needs of the many out-weight the needs of the few, so by sacrificing their good name with out-right lies does not worry them. They are willing to sacrifice themselves and their very souls for what they perceive to be the greater good. This is how Obama has been able to so openly lie to the faces of virtually everyone he knows, including his union supporters over Obamacare, because his goal is not their salvation, but the salvation of the collective whole, as interpreted by academia—which has been fashioned after traditional communism.
They have changed the names, but the concepts are the same. To understand what Obama and the rest of progressives want out of Obamacare, just read the Ayn Rand novel We The Living. There is a reason progressives hate Ayn Rand, and it’s not so much Atlas Shrugged, or The Fountainhead, but We The Living which tells the story of how the Russians failed in their communist attempts during the 1920’s. In America those communist sentiments arrived through academic institutions and media outlets through the newly created Progressive Party climaxing in the 1930’s which became known as The Red Decade. World War II interrupted the communist push as the world became focused on another version of the same Marxist concept, the Nazi as Adolph Hitler turned Germany into a socialist state. Leading up to Hitler’s terror were the same academic institutions applauding the ruthless dictator in similar ways that they openly support modern socialism in Venezuela and in Europe. The same type of minds became tenured professors at popular American colleges and entrenched the “establishment” behind their communist rhetoric. As America completed the dream of progressive president Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations with The United Nations after World War II world-wide statism was up for grabs and the progressive oriented could taste the blood in the water, and set to pounce upon individual freedom for good. In 1958 communists and progressives rallied behind the book,The Naked Communist which layed the foundation of a communist takeover of world-wide education, business, political parties, the media and everything in between. They were quite clear about their intentions—the information was out in the open for all to see. Colleges continued to push the communist agenda as President Lyndon B. Johnston did his part with his Great Society programs introducing Medicaid and other government action on his war against poverty. As America fought a Cold War with the Soviet Union and braved threats from communist Cuba right off the coast of America, communism was pouring into both political parties through academia under the name of progressivism so to become a Trojan horse of that time, for the same reasons as today.
Medicaid was created by the Social Security Amendments of 1965 which added Title XIX to the Social Security Act. Medicaid was created as an entitlement program to help states provide medical coverage for low-income families and other categorically related individuals who meet eligibility requirements. Candidates include the blind, aged, disabled and pregnant women. In essence, Medicaid serves as the nation’s primary source of health insurance coverage for low-income populations. Each state administers its own Medicaid program, establishes their own eligibility standards, determines the scope and types of services they will cover, and sets the rate of payment. Benefits vary from state to state, and because someone qualifies for Medicaid in one state, it does not mean they will qualify in another.[6] The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) monitors the state-run programs and establishes requirements for service delivery, quality, funding, and eligibility standards.
The attack of the progressive and communists was to use compassion to advance their cause. They do not stop to analyze why some people are poor, while others are not, as the free market gives all people the opportunity to become wealthy based on their merit. Such a society does not need a government, or the communist minds of academia to train a society’s workforce in the benefits of bureaucratic statism. Free market options are to be attacked because they do not serve the greater good of global communism, as they were established in the early days of Petrograd, Russia in 1917.
Obama is a modern academic, and holds the views typical of the modern progressive—the professional students who find safety in the halls of scholarship—where theory serves as experience. Within those halls for nearly one hundred years nationalized health care has been a communist target, to nationalize medicine giving direct control of the government over every single individual. For the weak of all societies, they find the blanket of communist governments reassuring. For the misfortunate who lack strong adult influences in their lives, like Barack Obama, government represents safety and opportunity they wouldn’t have had any other way, so they found their minds molded by communism from day one to the present. They do not like, or trust the free market and have been taught by decades of academia to despise capitalism—and to attack it finally putting an end to it forever—giving rise to communism’s century long slow burning assault.
I grew up in the 80’s and Ronald Reagan was a president that I campaign for as a 7th grade child. I remember the debacles of Jimmy Carter’s progressive Democrats and I was born during the chaos of the 60’s. I watched Reagan use capitalism to destroy communism with the Berlin Wall falling in the last year of that marvelous decade. I watched music; art, business, and all culture thrive under the comparatively soft capitalism of Ronald Reagan. I noticed that those who hated Reagan seemed to have sympathies for communism or at the very least socialism. But back then they kept their mouths shut up tight because Hollywood was mostly pro-capitalism. MTV rose to power, and many millionaires were created off the conservative messages of the 80’s action heroes like Mel Gibson, Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Clint Eastwood. After Reagan left office, progressives rushed in to regain ground and the witless statist George Bush Sr. didn’t know what hit him, and the 90’s began and ended with Bill Clinton. All those 80’s action heroes found the world turned upside down upon them and most were on their way out by the year 2000—outcasts in the same Hollywood that made them massive international stars. The Naked Communist goals had taken over the funding of Hollywood, and more progressive films were introduced to a gullible public that had no idea what was going on, films like The Crying Game.
George W. Bush after a close election attempted to become more “open minded” and bring everyone back together after the progressive political interests suggested he rigged the election away from Al Gore. Being a genuinely good man, Bush was out maneuvered by the statists of Washington and he started the trend of deficit spending that continues to this day. For eight years, communists and statists bit their tongue and pounded away at the Republic machine until there wasn’t much left of the gears but a bunch of defenseless old men trying to protect their pension checks. That is until senators like Rand Paul from the newly created Tea Party entered the political race followed by constitutional puritans like Senator Ted Cruz. One of the progressive goals was to send a minority president into the White House and they achieved this with the hand-picked progressive Barack Obama who had been trained in the ways of Marxism and Communism extensively, and knew how to schmooze the public. For the first time after decades of planning and fighting, the communist oriented progressives had their guy in the White House under the Trojan horse of racism. Americans desiring to prove they weren’t racist elected a man of color not caring anything for his background. They simply wanted to avoid being called more names by proving they were not discriminating against a presidential candidate because of his dark skin color.
The climax to all these attacks is nationalized health care. Obamacare is the direct attempt to end America as a capitalist nation—it is no secret to those who know anything about history. The facts Matt brought to light in his video is the reality behind Obamacare. It is not being implemented to help people; it is an attack on America and everything it has stood for as a beacon of freedom to the entire world. The characters pushing Obamacare are like soldiers sacrificing themselves for a greater cause, the progressive cause of nationalized health care outlined behind the philosophy of communism many, many years ago and slowly advanced decade by decade to every American attending public education or seeking a college degree.
I have stated at this site the many possible technical advances available to the modern patient seeking medical attention, such as cures for cancer and regenerative medicine. Such free market options would eliminate many of the medical procedures that are covered under insurance plans, and statists like Barack Obama and the entire medical lobby on Capital Hill who pour millions upon millions of dollars into the pockets of law makers for both parties are terrified of the cure for cancer that is coming out of Texas and the concept that surgery could be eliminated completely and addiction to pharmaceutical drugs disposed of totally through the growth of new human tissue the way children were created in the first place, through cell growth. So to halt such advancement, the government wishes to do their pharmaceutical lobbyist friends a favor and preserve their grip on human culture through medicine that belongs in the dark ages—like high blood pressure, diabetes, and all forms of cancer. Government health care is about eliminating these threats to orthodox medicine and keep every citizen in the world dependent on some form of government control. But for the socialists and communists, nationalized health care eliminates independent lives and makes even the strongest human being dependent on the government for their very lives. So they better behave………………….
Matt and his guest are not inflating their claims about the dire consequences of Obamacare. My statements are not inflammatory—they are a fact. Obamacare is an attack on capitalism and every American should find it repulsive. Once implemented politicians will never have the guts to stand against it, and Obamacare will become just another statist program sucking money out of our pay checks like Social Security and Medicaid do presently. It will last so long as there is money to steal from those who work and contribute, which these days won’t be very long. Obamacare is an assault on everything that is good—because it attacks capitalism directly—and is the indirect target of the program from the very start. Matt’s information should be listened to and passed along to a friend as quickly as possible. Failure to do so now may mean that such a chance may never come again under the flag of The United States. Act now, or fall to peril. Indecision is not an option. Pick your side, and fight now! There is no middle ground.
It is now at a point that I cannot read all my email, let alone respond to all of them. But I have a group of people who when I see their name in the header, I make a point to at least read what they send me. Of these people is a group that sends me rumors, facts, and happenings behind the enemy lines at the Lakota school district. I learn all kinds of things from these “double agents” who show their Lakota employers politeness and cooperation to their faces, but are willing to cut out their heart through actions driven by pent-up frustration. One such email came to me from within the For Lakota campaign as the participants were promoting their pro levy zombie tactics to one another through a Facebook campaign.
I put a small caption of these Facebook diatribes upon these pages below for analysis, because it offers a fascinating glimpse into the thoughts and actions of the typical levy supporter. Most of the normal people who vote against school levies don’t get a chance to interact with these levy supporters because what they say disgusts us. But in the context of their social imposition, it is relevant to understand their mindset. With that in mind, read the exchange below with caution. The shallow perspective may be extremely insulting, yet it is the kind of dialogue that is going on within the confines of the typical levy supporter openly broadcast on their Facebook accounts.
Please take the time to vote!!! We can all make this happen!!! Our children deserve the best so let’s make sure that Lakota is able to give it to them….Register, Show Up and Vote YES for Issue 7-Lakota School Levy!!!!! Thanks Laura Macdonald Kennedy for the great Lorax quote!!!! — feelinghopeful with Jeanne Brauns and 84 others.
