The real issue is Limited Government versus Unlimited Government
Most Americans want less government, smaller government and lower taxes. The only
way to accomplish this is by abolishing federal departments and bureaucracies. As far
back as the Reagan administration, Republicans promised to abolish the Department of
Education. They couldn’t do it then because they lacked a majority in Congress. But
whatever happened to the plan to abolish the Department of Education when Republicans
became the majority? Not only did they forget their promise, but in September 1996
they passed the single largest increase in federal education funding: $3.5 billion. Who
were the Republicans trying to impress? The National Education Association?
The basic question is: Can good education be provided in the U.S. without the help or
intrusion of the federal government? The answer is clearly yes. In fact, there is ample
evidence indicating that the present decline in educational quality is a direct result of
federal funding which has been used by the educators to fund more and more expensive
educational malpractice.
A little historical background will help us understand why the federal role in education in
America is more of an aberration than a natural development. There is no mention of
education in the U.S. Constitution. However, in 1785 and 1787, while the United States
were still under the Articles of Confederation, the Continental Congress passed the
Northwest Ordinance Acts which provided for the orderly settlement of the Northwest
Territory and encouraged the establishment of schools in the territory by stating:
“Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the
happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall be encouraged.” The
new states were required to set aside the 16th section of each township to be used for
educational purposes. But there was no requirement that the schools be government
owned and operated.
Seventy-five years later, in 1862, Congress passed and President Lincoln signed the
Morrill Land Grant Act providing each loyal state with 30,000 acres of land for each
Senator and Representative, the land to be used for agricultural and mechanical schools
under a measure proposed by Senator Justin S. Morrill of Vermont. Five years later, in
1867, a federal Office of Education was established. Its purpose was:
“To collect such statistics and facts as shall show the condition and progress of education in the
several States and Territories, and to diffuse such information respecting the organization and
management of schools and school systems, and methods of teaching as shall aid the People of
the United States in the establishment and maintenance of efficient school systems, and otherwise
promote the cause of education throughout the country.”
It should be noted that the National Education Association had been founded ten years
earlier in 1857 and that its members called for the establishment of a federal department
of education at the founding convention. And it is obvious that in that statement of
purpose was an expansionist view of the government’s future role in education.
After World War I, the NEA began a long range campaign to get federal aid for public
education. From 1867 to 1940–a period of 73 years–the Congress passed about 11
minor pieces of legislation related to education. The fear of federal control of schools
kept most legislators from voting for federal aid to public education. But resistance was
gradually broken down by such acts as the National School Lunch Act of 1946, the
School Milk Program Act of 1954.
But it was the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 passed during the
Johnson administration which opened the floodgates of the U.S. Treasury for the benefit
of the education establishment. From 1965 to 1983–18 years–there were 43 education
acts passed by the Congress, including the establishment in 1979 of a U.S. Department of
Education with cabinet status. In the year 1994 alone, there were about 180 educational
restructuring bills before Congress! The three most important bills enacted were the
Goals 2000 Act, the School-to-Work Opportunities Act, and the Improving America’s
Schools Act, a reauthorization of the ESEA of 1965. All of this legislation was passed
with much Republican help. In short, the Congress launched an avalanche of bills
which virtually amounted to a cultural revolution.
It seemed as if all restraints had been removed on government expansion and intrusion
into education, and the Republican Congress did nothing to reverse the trend. That is
why the federal government has become a government of unlimited power.
We must return to the principle of limited government if we wish to reduce the cost of
government and its unwarranted intrusion in the education of our children. A limited
federal government does only those things that cannot be done by the states or the private
sector. The purpose of taxes is to pay for government not change society.
There is no doubt that the federal intrusion in education has harmed education and
produced the dumbing down effect. Test scores attest to this bizarre phenomenon.
Since 1962, SAT verbal scores have declined despite billions of federal dollars pumped
into public education. In September 1993, the U.S. Department of Education revealed
that some 90 million adult Americans have grossly inadequate reading and writing skills,
despite compulsory school attendance. The more federal money Congress pumps into
education the worse it gets. Why? Because educational malpractice is very expensive,
and without federal funding we’d have much less of it.
The simple truth is that federal education programs cost the taxpayers billions of dollars,
yet not one of these programs has actually improved education. Claims have been made
that Headstart is a successful program. But research indicates that whatever gains
children make in Headstart are lost by the third grade.
