We are a nation under judgment! We are a broken people living in a broken nation.
Lamentations 2:11 says, "My eyes have no more tears, and I am sick to my stomach. I feel empty inside, because my people have been destroyed."
Can you relate to this agonizing statement from the prophet Jeremiah?
The sermon I am preparing for Sunday is titled, "Is this the End?" You can listen to it on Sunday morning at 11 am Central Time. Go here to listen: www.ChristianRevivalCenter.net
God bless!
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Private Education Under Attack
The Decline and Fall of Private Education
by Chuck Norris
04/28/2009
There's something the U.S. government doesn't want you to know. And it's come out again in the new Heritage Foundation report on education. It conveys that the general public is increasingly dissatisfied with public schools, with a rising number opting for private education.
The report explains that during the 2007 and 2008 legislative sessions, 44 states introduced school-choice legislation. And in 2008, choices for private school were enacted into law or expanded in Arizona, Utah, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana and Pennsylvania. Today 14 states and the District of Columbia offer voucher or education tax-credit programs that aid parents with sending their children to private schools. But that may be short-lived.
Despite the growing public preference for private education, Congress recently canceled the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which was created in 2004 to offer students from low-income families in the nation's capital an opportunity to join the voucher educational community. The law provided $14 million in scholarships to help pay for tuition at private schools of their choosing. But no longer.
Why did Congress nix the program, especially when recent studies showed that students receiving vouchers since the program's inception were academically 18.9 months ahead of their peers? (I read the other day that 100 percent of Thurgood Marshall Academy's charter graduates are accepted to colleges.) And why would Congress phase out a program that costs $7,500 per student annually, compared with the $15,000 it costs in Washington's public schools to educate a child?
So its cancellation is not a result of costing too much, because it's half the price of public schooling. And it's not because of inferior quality, because the kids enrolled in the program were scoring higher than students in regular schools. There's only one reason Congress canceled it, and it comes down to this: federal control and educational indoctrination.
Of course, government officials won't admit to a blatant usurpation of our rights, but they will say their educational reform is seeking to help your children. They will say it is necessary to establish common educational standards. They will say that we need to leave education to the experts and not to parents. And I fear that too many of us simply will give in to the whims of the nanny state.
As I wrote in my new best-selling book, "Black Belt Patriotism: How to Reawaken America": "The reason that government is cracking down on private instruction has more to do with suppressing alternative education than assuring educational standards. The rationale is quite simple, though rarely if ever stated: control future generations and you control the future. So rather than letting parents be the primary educators of their children -- either directly or by educating their children in the private schools of their choice -- (government) want(s) to deny parental rights, establish an educational monopoly run by the state, and limit private education options. It is so simple any socialist can understand it. As Joseph Stalin once stated, 'Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.'" (Get a free chapter of my book at http://www.chucknorrisnewbook.com/.)
What's amazing, too, is how hypocritical it is for Congress to make this decision. The Heritage Foundation's report also conveys that 44 percent of current United States senators and 36 percent of current members of the U.S. House of Representatives have "at one time sent their children to private schools." While the foundation found that 11 percent of American students attend private schools, 20 percent of the members of the 111th Congress attended private high schools. And they want to remove the voucher option for private school education?
While the members of President Barack Obama's administration profess to have education as a top priority, they did nothing in March when Congress chose to discontinue the Opportunity Scholarship Program. Why? Because they all are in cahoots to not only choose our medical care for us, own the mortgage insurance and finance businesses, and place caps on corporate earnings but also control our educational choices for our children.
Our Founders' educational philosophy seems to me to be the charter of a true American system of education. But as we know, our nation's public schools, especially our nation's colleges and universities, are the seedbeds of politically correct and leftist indoctrination. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. It's a travesty that we have come to the point that we have to protect our children from the public school systems by looking to alternative methods.
If you have a good public school, congratulations. Stay active in the PTA, and attend school board meetings to keep it that way. For many parents, the only responsible choice is to send their children to private, parochial or Christian schools or to home-school their children. My wife and I home-school our 8-year-old twins.
