Identifying The Caring Enemy

Flanders

ARCHCONSERVATIVE
Sep 23, 2010
7,628
748
205
This wikiHow definition of a sweet enemy includes good advice to individuals; especially the young and immature:

A Sweet enemy describes a person who you hold close but most likely will stab you in the back at some time. He/she may appear innocent, carefree and overly lovely, but if you should look closer you might see the bad eyes, the cold stare and even catch a cold breeze from his/her breathe. The fact is that sweet enemies have a reason for being close to you - just simply to destroy or harm you. It is often difficult to find out these types of people actually mean any harm, but they do. Here are the various ways of finding them out.

How to Identify a Sweet Enemy - wikiHow

Frankly, punching them out is the most effective way to deal with them. Knock a sweet enemy on his or her ass and they will stay far away from you from then on. Unfortunately, youngsters have to identify them first. Most do not have the maturity. Most adults can’t get physical, or won’t because of laws protecting the vilest of creatures. In fact, collectivist laws force you to associate with sweet enemies in the schools, in the workplace, and even in social settings. Ultimately, sweet enemies will always be a one-on-one proposition. Not so with the caring enemy.

A caring enemy is the sweet enemy all grown up. The caring enemy destroys countries, societies, cultures, and individual liberties. Many in government have identified America’s caring enemy while many support and protect them. Tragically, a large number of private sector Americans refuse to see caring enemies for what they are. That failure shackles those in government who would gladly rein in the caring enemy before they destroy the country. It’s like your parents telling you not to hang out with a specific “friend” but you do the opposite anyway.

If you’ve read this far you must be asking “Who is he talking about?” Answer: TEACHERS. Let me explain my position by beginning with this:


The justices of the Supreme Court of Sweden have finished the destruction of a family that was begun in their lower courts, rejecting an appeal of a ruling that permanently separated a young boy from his parents because he was being homeschooled.

“In a perfunctory order the Swedish Supreme Court rejected a desperate appeal by Christer and Annie Johansson, parents of Domenic Johansson, who was torn from his parents while minutes from takeoff on an international flight as the family prepared to move to India,” said a report from the Home School Legal Defense Association, which along with a team from the Alliance Defending Freedom has been fighting on behalf of the family.

XXXXX

WND has reported on the case from its beginning, when Domenic was seized by armed Swedish police officers operating on the orders of social services agencies from on board a Turkish Airlines flight June 25, 2009, because he was being homeschooled.

He was 7 at the time.

Sweden’s Supreme Court is no different than America’s in that the court is taking the heat while it was teachers who dictated the decision behind the scenes. The same thing happens in America. Example: An American court ruled that parental Rights end at the schoolhouse door:


The outrage against that decision was directed at the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals when it should have been directed towards the NEA (National Education Association). Misdirected outrage occurs because the caring enemy is so well hidden and protected by the media it is almost impossible for the public to identify the real enemy. Even well-informed conservative journalists blame the courts, or legislators, rather than lay the blame where it originates.

Here’s the part I like best about Sweden:


“The taking of this child for homeschooling and while the family was moving out of the country is an egregious violation of basic human rights and international law standards. Sweden is a party to numerous treaties that require them to respect the rights of parents to make education decisions and to leave the country if they choose. This is a dangerous precedent if permitted to stand.”

Judges rule to destroy homeschoolers' family
Swedish court rejects appeal of order separating parents from only child
Published: 15 hours ago
BOB UNRUH

Judges rule to destroy homeschoolers? family

Non-existent International Law is the Holy Grail to the NEA and to Socialists the world over —— except when it stands in the way of the NEA’s agenda. A happy cynic might smile and say that Sweden’s High Court proved that International law does not exist.

And Universal Human Rights is the philosophical foundation for every United Nations charity hustle. I can’t imagine what those judges in Sweden were thinking. B.S. is B.S., but you don’t mess with Human Rights when denying them could come back and bite the UN’s income on the ass.

So why connect the NEA to a decision handed down in Sweden’s Supreme Court? Try this:

The NEA is the largest professional organization in the world. The NEA belongs to Education International, a global federation of teachers' unions. The NEA is also the largest labor union in America. So nobody can tell me the NEA did not have its dirty hand in the Johansson decision through Sweden’s teachers’ union just as the NEA is behind every desirable decision in American courts. Had the ruling in Sweden gone the other way you can be sure the NEA would be using its considerable influence and resources to overturn a hostile decision.

