Monday, April 14, 2014

Shiree Bundy Cox on the Bundy Family Allotment That Was “Bought”:


“I have had people ask me to explain my dad’s stance on this BLM fight. Here it is in as simple of terms as I can explain it. There is so much to it, but here it s in a nut shell.

My great grandpa bought the rights to the Bunkerville allotment back in 1887 around there. Then he sold them to my grandpa who then turned them over to my dad in 1972. These men bought and paid for their rights to the range and also built waters, fences and roads to assure the survival of their cattle, all with their own money, not with tax dollars.

The rights to the land use are called preemptive rights. [which Cliven Bundy has cited.]

Some where down the line, to keep the cows from over grazing, came the Bureau of Land Management. They were supposed to assist the ranchers in the management of their ranges while the ranchers paid a yearly allotment which was to be use to pay the BLM wages and to help with repairs and improvements of the ranches. My dad did pay his grazing fees for years to the BLM until they were no longer using his fees to help him and to improve.

Instead they began using these monies against the ranchers. They bought all the rest of the ranchers in the area out with they’re own grazing fees. When they offered to buy my dad out for a penance he said no thanks and then fired them because they weren’t doing their job. He quit paying the BLM and tried giving his grazing fees to the county, which they turned down.

So my dad just went on running his ranch and making his own improvements with his own equipment and his own money, not taxes.

In essence the BLM was managing my dad out of business. Well when buying him out didn’t work, they used the endangered species card. You’ve already heard about the desert tortoise.

Well that didn’t work either, so then began the threats and the court orders, which my dad has proven to be unlawful for all these years. Now they’re desperate. It’s come down to buying the brand inspector off and threatening the County Sheriff.

Everything their doing at this point is illegal and totally against the Constitution of the United States of America.

Then there’s the issue of the cattle that are at this moment being stolen. See even if dad hasn’t paid them, those cattle belong to him, regardless of where they are they are my father’s property. His herd has been part of that range for over a hundred years, long before the BLM even existed.

Now the Feds think they can just come in and remove them and sell them without a legal brand inspection or without my dad’s signature on it. They think they can take them over two borders, which is illegal, ask any trucker.

Then they plan to take them to the Richfield Auction and sell them. All this with our tax money. They have paid off the contract cowboys and the auction owner as well as the Nevada brand inspector with our tax dollars. See how slick they are? Well, this is it in a nut shell. Thanks”

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Why The Feds Chickened Out On A Nevada Ranch

