Monday, September 14, 2009

School, Guns, and the Internet

Last week, as I am sure you all know, President Obama gave a speech to children in schools across the country. There was a great deal of controversy around this speech. As the speech was approaching, many parents were even threatening to keep their children home from school that day. Why? What was so upsetting about a speech to children in school that was causing such a response? I did not see such a problem with the President’s idea to give this speech. A President is supposed to be a leader, and hence should have the ability to inspire many. The children of the country are a great audience and certainly a body that can be inspired and motivated to do great things; especially if being spoken to by our president, who is looked up to by virtually every child in the country, and rightfully so. So, why would this speech not be seen as a good thing?

There were many parents complaining that this was not a proper use of school time. I did not see this as such a problem for a few reasons. First, because of what I just explained, that there is the potential for a speech like this to have a very positive impact on the children. Second, the time it would take to have this speech in the big picture of things is so small and negligible as part of the whole school year.

This being said, I was not happy about the speech. Well, the speech itself I was fine with, it was what the White House sent along with the speech that disturbed me. They sent a short email to schools providing suggestions for how the schools could deal with the speech. They said teachers should discuss the speech with children before and after it was given. They were even nice enough to give a list of suggested questions to ask the students, and this is what got me. The questions suggested, really showed me the true agenda of this speech.

Some of the questions that really stood out to me were: What is the President trying to tell me? What is the President asking me to do? And Why it is important that we listen to the president and other elected officials?

To me, these questions were an attempt to get the children to think in a certain way, mainly that the government is who to turn to for everything. I see these questions as trying to lead the children to believe in big government as a way of life. By trying to get them to think about listening to elected officials and what they are telling us to do, they are leading the children to view the officials in a specific light. They are attempting to guide the children to view the elected officials as the heads of the country, and the ones who should be telling us what to do. True, the president is in many ways the head of our country but not when it comes to how we should behave, and certainly not when it comes to how we should think.

This is not an isolated event. I believe that there is a very strong push by the democrats to create this mindset in all Americans. It does many things for them. It makes it easier for them to pass controlling, and regulating legislation. I also believe it allows them to more easily further their agenda of ‘spreading the wealth.’ By making the people feel that the government is the true head of the country, it is easier to convince them the government has the right to take from one and give to another; for they would feel that the government is truly in control of everything anyways. This has been going on with the democrats for a very long time, and as I have said before has worked wonders for getting votes.

There are a few other things that have been popping up in the news in the past few months that I believe are part of this attempt to change, (and in some, enforce) the way people view the government: As the owners, and controllers of every aspect of the country. Two things that really stand out to me are gun control, and this recent story of trying to give the President the power to take control over the internet.

First I will deal with the talk about stricter gun control. It does not really matter if the government does indeed come along and take away everybody’s guns. As long as they have created a fear that they would, they have done enough to further this agenda. How, you might ask? Well, lucky for you I can answer that question. We must look at why ‘the right to bear arms’ is such a crucial part of the constitution. We must look at what the founders were taking into consideration when setting up our great country, and mainly to create a government that does not own, nor control its citizens (as had been the case in the land they were coming from.) By allowing the people to bear arms, they were making it clear that government’s powers did not include having any control over the citizens. That they would not be able to do things by force, and to take over people’s lives as they had been doing under the King. So keeping this in mind, [and I am not implying that the democrats are trying to use force to take over the country and control us and rule over the people,] but I am saying that they are trying to make people think of the government as a body that can do that. I believe that they want Americans to view the government as the owners of the country, instead of themselves as being such.

The same thing is with this talk about the president being able to control the internet. If the president is able to control such a public, free thing as the internet, where does his power stop? No where. And this is what they want us to think. They want us to view the President, and all elected officials for that matter, as true rulers. As people who are in control of the land, and even in control of the people.

Now many of the democrats get caught up in different ideas that can be further pushed by thinking like this, and can almost forget about what else it implies. They see for example, healthcare for everyone, and can see it as a feasible government option because they view the government as the true owners of all in the land, and hence a body that can take from some to give to others. They do not have the time to see that this also means that the government can take away what is theirs, mainly because they are too caught up in their goal.

But this internet thing specifically troubles me because of the recent events that took place in Iran. The government was killing and beating peaceful protesters in the street, and if not for the internet no one would have known about it. Imagine, the protests were nothing compared to what happened on Saturday in D.C (G-d bless those people who attended,) and the Iranian government was brutally murdering innocent people in the street. Imagine if not for the clever use of Twitter and Facebook , no one outside of Iran would have known about what was going on, and who knows how long it would have continued if not for the international pressure that was put on them. So, how would anyone talk about our President being able to stop us from getting out those Tweets if something like that were to occur in our country? Again, not that I am even in anyway suggesting that it would, but the fact that we would know that if it did, there would be nothing for us to do, would put people in the mindset that ‘the government is in charge here, and they control our whole lives.’

I believe that this was the true motivation behind the speech to the kids in school, and for the talk of giving the president to power to control the internet. I think it is all part of the attempt to make people think of the government as the rulers of the land. To slowly remove from our society the truth that our government is for the people by the people, and that the country is owned by the citizens. To flip the table and create a land where instead of us being in charge and the government working for us, where the government is in charge and we work for them.


  1. J, heard you on Levin today and liked what you had to say. Have read a little of your writing here and also like that. Keep up the good word and keep the faith, in all things. God's best to you as you launch...

  2. Hi "J." I heard you on the Mark Levin Show earlier. I just wanted to say that for an older guy like me it is refreshing to hear (and now read) a young man who somehow dodged the indoctrination in the school system, and now, at least so far, the indoctrination at the university level. I live on the other coast, am a veteran of the U. S. submarine service, and most of all a conservative. Keep up the good work!

  3. I heard you on that horrible/evil/sadistic Mark Levin show yesterday, and wanted to let you know that MY blog,, is diametrically opposed to all conservative/right-wing/white-hate points of view. We strive for equality and we will not allow Mark Levin to stand in our way. You have been put on notice. I am reporting this site.

  4. Well, you know I have officially made it.... Hate mail! How exciting!! So Candle, you do not like my blog? You do not like Mark Levin? But yet here you are listening to us. How funny.

  5. Of course I like Mark Levin - he signed my book. Best conservative book I've ever read, in fact. I'm just trying to drum up interest in my blog :) Was saying "orthodoxconservative...orthodoxconservative..." all the way home from work last night so I could remember and post today :) How hard was it to get on the show? I keep trying to call in and then chicken out every time.

    I wish he'd lay off Beck - I love the great one, but jeeze, he's coming off kind of snarky and jealous if you ask me. Much better when he's not bashing the guys doing good out there.

  6. I think too many conservatives are preaching to the choir, the folks who need the common sense spoken into their mush minds are the moderate fence sitters, the waffles and the youngsters who will vote for the first time in 2010 and 2012 they dont know what to think, so we should help them. don't bother with rabid liberals because as Jesus put it "do not cast your pearls before swine or they will turn and attack you" encourage the ones who are with us and bring others who are teachable into the fold.
    also toss out the stinky moldy leaders who sold us out.
    That my friends is how you change the party to what it was under Reagan.

    hopefully Bro Richard

  7. This patriot writes a good factual blog.
    good job, keep at it everyone help him promote it!
    This country needs more people with critical thinking skills, bravo!!