Guest Columns
Obama: failure or success?
Let me say this plainly: This president is not a failure. He is a success! He knows exactly what demographic he should go to. The older generation has not yet figured out this method. He is going to the younger generation where the real battle rages. And that is where America must go if we are to win the future.
Is Obama really a failure?
A recent poll out from the Washington Examiner stated that President Barack Hussein Obama is seen as America’s biggest “failure” among modern presidents.
A failure?
Oh, how little the American people know about the history of tyrants and dictators like Mao Zedong, Adolf Hitler, etc.
The American people look at this president as if he does not know what he and his criminal administration are doing. Friends, he knows exactly what he is attempting to do! Barack Hussein Obama has already stated that he was out to “fundamentally transform the United States of America.” If he is out to destroy what America is, then he is in fact not a failure, but rather a success.
For example: It was not too long ago that I heard many in the older age demographic saying they believed that this president made a huge mistake because he had so many people on government entitlement programs. Little did they realize that this was not a failure on the behalf of this president and his criminal administration, it was a total success.
He needed dependents; therefore, he created dependents. Those dependents were sure to keep him in office, and keep him in office they did. Was this a failure on his behalf, or a success? Who are a good majority of the dependents? I’ll tell you who they are: the up-and-coming generation.
Failure or success? Education
Obama’s radical plans compared to Karl Marx. Montage: Greg Tew, CC BY 2.0 Generic License
What would you say if I told you that over 700,000 of the up-and-coming generation graduating from public schools in America each year cannot even read there own high school diplomas? This, in fact, is true. They cannot.
Is this a failure or a success on the behalf of those who wish to stupefy the next generation (Hosea 4:6)? Of course … a success!
On Dec. 4, 2013, the Obama administration announced that it would hold a special “youth summit social” for the “people who engage” the White House on social media.
The White House also requested that participants ages 18-35 (in 2008, 68 percent of those who voted for Barack Hussein Obama were in the age demographic of 18-33) are eligible to apply to attend this “White House event,” stated the White House in a blog post. “After you sign up, spread the word! Let your followers know that you applied to attend the #WHYouth social.”
The summit aims to educate young voters on the supposed benefits of enrolling in the Affordable Care Act.
Who else could they win over to their unconstitutional and unlawful “Affordable Care Act” except those who do not know the difference?
I have for the last 19 years spent my life reaching out to our posterity, who are now becoming our present leadership. Either America will take up the mission of reaching out to them, or you can rest assured this administration will. If this happens, American Christians and patriots will wish they had listened. There is still time (Deuteronomy 1:39).
The Church Militant:
Think the Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman case was bad? You should see what MSNBC and Rachel Maddow did to Bradlee Dean. Help in his lawsuit against them. Stand for America and get your free gift.
[subscribe2]
Bradlee Dean is an ordained Christian preacher, Radio show host for the #1 show on Genesis Communication Network from 2-3 p.m. central standard (The Sons of Liberty), a National Tea Party favorite. He also speaks on high school and college campuses nationwide. Bradlee is also an author, a husband to one, daddy to four boys. You have probably seen Bradlee through such outlets as The New York Times, Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, The Weekly Standard etc.
-
Clergy4 days agoFaith alone will save the country
-
Civilization1 day agoElon Musk, Big Game RINO Hunter
-
Civilization5 days agoDr. Jay Bhattacharya Will Rebuild Trust in Public Health
-
Civilization5 days agoFreewheeling Transparency: Trump Holds First Post-Election News Conference
-
Civilization3 days agoLegacy media don’t get it
-
Constitution16 hours agoBiden as Feeble Joe – now they tell us
-
Executive2 days agoWaste of the Day: Mismanagement Plagues $50 Billion Opioid Settlement
-
Civilization2 days agoA Sometimes-Squabbling Conservative Constellation Gathers at Charlie Kirk Invitation
“What would you say if I told you that over 700,000 of the up-and-coming generation graduating from public schools in America each year cannot even read there own high school diplomas?”
I’d say “Oh the irony.”
“THERE own high school diplomas”? Really??
And how are conservative ideas responsible for that outcome? There should not even be any such thing as a government school. That outcome is the inevitable result when teachers join unions, go on strike, and hold communities up for ransom.
“And how are conservative ideas responsible for that outcome?”
They’re not.
“There should not even be any such thing as a government school.”
I don’t agree with you there. Education is generally too local for the free market to work quickly enough. Given enough time parents would identify the best schools and the bad ones would go out of business, but how many pupils would suffer in the meantime? Here’s what happened at one school that was state funded but privately run:
link to telegraph.co.uk
“That outcome is the inevitable result when teachers join unions, go on strike, and hold communities up for ransom.”