Kevin McCullough | Apr 13, 2014

Let me obliterate a bit of confusion here: the Obama administration attempted to go to war with a rancher in Nevada. Let me amplify a little bit of truth: They tucked tail and have returned home. And let me add a bit of clarity: they had no choice!
As the nation began to become familiar with the plight of the family of Cliven Bundy, many of us harkened back to another standoff in which the Federal government attempted to bully it's outcome: Waco, Texas and the Branch Davidian massacre.
It is telling that in the Nevada case the feds pulled out so quickly, given all they had indicated they were willing to do to resolve the matter to their satisfaction. They had set up a perimeter around the Bundy's family land, ranch, and home. They had brought in extra artillery, dogs, and snipers. They were beginning the process of stealing more than 300 head of cattle that did not belong to them.
They did so--or so we were told--for the reason of protecting the desert tortoise. But then it was revealed that the Bureau of Land Management had shot far more desert tortoises than the Bundy cattle had even possibly destroyed. We were told they did it because the Bundys had broken federal laws by not paying what amounted to retroactive grazing fees to the federal government. But the Governor of the state of Nevada told us that Bundy had paid every ounce of state tax, met the state requirements, and their family had been improving the property more than 100 years previous.
Finally we were allowed to know the connection between a communist Chinese wind/solar power plant and its connection to that senator named Harry Reid. Evidently a plan had been hatched to use the Bundy property for a solar farm and instead of paying the Bundys, someone, somewhere in the administration believed it was easier to just take what they wanted.
That approach is at least consistent with the readily documented abuse of eminent domain where the government for any number of reasons--few of them valid--have taken to taking what doesn't belong to them. Americans then watch as it gets handed over to some multi-national corporation for the "cause" of the "greater good."
There were a few specific reasons why the feds chickened out in the Nevada desert though.
1. Technology - As the Bundy family members were abused, cameras captured it. Not television network cameras, but dozens of cell phone video devices that gave witness to a Bundy aunt being shoved to the ground, and a Bundy son being tazed. All of this while threatening protestors with dogs, brandished weapons and vehicles was captured, uploaded and made viral to the watching world.
2. States' Rights - As the drama unfolded it became clear that the Governor of Nevada, and the Sheriff of Clark County knew that Cliven Bundy's family had not only not broken any state law regarding the land, but that they had gone to the enth degree to insure compliance with Nevada laws on the property. The Governor and the Sheriff, to their credit, did not favor the feds as a more powerful party in the conflict. Though there must have been pressure from Senator Reid's office, the administration via the Bureau of Land Management, and local officials who were bought and sold like the Clark County Commissioner who told those coming to support the Bundys to have "funeral plans in place."
3. Grassroots Response - As other incidents have transpired in the past, the amount of time it took honest information to reach the grassroots and thus the response to the action came to slow. In the massacre in Waco, most of the nation had been sold a single narrative from the limited media outlets covering the events. Similarly the events surrounding the abduction of Elian Gonzales from his family in Florida and deportation to Cuba took place in such a response vacuum that by the time Americans knew the real story, the damage was done. With the Bundy ranch, internet outlets by the dozen had competing information with the limited "official news" being released by the networks, and in most cases the alternative sources had it correct and usually a full day or so ahead of the news cycle. By the time afternoon drive hit, when the network news rooms in New York were preparing their first stories, talk radio audiences had already been dialing their elected officials in Washington demanding action.
The majority of Americans saw through the efforts to spin the story in Nevada. Couple that with the leadership failures that the American people view the administration responsible for, from Benghazi to the Affordable Care Act, all it took was the unedited video of federal agents tazing Bundy's son, followed by his pulling the wires from his chest and continuing to stand his ground for there to be comparisons made to the American revolution.
It's also important to note that merely pulling back from the Bundy property hasn't settled the matter for the American people either.
The feds have stolen 352 head of cattle, and will not confirm or deny if they euthanized some or all of them. Recompense must be made. And to be candid, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see if a few ambitious law firms don't try to convince the Bundy family of the validity of litigation.
Fortunately for the American people, the feds were not able to ultimately bully a simple rancher, not for a tortoise, a solar power plant, or a dirty Senator and his administration.
We owe the Bundy family a great deal of thanks for standing tall.
For if the federal government is allowed to do it with one, then there will be nothing stopping them from doing it again.

Historic! Feds Forced to Surrender to American Citizens

Saturday, April 5, 2014

You Can’t Spell “Progressive” without an “S.S.”

By Tim Dunkin

Sinclair Lewis was wrong—when fascism came to America, it was actually wrapped in a rainbow flag and wearing an ascot.

How else can one describe the ongoing left-wing commitment to the stamping out of free speech, whenever that speech contradicts the gay agenda, as well as other parts of the “progressive” platform? With the resignation of newly minted Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich, the “progressive” Left, especially its social wing, has once again shown itself to be the enforcers a political correctness in speech and thought that ought to be chilling to any person who actually cares about individual liberty.

It’s time to come right out and say it—the gay “rights” movement is the biggest threat to American freedom in existence today. Bigger than Islamic terrorism. Bigger than Russian revanchism. Bigger even than ObamaCare and our continuing out-of-control spending.

Yet, this is only one small part of the “progressive” movement in America which is quickly taking on shades of 1933. Under Barack Obama, the radical Left has apparently felt that its time has come, and its movement toward open totalitarianism has accelerated. The recent displays of homofascism are but the tip of the iceberg in the Left’s attempts to create an all encompassing control of your lives, your words, and even your thoughts. There is not a single area in your lives or mine that the Left would not like to domineer so as to force compliance. Indeed, anyone who has been paying any attention knows that the left-wing agenda is characterized by this. There is not a single aspect of their agenda that cannot be accurately described by one of the following terms: coerce, regulate, control, punish, socially engineer, mandate, confiscate, or dominate.