Federal education grants subsidize a liberal academic elite with its secular humanist,
socialist agenda, thus violating the Constitutional prohibition against establishing a state
religion: Humanism. The Data Collection System of the National Center for Education Statistics threatens
family privacy and freedom. Children are not a “national resource” to be monitored and
controlled for use by the state or industry. They are individuals whose lives belong to
themselves, not to “the economy.”
The federal government has institutionalized educational malpractice by supporting
unsound educational theories and practices which have found their way into the public
schools via the federally funded National Diffusion Network. Federal aid to public
education simply reinforces a socialist, government owned and operated education
system which distorts market values and encourages monopoly union practices.
Meanwhile, the education establishment continues to grow and prosper. In 1982, the
average public school teacher’s salary was $19,274. In 1995 it was up to $37,643., and
in 2008 it us up to $47,602. In 1982, per pupil expenditure was $2,726. In 1995-96 the
national average was up to $6,213, and in 2009 it was up to $9,963. In 1984, total
expenditure for public education was $134.5 billion. In 2002 it had risen to $420 billion.
In short, never has public education been more generously supported by the taxpayer and
never have our schools seen more violence, academic disarray, and parental
dissatisfaction than the present. What is even more shocking is that over four million
students must be drugged daily with Ritalin in order to be able to attend class.
Today, well-connected change agents like Mark Tucker are busy imposing on America
the new Human Resources Development System, exuberantly described by Tucker in an
18-page letter to Hillary Clinton when her husband was elected President. Tucker
described his system as “a seamless web of opportunities to develop one’s skills that
literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone–young and
old, poor and rich, worker and full-time student.”
And so, in place of academic excellence, we have Outcome Based Education, Whole
Language, Multiculturalism, Skinnerian Mastery Learning, National Teaching Standards
and Certification, School-Based Clinics, Attitude Assessments, Global Citizenship, and
Socialized Medicine for every student.
What is actually taking place is a cultural revolution engineered by behavioral
psychologists, humanist educators, and socialist change agents using a whole galaxy of
education programs to implement their agenda, financed by the federal government.
And much of this has taken place when Republicans were in control of Congress. And
that accounts for the extreme frustration of conservatives who vote Republican but get
liberal results. When will this change?
The takeover of the White House and the federal government by radical leftists has
finally awakened the American people to what has happened to this country since we
started allowing the federal government to exceed all limits placed on it by the
Constitution. But in order to succeed in restoring the principles of government held by
our founding fathers, we must return to limited government. This can only be done if
the American people realize the potential for tyranny inherent in a government education
system.
The most important institution in a socialist state is a government owned and controlled
school system wherein children can be indoctrinated to accept a socialist way of life.
And the best way to prevent this from occurring is to return to the concept of educational
freedom in which the federal government has no role in education.
Local public schools can easily become private institutions governed by local trustees and
supported by tuition fees. This would greatly reduce the tax burden on home owners and
provide more than enough resources to pay for the tuitions of poor families. The costs of
education would decrease dramatically since education would once more become reality
based wherein the fundamental academic subjects would be taught without the added
costs of educational malpractice. Individual intelligence would be enhanced, while
collectivist group-think would be discarded.
Can this be done? Only if America’s conservative leaders demand that it should be
done. The home-school movement has already proven that parents can actually teach
better than our high-priced professionals, that children progress better academically
when taught at home, and that the cost of educating a child at home is less than $1,000 a
year.
If Americans want to once more experience what it means to be free, they must burst out
of the high-priced straitjacket imposed on them by the socialist education tyrants. If they
want better education at lower cost, then the prescription for success is simple: get the
government out of education.
(This article was written fifteen years ago and things have only gotten worse. Trump was right to defund the Department of Education.)

The Blumenfeld Archives http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/main.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The other day a friend of mine called to ask if I’d read Wayne Johnson’s October 13
column in WND about my taking Rush Limbaugh to task for being so harsh on us
conspiratologists. Somehow I had missed it, and so I dug it out of the Archives and read
it.
Indeed, it’s a very interesting article, but I fear that Johnson missed the whole point of
why people like me and my friend even bother to research the conspiracy.
We do it for one very simple reason. The more you know about what goes on behind the
scenes, the better you are able to understand what goes on in front of the scene. For
example, when Bill Clinton paid homage to Prof. Carroll Quigley in his acceptance
speech at the Democratic National Convention in 1992, the few of us in America who
knew the significance of that reference, knew exactly who Clinton was going to serve as
President. For, Quigley was not only Clinton’s professor at Georgetown University, but
also the author of “Tragedy and Hope,” the book that exposed in great detail the Rhodes
conspiracy for world government.

(A link to an interview of Carroll Quigley: https://youtu.be/OV0zavSKHR4?si=xBks4ELdmrvjGodK
Also, the fact that Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar was significant, just as significant as the
fact that Bill Bradley is also a Rhodes Scholar. The other night, when Bradley was asked
who he personally admired most among world leaders, his answer was President Carter,
Woodrow Wilson, and Gorbachev. Wilson gave us the Federal Reserve System, the
income tax, and entry into World War 1. Carter gave us inflation and social malaise.
And Gorbachev is a lifelong Communist.
It was Cecil Rhodes who founded a secret society about a hundred years ago that would
work toward the creation of a world government, and he created the Rhodes Scholarships
to recruit future young leaders into that society. Rhodes said that for a secret society of
that kind to succeed, it must gain control of the wealth of the world. Setting up a central
bank in America was an essential part of the plan, plus the creation of huge tax-exempt
foundations that could further the goals of the globalists.
By now there are several thousand Rhodes Scholars in positions of influence and power
subverting our national sovereignty. Of course, you don’t have to be a Rhodes Scholar to
believe in world government. The idea is now so prevalent among the academic elite that
it’s now downright respectable, if not mainstream, to believe that our constitution is
obsolete. Most Americans would probably like to get rid of the Second Amendment if
they could. No other unalienable right–the right to bear anns–has been under such
heavy and relentless assault from the mass media, which is controlled by the CFR
establishment.
Am I beginning to sound paranoid? There are probably even a few renegade Rhodes
Scholars who do not favor world government. But at least those of us who know why the
Rhodes Scholarships were created can look at all of those Rhodies in our government and
ask why there are so many of them making policy for the American people – such as
going to war against Yugoslavia and making strategic partnerships with all the countries
surrounding Russia.
Knowledge does not make one paranoid. Lack of knowledge does. Any Jew in Germany
who read Mein Kampf in 1932 would have known that Germany was going to be a very
dangerous place to be if Hitler came to power. He would not have been paranoid if he
acted on that knowledge. Were Russian anti-communists paranoid in 1916? Was David
Koresh paranoid about the U.S. government coming after him with guns and tanks?
Wayne Johnson wrote: “The issue is not so much whether history is being subverted to
serve evil, but rather whether such subversion can ultimately be successful.” My view is
that evil can indeed be defeated, but at what price in human suffering? The Russians
finally got rid of communism after 75 years of totalitarian rule and the slaughter of
millions. Nazism was finally defeated after bringing ruin to Europe and destroying
millions of lives.
Would it not have been better had Hitler been stopped in 1933 rather than in 1945? And
wouldn’t it have been better had the plans of Lenin been thwarted in 1916 than in 1989?
If knowledge of what the conspirators are planning can be exposed to millions of people,
we may yet be able to save this country by electing people to office who understand what
is at stake. Studying the conspiracy does not make one paranoid. But it does tend to make one
cynical about politics, government, bureaucracy, and the establishment. Johnson says he
once subscribed to Foreign Affairs, the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, and
was bored by it. Well, in order to know what is going on in our education establishment,
I have to read journals of education, and there is no more boring body of writing in the
world than journals of education, mainly because they are so full of nonsense in
convoluted language meant to fill space in order to justify the payment of a salary.
Colleges of education produce thousands of doctors of education who must find
employment somewhere in the mammoth education establishment. And so journals and
educational research projects proliferate just to keep all of these people busy.
Meanwhile, the education system is deliberately dumbing down the American people so
that they can be easily led into the new world order with little or no resistance.
Parents who understand what the conspiracy wants to do to their children are in a better
position to protect them than those parents who willingly put their children in the hands
of the enemy to be lobotomized. That’s why it’s important to know who is doing what to
whom and for what reason.
Most people, sadly to say, do not have the stomach to do this kind of research. But like
any hobby or pursuit, it can become quite challenging. There is also a kind of satisfaction
one gets in gaining knowledge that is withheld from the public at large. It’s nice to be
able to look at a fool like Strobe Talbott, Rhodes Scholar and assistant to Mad Madeleine
Halfbright, and know that he’s not fooling this writer. He may have the backing of the
Council on Foreign Relations, the President, and several multi-billion dollar foundations,
but he has the mind of a programmed robot.
Meanwhile, the conspiracy has highjacked our military services to do the dirty work for
NATO, the military arm of the Council on Foreign Relations. Kosovo was merely a
rehearsal for what is to come. I said as much in the columns I wrote during the war
against Yugoslavia. I wrote that the real target is Russia, and that NATO was preparing
for this conflict by forming strategic partnerships with all of the countries surrounding
Russia. In fact, dissident Alexandre Zinoviev, who recently returned to Russia, said in an
interview with Le Figaro in Paris (7/24/99):
“The Russian catastrophe was wanted and programmed by the West. I say this, because I
was, at a certain time, an initiate. I read the documents, participated in the studies which,
under the pretext of combatting an ideology, were preparing for the death of Russia.”
So the question is: Will American men and women be required to fight in this next war
over oil in the Caspian region? What do you think? Then there is the World Trade
Organization, which will now supercede our constitution with its rulings. Our
sovereignty is slowly being whittled away by the CFR establishment, and most
Americans haven’t a clue.
Whether you want to call these people conspirators, or insiders, or global planners
depends on your view of history. But whatever you call them, you should know who
they are, what they believe in, and where they want to lead us. For starters, I would
advise Wayne Johnson to read “Shadows of Power” by James Perloff. It’s a lot shorter
than Quigley’s book, but just as devastating.

(This article was written by San in 2000-2001. It is in his archives which can be accessed here: http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/main.htm

The Blumenfeld Archives
As Trump boldly takes back control of vital U.S.-built waterway, media decry president’s ‘expansionist agenda,’ ‘land grab’ obsession and ‘new U.S. imperialism’

Democrats in Congress hate it.
“It’s bananas. It’s insane,” U.S. Rep. Jim Himes, D.-Conn., told CNN. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D.-Fla., agrees: “It is utterly preposterous to suggest that we are going to send our military into Panama to, quote, ‘take back the Panama Canal.'” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., speaks for virtually all his congressional peers when he insists, “House Democrats believe that we are not sent to Washington to invade Greenland, rename the Gulf of Mexico or seize the Panama Canal by force!”
But as President Donald Trump stated explicitly during his March 4 speech to Congress, the nation and the world: “My administration will be reclaiming the Panama Canal – and we’ve already started doing it. Just today, a large American company announced they are buying both ports around the Panama Canal and lots of other things having to do with the Panama Canal and a couple of other canals.”
The Panama Canal, Trump pointed out, “was built at tremendous cost of American blood and treasure. 38,000 workers died building the Panama Canal. They died of malaria, they died of snakebites and mosquitoes. Not a nice place to work. They paid them very highly to go there, knowing there was a 25% chance that they would die – the most expensive project also that was ever built in our country’s history.”
Trump’s inaugural address: ‘China is operating the Panama Canal, and we didn’t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.’
Concluded the 47th president: “It was given away by the Carter administration for $1. But that agreement has been violated very severely. We didn’t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.”
The astonishingly gruesome process of constructing the Panama Canal – commenced by America in 1904 and completed a decade later – was undertaken to fulfill the centuries-old dream of connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, thereby saving ships from 21-23 extra days at sea by being able to cross through what would become a 51-mile-long waterway.

However, “the Panamanian isthmus proved to be one of the most difficult – and deadly – spots in the world in which to construct a channel,” explains History.com:
Death could strike in the form of an 18-ton boulder or miniscule, malaria-carrying mosquitoes that bred by the millions in festering swamps and puddles. … “The working condition in those days were so horrible it would stagger your imagination,” recalled laborer Alfred Dottin. “Death was our constant companion. I shall never forget the train loads of dead men being carted away daily, as if they were just so much lumber.”
The most dangerous work took place as laborers carved a ditch 45 feet deep and at least 300 feet wide through an eight-mile mountainous stretch known as the Culebra Cut.”
Nicknamed “Hell’s Gorge,” the Culebra Cut was a cauldron of noise with roaring locomotives and belching steam shovels where risks of death ranged from drowning to electrocution. Workers blasted away at the mountains with upwards of 60 million pounds of dynamite, which could ignite prematurely in the tropical Panamanian climate. …
Flooding regularly submerged equipment, and the unstable ground could give way at any instant. “The work of months or even years might be blotted out by an avalanche of earth,” lamented a senior U.S. administrator.
