A link to a short video on the John Jones Museum:
A link to a short video on the John Jones Museum:
Editors note: This article fron the early 1980s, was originally typed and contains some typos which we were not able to correct. A link to a PDF version: http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/Transcripts/The%20Wonderful%20World%20Of%20Charity.pdf
By Samuel L. Blumenfeld
Laissez-faire — or a reasonable facsimile thereof — is alive
and well in the wonderful world of nonprofit organizations better
known in America as philanthropy. Anyone can start a charity around
some worthy medical, educational or cultural cause, get a mailing
list, send out a quarter of a million letters pleading for money,
and then wait for the checks to roll in. This is one of the great
freedoms Americans can still joyfully exercise, a freedom that some
people would like to curtail.
And that’s why your mailbox on some days is literally crammed
with letters from such organizations as the American Civil Liberties
Union Foundation, the Sierra Club, American Leprosy Missions, The
Salvation Army, the Cousteau Society, Planned Parenthood, the Epilepsy
Foundation of America, Alternatives to Abortion International,
Animal Protection Institute of America, Sacred Heart Auto League,
Leukemia Society of America, etc.
Would you believe that the cumulative list of tax-exempt
organizarions compiled by the Internal Revenue Service has over
250,000 entries? And that doesn’t tell the whole story, for under
one umbrella organization . may be hundreds of branches or chapters
that are j ust as tax exempt as the parent group . . Would you believe
that Americans give to charity at a rate of over $100 million a day?
Would you believe that America’s total giving — $47.74 billion In
1980 — is more than the national budgets of all but uine of the
160 nations listed in the World Almanac? (Brazil’s national budget
in 1979 was $18.83; Canada’s, $44.75 billion.)
The simple truth is that Americans are the most generous people
on earth. They give about $180 per capita each year to charity,
whereas Canadians give only about $35, and Englishmen a mere $20.
Large-scale philanthropy is a peculiarly American phenomenon for a
number of very good reasons: (1) Americans in ‘ general rely less on
government to get things done than do people in other nations;
(2) Americans, because of their wealth, are grateful for their good
fortune and are thus easily persuaded by religious conviction or a
sense of altruism to help the less fortunate and contrbute to worthy
causes; (3) the tax-exempt status of the nonprofit organization has
made it economically attractive to conduct certain medical, cultural,
educational and scentific enterprises in the nonprofit format;
(4) fund-raising has been developed into a very highly skilled
profession, with the result that more people are being persuaded to
give to more causes than ever before.
become the favorite
Contrary to the popular belief that foundations are the big
givers in America, the fact is that individuals contribute over
80 percent of the total given to charity. In 1980 that came to
And that is why direct-mail solicitations have
way to reach potential donors. They go to
inqividuals in their homes where the letters can be read in an easy
chair in close proximity to a personal checkbook. The appeal letter,
skillfully written by a w|ll-paid professional, is intended to
enlist the reader’s interest and symp}thy to the extent that he
or she will write out a check immediately, slip it in the prepaid
reply envelope, and mail it in the morning. An appeal letter that
is set aside for future answering seldom gets ansv?~reu because the
appeals that arrive in the next day’s mail may command greater
interest and sympathy.
Although begging for alms is probably as old as the human race,
soliciting contributions by mail is a relatively new phenomenon
which, in the computer age, has become a highly sophisticated business.
Legend has it that direct-mail fund-raising was started in Italy
in 1835 by Saint Vincent Pallotti, an advisor to the Pope, wh0 sent
letters to potential donors appealing for money to support his
works of mercy. Undoubtedly Father Pallotti wrote some very persuasive
letters, for he opened a whole new world of charitable enterprise.
Today some direct-mail specialists charge as much as $5,000
to write a good, hard-hitting letter for a client — who might be
a magazine publisher, a sales house, or a charity. In 1978 about
34 billion form letters were sent through the mail by businesses and
organizations trying to drum up mail-order response. Their
success accounted for about 12 percent of all retail sales,
addqng up to $83 billion in gross revenues.
That’s a lot ofBut it all starts with a mailing list. You just don’t send
out letters to everyone in the phone book. You try to get a list
of people most likely to respond to your appeal. Richard Viguerie,
the direct-mail king for conservative. causes, built his thriving
empire on a list of contributors to the Goldwater campaign of 1964.
Hqving those names and addresses was literally like having money
n the bank. These were people interested in any number of
conservative causes. The result was the birth of numeyous sinqle
issue organizations that began laying the groundwork for a conservative
Likewise, ln 1972 the liberals put together their own mailing
list from contributors to the McGovern campaign. This list, compiled
by direct-mail specialist Morris Dees, had a half million names to
begin with. If you were on this list, you no doubt have received
since then several hundreds of solicitations from liberal causes.
