The Tenth Amendment is one I cite like NRA members cite the Second. I often refer to it because I think it validates my call for the abolition of the Department of Education (among many, many others.) I’m very passionate about K-12 education and I do not like that the federal government has their hands in it. The Tenth Amendment declares; “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
Education falls into the purview of the powers not delegated by the Constitution, and therefore disqualifies the federal government from having any right to regulate, constrict or control it. You can read more about how the government is actively and continuously ignoring this amendment in regard to education in a blog I wrote a couple years ago, titled “A Federalist View on Education.”
The Tenth Amendment is so important because it keeps the idea of Federalism, and a small central government alive and well. It empowers the states and the people, keeps the federal government in check, and gives us freedom. The Founding Fathers were very insistent about the creation of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments because they wanted to ensure that the government knew that the powers not designated in the document were to be promised to the people. Learn more about the Founding Fathers in My Dinner with the Founding Fathers.
Be sure to read the rest of the Know Your Rights series, and once you know them, never forget them. It is up to each of us to defend our rights, and the rights of our neighbors. Stand up against tyranny in all forms. To help arm yourself with the freedoms of the Constitution, get your free pocket Constitution from Hillsdale College; and if your travelling this Summer, order yourself a metal Bill of Rights card to stick it to the TSA.
Sic Semper Tyrannus!
Continuing the Vote for the Candidate series, moving left to right, this post will be about the democratic party nominee; Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton’s career has been entirely in law and politics. She’s been the First Lady, a Senator, and the Secretary of State, so she may be considered a little more relevant than Jill Stein.
If you are awake and living in the U.S., you are probably already familiar with some of the scandals that surround Mrs. Clinton. Benghazi, the emails, and the lies she told regarding both. And as bad as they are, just try remembering all the scandals that she and her husband, Bill, were involved with. (This is a pretty long list, so I’m just going to do it bullet point style, if you don’t mind.)
o The Clinton Foundation, illegal and dirty dealings
o The Alinsky Alignment, and the Vanishing Thesis
o Invisible Bullets; “landing under sniper fire”
o Looting and Leaving… and Taking. Stealing from the White House
o Bad Boy Bill and his partner in crime… Hillary threatens his many women
o “The Body Count” (True or not, it’s creepy and just a tiny bit concerning.)
The Clinton’s have been involved in far too many scandals for me to believe that there is a single innocent bone in either of their bodies.
If the scandals don’t scare you, you should take a look at who Hillary has aligned and surrounded herself with. People like Saul Alinsky, Margaret Sanger, Henry Kissinger and Huma Abedin. These are racists, socialists, Islamists and advocates of mass genocide. She’s also said that she considers herself to be a progressive. She voluntarily likened herself to the worst of the worst when she said; “I prefer the word ‘progressive,’ which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century.” The 20th Century progressives were real bad dudes, and they did not have the values I want my candidate to have.
If the scandals and the terrible people she identifies with doesn’t concern you, then we should look at actually the first thing you should consider: her policies. Hillary Clinton’s policies aren’t representative of what the average American believes. Even if that American is a Clinton supporter.
The vast majority of Americans disapprove of the Affordable Care Act (in fact, Gallup polls show it has only a 37% approval rating,) yet Hillary wants to keep and expand it. The ACA also plays a part in her immigration policies, as she wishes to expand coverage to everyone, “regardless of immigration status.” And if the expansion of ObamaCare doesn’t leave the economy in shambles, maybe her New College Compact will. She took a page out of Bernie Sander’s socialist handbook, and started promising free college. That promise is tied to a plan that not only pushes the burden onto taxpayers, but also allows the federal government more control over post-secondary institutions.
When on Clinton’s website, reading about her positions on the various issues, you will find the name “Obama” so many times, you’ll start to forget whose website you’re actually on. It is often written that she will “defend Obama’s…” or “continue Obama’s…” and seldom written that she would change anything he’s done or proposed. President Obama’s approval rating is currently at 51% – amongst the lowest of any out-going president. He has been much lower. Why would we want to vote in someone whose policies don’t differ at all from the man America can’t wait to get out?
Perhaps the most concerning thing for those of us who knows what Hillary Clinton believes and knows what’s at stake; is who would end up on the Supreme Court. The idea that someone who does not respect the Constitution as the Law of the Land appointing someone to the Supreme Court is absolutely terrifying. This is why my research proves to me that Hillary Clinton is not only not the candidate for me, but not the person I would want to represent women as the first female president.
Joseph Stalin was a huge proponent, and implementer, of a centralized government-ran education system. He was also a proponent of communism and labor camps. Stalin would use his education system to teach kids that what he believed was good for them and for the nation. Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, much like Joseph Stalin, used their government-ran education systems to indoctrinate young minds. America now, is leaning further and further into a centralized education system, which would put the power of educating children solely into the hands of the federal government. Remember, “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
This is why I am passionate about saving our education system from the federal government and returning it to the states. The most important step we can take to fix our broken education system is to repeal anything and everything that has been or will be signed into law by the federal government that affects K-12 education. Repeal it because it is poison. Having the federal government involved in education is toxic; it’s unnecessary, it’s expensive, and it’s also unconstitutional.
The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution restricts the federal government to the powers granted to it in the original document, and delegates to the states the right to cover all other matters. “All other matters” would include education, seeing as how it is never mentioned in the Constitution. Yet, we pay the salaries for five thousand federal employees in the U.S. Department of Education.
If the idea of paying five thousand salaries to people in positions that are – in fact – in direct violation of the Law of the Land doesn’t make your blood boil, then do some research on the current U.S. Department of Education budget. In President Barack Obama’s Fiscal Year 2017 Budget proposal he “provides $69.4 billion in discretionary funding and $139.7 billion in new mandatory funding for the U.S. Department of Education.” That’s $209.1 billion dollars in federal spending, and for one of many of the unnecessary federal departments we can and must eliminate. Understand that this department IS unnecessary.
Many, many people will tell you that the U.S. Department of Education is vital, and that there is a definitive place for the federal government in education. These people are what I like to call “wrong.” Do not let these people confuse you. I will help you address some concerns critics will have to this “repeal at all costs” plan.
Argument #1: National standards allow colleges to know that students from any state are coming in having met the same set of standards.
Rebuttal: By now, states pretty much know what colleges require, and would consider that when writing their own standards. Colleges, also, would understand what each state requires and consider that in their admission process. Most importantly, however, governors and state lawmakers could communicate to keep some continuity in their standards for this very reason. This would also encourage states, at both a K-12 and collegiate level, to compete for the best schools and teachers; as if they were in a free market. Additionally, this argument does not negate the U.S. Constitution and you are wrong.
Argument #2: States receive federal funding for their education. If the federal government cannot have anything to do with education, then how would they get their money?
Rebuttal: The vast majority of public education funds come from state and local sources. We could make up the difference in state or local taxes if you cut the federal expenses out of our federal taxes. OR if states opened district lines, and the money followed the child, the schools would have to compete for the money. Additionally, this argument does not negate the U.S. Constitution and you are wrong.
Argument #3: If it wasn’t needed, it never would have been created.
Rebuttal: You’ve seen Gumby, right?! What need did that creation satisfy? Progressives created several federal departments so that we would become more dependent on government and fall into a centralized system. We want to end this and put the power back into the state’s hands’. Additionally, this argument is stupid and does not negate the U.S. Constitution.
Alright, so you may not want to use those exact words, but you get the idea.
We need to say goodbye to No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, Common Core, Every Student Succeeds Act, and anything else the government touched and injected into our education system. It’s time that we repeal every act of federal legislation as it relates to our education system, remove the U.S. Department of Education, and that the federal government relinquishes all powers over education back into the states’ hands.
The political class loves the idea that they know what’s best. They thrive and survive by convincing the American public that we need them to tell us what’s best. Not only is that totally reverse from the way our government was set up, but it’s also just plain silly. There are two major issues facing society today that have little or nothing to do with the political class: education and employment.
Republicans and Democrats alike will argue about whose “simple 48 step, 978-page bill will raise employment 748% and completely wipe out poverty,” (at least that’s what I hear in between all the mumbling, like the adults in The Peanuts.) But have they ever stopped to think that the people they are supposed to be representing, might have a better, simpler idea that just might work? Of course not. Because if Americans were self-sufficient, and could think for themselves, then what would we need them for?
Employment and education are perhaps the two most intertwined issues ever discussed in politics, yet you’ll never hear any political players word it as such. Education at the K-12 level is so exponentially important in terms of the work force, especially regarding youth employment (ages 16-24). School influences so much of a young person’s life, and is sometimes the only source of guidance a child receives. This can be especially true in inner-city schools, which have the hardest time attracting the best teachers and administrators that will make a difference in their lives.
If the education you receive at the primary and secondary levels are flawed, then too will be your approach to work and all future endeavors. Primary schools should equip you with all the tools you need to know how to learn and innovate. Secondary schools should equip you for life. If we put kids into a flawed education system, that does not build within them these skills, then we should not question a double digit youth unemployment rate.
When you look at it from an employer’s perspective, why would you hire a youth worker, lacking any sufficient education and all work ethic for a position when you’d have to pay them the same rate as a hard-working, experienced, learned candidate? I’d go with the latter every time… unless, it saved me money to do otherwise. In an age where baby boomers and millennials have come together to demand an increase in the minimum wage, I’d like to see it abolished, amended, or lowered.
I believe it would be doing our country, and our children, a big service if we created an education system that prepared them for the workforce. And if we had a work environment that rewarded them for working hard, gaining experience and becoming more learned. This is a duel issue, and has to be handled as such. We need to finally admit that these issues are intertwined and cannot be handled at a federal level.
Recent news stories report that the idea of “white privilege” is being taught in schools, to kids as young as are in kindergarten. ( http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/07/02/elite-nyc-school-teaching-kindergartners-about-white-privilege.html) But this shouldn’t come as a surprise. Anytime there is a narrative the political class wants to push, it is first pushed in the education system. This is where the majority of lies are born.
It’s not a new thing; the progressives have been imploring this tactic for years. It’s been done over and over again. Not just here in America, but everywhere. It was seen perfected in Nazi Germany. Teaching and molding young minds is such a precious job, and there are so many great teachers out there. However, the system as a whole, and many individual teachers are just boiling over with progressive lies.
The concept is ingenious, and not off target. You have to start with the youth. You have to teach them what you want them know. If you start teaching them one narrative when they are young and they hear over and over again their whole lives, they will not know anything else.
It’s actually not unlike how bullies get you to devalue yourself. When you hear “you’re dumb,” “you’re fat,” “you’re ugly” enough times, and that’s all you hear, you start to believe it. And as a parent, it’s your job to make sure they hear another, more supportive voice that you hope will cancel out the negativity. It’s your job to build them up – starting when they are young – so that they will always know where their real value comes from.
The job of a teacher should be the same. To teach our children how to think, how to find answers, and how to make up their own minds. The job of a teacher should be to teach our children to know enough when they are being indoctrinated. They should be teaching our children that when someone is pushing a narrative, you need to take a step back and figure out why, and then collect all the facts. When they don’t do this; when teachers instead push their beliefs – or the beliefs of the administration on them, they treat them like pawns; like players in their sick, political game. They take away their value as critical thinking human beings and turn them into parrots of the public agenda.
Like I said before, the concept of starting with the youth is not off target. It’s just not being done right. We do need to start with the youth. We need to start teaching them how to be self-sufficient, and how to reach their own conclusions about things. We need to teach them with no agenda. We need to raise children to do what the last couple of generations have obviously failed to do; listen, learn, apologize, forgive, love, serve, lead, follow, and save this country.
The first public school in America – Boston Latin School – was established by puritan settlers in 1635 in order to teach children how to read scripture. They taught Latin so that they would read and interpret the bible freely, without judgement. This was important to the pilgrims, who had fought against the monarch’s religious teachings, allowing not the individual’s interpretation of scripture. Today, the public school system cannot even mention God or creation without getting in six different types of legal trouble. We went from teaching kids how to interpret the bible to ensure religious freedom, to not allowing bibles in schools to ensure religious freedom.
Thomas Jefferson had the idea to create two different tracks for children in school. The laborer, and the learned. There was not insinuation that one was better than the other, or that one would perform better than the other, but that they would take the track that would most benefit them in their future pursuits. It’s true that we still have vo-tech schools that teach valuable skills to kids on less academic path, but we also live in a society that largely values education and degrees over skills and experience.
Jefferson had the right idea – but it was never completely seen put into action. If you’re fourteen and you already know you do not want to go to college, you are better off learning trades and interning than you are spending your entire day in a classroom. (This does not mean you don’t need a complete high school education.) If you are sixteen and you know that all you want to do with your life is become a doctor, than you should be on an all-intensive track that will especially challenge you in science. There’s nothing wrong with being a laborer, and there’s a lot to be said for the stick-to-itiveness of the learned, but when you don’t do enough to separate the two, they get lost and the work force suffers for it.
What does school actually prepare you for, anyway? I’ve never been to public school, but everyone I know that has, can’t answer that question. They don’t know how to write a resume, they don’t know how to conduct a successful interview, and they don’t know how to pay bills, or do taxes. They weren’t prepared for the real world things they would encounter just within a year of graduation. If it is not the job of educators to teach young children how to grow into a successful member of society, than why would we consider it their job to teach them about sex?
The government is so dysfunctional that they can’t efficiently deliver our mail, but we let them teach our kids. Think about that for a minute. The United States Postal Service was such an utter disaster that democrats started to demand its privatization, yet we want them to mold the minds of millions of young children. I guess our teachers weren’t that smart either. If the preferable option to the post office is a private company like UPS or FedEx, wouldn’t a preferable option to public school be a private school? It’s beginning to look that way. The more we see the effects of Common Core in action, the more we see a spike in home and private schooling.