What I also think is good about private schools is the students' wearing uniforms. Just like in my KICKSTART martial arts program for kids in Texas schools, uniforms in private schools give students a sense of pride and empowerment. They increase the atmosphere of respect. And uniforms make economic class more of a nonissue, making rich and poor students indistinguishable -- not to mention the fact that uniforms do away with young people's style of wearing their jeans down to their knees and showing their butt cracks!
Parents deserve educational choices; choice is what this country was founded upon. Government's controlling and monopolizing education is just another avenue for usurping power and control on the slippery slope to socialism. And it's unbecoming for our republic, whose Founders created a system of freedom, choice and minimal government intervention.
by Chuck Norris
04/28/2009
There's something the U.S. government doesn't want you to know. And it's come out again in the new Heritage Foundation report on education. It conveys that the general public is increasingly dissatisfied with public schools, with a rising number opting for private education.
The report explains that during the 2007 and 2008 legislative sessions, 44 states introduced school-choice legislation. And in 2008, choices for private school were enacted into law or expanded in Arizona, Utah, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana and Pennsylvania. Today 14 states and the District of Columbia offer voucher or education tax-credit programs that aid parents with sending their children to private schools. But that may be short-lived.
Despite the growing public preference for private education, Congress recently canceled the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which was created in 2004 to offer students from low-income families in the nation's capital an opportunity to join the voucher educational community. The law provided $14 million in scholarships to help pay for tuition at private schools of their choosing. But no longer.
Why did Congress nix the program, especially when recent studies showed that students receiving vouchers since the program's inception were academically 18.9 months ahead of their peers? (I read the other day that 100 percent of Thurgood Marshall Academy's charter graduates are accepted to colleges.) And why would Congress phase out a program that costs $7,500 per student annually, compared with the $15,000 it costs in Washington's public schools to educate a child?
So its cancellation is not a result of costing too much, because it's half the price of public schooling. And it's not because of inferior quality, because the kids enrolled in the program were scoring higher than students in regular schools. There's only one reason Congress canceled it, and it comes down to this: federal control and educational indoctrination.
Of course, government officials won't admit to a blatant usurpation of our rights, but they will say their educational reform is seeking to help your children. They will say it is necessary to establish common educational standards. They will say that we need to leave education to the experts and not to parents. And I fear that too many of us simply will give in to the whims of the nanny state.
As I wrote in my new best-selling book, "Black Belt Patriotism: How to Reawaken America": "The reason that government is cracking down on private instruction has more to do with suppressing alternative education than assuring educational standards. The rationale is quite simple, though rarely if ever stated: control future generations and you control the future. So rather than letting parents be the primary educators of their children -- either directly or by educating their children in the private schools of their choice -- (government) want(s) to deny parental rights, establish an educational monopoly run by the state, and limit private education options. It is so simple any socialist can understand it. As Joseph Stalin once stated, 'Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.'" (Get a free chapter of my book at http://www.chucknorrisnewbook.com/.)
What's amazing, too, is how hypocritical it is for Congress to make this decision. The Heritage Foundation's report also conveys that 44 percent of current United States senators and 36 percent of current members of the U.S. House of Representatives have "at one time sent their children to private schools." While the foundation found that 11 percent of American students attend private schools, 20 percent of the members of the 111th Congress attended private high schools. And they want to remove the voucher option for private school education?
While the members of President Barack Obama's administration profess to have education as a top priority, they did nothing in March when Congress chose to discontinue the Opportunity Scholarship Program. Why? Because they all are in cahoots to not only choose our medical care for us, own the mortgage insurance and finance businesses, and place caps on corporate earnings but also control our educational choices for our children.
Our Founders' educational philosophy seems to me to be the charter of a true American system of education. But as we know, our nation's public schools, especially our nation's colleges and universities, are the seedbeds of politically correct and leftist indoctrination. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. It's a travesty that we have come to the point that we have to protect our children from the public school systems by looking to alternative methods.
If you have a good public school, congratulations. Stay active in the PTA, and attend school board meetings to keep it that way. For many parents, the only responsible choice is to send their children to private, parochial or Christian schools or to home-school their children. My wife and I home-school our 8-year-old twins.
