Are High School Students Really Prepared?

Are High School Students Really Prepared?
Kevin Bryant

Two plus two is four, the earth revolves around the sun, four times five is twenty, osmosis is a chemical process, Paul Revere was not the only rider on the night of his famous ride to warn of the start of the British invading the colonies, Shakespeare wrote Romeo & Juliet, the first 10 amendments to the constitution are called the Bill of Rights, the first man to die in the Revolutionary War was black, “Ur BFF IDK?” is not an acceptable way to write “I don’t know who your best friend is” and no state east of the Mississippi River is bigger than the smallest state west of the Mississippi River (Hawaii excluded for those who like to get really technical). These are basic statements that any high school student should know long before they are ever handed a diploma, but sadly many do not.

I wrote to a half dozen or so current or former high school and college educators and asked them if schools were preparing our kids for life beyond high school in areas other than math and science. These current and former educators are from the west coast, the east coast and parts in between. I have great respect for each of them and consider them to be outstanding in their career field. The comment below best sums up the overall responses that I got.

One reason you see so much about math and science is because math and science are so important in terms of assessment at the state and national level. Schools are judged by those numbers, money is funneled to the schools because of those numbers, and parents want their children to have a good foundation in math and science because of the perception that those scores are more meaningful.

My daughter graduated high school last year. I asked her some simple questions the other day and as I suspected, she didn’t have a clue as to what the correct answers were. Those simple questions I asked her included: “Obama is what number President?” She didn’t have a clue, “How many members make up the Supreme Court?” She answered “12”, “What did Truman Capote do for a living?” and her answer was…..”Wasn’t he a gangster?” She did get the following question right though not by normal means did she know the answer: Is Obama a republican or democrat? When she said democrat I asked her how she knew that one. She told me because had he been a republican, I probably wouldn’t dislike him quite as much. I had to give her some credit for figuring out the right answer.

There are so many students today that can’t speak a complete sentence much less write one. When they actually do try to write a complete sentence, half the words are spelled wrong because spelling is no longer considered important enough to be taught beyond the elementary years or stressed at the high school level. We have spell check to take care of that for us. If you recommend remedial classes for a student, it’s alarming how many parents will protest because of the embarrassment it will bring upon their child. If I were an employer or an admissions person at a college or other institute and someone misspelled half their words on a job or entrance application, that application would immediately go to the bottom of the pile and by the time I got back to it, the likelihood of there being a slot remaining open is practically zero.

Here in Kansas City, the annual school budget for the KCMO school district is approximately $1.2 billion per year. The district for years has been nothing more than a bottomless money pit. Compare Kansas City school district to that of Omaha, NE. These cities rank 30th and 31 respectively in the nation in size yet Omaha’s annual educational budget is just over $500 million per year. That is less than half of KC’s budget for those of you that graduated high school within the last 5 years. There is less than a 600 student difference between the two districts. KCMO school district in 2009 had more classrooms than did Omaha yet Omaha ranked higher in almost every educational category. So it’s quite obvious that money is not the problem.

There are several factors that come into play when it comes to the quality of education our kids get in public school. First off, let me start by saying that I believe that the most dangerous union in the nation is the NEA or Teacher’s Union. When the former head of the union recently gave his farewell speech, he stated it quite plainly. He said that the purpose of the union was not for the betterment of education. The primary purpose of the union was power and money. Now, I believe whole heartedly that there are many fine teachers out there that do the job because they love it, they want to educate the youth of this nation. Why do a job for half your life if you don’t love it. Unfortunately, I believe 10% of all teachers and principals in the public education system are there strictly for the paycheck, perks and prestige that come with the position and nothing more. Teachers have been well respected in communities for more than two centuries now and that respect has been rightfully earned by many, but not all. The union members know that all they have to do is last long enough to be tenured in and unless they are convicted of a crime, the school district basically can’t fire them without risking a lawsuit. What other job can you get where you get multiple weeks off every summer and you still earn vacation days during the 10 months that you actually work? Let me be clear, not all our public educators are in their position primarily because of the perks. I believe that those 10% that I mentioned are the ones dragging public education and the 90% fighting to do their jobs correctly through the mud and our communities are suffering as a result.