Andrea Sack Sandy If you are “on the fence” just Vote Yes, do it for “that one teacher” whose extra time with your child, kind words or endearing smile changed your son or daughters life. Be responsible for the well-being of our children and our community. Do the Right Thing!!!! Vote Yes!!!!!
So let’s study what is meant by the phrase, “Our children deserve the best so let’s make sure that Lakota is able to give it to them,” since this appears to be a common belief among the levy supporters. What is the determining qualification for why “their” children deserve the best? Why do they deserve the best, because they are the children of these particular women? What makes these mothers so special? Are these children royalty for some future kingdom—what makes them so prone to entitlement? And why does Lakota have to give them this attribute. Lakota in the context provided is all tax payers in the Lakota district. These mothers are supporting the open looting of financial assets from every tax payer to fulfill the Barbi dream house mentality that their children are automatically deserving of some special treatment just for being born.
The word “let’s” implies collective action, as though through thuggish democracy the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The levy advocate above states clearly that even if voters are on the fence, they should just vote Yes for some greater purpose—defined by the levy supporter. They are encouraging thoughtless compliance to the mob rule of group assimilation. The purpose of this Facebook communication is not to address a single fact as to why taxes need to be increased at Lakota, but simply to advance the emotion of the argument with thoughtless compliance.
Always at the center of these rally cries are the “needs of the children” which are exploited, as if kids will be destroyed if such a tax increase is not passed. Yet the responsibility for raising children falls squarely on the shoulders of the parents. Most of these staunch advocates of tax increases come from voters who are deeply insecure about their parenting skills, and would rather pass that responsibility off onto a paid teacher who is professionally trained. This equates to the same mentality of the person who sends their car to the dealer to change their oil or replace the brakes. Since they lack the skills to make the repairs to their vehicles on their own, they would rather pay large fees to have someone else perform the task for them. The same trend translates over into their family lives; they would rather pay a specialist to do their parenting for them, because they lack the skills of parenting needed to raise children. They seek to cover up this deep insecurity with rally cries supporting teachers who they fully expect to do their parenting jobs for them while they run around like busy bodies gossiping about everyone who intersects their life, eating too much, shopping too much and are continually busy so they can always have an excuse for avoiding the scary task of parenting. The escapades of their life are a travesty of errors brought about by their need to avoid the insecurities of parenting. So they want Lakota teachers to do their job for them, and expect the “community” to pay for their children to be fixed, just like a mechanic fixes their cars. The notion is as stupid as those same tax advocates asking the community to pay for their oil change, when the rest of us tend to do it ourselves.
Most voters in the Lakota district already raised their kids, and they did it on their own. They didn’t leave the task of raising children to professional teachers. In previous generations, when education quality seemed to be higher, and still cost a lot less than it does today, teachers were only a part of the lives of children, they weren’t expected to actually be the parents the way modern levy supporters do. The guilt that many parents feel over their lack of skill in communicating with their children is covered up with their radical support of tax increases. In a warped way, the levy advocates believe that they can sin every day of the week, but on Sunday, they can say a prayer and get into heaven. In the case of their children’s educations, they believe they can be gossiping, materialistic, social menaces and all the sins of their lives will be erased if they campaign for higher taxes at their children’s school. They convince themselves and anyone who will listen that everything they do is “for the children” but it’s really for them—to cover the sins of their chosen lifestyle and the guilt they feel over it.
I know most these levy supporters will read this at some point in time over the next couple of months and I challenge any of them to dispute my claims in the comments below. I know what is in their hearts and I invite them to dispute it with me. But they can’t because what I have said here is true—it is the backbone of their neurosis—they seek redemption for the sins of their crumbling lives off the backs of their children and they hope that nobody notices. But anybody with any level of intelligences sees the situation clearly. Only the like-minded levy supporter is blind to the messages of mental depletion that is written upon their foreheads with invisible ink, yet the messages are there for those with special lighting who can see it plain as day. My special lighting comes from experience, and in dealing with these types of people for thirty years now. I have met and dealt with every personality type that gets involved with these school levy things, and I know how they think. The tax increase is not for their children, but to get them off the hook for being terrible parents either by choice, or by personal insecurities. The cry for better schools is the subtle demand that someone besides them raise their children for them. The crime is that those types of parents believe falsely that their children can be maintained like their cars—dropped off at the dealer to have their oil changed and brakes fixed—then returned to them all ready to run for a few thousand more miles. But kids don’t work like that—and no amount of tax money thrown into the black hole of public education can change that fact. Kids need love, and they need parents who are role models. And that can’t be purchased at a school, or supplied through tax increases.
To know how ridiculously misleading and parasitic the Lakota school system intends to make itself upon the community which is its host it is important to read the quarter page public awareness column that the community newspaper gives to Lakota’s Superintendent each week. This latest week, as much as their campaign strategy has been designed to diffuse my “narcissism” Mantia acknowledges that she is reading here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom frequently, because she addressed several of my recent points made upon these pages. Her topic this week was a proposal to reduce fees in extracurricular activities so to increase student participation. But first she felt she needed to set the record straight on the value of teachers who volunteer their time—“for a small fee of course”—to provide students with extracurricular activities. She said, “Many, though not all of our extra-curriculars are guided by our teachers. They earn a small amount of extra money for doing it, but the vast majority put in far more hours than they’re required to, because they love what they’re doing and know how much it means to kids. Per-hour our coaches and advisors could make far more money working at any fast food restaurant.” The most dangerous part of that statement is that Mantia is a quarter million dollar member of Lakota’s management team and they are preparing to engage the labor union in 2014 contract negotiations. Mantia clearly is on the side of the teachers and the union based on just the statement she provided above—so anyone hoping that Lakota will put up a good fight against the union can wake up. Mantia is a former teacher, and she is on the business side of teachers. The management at Lakota is bought and paid for by the labor union and they are just “narcissistic” enough to believe that the residents of Lakota are stupid enough to supplement their scam with higher taxes.
Mantia goes on to say, “The two qualities we see young people develop so often in extra-curricular activities are leadership and teamwork. They also learn the value of sacrifice and hard work, and often, other life lessons. They may have to accept that they may not always be the star. Sometimes they will have other roles to fill.” She goes on for several more paragraphs with the same kind of progressive drivel for the next quarter page in the newspaper in that same fashion neglecting to report that the causes for the high fees imposed upon students and their families in the first place are due to her mismanagement. She chose to raise sports fees to punish parents for voting down Lakota’s previous three levies, and not ask the teachers and other Lakota employees to take a 5% pay cut which was proposed by No Lakota Levy after the levy defeats. Instead she advised the rest of Lakota’s management to raise sports fees to protect the teachers who work under her from unnecessary public scrutiny over their average salaries of 63K per year. She chose protecting the highly paid public employees over the community health then, and now to appear as though she were doing the community a favor ahead of the fourth levy attempt, she is floating the idea of being “compassionate” so that she can earn votes for a levy allowing her to throw that money gained straight at her upcoming union contract—which she already blew the negotiations by revealing her pro-teacher position—which for those who know her was a foregone conclusion. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FINANCIAL FACTS ABOUT THE UPCOMING LEVY.
Mantia had the audacity to state that her teachers would make more money working at a fast food restaurant then they would be paid to stick around a few extra hours a day to teach kids during extra-curricular activities. For those who aren’t so good at math, with an average salary of 63K per year, the teachers average approximately $30 dollars an hour, so teachers can make a lot of extra cash off their “extra-curricular sacrifices.” But what’s worse in Mantia’s comments are the things she values from these experiences which come straight out of the progressive playbook, sacrifice, team-work and other “shared values.”
The statements about communist penetration of our public schools have been underway for many years, so long that it is doubtful that Mantia has the intellectual history to grapple with the issues. She and her teachers are paid well to not pay attention to the “big picture” only to teach it. She was raised into the system and knows of nothing else. The attack against America was subtle, and occurred before her time. She believes she is sticking up for her employees with her comments and support of another tax increase against the community. But she is the one who’s narcissistic, and wrong. My father-in-law was visiting over the weekend and told me the story of how on Friday he was called into a school district where he lives in Kentucky as a substitute—a very affluent district that is the home of many thoroughbred owners. The demographics there are very similar to Lakota. He was called in to teach as he has been a teacher for public schools for several decades, and now in his later years does it only as a substitute. He holds several degrees, one of them a Master’s in geology. He reported his anger to me upon seeing two of the topics given by an advanced English teacher to their class written on the chalk board, one on the merits of Marxism, the other on the merits of feminism. Students had to pick one of those two topics to write about. It wasn’t hidden with subtle dialogue the way that Lakota hides their progressive educations, because there isn’t a narcissistic Rich Hoffman in my father-in-law’s school district to call them out, so they recklessly placed their agenda up on the chalk board for all to see. He was aghast at what his very affluent public school was teaching children and his obvious question—why wasn’t there a third topic about capitalism to choose from? The answer was that public schools are not about American traditional values, they are about collapsing economies and advancing fairness for all—at the expense of productivity. They are about higher taxes through schools as a way to redistribute income from one sector of the economy to another and they advance their agenda recklessly through the narcissism of the parents who support a large centralized institution that is simply a parasite upon the community. Those parents believe that in exchange for their support of people like Superintendent Mantia, and the 63K per year teachers at Lakota, that their child will escape a life of mediocrity and become successful adults. But what those parents discover too late is that the taxes raised are intended to be spent on teaching their children the merits of sacrifice—of sharing their wealth for the benefit of others. What their children are learning, which was confirmed in the comments of Superintendent Mantia in the Sunday, September 15, 2013 edition of Today’s Pulse of Butler County, is that kids are learning to work hard for the sacrifice of others so that collective society can advance fulfilling the aims of communists many years ago. These school officials will mislead, manipulate, and stoop to any low to advance the progressive platform.