And, of course, organizations will exchange or buy lists to expand
their reach. One contributor who gave $15 to the Kent State Fund
soon began receiving solicitations from the followers of Karen
Silkwood, the Union of Concerned Scientists (nuclear power) and
the Greenpeace Foundation (baby seals). There is a very lively
traffic in lists, with brokers offering whole catalogues of specialized
lists for rent — doctors, lawyers, teachers, salesmen, home-owners,
boat-owners, farmers, pilots, ministers, etc. Some lists are
computer-coded so that they can be broken down by sex, level of
,donation, ethnic derivation of surname, and zip code, which makes
it pretty easy for an organization or business to direct its
campaign to a very specific group of people.
Renting a list is not cheap. The cost will run between $15
and $60 per thousand names. But that’s only the beginning. There’s
also postage, paper, and printing to pay for — not to mention the
overhead of an office. On the average, the overall cost for a mailing
of 100,000 pieces is about $20,000, or 20 cen¡3 apiece. A resronse
of 2 perc¢nt is considered highly successful. If those 2,000
respondees contribute an average of about $15 each, your income
will be about $30,000, leaving your organization about $10,000 to
spend on the cause.
Actually, in its first year no new charity is expected to raise
much more money than is needed to simply get it off the ground.
The payoff comes after the first year when contributors renew their
donations and the organization developes a loyal following of
interested people and a specialized mailing list of its own.
Because there is now so much competition in direc£-mail.
solicitations, fund-raisers are using all sorts of gimmicks to get
people to respond. Public affairs groups may enclose opinion
polls or postage stamps. Religious charities often enclose plastic
key chains and medallions. Health agencies tend to favor seals.
Other gimmicks include sweepstake tickets, greeting cards, ball-point
pens, return address labels, and bright new pennies. The hope
is that these “gifts” will induce the receiver to send some money
back in the return envelope. The gimmicks often work, for no one
likes to feel that he or she is taking something for nothing,
particularly from a charity. Naturally all of this gimmickry
increases the cost of fund-raising.
There is a great deal of debate over what constitutes fair
operating costs for a chartable organization. Some charities are
accused of spending too much money on raising money and not enough
on the charity itself. That was the case with the Sister Kenny
Foundation which in the years 1952-9 collected $30,674,000 from
the public to help rehabilitate victims of infantile paralysis.
Of that money, 53%, or $16,260,000, went for “overhead” and fundraising
costs. Thus, less than half the money collected was
actually used for therapeutic purposes.
Was this a result of fraud, greed, or plain poor management?
In this case it turned out to be a matter of greed, and the promoters
involved one of whom was a well-known operator in the charity
business were found guilty of mail fraud and conspiracy and were
sent to jail.
But the truth of the matter is that charitable organizations,
subject to the strong pressures of a highly competitive marketplace,
have become more and more like businesses, p la gue d wit the same
economic problems, expected to perform with the same efficiency.
Yet, as we all know, businesses can fail. They can lose money as
well as make it, and the same holds true for the charitable organization,
One ought not to automatically suspect fraud if a charity can’t
quite make it.
In a field of activity as large, diverse, and open as fund-raising
there are bound to be some sharp operators and some shady dealings
and practices. However, most of the people who start charitable
organizatlons are motivated by the desire to serve some worthy causes.
The hired help, however, may not be so altruistically motivated.
The professionals who run the biggest charities are paid salaries
comparable to their peers in government and industry. For example,
five officers of Disabled American Veterans are paid about $49,000
and the top executive officer earns nearly $63,000. Were these
same services performed by a government agency at taxpayer expense
the saiaries would be the same but the staff would, no doubt, be
twice as large.
As for the lower echelon workers, they are no more self-sacrificial
than their counterparts in business or government. Some have been
known to even strike for higher wages. That was the case in the
mid 1970’s when 120 staff members of New York’s Association for the
Help of Retarded Children walked off their jobs and did not return
until they had received $800 in annual increases over their pay
which ranged from $5,100 to $10,000.
How can you as a consumer know which of the charities are worth
contributing to? Most contributors give to causes that interest them.
If the cause is a vital one, they rarely worry about how efficient
the organization championing it is. But if you do want to find out
something about a specific nonprofit organization, there are two
information agencies that can help you: the National Information
Bureau (419 Park Ave., South, New York, N. Y. 10016) and the
Philanthropic Advisory Service of the Council of Better Business
Bureaus (1150 Seventeenth St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036). The
NIB keeps tabs on the finances and activities of almost 400 national
charities. The NIB rates charitiEs according to how well they
measure up to the eight standards which the agency feels every wellintentioned,
well-run chaity should meet:
(1) An active and responsible governing body with effective
administrative control, serving without compensation and holding
[2) A legitimate purpose with no avoidable duplication of
the work of other sound organizations.