What I also think is good about private schools is the students' wearing uniforms. Just like in my KICKSTART martial arts program for kids in Texas schools, uniforms in private schools give students a sense of pride and empowerment. They increase the atmosphere of respect. And uniforms make economic class more of a nonissue, making rich and poor students indistinguishable -- not to mention the fact that uniforms do away with young people's style of wearing their jeans down to their knees and showing their butt cracks!
Parents deserve educational choices; choice is what this country was founded upon. Government's controlling and monopolizing education is just another avenue for usurping power and control on the slippery slope to socialism. And it's unbecoming for our republic, whose Founders created a system of freedom, choice and minimal government intervention.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Internet Radio Interview
I will be on The Black Conservative internet radio show this coming Friday night. If you are near your computer you will be able to listen and also call the program if you wish. The web site location of The Black Conservative is www.blogtalkradio.com/conservative. You can listen to the program at 10 PM (Central Time) this Friday (May 1).
I was told the radio audio would start as soon as the page installs, however, when I attempted to listen last night, I could never connect to the audio. I'll try again. Some of your may also want to try and see if you here anything on Wednesday or Thursday night.
I hope you will all take time to listen and perhaps call in to the program.
I was told the radio audio would start as soon as the page installs, however, when I attempted to listen last night, I could never connect to the audio. I'll try again. Some of your may also want to try and see if you here anything on Wednesday or Thursday night.
I hope you will all take time to listen and perhaps call in to the program.
Email to Eve Conant
Eve Conant, the author of a recent article in the May 4th edition of Newsweek asked for my thoughts on her recent article. I posted some to this on my blog the other day. I sent her an email last night (May 28). Below is the email I sent her furthering my thoughts about the article.
I am posting it for your general interest.
---------------------
Eve:
I have read the story from Newsweek and have posted comments about it on my blog. You can go here to read it: http://www.tarobb.blogspot.com/ As I told you when you were here I certainly do not expect a reporter to write a story the way I would. I only ask that it be fair.
I must admit though that I grow tired of individuals like Mark Potok being elevated to be paragons of truth and nobleness.
I also find it disturbing that I am accused of being a hate-filled bigot when I have never advocated hatred for anyone. I do, however, see value and beauty in our people and in the eyes of our children. For this I am accused of being hateful. And certainly you can understand the accusation of mendacity toward the media when Negroes and those of other racial ethnicities are encouraged to freely enjoy and celebrate their racial identity, but whites who do the same thing are suddenly demonized.
Can I be so mistaken not to notice the hypocrisy?
Who is the real hater? Those of us who see value in our people or those who see value in no one? Are we to be judge guilty of hatred for merely pointing out the reality that all races are encouraged to celebrate their racial identity - except for white people. We certainly do not have to search far to find clubs and associations based on a persons racial identity. Such associations are to be found among Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Arabs etc. Certainly you are aware that there are Black (Asian, Arab, Hispanic etc.) associations for farmers, doctors, lawyers, dentists, school teachers, realtors, firemen, policemen etc. There is even the Black Congressional Congress. These associations of "minorities" are encouraged and celebrated. White people, however, are simply scared to form such groups for fear of being called "racist." Why is this not disturbing to people? Because to even show a concern is to be labeled a racist. We are suppose to sit back quietly while our race fades into the night.
There is even an association for black journalists. Click here: http://www.nabj.org/ Yet you cannot join a white journalist association. Eve, you could not even begin to start such an organization! You know what I am saying is true! And we are called the haters!
I won’t question your intention to be fair in your article. But certainly you can see why many would raise an eyebrow. Certainly you did not see anyone calling minorities fleas. I dare say you did not hear or see any racial epithets used in anyway. The illustration using fleas was given to actually show that hatred for minorities would be unjustified.
Also the inclusion of Cynthia Lynch in this story was certainly out of bounds. I cannot imagine anyone in the White Nationalist movement justifying her murder. These Sons of Dixie were no more a part of White Nationalist Movement than they were a part of the Louisiana Chamber of Commerce. To include them in this article was misleading and deceptive and is the reason people in the White Nationalist movement develop attitudes as expressed by Truck Roy in his speech.