Another serious problem with public education is school boards. For one, school boards have way too much authority and in many districts, abuse that power. The power of the school boards should be regulated by the state. School boards should have the power to review and recommend changes to school policy, not dictate school policy so long as it falls within the guidelines of the state. They should have the power to amend school policy or a decision made by a principal or superintendent by a vote of not less than ¾’s approval so long as their decision falls within guidelines regulated by the state. Far too often politics and personal interest come into play on school boards. I think that if you have a child currently enrolled in the school district, you should automatically be disqualified from holding a seat on the board. If you hold another public office, you should be disqualified from sitting on the school board.

Arguably the biggest problem with public education comes from the federal government itself. Why should the federal government be mandating to schools? What dictates that some senator or representative from Connecticut knows more about what kids need and how to educate them in New Mexico than those that serve in the New Mexico state houses who have personal vested interest in those school systems? What gives big brother the right to mandate that schools will spend more money in this area of education and less in that that area? What sense does it make for the federal government to have a department of education in the first place when every state in America has their own? How ridiculous is it that the federal government collects taxes from people of all states, uses that money to pay those employed by the federal dept of education then gives that same department money to give back to the states and dictates to them how they can use it? I know there are several different channels that the money flows through, but it still comes out the same way. What purpose does the federal department of education serve anyway other than just being another government entity that uselessly and needlessly sucks up federal tax dollars? Sorry, common sense here, dissolve the DoE and let the states keep their own money. That makes a lot more sense to me.

It is my belief that every high school student (grade 9-12) should have at least 2 full years of U.S. History and 1 year in some other Social Science area. However, in one state that I got a response from, the requirement for the entire social science field is only three semesters. In that state, the requirement for English is 3 years, but you can substitute a year if you take drama or some other approved elective.

Administrators do the best they can considering that they must balance what the state and federal governments mandate and they have a limited number of days with which to accomplish those requirements and must do so with limited budgets. Now, in the era of shrinking budgets, imagine yourself as a district superintendent in the state of Texas. Your budget was just cut by another 10%. You must now decide where you are going to have to cut to meet all the requirements that you are mandated to meet. Far too often those cuts are made in areas of arts, yet the football team is still allowed to keep its 12 member coaching staff when 5 will do. The school board and the district would demand the superintendent’s resignation if he messed with the football program. The school marching band will not be allowed to participate in the Christmas Parade in a neighboring town because there is no money but some kid who lives 200 yards from the school can jump on a bus and ride it to school so he doesn’t have to walk off any of the 3000 calories he acquired from eating McDonalds the night before. Make him walk to school or have his parents bring him and the parents will be protesting at the next board meeting calling for the superintendent’s resignation. You are the superintendent. What do you do? Get rid of 7 coaches? Reduce the size of the bus fleet and limit service to only those living a mile away or further? Cut money from the band, music and art classes? Perhaps you cut some funds from each. These are the decisions being made everyday. Schools spend a fortune in athletics yet less than 1 in 50 high school student athletes will ever play at the college level. You actually have a better chance of getting into college on a band scholarship than you do an athletic scholarship yet funding for band will be cut long before athletics.

One teacher stated that we need to make grades K-12 year round. I know of no such school that lacks air conditioning so summer heat would not be a factor for consideration. With the advances made in farming, it is no longer beneficial for farmers to have large family to help work the land and it is reasonable to assume that with advances in farming and equipment, students who do live on farms can easily attend school a full day and still be productive after the school day is over. Many of the teachers I questioned favored a longer school year but did not explicitly say how long to extend the school year.

Another concern was brought up by every teacher but one. History, Civics, Geography, Government……..these classes are repeatedly being used by districts to provide coaches and other non-subject matter experts places to fill their day so they may justify drawing a full paycheck. Growing up, I had some of these as class instructors. All they could do was read directly from the book. History, Geography, Government….these are not just facts to be remembered long enough to pass a test then forgotten. These are all full of wonderful stories of who we are, how our nation was formed, what events took place that shaped our country and formed our government. I’m paraphrasing one teacher but her comment was that how can any young person today make an intelligent choice when voting if they do not know why our forefathers created the constitution, what is in the constitution and how government is supposed to work in accordance to the constitution.