Finally, a little background.

Teachers began their long march in 1857. (Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 9 years earlier).

Around 1960, in spite of the longstanding opposition to giving public sector employees the power inherent in collective bargaining, teachers’ unions began enriching their members with tax dollars negotiated through collective bargaining. I use the word negotiated loosely since the taxpayer never has a seat at bargaining tables. In effect, pubic sector unions negotiate with themselves.

The exorbitant salaries teachers “negotiated” allows them to contribute part of their SALARY to Democrats, and to causes advancing socialism’s ideology, without breaking the law that prohibits contributing union DUES to political parties, candidates and causes.

More importantly, NEA membership before 1960 was much less than one million. Today it is approximately 3.5 million. Indeed, after JFK’s assassination the entire parasite class began its phenomenal growth in tandem with LBJ’s Great Society and the parasites in the education industry. Surprise, surprise! LBJ was a teacher before running for elected office.
 
Last edited:
After reading the 'parents rights end at schoolhouse threshold' I think you are mistaken on the villain, at least in part. It has more to do with legislatures, traditionally at state level, more and more now at federal level. Yes, they are lobbied by various teachers groups and university education departments, as these are the folks that will write in what they think is 'best for the children'.

Currently it's "Core Standards." In theory I find nothing to warn against. The goal is to prepare k-12 students to be ready to enter college or the work force at graduation. Nothing wrong with that, indeed we shouldn't need more legislation, as that was always the goal, no? What one finds is one underlying principle to the CORE is to have commonalities within subject areas so that over time the students gain greater depth of study and more understanding. Good idea on the face, indeed that is the underlying premise behind AP and gifted programs, they are just more accelerated in that depth.

Let's make it a given that many are not prepared by the end of compulsory education age. Furthermore, we can also make it a given that many diplomas are given out to young adults that fall far short of being prepared. Indeed that is a fact, just ask employers or universities that spend much time and money attempting to teach basic math, reading, and writing at the 001 level, not too mention the costs of non-credit college courses to parents and students for skills they assumed were learned prior.

The problem however comes from what lessons are planned to reach the specific targets. In the case you cite regarding the sex education, while likely not CORE, it meets one of the state's learning goals and grade standards, thus is 'legislature approved.' Read your state's current goals and standards-you will find that the language is quite specific, while writing the lesson plans is left open to teacher/school/ or district. The outcome depends on those writing those plans and whether or not there is a 'unity of thought' that could be positive or negative, depending upon your own standards.

*Taking off teacher hat, putting on parent hat* Two examples in science, if I lived in a district that was 'pro-global warming' or 'pro-Creationism' I might have a problem with what lessons my child was learning in science in either case.

For my kids, I'd haven't a problem with a discussion of 'man-made climate change' or 'cyclical climate change', indeed I believe that grade appropriate discussions on such over time would be beneficial as more is learned and the child matures in their thinking and understanding. The problem for me would be if only one was being taught as 'true' and direct instruction was leading to 'expected' concept learning.' Keep in mind that the same concept/target is going to be reinforced year after year, at a higher level.

Now a school that was teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design in science, whether or not using compare/contrast with evolution? That I would have major problems with. While I wouldn't go 'bonkers' if my kids came home and mentioned it, due to class discussion, I would want to find out how it was presented. If part of normal give and take discussion in class, perhaps brought up by a student whose parents or church held that idea, no problem. However, if part of teaching within a lesson plan? I'd start off non-bonkers, but depending on discussions with teacher might go there.

There are many topics that fall within the above types of concepts. The specifics come from the lesson plans, indeed if too many like-minded folks are writing the overall local lessons-often finding university created plans, there can be more of an indoctrination occurring, not critical thinking.
 
Education is a union racket on a scale that Jimmy Hoffa couldn't have imagined and the mafia envies. It is what happens when union people sit on both sides of the table and stockholders are not represented at all.

Locally the system is broke and going after the halfwit white trash commissioners for a tax increase. The results of educated filth holding county children hostage in negotiations with some of the stupidest white trash motherfuckers on earth already has the county up against it.

