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.

Political Equality in Baltimore County Zoning Laws?

Political Equality in Baltimore County Zoning Laws?
Al Ritter

Baltimore County and patriot Steve Kolbe are still at odds over the enforcement of an“alleged” Baltimore County violation to force Mr. Kolbe to remove a 4 foot by 8 foot Ehrlich for Governor lawn sign. Mr. Kolbe received a citation exactly one week to the day from the sign’s installation, and he was required to remove it one week from the date of notice, or face a $200 a day fine. Mr. Kolbe complied with the order, but has chosen to proceed in court citing his right to express his freedom of speech.

Fast forward to yesterday; when this reporter spotted a similar size sign in a residential area of Baltimore County. The sign this time is for Kevin Kamenetz, a Democratic candidate for Baltimore County Executive. Surely Mr. Kamenetz had read about the stir caused by the Ehrlich sign on Mr. Kolbe’s property, one would have to live under a rock not to have heard about it, by all the media attention that was given to the issue. The property this sign rests on is in the road easement in front of the development “West Padonia,” from developer Tom Brooks, the actual address is 941 West Padonia Rd.

Even with my basic grasp of math, the 4 foot by 8 foot sign equates to 32 square feet, the same exact size of the sign that Mr. Kolbe had to remove from his property last month.

A bigger question now will be; will this sign be allowed to stand without citation from Baltimore County Zoning, or will the owner of this property be given the same time to remove it or face fines equal to Mr. Kolbe’s ?

Improvise, Adapt and Overcome

Improvise, Adapt and Overcome
Kevin Bryant

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

I know I said I was going on vacation and not write again until the fall. Something made me think of this last night and it just would not get out of my head. I knew that if I didn’t write this, I would regret not doing it. So……..

Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt. Before Barack Obama, history has shown that these three men were the biggest destroyers of liberty ever to occupy the White House, each a hero of the progressive movement in the United States, each in their own right clearing a path for another progressive to come in and move the country more towards a progressive utopia, each one ultimately falling short of their goals.

I don’t think Obama’s agenda is quite the same as the other three. Where the other three tried and failed in setting up a European style socialist state here in America, I think Obama has a different idea on where to take the country. Where the Roosevelts and Wilson wanted the country to be a far left total government control, I think Obama actually wants the country to go in the opposite direction. I believe that Obama actually wants to collapse the government not so as to set up a socialist style form of government but to get rid of government all together. I believe Obama is not a socialist but an anarchist.

Before you dismiss me, think about a few things. Other than Hillary Clinton, who has Obama put into office that is more loyal to the Democratic Party than they are to Obama and his ideas? From Van Jones, to Anita Dunn, to John Podesta to Valerie Jarrett. These are no party loyalist; they are all anti-government radicals all in some way being funded by one means or another by George Soros, himself an anti-government capitalist opportunist who made a fortune off the collapse of the British sterling. Van Jones said it himself: “We don’t want to fix the system, we want a new system”.

Why would you sign into law a health care bill that does nothing to fix the problems of healthcare? Why would you want to bring known terrorist onto American soil and give them constitutional rights? Why would you not secure the borders when you have indisputable proof that terrorist are crossing that same border? Why would you put a known supporter of Hugo Chavez in the FCC and give him authority equal to that of the FCC chairman? Why would you loan $2 Billion to an extremely profitable company that George Soros is heavily invested in? Why would you purposely put 20,000 oil rig and support workers out of work knowing that the companies that own the rigs can’t afford to have them sitting idle? Why allow and environmental disaster to continue and stop all outside influences from correcting or minimizing the situation? Why would you protect the thugs and crooks of ACORN and SEIU? Lastly, why the need to fill every government department and agency with a czar that answers to no one but the office of the President?

Obama once stated that the Constitution gets in the way of government. If something gets in the way of the military, they in turn improvise, adapt and overcome the obstacle so they can complete their mission. In Obama’s case, the obstacle is the Constitution.

If my theory is correct and Obama is an anarchist as I suspect, some pretty sharp and committed minds had to be behind the planning of this. Where the Roosevelts and Wilson failed, Obama just might succeed. Wilson, Teddy & FDR all played on public support once they were in office. They used public emotions to set things in motion and then used that emotion to rally congress to do their bidding. Of course they were all in power before Cloward & Piven and Saul Alinsky all came to the forefront of the progressive movement.

