As dissatisfaction with the U.S. public school system grows, apparently so has the appeal of homeschooling. Educational researchers, in fact, are expecting a surge in the number of students educated at home by their parents over the next ten years, as more parents reject public schools.
A recentÂ reportÂ inÂ Education NewsÂ states that, since 1999, the number of children who are homeschooled has increased by 75%. Though homeschooled children represent only 4% of all school-age children nationwide, the number of children whose parents choose to educate them at home rather than a traditional academic setting is growing seven times faster than the number of children enrolling in grades K-12 every year.
As homeschooling has become increasingly popular, common myths that have long been associated with the practice of homeschooling have been debunked.
Any concerns about the quality of education children receive by their parents can be put to rest by the consistently high placement of homeschooled students on standardized assessment exams. Â […]
Similarly, the common myth that homeschoolers â€œmiss outâ€ on so-called â€œsocialization opportunities,â€ often thought to be a vital aspect of traditional academic settings, has proven to be without merit. According to the National Home Education Research Institute survey, homeschoolers tend to be more socially engaged than their peers and demonstrate â€œhealthy social, psychological, and emotional development, and success into adulthood.â€
Argentina, like most of Latin America, is a hotbed of Marxist “Liberation Theology” (Obama is an adherent of the racist version, Black Liberation Theology). Â But does Francis I subscribe to it? Â Unfortunately, the reports are contradictory and somewhat cryptic.
Here’s Lynch quoting from that 2011 speech delivered by, now, Pope Francis I:
Said Cardinal Bergoglio in said speech that “The economic and social crisis and the consequent increase in poverty has its causes in ways policies inspiredneoliberalismÂ considering profits and market laws as parameters, to the detriment of the dignity of individuals and peoples. In this context, we reiterate the conviction that the loss of the sense of justice and lack of respect for others have worsened and led us to a situation of inequity. ” Later stressed the importance of “Â social justiceÂ “, the”Â equal opportunityÂ “damage” transfers of capital abroad, “which should be required”Â distribution of wealthÂ “, said the damage of economic inequalities and the need to “prevent the use of financial resources is shaped by speculation,” especially in the context of the “social debt”-which in his opinion is of eminently “moral” – is to reform “economic structures” in expressed the sense before.
Again, I may have lost something in the translation, but it appears the new Pope fails to understand markets and holds the concepts of social justice, equal opportunity andÂ distributionÂ of wealth, as important. Concepts which, of course, generally lead to advocacy of much government intervention and much central planning. It as though the new Pope has somehow given up on the good in people, and perhaps even in God, and has decided to replace both with a central role for the coercive state.
The change that swept Eastern Europe in the 1980s and fueled the collapse of the Soviet Union may find itself repeated by a new pope with similar disdain for the authoritarian governments of his region.
When Cardinal Karol Wojtyla stepped out on the balcony of St. Peter’s in 1978 as Pope John Paul II, Soviet communism still stood astride Eastern Europe and his native Poland.
He would be the moral force helping to lead half a continent out of the human bondage of totalitarianism.
Argentina’s 76-year-old Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, now Pope Francis I, is no stranger to â€” or compromiser with â€” the oppression of authoritarian government.
During his tenure as Archbishop of Buenos Aires and head of Argentina’s Conference of Bishops, the new pope had a strained relationship with the governments of President Cristina Kirchner and her late husband, former President Nestor Kirchner, who once called Bergoglio “a real spokesman for the opposition.”
The cardinal who eschewed limousines to ride his bicycle or take the bus, is known as a man of the poor and of the people.
He gained admiration for living in a modest apartment instead of the palace in Buenos Aires that was adjacent to the Casa Rosada where the president resides (and where Juan and Evita Peron often harangued the Argentine people).
The new pope has fought a long battle in Argentina against leftist government, Peronist anticlericalism, the spread of evangelical Protestantism and the secular temptations of modern society.
Like Pope John Paul II, he is likely to resist calls to “modernize” the church, to make it more “popular” and “appealing.”
Like Pope John Paul II, Pope Francis is a strong opponent of what is called “liberation theology,” a bizarre mix of Marxism and Catholicism often embraced by left-leaning politicians and clerics in Argentina and elsewhere in the hemisphere.