On the other hand I have some sympathy there. Teachers are, in my view, as essential as firemen and the police. They shouldn’t have the right to strike. They should also be expected to act professionally and educate children as well as they possibly can, instead of holding many of them back through misguided ideas of equality. The whole POINT of examinations is to show up relative ability; if everyone gets an A just so nobody feels like a dunce the system is failing.
The worse problem – and not with the faculty, but with the administration – is the political indoctrination now appearing in many American government schools.
Like a third-grade lesson now showing up in the CORE curriculum, explicitly identifying Barack Obama as “the Messiah.” And I gather they don’t really mean the one that men like Isaiah and John the Revelator predicted. They mean the One Ruler for whom humanity has long waited.
And then there’s the music lesson to teach a song that began thus: “Mmmm mmmm mmmm! Barack Hussein Obama!”
Beyond that, I have seen incredible featherbedding in school administration. I have experience with only one public school district. When I was a student in that school, each school (four elementary schools, a Junior High that has since become a Middle School, and a High School) had one principal each, and the district had one overall superintendent, plus a smattering of deputy superintendents – like the deputy superintendent for elementary education, in charge of the four elementary schools. Today every school has at least ten Vice Principals in Charge of This-or-that Fiddlework, and the district has at least as many Deputy Superintendents in Charge of Fiddlework. And each one has his or her own private secretary. And the property ratepayers are expected to pay all those salaries.
Please cite where the Common Core curriculum explicitly calls Obama the messiah.
Remember, “explicitly” would mean it actually says “Obama is the Messiah” or similar. Explicitly is *not* the usual conservative hyperbolic interpretation that takes one line, spins it in a manner that would impress a centrifuge, and then declares “they’re saying Obama is the Messiah!”
A third-grade lesson in that curriculum includes an unmistakable hagiography of Obama.
It is inappropriate ever to hagiographize a sitting President in a school lesson.
Or do you consider that appropriate?
As I suspected — nobody is calling Obama the messiah; that’s the spin of the right wing whining machine.
And you *still* have not responded to the irony pointed out by Fergus Mason.
Then kindly read this link.
Interesting. Where can we find this hagiography of Obama in the third-grade lesson to judge it for ourselves? Does it describe miracles that he has supposedly performed or attribute supernatural powers to him, or is it merely a biography that is insufficiently critical? Does it or does it not explicitly identify Obama as “the Messiah” as you stated?
If you disapprove of hagiography of sitting Presidents, does that mean you support hagiography of former Presidents, or do you disapprove of that as well? George Washington and the cherry tree comes to mind.
Read this link.
By the way, I happen to agree: it’s time to lay the cherry-tree story to rest. George Washington has many substantiable things to commend him for, without repeating that story as if it were fact.
Again, you said “explicitly.” That means directly calls him the messiah. It does not do that.
And from the link you posted, it’s a book someone has written, asserting it’s “aligned” with big bad Common Core. You don’t show anyone is using the book.
Indeed, if you perform the horrifically liberal act of searching for the book at amazon.com, you see it’s was even published in 2008. You’re bringing up an old book, and the author’s claim it’s aligned with Common Core, and spinning it into “Common Core says Obama is the Messiah!”
Did the developers of the CORE Curriculum select that book, or not?
You’re quibbling, as usual.
As far as I can tell, no, the authors of Coomon Core did not select the book. The link you yourself provided states that the author of the book describes it as “aligned” with Common Core, which strikes me as little more than an attempt to rejuvenate sales of a book over five years old. (She should probably send the tea party a thank you note, by the way – NOTHING simulates book sales like outrage about it.)
I see somebody backpedaling.
So let’s clarify: one teacher prepares a one-hour lesson plan, to _sell_ as part of a teacher-teacher market for these sort of lessons, which approaches this particular (apparently not very good) book using the Common Core techniques of vocabulary practice, comprehension questions, examination of author’s viewpoint, etc. etc.
This is supposed to represent the Common Core developers selecting the book?
I think you fail on multiple levels here:
1) The author of the book does not describe the book as ‘Common Core-aligned’; the teacher who wrote the lesson lesson plan about the book says that the _lesson plan_ is ‘Common Core aligned’. See here: link to teacherspayteachers.com
Any person can make a lesson plan about any book using Common Core techniques. That does not make Mein Kampf or the Koran or the Bible ‘Common Core Aligned’.
2) The book has not been ‘chosen’ by ‘the developers of the CORE curriculum’. You may feel free to prepare a Common Core aligned lesson plan about the Book of Revelation and try to sell it to anyone who wishes to buy it, just like this teacher did. The developers of Common Core have as much control over your lesson plan as they do over hers.
3) The book does not “explicitly identif[y] Barack Obama as ‘the Messiah'”, as you claimed. That is simply false. If you think a picture book prepared for elementary school children is too fawning in its approach to a sitting President, fine. There’s no need to lie about it.
Are you sure this lesson plan didn’t go nationwide?