The fight of our day is not in Syria, Russia, or even the Middle East, it is in our public schools where saboteurs are using our money stolen from property taxes to convert our children into socialists through an advanced communist plot hatched before Superintendent Mantia was even born. She is paid to advance that plot and look not too closely at their intentions—which is driven by government for the service of government with the ultimate example of narcissism provided anywhere. And it is our task to put an end to their scheme. There is no hiding it now; they are out in the open with their intentions. All that is required now is to admit that such sinister plots are at play and they intend to feed off the innocent minds of our children for a social goal that is not in their best interest. As Mantia said in her article, sometimes kids need to “learn the value of sacrifice and hard work, and often, other life lessons. They may have to accept that they may not always be the star. Sometimes they will have other roles to fill.” Those roles under communism are to work hard for the benefit of the greater good, a greater good that is determined by mother government for the benefit of itself and the employees who make it grow.
A few years ago I had to work a second job because of a tax bill that came in the mail from the IRS. The reason the IRS is such a terrifying organization is that if you get in the cross-hairs of them it will cost either in defense or compliance. In my case it was compliance. I had worked hard the previous year and some of the work wasn’t easily calculated and the IRS disputed that I owed them more. Defending my amount would have cost more to take to court so I had to pay, and they knew that was my only real option. So I elected to work a second job to pay my bill rather than rob the money from our family’s normal income. Every morning at 4 AM I got up and rode a bicycle from Mason to Lebanon to report for work at 5 AM at my primary employer. At 3 PM I got off that job and rushed up the road to the Kings Island exit to work at a popular fast food establishment there by 4 PM. My job was to work as the grill cook, and within a few short months I became known as the fastest grill man from Michigan to Florida and my exploits drew the attention of corporate headquarters. Fast food executives paid personal visits to me to figure out how I was able to work so fast. I worked every night the dinner rush and left at 8 PM to ride my bicycle home arriving around 9 PM. Finally after a long hard day I’d go to bed to begin the day again the next morning. In addition to that schedule I worked at the fast-food restaurant on Saturday nights as well covering the lunch and dinner rush from 10 AM to 7 PM as Kings Island provided a lot of business.
It took me two years to pay off my tax debt in this fashion but I eventually did without it sucking the money from our primary income. My wife did not work and I did not want her to. She was homeschooling our children for a bit of time during this period and she needed to be free to care for them. Even when they did attend Mason public schools, my wife drove them every day so that they wouldn’t have to ride the school bus with all the vile filth that goes on during bus rides. So my wife working simply wasn’t an option. During the day she also was a teacher’s assistant in my daughters classrooms until the relationship with the school went south when we would not allow our 4th grade children to attend a sex education class that consisted of teaching them how to put condoms on a fake penis. We declined and from that point the administrators put an “X” on my wife’s back, so we pulled our children out of the school for their own protection, and proper instruction. Meanwhile, I rode my bike to my jobs and kept the money coming in. My exploits during this period of time were described in my novel, The Symposium of Justice.
I explained to them that I could read what a person would order by way of food by the look on their faces when they stepped into the dining room. I had their food already cooking before they stepped up to place their order. And on the drive thru I would watch the cars pull into the lot headed for the speaker and determine what they were going to order based on the way the driver looked, how many people were in the car, the condition of the car, and various other factors. By the time the sandwich maker called the order I had the meat prepared and perfectly cooked ready to hit their prep. The ability was physical of course. I have always been very fast at everything I do. But in this case it was more psychological than physical. This left the corporate executives baffled as to how they could train other stores to have grill cooks who did the same thing.
They offered me a .50 cent raise for my efforts which I gladly accepted bring my total to $7.50 in 1997 money. It wasn’t much then and it isn’t much now, but it was I thought a fair wage for the work I was doing. My rule against the customers was that I knew that some government workers came to Kings Island often and I didn’t want to speak to them. They had put me in the position of having to work a second job and be away from my family, so I didn’t want to be nice to them, or even acknowledge their existence. I could always tell those types upon site, so I worked it out so that all I’d have to do was prepare the food, I would not have to give the people who put me in that situation the privilege of serving them directly.
I of course became the restaurant psychologist and the young people often confided in me their problems seeking my help, which I gave them. The managers often had wrecked lives due to all the crazy hours they worked so I helped them too; by solving many of their personal problems. But my rule about dealing with the customers was firm. On one such occasion a pretentious Mason school teacher who weighed in at least three hundred pounds came to the front register while the 16-year-old girl manning that station was using the restroom. The teacher demanded service and I was the closest one to her. I instructed her to sit tight until someone came to take her order but she ignored me and continued anyway. Needless to say her order fell on deaf ears. I continued doing my work ignoring her. When the girl came back, the Mason teacher was standing their refusing to repeat herself expecting me to tell the girl what the order was, which of course I didn’t provide. Rather than repeat her order to the cashier the teacher complained about me to corporate headquarters thinking she would get me fired for disrespecting her. She called from the dining room making a huge fuss in front of the other customers and demanding our own management to remove me from the line. The lead manager told her that we were in the middle of lunch rush and that they couldn’t afford to remove me from the line. The teacher proclaimed that nobody was “irreplaceable!” Corporate took my side on the issue and the frustrated teacher took her business elsewhere. She was back a week later, but this time didn’t look at me. She simply placed her order and I had her meat ready for her. I knew exactly what she was going to order, and it was a lot of food.
With all that said, the recent union attempt to inject themselves into the fast food restaurant business is a vile attempt at communism. Fast food workers are not worth $15 an hour. I was the best of my kind, and I wouldn’t have thought of asking such a fee for a job that was worth more to me for its flexibility than the wage I earned. I enjoyed being able to come in and dominate a position so that I could dictate my terms based purely on performance. While it’s true I could have made more money quicker if I were willing to “compromise” the fact was that I wasn’t, and fast food gave me the opportunity to work such a job, get the government off my back, while not having to lower myself to people like that 300 pound Mason teacher. People who knew me then felt sorry for me, because I rode my bicycle to work every day, worked long hard hours, and had to wear a fast food uniform well into adulthood even though I was making good money and showing great talent at my regular job. My wife and I could have just used the public school like a baby sitting service like everyone else did, she could have worked, we could have had two cars and life could have been easier if we just played along. But we chose to do only what we had to in order to appease our government obligations. Making a lot of extra money would have just been consumed in further taxes and was not a smart strategic choice. Fast food gave me the perfect opportunity to dig out of that tax liability without making it worse, and without lowering myself to making plea deals with the IRS, or using expensive lawyers to just feed the monster even more. And it also allowed me to take care of the problem so that my wife was always around my little girls, shielding them from the evils of the world that were being placed upon them by a statist government gone mad wanting to teach them to put on a condom in the fourth grade. Little girls who had both parents working late staying in an empty house from the time they get home from school till their parents arrive between 5 and 6 PM have lots of opportunities to get into trouble with boys in their neighborhoods, but since my wife was always home, my girls didn’t have that problem. They didn’t need to learn how to put on a condom when that was furthest thing on their minds than anything at the time.
The protests from restaurant workers demanding a “living wage” for their work in fast food are not worth more than $7 to $8 dollars an hour, I don’t care who they are. Fast food work is entry-level work designed to fill the social needs for cheap food on the go. Nobody should work in fast food as a career choice unless they want to go into management. There is no such thing as a “living wage.” But there is such a thing as “value,” and restaurant workers are only worth so much. The fast food restaurants of America have one obligation, to provide a good quality product cheaply. If I could have taught corporate headquarters my skills at working a grill, I would have. Unfortunately for them, I cannot be duplicated, and no machine can do what I could do—not even the perverted imbeciles who work at the NSA and supposedly have supercomputers that cross-reference everything we do in our lives. They can’t calculate human behavior as well as I can. Even so, the work I did was not worth more than $8 dollars an hour and I would never have considered asking for more. I used the job to clear my tax debt and a little bit more, and then saved up money to move out of Mason and back to my childhood home of Liberty Twp. I stayed on at the fast-food restaurant working to make extra money for some time after so to get out in front of our financial condition. $8 dollars an hour becomes quite a lot of money when you don’t drive a car and your wife is at home teaching your children. The household expenses go down rapidly when you are not part of the system. And a good bit of savings can be generated while working fast food.
A “living wage” as the communist labor unions advocate is attempting to do the same thing they’ve done to the teaching profession and virtually every endeavor that they are a part of. They set artificially high values for their labor that is built purely on monopoly power. In fast-food, they know they cannot obtain that monopoly unless they get all the workers in that industry to buy in to their scheme. Fortunately for America, that plan will fail. If twenty fast food workers decide to strike from a local McDonald’s, there are always people like me who will step in and take the money that is left in the void, and can do four jobs all by myself. It would make me happy to do it just to keep prices low on the hamburgers we buy. There is no shame in it, but only advantage, for what I’m talking about are the benefits of capitalism—a concept that labor unions do not understand, and despise with every cell in their bodies.
I’ve given my two daughters both nice weddings. One had her wedding at a nice country club setting that was very private. That was a great experience and has fond memories. The other was one that took place near downtown Cincinnati in a nice establishment specializing in wedding receptions, and often hosts multiple weddings in the same building. When my daughter had her wedding at this facility, there were four other weddings going on in the same building and that I didn’t care for. The place we were holding the wedding was very posh and elegant, but the lack of exclusivity made me perpetually uneasy. I didn’t like it.
