Common Core Inculcates The Rationalism Of The Political Class

When does 8+5=11? Only when "8" isn't "8," "5" isn't "5" and "11" is merely an interpretation of what could be the right answer under the right circumstances. Like Bill Clinton's inability to define the word "is," and like George W. Bush's affinity for "fuzzy math," we now can conclude that "is" means "could have been" and "bailout" means "loan." The only way to preserve such nonsense in a common sense society is to teach it to our children.

It is an unfortunate reality in modern times that the political class is allowed to make up its own reality. A brave Delta Force officer dying in a gunfight is not "combat" and his unit's presence in Iraq during a rescue mission is not "boots on the ground." Ex-Communicated political operatives like Sid Blumenthal sending advice emails to Hillary Clinton is not "advising" the Secretary. Using the power of the IRS to "target" political organizations is not "targeting political organizations because of their political beliefs." Whatever your political persuasion, you can find a myriad of examples of politicians straining reason to create the political reality of their choosing. It is common core. It is the tool of the political class to shape the narrative in a way that avoids absolute truth in favor of their version of events. And now they saddle our children and us parents with their twisted reality.

8+5 is 13. It will always be 13. It will never be 11. This is a universal truth so common at its core that we used basic mathematics to communicate as we launched a probe into deep space hoping some intelligent life would be able to conclude that we are also intelligent. To channel Ayn Rand, "A" is "A". It is not "B." Rand was not unique in her belief either. The concept dates back to Aristotle's "Law of Identity." Put simply, a thing is what it is and is not something else. A leaf is not a stone. A stone is not a horse. A horse is not a tree. There exists no level of perception that will make it so.

However, we now live in a society so deconstructed that somehow it is normal to talk about absolute truths as mere opinion, as if everything in the universe is defined by a simple matter of perspective. For the political class the truth is often inconvenient, so the truth must be obfuscated.

The political class, you see, is so used to being allowed to define its own reality that the idea of absolute truth is a threat to its very existence. Lies are now so commonplace that "spin" is euphemistically used to explain every inaccurate statement from every political operative appearing on television or in print. One's "opinion" is now a substitute for the facts and, as the electorate becomes wise to the game, something has to be done to preserve the Establishment's right to lie. 

Defining your own reality has long been a privilege of the rich and powerful. If you do not want to serve in Vietnam, you buy your way out. If you do not want to go to jail for banking fraud, you buy your way out. If you do not want to be held to account for violating someone's civil rights, you buy your way out. Morality has nothing to do with it. It is always about who you are, what you have, and who you know. The solution is never groupthink, or standardization, or a national curriculum. It is independent thought.

Common Core was bipartisan legislation, as was No Child Left Behind. Whenever I see bipartisan legislation I always ask myself, "what do they hope to accomplish with this"? We should all be suspicious of any legislation that garners the uniform support of the political elite. It is almost certainly something that is beneficial to them, unless you still believe that the political class cares about your individual problems. To acquiesce is, ordinarily, just an acceptance that you are not in power and it is natural for those in power to abuse that power. However, Common Core affects our children and we cannot accept it. This muddled thinking, particularly in mathematics, will create in our children an inability to discern reality from fantasy - just as it was intended to do. 

The proponents of Common Core defend it by redefining it as a vehicle to higher standards in primary school education. Admittedly, "higher standards" sound like a good idea. But, if those standards rob our already underactive children of an active, healthy childhood, then they are insidious. I remember my parents having to help me with homework every once in awhile, but not on a regular basis. I remember, as I'm sure most of you do, having several hours before dark to do homework and still play outside. Parents now are faced with helping children on a daily basis with homework assignments even we cannot understand.

America has enjoyed the largest economy and the most powerful military, cultural and political influence ever in history. One would have to go back to ancient Rome to find a nation as hegemonic. Yet we pretend that it is our educational system that is somehow crippling our ability to compete with China or India. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is our values and our natural instinct to innovate that makes us great. It is a culture of hard work and our traditional emphasis on entrepreneurialism that has made us who we are. It is our traditional belief that "truth" and "equality" are tangible things and not mere ideals that has guided our nation to prominence. Moral equivalency and deconstructionism are the antitheses of our founding principles. An abortion is an abortion. You can have differing ideas about whether it should be legal, but you cannot redefine into something it is not. Taxing is taking something from someone else for the "greater good." You cannot redefine it as "investment" and pretend it is not a taking. A bailout with taxpayer money is a bailout with taxpayer money and cannot be redefined as a loan. Marriage is marriage and cannot be redefined as "civil unions." Combat is combat and cannot be redefined as "advising." Fall where you like on the issues, but no reasonable debate can be had without all parties first acknowledging the basic parameters of the debate.