In closing, I am going to use another comment from a 30 plus year educator:
I do agree with you that we have to know our history, but more than that, we have to understand it. Somewhere along the way, we have to instill the importance of all knowledge to students. We have to build on those foundations of learning to read and write and do arithmetic and add the basis for thinking and understanding. I wish I had the answer for how to accomplish that. (I’d be really rich by now if I knew.) Research tells us that “teacher quality – not star principals, laptop computers, or abundant electives – is the crucial ingredient for (student) success.” We are also told that: “It’s not how much money you have, apparently, but how you spend it. And it’s not only what you teach, but how you teach it….” I guess it boils down to this: We have to hold teachers to a high standard. We also have to hold administrators accountable for providing the best possible teacher for every subject and not just accepting a warm body in front of the classroom. When we can get that done, then we will see students who have that well-rounded education, not just in math and science, but also in history and English and all those other content areas.

Democrats: Pay your taxes as we say, not as we do!

Democrats: Pay your taxes as we say, not as we do!
Al Ritter

It seems that Democrats are all for higher taxes on the rich, but when push comes to shove they try to avoid them too!

Charlie Rangel this week became immersed in his ethics investigation, the stone walling for the last few years is finally over. The once chairman for the Ways and Means Committee (the group who writes the IRS rules) has come under scrutiny for his rent controlled properties in NY city and his Dominican Republic vacation properties, and various other charges, that he as the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, knew were against the law. Rangel was replaced by another despicable Democrat with IRS problems of his own Pete Stark who tried to claim a homestead tax on his secondary home in Maryland which isn’t allowed.

We are all aware of Democrats who have skirted their IRS obligations, only to miraculously discover the error of their ways once they were named for specific Obama cabinet posts. Unlike us they were only made to pay the “oversight” in taxes, but not the penalties and interest.

Just this week we watched as John Kerry was exposed trying to skate his own state excise taxes on his 7 million dollar yacht, by docking it in Rhode Island. I don’t think anyone would question that if this wasn’t exposed he would have never come clean on this tax indiscretion.

I’m not asking that politicians be held to some higher morality, let’s just hold them to the very same laws they write that WE have to adhere to.

I am a Racist!

I am a Racist!
Al Ritter

I am a racist if I don’t agree with the Healthcare Reform bill. I am a racist if I want the responsibility of buying my own health insurance. I am a racist if I want Barack Obama to fail in his effort to “fundamentally change America.” I am a racist because I demand proof of Obama’s birth certificate and to make the records of his passport public.

I am a racist because I don’t see the sense in turning the New Black Panthers loose AFTER their conviction. I am a racist because I want to see the Mexican Border secured from the influx of illegals that spew into our country on a daily basis. I am a racist because I support Israel rather than Hamas. I am a racist because I don’t think that a mosque should be build across the street from where 3000 American citizens were killed by Muslim terrorists. I am a racist because I don’t like Barack Obama, but I share the same dislike for Joe Biden, Rahm Emanuel, and David Axlerod too.

I am a racist because I reserve an opinion until I have all the facts, not because I jump to conclusions based on prejudice. I am a racist because I don’t believe in a war that hasn’t been declared by congress. I am racist because I hold the idea that no “war” can be won based on the idea of “winning over hearts and minds of the people,” the very same strategy was tried in Korea and Viet Nam, and accomplished nothing. I am a racist because I don’t like the direction my country is taking. I am a racist if I think that abortion is wrong, but I’d been just fine thinking that execution is wrong for murderers.

The charge of racism is indefensible at any level. How do you prove you are NOT a racist? Maybe Congress should have banned the word racist before they spend all the time and energy to ban the word “retard.”

Socialism in America

Socialism in America
William G. Burmer

Part II of III


In chapter three of this text we defined what a Republic and Democratic Government are. We determined that they were not related to the republican or democratic parties which, are political entities.


Presently our government, working within the confines of a Democracy controls the citizen, and in vague terms itself by the use of Statutes and Codes. For several decades under “Color of Law” our public servants have brought about dramatic social changes that have severely altered the face of our once great Republic. Like it or not we have taken on the visage of a collectivistic state.