This is doubly ironic because the Left has spent decades trying to convince Americans that “the Religious Right” and other bogeymen are the ones who really want to control your lives. Despite the overwhelming lack of actual evidence for this proposition, the Left has nevertheless managed to convince a sizeable share of mind-numbed drones in this country of it. So, while half a country full of useful idiots is running around worrying that the “Republicans” or “Tea Partiers” are going to take away their condoms or something, the movers and shakers in the leftist movement are busy worming their way into every facet of our lives with a view to forcing us to live by their dictates.

It’s easy to understand the Left once you start understanding them through the lens of fascism. How else do you explain their drive for gun control? It certainly isn’t from any evidence that gun control “cuts crime”—in fact, just the opposite is the case as we see looser and looser regulations on firearms ownership and use leading to less crime. But, see, fascists don’t believe private individuals should have guns, but only the police and the military should, so you and I should have them taken away from us regardless.

How do you explain the left-wing obsession with global warming, despite the fact that every major prediction they have made to date has failed to come to pass, and that we are in fact in the midst of a 17-year-long pause in warming? Yet, you have wacko left-wingers who want to imprison people for being “climate deniers.” Why? Because, when you get to the root of it, “global warming” serves as an excellent cover story for taking control of and destroying the industries, and therefore the high standard of living that has allowed Americans and other Westerners to live lives free from “needing” to be provided for by all-encompassing government.

The left-wing hatred for free speech I’ve covered previously.  What’s funny is that, without a trace of irony, you had people writing in the comments about that article trying to defend the notion that people ought to “pay” for saying things that liberals disagree with, and were apparently doing so with a straight face.

Even the freedom-unfriendly aspects of the so-called “War on Terror” put into place during Bush’s administration, such as TSA harassment at airports, warrantless wiretapping of innocent Americans’ communications, and laws that allow citizens to be “indefinitely detained” for “suspicion of terrorism” have all been continued and expanded under the Obama administration, and are now defended by those on the Left.

In fact, you can go right down the line and compare the radical Left in America today with totalitarian regimes such as Nazi Germany, the Stalinist Soviet Union, and (just to make it fun) the dystopic nation of Oceania depicted in George Orwell’s 1984:

The American LeftTotalitarian Regimes
  • Oppose private gun ownership, only police and the military should have guns
  • Outlawed private gun ownership, only police and the military had guns
  • Oppose homeschooling and other alternatives to public skoolz
  • Outlawed any form of alternative education systems not completely controlled by the state
  • Encourage children to inform on their parents about guns in the home, lack of support for gay and environmentalist agendas
  • Recruited children to turn their parents in for unapproved opinions or opposition to government policies
  • Enforce political correctness and other social and political efforts to discourage wrong opinions
  • Employed propaganda and punishment to discourage “thought crime” that consisted of holding to wrong opinions
  • Support the breakdown of the nuclear family because it reinforces anti-progressive values
  • Tried to break down the nuclear family because it was a source of “heterodox” loyalties (i.e. to something other than the state)
  • Support abortion and do not recognize the right to life of all individuals, especially those with congenital disorders
  • Employed abortion (and post-birth murder) to “weed out” dysgenic individuals or those who were “unwanted”
  • Oppose economic freedom for businesses by mandating executive wages, directing production, and denying the right to hire or fire who they will
  • Business was either state-run or else was forced into “corporatistic” public-private partnerships that mandates executive pay, production, and employment practices
  • Support welfare and other give-away programs that work to encourage individual dependence on government
  • Used government to coerce citizens into dependence upon state support for daily necessities

And the list could go on and on.

The problem is that once the Left realizes that there is a limit to how far they can get with their agenda merely by lying to people and using smokescreens, they’re going to have to try to get the rest of the way there through outright violence and open intimidation. That’s when things will get really ugly. That’s when the progressive “S.S.” will go from mere rhetoric to being a reality.

So, what can we do about all of this?

Well, for the time being, we need to do everything within our power to oppose the further advancement of their agenda at a demotic level. This means directly disobeying everything the Left wants to push through. They don’t want us to own guns? Go out and buy as many guns with as much ammunition, as you can reasonably afford, learn how to use them, and have the resolve to use them against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. And under no circumstances should we ever register these guns. Ever. The Left tries to shut us up? Just get louder and louder. Vent your opinions on every blog, comments section, and forum you can find. Overwhelm them with free speech. Hound them across the internet until they finally shut the thing down, and then hound them with pamphlets in the streets and soapboxes on the corners if we have to. They want to force us to put our kids in public skools where they can get at them with propa-gay-nda and Common Core nonsense? Pull your kids out of the system and homeschool or put them into private or religious schools. Starve the beast. Start educational coops to help each other out. Long story short—double down on opposing everything they’re trying to do. 

Don’t continue to let them do what they want unhindered while ducking your head down and “minding your own business.” If there ever was a time for conservatives and liberty-lovers to relearn the virtue of public-spiritedness (which is not the same thing as socialism, by the way, reread your Tocqueville), it is now.

May come a time when opposing the Left’s cultural and political coup in America may involve more than just words

But also—and let’s be very serious here—understand that there may come a time when opposing the Left’s cultural and political coup in America may involve more than just words. The Left will not be content until they control us all completely. If they can’t do it by deceit and guile and dependency, they will try it by other means. There may well come a day when the left-wingers actually do try to put “climate deniers” in prison for opposing the party line. When that happens, be prepared to shoot back. If they try to come and take our guns away, be prepared to make them pay a high price for each one. If they come to take our children away, be prepared to show them what being a “Papa Bear” is really all about. And know that if this type of situation ever does come to pass, it is WE, not they, who are in the right. It is WE who have inalienable rights that no government and no social cadre can ever rightly or justly infringe. Shooting back will not be an act of rebellion, but an act of preservation of our constitutional government from terroristic interlopers seeking to overturn it by revolution. THEY are the revolutionaries, the traitors, the terrorists.

I know this all sounds “radical,” but is it really? Our country was born through the fire and blood of men who felt the exact same way as I’ve expressed above, men who were actually engaging in the defense of their rights and liberties as Englishmen, predicated upon the natural law foundation that was as old as our civilization, and even before. They actually went to war for far fewer offences than we have endured—we’ve been remarkably long-suffering in putting up with the antics of the Left for as long as we have. Nobody wants to see our society reach the point where actual shooting is involved—which is why we need to take every step we can to stop those who hate our Constitution and our society NOW, rather than continuing to let the situation grow worse unimpeded. The line in the sand must be drawn now.

Teach Common Sense not Common Core

By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh 

“Common Core will be raising good little socialists, who are in tune with their feelings, not so much their critical thinking skills.”  - Author unknown

I have seen many educational fads come and go, trying to replace teaching methodology in our public schools with something so revolutionary and never tried before that would make teaching a “science” instead of an art and to place all children into a national standardized one mold fits all in spite of the human variability in intelligence, talent, aptitude, ability, and the desire to learn. All these fads were driven by the Department of Education’s intention to fund new research that justified its existence and the college professors of education who were under the threat of “publish or perish” when it came to obtaining the very sought-after tenure - life employment without dismissal for cause. Education grew more and more liberal, infusing non-science subjects with Chavezism, Castroism, Maoism, Stalinism, feminism, racism, socialism, and communism.

Why are we then sending our kids to college, borrowing the money we don’t have, knowing that the kids won’t be able to pay it back when they can’t find a job because the jobs don’t exist, the economy is in shambles? Why are we allowing these degenerate college professors many of whom hate America and what it stands for to destroy the minds of our children and reshape them in the vision of their professors’ ideology?

Common Core, the brainchild and work of 30 individuals under the aegis of the Governors’ Association and the almost $200 million sponsorship of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is something else. It is the tool to achieve the “fundamental transformation” of our society as promised in 2008. It is nationalized education “standards” that require students to find another way to reach an answer, particularly in math, even if the answer is wrong, justifying the incorrect answer as the path to help students learn to think critically. This would probably happen right after the student is turned off to math or he/she reaches the right developmental age to think analytically and critically.

A simple addition, 17+25=42, elicited the following response from a second grader in San Jose who was using the GO Math! Curriculum of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, aligned with the Common Core standards, “I got the assignment by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer that my brain got.”

Here is another simple math problem that a third grader should be able to solve immediately, 26+17=43. In the Common Core new, perplexing, and convoluted way of thinking, the problem is resolved this way
“Add 26+17 by breaking apart numbers to make a 10.
Use a number that adds with the 6 in 26 to make a 10.
Since 6+4=10, use 4.
Think: 17=4+13
Add 26+4=30
Add 30+13=43
So, 26+17= 43”
If you are dumbfounded by this kind of stressful and irrational logic, you are not alone.
A simple subtraction, 243-87=156 done quickly “the old fashioned way,” turns into a complicated solution that requires strange logic and drawing a graph such as the one illustrated below:
Can we imagine now studying calculus and differential equations under such contorted thinking? But it gets much worse in reading, writing, government, and history.

A Common Core kindergarten problem instructs, “In each cube stick, color some cubes blue and the rest of the cubes red. Draw the cubes you colored in the number bond. Show the hidden partners on your fingers to an adult. Color the fingers you showed.” Aside from the fact that the problem is almost impossible for an adult to comprehend, it involves “cube sticks,” “number bonds” and “hidden partners.” The worksheet further urges children to impose this math concept on an adult.

Another example from the Go Math! Common Core aligned math curriculum involves Mina Boyd’s kindergarten child who was given the worksheet to Count and Write 20, presumably 20 apples that looked curiously like bombs. There were actually only 19. Was it a printing mistake or were the publishers having difficulty with this “transformational” math? One reader described the assignment beyond brainwashing - a form of Pavlov’s dog conditioned response, “neuro-linguistic programming, and otherwise known as hypnosis.”

A fourth grade reading assignment asks students to describe adultery, a highly inappropriate topic for elementary school.

Sixth grade students in Arkansas were given in 2013 the assignment to “revise” the “outdated” Bill of Rights, “suggesting that the government can grant and remove inalienable rights.” Middle School students were also told that the Second Amendment requires gun registration.
According to the workbook, “This amendment states that people have the right to certain weapons, providing that they register them and they have not been in prison.”

It gets even more interesting. The USDA is now in the business of nudging grandparents to use to help their grandkids eat healthier, and giving instructions to offer their grandchildren “hugs” instead of treats and to “read government bedtime stories.”

People like Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee have constantly pushed the Common Core standards. If implemented, they are “designed to make the United States more competitive with the rest of the world.” How exactly would a dumbed down curriculum make children more competitive? Were we not competitive enough before Common Core? Was American higher education not the envy of the world? Why must we now destroy it?

Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Excellence in Education is running Common Core ads non-stop. Parents are waking up and garnering the support of some teachers. But there are powerful groups who are pushing Common Core because there is a lot of money at stake. Common Core standards are not a grass-roots, nor state-led initiative.  It is the Obama administration Race to the Top competition bribing schools with billions of dollars if they adopt Common Core. It is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, it is Pearson, the billion dollar educational publishing and testing conglomerate, the Center for American Progress, the National Governors Association (NGA), the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), and recipients of Bill Gates Foundation money who continue to propagandize Common Core.
U.S. News and World Report quoted Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (1.5 million members), who stated that the Common Core implementation is ‘far worse’ than ObamaCare.

Money is no object when it comes to sending school administrators to a luxurious hotel and spa ($38,000) in order to discuss strategies for implementing Common Core standards at schools in the Inglewood, California impoverished school district that had to be bailed out in 2012 to the tune of $55 million.

The Daily Caller assembled a list of complicated, dreadful math problems and worksheets that are glaring evidence that Common Core standards are not really trying to improve our children’s education, but are hurting their education.

Common Core math standards are based on the theory of Constructivism. This theory rejects the drilling of children on basic arithmetic (addition, subtraction, multiplication). Instead, children are taught to “construct” their own way of figuring out an answer. An incorrect answer is acceptable as long as the child explains how he/she got the wrong answer.

The reading found in the English literature selections is not chosen for the joy of reading and learning, but instead, they are to be “analyzed and discussed by students using leftwing norms” of morality and behavior. This unproven theory of education is called New Criticism Literary Analysis.

Moral ambiguity, acceptance of perverse and aberrant behavior presented as courage, overt sexuality, adultery, and even pornography are some of the themes chosen for young and older students. For example, schools in North Carolina who adopted the Common Core standards are requiring the reading of the sexually explicit book, The House of Spirits.

Middle school readings include the complete United Nations Declaration on the Rights of the Child and the complete United Nations Millennium Declaration with the main theme being global diversity and global citizenship. Stories include head scarves of Muslims in France, an American teenager punished in Singapore, an arranged marriage in India, learning Japanese, an African novel, and articles promoting global warming as settled science. The readings indicate the progressives’ love affair with third world societies which they deem superior to our own.
Centuries of European and American civilization and culture are glossed over. The few stories devoted to American culture include a kid who tries to avoid parental punishment for breaking curfew, Halloween, and a controversy over sea lions in Oregon.

The Eagle Forum described some of the reading materials aligned with Common Core. The common denominators are anti-Americanism, sexuality, porn, and global warming:
  • Dreaming in Cuban by Cristina Garcia (10th grade reading, anti-American and sexually explicit)
  • Black Swan Green by David Mitchell (9th grade, a 13-year old boy describing his father’s genitals and a sex act)
  • Wind Power (k-1, telling children their electricity comes from wind mills)
  • Ted the Fly Guy (k-1, cartoon characters with large eyes)
  • Where Do Polar Bears Live? by Sarah Thomson (2nd and 3rd graders, global warming, climate change, carbon foot print)
  • Sorry, Wrong Number by Lucille Fletcher (4th and 5th graders, woman learns of her own murder plot when phone wires get crossed; is this the kind of reading appropriate for 9 and 10 year olds?)
  • English language arts lesson plans for 3rd, 4th, and 5th graders based on the book, Barack Obama: Son of Promise, Child of Hope, portray President Obama as a “messianic figure,” clearly a propaganda effort to align ideology with Common Core
  • Common Core Anti-American teaching guides produced by Zaner-Bloser company
  1. Two-week lesson for 4th graders using the book The Jacket indoctrinates children into the concept of racism and white privilege; the left-wing concept that the values of
  2. American society are designed to benefit white people to the exclusion of black people
  3. Another Zaner-Bloser guide uses the book Harvesting Hope: The Story of Cesar Chavez, to indoctrinate 2nd graders into the founder of the United Farm Workers union and “equality.” The conditions of the farmers and the landowners are presented on opposite pages, instructing teachers to say, “Fairness and equality exist when the scales are balanced” and “unfairness and inequality exist when the scales are weighted heavily on one side and are out of balance.” Do 7 year olds understand economics and property rights? Do they understand that first generation Americans came to this country with the clothes on their backs to escape poverty and religious persecution, worked very hard and made a better life for themselves and their children? (, 10-17-13 and 10-21-13)
“These lesson plans will indoctrinate students against the same American opportunities that allowed millions of immigrants to arrive here penniless, work hard, and achieve the American dream.”
Phyllis Schlafly explained that parents also object to Common Core for its massive data collection on every student in the United States, in-depth longitudinal studies from birth to college, an invasion of privacy, and the mark of a totalitarian state.

To make the Common Core more acceptable, some states are changing the name. Iowa calls it the Iowa Core. Florida found a more euphemistic name, Next Generation Sunshine State Standards. Arizona governor Jan Brewer signed an executive order to erase the name Common Core.

“Even under a different name, the Common Core Standards are still mediocre, at best, and continue to put American students at a significant disadvantage to their international peers,” Glyn Wright, executive director of the Eagle Forum.”

Should parents question the Common Core standards that are unproven and untested, they might experience what happened to the father who showed up at a school board meeting in Towson, Maryland, asking questions the board had not picked – he was forcibly escorted out of the meeting by a hired security guard and arrested.

The latest Common Core outrage comes from California. The Mark Twain School in Sacramento has suspended Katherine Duran, the mother of a 12-year old student, for 14 days in her home for “disrupting the school.” Duran’s son, Christopher, distributed Common Core opt-out forms to other students to take home to their parents. The principal confiscated the forms. Mrs. Duran visited the school and confronted the principal who then called the police. She was served with the two-week suspension order. According to the Blaze, the principal “sent police with a chilling note that contained notice of the two-week ‘Withdrawal of Consent’ as well as a threat of arrest should she violate the order,” including the legalese, “The District will seek reimbursement for attorney costs the courts may impose.”

In light of the recent developments in Scotland where a bill was passed that appoints a health worker to act as a “named person” for every child until the age of five, then to a council with teachers until the child reaches 18, parents should be concerned.  Conservatives tried to argue that such measures should have been taken only when the well-being or safety of a child was at stake. A Christian charity promised to take court action to overturn the law because it violates parental rights. The law was passed under the guise of identifying children with developmental difficulties and potential cases of abuse.

Michael Ramey, of, writing to his supporters, pointed out that “the legislation was specifically aimed at compliance with the radical U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.” Where are the rights of the parents vis-à-vis excessive government intrusion?

American parents should better wise up before it is too late and they too will lose their parental rights because the government deems that it is better positioned to be mommy and daddy.
Note:  Michelle Malkin is informing parents that there is a Common Core opt-out form, courtesy of Truth in American Education. “You can exercise your parental rights to protect your children from the nationalized Common Core.”

Watch the recently released documentary on Common Core by Ian A. Reid, Building the Machine.

Thursday, March 20, 2014

Prove it: Court rules states can make voters prove citizenship

A U.S. District Court judge ruled Wednesday that Arizona and Kansas can require anyone registering to vote to prove their citizenship and the federal Election Assistance Commission cannot block them.

The ruling is a boost for states’ rights and marks a setback for President Obama and other liberals who fought stiffer voter ID checks with an argument that they reduce voter turnout.

“This is a huge victory for me, personally, for the states of Kansas and Arizona, and for the whole cause of states’ rights,” said Kansas Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach, who led the challenge. “We’ve seen so many defeats recently in areas where the federal government has been encroaching on states’ authorities, and this time the good guys won.”

In his ruling, Judge Eric F. Melgren said the EAC, which Congress created after the 2000 Florida voting fiasco, must accede to states’ requests for people to provide proof of citizenship when they register to vote.

The judge said the Constitution gives states the power to determine voter qualifications, and if states want to insist on proof of citizenship, the election commission cannot overrule them.

“The EAC’s nondiscretionary duty is to perform the ministerial function of updating the instructions to reflect each state’s laws,” Judge Melgren ruled in a decision out of Kansas. “The court orders the EAC to add the language requested by Arizona and Kansas to the state-specific instructions of the federal mail voter registration form immediately.”

A spokesman for the EAC said the commission was reviewing the decision. The Justice Department, which
argued the case before Judge Melgren, didn’t return a message seeking comment.

The ruling comes at a time when both Democrats and Republicans are paying increasing interest to the rules governing campaigns and voting. With the country ideologically split, each side is looking for an advantage at the ballot box.

Democrats say identification checks could prevent some eligible voters from casting ballots. Republicans generally argue for stiffer checks to prevent fraud.

Kansas and Arizona enacted requirements that voters prove their citizenship when they register. State registration forms were changed to add the requirement.

But the federal government, which also distributes voter registration forms in states under the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, or motor-voter law, refused to add the requirement.
Arizona then said it would refuse to process federal forms and ended up in court. Last year, in a case known as Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, the Supreme Court ruled that Arizona couldn’t reject the federal forms.

But the Supreme Court ruling also hinted that if states asked the EAC to include proof of citizenship on forms distributed within their borders, the commission couldn’t refuse.
Arizona and Kansas requested that the EAC change the forms distributed in those states, but the commission refused.

Judge Melgren said he saw clear signs in last year’s Supreme Court ruling that the justices intended for the EAC to follow the wishes of the states.

“On one hand, the ITCA decision acknowledges the broad scope of Congress‘ power under the Elections Clause, which includes the authority of the NVRA to preempt state law regarding voter registration,” the judge wrote. “But the ITCA opinion also emphasizes the states’ exclusive constitutional authority to set voter qualifications — which Congress may not preempt — and appears to tie that authority with the power of the states to enforce their qualifications.”

Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett said the ruling will help clean up voter rolls. About 2,000 people have submitted federal forms in the state but haven’t proved their citizenship, he said.
“With this filing and with this ruling, we have accomplished what we felt was the desire of Arizona voters all along,” Mr. Bennett said.

Wednesday’s ruling was focused on election law, but it comes in the middle of a thorny national debate about U.S. immigration laws. A number of states have pushed for stricter enforcement from the Obama administration and the right to help enforce federal immigration principles.
Mr. Kobach has been at the forefront of those efforts.

The Washington Times