Rosendo Fraga, a well-known Argentine political analyst, told the Miami Herald’s Andres Oppenheimer that Pope Francis “is definitely bad news for the Argentine government. His homilies, as recently as two weeks ago, were very critical of economic and social conditions, and of corruption in Argentina.”
“Francis may become a critic of governments such as those in Venezuela, Ecuador or Bolivia, in the same way that John Paul II became a critic of communism in Eastern Europe,” says Daniel Alvarez, a professor of religious studies at Florida International University.
[T]oÂ be sure, South American governments are, with certain exceptions, nothing like the monolithic, totalitarian USSR.
Moreover, Pope Francis I is not as young as Pope John Paul II. Nor does he have a Ronald Reagan and a Margaret Thatcher to work with.
Even so, he does provide a rallying point for a region beset by authoritarianism that badly needs one.
Every year, the federal government spends well over a trillion dollars more than it takes in. As a result, it has racked up seventeen trillion dollars in debt, most of it in the last decade. In seven years at current rates, the U.S. will need almost a fifth of the GDP from the rest of the world just to finance our national debt.
JustÂ twoÂ of our federal entitlements, Medicare and Social Security, have â€œunfunded future liabilitiesâ€ of $46.2 trillion. Total liabilities are $86.8 trillion or more. Entitlements and other mandatory spending will burden more and more of the federal budget in the coming years. At todayâ€™s burn rate, before long no realistic amount of tax revenue will be able to service the debt and fund the governmentâ€™s basic functions.
We need not worry about the federal government defaulting, since, unlike U.S. states or private citizens, it can print the money it needs to pay the bills. It can and will do so if we donâ€™t make a course correction fast. Massive monetary expansion will ultimately devalue every dollar in circulation and trigger the sort of hyperinflation that flattens entire societies in short order. Thatâ€™s bad enough, but when government borrows and spends for our supposed benefit,Â somebody elseÂ will have to foot some or all of the bill. If our faith applies to every aspect of life, then it must have something to say about this moral outrage.
[…] Â In the twentieth century, more than a hundred million people were murdered by their own governments. And that was just in communist countries. History and scripture agree: because of sin, governments with too much power become propagators of evil and destruction.
This speaks directly to government debt, since deficit spending is a symptom of government doing more than it can or should. The federal government now borrows and spends with such reckless abandon that it is careening toward a global economic catastrophe. If Christians canâ€™t muster the courage to speak out against what Rep. Paul Ryan has called â€œthe most predictable debt crisis in history,â€ we wonâ€™t deserve to be taken seriously after the collapse.
Sadly, many Christians don’t know how to disciple our nation to turn the tide because they’ve never studied God’s design for economics or the Biblical role of government. Â Â They can’t teach what they don’t know. Â The Â key to real reformation, says R.C. Sproul, Jr., is for Christians to understand and work to implement Biblical economic principles:
Christian author and teacherÂ R.C. Sproul, Jr.Â told CBN News Anchor Lee Webb that he believes it’s time to return to the basics when it comes to economics.
“When we’re left arguing about whether or not we should have a marginal tax rate of 45 percent or 48 percent, and the conservative is stuck arguing for the 45 percent we’ve had an insufficient reformation in our thinking,” Sproul said.
Sproul believes that reformation will happen only when we return to scripture to see what God has to say about economics. That’s why he produced a video series called “Economics for Everybody.” It’s a compelling, even entertaining approach to a topic many find boring.
[…] Â Â Sproul provides historical evidence that nations most influenced by biblical Christianity are nations that, by and large, have prospered. They are nations marked by decentralized governments and free markets.
But nations that reject God are marked by centralized power, tyranny, and no free markets. Unfortunately, he said he has observed some of those troubling trends in America now.
“The United States is not a free market. It’s an interventionist economy that’s been moving closer to socialism for over a century now,” he said. “I am not optimistic about our nation’s future economically.”
“We live in a country in which the state forbids me to hire a man unless I promise to pay him X number of dollars,” Sproul explained. “We now live in a country where I can’t hire 50 men unless I promise to buy them all health insurance, including access to abortion.”
“This is not economic liberty. This is not free markets,” he said. “We’re missing the fact that we’re the frog and the water is boiling.”
“It’s my conviction that education is always and everywhere religious,” he said.
“And it’s not a surprise that when 80 percent of evangelical parents have their children in the government’s schools that they’re going to embrace the religion of the government which is the worship of the state,” he said.