Socialist ideology has no place in a true republic. Our most recent history, of the last one hundred years, has proved itself most detrimental to our republic. Following the turn of the century, the sixteenth amendment, incorporation of the Federal Reserve, two world wars, the Great Depression, the Korean conflict, and the Vietnam conflict have all contributed to a social, moral, and political unraveling of our society. In truth none of this need to have occurred if only our leaders in Washington DC would have heeded the advice given by the Father of our Country at his farewell address 19th September 1796, before leaving office Washington pontificated: “. . . .Europe (and the rest of the world) has a set of primary interests which to us have none or very remote relation. Hence, she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the cause of which, are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence therefore it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in . . . her politics.’ . . . ‘Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rival ship, interests, humor, or caprice? It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world. ---So far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it.” Ital. Added.


When we begin, as we have in past few generations, involve ourselves in trying to bring other nations into compliance, or for any other noble however, misguided reasons attempt to parallel with our values, or those of the “New World Order under UN control,” we invite conflict and a clash of culture which, inevitable diminishes our sovereignty and those others involved.


America needs to be isolationist in the political sense. On the private side we can and should offer help and assistance where needed. But, when conflicts arise we should avoid involvement. We do need to respect other cultures and allow those societies who differ with our values to exist in peace without interference, no matter how repressive we may view them. Thus real peace and mutual respect will be allowed to exist between all nations and peoples. I cannot believe that there would not be more peace in the world as a result! It is clear that our founders understood this principle and applied it for the first century of our Republic.


President Washington issued his “Proclamation of Neutrality” when approached by France in 1793 to help them during the French Revolution. President Monroe and John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State, again maintained Americas none interference in European affairs in1823 by issuing the “Monroe Doctrine” declining to interfere in European dependencies and asserting Americas right to protect its boarders from invasion by foreign interests. Shortly thereafter we kicked Spain out of Florida, and France ceded her claims on the Louisiana Territories. Our founders understood the danger of getting involved in European affairs. We must somehow summon the character as a nation to return to our Republican roots, replacing internationalism and endless war with the old-fashioned virtue of minding our own business.

Does anyone else see the insanity?

Does anyone else see the insanity?
Al Ritter

I watch the government start a legal battle with Arizona, and their Governor Jan Brewer, when all the Arizona legislature did was restate the federal law pertaining to illegal immigration. After all the ballyhoo the Administration made about racial profiling and injecting the race card into an argument, it seems that the case the feds have presented only claim that they have the right to enforce immigration and not the state. This idea has been shot down time after time in the past.
The problem doesn’t lie with who has the right to enforce federal immigration policies, it has to do with who WILL! The law is clear, it encourages states to work WITH the feds in enforcing the immigration laws, and the Arizona law sb 1070 does just that!

The thing that is infuriating is that certain “sanctuary cities” have laws that forbid their local police departments to help in immigration enforcement. The citizens in Maryland are very familiar with such laws. Takoma Park for one specifically forbids officers from participating in anything to do with illegal immigration enforcement. This is specifically spelled out in federal law, and yet political intervention by this administration has shown that they never intend to stop illegal immigration, but to offer support to localities like Takoma Park.
Clear law precedence declares laws that offer sanctuary to illegal aliens is against federal law, and yet Attorney General Eric Holder refuses to sue those localities, but instead wastes taxpayer money on a ridiculous law suit, that can only have a favorable outcome to his benefit if he happens to get a liberal judge to hear the case.

People are tired of this abuse of reckless power. Liberals always see the expenditure of funds as the doling out of government money. The fact is that the government has NO MONEY of their own! They refuse to see that, and then add the idea of “only we know best how to spend money,” and what is best to spend it on.
The feds will spend millions of dollars on this Arizona suit, and Arizona will spend millions to defend themselves. Jan Brewer wants conservatives to donate to the legal fund to defend a suit that shouldn’t have been made to begin with! All this money being spent is OURS, not theirs! So we spend it on both sides, how crazy is all of this?

All of this could have been avoided had the federal government just done their job in the first place!