Our wedding reception went on for quite a while and was the last of the multiple weddings to yield to the night. With that said as the music was thumping and our dance floor was crowded a group of guys from another wedding which had just ended came into our wedding looking for some fun, alcohol, and action. Well, that was a big mistake, because this is my family, my nieces, and friends of my daughters, not some random pieces of meat for young men to fondle, and I wasn’t going to stand for it. So I told the boys to get lost, that I wasn’t going to tolerate any wedding crashers. They insisted that they just wanted to have a good time, and that I should reconsider. I told them flatly, “NO.” It was my money, my family, and my decision, end of story.
The boys left with their heads hung with rejection. They couldn’t help but notice the attractive women in my family and cussed at themselves for the lost opportunities. However, little did they know or understand that part of the reason there were so many attractive women in my family is because there are men like me who fight to give them some sanctuary to reside within, who keep them from being just cheap pieces of meat for the use of young boys looking for conquest. Some members of my family thought I was too hard on the boys, and thought the wedding would be a lot more fun if a massive party erupted and I was the “cool” type who allowed wedding crashers to liven things up with their spontaneity. But I’m not that kind of guy and if I’m spending thousands of dollars on a reception center for my daughter’s wedding, it will be the way she wants it—and wedding crashers didn’t fit the profile.
I spent about the same amount of money on that reception hall as I do in taxes for the Lakota school system each year which is the public school in my area. Yet just last night embolden by events at the Lakota football games where the school had a booth set up passing out campaign signs for their upcoming levy attempt, several emails and comments came my way from levy addict supporters who were charged up with “school pride” established at the football game. The message to me was that if I didn’t like the tax increase then I should move out of the community. Click the link below to see one of those comments and my response.
To me, those types of people are like those kids who wanted to crash my daughter’s wedding. I graduated from Lakota many years ago and have lived in the area most of my life. When I was a kid I grew up in a house along 747 when it was farmland for as far as the eye could see. My home was on the kind of land that the Carriage Hill homeowners are paying 150K per plot to own today. But I lived on such anchorage when very few homes could be seen from my front yard. Traffic down 747 had the character of a distant country road. My boyhood home is gone now replaced by a strip mall that one of the guys in my group No Lakota Levy built. I didn’t always get along with those guys, but we did join together to fight the Lakota schools massive taxation plans for a community we had all been in from the beginning. I have watched many new homes move into the area who are willing to pay extraordinary amounts of money to have essentially what I had as a kid—and that’s fine. I understand wanting to have the best for families.
But when snot nosed despots move into the area with about a 5 second investment of their time and resources into my community then tell me I need to move, I think back to the kind of mentality that was exhibited by those wedding crashers at my daughter’s wedding that I had to run off. These new pretentious homeowners who have moved into the Lakota community and overpaid for their properties due to their own stupidity, and arrogance are wedding crashers in the Lakota community relative to my position. I am the one who paid for everything with my years of tax revenue contributed, and I helped shape the school into what it is with my participation in it, because I attended there. So it’s my business if I want to tell the Lakota administration they are full of shit and need to manage their money better. And if I want to call the levy supporters a bunch of pretentious latté sipping prostitutes with asses the size of car tires, and diamond rings to match—I will do it, and I have a right to do it—because it’s my community and I’ve invested a lot more in it than they have.
The levy supporters think that just because they show up in Lakota and purchase a half million dollar home on a quarter acre plot of land that they have some right to tell people like me to move if I don’t like their intentions to vote for higher taxes. They are just as stupid and immature as those wedding crashing young men who thought they could come to my daughter’s wedding and play out some fantasy of what they saw in a movie. In that fantasy they thought I’d sit idly by while they grabbed the asses of the women attending and had a jolly time drinking from the bar while I paid for everything and quietly sat in a corner and acted like the out-of-touch middle-ager they thought I was. To their mindset I was old, and I had my day in the sun, and I should sacrifice myself to the youth so they could have their fun, and memories which they wanted to make at my expense. The same mentality is present with the wedding crashers of Lakota. A bunch of pretentious snobs have moved into the area and think that their little 7 to 8-year-old children should have infinite resources and that the community should spare no expense for their pleasure. They are of course wrong.
I spend as much money in taxes on Lakota every year as I did on just that dance hall for my daughter’s wedding. So it should come as no surprise what my response to the wedding crashers of Lakota is. To me they are mindless zombies who don’t consider what the cost of a tax increase will do to the community, but only indulge in their own short-term desire to fill their bellies, and they have no right to make any demands, let alone move into my community then tell me to move out if I don’t like their decisions. That is not how the world works.
If that is the levy strategy concocted at the Friday night football games by the pro levy crowd, good luck. I’m not the only one who feels that way. To most who live in the Lakota community, they see the levy zombies the same way I do, as wedding crashers. Those types of people—the wedding crashers do not care for all the events that led up to the wedding, they only want to attend the party once everyone else has done the work. In Lakota, few have done more work than I have, and few have the concerns of Liberty Twp., in their blood more than I. So it naturally disgusts me to see pretentious, short-sighted snobs enter the arena of debate with demands for higher taxes to cover a neurosis that resides deep within their psychological imperfections. I do not tolerate “community crashers,” especially when I’m paying the bill.
The harsher reality to the presidency of Barack Obama is not just that he is a manipulative saboteur of American ideals who supports socialism over capitalism, but he was elected as a representative of a large number of the American public—people who enjoy welfare support, think the Miley Cyrus stunt at the recent MTV awards was cool, and loves intoxication, drug abuse, and alternative sexual practices. The worse realization about the Obama administration is that it represents a growing number of Americans. The origin of how those people came to be such a group of degenerates is harder to pin down because it forces an admission that is difficult to acknowledge. The minds making up the typical modern progressive described started at the same point as everyone else, small children born of a mother and a father. But the path that delivers such minds to fish net stocking wearing voters dressed in drag voting for Obama and his free government “stuff” is different from those who tend to find such personal philosophies repulsive. Those differences of course start in a child’s home and are determined by their parents. But beyond that, it is public education that destroys the minds of young people and corrupts them well into their adulthoods. Public schools are breeding grounds for progressive philosophy and are dangerous. They have been for a long time, but it has only been the last couple of years where such admissions have begun to be made. Doc Thompson and his producer Skip on The Blaze Radio Network dedicated an entire hour and a half to the topic of public education corruption which can be heard at the clip below. It is worth the time to listen to, because they cover Common Core instruction during the beginning then allow the discussion to evolve into the aim of public schools—which is to educate and create progressive citizens—who wishes to work against traditional America. Have a listen! This is classic radio and you should take the time to listen to the whole thing.
Public schools are incubators for social change—the kind of change that would rather see a child attend a Rocky Horror Picture Show screening at midnight in some dank college campus movie theater rather than attend church on Sunday to worship the teachings of Jesus Christ. So it should come as no surprise that kids after twelve to thirteen years of public school education arrive at 18 years of age unprepared to do anything of any responsibly as an adult, because progressive education teaches personal irresponsibility. Public school educations are destructive, and do ruin the minds of the attendees.
The tough admission is that almost every American comes from public schools and to arrive at the conclusion that it is there many of the stupid ideas which lead to presidents like Obama sitting in The White House are born. Public schools are for most parents free baby sitting services which gives the illusion of positive social instruction, so it is hard for parents to blame the progressive tendencies of their children on “the baby sitter” because it forces acknowledging that they must take action to help save their children. For many parents this means they have to make decisions that will likely cost them money…………..and time, which often they have neither. So they are stuck sending their children to their local public school and they put on blinders to the faults of the institution because they do not have the mental or financial capacity to solve the problem.
Public schools consume enormous amounts of tax money which strip away the expendable cash that these same parents could use to send their children to a private conservative school—so to undo the progressive instruction otherwise given. This leaves parents with no options but to hold their nose and support their local public school just because it’s near their home. Parents do not have a choice because public education is a monopoly. They suppress competition and openly destroy the minds of individual children leaving the consumers and suppliers with no choices. When a child complains to their parent that the public school is a bad place, the parent has only one choice but to instruct the child that life is unfair, and that they need to learn to live with their displeasure. This begins a chain reaction that slowly begins to destroy the lives of those children from that day on.
Three years ago Doc Thompson did not have a microphone that allowed him to discuss public education to such a degree as he has in the broadcast above. Radio stations that employed him would have feared losing their FCC license—which further solidifies the public education government controlled monopoly. Criticism of public education was nearly non-existent leaving millions of desperate souls to anguish over their unacknowledged fears regarding the intentions of public education. But now, popular radio personalities like Doc Thompson are free to delve honestly into the evils of public education in several game changing broadcasts that are routine on The Blaze Radio Network. It will take a while to change the culture of acceptance which public education has enjoyed using their monopoly to invoke on witless students the aptitude of a destructive progressive education. But the start of such dismantling, and reinvigoration comes from the understanding that something is terribly wrong and should be corrected in order to save future generations. A large portion of our modern youth are lost and will never recover. They will continue to vote for politicians like Barack Obama because they have been trained in progressive statism. Many of those same types were seen screaming after Miley Cyrus and her sexual antics on MTV that raised the eyebrows of many concerned parents. Someday those former students will have children and life will beat their progressive educations out of them, and they will recover to some extent to live decent lives—if they are the fortunate few. But their minds cannot be recovered fully as they were handicapped as children in public education. However, if our society acts now, it may be possible that twenty years from now, public education and its impact on society will be greatly diminished allowing more people to rise to new emotional and intellectual heights. At that time, the voting population will become better and vote for better representatives because the quality of their mind will be improved.
It is not enough to just proclaim the name of the problem. Once known, it must be acted upon, and slowly over a fairly short period of time, radio broadcasts like the one Doc and Skip produced are changing minds, and forcing admissions. Those admissions are difficult, but they are healthy. Nobody said that doing the right things would be easy, or convenient. But for the health of all our futures, we must do the right thing, and that is realize that public education is a corrosive endeavor that is laced with vile thoughts and teachings—which should be sanctioned from tax dollars. Any group, even progressives should be allowed to compete equally in the battlefield of ideas, but citizens should not be forced to pay for such things with money extorted from them through taxation under force of a monopoly. That is the greatest evil of public education, and the reason that it must be changed—options create competition and allows evil ideas like progressivism to be crushed out of existence in direct interaction with ideas which actually work. Progressives claim that they have the superior mode of thinking, yet they can only convince others of such a claim through monopoly status by eliminating competing modes of thinking. The first step in destroying such a tyrannical hold on the minds of our society’s youth is to destroy the monopoly that backs public education, and to introduce new ideas—ideas that are born out of the wreckage of the old—a public education system designed to put presidents like Obama into office for aims that are not American.
Now to explain a bit, “artistically” what was going on at the MTV event where Miley Cyrus was paraded about like a slut for the advancement of progressive causes. Watching her performance I was reminded of two other events, the Janet Jackson Super Bowl stunt where she had her top ripped off to expose her breasts, then the famous kiss between Britney Spears and Madonna. What all three women had in common was that the “public” thought of them as good girls. Miley Cyrus and Britney Spears are graduates of the Disney Channel and were examples of nice wholesome teenage girls. Progressive backed money was poured into entertainment, and it can make these girls do whatever the financiers’ desire like prostitutes working for an escort service. Miley Cyrus was coached into performing the dance routine which was all very carefully designed. Cyrus was placed on stage to rip from millions of youthful girls the innocent image of Cyrus as a Disney girl. The dance routine was set up with the teddy bears looking not quite so innocent so to show on stage that Miley Cyrus had lost any resemblance of her youthful innocence and was no longer a little girl. The act has been repeated for several decades now and is constructed by the same minds that stand behind Common Core education. To understand what investors into Miley Cyrus’s record label believe, and MTV’s investment in the event, listen hard to the broadcast from Doc Thompson and his producer Skip shown above. They have the answer. Miley Cyrus is simply a paid spokesman for progressive causes, and she was established by an entertainment culture infused with “political progressive” money to unlock the teaching instructed to children in public schools. Former Disney personalities are targeted because of their naturally high-profile, with foundations in family entertainment that Disney is known for. This makes them very important in reaching the proper demographic groups with the ritual understanding of merging from childhood to adulthood through sexual practice. Since the government profits off of misconduct through sexual recklessness, this is to their advantage.
When people believe that Bill Gates is behind Common Core and is a good man, so Common Core must be good, consider again that Common Core computers only run on Window’s operated machines, Macintosh computers will not work. So part of the implementation of Common Core in public schools is to support the sale of Windows operating systems over Macs. That in itself isn’t bad, but the minds who shape the Common Core agenda for which Gates latches himself on to, in order to make a deal that will launch Microsoft driven computers into every school in America are the same minds who take the innocent greed of a young woman named Miley Cyrus and tell her that they’ll fund her record and image if she’ll dance half naked on stage with stoned looking teddy bears and sell herself to the public. Bill Gates and Miley Cyrus think they are cleaver and astute business people taking advantage of the glories of capitalism to advance themselves. But what they don’t see is the progressive puppet masters who have shaped the battlefield in both entertainment and education for the same intentions, to break down the traditional American family and revise the minds of youth to sexual deviancy which pushes them away from parental care and into the loving, manipulative arms of mother government, and the sinister plots of doom which were touched up in the classic novel Brave New World. Now considering those things, listen to Doc Thompson recite the specifics of Common Core education to second and third grade students, and consider what the real intention of public education is in America. The Miley Cyrus MTV event was the result, but the cause started in the classrooms of America’s government schools, and the plots of progressive politics that are behind nearly every single institution.
The Blaze Television is one of the most cutting edge programs produced today and is the latest project of Laurie Dhue. She left Fox News to work for her new employer Glenn Beck. Watch this stunning episode and share it with a friend on the extreme depth of the NSA and how it affects your life.
The level of domestic surveillance in the United States has reached such shocking levels in the post-9/11 world that people will find it hard to fathom, said Laurie Dhue, host of TheBlaze TV’s new investigative series “For the Record.” The show’s first episode, “Surveillance State.”
“I think this is going to open a lot of people’s eyes…people will be absolutely shocked to know that things have gotten even less transparent in the last 10 years — there’s even more surveillance going on than ever before,” Dhue told Beck on his radio show.
The show reveals how the National Security Agency transformed from its stated purpose of foreign intelligence gathering into an arm to listen in on U.S. citizens — all on the taxpayer’s dime.
“After 9/11 the spigots just opened, money continued to flow in the NSA. The NSA got everything it wanted, and the taxpayers basically just got taken to the cleaners,” Dhue said.
What information the government collects, they keep — including in a massive Utah facility slated for completion earlier this year, Dhue said.
“This is all being done in the name of protection, in the name of keeping us safe. But it’s scary stuff when you think about it,” Dhue told Beck.
The lawsuit against Apple by the Department of Justice is an astonishing maneuver made by an organization that is under criminal investigation itself. Yet even with all the scandals that it is currently being scrutinized for such as cover-ups, criminal deceit, and murder, the Department of Justice is engaged in an outright attack against the Apple Company for an e-book price-fixing anti-trust busting lawsuit. For a review on my thoughts about anti-trust cases created under the Sherman Act, please refer to the following link, where I break down the history and hypocrisy of these government cases revealing what is really behind them.
The federal government operates currently the largest monopoly on the face of the earth with their vast support of price-fixing through government labor unions. For examples of price-fixing that is much more destructive than anything Apple has done look no further than the local teacher at your government school, look at your friendly neighborhood IRS agent, or any bureaucrat working for the federal government in virtually any direct capacity. The government is not qualified to pass judgment against Apple for price-fixing. But in this case, as in most anti-trust cases, the intention is not to find justice for the “public” but to shake down the prosecuted for money through bribes, court settlements, or campaign donations to political parties. If the roots of this case were traced back to a cause, one of those three issues was the motivation. Because Apple did not grease the wheels of government “properly” they are now being prosecuted. It is that simple. For proof examine the statements below as reported by CNET regarding this anti-trust case, and read carefully the words used by Justice Department attorney Lawrence Buterman.
Apple shouldn’t “be rewarded” with the same sanctions as the e-book publishers that settled with the U.S. government, the Department of Justice argued ahead of a court hearing Friday. “Apple has been found to have orchestrated and facilitated a…price-fixing conspiracy — amongst these very publisher defendants,” Justice Department attorney Lawrence Buterman wrote in a letter dated Thursday but made available for viewing Friday. “Apple should not be rewarded with the same terms received by those that chose to settle to avoid the risks of litigation.”
The Justice Department last week issued its proposals for ways “to halt Apple’s anticompetitive conduct, restore lost competition, and prevent a recurrence of the illegal activities.” The three big pieces of that proposal were that Apple would end its existing agreements with the five major publishers, let other e-book publishers’ link to their own bookstores in iOS apps, and staff an antitrust monitor to evaluate its business for five years. Apple fired back last week, calling the government’s proposals vague, overreaching, unwarranted, and even “draconian.”
In a filing Wednesday, the five major book publishers weighed in, arguing that one of those stipulations — ending the existing agreements — would completely eliminate a pricing model that’s become the industry standard. The publishers also said it would break agreements the Justice Department made with each of them when they settled.
Hachette, HarperCollins, Holtzbrinck (also known as Macmillan), Penguin, and Simon & Schuster filed an opposition to last week’s proposed remedies against Apple by the Justice Department, arguing that the plan would “effectively eliminate the use of the agency model” for e-book distribution for the next five years.
“…Under the guise of punishing Apple, they effectively punish the Settling Defendants by prohibiting agreements with Apple using an agency model,” the publishers wrote, adding that the move “directly conflicts” with the settlements the publishers reached with the Justice Department before the Apple case went to trial.
“Despite achieving their stated goal of returning price competition, Plaintiffs now seek to improperly impose additional, unwarranted restrictions on the Settling Defendants, thereby depriving each publisher of the benefit of its bargain with Plaintiffs,” it goes on to say.
The “agency” model is where publishers set e-book prices to retailers, while retailers get a commission. That’s as opposed to the “wholesale” model, where publishers set the list price and the retailers can sell it at whatever price they want. (Read CNET’s in-depth explainer here.)
Basically what all that means is that the Department of Justice wants to shake down Apple because they did not settle out-of-court as the five major publishers did so to avoid a damaging public court case. The DOJ is using this excuse to inject its authority into the company for five years to monitor Apple business practices. The DOJ also intends to use this case “to halt Apple’s anticompetitive conduct, restore lost competition, and prevent a recurrence of the illegal activities.” Those are amazing statements by a government entity that is itself a functioning monopoly excessively guilty of anti-trust violations of their own. They are even more amazing statements considering all the other criminal investigations that the DOJ is currently under itself, but cannot be prosecuted for because there is no higher law enforcement authority than the Department of Justice—who works directly for the President of the United States. (This is why it’s important what kind of president Americans elect).
There is only one motivation by the Department of Justice in this. They do not care about the pricing of e-books on the open market. They only care about entrenching themselves into the publishing business any way they can so that content can be “influenced” in subtle ways. The message to the five major publishers couldn’t be clearer. They took the settlement like most companies would, to take the path of least resistance. It didn’t mean they were guilty, just that they took the option with the least immediate cost to them. The real crime is that the Department of Justice injected itself into the capitalist marketplace with socialist standards of regulation that do not belong in America. If not for Apple and those five major publishers, there wouldn’t be an e-book market. The DOJ is functioning from a socialist economic model whereas the publishers and Apple are operating from capitalism. Apple is not guilty of anything but operating as a capitalist enterprise. The DOJ is operating as a socialist enterprise. The difference between the two is one of philosophy, not function. The Department of Justice view of itself might be more appropriate in China, or in Europe where socialism and communism are practiced much to the restriction of ideas and financial enterprise, but they have no place in America and never had since the concoction of the Sherman Act so many years ago. The anti-trust busting that has been so publicly advocated by the government is simply the actions of a gang of thugs who want to shake down the profit makers of a capitalist economy under the guise of “equality.”
Every American should be outraged by the attack of the Department of Justice against the Apple Company. If it can happen to Apple, it can happen to everyone. Microsoft as a company never recovered after their anti-trust case in the 1990s. And now Apple, without the leadership of Steve Jobs to pull them back out of the mud after this incident with the DOJ will find themselves overly, and needlessly cautious toward anti-trust accusations that will directly hinder their marketing strategies, and innovation for many years to come. The cost of this lawsuit against Apple by the DOJ will resonate for the next century in America not in lost competition, but in lost innovation by a company that is among the best that America currently has to offer. The government, as usual, is standing in the way of prosperity, hindering capitalism, and openly seeking to undercut technological growth through a thuggish strategy of short-sighted shakedowns against a good company to appease a blind and stupid mob who democratically elected criminals, scumbags, and despots to enforce laws that they make up as they go to serve only themselves and an ever-expanding government.
‘’American Exceptionalism tends to set off tempers from the type of people who have been taught their entire lives that America should follow the trends of the rest of the World and not proudly proclaim the wonderful attributes that have come out of the freest country in the world-such as capitalism, human rights, individual freedom, and quality of life that is unmatched anywhere.’’ Did Rich or El Rushbo write this? Funny I was a Rush baby, some of us grow up and actually learn history, economics, free-markets, and real Conservative, ex. Russel Kirk, TS Elliot, Edmund Burke, and M.E. Bradford (who was originally appointed by Reagan for national endowment position, but sidelined by Bill Krystol for neocon Bill Bennett (Lincoln lover)).
The listener’s name is Ben Cowan and he is attempting to display that he has the superior argument by stating he has grown up and away from the way of thinking of Rush Limbaugh. People who use such arguments with a direct attack like that try to gain supremacy through insult instead of the quality of their statement. Cowan then proceeds to establish that he has a vast knowledge of history to draw upon as if I do not. He has obviously not read the more than 2 million words here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom, so if he starts now he may be qualified to make such statements in about 6 months. But until then he is functioning from ignorance. I enjoy the work of T.S. Elliot particularly “The Wasteland.” The point of his statement is to say that Cowan has evolved intellectually into thinking beyond Rush Limbaugh which is supposed to qualify everything that follows as fact, and everything he says about me as inferior to his arguments. This is a trick Cowan learned from the progressive intellectuals which he reveals further in the next section.
Notice how weak Rich’s arguments are that he portrays anyone who gets frustrated with Decepticons aka neocons using the term American Exceptionalism as someone who supports Obama or his ideology. As to Rich’s Bill Maher clip, I actually agree with some of Bill’s sediments in this clip. This is probably the only time that I have agreed with Bill Maher, but our solutions and reasons are much different. Did you notice how I separated the two complaint/Solutions without emotionally driven comments like Rich uses?
Prof. Kevin Gutzman liked this part of the main article ‘’Under the American Constitution, slavery was abolished- a move happened nowhere else in the world.’’ If the point is that slavery wasn’t abolished under the US Constitution outside the US, well duh. Slavery was abolished in Haiti, Cuba, Brazil, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Barbados, Bahamas, Suriname, Guyana, Trinidad, and Nevis. –Response by Prof. Kevin Gutzman (Author of Who Killed the Constitution).
Cowan attacks my arguments as weak without identifying the argument which is an anti-concept trick that was perfected by the political strategist Saul Alinsky. It is used, copied and heavily studied by radical groups to this day. People like Cowan pick up the behavior through observation and interacting with people who use the method. The premise of his attack is that my statement about Obama and his ideology is weak because it points to American Exceptionalism as strong, and that such a broad brush is not appropriate under the terms Cowan established in his anti-concept. By my definition of American Exceptionalism I am stating the concept “America is good.” The reason this angers people like Cowan, who believes that he is an evolved conservative to some degree, or just defining himself as some degree of libertarian, is that he has accepted that the concept of American Exceptionalism is a myth at some point in his past and he is defending his foundation beliefs from the concept of goodness. He then uses Bill Maher as validation to support his theory in the same fashion that he uses Kevin Gutzman as a crutch the way most academics use quotes and references to support collectively their own thoughts and beliefs. The implication of their need for reference crutches is their insecurity to their own thoughts. They attempt to build a public consensus by pointing at others and what they say as if to justify their own thoughts. The truth about slavery is that The Society for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage was the first Americanabolition society. It was founded April 14, 1775, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania by Anthony Benezet and others, and held four meetings.[1] Seventeen of the 24 men who attended initial meetings of the Society were Quakers, or members of the Religious Society of Friends. Thomas Paine was also among the Society’s founders. It was reorganized in 1784[2] as the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage,[3] (better known as the Pennsylvania Abolition Society) and was incorporated in 1789. At some point after 1785, Benjamin Franklin was elected as the organization’s president. The society asked him to bring the matter of slavery to the Constitutional Convention of 1787. He petitioned the U.S Congress in 1790 to ban slavery.[4]
During this time there were similar movements happening all over the world as many were questioning the practice. But the big driver in changing the culture of slavery was The United States in their fight for independence. Once that revolution was won other countries looked at their own situations and made adjustments. Smaller countries like Haiti, Cuba, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Barbados, Bahamas and so on were able to abolish their slaves more quickly than larger countries with more bureaucracy. My example of American Excepetionalism is that if America had failed in their revolution then other countries would have stepped back from such a task. It took America to lead by example. Cowan would then point out that many of those movements took place at the turn of the 1700s into the early 1800s. Yet they were using America as their example as many of the discussions taking place in the colonies from those Philadelphia meetings were exported all over the world through commerce. When America defeated the British, many countries became more embolden in their pursuit of individual freedom and passed anti slavery mandates. Sadly, many of those same countries Cowan mentions would submit to socialism just a few years later falling back into social slavery of a different type.
Capitalism is great and the best system in which people can move up and down mobile in a free society. Capitalism predates the Union of States and American Exceptionalism. Did it occur to Rich that Britain lead the 1st industrial Revolution, followed by Meiji Restoration in Japan, and the 2nd industrial revolution was led by the United States.
Yes, it did occur to me, yet Britain failed in their economy falling to socialism as they allowed Keynesian economics to ruin their capitalism, and Japan of course could not leave their feudal social functions once they submitted themselves to an emperor. To this very day many large countries make the mistake of attempting to emulate Japan for their manufacturing standards believing them to be of higher quality than American standards. The failure in this thinking is that the Japanese place themselves before their individuality in nearly every case. Their programs of lean manufacturing work well as their people do not question the methods. Their service to their country and business come before their own desires. American strength in manufacturing has always come from their ability to think outside-the-box as individuals, not blind compliance to a greater good such as country, company, or even community. America adopted foreign lean manufacturing methods as a direct assault against the American labor unions which infected manufacturing from the Red Decade with communist philosophy. It was the only way that companies could force the unions to not destroy their businesses with non-productive effort. Because the unions put a lock on productive output, American companies were forced to use foreign collectivist methods perfected abroad to keep the unions from destroying their companies that were legally allowed to organize against industry for the collective gain of the many. Even with these severe handicaps most new ideas still come out of The United States. Most literature, films, music, art and technical innovation are generated by free people with the prospect of profit blowing wind into their sails. Even with all the best lean manufacturing techniques produced for collective motivation of work forces, creativity is what makes American Excptionalism. Creativity is what is missing from all other countries that have stepped away from capitalism, and to this day seek alliances with others to disguise the fact that they are nations of suppressed thought praying to their religions for inspiration. In America, innovation is invented because the mind is free—that is the backbone of American Excepetionalism.
‘’Americans have been taught by their gov’t that the United States gained everything it achieved by consuming too many resources and stepping on the rights of others across the world.’’ -This is what would be taught at a progressive college, that so called conservatives send their kids to and help support and perpetuate. Many fake conservative send their kids to progressive colleges so Johnny and Suzie can watch people run into other people on Saturday afternoon and ‘’what’s the score of the game mindless thinking.’’ Again, Rich is using the absurd progressive logic to lump real Conservatives like myself into, to push ‘’American Exceptionalism’’, which is the progressive rights term invented by a Frenchmen, and used to spread democracy by force to any country whether they want it or not.
Not sure that I disagree with Cowan here. He uses my name in a way that implicates that my statement is wrong, but then he agrees with it, because I had just said the same thing. Americans have been taught such things as I stated and most colleges are infected with progressive thought. If Cowan doesn’t believe such a thing I’m not sure what planet he’s living on.
I enjoyed Rich’s definition of a neocon! How terrible of the social freedom of the people in the 60’s. Was Steve Jobs one of those people?? A neocon or decepticon is someone who left the Democrat Party to join the Republican Party in which they brought their FDR progressive foreign policy with them. They also brought the mentality that morals should be controlled through the Fed gov’t. They were Nationalist that the great founders feared, and why some didn’t sign the Constitution fearing the Union would end up like as it is now.
Steve Jobs had a good idea and left his indoctrination education to invent his own way. He used capitalism to bring a great product to market, so not all people who smoked dope, and listened to the garbage music of the 60s was a diabolical hippie menace. I would say that George Lucas was cast of the same mold as Jobs, and I’m sure that George loved the 60’s although he was more of a loner than his friend Francis was at their first studio set up in San Francisco where hippie mania was rampant. Somewhere in that drug induced haze Star Wars was born which I love. But these guys are rare examples that managed to rise to the top even as statism was increasing to put shackles on the mind of mankind by suppressing capitalism. The second part of Cowan’s statement I agree with for the most part, even though it’s pretty general. The real situation is more complicated, but Cowan is learning so I’ll give him a gold star on his paper for at least thinking.
The founding fathers wanted to be immortalized for their writings and their accomplishments ‘’Fame of our Fathers’’, they however were very humble; they had humility which Rich doesn’t seem to grasp! Jefferson studied Scottish philosopher David Hume, Switzerland’s decentralized country, the Indians free trade, and the ancient Greeks who prior to Alexander the Great were successful for centuries with their small [r]epublics in which Math, Science, Art, Philosophy, architecture, and sport was mastered in small [r]epublics of people. Jefferson wasn’t arrogant as to say he created our ‘’written gov’t’’ on his own without researching other countries and philosophers. Rich’s progressive right term “American Exceptionalism’’, he points to ‘’American Experience’’ of 1776, which I noted to Matt Clark in my response.
‘’The benefits of capitalism and the American Experience produced a unique type of person that had only been contemplated by philosopher fantasies prior to the declaration.’’ Again the arrogance of Rich’s comments, Madison and Jefferson both used Adam Smith’s a Scottish Philosopher book ‘’Wealth of Nations’’ as a guide to preventing a National Bank and advocating the market to work!
As to Cowan’s point, there is nothing “progressive” about my term other than such an identification about American Exceptionalism is needed to defend what’s good about The United States against the progressives. Other than that, Cowan is indulging himself in wishful thinking to believe that I adhere to something because of some progressive invention that has not been carefully considered from all angles. In this paragraph the real weakness of Cowan begins to emerge, his real gripe with me. As a victim of a mixed economy he believes certain things. As a flawed human being who probably has events from his past that he regrets, he chooses to maintain a view of the world that supports notions that flaws make humans, “human.” Many people wish to believe such things because it would be hard for them to get up every morning and put on their shoes. But I am very aware of the origins of Jefferson’s belief and studies of Scottish Common Sense, which I have written about elsewhere, CLICK FOR REVIEW. I have said on many occasions that the work of John Locke was inspired by the pirate Henry Morgan, which then also showed the colonies how to shake off a nation the way that Morgan took on Spain nearly single-handedly with their presence in the Caribbean. But the fact remains that these elements came together not in Scotland, England, Spain, or France where they were talked about. It was only in America where the dialogue was able to move away from dinner tables, congregations, and card games to become part of the governing philosophy of a country on the rise.
Now to deal with the “arrogance” portion of this debate–being humble is a taught theory by statist oriented groups, be it religion or government to force compliance of the masses to the desires of institutionalism. Grace in victory and humbleness are often confused to be the same thing by people like Cowan, but they are not. It is often perceived that confidence is “arrogant” by those who lack it which is to say that such a declaration is just another anti-concept. By calling me arrogant Cowan hopes to dismiss everything I have said and place himself in high esteem with a reader who identifies their internal value with humbleness, which is sheer nonsense. The concept of serving God with humbleness may be what the majority of human beings believe, but that belief was created during the Dark Ages of Europe and should be confined to the corners of one’s own home. Humility and “duty” to something greater than oneself is a statist concept that was created by the churches of Europe to maintain political control over their flocks. Under the rules of engagement for people like Cowan he is quick to associate humility with arrogance so that he doesn’t have to deal with the root cause of the word. It is the tendency toward humility that Eric Holder continues to lie directly to the American people, it allows Barack Obama to lie about the impact of the scandals he’s at the center of, it allows scum bags like Anthony Wiener to lie, lie, and lie again to anybody and everyone about his sexual lust for other women making his wife look like a buffoon who will forgive anything just so she can be married to someone in a powerful public office—like her mentor Hillary Clinton. These predators all have in common a desire to use the humility of civilization to hide their true intentions. Humility is not a good human trait, kindness is, intelligence is, even compassion, but not humility. Yielding to ones faults, which humility implies, is a sin against the individual soul of every human being and people everywhere will continue to live in bondage to social parasites so long as they believe in the kinds of things that Ben Cowan believes, that humility has value, and equals arrogance. More on this in a bit because it’s not the only time Cowan uses the term. But as far as how to behave when you win, the following videos are from the bullwhip competitions that I was at when Ben started this little fuss through Matt. Notice my behavior when I win. I expect the same from every American. You don’t rub people’s face in it, but you don’t cower away from it either. When you have something to be proud of, be proud of it.
‘’Life in virtually every facet is better in America because of the philosophy of personal independence that is much larger than the ‘’American Experience.’’ This is so obnoxious, that is the American Experience, limited gov’t. The founders referred to their states as countries, they didn’t speak in homogenized tongue like Rich! The South traded throughout the world (off the backs of slaves) and the Northern States were protectionalist!
This is the kind of thing that caused Cowan to start this dialogue off with an anti-concept attack instead of fact based thought. He does not understand the American Experience in spite of all his supposed education and conservative thought. He doesn’t understand it as a graduate of Rush Limbaugh thought so he finds my statement, “obnoxious.” He lacks perspective to see the world through common sense instead of memorized standards which is why he surrendered his statement to some implications of racism and isolationism—both agreed upon violations of universal understanding. The American Experience is being born in a free country with no hooks into the soul of the child. Many believe that the World Bank owns us all, but at least philosophically, in The United States there is at least the assumption of personal freedom that is held in high regard. In America one does not have to social climb to be successful. That is a European trait. One does not have to marry someone else to become powerful. That is a European, and Asian trait. One does not have to become a member of the political class to gain wealth. That is a European trait. In America one can be just about anything they want to be and they can be it anytime they want to. Just as a byproduct of American culture, which is a direct result of the American Experience, look just at Comic Con in San Diego. America is dedicated to the products of the mind, and no place else in the world is there anything like Comic Con. There are other countries that attempt to host such events such as the recent Star Wars Celebration in Germany, but the products displayed there are not developed in other countries, it is in the United States that they were created. Or consider the British Invasion of music that came out of England during the 60’s, a period that Cowan seems to enjoy. They came to America to be superstars as England had too small of a stage to gain such fame. That is the American Experience. Cowan because of his very weak position again took a page out of the progressive notebook of anti-concepts and attempted to use racism and isolationism to gain control of victory in the debate without having any facts to cover his emotional lack of understanding about the American Experience.
Walt Disney should be honored as a great entrepreneur that used determination, creativity, and thrift which is missing in today’s culture. People don’t know what thrift is, these days!
Rudolf Diesel a German inventor invented the diesel engine, which we use very much in the Union today. I could see German’s going around saying this is German Exceptionalism. I have never heard German’s speak in that tongue, but I detest our countrymen arrogantly beating their chest say we are the Awesomest of the Awesome! People don’t like pompous people, they are attracted by humility, what you don’t have Rich.
This is where I get really angry, and why I took a few days to cool off before answering Cowan directly. Let me start on a positive, which I agree with Cowan on the thrift issue. I would like to see a return to that type of mental exercise. And the German’s would have every right to proclaim German Exceptionalism. It was they who produced some of the finest engineering feats in the world during the 20th century and even as members of the European Union, they manage to be so productive that the rest of their European neighbors continually want to borrow their money. German BMW and Mercedes automobiles are fabulously engineered earning them the right to beat on their chest about that particular field. But here is where people like Ben Cowan are deeply flawed human beings bringing in the front door the tyrants of our modern age because they fail to project the proper mentality to combat attacks from villains who prey on humility.
When making a point that most of society will reject people who do not display humility he is right, but wrong. Being “liked,” being “popular,” or having people think you’re “awesome,” is the furthest thing from my mind. I don’t have humility because I don’t want it Cowan. I do not conceal from hangers in my closet skeletons of shame, I do not fear violence by my attackers, or need to be liked in any fashion. I do have people who like me, who share my values, but I have no desire to be liked by people who do not share my values, which is very few. If I had such a thought I wouldn’t say half the things that needed to be said in this day and age. Even people who read here every day get angry with the things I say. But it doesn’t change my stance and it never will. When you start caring what people think of you, you are finished in the philosophy business. When you desire to be loved, you are prone to be corrupt, to be bought, to allow enemies to gain emotional leverage over you. People should like you because they share your values or respect you, not because you pander to their own weaknesses. It is that process that has turned our entire society into a nation of fools led by idiots, and I would guess that many of them think just like Cowan.