We must demand that the political class admit 8+5 equals 13. Until we do, the Bushes and the Clintons of the world will continue to destroy our nation with the false promise that, this time, 8+5 equals 11.

For Hillary, The Question Remains: "Is She Above The Law"?

After eleven hours of testimony before Congress, there was no question, Hillary dominated a feckless and disorganized Republican Party. In fact, the entire week leading up to the hearing, including hyper-partisan statements and shameless leaks of new information, highlighted the stunning lack of leadership in the House. The Special Committee on Benghazi, was assembled by House leadership after two previous committees (also run by Republicans), completely failed to gain any insight into the horrific events of September 11, 2012. Hillary Clinton's total domination of Republicans last week perfectly illustrates the reasons for the current leadership crisis in the House. The only remaining question is whether she is above the law.

Against the backdrop of the various Benghazi committees, the FBI has been conducting a serious investigation into Secretary Clinton's treatment of classified information. This is the same FBI that indicted former CIA Director, David Petraeus, on a single count of the unauthorized removal and retention of classified information. For those of you who are not familiar with the case, General Petraeus  removed a classified file containing information about him and placed it in a desk drawer where his biographer and mistress viewed it. This is also the same FBI that surreptitiously hacked Fox News Correspondent, James Rosen's, personal emails, ostensibly looking for evidence that he was a "co-conspirator" with a source critical of Administration policy. The warrant was issued under the Espionage Act, it was improper, and the FBI dropped the investigation after the public outcry.

Hillary Clinton, in contrast, had more than 300 classified emails on a personal server located in the basement of her home, and these are just the emails that we know about now. The information contained in those emails ranges from confidential discussions with heads of state to information so sensitive that it is now classified as "Top Secret" and redacted. There is now also conclusive evidence that foreign intelligence agencies not only knew about her personal server, but also attempted, perhaps successfully, to hack into the system. If true, it would represent perhaps the worst breach of U.S. security since the 1980s.

Clinton's only defense is that the information on her server was not "marked classified." While that argument has some surface appeal, the law clearly does not draw a distinction between information that is marked or unmarked. Information is classified first and marked later. It is not classified because it is marked as such. The law is simple and clear. Anyone who retains or transmits classified information except as authorized by the Act, is guilt of a felony. The "authorized" retention of classified information does not include an unsecured personal server in one's basement. It also does not include the transmission of classified information to and from an unsecured personal server in one's basement. Finally, one is not "authorized" to transmit classified information through an unsecured personal server in one's basement to people like Sid Blumenthal, who incidentally was banned from the administration by President Obama himself.

If the evidence shows that Secretary Clinton did the things of which she is accused, she should be indicted. She should be indicted the same way everyone else is indicted for the same or similar misconduct. "So what, she was the Secretary of State," one might say. Well, General Petraeus was the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq and the Director of the CIA. He was indicted for a comparatively minor violation so, to the extent she is treated differently, it will be because she is, quite literally, above the law.

This scene has played out before, most recently with the IRS targeting scandal. Just this week we learned that Lois Lerner, who admits she deliberately targeted conservative groups seeking tax exempt status, will not face any criminal charges. This is notwithstanding that she admits to the targeting and shortly after the story exploded, proceeded to "recycle" all of her electronically stored information. Nothing will happen to her, and she will be allowed to retire with her full pension. Given the current politicization of criminal law, it seems even less likely that the Democratic front runner will face anything more than the inconvenience of having to explain herself to a group of hapless Republicans on the Benghazi Committee.

This is all the unfortunate continuation of our current national Zeitgeist - the political class vs. the rest of us. We the people are in a vicious struggle with the political class for freedom and equality under the law. Whether it is the Black Lives Matter movement, the Tea Party movement, or the rise of political outsiders like Trump and Ben Carson, Americans appear to be fed up. We all know that when the average Joe gets in trouble with the law, he faces a life changing series of events. Sometimes he does not even survive the initial confrontation with a militarized police force. But, we also know that when a powerful corporation, or a Senator, or a Secretary of State, or one of their fund raising buddies violates the same law, they face nothing. The Political Class avoids criminal penalties, jail, and even civil justice. If you do not agree, ask yourself: "How many bankers went to jail after wide spread mortgage fraud led to the 2008 financial collapse"? Or research for yourself how many major corporations have actually been put out of business because of egregious criminal, civil, or regulatory misconduct. BP destroys the Gulf of Mexico for three years and pays a fine. A small rancher in Wyoming builds a rainwater pond to feed his livestock and is put out of business by the EPA with $75,000.00 a day in fines. It is the little people they attack, and they attack us because they can.

Hillary Clinton and her personal email server are the litmus test for the future of America. Will she be held to account, or is she above the law? My money's on Clinton.