The Obama Administration claims that the fact that more border agents are along the Mexican Border than any Administration in the past is good enough, yet not 30 miles from Phoenix a federal park has been basically handed over to Mexican Drug Cartels.
What we are experiencing is an INVASION Mr. President, and it is YOUR job to protect us against invasion in our homeland. It is NOT your job to encourage illegals to bleed our system of freedom dry! DO YOUR JOB!

Socialism in America

Socialism in America
William G Burmer

Part 1


It is inevitable when talking of or writing about collectivism, most people will lump such revelations into a form of conspiracy, and errantly or deliberately dismiss the issue entirely. This is especially true in America, where too many of us view our nation thru “rose colored glass s’; like two newlyweds we cannot see those dangers that loom all about us which, in truth will eventually shred our idealisms. We would like to believe all is well about us; however, this is in truth, not the situation.


First ask the question, what is a conspiracy, and why is it so hard to see those changes that have taken place in America for the last several years which indeed are radical, or the very antithesis of the Republic our Constitution prescribes? Could it be that in order to accept a conspiracy to enslave us, we would first have to accept the Christian appellation that there are opposites; right and wrong, that there is in very deed, good and evil in the world?


A conspiracy is a deliberate plot to do evil. We know that there was a conspiracy to crucify Christ, see Mark 14: 1. We also know that the Devil is the father of all lies and that he masquerades himself as an angel of light, see 2nd Corinthians 11: 14-15. Is it evil to manipulate America from deifying God to deifying man? Is it evil to socialize aid and institutionalize communist principles in our government, and society in general?


Does it take more than one evildoer to plot a conspiracy, to attack and carry out that conspiracy to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993, and fly two civilian jumbo jets into the same buildings in “9/11.”? You bet it does! Does it take more than one person to conspire to fill our schools and the minds of our children with amoral sex education, to design programs, print schoolbooks and compel teachers to teach our children about homosexuality, “safe sex,” and “alternate lifestyles”? Is it evil to put aside the sacred institution of marriage, and destroy the family unit? If you agree then you must also agree there has been, and continues to be an ongoing conspiracy to institutionalize these things! If you don’t agree, I feel pity for you, for you have allowed yourself to be made a fool.


From the beginning of our nation’s history there are groups of individuals who have been active in manipulating evil, to purposely cause wars, wage war, and lose wars purposely, for political gains, to aid the enemy while our solders die on the battlefield, and bring our nation to the brink of communist control, and to create a “New World Order.” By destroying the family, true religion, and the best economic system that has ever existed, with all these barriers of resistance removed, America is ripe for tyranny. Thus one of the greatest nations in the world is made another slave to Socialism. Yes, I would call this a conspiracy.

Email your Senator TODAY!

Email your Senator TODAY!
Al Ritter

I've been a bit busy this week working on several projects. Illegal Immigration is one huge problem this week as a form of amnesty has worked its way through the house; we need to make a stand on this! America has always been a nation of laws, but the present administration has been working for almost two years to circumvent those very laws we as conservatives hold dear.

It is important that we tell our senators this will not be tolerated, over 60% of America disagrees with the law suit against the Arizona law sb 1070. We want the Administration and Congress to listen to the majority of their constituents and end this insanity of an amnesty program. The illegal alien problem isn't just a product of this President; it has been going on since Richard Nixon. 9/11 changed our border problem forever; we cannot have any form of National Security until we address the hundreds or perhaps thousands of people streaming over our borders on a daily basis. Illegal aliens cause more of a drain on our tax dollar than the overused argument of the liberals of "the cost of the Iraqi war."

Anchor babies are yet another problem passed by Congress, and only serve to break families apart, and tax our system even more. Where are the level headed thinkers that should be running our country based on laws and not "social conscience?" We should be making laws based on what is best for America, not laws based on a small portion of people.

The preamble to the Constitution says that natural and naturalized citizens are entitled to the benefits and rights afforded in the Constitution, it doesn't say anything about non-citizens being entitled to ANYTHING, and yet our Congress and President pander to these groups that don't represent any legal standing.

If a citizen, a politician, or a serviceman does have "proper standing" to require our President to produce his birth certificate, then why should any illegal alien have standing to make demands on our government?

Please cut and paste the following letter and send it to your Senator TODAY, time is running out!

Dear Sen. Smith:
This is more than a letter of protest of efforts to provide amnesty for tens of millions of illegal immigrants currently residing in the U.S. It's a promise of a vote against any senator who supports such a plan.

It's a promise of financial support to candidates opposing any senator who supports such a plan.

It's a promise to expose this betrayal of the rule of law and the will of the people to the constituents of any senator who approves such legislation.

It's a promise to use any legal means necessary to thwart the future ambitions and aspirations of any senator who chooses to reward lawbreakers and punish law-keepers.

It's a promise to fight tooth and nail, even resorting to peaceful civil disobedience if necessary, to ensure that such legislation can never be carried out.

I don't expect you to read all of the "No Amnesty Pledge" letters currently flooding into your office. All you have to do is read one – and notice the volume of duplicate letters you are receiving, all sent by different American citizens who are thinking about this issue just as I am.

Frankly, we're concerned that what is being considered by the U.S. Senate would tear this country apart, break trust between the people and government and forever change the character of our nation and our communities.

Vote no on amnesty – or else!

Your name here

Taxes Again

Taxes again
William G Burmer


We as patriot Citizens must be willing to do everything we can to disseminate truth and not error. We cannot be successful if all we do is “preach to the choir.” There are many voices, which need training.


One can study the wisdom of Locke, Montesquieu, Adam Smith and others who warned of the sins of excessive taxation. Yet unless heeded has caused the downfall of great civilizations; ours could be next.


It is clearly inscribed within the Constitution, if we would follow that rule of law, everyone who would claim to be called an American, could be very prosperous; not only in terms of money and property, but more importantly, because personal sovereignty would be protected from a large unchecked government. Every Nation would want to follow our example. That rule of law as set forth within the Constitution is born from common law, that is, the laws of nature and God.

Our Liberties are an inheritance from our Founders. We ought not to treat them lightly less they become irretrievably lost to us. Our current tax system will eventually consume our liberties with its abusive statutes and regulations. It thumbs its nose at due process and makes criminals of its citizens; it is in truth a despotic, criminal, tyrannical régime which currently administers our tax laws.


The IRS claims that our system of taxation is voluntary, if so then why should we be forced to voluntarily give up our wealth? Government financing and taxation is constitutionally defined see Article 1, Section 8; note that it is not voluntary. It must be limited as outlined in Section 9; ours is no longer limited; government must not have power to enlarge the scope of their taxing power, yet the Congress assumes they have the power to do whatever they desire; as they believe we are sleeping at the voting booth.


The principle of accountability by government comes under the jurisdiction of the Congress; see Section 10. Think about it. If a father and husband battles each pay day to balance his limited budget, and sees a tycoon in a resplendent automobile, he may believe that just one of the tycoons’ cuff links would solve all his problems.


Political voices cry out constantly to soak the rich for they make too much, or, they are not paying their “fair share.” Speaking for “Joe six-pack” or “the little guy” again the politicians cry out, “we feel your pain, you have so little, let us help you!” Many blindly believe their rhetoric.


No one tells him (the little guy) that the higher taxes imposed on the wealthy will not come out of their living expenditures. It comes from their investments and savings. Such taxes mean less investment, less production, fewer jobs, and finally higher prices for scarcer goods. As the rich have to lower their standard of living, the struggling husband and fathers’ income will be gone along with his savings and his job. Some tend to forget, or are so blinded by negative political rhetoric, they fail to think of the fact that it is the wealthy which provide jobs, and benefits to those who are employed.


Class envy has been and is cleverly used by the politicians to divide people into, upper, upper middle, lower middle, and lower classes. Thus the politician’s power base increases as he makes promises to each, most of which he will never be able to fulfill. We have become so used to the lie that we have learned to accept it as “politics as usual.” Ever so often a politician does come along who really means what they say and follows through with their promises. We all know however, that this is such a rare occurrence, it is hardly worth mentioning.