Cowan believes he stands on high moral ground backed by historical fact, but all he stands upon is a pile of his own metaphorical feces created by years of such thinking. It is because of this weakness in him personally that he attempts to skirt around the edges pretending to be a sophisticated conservative that is beyond refute. But in reality he is a child of the mixed economy that has bought into some of the statism that is rampant in American culture, much of it culminating in the 1960s a period Cowan appears to enjoy.
A defeated person uses an emphasis on humility, weakness, or accusations of pompousness to justify their lackluster existences. It is easy to be an armchair philosopher, a casual listener of a radio broadcast, and a Facebook junkie that comments on things other people do. It is quite something else to be the leading edge of an ice breaker, to crash through all opposition knowing that the pain will never ever go away so long as there is ice to smash through. To the broken ice, the ice breaker is a villain, a un-compassionate destroyer, an uncompromising force of sheer will and something to be feared. To me the value is in the ice breaker who can smash through the progressive ice even if people like Ben Cowan have built cities upon the ice believing that the surface was sturdy underneath. They believe such things until they see the ice breaker coming and to cover their fear of seeing for the first time the waters under the ice, they attempt to direct the ice breaker somewhere else so that it doesn’t violate the cities of thought they have built upon progressive corruption. That is the motive behind their diatribes of humility, arrogance, and pompousness. Notice in the events shown in these clips that I was competing in as Cowan sent me his half-baked diatribes, that I don’t rub anything in when I win events. But I don’t show modesty either. If you are good, you are good and should not be ashamed of it. People like Cowan mistake pride, confidence, and determination for evil vices created in the courts of Europe for the determined strategy of controlling the masses to limited thinking and self imprisonment by social shackles.
Instead of comparing us to China, India, Spain, and Russia, how about you compare us to Switzerland, Estonia, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Chile. We are the 10th freest country in the world now! Using the left/right paradigm gets old. It is now Nationalism vs. Federalism, Limited gov’t vs. Central planning. Obviously you want the Fed Gov’t to plan social cultural norms. Steve Jobs was a capitalist; he listened to the Grateful Dead and was an advocate of LSD. I don’t own any apple products, but luckily he was never jailed for 20 years with your authoritarian leaning positions. How many jobs did Steve Jobs create Rich?
I didn’t try and put Matt on the defensive. ‘’American Exceptionalism’’ comes off as arrogant to the average person and turns them away from limited decentralized gov’t that the good founders embraced! It also gives the average person the mentality that we need to export our awesomeness to other nations, which is the opposite of the founders. ‘’American Exceptionalism, is a term that Hitler would have embraced if he were American, getting people to believe in the good of the state. He detested divided gov’t and decentralization. He wanted to instill Nationalism in the German people, and he commended Lincoln in his book Mein Kampf for Nationalizing the US and trampling the states. No critical thinking allowed in their worlds, similar to Rich’s.
And here is why I find Cowan such a repulsive parasite that is more dangerous than the average progressive, because at least those threats are easy to identify. Cowan sells himself as a logical conservative, but since his value system was threatened by my statements he has retreated to comparing me to Adolf Hitler! Cowan, America needs to export its awesomeness to other nations! You bet your ass! I’ll say it again. “AMERICA NEEDS TO EXPORT ITS AWESOMNESS TO OTHER NATIONS!” Other countries would be much, much, MUCH better off if they adopted American ideals of independence, economic freedom, and creative enterprise.
As for celebrating in sports, I don’t watch those main stream sports! I play sports that are gentlemen’s games, where you can call a penalty on yourself because the people who play have virtue! Humility and lack of explaining in a story of how the Union came about and how the founders studied other countries to help craft written documents such as the ‘’Declaration of Independence’’, ‘’Articles of Confederation’’, and ‘’The Constitution’’ is what is missing today. Broad rhetoric and arrogant phrases ‘’American Exceptionalism’’ detour people from discovering our founding generation’s great works!
Just as the definition of Welfare 250 years ago, ‘’it was a deliverance from evil’’, which now means gov’t assistance. The American Experience is the correct term in which to use! I have served my country and I am a small business owner and it makes me upset when people use terms that confuse people into thinking the person is bragging about America or is trying to invade another country and impose its Exceptionalism on them! So let’s teach kids limited gov’t and to promote trade with countries we don’t see eye to eye with. Encourage kids to read about the great risk takers and inventors of our country and the rest of the world!
Finally what Ben Cowan is really about; he considers himself a gentleman, something of a Victorian gentleman at that. Well, dude, it was considered against the “gentleman code” to attack during bad weather or other adverse conditions, but George Washington attacked the Hessians at Trenton anyway against every kind of “gentlemanly” code of conduct there was, early in the morning, right after a holiday, and during bad weather. Then again at the fall of Yorktown, Cornwallis attempted to send his surrendered sword by Deputy General Charles O’Hara to give to General Rochambeau. When Rochambeau rejected the offer O’Hara had to give the sword to Benjamin Lincoln because Washington refused to allow Cornwallis to avoid acknowledging the American General as his superior in combat. Cornwallis was a gentleman. Washington was gracious in victory, but demanded respect—which is a lesson we should all be embracing! I can only imagine what kind of “gentlemanly games” Cowan is talking about, Croquet, basket weaving, coin collecting? I hang around knife throwers, gun marksman, and bullwhip artists. CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW. The “gentleman code” is just another anti-concept. There is a difference between being respectful of other people, and then pawing off inaction, indecision, and just plain being a pussy to behaving like a “gentleman.” Cowan, you be a gentleman all you want. I’ll take the win, I’ll take the American Excepetionalism, and I’ll take the freedom that comes with it. You keep the European terminology and keep calling me arrogant. It lets me know I’m doing the right things.
For the second time in a month allegations that a Lakota West High School teacher conducted improper contact with a student surfaced. The Enquirer deserves credit for the story as they reviewed the personnel records of Lakota and discovered Robert E. Supinger, a former long-term substitute teacher at the Butler County high school had allegedly kissed a student and took her to meet his parents while he was employed by the Lakota school district.
The important thing to understand about this case is the date of the offense. Lakota did not reveal the details which were happening in parallel to the George Merk case. The impropriety occurred during the 2011/2012 school year and was finally resolved in December of 2012 by the Ohio Department of Education. The Merk offenses occurred during March of 2012 right after the much publicized cuts to the staff in February of 2012 because of the failed levy in 2011.
It appears that the teaching culture at the Lakota school system is one of excessive sexual preoccupation. The amount of sexually related offenses is not a coincidence, but comes from the day-to-day management of their occupational affairs. As Robert E. Supinger was only 25 years old, he was still nearly a decade older than the girl he was parading around to his parents as an employee of the Lakota school system, which shows extremely bad judgment. That begs the question of why Supinger was teaching high school level kids, and who made that decision. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate for Supinger to learn the teaching profession as a substitute in the middle schools where the children are much younger? Wouldn’t it make sense to have teachers who are “older” instructing high school aged children?
It can be speculated forever why so many public school teachers seem to be obsessed with sex involving their students. Yet the worst part of this case is that Lakota has had two sexually related scandals which they attempted to conceal, and were only revealed because The Enquirer did some digging to discover the information. It should be clear now why Lakota cut a deal with No Lakota Levy to delay a school levy attempt in 2012. When Channel 19 called me to do a story in June of 2012 I thought the timing was odd and Lakota seemed awfully eager to make such a deal. Now the timing makes more sense. Robert Supinger had just gotten into trouble with inappropriate conduct with one of his students and the district wanted to put time and distance between them and their next levy attempt once the Ohio Department of Education had finished their investigations. Lakota had two sex scandals happen close together and they wanted to suppress the story. If The Enquirer had not dug through the public records, the tax paying public would have no knowledge of these offenses and parents would have absolutely no idea what kinds of employees Lakota was employing. They’d be forced to take the school’s word for it, which is of course is misleading 100% of the time.
Parents assume when they send their children to school that the teachers aren’t going to attempt to engage in sex with the children no matter what the age of the teachers. Teachers are supposed to “teach” not “date” the students. Lakota stated regarding Robert Supinger that they had terminated the employee immediately, yet they didn’t publish the results in the flowery newsletter that the school sends home with the kids advertising the need for more money for those same teachers. When I went to Homearama this year and browsed through the booth that Lakota had set up at the home building show the school did not reveal how their human resources team had taken evasive action to discharge sexual predators from their classrooms in order to protect the children of the “community.” If The Enquirer had not dug through the public records the public wouldn’t have any idea that Robert Supinger had even been disciplined for anything. The case would have been swept under the rug like so many other stories that are related to public education.
The question is obvious—how many teachers at Lakota are engaged in sexual enterprises with the students of their classrooms? And how many such stories are being suppressed by the public relations machine the Lakota administration spends so much tax money on? The answer is becoming known little by little as diligent reporters discover what many disheartened parents have attempted to break open for years, that Lakota may be a good school with an excellent rating, it may have a good football team, and may actually prepare students for a life in college. But that preparation may not be academic. It would appear by the behavior of Lakota schools that their teachers are overly sexual in their focus and intent to prepare students for the next college party, instead of a competitive workplace that expects good conduct and at least the illusion of sexual restraint. Lakota acts as though their management conduct is acceptable and maybe it is for the Zombies of Lakota who vote continuously for school levies to pay for teachers who simply want to seduce tax payer’s children with flights of fantasy in their classrooms. But for me, and many other people who are voting NO on the upcoming fall school levy, these employees are not worth the money. If we wanted this kind of behavior at Lakota we’d simply recruit the teachers from a whore house.