(3) Reasonable management efficiency with adequate material
and personnel resources to carry on its stated program together with
reasonable dministration nd fund-raising expense.
(4) Consultation and cooperation with established agencies in
the same and related fields.
(5) Ethical methods of publicity, promoton and fund solicitation.
(6) No payment of commissions for fund raising, no mailing of
unordered tickets or mercharldise with a request for money in return,
no general telephone solicitation of the public and no use of
icentitled government employees to solicit the public.
(7) An annual audit employing the Uniform Accounting Standards
and prepared by an independent certified public accountant, showing
all support/revenue and expenses in reasonable detail. A combined
audit of the national office and affiliates is required.
(8) A detailed annual budget consistent with the Uniform
The NIB publishes a rating list, updated each month, of some
365 national charities entitled the “Wise Giving Guide,” available
free on request. In-depth individual reports are also available,
with a limit of three per request.
Th2 Council of Better Business Burearus maintains files on
about 7,0 00 national nonprofit organizations that solicit public
support. It publishes a rating list of the 360 or so most active
ones. Detailed reports on any charities monitored by CBBB are
available on request. The rating list can be had for $1.
¥he NIB and the CBBB do not always agree in their evaluations
of particular organizations. But both watchdog groups have
reservations about the following charities: American Brotherhood
for the Blind, AMVETS National Service Foundation, Christian
Appalachian Project, Cousteau Society, David Livingstone Missionary
Found¦tion, Disabled American Veterans, Guiding Eyes for the Blind,
Help Hospitalized Veterans, Korean Relief, Paralyzed Veterans of
America, Salesian Missions, Seeing Eye, Southern Poverty Law Center,
Southwest In§ian Foundation, and World Ch¨ngers.
The ratings may not ma©e much sense to those who contribute to
organizations because of the causes they espouse rather than because
they meet a set of standards devised by some self-appointed watchdogs.
For example, I found that several of my favorite organizations did
not get the approval of the NIB, while others which I didn’t like at
all made the approval list. I hate to think that the NIB’s rating
system is biased. But one thing is certain: you can’t base your
glvlng decisions solely on their criteria and findings. All of which
means that even the work of a watchdog agency must be monitored for
its own inherent prejudices. There is more to a charity or a nonprofit
organization thar. the frequency of its board meetings and
the cost of its fund-raising.
There have been attempts in some states to legislate limits
on fund-raising costs. In Florida the limit is 25 percent of the
funds raised; in Pennsylvania and North Carolina, the limit is
35 percent; and in New York and New Jersey it is 50 percent. Clearly
it is impossible to come up with a figure that means anything.
It’s like trying to legislate limits on how much a businessman may
put into a ne business before he turns a profit. Start up costs
for nonprofit organizations are subject to just about as many
variables, pre ictable and unpredictable, as those for businesses.
All tax-exempt organizations — except churches _.- are required
by the IRS to file annual financial reports. These reports really
tell us as much as we have to know about how a particular nonprofit
organization is handling its money. In addition, these reports are
thoroughly analyzed by the NIB and the CBBB. Therefore, if any
contributor has doubts or reservations about any charity, he can
always get plenty of information about it. Nonprofit organizations
will send you their annual reports on request.
But because church-affiliated charities are not required to
submit annual financial reports to the IRS — remember separation
of church and state — it is far more difficult for the contributor
to find out how that charity is handling its funds. We assume that th
priests, ministers, and rabbis who administer these charities are
_.L.L’-‘ …… …………. ,1
kept honest by the higher laws of their respective religions. But
even men of the cloth are susceptible to temptation. In fact, a
recent scandal involving a well-known Catholic charity reminds us
that Original Sin has not gone the way of the Latin mass.
Foy years the Pall ottine Fathers of Baltimore, a venerable
Roman Catholic missionary order with 2200 priests and brothers in
’23 countries, had been soliciting contributions by mail. In fact,
the order was founded in 1835 by Saint Vincent Pallotti, the father
of direct-mail fund-raising. From that modest beginning grew a
mammoth direct-mail charity which is now run from a warehouse in
Bltimore with computerized mailing lists, automatic typewriters and
high-speed envelope stuffers.
From June 1974 through December 1975 the order sent out 150
million appeals, some of which contained ball-point pens, calendars,
prayer cards, and sweepstakes tickets. The response during that
period added up to $20 million of which less than 3 percent ever
reached the charitable missions. The bulk was used to pay for the
mailings, including a postage bill of $2 million a year.
This alone was dismal pnough, but when a federal probe into a
Maryland bank revealed that the Pallottine Fathers had loaned the
bnnk $87,000, the state attorney general began an investigation
that finally led to the indictment and conviction in 1978 of the
charity’s fund-raising director, the Very Rev. Guido John Carcich.