Hard to be optimistic.
 
After reading the 'parents rights end at schoolhouse threshold' I think you are mistaken on the villain, at least in part. It has more to do with legislatures, traditionally at state level, more and more now at federal level. Yes, they are lobbied by various teachers groups and university education departments, as these are the folks that will write in what they think is 'best for the children'.

To Annie: First, there is no constitutional authority for the federal government to be involved in education on any level.

Second, teachers’ unions help elect Democrats at state and local levels for the sole purpose of benefitting everybody in the education industry. Everybody in the education industry includes staff, building maintenance workers, private sector contractors, suppliers, and political hacks who swell the ranks of city education bureaucracies without ever setting foot in a classroom. “What’s best for the children” is the sales pitch.

As for the remainder of your response, indoctrinating children into the joys of socialism has long-been the primary goal of the NEA, and the Department of Education since Jimmy Carter created it. Countless journalists, political thinkers, government-watchers, and concerned Americans have addressed those evil twins many times.

Basically, teaching the Socialist religion in public schools is a direct violation of the First Amendment. Even if you take the First Amendment out of the equation the NEA using tax dollars to teach a religion the majority of Americans reject is abhorrent to a free people. Note that brainwashing children is exactly why parental authority must end at the schoolhouse door. Go the other way and liberals would burn the nation’s Capital to the ground if any traditional religion pulled the same things the NEA is getting away with.

These two articles pretty much sum up the pertinent topics:


John Dewey: Bosom Serpent of American Education
Kelly OConnell Sunday, February 24, 2013

John Dewey: Bosom Serpent of American Education

XXXXX

Abolish the Department of Education
By Jeffrey Lord on 2.26.13 @ 6:11AM
Will House GOP have the courage to tackle Reagan’s unfulfilled promise as sequester looms?

The American Spectator : Abolish the Department of Education
 
Last edited:
Hussein is so full of crap he would not get away with the garbage he spouts if America’s “educators” led by the NEA had not brainwashed, propagandized, and dumb-downed the very college grads he was addressing:

Unfortunately, you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that's at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works.

Hussein is pissed off because young kids in the public schools never heard anything except liberalism’s big government horse manure, yet resistance to socialism/communism is growing. Or maybe he’s just angry because he knows he is seen as a bold-faced liar rather than the spiritual leader persona he designed to win elections.

They'll warn that tyranny always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave, and creative, and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can't be trusted.

The voices of history do the warning —— most often in relation to being armed just in case leaders like Hussein emerge. One recent voice gently warned:

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan

And where the hell was self-rule when Hussein & Company rammed socialized medicine down the country’s throat? Where the hell is self-rule every time he disregards the Constitution? Where the hell is self-rule for an overwhelming majority of AMERICANS who oppose amnesty for illegal aliens? Where the hell is self-rule every time the government betrays the country to the United Nations? Where the hell is self-rule every time the government rips off American taxpayers with foreign aid, global warming scams, bailouts, and stimulus packages that only stimulate government growth? Where the hell is self-rule in coverups for tragedies like Benghazi and Fast & Furious?

This next one wins the prize:


Because we understand that this democracy is ours. And as citizens, we understand that it's not about what America can do for us, it's about what can be done by us, together, through the hard and frustrating but absolutely necessary work of self-government.

Posted on May 5, 2013
Obama To Grads: Reject Voices That Warn About Government Tyranny

Obama To Grads: Reject Voices That Warn About Government Tyranny | RealClearPolitics

Only fools fail to see that his words say one thing while his actions say “Ask not what your government can do for you, ask what you can do for your government.” This is the way it works out. The producers do for the government, while the government does for the parasites.

And just in case nobody ever told the boy genius, America’s Founders had no use for democracy. Hussein & Company are a good example of why democracy sucks. They are proving that democracy always leads to something worse; never to more liberty and freedom:


Democracy passes into despotism. Plato

Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx

In truth, democracy and individual liberties are opponents. More than anything else democracy has been the preferred form of government for parasites throughout history:

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. - Thomas Jefferson

When the people find they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic. Benjamin Franklin

Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy. Ron Paul

Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance. H. L. Mencken

I would add that in spite of the trillions of dollars spent on education in this country individual ignorance remains the tool of demagogues.
 

Forum List

Back
Top