Particularly for workers partially deafened as a side effect of drinking quinine to ward off malaria, the inability to hear made deadly railroad accidents a regular occurrence. In an oral history, George Hodges remembered a fellow worker who fell trying to hop on a train and the wheel of another train “cut his body right in two…as if he had been chopped with a machete.”
As one laborer, Antonio Sanchez, explained, working in “the cut” was just like “going to a battlefield.”
Fast-forward six decades. In 1976, Democratic presidential candidate Jimmy Carter, campaigning against Gerald Ford, publicly promised – as did Ford – that he would not support transferring the canal from U.S. ownership to Panama, an idea that was then popular with the elites, but not the American people. Yet when he won the presidency, Carter changed his mind and, in 1977, signed the Carter-Torrijos Treaties, transferring total control of the canal to Panama, to take effect on Dec. 31, 1999.

Interestingly, during the 1980 presidential election, Ronald Reagan expressed his firm opposition to turning the canal over to Panama … and then defeated Carter in a historic landslide, with a staggering 489 Electoral College votes to Carter’s 49.
“When it comes to the [Panama] Canal,” Reagan said, “we built it, we paid for it, it’s ours, and … we are going to keep it!”
China’s plans for world domination
Today, the big issue cited by Trump and other administration officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, is what has long amounted to the de facto control of the Panama Canal by the nation widely regarded as America’s most dangerous geopolitical adversary.
How can that be, many wonder? What happened to the Monroe Doctrine, that revered 200-year-old foreign policy stance established by the fifth U.S. president, James Monroe, holding that any major intervention in the Western Hemisphere – i.e., North, Central or South America – by a foreign power constitutes a potentially hostile act against the U.S.?
U.S.-based China expert Gordon Chang – author of several books about China’s barely disguised plans to dominate the world, including his 2024 bestseller, “Plan Red: China’s Project to Destroy America” – says the Panama Canal has long been a “chokepoint” that Beijing wants to control.
And as Secretary of State Marco Rubio told SiriusXM’s Megyn Kelly on Jan. 30: “If the government in China in a conflict tells them to shut down the Panama Canal, they will have to. And in fact, I have zero doubt that they have contingency planning to do so. That is a direct threat.”
Indeed, as WorldNetDaily reported in February, shortly after Rubio expressed to Panama’s leadership President Trump’s concerns over Chinese influence over the canal, Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulina stated that he would not renew a 2017 “memorandum of understanding” by which Panama joined China’s “Belt and Road Initiative.”

“Under that program, China funds the construction and development of infrastructure, such as ports, and then takes control of them for its own profit and empire building,” WND reported, adding: “In the case of the canal, [China] has worked on ports at both ends, creating the possibility that it could shut down the canal if it seemed in the best interests of the Chinese Communist Party. It also has been building bridges over the canal, which would offer the same option.”
Rubio explained to Panamanian officials that “the United States cannot, and will not, allow the Chinese Communist Party to continue with its effective and growing control over the Panama Canal area.” And in Congress, a bill has been introduced directing the U.S. to negotiate the repurchase of the canal from Panama.
Meanwhile, Trump’s March 4 prime-time announcement that “a large American company announced they are buying both ports around the Panama Canal” referred to BlackRock, the huge U.S.-based investment and asset-management firm. BlackRock purchased the critical ports from CK Hutchison Holdings Limited, officially described as a “Hong Kong-based and Cayman Islands-registered multinational conglomerate corporation” formed in 2015 by a merger of Cheung Kong Holdings and its main associate company Hutchison Whampoa.
However, just as with most things concerning Communist China, massive subterfuge and deception are involved. For Hutchinson Whampoa – as a few reality-based media organizations have noted, including this RealClearHistory analysis from January – has been identified as “a front Chinese company that was owned by Chinese military intelligence.” In the report, author Miguel A. Faria succinctly demystifies China’s longtime control of the Panama Canal:
The United States built the Panama Canal early in the 20th century with American sweat, toil and money, only to give it away to a leftwing Panamanian dictator via a dubious treaty. The Panamanians, in turn, ceded the Canal to Hutchison Whampoa, a front Chinese company that was owned by Chinese military intelligence. At about the same time, another Chinese front organization, the Hong Kong-based Hutchinson Port Holdings, obtained a 50-year lease to operate the two strategic ports at either end of the Panama Canal. Thus, in case of hostilities, U.S. shipping routes would be cut off and bottled up in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, encircled by the Chinese and their allies Cuba, Venezuela and Panama. To this day, the Chinese deny that they control the Panama Canal, and the American media seem to believe them. President-elect Donald Trump does not.
Indeed, the American media have rarely if ever sounded the alarm over this serious threat to U.S. security located right in “America’s backyard” (as Central and South America are commonly referred to in the U.S. global security context). Legacy media stories today instead obsess over Trump’s supposed “expansionist agenda,” his “land grab” obsession and his dangerous vision of “a new U.S. imperialism.”
There are a few exceptions, however, including WorldNetDaily, one of the only American media organizations that has sounded the alarm not just recently – but for decades. More than 25 years ago – before the canal was even turned over to the left-wing Panamanian government – WND founder Joseph Farah was passionately making virtually the same arguments Trump has been making during his second term as president.

In “Clinton’s Panama Canal admission,” published Dec. 1, 1999, just weeks before Carter’s “gift” of the canal to Panama would take effect (one of many articles Farah wrote during the late ’90s warning about Chinese control of the vital waterway), he focused on then-President Bill Clinton’s public admission that, indeed, China was running the Panama Canal!
Was it a Freudian slip? Was it a gaffe? Or was it President Clinton finally being honest about something for the first time in his life?
I refer to the statement he made yesterday with regard to the Panama Canal transfer to a group of reporters in the Oval Office before leaving for the West Coast. …
Here it is, folks. Hold on to your hats – especially all of you people who scoffed when I began telling you three years ago that the Communist Chinese were taking over the Panama Canal.
“I think the Chinese will in fact be bending over backwards to make sure that they run it in a competent and able and fair manner,” Clinton said. That’s verbatim. Those are his words, not mine. Clinton, who has until now denied that the Chinese were to take control of the strategic canal, admitted it publicly.
And, as if to underline his admission and seemingly to ensure there could be no misunderstanding of his words, Clinton elaborated. … He compared the operation of the canal to China’s campaign to win admission to the World Trade Organization, which sets the rules for global trade.
“They’ll want to demonstrate to a distant part of the world that they can be a responsible partner,” the president said. “And I would be very surprised if any adverse consequences flowed from the Chinese running the canal.”
Oh, absolutely. Responsible. Partner. Competent. Fair. Those are all words I readily associate in my mind with the totalitarian government in Beijing. Don’t you?
Well, there you have it, folks. Goodbye Panama Canal. The Bamboo Curtain just moved into the Western Hemisphere – officially, that is.
After all, I gave you this history long ago. I told you about the fact that a Chinese government company – a front for the military – Hutchison Whampoa Ltd., was to begin operation of the ports on both ends of the strategic waterway Jan. 1. It has been the Clinton administration and its many apologists in Congress and the press who have laughed, ridiculed the idea. Chinese military shill Alexander Haig suggested I should be jailed for making such accusations.
And now the truth has finally come out through an unusually candid admission by Clinton. He is telling us now what has been obvious to anyone familiar with the transfer of the canal. He is admitting what former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Thomas Moorer stated in our pages some time back.
Clinton says we can rely on the good intentions of the Chinese to maintain access to the canal. Doesn’t that reassure you? The Chinese, who, as we speak, are rounding up tens of thousands of religious dissidents and interning them, threatening to attack Taiwan and working overtime on developing military technology that could only be used to attack the United States, should be trusted on this Panama Canal deal because it’s a chance for them to show how responsible they really are.
This is nuts!
When are the American people going to wake up? Clinton is so embarrassed by this deal on the canal that he is not even going to attend the transfer ceremonies. Why? If he doesn’t have any second thoughts and believes giving away the Panama Canal to a hostile foreign power is still a good idea, why not go wave the flag next month at the ceremony?
… If ever there was a time – an opportunity – to pressure the politicians to reverse what will someday be judged a historic blunder, it is now. If you really have the guts to stop this thing, America, wake up and take action now. You won’t have to risk your life to write a letter to your senators and representatives in Washington or fill out a simple online petition today.
Your kids, however, may someday pay for our mistakes with their blood if you sit silent through this official treachery.