It turned out that millions of the charity’s funds had been
invest8d in real estate and business ventures, including a portable
classroom manufacturing company owned by the nephew of the Pallottjne
CharityFathers’ accountant. An investigation into that company resulted in
the indictment of Maryland’s school construction chief. Another
Pallottine loan of $54,000 helped pay for Maryland Governor Marvin
Mandel’s 1974 divorce; and $52,000 was used for the purchase of a
house for Father Carcich’s niece.
When all the faces were finally known, Father Carcich pleaded
guilty to diverting $2.2 million of the charity’s funds into 28
secret bank accounts. Under a plea-bargaining arrangement, Father
Carcich was placed on probation for 18 months Qnd ordered to work
for one year in the Maryland penal system “ministering to the needs
of prisoners.” Meanwhile, the order was stripped of its fiscal
autonomy by senior officials of the Catholic Church who also imposed
a moratorium on future Pallottine financial dealings pending a
review of its fund-raising methods and philosophy.
It would be wrong to conclude from the Pallottine case that
the charity world is riddled with crooks and charlatans. There
about as much fraud in the nonprofit sector as one is likely to
find in government or business, perhps even less these days because
of the inordinate publicity charity frauds get. Cal Bakal, author
1Sof USA, states that from $500 million to $1.5 billion is
estimated to wind up with chaity charlatans. That’s about 2 percent
of the total $47.74 billion contributed to all charitable organizations.
One can philosophize that it’s part of the cost we must bear if we
are to enjoy the freedom to organize and raise money for any cause
that grabs hold of us.
Some social critics have suggested that we create a federal
agency to regulate and police charitable organizations. But instantly
you would have to exclude religious organizations from such government
regulation because of our long-standing tradition of separation of
church and state. In 1980 religion received $22.15 billion in
contributions, or 46.3 percent of all charitable giving. Thus, -almost
half of all charitable acIivity would be exempt from government
On the other hand, government regulation would merely create
another expensive federal bureaucracy which would generate tons of
needless paperwork and red tape. It would place a damper on nonprofit
entrepreneurship, it would inhibit the starting of new organizations
and solidify the dominance of the establishment charit)es. Federal
regulations would increase the cost of fund-raising without improving
the quality of services rendered. They might reduce the chance
of fraud, but they would not solve the problems of human error and
mismanagement. But worsJ of all, they might also kill the vitality
of the nonprofit sector which depends so heavily on personal motivation
and the freedom to act forcefully in its behalf. Bureaucracy is no
substitute for individual initiative and dedication.
Charity – 16
entrepreneurship, it would inhibit the starting of new organizations
and solidify the dominance of the establishment charities. Federal
rºgulations would increase the cost of fund-raising without improving
the q»ality of services rendered. They might reduce the chance
of fraud, but they would not solve the problems of human error and
mismanagement. But worst of all, they might also kill the vitality
of the nonprofit sector which depends so heavily on pe¼sonal motivation
and the freedom to act forcefully in its behalf. Bureaucracy is no
substitute for individual initiative and dedication.
Meanwhile, fund-raisers are worried about the future. They
don’t know if Reagan’s new tax policies will help or hurt charitable
giving. But one thing is certain: people will continue to give as
long as there are good causes to support and enough persuasive
fund-raisers to do the asking. One 27-year-old sheet metal worker who
pledged $20 to a policeman’s benefit association in response to a
phone solicita’tion summed up the feelings of a lot of contributors
when asked why he gave :
“It’s hard for me to say no when someone wants my help ,
when they come right out and ask me. I want people to like me. I feel
that I have failed or fallen short in some way when I refuse to help
people. I’d rather pay the $20 than feel bad about it for several days
because I didn’t pay it½ Twenty dollars isn’t very much . . . I can
handle that much.”
But not every donor is a soft touch. Here’s what a 50-year-old
sports store owner replied when asked by Paul Schneiter, author of
The Art of why he gave a motor boat and three canoes wortil
Charity – 17
$6,500 to a parochial high school: “I ‘m basically stingy about
donating, except where the church is concerned. I believe in
their programs. • Another reason I gave is because I would rather
control where my money goes than simply turn it over to the Internal
But perhaps the 52-year-old owner of a grocery store who
gave $2,500 to a boys’ club hit the nail on the head when he said:
“When the boys’ club president and two of the boys visited me and
asked for the money, I just didn’t want to refuse • • . . They. made
me feel important, and I just couldn’t let them down .. .. You
know, after you make some big purchase you feel blue about it for
days afterward, wondering if you did the right thing. But after
I gave that $2,500, it wasn’t that way. It was just a great feeling}
and the feeling comes back every time I think about it.n
For many Americans? giving to charity is a sure way to
experience that great feeling — whether it be in giving fifty cen·ts
to a down-and-outer, SIOO to a Jerry Lewis telethon for Muscular
Distrophy, or S105 million to a university. Yes, that much money,
in Coca Cola stock, was given to Emory University in 1980 by the
Emily & Ernest Woodruff Fund, ,the largest single gift in the history
of philanthropy_ It ·s assumed that great feelings — in some cases
approaching delir.ium was had by all. Of such stuff are ·the
dreams of fund-raisers made.’