Sproul cautioned Christians to avoid despair. One way to do that is by returning to the beginning, to the Creation Mandate and begin to see that our work is part of worship.
Is your three-year-old preschooler chanting â€˜union powerâ€™ these days? She might, if author Innosanto Nagara has his way.
Nagara wrote â€œA is for Activist,â€ a book supposedly geared for the Â children of the â€œ99 percent.â€ In other words, a new vehicle has been developed for leftists to begin indoctrinating children.
â€œItâ€™s pretty awesome to hear a three-year-old saying â€˜union power,â€™â€ Nagara said in aÂ YES! magazineÂ interview.
But union power and student activism arenâ€™t the only goals. Consider these other letters and how they are applied in the book:
B is for banner, as in a protest banner hanging off a construction crane
L is for LGBTQ, as in Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgendered and Queer
T is for Trans, as in transgendered
Z is for Zapatistas, as in Mexican revolutionary leftists
Heady stuff for preschoolers, but the indoctrinators believe the tykes are old enough to learn the basics of revolutionary thought.
Nagaraâ€™s â€œA is for Activistâ€ has been heralded by the likes of Code Pinkâ€™s Medea Benjamin, whoÂ said, â€œMay a thousand young activists bloom!â€
Why would a teacher’s association want anÂ unrepentantÂ domestic terroristÂ – who participated in three bombings and regretted that he didn’t do moreÂ – as their keynote speaker regarding educating America’s youth? Â This is theÂ equivalentÂ of inviting Timothy McVey to speak.
Is THIS the kind of person they admire, who’s advice on molding young minds they want to follow? Â Â Just imagine what they’re teaching their students if they have such little discretion and no moral compass!
The Association of Teacher Educators has recruited Chicago professor â€“ and former domestic terrorist â€“ William Ayers to speak at their theÂ 2013 Annual MeetingÂ in Atlanta, Georgia which will be held next month.
William Ayers, a co-founder of the radical Weather Underground domestic terror group, was a key figure during the 2008 presidential campaign due to his Chicago ties to then-Senator Obama.
The organizationâ€™s executive director, David Ritchey, confirmed that Ayers would be a keynote speaker at the conference although he admitted that he wasnâ€™t involved in the selection process.
Ritchey added that although Ayers was a controversial figure he had been invited due to his â€œwork in the education field, apart from all the other stuff.â€
TheÂ website biographyÂ makes no specific mention of Ayersâ€™ controversial background, describing him as the â€œformerly Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar at the University of Illinois at Chicago.â€
The only “work” Ayers does in education is indoctrinating students with his radical ideas and training others how to do the same. Â Although this teachers’ association won’t publicly condone his actions, they don’t condemn them either, and they clearly agree with his radical leftist ideas, or else they wouldn’t have invited him to share them.
Earlier in his homily, the leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics decried “hotbeds of tension and conflict caused by growing instances of inequality between rich and poor“.
The idea that economic inequality is the root of most conflict is a Socialist idea, not a Biblical one. Â The Bible makes it clear that man’s sinful nature is the source of mankind’s broken relationships and conflicts.
Also, the Pope appears to mistakenly assume that economic inequality is automatically a form of injustice which creates resentment, not recognizing that poor people are not made poorer by other people getting richer, because wealth is not a zero-sum game. Â Any resentment over inequality is either based in envy, or anger over being cheated and exploited (in which case, it is the dishonest manner in which the wealth was gained, not the wealth disparity itself, which is the problem).
He also denounced “the prevalence of a selfish and individualistic mindset which also finds expression in an unregulated capitalism, various forms of terrorism and criminality”.
Funny how Socialists believe that it is “selfish” for people to want to keep what they earn, but neglect to recognize selfishness in those who demand that money be taken from those who earned it and given to themselves (who didn’t earn it). Â The Bible has a word for that, however: theft.
Also, Socialists denounce any rejection of collectivist control over goods and services as “individualist” and selfish, completely ignoring the fact that God Himself established private property rights when he gave the 10 commandments, including “Do not covet” and “Do not steal.”
Socialists also assume that pure Capitalism is an “unregulated,” winner-takes-all affair. Â Nonsense! Â True Capitalism requires law and order to make sure that all transactions are conducted honestly and voluntarily, without coercion or deceit. Â Free enterprise is not anarchy. Â Nor is it a form of “terrorism and criminality.”
Guess I shouldn’t be surprised that the Pope completely misses these points. Â He’s a former Nazi youth, after all, and like most Germans has never fully rejected the Welfare State or many of the other Socialist underpinnings of the Nazi party. Â Also, like most Christians across the theological spectrum, he has never studied Biblical Economics.
Even more sadly, millions of Catholics are fighting for religious liberty against the very kinds of oppressive Socialist governments the Pope is supporting with these statements. Â At a time when he should be denouncing abuses of government power, he denounces the “individualism” of those fighting for their God-given rights of economic and religious liberty instead.
Before leaving his 54 Christmas trees and giant gingerbread White House for a $4 million Hawaiian vacation at taxpayer expense, the President and Â First Lady took it upon themselves to explain to us lowly serfs what the Christmas season is really about.
THE FIRST LADY:Â Thatâ€™s what makes this season so special â€“ getting to spend time with the people we love most.
THE PRESIDENT:Â And this year, thatâ€™s especially true for some of our military families.Â You see, the war in Iraq is over.Â The transition in Afghanistan is underway.Â After a decade of war, our heroes are coming home.Â And all across America, military families are reuniting.
Spike the football for withdrawing troops from an Islamist-run Iraq and preparing to hand Afghanistan back over to the Taliban? Â Check!
Then they go on to thank military families for their sacrifice.
Our military families sacrifice so much on our behalf, and Barack and I believe that we should serve them as well as they serve this country.Â Thatâ€™s why Dr. Jill Biden and I started Joining Forces â€“ an effort to rally all Americans to honor and support our veterans and military families.Â Just go to joiningforces.gov to find out how you can show your gratitude for their service.
For my family and millions of Americans, itâ€™s a time to celebrate the birth of Christ. To reflect on His life and learn from His example. Â Every year, we commit to love one another. Â To give of ourselves. Â To be our brotherâ€™s keeper. Â To be our sisterâ€™s keeper.
“Brother’s keeper” is a favorite mantra of Obama’s, which he continually attributes to Jesus Christ. Â Just one problem: JESUS NEVER SAID IT.
The original phrase from scripture is, â€œAm I my brotherâ€™s keeper?â€ (Genesis 4:9) Â It was a sarcastic response from the murderer Cain when God questioned him about his dead brother. Â Essentially he was saying to God, â€œHow would I know where my brother is?Â Iâ€™m not his babysitter,â€ Â when in fact he knew that he was guilty of his brother’s blood. Â Â Liberation theologyÂ has twisted Cainâ€™s guilty response into an endorsement of socialist policies such as redistribution. Â Obama, as an adherent of Black Liberation Theology, has learned this misinterpretation so well that he continually quotes it as justification for his Marxist ideology, and now promotes it once again in his Christmas address as an idea he supposedly learned from Christ.
But those ideas are not just part of our faith.Â Theyâ€™re part of all faiths.Â And they unite us as Americans.
ALL faiths promote your Marxist ideas, Obama? Â That would certainly come as a shock to most of their adherents! Â And this ideology certainly doesn’t UNITE Americans. Â If anything, his Socialist “faith” has done more to divide Americans than at any other time since the Civil War.
THE FIRST LADY:Â In this country, we take care of each other.Â And in this season of giving, itâ€™s inspiring to see so many people all across America taking the time to help those most in need.
Yes, it is. Â But the greatest successes in charity and disaster relief come from PRIVATE CHARITIES, which your husband is doing his best to undercut and destroy.
New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof has gone where few liberals dare to tread. Â He has discovered the undeniable evidence that the welfare state does, in fact, create perverse incentives andÂ exacerbateÂ the very problem it endeavors to cure: poverty.
THIS is what poverty sometimes looks like in America: parents here in Appalachian hill country pulling their children out of literacy classes. Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability.
Many people in hillside mobile homes here are poor and desperate, and a$698 monthly checkÂ per child from the Supplemental Security Income program goes a long way â€” and those checks continue until the child turns 18.
â€œThe kids get taken out of the program because the parents are going to lose the check,â€ said Billie Oaks, who runs a literacy program here in Breathitt County, a poor part of Kentucky. â€œItâ€™s heartbreaking.â€
This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that Americaâ€™s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.
[…] Â Most wrenching of all are the parents who think itâ€™s best if a child stays illiterate, because then the family may be able to claim a disability check each month.
â€œOne of the ways you get on this program is having problems in school,â€ notes Richard V. Burkhauser, a Cornell University economist who co-wrote a book last year about these disability programs. â€œIf you do better in school, you threaten the income of the parents. Itâ€™s a terrible incentive.â€
A middle class taxpayer pays 25% percent of their income in Federal Income Tax. Sounds, ok?
Then there is the Federal Social Security and Medicare payroll tax of 13.3%. You pick up 5.65% while you’re employer pays 7.65%. Add them up and that’s 38.3% of middle class family incomes going to Uncle Sam. But we aren’t done, not by a long shot.
According to the Tax Foundation, the average state’s income tax rate on the middle class is 4.82%. Of course, some states have it and some don’t, but we’re taking an average here.
Now the total: 43.12% of middle class income to taxes.
Oh, and I almost forgot, unless congress makes a move, Federal Income taxes go to 28% for middle income folks next year as the Bush tax cuts expire.
Neither party has said they want that to happen, but in Washington, well, you never know.
Also the payroll tax for those folks will go to 15.3% from 13.3%percent.
Did I mention state, property, corporate, and excise taxes? No?
All told, next year, total taxes will go to almost 50% for the middle class; the very group that the president says he wants to protect. That means 50 cents out of every dollar earned has to go to the government. Half of everything will go to an entity that didn’t earn that money, and shouldn’t be entitled to all that dough.
In the recent election, 68 percent of new young voters overwhelming chose to vote for Obama and the Democratsâ€™ socialist agenda. Thatâ€™s a scary statistic, but itâ€™s no accident. Itâ€™s the result of a patient, long-term strategy on the part of leftist social reformers, and itâ€™s finally coming to fruition.
The majority of new voters were all recent public school graduates and new university students. Itâ€™s no secret that the Left controls government education in this country, especially the universities, and that true conservatives in the system pay the price for speaking out against elite intellectual ideology. 12+ years of subtle indoctrination has left this generation with a lopsided, leftist view of the world, making public education a guaranteed assembly line for mass-market production of new liberal voters.
Public education is government education. Itâ€™s paid for with other peopleâ€™s money. One of the reasons so many people are in favor of government healthcare is because they have been conditioned to accept government retirement (Social Security), medical reimbursement (Medicare), and government education. Weâ€™ve had Socialism for decades. Americans are used to it. Whatâ€™s one more government program? […]
More than 90 percent of children are in government schools. Why are we surprised after at least 12 years of government education that they believe government is the source of all thatâ€™s good in the world?
We have the freedom (at least at this point in time) to educate our children outside the control of government. Will it cost more money and time? Yes. We can pay now or we can pay later. Can you imagine what would happen if 50 percent of the people who voted for Mitt Romney took their children out of public schools and chose home education, some form of private education, or church sponsored schools? Â The Left would be crippled.
By the time we â€œrecapture the public education of this countryâ€ it will be too late. Well intentioned people have been trying to save public schools for decades. The schools have only gotten worse teaching a worldview that is counter to everything we believe. Once again itâ€™s the â€œgiftâ€ idea. People believe that government education is â€œfree,â€ or at least discounted.
I know that there are some good teachers and a few good schools when compared to most other schools. Thatâ€™s not the point. The curriculum and system of funding are mandated by government.
If you want a free country, you have to abandon â€œfreeâ€ education.â€
â€œThe philosophy of the classroom in one generation will be the philosophy of the government in the next.â€
Many Christians vote for politicians who support completely unbiblical economic policies because they have no idea what the Bible has to say about economics. Â All they know about economics they learned in secular government schools and the talking points put forth by politicians and political activists.
The world is reeling from poverty, drowning in debt, and suffering from other hardships caused by bad economic policies. Â God’s Word has the answers. Â Christians are called to disciple the nations to obey everything Christ commanded, INCLUDING in the area of economics, but we can’t teach hurting nations what we haven’t bothered to learn for ourselves.
A week ago, a lot of Americans received a jolt. After the election dust settled, they realized a majority of voters donâ€™t want to lessen the role of government in their lives. If anything, they want to see government expand.
It was (and continues to be) the talk of the airwaves and Internet. As one radio host put it, in light of the election results, what we need is significant economic education. He is right â€“ we do.
It is a pretty grave problem. The truth is that a majority of Americans in both political parties are radically ignorant of basic economics. In numerous ways, most people in the United States have been committed to some form of economic suicide for generations. They just donâ€™t realize the extent of it.
This is one of the main reasons we createdÂ Economics for Everybody. The long-term implications of government intervention in the economy are extremely dangerous to all of us, especially to our religious freedoms. More and more people have a sinking feeling about this. But unless they take time to learn the basics of economics, nothing will change.
What is really at stake here?
If a majority of Americans are committed to the expansion of the welfare state, it will lead to increasing poverty for all. A basic economic principle is that whatever you subsidize you get more of.
If a dad offers to give money to his kids to clean up their rooms, heâ€™ll get cleaner rooms. In the same way, if a government offers money to its citizens when they are unemployed, it will get more unemployment. Strange as it may seem, statistics consistently bear this out. And since the government offers money for all sorts of things it shouldnâ€™t be offering money for, itâ€™s no wonder we are where we are. We discuss this at length in â€˜Lesson 10 â€“ The Corporate and Welfare States of America.â€™
Next, if a majority of Americans are committed to government intervention in business through regulation, it will lead to a shrinking business sector. The basic economic principle here is that governments are unable to make accurate economic calculations.
The whole idea behind a planned economy is that central planners know better than producers and consumers whatâ€™s good for the economy. But such an idea assumes that a few people not only can comprehend, but actually direct the unique and ever-changing choices of limitless producers and consumers better than they can themselves.
It would be like a few people telling everyone else what they should buy at a grocery store. Itâ€™s functionally impossible to know all the discrete needs and desires of that many people, so the only way to attempt it is through general rules that restrict and direct consumption for all. At a business level, such a regulatory approach always ends in more and more businesses not being able to operate profitably and shutting down, ultimately resulting in the slow strangulation of an economy. We explain exactly how it happens in â€˜Lesson 8 â€“ The Basics of Government Intervention.â€™
Finally, if a majority of Americans donâ€™t understand the relationship between economic freedom and religious freedom, they will inevitably lose both. The economic principle is that we are caught in a cosmic battle that has many economic aspects: God wants us to build up a godly civilization with our resources while Satan wants to prevent us from doing so.
In an economy based on Christian principles, there is economic freedom for people to use their land, labor and capital as they see fit. It is a matter of individual stewardship based on God-given ability and property. But in an economy based on atheistic principles, the government is a tool of Satan to control the lives of individuals so that they cannot steward their resources and time for Godâ€™s Kingdom. Think of the many socialist and communist economies that persecuted tens of millions of Christians.
The fact that there is a spiritual battle going on that has economic dimensions is lost on most people. But it is the reality of this, as well as the fact of sin in the world, that is so important economically.Â History reveals this to us over and over again. We explain it in greater detail in â€˜Lessons 6 & 7 â€“ A Tale of Two Theologies.â€™
There is, of course, even more to economics. We try to explore as many basic principles as necessary in the twelve-lesson series. Our belief is that if people go through the entireÂ Economics for EverybodyÂ curriculum, they will be in a much better place to understand what happened last Tuesday on Election Day.Â They will also understand what needs to happen in the future.
The 1977 “Community Reinvestment Act” laid the groundwork for racial bias in lending. Â Banks were forced to fulfill racial quotas Â – even if that meant relaxing lending standards – or face fines and shake-down campaigns from the likes of ACORN activists.
If your organization has a policy or practice that doesn’t benefit minorities equally, watch out: The Obama administration could sue you for racial discrimination under a dubious legal theory that many argue is unconstitutional.
President Obama intends to close “persistent gaps” between whites and minorities in everything from credit scores and homeownership to test scores and graduation rates.
His remedy â€” short of new affirmative-action legislation â€” is to sue financial companies, schools and employers based on “disparate impact” complaints â€” a stealthy way to achieve racial preferences, opposed 2 to 1 by Americans.
Under this broad interpretation of civil-rights law, virtually any organization can be held liable for race bias if it maintains a policy that negatively impacts one racial group more than another â€” even if it has no racist motive and applies the policy evenly across all groups.
Obama has a long history of punishing producers in his quest for minority justice.
State Sen. Barack Obama and hisÂ radicalÂ mentor and friend Fr. Michael Pfleger led a protest against the payday loan industry demanding the State of Illinois to regulate loan businesses back in January 2000. (NBC 5Â Week of January 3, 2000)
In his next term Obama is going back to his roots as a community organizer.
The election is finally over, which means the tax clock is ticking. Congress now has eight weeks until the U.S. economy jumps over the much-dreaded “fiscal cliff,” the combination of tax increases and spending cuts that are scheduled to go into effect in January 2013.
Earlier this week, House SpeakerÂ John Boehner, R-Ohio, saidÂ that a lame duck Congress “probably shouldn’t do big things,” but “the best you can hope for is a bridge.” That bridge may mean a short-term extension, which would allowÂ newly-elected lawmakers and President Barack Obama to hash out a deal.
Professor Stephen Schneck is the National Co-Chair of Catholics for Obama, a group which defies church teachings by supporting pro-abortion Democrats and blames Republicans for increasing abortion by not supporting Socialist solutions to poverty.
Rabbi Samuel Gordon is co-founder of Rabbis For Obama, a group that boycotts and defames Israel while cozying up to Ahmadinejad.
And what do these Socialist, pro-abortion, anti-Israel spokespeople consider to be Obama’s “biblical values”?
Pastor Kerr touts Obama’s “basic core belief that when one part suffers, every part every part suffers…itâ€™s a deeply religious belief.” Â Yes, it is. Â Problem is, instead of recognizing that the Bible’s command to care for the needy is directed to individuals, families and the body of Christ, Obama seeks to transfer these responsibilities to the control of the Almighty State.
Obama says in the ad thatÂ â€œI believe in country that rewards hard work and responsibility, a country where we look after one another, a country where I say Iâ€™m my brotherâ€™s keeper, Iâ€™m my sisterâ€™s keeper.â€ Â Problem is, he doesn’t trust God and the free market to reward hard work and responsibility through voluntary exchanges and happy customers.
If Obama had ever studied the teachings of Jesus, heâ€™d know that â€œbeing my brothersâ€™ and sistersâ€™ keeperâ€ isnâ€™t one of them.Â Rather, thatâ€™s a distortion of Cainâ€™s response to God when asked where his murdered brother was: â€œAm I my brotherâ€™s keeper?â€Â In other words, â€œHow would I know where my brother is?Â Iâ€™m not his babysitter!â€ Â Â Liberation theologyÂ has twisted Cainâ€™s guilty response into an endorsement of socialist policies such as redistribution.
Rabbi Gordon praises Obama’s government takeover of the healthcare industry, supporting Obama’s claim thatÂ â€œWhen I talk about making sure insurance companies arenâ€™t discriminating against those who are already sick, I do so…because I believe in Godâ€™s command to love thy neighbor as thyself.â€ Â Making sure that people with long-term illnesses and pre-existing conditions are able to receive health care is a lofty goal, but again, the problem is that he employs an unscriptural solution: nationalizing one’s own body. Â Solutions that employ private charities and respect individual liberty are completely dismissed.
â€œLove thy neighbor as thyselfâ€ is another command that Obama and his friends are twisting to mean that government can forcibly confiscate your rightful property and use it to pay for someone else’s medical bills. Â Thatâ€™s not love â€“ thatâ€™s THEFT.
Bishop McKenzieÂ makes the claim thatÂ â€œWhen he stands in the gap for the auto industry to be sure there are jobs for people to have, thatâ€™s putting your faith in action, thatâ€™s putting feet to your faith.â€ Â We already have a lawful system for that, called bankruptcy court. Â Obama broke the law by bypassing the courts, forcing investors to take less than they had been promised by contract, and forcing hard-working American taxpayers to pour billions of dollars into the pockets of his union pals, who had helped to bankrupt the industry. Â Much of that money came back to the President in the form of campaign contributions. Â Giving special favors to campaign contributors and going around the law are NOT Biblical values.
Professor Schneck insists that “saving peopleâ€™s jobs is a moral policy,” but he doesn’t understand how Biblical economics works. Â Keeping a person at a job in an industry that is failing simply diverts that person’s labors away from another industry that may be better served by his talents. Â We could get the government to still subside making horse-drawn carriages and 8-track machines that nobody wants to buy, but neither the workers nor the economy would beÂ benefitedÂ by doing so. Â It is not the government’s job to decide where to divert workers and resources. Â The free market naturally directs workers and resources to the areas where they are in most demand, allowing less efficient orÂ desirable industries to fade. Â It is not for the State to play God in this area.
Schneck also saysÂ â€œThe Bible tell us that to whom much is given, much is expected,” misquoting Luke 12:48Â to support the Marxist theory of progressive taxation: that the more you make, the more you should pay. Â Luke 12:48Â refers to what GOD will require from us, not the government. Â It is GOD who gives and takes away, not the state. Â Obama is deliberately putting the state in the place of God by hijacking that verse.
In fact, the Bible admonishes us inÂ Leviticus 19:15 to treat all people equal under the law, regardless of income: “Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.” Â A tax policy that punishes people for their success and declares that the rich have less of a right to their earnings than the poor is a miscarriage of justice; a form of unequal treatment before the law in violation of scripture. Â The example God left for us was one of a flat percentage rate of 10% from the poorest to the richest, and His ways are just.
American Christians have a very serious decision to make, and they have to make it based on solid Biblical principles. Â We are obligated to support candidates who respect human life at all ages and stages, the Biblical definition of marriage, religious liberty, and Biblical economic principles and solutions to poverty – NOT Marxist ones. Â We must be cautious to examine the claims and promises of politicians and their sycophants against the truth of scripture, and discern where those scriptures are being twisted to support an ungodly agenda.
The Declaration of Independence made us free from European powers. Obama wants to surrender our national sovereignty to unelected foreign bureaucrats once again, giving them the power to “redistribute” the fruits of American labor to third-world dictatorships.
A One World Socialist State is no longer just a crazy conspiracy theory…it’s the goal nearly within their reach.
It’s long past time to DEFUND the United Nations entirely of American money, and have them move their headquarters off our shores. Â They have become the tyrants the purport to prevent.
It should come as no surprise that President Obama will raise taxes if he is re-elected. Â But hereâ€™s the shocker: He will invite the United Nations to tax Americans directly. Â And the proceeds would go directly to the Third World. Â In this way, Barack Obama will, indeed, realize the dreams of his father.
In our new book, “Here Come the Black Helicopters: UN Global Governance and the Loss of Freedom,” Eileen and I describe how there is now pending in the U.N. all kinds of plans to tax Americans and redistribute their wealth â€“ not to other Americans â€“ but to other countries. Â These taxes will not be like our U.N. dues paid by a vote of our Congress. Â Nor akin to foreign aid which we choose to give. Â They would be mandatory levies imposed by treaty on American citizens. Â And, since they would be enumerated in a Treaty â€“ not an act of Congress — Â only the president and the Democratic Senate need be on board. Â The Republican House has no role in the Treaty-making process.
(Of course, we do not believe that actual black UN helicopters will land in our midst to take over our country. Â But we use the symbolism to warn that the liberal, bureaucratic elites in the UN, enabled by Obama and Hillary, mean to create global governance to override American self-rule and independence).
Here is what we say in “Black Helicopters” that Obama, Hillary, and the UN are planning for us:
A â€œRobin Hoodâ€ tax on financial transactions. Â Every time you buy or sell a stock or a bond or exchange money while travelling, youâ€™d be hit with a financial transactions tax (a percentage of your transaction) that would go to the UN.
A global tobacco tax with the funds to flow to the World Health Organization (WHO).
A UN-imposed tax on billionaires all over the world. And donâ€™t delude yourself for a moment that it is only the 1600 current billionaires who will be hit. Â Once the precedent of a UN tax on US citizens is approved, it will gradually grow downwards to cover more and more Americans. Â Again the funds will go to the UN.
Under the Law of the Sea Treaty â€“ up for Senate ratification in December of the lame duck session â€“ offshore oil and gas wells would have to pay a proportion of their revenues to the International Seabed Authority, a UN-sponsored organization, which would distribute the loot to the third world.
A carbon tax on all U.S. or other foreign commercial or passenger aircraft flying to Europe. Â Nominally to fight climate change, these revenues would also go to the third world.
A mandatory assessment to be imposed on the U.S. to compensate third world nations for the costs of reducing their carbon output.
These taxes are, of course, only the first steps. Â Once the principle is established of UN taxation of American citizens, the sky is the limit.