The same day, Dec. 1, 1999, this writer published a detailed news article on WND, headlined “In 2000, it’s China Canal,” which included exclusive comments from former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Thomas Moorer, who assured WorldNetDaily that China’s takeover of the canal “would be catastrophic for the U.S.”
Editor’s note: In these historic times, stay informed with fearless, hard-hitting, truthful journalism 24/7. And please support our work by making a tax-deductible donation to the Christian nonprofit WND News Center. Every contribution helps enormously!
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases. Purchasing through our affiliate links helps support WorldNetDaily with commissions at no extra cost to you.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@wndnewscenter.org.
SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!
























Long-time friend of Camp Constitution, head of the Phyllis Schlafly Eagles, and host of The Pro America Report radio show was chosen by President Trump to be the U.S. Attorney of Washington, D.C. While his appointment didn’t sit well with the left-wing media, we are delighted to hear the news. Ed is currently serving as the acting D.C. Attorney and needs Senate confirmation. Our prayers are with him and his family.
Donald J. Trump
It is my honor to nominate highly respected Edward R. Martin, Jr., for the full and permanent term of United States Attorney for the District of Columbia.
Ed has led a distinguished career of service, including as Human Rights Office Director for the Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis, where he supervised legal clinics for low-income residents. He later worked as judicial clerk to Judge Pasco M. Bowman, II, of the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals, and launched his own successful Law practice. He has also invested his expertise in other roles, but always with the same goal, of serving his community, and creating a brighter future for all.
Since Inauguration Day, Ed has been doing a great job as Interim U.S. Attorney, fighting tirelessly to restore Law and Order, and make our Nation’s Capital Safe and Beautiful Again. He will get the job done.

Camp Constitution Director Hal Shurtleff was a guest on Ed’s Show on a number of occasions.
And in September 2017, Hal interviewed Ed about his book that he co-authored with Phyllis Schlafly:
https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/shurtleffhal/episodes/2017-09-11T06_13_01-07_00

Washington’s birthday was recognized by an Act of Congress for government offices in Washington, D.C., in 1879, and for all federal offices in 1885.
![]()
At the Battle of Brandywine, September 1777, Washington and Polish Count Casimir Pulaski, Father of the American Calvary, were scouting in the woods.
British sharpshooter Patrick Ferguson reportedly had Washington in his sights but refused to shoot him in the back.
After the Battle of Yorktown, toward the end of the war, many soldiers had not been paid in years, as the Continental Congress had no power to tax.
Disgruntled officers plotted a Newburgh Conspiracy to force Congress to give them back pay.
This was dangerous, because a show of disunity could have persuaded British to renew fighting.
Washington surprised the conspiracy by showing up at their meeting in New York, March 15, 1783.
Taking a note from his pocket, he put on reading glasses, which few had seen him wear, and read:
“Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country …”
Becoming aware of his personal sacrifice, officers’ hearts melted. He urged them not to open the floodgates of civil discord.
With this one speech, the conspiracy collapsed.
Major General David Cobb, who was an aide-de-camp to Washington, wrote of the Newburgh affair:
“I have ever considered that the United States are indebted for their republican form of government solely to the firm and determined republicanism of George Washington at this time.”
![]()
The insurrection dissolved and Washington forgave the insurrectionists. This was in sharp contrast to the harsh behavior of European kings.
In his Farewell Address, 1796, Washington warned of those who would usurp power and rule through executive orders:
Earlier, in 1783, the American-born painter Benjamin West was in England painting the portrait of King George III.
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports.
I picked up this little book the other day in a discount bookstore. Intrigued by the title,
God Is a Salesman, I started thumbing through it and came across this thought-provoking
passage.
Success in life and the ability to sell are inexorably bound. Whether you are
moving Chevies off a showroom floor, inspiring others to achieve a goal, or
spreading your philosophy on how best to engage in real estate investing, you
have to sell. You have to educate. You have to influence.
It was enough to get me to buy the book. The author, Mark Stevens, is not only a
fervent believer in God, he is also a very successful marketer who has learned to sell by
emulating The Master. He writes:
“When I say God is a salesman, I mean an influencer,
an educator, and a force that enables us to bridge the gap between what we see and what
may well be the greater truth.”
When I finished reading the book, I realized that we are all salesmen and always selling
something. As a writer, I am constantly selling my ideas to publishers, selling my books
after they’ve been published, selling my knowledge, intelligence, and experience. That
is the essential activity in a free society based on free enterprise. In a communist society
salesmanship is not needed. It is forbidden. You are told what to do, where to work,
and paid the government’s set wage.
Under capitalism, we must sell ourselves when we apply for a job. We get an education
in order to make ourselves saleable. The more saleable the better. Our aim is to earn
money by offering our services to others so that we can support ourselves. And in a free
society we have the choice of earning money by doing something we enjoy. That
requires ingenuity and creativity. Indeed, the fuel of invention is the desire to produce
something new of great value that will make us rich.
The ability of the author to combine God’s standards with human salesmanship is quite a
feat. This is the first book on salesmanship that I found enlightening and instructive
because Stevens elevates the whole concept of selling above the mundane view we have
of salesman as huckster. In other words, the salesman must have vision and the ability
to convey the true value of what he is selling.
He tells of the day he spent with Bill Gates at Microsoft, before Gates had become a
household name: “He waxed poetic about an ideal encapsulated in a vision. His goal of
seeing a computer on every desk in every home and office….There is a genuine analogy
here to religion, which sells us the ability to have meaning in our lives.” He also asked
Gates if he thought much about money. The answer was sharp: “Thinking a lot about
money is the best way to make sure you never earn a great deal of it. Far wiser to focus
on a passion, on something powerful you can do to change peoples’ lives. I have always
believed that the money will then follow.” Profitable advice for young entrepreneurs.
Even the concept of the guarantee is based on the guarantee that God will return our faith
with His eternal love and protection. That is a guarantee that the salesman must emulate
when selling his service or product. In other words, our guarantee must be real and not
conditional. Stevens writes further:
“As we seek to learn from The Master, we should think of why He is adored. It
has nothing to do with a product or service, it is because we believe God is great,
loving, accepting, generous, and moral. None of these attributes are flashy,
trendy, exotic, or expensive. Quite the opposite, they represent the staff of life,
simple goodness and inner beauty that is so rare in our world that when we see it
we are awed by it.”
Since selling is the central economic, social, and spiritual activity in a capitalist society, it
is worth noting that God has played a crucial role in the development of our modern
American civilization. It is that spiritual underpinning that permits human beings to
engage in economic activities that require trust, honesty, and integrity. Before the word
capitalism was invented, the free-market system was called the ”credit system,” whereby
entrepreneurs borrowed money to finance their businesses and paid the money back. It
could also have been called the “trust system,” because that’s what it was all about.
Indeed, the foundation of the free-market system is the concept of private property. That
is why we have a Patent Office, to ensure the private property rights of inventors.
The aim of the Fabian Socialists was the abolition of private property. Today, we have a
federal government that is gobbling up more and more property in the West, depriving
citizens of the productive use of land and resources that can build our prosperity.
The Democrats didn’t even try to sell us their national healthcare program. They simply
rammed it through a Democratic Congress despite overwhelming public opposition.
You cannot sell anything with lies. By lying you are admitting that what you are selling
is either of no value or is indeed harmful.
You cannot sell what will harm your customer, unless you lie about it. The Democrats
were not emulating The Master in selling national healthcare. Socialists are not
salesmen. They are imposers. That is why the message in Mark Stevens’ book is so
important. Salesmanship requires honesty. It requires truth. And a government that
lies to its citizens is a destructive force.
The policies and philosophy of the Democrat Party are in conflict with the principles of a
free-market economy, which requires honest salesmanship. The Democrats have been
trying to sell us socialism and slavery, which the American people are not buying.
Indeed, it is up to Americans to rediscover the importance of honest salesmanship in all
aspects of our lives, including government, based on the principles of The Master
salesman in all of history.

The Blumenfeld Archives

St. Valentine is mentioned in the Legenda Sanctorum by Jacobus de Voragine in 1260 and in the Nuremberg Chronicle, 1493.
“I ask them if they are Christians. If they admit it, I repeat the question … threatening capital punishment; if they persist, I sentence them to death.”
Emperor Trajan replied, 112 A.D.:
“If anyone denies that he is a Christian and actually proves it by worshiping our gods, he shall be pardoned as a result of his recantation.”
He had Valentine arrested and dragged before the Prefect of Rome, who condemned him to die.
The 8th-century Gelasian Sacramentary recorded the celebration of the Feast of Saint Valentine on February 14.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reposted with permission from American Minute.