Camp Constitution’s annual family camp is less than week away. We have an excellent line up of speakers, and plenty of activies.
Here is the daily schedule not including the junior camper schedule:
Sunday July 2nd 4:00 PM Registration by Mr. Everett) + 4:00 PM staff mtg.
6:30 PM Entrance Quiz (in Cafeteria / Mess Hall) All campers age 11 and up; Staff
7:45 PM Camp Orientation by Mr. Shurtleff, Mr. Hoderny, Mr. Kalis …
9:00 AM Know the Constitution by Mr.Hal Shurtleff
10:00 AM Crimes of the Educators by Mr. Alex Newman
11:00 AM The New World Order by Mr. John McManus
1:00 PM Class Picture – See 2010: (face Hebron deck & drive: mountain view; picnic tables as risers?)
6:30 PM The Climate-Change Hoax by Professor Willie Soon–Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
7:45 PM Target of a Smear – Senator Joseph McCarthy by Mr. McManus
Tuesday, July 4th Independence Day!
10:00 AM Faith of the Signers by Rev. Steven Craft
11:00 AM The Lives of [some of] the Signers by Mrs. Catherine White
1:00 PM “High Flying Frisbee Dogs and Magic Show” with Mr. Eric Conover
6:30 PM “Red Pill Politics” Live Radio Show! Dave Kopac interviews Rev. Craft, and others
7:45 PM Signing of the Declaration of Independence with (Mr.) Eric Eastman
(8:00 Shuttle campers to…) 9:00 PM Rindge Center for the fireworks!
9:00 AM Environmental Alarmism Refuted by Professor Willie Soon – Harvard-Smithsonian Astrophysics Ctr.
10:00 AM U.S. Constitution Article I (Legislative branch / powers of Congress) by Mr. Norman Tregenza
11:00 AM The U.S. Constitution vs. Sharia Law by Father Michael Carl
1:00 PM Optional – Field Trip: Rindge Historic Society
6:30 PM Applying 10 Commandments to Advocate for Bill of Rights in Contemporary Issues Mr. Earl Wallace
7:45 PM Article 2 (Executive branch) and Article 3 (Judicial branch) by Mrs. White / Mrs. Harper
9:00 AM 13 Rules for Radicals Used to Redistribute Wealth & Wreck the Republic by Mr. Earl Wallace
10:00 AM Declarations and Preambles by Mrs. White
11:00 AM The Moral American by Mr. John Hoderny
1:00 PM Optional – Hike up Mount Monadnock
6:30 PM The Right to Keep and Bear Arms by Mr. Larry Pratt – Gun Owners of America (GOA)
7:45 PM Engaging America by Michael King of the Massachusetts Family Institute
9:00 AM Refuting the Gun Controllers by Mr. Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America (GOA)
10:00 AM History of Drug Addiction in America by Dr. Kishore [M.D.]
11:00 AM Articles 4=States, 5=Amending it, 6=Debts, Supremacy, Oaths, & 7= “Done!” 17Sept., 1787
6:30 PM The Electoral College [How It Saves Us from Runaway Mob Rule] by Tom Moor
7:45 PM Exit Quiz – Teaching Staff
9:00 AM Color, Communism, and Common Sense by Rev. Craft
10:00 AM Death by Government by Mr. Chris Kalis
11:00 AM Actions Anyone Can Take to Confront Lies & Claim Liberties by Mr. Wallace
1:00 PM Optional Workshop: First Aid – by Mr. Scott Richards, EMT
6:30 PM Test Review w/ Mr. Tregenza & Mrs. Harper
7:45 PM Awards & Graduation Mr. Shurtleff and Rev. Craft
CAMP CONSTITUTION – General Daily Schedule A.D. 2017
Note: All buildings at Toah Nipi are named for Biblical places of refuge.
Bethel – Building next to stairway to lake & campfire; has Newspaper Office, Girls Dorm, Faculty Rooms
Hebron – Bldg. w/front porch supported by cross; Mess Hall / Ping-Pong; Boys Dorm; Classrooms; VIPs
Every morning: (Monday – Sunday)
[Except Tues. July 4th, when all morning events =1 hour later, & NO 9:00 AM CLASS!!]
M, W, Th, F, Sat., Sun. :
6:30 AM Polar Bear Swim / Run (optional)
7:00 AM Non-polar bears, Wake-up!