I can certainly understand the difficulty that a person has shaking off the image of the White Nationalist movement that many have been raised to accept without question. But who created this image and why? Certainly you can find the extreme in any idea and philosophy. But the extreme is not a representation of the whole. If your story was going to be about the extreme than it should not have included us. If it was about the whole than it should not have included the extreme and certainly not the story of Cynthia Lynch.
I trust you will not be angry with me concerning my comments about your article anymore than I am angered at you for the article itself.
At your convenience I would be willing to continue this dialogue.
My best to you! . . . Thomas Robb
I am posting it for your general interest.
---------------------
Eve:
I have read the story from Newsweek and have posted comments about it on my blog. You can go here to read it: http://www.tarobb.blogspot.com/ As I told you when you were here I certainly do not expect a reporter to write a story the way I would. I only ask that it be fair.
I must admit though that I grow tired of individuals like Mark Potok being elevated to be paragons of truth and nobleness.
I also find it disturbing that I am accused of being a hate-filled bigot when I have never advocated hatred for anyone. I do, however, see value and beauty in our people and in the eyes of our children. For this I am accused of being hateful. And certainly you can understand the accusation of mendacity toward the media when Negroes and those of other racial ethnicities are encouraged to freely enjoy and celebrate their racial identity, but whites who do the same thing are suddenly demonized.
Can I be so mistaken not to notice the hypocrisy?
Who is the real hater? Those of us who see value in our people or those who see value in no one? Are we to be judge guilty of hatred for merely pointing out the reality that all races are encouraged to celebrate their racial identity - except for white people. We certainly do not have to search far to find clubs and associations based on a persons racial identity. Such associations are to be found among Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Arabs etc. Certainly you are aware that there are Black (Asian, Arab, Hispanic etc.) associations for farmers, doctors, lawyers, dentists, school teachers, realtors, firemen, policemen etc. There is even the Black Congressional Congress. These associations of "minorities" are encouraged and celebrated. White people, however, are simply scared to form such groups for fear of being called "racist." Why is this not disturbing to people? Because to even show a concern is to be labeled a racist. We are suppose to sit back quietly while our race fades into the night.
There is even an association for black journalists. Click here: http://www.nabj.org/ Yet you cannot join a white journalist association. Eve, you could not even begin to start such an organization! You know what I am saying is true! And we are called the haters!
I won’t question your intention to be fair in your article. But certainly you can see why many would raise an eyebrow. Certainly you did not see anyone calling minorities fleas. I dare say you did not hear or see any racial epithets used in anyway. The illustration using fleas was given to actually show that hatred for minorities would be unjustified.
Also the inclusion of Cynthia Lynch in this story was certainly out of bounds. I cannot imagine anyone in the White Nationalist movement justifying her murder. These Sons of Dixie were no more a part of White Nationalist Movement than they were a part of the Louisiana Chamber of Commerce. To include them in this article was misleading and deceptive and is the reason people in the White Nationalist movement develop attitudes as expressed by Truck Roy in his speech.
I can certainly understand the difficulty that a person has shaking off the image of the White Nationalist movement that many have been raised to accept without question. But who created this image and why? Certainly you can find the extreme in any idea and philosophy. But the extreme is not a representation of the whole. If your story was going to be about the extreme than it should not have included us. If it was about the whole than it should not have included the extreme and certainly not the story of Cynthia Lynch.
I trust you will not be angry with me concerning my comments about your article anymore than I am angered at you for the article itself.
At your convenience I would be willing to continue this dialogue.
My best to you! . . . Thomas Robb
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Enough of the Foolishness
I am tired of the childish name calling that so many have resorted to such as idiot, moron, stupid etc. If there is a serious comment I will post it. Otherwise your wasting you're time. There are plenty of other sites for internet warriors - so go to them.
I will continue to post comments of a serious nature.
I will continue to post comments of a serious nature.
Newsweek Article
The current issue of Newsweek Magazine (May 4) carries an article about The Knights. I gave it a rating of 6 out of 10 for fairness.
I certainly do not expect a reporter to write a story the way I would, however I do expect it to be fair and balanced. You can read the article by going here http://www.newsweek.com/id/195085?from=rss. The issue with many reporters is that they have a hard time getting over their pre-conditioned attitudes about white nationalism. Many of those who post comments here have the same problem.
The entertainment media (Hollywood and television) has had a major influence in shaping people's opinions. Reporters are like all people in that their image of the world has been shaped by others who have a socialist, global agenda that is radically different that of our founding fathers vision.This news story may have been an attempt at being fair (We'll never know) but there are a couple of inclusions that simply had no place in this article.I will point out two. The article says, "Robb equates minorities to fleas." This statement in wholly inaccurate. It says to the reader that I go about calling minorities "fleas" or perhaps other unsavory names. This is not true, the statement comes from an illustration I was giving.
Speakers and writers use illustrations and allegories quite often to help highlight an important message they wish to get across. This, of course, was the reason that Jesus Christ used parables (illustrations). In fact the full context of the illustration was to show that hatred for minorities is not justified.
I do not call minorities fleas or any other names.
The 2nd issue I would take exception with was the inclusion of the murder of Cynthia Lynch. Miss Lynch was killed by an individual posing as a Klan leader. She traveled to Louisiana to join his group which he was calling Sons of Dixie. After arriving in Louisiana she changed her mind and was murdered.
To include this incident hovers close to "yellow journalism." Yellow Journalism is a term used to suggest that the purpose of a story is not to inform but to mislead.
I would challenge, Ms. Conant, the author of this Newsweek article to find ANY white nationalist organization or members of such who are anything but horrified by the murder of this innocent woman.
To highlight this case and include it with this article is no more responsible than to castigate all police because of the actions of Drew Peterson, the Illinois policeman who is suspected of killing two of his former wives. In fact, a simple search on google will actually reveal more accusations of police brutality and murder against minorities each year than the Klan has been accused of in the past 100 years.
While people quickly understand that all police are not bad even though some are, those in the white nationalist movement have a higher hurdle to jump. The same people who would not condemn all police based upon the actions of one will immediately condemn all white nationalists because of one horrible incident. Rather than simply thinking this is a rare case it instead reinforces what they have already been pre-conditioned to believe. The untruth becomes the so-called truth because of this pre-conditioning.
Does the story hurt or help our cause?
This is a question that could be examined from many perspectives. But I want to point out that those that hate our people are going to continue hating us. And those that love our people and the faith of our forefathers will continue loving us in spite of this slightly off centered story. There is also a degree of comfort in knowing that according to the most recent opinion poll I have, the media only has a confidence rating among the American people of 13.7%. In other words, there is less people who trust the media than trust used car salesmen.
There are always those who question whether we should even talk to reporters. I know it is a delicate issue and one that I always ponder. However, we do get good stories from the media quite often. But I always have to be prepared to get body slammed once in a while.
Ms. Conant was a nice enough person, but was it only "cosmetics" or did her editors have some power in her final story. Also we must consider that she is struggling under an image of white nationalism that has been created and shaped by groups like the ADL, SPLC and the entertainment media.
People (reporters included) often have a hard time shaking this image that has been created by those who are promoting an agenda that is not in the best interest of our people. Also like I said earlier, there are many pre-conditioned opinions which they must over come.
I am of the opinion that we must engage the media when necessary. I do not have the luxury to avoid the media as most of you have. To say, "Have nothing to do with reporters" makes about as much since as telling a soldier in battle, "Don't you know that if you go to the front lines the enemy is going to shoot at you." A soldier, following orders does not have the luxury of making this decision. He just follows orders.
I have learned long ago, that the decision not to speak to the media only allows those with the ADL or SPLC (Anti-Defamation League and Southern Poverty Law Center) to paint the picture of us they want.
I will say this however, many people who talk to reporters, simply need some lessons in Public Relations 101. I could write quite extensively on this issue but will put it to rest for now. I have one last word for my white brothers and sisters who hate the Klan and white nationalism in general. I love your children, and we are working to provide a future for them even though you are not. Not just my children, but your children will also suffer the consequence of your folly.
I certainly do not expect a reporter to write a story the way I would, however I do expect it to be fair and balanced. You can read the article by going here http://www.newsweek.com/id/195085?from=rss. The issue with many reporters is that they have a hard time getting over their pre-conditioned attitudes about white nationalism. Many of those who post comments here have the same problem.
The entertainment media (Hollywood and television) has had a major influence in shaping people's opinions. Reporters are like all people in that their image of the world has been shaped by others who have a socialist, global agenda that is radically different that of our founding fathers vision.This news story may have been an attempt at being fair (We'll never know) but there are a couple of inclusions that simply had no place in this article.I will point out two. The article says, "Robb equates minorities to fleas." This statement in wholly inaccurate. It says to the reader that I go about calling minorities "fleas" or perhaps other unsavory names. This is not true, the statement comes from an illustration I was giving.
Speakers and writers use illustrations and allegories quite often to help highlight an important message they wish to get across. This, of course, was the reason that Jesus Christ used parables (illustrations). In fact the full context of the illustration was to show that hatred for minorities is not justified.
I do not call minorities fleas or any other names.
The 2nd issue I would take exception with was the inclusion of the murder of Cynthia Lynch. Miss Lynch was killed by an individual posing as a Klan leader. She traveled to Louisiana to join his group which he was calling Sons of Dixie. After arriving in Louisiana she changed her mind and was murdered.
To include this incident hovers close to "yellow journalism." Yellow Journalism is a term used to suggest that the purpose of a story is not to inform but to mislead.
I would challenge, Ms. Conant, the author of this Newsweek article to find ANY white nationalist organization or members of such who are anything but horrified by the murder of this innocent woman.
To highlight this case and include it with this article is no more responsible than to castigate all police because of the actions of Drew Peterson, the Illinois policeman who is suspected of killing two of his former wives. In fact, a simple search on google will actually reveal more accusations of police brutality and murder against minorities each year than the Klan has been accused of in the past 100 years.
While people quickly understand that all police are not bad even though some are, those in the white nationalist movement have a higher hurdle to jump. The same people who would not condemn all police based upon the actions of one will immediately condemn all white nationalists because of one horrible incident. Rather than simply thinking this is a rare case it instead reinforces what they have already been pre-conditioned to believe. The untruth becomes the so-called truth because of this pre-conditioning.
Does the story hurt or help our cause?
This is a question that could be examined from many perspectives. But I want to point out that those that hate our people are going to continue hating us. And those that love our people and the faith of our forefathers will continue loving us in spite of this slightly off centered story. There is also a degree of comfort in knowing that according to the most recent opinion poll I have, the media only has a confidence rating among the American people of 13.7%. In other words, there is less people who trust the media than trust used car salesmen.
There are always those who question whether we should even talk to reporters. I know it is a delicate issue and one that I always ponder. However, we do get good stories from the media quite often. But I always have to be prepared to get body slammed once in a while.
Ms. Conant was a nice enough person, but was it only "cosmetics" or did her editors have some power in her final story. Also we must consider that she is struggling under an image of white nationalism that has been created and shaped by groups like the ADL, SPLC and the entertainment media.
People (reporters included) often have a hard time shaking this image that has been created by those who are promoting an agenda that is not in the best interest of our people. Also like I said earlier, there are many pre-conditioned opinions which they must over come.
I am of the opinion that we must engage the media when necessary. I do not have the luxury to avoid the media as most of you have. To say, "Have nothing to do with reporters" makes about as much since as telling a soldier in battle, "Don't you know that if you go to the front lines the enemy is going to shoot at you." A soldier, following orders does not have the luxury of making this decision. He just follows orders.
I have learned long ago, that the decision not to speak to the media only allows those with the ADL or SPLC (Anti-Defamation League and Southern Poverty Law Center) to paint the picture of us they want.
I will say this however, many people who talk to reporters, simply need some lessons in Public Relations 101. I could write quite extensively on this issue but will put it to rest for now. I have one last word for my white brothers and sisters who hate the Klan and white nationalism in general. I love your children, and we are working to provide a future for them even though you are not. Not just my children, but your children will also suffer the consequence of your folly.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Internet Radio Interview
I will be on The Black Conservative internet radio show this coming Friday night. If you are near your computer you will be able to listen and also call the program if you wish. The web site location of The Black Conservative is www.blogtalkradio.com/conservative. You can listen to the program at 10 PM (Central Time) this Friday (May 1). I hope you will all take time to listen and perhaps call in to the program.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)