Government spending being at the heart of our economic problems in the 1970’s and early 80’s, dubbed “Reaganomics” by the media, Ronald Reagan during his administration, cut government spending, made large tax cuts for business and individuals, and created incentives (a 25% tax cut for individuals, and faster write offs for businesses) to increase more jobs. He in addition combated inflation by controlling government spending. His efforts received mixed reviews but by 1988 after reducing tax rates, and removing low-income persons from the tax rolls, Reagan practically guaranteed his Vice president would be the next President to occupy the White House. He became the most popular President we have had sense John Kennedy. If people read and understood the principles of wealth guaranteed by the Constitution they would not have allowed their legislators to continue soaking them with the tax burdens of the past one hundred years.


“WE THE PEOPLE” and the American Constitution

By: William Grant Burmer ISBN 978-1-4363-2186-0

Available at Barnes and Noble and other fine book stores

Dazed and Confused

Dazed and Confused
Al Ritter

I am so confused about our government’s latest legal problems. The first problem was when the DOJ dropped charges against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation in Philadelphia in 2008, and yet even with overwhelming evidence in the way of video, they get released. Mean while in Arizona, because of Arizona’s sb 1070 anti-illegal legislation, the DOJ sees fit to sue to revoke a law that only mirrors the federal law, so that they may enforce a law that the federal government refuses to enforce.

Talking heads from the Obama Administration have claimed that Arizona is safer now than it’s ever been. What they should have said is that the federal government has more border personnel than they have ever had, but it’s still not enough. The feds have given up federal park areas to drug lords from Mexico, not 30 miles from Phoenix, but keep telling us that America is safe.

The third item is the federal judge who rescinded the moratorium on drilling in the Gulf has given stern warning to the Administration against reinstituting the moratorium. This has been decided in federal court, and yet the Administration wants to strong arm their way to achieve the results THEY want at any cost.

For a Whitehouse that employs more lawyers than any Administration in the past, it sure seems to me that they are flaunting their power and daring anyone to challenge them. The sad part in all these challenges is that there is a 50/50 chance that either side will win based on whether or not the cases will be heard by a liberal or conservative judge. America has been so divided by this President, whatever happened to the man who was supposed to bring the nation together?

The Communist Manifesto

The Communist Manifesto
William G Burmer

Karl Marx describes in his communist manifesto, the ten steps necessary to destroy a free enterprise system and replace it with a system of omnipotent government power, so as to affect a communist socialist state. Those ten steps are known as the Ten Planks of The Communist Manifesto… The following brief presents the original ten planks within the Communist Manifesto written by Karl Marx in 1848, along with the American adopted counterpart for each of the planks. From comparison its clear MOST Americans have by myths, fraud and deception under the color of law by their own politicians in both the Republican and Democratic and parties, been transformed into Communists.

Another thing to remember, Karl Marx while creating the Communist Manifesto designed these planks AS A TEST to determine whether a society has become communist or not. If they are all in effect and in force, then the people ARE practicing communists.

I am sensitive to the reality that many who may read this are working for, and receive their livelihood from working within or for these corporations of government. Never the less it is important to point out that these very institutions, no matter how philanthropic they sound or may be, are responsible for taking from us our liberties, and abilities to care for ourselves, and our neighbors as Christ would want us to do.

This is my favorite: %$$%#%##*&)()_)_)^(*^&^

The second plank of the Communist Manifesto reads: “The proletariat (National Leader- B. H. OBAMA) will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie (working class) to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State, . . . (by) a heavy progressive or graduated income tax.” Original translation (Ital. Added)


The 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto


A complete text of the Communist Manifesto can be retrieved from the Internet by simple keying in Communist Manifesto .I feel it is important to point out the keys by which communism is achieved in society, they include these principles:


1. Abolition of property in land (confiscation of benefits) and application of all rents of land to public purposes. (Under: Federal Parks and Recreation/Implementation of Rights of Eminent Domain.)

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. (Via: IRS/In CA the FTB)

3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. (Federal Confiscation of farm Land c/o death tax)

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. (Federal and State Welfare Laws/ Endangered Species Act-Road Maintenance and Abandonment Plan/ Dept of Natural Resources.)

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. (Federal Reserve System/International Monetary Fund under UN control.)

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State. (Under: FCC / AMTRAC and BART / FAA / Maritime Administration / Fed Railroad Adm. / Dept of Transportation / Fed Highway Adm.)

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. (Environmental Protection Agency / OSHA-Occupational Safety and Health Act, with the Employment and Training Adm.)