7:50 AM Flagpole: Devotions, Announcements +
Recite Preamble to US Constitution and/or Pledge at Flagpole
8:00 AM Breakfast Hebron (Main Building) Meet on porch until line opens.
8:30 Staff Meeting – Hebron // Students in Cabins cleaning & decorating
Classes (Mon-Sat) at 9:00,* 10:00, and 11:00 AM (with mini-breaks between classes)
*Tuesday, July 4th – No 9:00 AM class on Independence Day
Locations – See other side for detailed class list:
Classes are in Hebron (just upstairs from Cafeteria / Mess Hall)
Meet in Mess Hall: Sun, July 2, 6:45pm – Placement Quiz; & Fri., July 7, 7:45pm – Exit Quiz
Lunch at Noon – Meet on Hebron porch for grace (Monday – Saturday)
1:00–5:30 PM = Recreation, Swimming + Pictures, Hikes, or Field Trips…
Evenings: (Sunday – Saturday):
Dress-up only for Saturday Supper and Graduation
5:30 PM Dinner (Meet on Hebron porch for grace)
6:30 PM Classroom
7:20 PM Flagpole
7:45 PM Classroom
8:35 Break – Rooms to get long sleeves, or mosquito stuff, and…
9:00 PM Campfire (Bring Flashlight & Song Book!); beware mosquitoes!)
10:00 PM Break – Snacks** & Camp Newspapers usually available in Mess Hall.
10:30 PM in Cabins
11:00 PM Lights Out!
** Pizza Party – after Campfire Saturday evening! Class pictures if ordered. Take pictures of and with friends,
exchange phone and e-mail information! You may also wish to organize for your trip home, take down your
cabin decorations, and plan for next year!
Final Sunday morning, clean up room and bathroom. Use cleaning supplies and vacuum, as needed, to tidy up.
A good rule-of-thumb, as they say: “Always leave a place as good as, or better than, you found it!” Safe Travels!
We are delighted over the number of views and downloads the Sam Blumenfeld Archives is receiving.
Here are the stats for the month of May 2017:
Alpha-phonics Workbook 6727
Alpha-phonics Instruction Manual 1241
Are Public Schools Harming Your Kids – CT.mp4 1058
Marlowe-Shakespeare Connection (editor).pdf 1039
America’s Future – On Public Education.mp4 549
Are Public Schools Harming Your Kids – Stockton CA 1986.mp4 513
America First Ep1.mp4 486
Foreign Traffic accounts for roughly 25% of all traffic
Russian Federation 11,042
And in the past five months:
2017: 845, 081 hits with 29,304 Workbooks downloaded over 5 months.
We pledged to Sam on his deathbed that Camp Constitution will do its utmost to ensure that his rich legacy will live on after he passes. I think we are off to a good start. Please help us reach out to more people. Make a donation today from our PayPal account on our home page http://www.campconstitution.net
And, of course, visit and share the Blumenfeld Archives http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/
Professor Willie Soon, who will be an instructor at this year’s Camp Constitution’s family camp shared with us a memo he received from the White House Press Office:
Topline: The Paris Accord is a BAD deal for Americans, and the President’s action today is keeping his campaign promise to put American workers first. The Accord was negotiated poorly by the Obama Administration and signed out of desperation. It frontloads costs on the American people to the detriment of our economy and job growth while extracting meaningless commitments from the world’s top global emitters, like China. The U.S. is already leading the world in energy production and doesn’t need a bad deal that will harm American workers.
UNDERMINES U.S. Competitiveness and Jobs
According to a study by NERA Consulting, meeting the Obama Administration’s requirements in the Paris Accord would cost the U.S. economy nearly $3 trillion over the next several decades.
By 2040, our economy would lose 6.5 million industrial sector jobs – including 3.1 million manufacturing sector jobs
o It would effectively decapitate our coal industry, which now supplies about one-third of our electric power
The deal was negotiated BADLY, and extracts meaningless commitments from the world’s top polluters
The Obama-negotiated Accord imposes unrealistic targets on the U.S. for reducing our carbon emissions, while giving countries like China a free pass for years to come.
o Under the Accord, China will actually increase emissions until 2030
The U.S. is ALREADY a Clean Energy and Oil & Gas Energy Leader; we can reduce our emissions and continue to produce American energy without the Paris Accord
America has already reduced its carbon-dioxide emissions dramatically.
o Since 2006, CO2 emissions have declined by 12 percent, and are expected to continue to decline.
o According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. is the leader in oil & gas production.
The agreement funds a UN Climate Slush Fund underwritten by American taxpayers
President Obama committed $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund – which is about 30 percent of the initial funding – without authorization from Congress
With $20 trillion in debt, the U.S. taxpayers should not be paying to subsidize other countries’ energy needs.