Why would anyone of good will prepare such a lesson plan as a marketing tool?
If someone is putting words into the work that the author did not write, why hasn’t the author taken legal action?
Nobody is putting words into the work that the author did not write. Where did you come up with that? The same place that you came up with the claim that the book explicitly identified Obama as “the Messiah”?
The lesson plan isn’t a marketing tool for the book; one teacher prepared a Common Core-aligned lesson plan that used the book. She then decided to sell that lesson plan to whomever might want to use it. She is marketing the lesson plan. I suppose she’s doing that because she wants to exchange the product of her labor for financial compensation, like all good capitalists.
This lesson plan is not required by Common Core. The book itself is not required reading for Common Core. Someone saw “Common Core” mentioned in second-hand connection with this book, and promptly lost their power of critical thought. This lesson plan has ‘gone nationwide’ in exactly the same way that any item on Ebay has ‘gone nationwide’, in that any interested person can buy it.
In other words you fall back on the old standby that some underling exceeded her lawful and/or bureaucratic authority. Sorry, but it won’t hold. Who failed to intercept that lesson plan?
I’m not falling back on anything. Teachers come up with lesson plans as a fundamental part of their jobs. This teacher came up with a lesson plan using that particular book. Other teachers prepare lesson plans using other texts. They are free to keep such lesson plans to themselves, or give them away, or try to sell them, as this teacher did.
She did not overstep any authority in doing so, and this was not an authoritative act. She cannot mandate that anyone else use her lesson plan, and no one has been required to do so.
Who do _you_ think was supposed to ‘intercept’ that lesson plan? Surely you aren’t advocating for some central educational authority to micromanage every teacher’s classroom, deciding which texts are politically acceptable…
It’s no good. You are still saying one teacher went rogue, or that her lesson plan went viral and did her, and the CORE curriculum, an injustice. But you’re twisting in the wind. No one, in or out of government, except you, is offering that defense of the program, or that argument for where that lesson plan came from.
“You are still saying one teacher went rogue, or that her lesson plan went viral and did her, and the CORE curriculum, an injustice.”
No, he didn’t. He’s saying that a teacher wrote a lesson plan and tried to sell it. This happens all the time. Other teachers can buy it if they want. Alternatively they can NOT buy it. Nothing to see here, move along…
Only from you and Matthewj have I heard anything about buying and selling. Now why is that?
I say your information is inaccurate.
“Only from you and Matthewj have I heard anything about buying and selling. Now why is that?
I say your information is inaccurate.”
This website seems to be the original source for this:
link to eagnews.org
That site links to the aforementioned lesson plan on TeachersPayTeachers.com for its source:
link to teacherspayteachers.com
As you can see, you can BUY that lesson plan for $3.60. If you do a search on that site, you can find thousands of them that say “Common Core Aligned”:
link to teacherspayteachers.com
Hey look, there’s even one that encourages third graders to read the bible!
link to teacherspayteachers.com
Funny: the Education Action Group still says it is aligned with the CORE curriculum.
Which your side does not so much deny as make light of.
“Funny: the Education Action Group still says it is aligned with the CORE curriculum.”
Well yes. That’s a selling point, isn’t it? If it’s aligned with the approved curriculum you can use it in class, therefore it’s (at least nominally, although probably not in this case) worth buying.
That might be the way they sell it. It would turn me off. Then again, I’m not some unionized teacher in league with the Communization of America and the attempt to turn the United Nations into the United Federation of Man. (Menschenvereinigtebund.)
“the Communization of America”
*sigh*
Obama is not a communist. He’s not even really left-wing, if you step outside the rather peculiar bubble of US politics. He’s a centrist, maybe centre-right. In the UK he’d be a Conservative.
Conservatives, no matter where they are, do not lament that their country’s Constitutions do not direct them to redistribute wealth. As Obama did.
“Conservatives, no matter where they are…”
That was Conservative with a large C, as in a member of the Conservative Party. Conservatives with a small c, as in people who base their entire philosophy on resisting change, are extinct outside the USA and the Islamic world. That’s because most of us don’t want to live in Bronze Age Palestine; it was a crap place full of crap people, and my biggest regret is that the Romans never fully civilised it.
We agree on this: the title “Conservative Party” is misleading.
As to the Middle East, that region is the geometric centroid of the inhabited world. And one day it will become its Capital District.
“Conservatives, no matter where they are, do not lament that their country’s Constitutions do not direct them to redistribute wealth”
As for redistributing wealth, I think it’s a dreadful idea.
As a human being I don’t want anyone in my society to starve to death, die because they didn’t have health insurance or be unable to get a job because they didn’t have one decent suit for an interview.