8. Equal liability of all to labor; Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture. (Minimum Wage Acts / Product Safety Acts under HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ADM. / Positive Action programs.)

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country. (Agricultural Adjustment Acts Under Dept. of Agriculture. / Urban Homesteads /Dept. of HUD.)

10. Free education for all children in public schools; Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial productions; etc. (Dept. of Education, state and federal by President Carter’s Adm.) Taken away from the private sector in 1979.)


Now that we can see these institutions are in place, we are ready for another phase of tyranny---enter the United Nations. Concerning the true goals of the UN, this should send a chill up your spine, taken from the U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, and D.C. Price 15 cents. Department of State Publications 7277 Disarmament Series 5, Released September 1961, Office of Public Services BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 1961 0---609147 pamphlet “FREEDOM FROM WAR” The United States program for general, and complete disarmament in a peaceful world. Emphasis added


Made all the more haunting since it was printed three years before the beginnings of the Vietnam Conflict; I have chosen to quote only the last page of this pamphlet since it says more than all the other 17 pages combined:


“By the time Stage II has been completed, the confidence produced through a verified disarmament program, the acceptance of rules of peaceful international behavior, and the development of strengthened international peace-keeping processes within the framework of the U.N. should have reached a point where the states of the world can move forward to stage III. In stage III progressive controlled disarmament and continuously developing principles and procedures of international law would proceed to a point where no state (meaning the state you live in) would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force and all international disputes would be settled according to the agreed principles of international conduct.


“The progressive steps to be taken during the final phase of the disarmament program would be directed toward the attainment of a world in which: a) States (meaning United States of America) would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N Peace Force. b) The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning. c) The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes. d) The peacekeeping capabilities of the United Nations would be sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states (meaning, again, the state you live in) under such arrangements sufficiently far reaching as to assure peace and the just settlement of differences in a disarmed world.


Now if this information printed by our own government does not create within you some grave concerns, I suppose nothing will!! This is absolute proof that our government plans to turn America over to tyrants, Led today in June 2010 by Barrack Husain Obama.


My Great grandfather died when I was twenty-one years old. He once told me “communism is the greatest threat to our country’s liberties there ever could be. At heart, communism is atheistic and antagonistic to freedom and other Christian principles.”


America is better than this. Turn again to God, freedom, and Constitutional Principle. Turn to Liberty. Take back you individuality, and ability to do for yourself and be able to bless others. You are a child of God; your rights come from Him, not from man, governments, Kings or Queens.


“WE THE PEOPLE” and the American Constitution

By: William Grant Burmer ISBN 978-1-4363-2186-0

Available at Barnes and Noble and other fine book stores

Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010

Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010
Al Ritter

I have some real problems with this act which will use the form of an amendment to add yet another government agency to the enormous machine that we can’t feed now. This act will be an amendment to the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The senate bill is S. 3480 and the house version is H.R. 5548. The bill gives carte blanche to the “Director” who will be named by the President to set regulations. There are no real rules as of yet, but one glaring rule made in the beginning.

These are the following areas I have problems with;

Page 15 Sec. 103 Prohibition on political campaigning

Page 17 Sec 105 Access to intelligence the agency will DIRECT access to everything
that was once considered as privileged information by servers

Page 53 Sec 24 Authority of the Director to access ANY government agency to gain information

Page 94 line 8 Civil penalties (government may sue you, but you may not sue the government)

Page 98 line 10 Protection of information by director to “prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency”

Page 169 line 18 the director along with the Sec. of Education to select curriculum to school children

Page 176 lines 13 and 14 Pay scales; “can’t exceed GS-10 for entry level”

I see it as very offensive that the same social network that President Obama used to obtain his campaign win could be off limits to all political campaigning in the future, I find it offensive that an agency will now have NO boundaries to collect information on anyone at the whim of the director, I find it offensive that the government may sue me in civil court but I have no similar recourse. I find it offensive that material may be removed from the internet to prevent embarrassment to anyone the director sees as necessary to protect? I find it offensive that anyone other than the Sec. of Education may set curriculum for school children. I find it offensive that the pay scales for entry level positions may go as high as the highest government pay scale.