The deal also accomplishes LITTLE for the climate
According to researchers at MIT, if all member nations met their obligations, the impact on the climate would be negligible. The impacts have been estimated to be likely to reduce global temperature rise by less than .2 degrees Celsius in 2100.
This article from the Sam Blumenfeld Archives was written over 10 years ago:
Oriana Fallaci, the intrepid Italian journalist, known for her no-holds-barred interviews of world leaders and celebrities, has written a book which the Moslems in Europe have tried to ban. Titled The Rage and the Pride, it was written as a response to the attack on New York and Washington on September 11,2001, in which 3,000 human beings perished in the World Trade Center Towers, in four hijacked airliners, and in the Pentagon, killed by Islamic fundamentalists. The book is a powerful alarm to wake up the West to the Reverse Crusade launched by this Islamic Pearl Harbor. Fallaci is the only writer I know of who has connected what happened on 9/ll with what has been going on in Europe for the last fifteen years: a massive invasion by Moslem immigrants. She characterizes this invasion as the Reverse Crusade, by which the Moslems hope to dominate Christian Europe from which they were expelled in the 15th century. She writes: People are afraid to speak against the Islamic world. Afraid to offend, and to be punished for offending, the sons of Allah. You can insult the Christians, the Buddhists, the Hindus, the Jews. You can slander the Catholics, you can spit on the Madonna and Jesus Christ. But, woe betide the citizen who pronounces a word against the Islamic religion.
What particularly disturbs Fallaci is the extent to which Italy has been impacted by the Moslem invasion. And the reason why Italy permits these immigrants to stay is because Italians have the lowest birthrate in Europe, and they don’t want the menial jobs. But the hope has always been that immigrants would be absorbed into Italian culture, so that the generation born in Italy would adopt Italian or Western ways and attitudes. But Fallaci writes: Because our cultural identity has been well defmed for thousands of years we cannot bear a migratory wave of people who have nothing to do with us … who are not ready to become like us, to be absorbed by us …. Who, on the contrary, aim to absorb us. To change our principles, our values, our identity, our way of life. And who in the meantime molest us with their retrograde ignorance, their retrograde bigotry, their retrograde religion. I am saying that in our culture there is no room for the muezzins, for the minarets, for the phony abstemious, for the humiliating chador, for the degrading burkah. Fallaci is infuriated by the way Islamic fundamentalists treat women. She quotes the two testaments that Muhammed Atlah, the leader of the 9/11 attack, left for his parents: “At my funeral I do not want impure things. Meaning, animals and women …. Not even around my grave do I want impure beings. Especially the most impure: pregnant women.” But of course, there was no funeral for Attah who was burnt to ashes with the rest of his fellow hijackers and the passengers in the plane. It requires a diabolical mind to believe that this is something God called for. There is nothing in Judaism or Christianity that calls for such diabolical behavior. And there is nothing in Biblical religion that calls for the total degradation of women. The burkah is probably the most degrading form of dress ever conceived by any culture for women. It puts them in a mo bile prison, reducing them to a form of chattel, a movable piece of personal property. They have no rights, no freedoms, and are forced to remain ignorant, illiterate, and enslaved by their husbands.
In Afghanistan, women have been given the right not to wear the burkah, which was required under the Taliban. Yet, there are many women in Afghanistan who still wear the burkah because of custom and the fear of their husbands. What is amazing is how passively the Europeans have allowed this invasion to take place. It’s as if the Islamization of Europe were taking place in a cultural vacuum. But it is not so much a cultural vacuum as it is a spiritual one. Western Europe has long fallen away from its Christian roots mainly through the prevalence of its atheist leftists in positions of power in politics and academe. Christianity has been replaced by communism and socialism, the two utopian philosophies of the 20<1> century for which millions of human beings were sacrificed. And so, why resist the Islamic invasion which is being aided and abetted by the Left. But the rise of Le Pen in France, and so-called right-wingers elsewhere in Europe, are the rumblings of a growing opposition to Islamization. Brigitte Bardot, the famous French mm star, has written her own passionate book, A Scream in the Silence, in which she proclaims: “I am against the Islamization of France …. For centuries our forefathers, the ancients, our grandfathers, our fathers gave their lives to chase all successive invaders from France.” But when will the French fight back? There are now six million Muslims in France who want the right to send their daughters to secular public schools wearing the chador. They want to impose their culture on France, and they are a power to be reckoned with. It was Charles de Gaulle who betrayed the Christian West, in 1962, when he surrendered French Algeria to the Arabs, forcing the flight of over a million Europeans and Jews from North Africa. It was the presence of France in North Africa that kept the Arabs in check and permitted the creation of a productive civilization in that part of the world. But de Gaulle’s retreat from North Africa made the Reverse Crusade inevitable. France had invaded Aljgeria in 1830 to put a stop to Moslem depredations along the Mediterranean coast. The French stayed, and Europeans settled there, building farms, vineyards, factories, and a European way of life. Algeria became a prosperous French colony in which the Arabs enjoyed a high degree of safety and freedom. Today, with the French gone, Islamic radicals are free to slit the throats of children sleeping in their beds. And so, six million Algerians have gone to France, with a large contingent of anti Semitic radicals among them. And they have brought Islam with them. With the Islamization of Europe has come a resurgence of anti-Semitism sparked by the hatred of Israel. The Arab-European League, a militant Arab nationalist party, is one of the Islamic groups responsible for inciting hatred of Jews. In pro-Palestinian marches in Antwerp, Belgium, police warned Jews not to go to their temples because their safety could not be guaranteed. Some European Jews are emigrating to Israel. But Israel is not exactly a safe haven.