In St. Louis, a man was beaten by multiple SEIU thugs and the government refused to prosecute. In Philadelphia, members of the black panthers stood outside voting places and intimidated voters verbally while wielding night sticks. Again, the government refused to prosecute. In fact, since Obama came into office, not one federal prosecution has been conducted against a member of leftist organization who committed a violent act. Why?

Illegals are not being prosecuted, but actually protected by the federal government. Union thugs and radical members of ethnic racial groups allowed bully and intimidate the citizens of this country. Our president arrogantly ignores the majority of the people, Congress passes legislation that is destroying the economy, Executive orders being issued and not challenged so as to avoid the courts, Czars not being vetted, Bankers and oil executives being vilified. A government that now controls over 70% of the economy and spending money uncontrollably. This is a perfect storm in the making. All it needs is something to set everything in motion.

As Rahm Emanuel said, “never let a crisis go to waste”. Obama and his thugs have taken advantage of every situation to circumvent he system to achieve more power and control. Yet the prize still eludes him. What is the prize you ask? That is a simple answer, what did Obama say gets in the way of government? The Constitution. Obama and his handlers know every trick in the book thanks to the likes of Cloward/Piven and Alinsky as to how to get around everything but the constitution.

So, how do you get around the constitution? The answer is by using the powers that are allowed by the constitution against it.

Like I said, Obama has all the ingredients for the making of the perfect storm: an angry public, thugs and crooks in power in every department of government and an economy imploding. Remember Rahm Emanuel (never let a crisis go to waste), you need one crisis to destroy this country and the constitution and you need look no further than Greece. That’s right, all he and his handlers need is nationwide civil unrest. Obama needs that one thing so that he may declare Martial Law. Martial law is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but the suspension of habeas corpus is mentioned in Article 1, Section 9, and the activation of the militia in time of rebellion or invasion is mentioned in Article 1, Section 8.

The constitution is the enemy of Obama and progressive anarchist. You can’t attack it head on because eventually the constitution will prevail, so you must improvise and adapt to overcome your enemy (the constitution). Use the powers of the constitution against the constitution to defeat it. Suspend habeas corpus and with nothing left to keep the government in check, remember, he has all his anarchist cronies already in place to prevent retribution, Obama, Soros, Van Jones, Bill Ayers and the like have the power to do as they please and as Commander – in – Chief, what can the military do but ensure he stays in power.

May God prevent this from ever happening.

Two stories this week with conflicting Whitehouse messages

Two stories this week with conflicting Whitehouse messages
Al Ritter

The first story is the oil spill that will never end. In Sept 2009 TransOcean was given permission to drill in the Gulf off the coast of Louisiana. The first request made by BP was to drill in 500ft of water and was approved by the state of Louisiana, but the request was denied in its final form by the Federal Government, they told BP the drilling had to be in 5000ft of water regardless of the fact that no oil spill had ever been worked on in 5000ft of water.

Later this week a Federal judge ruled that President Obama’s 6 month moratorium on drilling on only certain oil rigs was unfounded according to the experts he consulted about the leak. Not one of the experts suggested he shut down all drilling. Robert Gibbs told reporters after the federal case that …. “President Barack Obama believes strongly that drilling at such depths does not make sense and puts the safety of workers "at a danger that the president does not believe we can afford."

Now if this is in fact true, why was it that the federal government told BP they had to drill in deeper water? Another troubling question is why did the federal government agency,Export-Import Bank give 2 billion to Petrobra, a Brazillian oil drilling company to do basically the same thing BP did but in 3 times deeper water?

The second story has to do with another Federal Judge who ruled on Tuesday that it will now be illegal to donate any money to a terrorist organization, even if labeled as “humanitarian aid”. Since 2006 Hamas has been on the official State Department Terrorist Organization List. Shortly after his inauguration, Barack Obama showed his intention of backing this group that had been previously funded by Saudi Arabia and Iran, by promising $900 million to Hamas for “reconstruction”. Recently he added to that total by another $400 million.

Nothing has changed in the political climate with these terrorists, and yet this administration continues to support them. If the definition of treason includes giving comfort and aid to the enemy, President Barack Obama has filled both requirements, and I for one want to know when he will be charged.


http://www.exim.gov/pressrelease.cfm/1C3E8A59-FA74-F3CB-3F3E6E44E287C2DA/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrobras

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,499068,00.html

http://freedomist.com/2010/06/22/supreme-court-bans-humanitarian-support-for-terrorists-will-obama-400-million-hamas-aid-be-taken-back-obama-watch-christian-news/

How many times do I get to vote again?

How many times do I get to vote again?
Al Ritter

REAL Americans know that when voting time comes, we get to vote ONCE and only once. Liberals have never played by the same rules and Federal Judge Stephen Robinson thinks similarly, he cited that the “one person one vote” idea violated the Voting Rights Act in Port Chester, NY. A town of nearly 50% Latino population of approx. 30,000 residents had no representation in the six trustee seats. This town of a majority of white voters was told that Latinos would be allowed to vote six times to compensate for low Latino representation in government.

One has to wonder what this Judge is thinking when it comes to the “will of the people.” I don’t see how this obvious violation of the “intent of the law” can be left to stand. Hopefully a law suit will appeal this travesty of justice and the right of the voters. Hopefully this Judge can be run out of the state on a rail, and even better have his license removed to practice law in the future!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election

The Fed

The Fed
William G Burmer

There was a time when one was expected to live within their means, saved, paid cash for their needs, and owed no one. They also mended socks and other clothing, made due and wore out. We each need to reevaluate our needs and set better priorities. Truth is we have become a debtor nation of people with little to no assets we can call our own. Essentially we have fallen prey to the first five planks of the communist manifesto. See chapter eight which contains the manifesto.


“No other banking system in the world was quite like it. It was the emancipation of the Treasury. New York bankers could not in the future go to Washington, as Mr. J.P. Morgan had done in 1895, and issue decrees to the President and people. Nor could there be holdup of the financial affairs of the country by business men who happened to have control of the New York bank reserves . . . the Secretary of the Treasury and the new Board would determine the movement and location of the surplus moneys in the country.” 4. On the surface it would appear that this act was legitimate in every respect. However, close investigation makes clear that “The Federal

Reserve Act is in direct violation of the Constitution, because no provision was ever made by the People for it. Congress by delegating this power to the Fed is in violation of the Supreme law of the land, the Constitution for the United States.” 5. The 10th Amendment says: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”


At the very least a referendum should have occurred prior to incorporation. More importantly incorporation of the Federal Reserve System violated state Banking Rights. We along with our Senators were asleep at the switch!


“Congress cannot delegate or sign over its authority to any individual, corporation or foreign nation. 16th Corpus Juris Secundum, No 141.’ In the words of chief justice John Marshall February 1803: “The powers of the legislature are defined, and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is the limitation committed to writing, if these limits may at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction, between a government with limited and unlimited powers, is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed, are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by and ordinary act,” U.S. Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 368.’


“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, whether federal or state, though having the form and name of law, is in realty no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose, since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” ‘16th American Jurisprudence, No 256.’ The supremacy of the Constitution as described in the Federalist papers #78 made it clear that “No legislative act . . . contrary to the

Constitution can be valid.” Its supremacy is to be preserved by the Supreme Court. (Ital. Added.)

“The Federal reserve Act, as passed by Congress December 23rd, 1913, has since become the (second) biggest fraud, (after the 16th Amendment,) in the history of this country. Its passage occurred because of self-serving politicians (admittedly, a redundant term) that were more interested in lining their pockets, than upholding their oath of office.’ (Ital. Added with parenthesis)


“All of our Founding Fathers had firsthand experience with bankers and paper money. They absolutely detested the notion that any man could issue notes based upon fractional reserves, thereby creating wealth for himself out of thin air. Most of the Founders were men of wealth, and they came upon that wealth by working hard for it, not by fraud, deceit, and plunder. Gold and silver are recognized around the world for their tangible wealth, because someone has to work very hard to get it out of the earth. How much effort does a banker expend in applying ink to paper to create a fractional reserve note? Not only did they abhor banks, they also disdained paper currency in general, because of their experience with the Continental Currency. In January 1779, The Continental Note was trading 8 to 1 against the Spanish milled Dollar, and by November of that year, it was trading 38 to 1. In January 1781 it was trading 100 to 1, and by

May of that year they ceased to pass as currency and quietly died in the hands of their bearers.


The Phrase “Worthless as a Continental” was widely heard in these times. It was for these reasons that the Founders forever mandated the use of an honest money system of gold and silver coin, and established it through the U.S. Constitution.’ “Prior to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the United States government coined, and issued our money debt free. The only lawful and Constitutional forms of money were (and still are) gold and silver coin. Acting upon the powers granted them by the Constitution, the Congress ratified the Coinage Act on April 2, 1792, which specified lawful money to be only gold or silver coin, and the denomination to be based upon a standard unit of weight---a Dollar (371.25 grains of fine silver), based upon the Spanish milled Dollar of silver, then widely in circulation in the sovereign States. The Coinage Act dramatically simplified the process of issuing a standard coin into circulation. At no cost, the individual could take his silver or gold dust, shavings, or bullion to the mint, and have it melted down and pressed into coin. Now it was guaranteed to be a standard weight and purity.’


“The Coinage Act specifies the weight and substance of the Dollar to be: ***Silver---412.5 grains, 90% pure, 10% alloy added for strength and durability. ***Gold---27.5 grains, 90% pure, 10% alloy added for strength and durability.” 6.


In the United States Code (USC Title 12 SS 152) “The terms “lawful money’ and ‘lawful money of the United States’ shall be construed to mean gold and silver coin of the United States.”

Some enlightening comments relative to the Federal Reserve come from some of our former leaders in the Congress: Representative Wright Patman from Texas, a Democrat of the 72nd to the 86th Congress (4 March to January 3, 1976), chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee said: “In the United States we have, in effect, two governments . . . We have the duly

Constituted Government . . . Then we have an independent, uncontrolled and uncoordinated government in the Federal Reserve System, operating the money powers which, constitutionally, are reserved to Congress. He further stated in the Congressional Record (May 5, 1975) . . . ‘the Federal Reserve System has never been subjected to a complete, independent audit, and it is the only important agency that refuses to consent to an audit by the Congress’s own agency, the General Accounting Office . . . GAO audits of the Federal Reserve will, moreover, fill the glaring gap that now exists in the information about the Fed’s activities and programs. As things now stand, the only information that we get on programs of the Fed is what they Fed itself wants us to have.” In truth much is available from the Federal Reserve about itself by just asking any bank. It is the Treasury Department that is most silent and secretive about its dealings with the Federal Reserve. Congressman Louis T. McFadden Republican, Banker while Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, introduced a resolution indicting the Federal Reserve Board of Governors January 13, 1932. “The resolution preamble read: ‘Whereas I charge them,

jointly and severally, with the crime of having treasonably conspired and acted against the peace and security of the United States and conspired to destroy constitutional government in the United States.’ McFadden had good cause to level such charges, Section 19 of the Coinage Act States: “If any of the said officers or persons shall embezzle any of the METALS (Emphasis Added). Every such officer or person who shall commit any or either of the said offenses, shall be guilty of felony, and shall suffer death.” 7. “Only five Congressmen stood with Him and the resolution failed. The House Republican majority leader remarked, “Louis T. McFadden is now politically dead.” A whispering campaign that McFadden was insane swept Washington, and the press was more than happy to assist in the character assassination.


In the next Congressional elections, huge contributions found their way to his opponent, and as a direct result of being outspent and publicly vilified as a “fruitcake,” McFadden was overwhelmingly defeated. He was in fact more than just “politically dead.” McFadden “mysteriously died,” as the papers reported, in 1936, after three attempts on his life. Truth be known, he was poisoned.” In addition he once accused the Federal Reserve Board of “having caused the greatest depression we have ever known.” 8.


Our present Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank Alan Greenspan (in 2000) was once an ardent foe of the very system he now serves. In his own words: “The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists (meaning the government) to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion of credit . . .” In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. (Remember inflation is a tax) There is no safe store of value . . . Deficit spending (using FRNs) is simply a scheme for the “hidden” confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights.” Ital Added. (a) Mr. Greenspan enjoyed politics after becoming an advisor to Nixon and Ford he was hooked. He served on several boards of prestigious companies, and even owned his own consulting firm. He was eventually chosen for a directorship of J.P. Morgan and Company; for which “Fortune” magazine wrote as coming near to receiving “Knighthood.” He thereafter became very silent about his criticisms of the FED. In 1987 President Reagan appointed him as Chairman of the FED, a post he secretly coveted. Is it not interesting how positions of power, prestige and money can corrupt?


Chapter Six

1. Woodrow Wilson p307

2. Ibid. p307

3. Ibid. p 309

4. Woodrow Wilson and His Work. p 141

5. Economic Solutions. p 2

6. Ibid. pp. 8-9

7. Ibid. p 15

8. Who Was Who in American Politics? p 399

9. Constitutional Law. p 12



Next: The Communist Manifesto, just for fun.


“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

I’m confused Mr. President, could you please answer a question for me?

I’m confused Mr. President, could you please answer a question for me?
Al Ritter

If Russia, or Iran, or Afghanistan, or say Cuba was invading our southern border, would you defend us? Then why sir are you avoiding the situation and ignoring the very thing you swore an oath to do? During your inauguration you promised to uphold the Constitution and to protect the citizens of this country, and yet during your 18 months in office you have done neither!

You have continually violated the Constitution that the conservatives of this country hold dear. You view the Constitution as a “living document”……..aka a moving target, and yet most of the American people view it as the laws that govern us. You refuse to admit that according to even the liberal MSNBC online poll that 96% of America agrees with the Arizona law against illegal aliens. Why is it that WE see the need for Arizona to protect themselves when you won’t? Why is it that the Arizona law mirrors the federal law that YOU refuse to administer?

We see Americans being killed on their own property, while you insist on apologizing to a critical Mexican President. We see American citizens being denied the ability to even visit the Arizona areas south of Phoenix because of the Mexican drug lord invasion of our country.

What country has to invade us before we react to repel the invasion? Is any one country worse than another?

Our President has shown through his actions in the past that he wants to multi task, by shoving every social initiative down our collect throats, and yet he can’t seem to address an invasion of our country!

You wanted this job sir, now act like a leader and do something about it or we will find someone who will!

Women Leading The Way

Women Leading The Way
Kevin Bryant

The latest round of state primaries proved what many expected; women would be leading the resurgence of conservatism in America. I for one am glad to see it. In my own little humble opinion, America is tired of members of the same Good Ol’ Boy network of politicians running for office. Many have been stating that America needs to change direction in order to return to glory.

Again, in my humble opinion, women are by nature more conservative than men in most areas including politics. No, I am not saying that men are generally to the left of Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Claire McCaskell as this trio tends to be more on the outer left fringe of the political spectrum. Just IMHO women are more likely to be more cautious, more conservative, more analytical and more likely to know what the pulse of America truly is.

Minorities are also starting to get deeper into politics. As anyone noticed that the rising political stars among minority men happen to be conservative? I have. Other than black theology churches, most black Christian churches speak more on traditional values, family unity and personal responsibility than white Christian churches do. I for one am glad to see minority politicians finally coming to the forefront of the political world and standing for the principals they were taught in church and at home.

America has needed a new direction to go in for quite some time, but as usual, the political parties have prevented this from happening. Take for instance the election in South Carolina GOP primary race. The establishment got burned badly by Nikki Haley and the people of South Carolina. Though she has not yet won the GOP nomination, she ran some 25+ points higher than the State GOP backed Gresham Barrett. The same held true in California and Nevada, the establishment candidate lost. Even though Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) is a democrat, even she came under attack from the far left for not being progressive enough by the Unions and left wing Community Organizations.

America is tired of the same old politics and sick of new faces coming to Washington and then doing and acting the same as the person they were elected to replace. Thomas Jefferson once wrote to James Madison on his views of why a little rebellion every now and then is a good thing. Now I won’t go as far as to say that it should be accompanied by armed conflict or other violent action as Jefferson did, but times are different now than they were is the 1780’s. Today we have media outlets, public assemblies and ballot boxes with which to wage rebellion against the government. America is witnessing a modern day rebellion. So long as the conservative rebellions continue to be non-violent, this rebellion will again in my humble little old opinion, continue to grow as we of this nation continue to sicken over an ever encroaching and increasing powerful federal government.

**Personal Note: It has been a wonderful 2+ years writing for Al’s page. I would like to thank all of you for reading my opinions and providing comments. I am going to be taking a couple of months off from writing and thinking about politics in general. Instead, I will be visiting the outer banks of North Carolina in a couple of weeks and then enjoying the summer with my wife, daughter, grand-daughter and our respective families.

I wish all of you a safe and happy summer and if Al will have me back, I will be back writing opinions in the fall.

Best Wishes
Kevin

Banking and Currency Reforms

Banking and Currency Reforms
William G. Burmer


For almost Twenty-Five years prior to ratification of the 16th amendment, the federal government received its revenues from property taxes, tariffs and excise taxes. Wealth was centered in the banking institutions, and large corporations. There resulted a growing division, spurred on by the politicians, among the classes. Banking interest prior to the beginning of the 20th century were privately controlled and concentrated in the hands of only a few wealthy financiers, known as the “Money Trusts” who used their positions to increase their own economic power rather than to serve the public.


The panic of 1907 had stimulated bankers, under the leadership of Republican Senator Nelson Aldrich, to try to substitute a centralized banking system that would replace the existing inelastic and unscientific credit structure. A National Monetary Commission studied the banking systems of the world and made a report to Congress in 1911 and 1912. A plan was drawn up by Paul M. Warburg, (a) of Kuhn Loeb and Company, and endorsed by the American Bankers Association. A large central institution (This information is taken from a modern text, the word “central, or centralized bank, was not a popular subject in the halls of Congress in 1911-12. Some in the Congress were still aware of what our founders knew about central banking) was proposed, with fifteen regional branches which would administer control over member banks, there would be no government controls.


“President Wilson desired to form a banking system controlled by a government board on which government appointees would manage its affairs. The United States (congress) was to supposed to be responsible for the issue of currency . . . secured by Solid Assets and a gold reserve. “Frank Glass rebelled against control of the reserve system by the government board; he dreaded the possibility of political interference with sound banking.” 1. Ital. added.


Sound banking means that any currency made or issued would be backed up with gold reserves. Wilson presented his plan to the joint session of Congress personally; the principles he espoused were clear, “There must be a currency “readily, elastically responsive to sound credit, a mobilization of (gold) reserves for legitimate uses, a ban on concentration of reserves for speculative purposes, and controls vested in the government, so that the banks may be the instruments, not the masters of business and of individual enterprise and initiative.” 2.


Paul Wartburg, then president of the American Bankers Association assailed Wilson’s plan to form a Federal Reserve as “an invasion of the liberty of the Citizens,” and ‘unjust and un-American.’ (Noble, however hypocritical words from one of the main architects of the Federal Reserve System, he and six other Bankers and Economist had three years previous secretly met and created it in November 1910; In addition, Wartburg had not received his U.S. CITIZENSHIP until 21 March 1911) (b) Elihu Root, a Republican senator from New York and Chairman of the RNC in 1912, feared that Wilson’s plan would: . . . “Bring inflation and create a vanishing gold supply.” Senator Root was correct; between 1913 and 1929 all of our Gold was used to pay interest to the Federal Reserve on all the money borrowed by our congress. The Central Banking system so despised by our founders was about to be unveiled. To spite all the political wrangling and predictions, above cited, the Carter Glass Bill was passed by Congress on December 19, 1913 with a vote of 54 to 34. The Senate passed the Bill on 22 December, and the Federal Reserve Act was on President Wilson’s desk for signature 23 December 1913.


Senator Robert Owen (R, OK), Chairman of the Senate Banking and Currency Committee and sponsor of the bill in the Senate was there with Carter Glass. We see here three of the four (c) principle players who formulated what John Adams warned about with regards to Central Banking at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. “The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution. I am an enemy to all banks, discounting bills or notes for anything but coin. If the American people allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.” 3.


The Federal Reserve Board was assigned quarters in the Building of the Secretary of the Treasury. Carter Glass was Treasury Secretary at the time. He was “an ex-officio” member of the Board. On November 16, 1914, 9:00 AM, the doors of 12 brand new Federal Reserve Banks opened for business with its main office in New York City.


(a) Paul M. Warburg’s earliest roots are found in Mr. Simon von Cassel who expired in 1556. Simon lived in a town called “Warburg” in central Germany. Because the German Jew was denied a sir name many took on the name of the town, village or farm they lived or were born in after liberation by Bismarck in 1862. Simons Great Grandson Juspa-Joseph took on the name of Warburg and moved his family north to Hamburg where they found refuge in a Jewish settlement in Antonia near the entrance to the Elb River. Here the family began to prosper and eventually, while mingling with the Dutch, Danish, and French cultures, their influence in commerce grew with each succeeding generation of the Warburg family. Paul was born the third child to Moritz M. Warburg and Charlotte Oppenheim in 1868. Paul moved to America to run the family’s’ Kuhn Loeb investment firm in New York. Here he wrote passionately about the virtues of the Central Banking system in an essay entitled “Defects and Needs of Our Banking system.”


(b) Shortly after Paul Warburg received his Citizenship he was assigned to chair a seat on a National Citizens League to promote a sound banking system. In January of 1912 he with twenty other bankers and economists lobbied Teddy Roosevelt for support of their plan. Paul testified before the House banking committee in January 1913; one month after President Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Bill. Warburg was nominated to share a seat on the new Board. He was sworn into office on August 10, 1914. See Chernow, The Warburgs, pp 135-40.


(c) The fourth person would be (R.) Senator Nelson Aldrich, however, the original bill was changed in order to take him out of the loop. The altered bill was passed primarily due to Democratic support under Wm. J. Bryans’ endorsement after giving it the appearance of public control and Government Issue but which, in fact, did neither. The Democratic leadership was in truth duped by the Republicans into accepting the Legislation as excluding any central banking controls. It was, of course, amended several times after passage and given those controls.


1. Woodrow Wilson p307 Dodd, William E. (1920). Woodrow Wilson and His Works.

Double Day, Page, and Company.

2. Ibid. p307

3. Ibid. p 309

“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

Expect an eventual BP bankruptcy

Expect an eventual BP bankruptcy
Al Ritter

The biggest question is… will British Petroleum declare bankruptcy due to the spill in the Gulf? They have lost close to $88 billion in market value in the recent month, and shares make drop to a point of a hostile take-over from of all places…….China! Yes China needs oil resources, and has the necessary funds to purchase those unwanted shares.

Obama and his hostile administration have actually added to this problem by his repeated comments on the situation. Recent comments from the Whitehouse of “keeping his boot on the throat of BP,” and “looking for someone’s ass to kick,” have only served to demean BP, and drive stock prices even lower than they would have normally gone.

It seems to serve Obama and his administration well to publicly lambast, and demonize BP to sway public opinion towards his cap and trade bill that already passed congressional muster, but up until now sat teetering on the senate desk.
As time goes on with a continued oil leak Obama’s approval rating continues to fall, but it is this writer’s fear that the cap and trade bill will eventually gain more traction with democrats and environmental activists.

It is also my feeling that with liabilities to American soil increasing hourly, that somehow the Obama Administration will find some way to lay claim to BP even though it is a foreign company. In much the same way the Administration laid claim to GM and Chrysler by circumventing the bankruptcy court, I fear the Administration will seize US assets of BP and hold them ransom.

From the past 18 months of tyrannical reign, is it so far-fetched to see this one the horizon?

Walking Our Own Path

Walking Our Own Path
Kevin Bryant

We have all done stupid things in our lives whether we want to admit it in public or not. Most of us at one point or another in our youth used the excuse that Johnny or Suzie did it and our parents had the classic response: “If they jumped off a building, would you?”

No one likes growing older, but hopefully, as we age, we get a little wiser during the process. We become able to make sound decisions that affect our lives. During this process, we also discover that sometimes there are no correct or incorrect answers. We come to understand that not everyone thinks the same, and that sometimes there is no such thing as one size fits all.

Children at a young age trust their parents to make the correct decisions for them. As they get older, they question why we sometimes have to say no and other times in similar situations we say yes. I know my kids did this quite often. As aggravating as it was sometimes, I always tried to give them the reasoning behind my decisions on a level that they could understand. Sometimes they got it and sometimes they didn’t.

I like to think that by me telling them the basis for many of the decisions I have made a difference in their lives and helped them to see beyond what was immediately in front of them and to think in big picture terms. Unfortunately, they still at times resort to the adage of living in the now and will deal with the consequences later. Since they are all grown and have moved out, the path that they walk is of their own making and by their own choices. Occasionally they ask for my opinion but as any parent would think, I don’t believe they ask it enough.

Everyone who is sitting at a computer screen reading this has chosen their own path in life. Many twist and turns are made based on circumstances but the direction most walk in life is founded on principal. It is what we choose to believe and believe in. It is how our morals and principals dictate to us what twists and turns we make to navigate through life. Almost every person reading this has these three things listed in their top five priorities in life: God, Country, Family. Their position of importance will vary from person to person and who is to say which order is correct? Again, it goes to our morals, principals and beliefs.

Those serving in congress have forgotten what their guiding principals are. Decisions are being made based on the priorities of party leadership than doing what is right based on morals, principals and the constitution. The expected large class of incoming congressional freshman from the 2010 elections will be hard pressed to drop the principals they ran on and adopt the party platform as their guide just as those currently serving have done.

Hopefully with such a large class of freshman, they will be able to walk their own path and not the path of the party. We must keep them from selling the public out in exchange for party support and favor. Keeping our eye on them, holding them accountable and not letting them off the hook for any decision made that goes against God, Country, Constitution and Family must be among our highest priorities. This goes for the old dogs of congress as well. They too must know that the path they choose to walk will seal their fate in all their future elections.

The Last Mile

The Last Mile
Kevin Bryant

I can’t recall a sitting president ever knowing that in only a year in office that he was going to be a one term president and a lame duck president during his last 2 years in office. I do believe that President Obama and the democrat leadership in congress have already figured it out.

Obama came strolling into office riding one of the highest waves in modern political history. He had to have had the impression that he was going to be in office for 8 years and with ease, he would be able to walk any piece of legislation through congress without so much as a minor hiccup. In less than 11 months in office, and with the Christmas Eve passage of healthcare reform, reality set in and he realized that his 2 year in office would be his last mile he would walk as president without barriers, insurmountable obstructions and congressional leadership clearing a path for him.

In 16 months he has gone from a job satisfaction rating of high 60’s to low 40’s. He repeatedly has forsaken the will of the people with almost every piece of legislation passed and executive order signed. He has made the phrase “The Chicago Way” a common household term in ways Sean Connery could never do in the movie “Untouchables”.

Now that he and his cabinet know they are on their last mile of having direct influence in congress, they have resorted to the tactic of overloading the system. Think of all the things congress (with the backing of the White House) is demanding to be finished before the New Year: Immigration Reform, Financial Reform, Cap & Trade (American Power Act), Stimulus III, Weapons Reduction Treaty, Net Neutrality Act, etc…….

Now add in the effects from the BP oil spill, lowering popularity, losing special elections (something the democrats never experienced during Bush’s last two years in office), global finance crisis and his own increasing burdens on the U.S. economy, the Sestak scandal, Americans increasingly becoming more knowledgeable to the political ways and now holding Obama accountable and not allowing him to pass the buck off on the Bush administration. He has resorted to stepping up his personal attacks on those who do not agree and support him. Many times he is doing the attacking himself instead of going through minions like he was last year.

It has been amusing these past couple of months watching Obama squirm a little more with each passing week. It’s comical watching Pelosi and Reid resort to telling more far reaching and improbable lies to the American people to try to push their radical socialist, nanny state policies.

Adolf Hitler once said, “Tell a lie, make it a big lie, repeat if often and people will believe it”. Obama and the democratic leadership tried this and now it is coming back to haunt them for the American people are no longer believing them, believing in them and have quit buying the hype they have been selling the public.

Censorship of Facebook, what's next?

Censorship of Facebook, what's next?
Al Ritter

It seems all that is needed to be investigated now by the FBI, is for someone to see another’s posts as offensive. William Hodges has long been a critic of the Obama Administration, but recently while posting a news article, his facebook account was deactivated, and merely 12 hours later an FBI agents and Secret Service Agents interviewed him and all his friends on facebook.

It seems that his posts were offensive to another member, obviously someone whom didn’t share his views. Is this what our country has become? Has the social networking venues such as Facebook, and My Space now become targets of the Obama Administration? It seems that not only did Mr. Hodges get investigated for his posts, but the FBI found that he had donated to Israeli cause, and they viewed that as donating to a questionable cause!

Since when has defending Israel (one of our best allies) become a questionable cause? Obviously the present administration sees Israel differently than all the past administrations. Have we become so politically correct in our actions that ANY comment offends us? I think the bigger question would be is has all dissent been outlawed by this administration, or does it just appear this way?

Actual posts by William Hodges after his account was restored by Facebook:
William Hodges

Facebook has unlocked my account. I was interviewed by the FBI and Secret Service for a week. Apparently, the First Amendment only applies when expressing the intellectual position of those in power. Also, be cautious of the charities you contribute to. If you donate to Israeli causes, you may be considered a "domestic terrorist" by the Obama Administration.

William Hodges
John & Roxanna, sincerely. I made critical statements regarding the Obama Administration. Someone reported me.

William Hodges
Lisa, remember the last evening I was online? I was in the middle of posting news articles when I was booted off of Facebook. In less than twelve hours, the FBI and Secret Service was knocking on my door. It was surreal.