On the other hand I am utterly opposed to the idea of welfare being a lifestyle choice. Benefits should be paid as vouchers for essentials, with a cash limit of €30 per week. Anyone who’s fit for work should be available to work; if they’re offered a job and refuse that should be the end of benefits. We German liberal redistributive socialists have a great scheme called One Euro Work. If you’re claiming unemployment benefits you can be called in at short notice to do a job for €1 per hour. It might be repainting a school or prison; it might be running a till in a supermarket. Any money you earn doesn’t affect the welfare benefits you get. You can refuse to do it, of course. If you do, ALL your benefits get stopped immediately.
What you describe, would be a good intermediate step between the present system of welfare-as-lifestyle-choice and the full mutual independence for which I strive. Which means even that system would be an improvement. We were on track toward that before Obama put it back to the straight handout system that Lyndon Johnson invented.
“And one day it will become its Capital District.”
Unless its inhabitants – ALL of them – have a serious attitude readjustment it’s more likely to become a sheet of radioactive glass. Which is fine; we can drill for the oil with robots.
Oh, I forgot: you refuse to believe in the Creator of this world, much less that He has a Big Operation planned to bring about the precise outcome I described.
“you refuse to believe in the Creator of this world”
That’s because I haven’t seen any evidence for one.
“much less that He has a Big Operation planned to bring about the precise outcome I described.”
I don’t see why any god would choose the Middle East as the location for his big plans.
Why not? Turns out that all roads do not lead to Rome.
The shortest aggregate air routes lead to Israel. Which is the travel centroid of the civilized world.
“The shortest aggregate air routes lead to Israel.”
Unless you want to go to Israel – which most people don’t – that is one of the most stunningly irrelevant facts I’ve ever seen. The Middle East is a backwater. Its sole importance to the rest of the world is oil, and even that’s declining. As its economic importance falls so will its capacity to create mischief. It has a small population, few resources apart from oil and one of the most unpleasant collections of cultures to be found anywhere outside a lunatic asylum. It’s never going to be more important than it is now.
“The shortest aggregate air routes lead to Israel. Which is the travel centroid of the civilized world.”
I’m sorry I’m being a bit slow this morning…could you explain what that means?
The sum of the distances (as the crow flies) from Jerusalem to every other point in the world is less than the sum of the distances from any other point in the world. If you want a central location for a conference, or for a seat of government, you can do no better than Jerusalem. (The only reason why Israel’s main airport lies in the suburb of Lod, near Tel Aviv, is that the lie of the land prohibits building an airport any nearer to Jerusalem.)
“The sum of the distances (as the crow flies) from Jerusalem to every other point in the world is less than the sum of the distances from any other point in the world.”
Er no, it isn’t. It’s pretty much exactly the same, with only a small deviation due to the planet’s oblateness.
Jerusalem is not going to become the capital of the world.
Make that: every other point on land. Lod Airport is therefore the most logical place to establish an air-travel hub. The sum of the distances from Lod Airport (TLV) to every other airport in the world, or to every other place where one might logically build an airport, is shorter than the sum of the distance from any other airport in the world.
Don’t forget: you cannot land on water. And the Pacific OCean is the vastest body of water in the world.
“Jerusalem” is a pretty unusual spelling for “a point in Turkey about 250 km NE of Ankara”. Or, going by the ICR, “150 km SE of Ankara”.
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to icr.org
Nevertheless, Jerusalem is the centroid for travel from any land to any other land.
Hm. Seems like someone here said differently not so long ago.
“The result yields the city center of Ankara, the present capital of Turkey, which has the same longitude as Jerusalem and is north of Jerusalem by seven degrees of latitude.”
link to examiner.com
Now, if you want to limit things to “every … place where one might logically build an airport,” you’re going to eliminate most of Antarctica. Maybe that will be balanced out by the loss of parts of Canada and Russia, but I wouldn’t bet on it. That should shift things even farther north. I hear that Odessa is a nice place to visit. Or Istanbul. Gosh, what if it turns out to be some mudhole in Bulgaria?
Seriously, did you get this claim from the Tel Aviv chamber of commerce, or what? A bit of local boosterism taken uncritically? If you want to claim that Jerusalem is going to be the world capital come the Rapture, feel free. But if you want to claim that Jerusalem (why not Tel Aviv, which is at least closer to the airport?) is the ‘center of the world’, please be prepared to offer proof.
I doubt that anyone in Tel Aviv even knows about the calculations I have seen. I figured this out for myself.
“The sum of the distances from Lod Airport (TLV) to every other airport in the world, or to every other place where one might logically build an airport, is shorter than the sum of the distance from any other airport in the world.”
I’ll take your word for it, but really, so what? Why is this even slightly important?
It shows how important Jerusalem is, and always will be.
You mean Ankara. Or are you willing to share your calculations with us that show otherwise? If you figured it out you should be able to show us how you did it. Otherwise It looks like Turkey has a far better claim to being the ‘center of the world’ than Israel.