The Jerusalem Report of June 2, 2003 reported: Ran Baron, 23, Yanai Weiss, 46, and French immigrant Dominique Caroline Hass, 29, were killed and about 60 wounded when a suicide bomber identified as AssifHanif, 21, of Britain blew himself up outside Mike’s Place, a beachfront pub in Tel Aviv on April 30. An accomplice of Hanifs, Omar Sharif, 27, also of Britain, escaped after his suicide bomb failed to detonate. Over 700 Israelis have been killed by suicide bombers since the beginning of this latest Intifada. And it is interesting that suicide bombers are now being recruited among European Moslems in this world-wide religious war. Fallaci writes: All the so-called Revolutions of Islam began in the mosques. Not in the Universities, as the [liberals 1 want us to believe. Behind every Islamic terrorist there is an Imam, and Khomeini was an Imam …. And I declare that many Imams (too many) are spiritual guides to terrorism. What do the Imams in the mosques of America preach? Is a non-Moslem American permitted to enter a mosque and [md out? Over the years I have attended Jewish synagogues, Protestant churches, Catholic churches, Mormon churches, and never did I hear a sermon that preached hatred of someone or anyone. But Islam is a religion of hatred that has no place in a tolerant Christian civilization. We wonder if some young American Moslems are being prepared to become the suicide bombers of the future. We hope the Homeland Security Department knows the answer. But all they presently see in their American liberators is disorganization and confusion. Nobody knows who’s in charge, not even American soldiers know. Thus, our troops are confronted daily by angry mobs that want jobs, or food, or relief; none of which our troops can provide. WIllIe the United States wants Iraq to be run by the Iraqis, the transition from Saddam’s murderous regime to a benign democracy may take much longer than we think. In the interim, the Iraqis need American authority to bring them out of chaos. They need a symbolic figure of authority who represents American goals and can create the framework of a reconstructed democratic Iraq. But where is that authority? Where is that top man who can hold press conferences and speak on Iraqi television to assure the Iraqis of what our intentions are? Meanwhile, we have a glaring vacancy at the top, indicating chaos and disorganization among the liberators.
Visit the Sam Blumenfeld Archives
Sam Blumenfeld figured out that the Look-Sat Method of reading was crippling American children. One of the main reading books used to do that was the “Dick and Jane Reader.” Sam would point how ridiculous the reader was and demonstrated how it promoted illiteracy. In 2003, Sam published “The Victims of Dick and Jane.” Here is a link to the book:
Sam Blumenfeld strongly believed that dyslexia was caused by the Look-Say method or reading. Just recently, a mother told me that Sam’s Alpha-Phonics cured her son of dyslexia. Here is a link to a speech that Sam gave on the subject:
Sam Blumenfeld was one of the first to expose the deliberate dumbing down of America. Sam named names and organization behind this crime. Here is an interview Sam did back in 1993 in the home of David Drye while he was on a speaking tour in North Carolina
to expose the fraud called Outcome Based Education:
For the past 18 years, I have attended the reenactment of the Battle of Lexington that takes place on the Lexington, MA Green on Patriots Day. This year it fell on Monday April 17. Over the years, I have brought family members, children’s friends, Camp Constitution families, and others to witness the reenactment of this important historical event. We get up at 3:30 AM, and make the 25 minute drive to Lexington. We make a stop off at Peat’s to buy a cup hot chocolate, and off to find a good spot to view the reenactment. After the reenactment, the Lexington Minutemen march to the Old Burying Ground where many of the Lexington Militiamen are buried to fire a volley honoring their sacrifices. We then make out way to Wilson’s Diner in Waltham for an early breakfast, and maybe, a trip to nearby Concord to witness their reenactment and parade. It never gets old. My son Nathaniel videotaped this year’s reenactment and we posted it to our Youtube Channel: