The Constitution signer who was impeached and expelled

Leave a comment

This is from the National Constitution Center.

I never knew this.


William Blount is one of the lesser-known men who signed the Constitution, but one of the most controversial, since he put a key part of the founding document to a critical test less than decade after it was ratified.










Blount represented North Carolina at the 1787 convention in Philadelphia and said little at the proceedings, when he was there. Blount was one of 39 delegates who signed the Constitution and he also promoted its ratification in North Carolina.

But about a decade later, on July 7th, 1797, 218 years ago today, the House of Representatives voted to impeach now Senator Blount from Tennessee, who was involved a plot to give land to the British.

Blount, who came from a wealthy Southern landowning family, had accumulated much land west of the Mississippi on credit, and was significantly in debt. When France defeated Spain in the War of the Pyrenees, Blount became involved in a  plan for Native Americans and frontiersmen to attack this land, which would ultimately be transferred to Great Britain.

An incriminating letter fell into the hands of Blount’s enemy, Secretary of State Timothy Pickering. President John Adams, upon receiving the letter, sent in to the Senate.

Blount was then the first government official to be part of the impeachment process and the expulsion process, two of the critical checks-and-balances in the Constitution.

The Constitution has several clauses that allow for the House and Senate to discipline government officials, including their own members.

Article II, Section 4, says that “the President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

And Article I, Section 5, contains the Expulsion Clause, which says that, “each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.”

The Senate voted to expel the Tennessean the next day, and it also ordered him to stand trial at a later date since the House had approved impeachment proceedings.

During Blount’s absentee proceedings in early 1799, the Senate didn’t move forward with a trial against Blount, deciding that he had already been expelled from the Senate. By a 14-11 vote, a resolution was defeated that read that “William Blount was a civil officer of the United States and therefore liable to impeachment.”

Since 1797, the Senate has expelled 15 members and the House has expelled five members, but no Congress member has been impeached.

As for Blount, he went back to his home in Tennessee, gained appointment to the state Senate and became its speaker. He died in 1800 after a brief illness.


30,000 Indiana Residents To Lose Their Insurance Due To Obamacare [VIDEO]

Leave a comment

This is from The Daily Caller.

I hope every one of them is a Obama supporter.

But it will be sadly the average mom and dad that will take the hit.



Notifications have been sent out to 30,000 residents of Indiana informing them their health insurance plans no longer meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, and will be cancelled at the end of this year.

Indiana joins Virginia (the hardest hit with 250,000 cancellations),Kentucky, Colorado, North Carolina, New Mexico, Tennessee and Maine, among the more than dozen states and the District of Columbia that are experiencing another round of health insurance cancellations this year.

BOOM: Elbert Guillory Has A Message for Blacks That’ll Make The Left Pout

Leave a comment

This is from Clash Daily.

How long before the DemocRats try to destroy Elbert Guillory?

Elbert is telling the truth about the Great Society is ruining black families and how the DemocRats want them on the New Plantation and keep voting DemocRat.


Yes, he just went there. This message from Elbert Guillory to black voters in North Carolina slams Democrats for using blacks. Enjoy.

Desperate Dems Turn to Fraud, Race-Baiting

Leave a comment

This is from Rush


RUSH: Voter fraud.  This is happening in North Carolina right now with early voting.  Listen to this. It’s from Judicial Watch.  “According to a letter from a lawyer for the State of North Carolina to the National Association for the Advancement of [Liberal] Colored People (NAACP), a speaker at a recent NAACP conference in North Carolina –” now, wait for this “– a speaker at a recent NAACP conference in North Carolina urged audience members to mislead the NAACP’s own members into believing they do not need to register to vote in advance, or that they do not need to vote at their assigned polling place.”

Let me read this to you again.  A speaker at a recent NAALCP conference in North Carolina urged people in the audience to go out and mislead African-Americans. The Republicans are always accused of this stuff.  The NAACP urged its members to go tell African-Americans they don’t have to register to vote in advance, and they do not need to vote at their assigned polling place.

Now, why are they doing this?  Well, the letter from a lawyer for the state of North Carolina, the NAALCP, alleges they’re doing this “to create confusion and animosity during the upcoming mid-term elections in North Carolina, and to use the evidence of that confusion in the ongoing litigation between Eric Holder’s Justice Department and North Carolina and to show that North Carolina’s election integrity laws are discriminatory.”

Here’s the upshot.  NAALCP members are being told to go all over North Carolina and tell black people, “Hey, you don’t need to register in advance.  You can register when you show up.  And go anywhere.  You don’t have to go to an assigned place.” So that when they get there and are refused the right to vote, they are then to raise hell, call the news media, which will be on call waiting for the call, and raise holy hell about how North Carolina is discriminating against black voters by not letting them vote, and not letting them register.

Nobody is ever supposed to know that this is a strategy.  Nobody is ever supposed to know that this is being done on purpose.  The desired result is a bunch of God-fearing American citizens, African-Americans show up to vote and are denied the right to vote because they haven’t registered, and they may be showing up at the wrong place.  They raise holy hell, they start shouting “discrimination.”  This will fit in with an ongoing lawsuit that Eric Holder has against North Carolina for this kind of thing, discrimination. Create mass chaos and confusion and use blunt-force intimidation to relent and let these people vote.

But more than that, it is to impugn the result, it is to call into question the result of the elections in North Carolina.  By saying, “Well, look at all these God-fearing black citizens who showed up and then were denied the right to vote.  This racist state would not even let them vote.”  And that’s supposed to call into question the entire outcome throughout the state.  This is a strategy.  It has been discovered again by a lawyer for the state of North Carolina.  He somehow found out about this and he’s written a letter to the NAALCP demanding answers.  “Hey, what is it you guys are doing here?”

This is all part of the early voting opportunity for confusion, disarray, and chaos.  NAACP leader calls for creating confusion during midterm election by deliberately misleading voters. And, by the way, the other aspect of this is when it comes out these people were misled, guess who’s gonna get blamed for doing it?  The Republicans.  This is a great example of where voter ID would not permit this to happen.  And voter ID is not yet the law in North Carolina.  They’ve been fighting it tooth and nail just so they can continue this kind of thing.

Speaking of threats and intimidation, from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. This is a story by Jim Galloway and Daniel Malloy in the Atlanta newspaper.  “A reader has sent us this early-voting turnout mailer sent out by the Georgia Democratic party that focuses on the shooting of Michael Brown and subsequent unrest in Ferguson, Mo. It contains an interesting line that concedes the problem of low interest among black voters: ‘If we want a better, safer future for our children, it’s up to us to vote for change. The choices may not always be perfect, but the cost of inaction is simply too great.’

“We caught up with Democratic Party Chairman DuBose Porter at an event in Milledgeville this evening. He said the situation in Ferguson easily applies to Georgia: ‘Again, it’s about opportunity. Are you going to be in situations more like that? I mean, that’s when you don’t have people having the opportunity for jobs or to participate in their community and the opportunity to grow. … That’s what we need to change in Georgia because that’s what you have. You have situations, you have communities that can explode like that because you’ve taken the opportunity away from them.”

Why, this almost sounds like a threat.  “DuBose Porter said the missive is in line with what Democrats are saying up and down the ticket.”

From North Carolina’s Fayetteville Observer: “Churchgoer Taken Aback by Political Flier’s Lynching Imagery — Dawn McNair said she was surprised Sunday when her daughter pointed out the background on a political flier urging people to get out and vote.

The front of the flier blares: ‘Kay Hagan doesn’t win! Obama’s impeachment will begin! Vote in 2014.'”  That’s the flier that’s being sent out to African-Americans.

“The words are superimposed over a grainy reproduction of a photograph of what appears to be a lynching. … ‘My daughter said, “Mom, look in the background. They’re lynching somebody.” It’s the lynching of an African-American man,’ McNair said.”  So African-American voters are getting a flier that shows a black man being lynched and the headline on the flier: “Kay Hagan doesn’t win! Obama’s impeachment will begin!”  It’s supposed to create the impression that Obama’s gonna get lynched if Kay Hagan doesn’t win.  Her daughter pointed it out, a political flier going around.

Now, do you remember we talked about the New York Times story on Monday about that internal Democrat memo warning about a Republican landslide in the midterms unless there’s a huge black turnout.  Let me remind you, from the article, “African-Americans could help swing elections in Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, and possibly Arkansas, a New York Times analyst of voter data shows, but only if they turn out at higher-than-forecast rates.”

Well, so let it be written, so let it be done.  Below, here are the examples I just gave you of ginning up the turnout in Georgia using Ferguson, Missouri, and North Carolina using a lynching photograph from long ago.  I’m sure it’s happening in other states as well.  And it doesn’t matter how incendiary or racist the Democrats have to get.  Their jobs are on the line.  And the media is going to be supportive and understanding of whatever they have to do.  This is just gonna be called really smart politics.

This takes us back to Ferguson, Missouri, on CNN’s Newsroom today.  The anchorette infobabe, Carol Costello, was interviewing St. Louis, Missouri, City Alderman Antonio French.  During a discussion about the shooting of the gentle giant, Michael Brown, the infobabe, Carol Costello, said, “What do you make of the county’s autopsy report?”  Now, we’ve reported to you on this already.  The autopsy, which has been known since August but only today was revealed, blood was found on the officer’s uniform, the gentle giant’s. Blood was found inside the police vehicle. The gentle giant actually entered the police car and attempted to get the weapon of the police officer.  This is now known.

The gentle giant was also using marijuana.  The gentle giant did not have his hands up and he was not surrendering. He did run away but then charged back to the police officer.  This is all known from the autopsy.  It’s been known since August.  And because that’s what it showed, they had to do two other autopsies try to cover this up or try to find some other conflicting evidence.  So now we’ve got CNN with this alderman from St. Louis, Antonio French, and they’re asking him what he thinks of this autopsy.

FRENCH:  I think it describes an awful way to die, and I think it also describes a situation, you know, where a young man who was unarmed was shot nine times.  What I’m alarmed by is that the way this is being tried in the public and that information is being leaked out and we’re not getting a clear picture of everything.  I think one of the things that we asked for at the beginning is that the only way this thing could happen in a way that actually gives the community what they’re asking for, is a public trial.

RUSH:  Yeah, there you have it. They want a trial, they want an indictment, or they’re promising a situation you don’t want to live in. And the only way to fairness is to have a public trial.  “We’re not getting a clear picture.”  Oh, yes, we are, finally we are getting a clear picture.  It’s just not the picture that the activists apparently want.  And then the infobabe, Carol Costello, says, “Well, based on what you just said to me, you have to wonder, what if the grand jury does not indict?  What happens then, Mr. Alderman?”

FRENCH:  Well, worry about our community.  We have to worry about the hours and days following an announcement that the grand jury would not indict.  But in the long term, you know, our community has been really ripped apart, and we’ve got a lot of healing to do.

RUSH:  Hmm.  Hmm.  Hmm.  See.  Public official here.  “Well, I worry about our community.”  Why?  What’s gonna happen if there’s no indictment?  What’s gonna happen in the community? So they want a public trial.  It’s the only way for fairness, get a public trial.  “If we don’t get a public trial, if we don’t get an indictment, well, I worry about our community.”  What does that mean?

Robber Brings Pepper Spray. Clerk Brings Gun. You Know Who Wins.


This is from Bearing Arms.

I can see Thomas Hartman becoming a future Darwin Award Winner.



Thomas Hartman isn’t the smartest robber in the world, but he’s among the luckiest. He attempted to rob a North Carolina gas station with pepper spray, and found that the gun-wearing owner didn’t have an itchy trigger finger:

Cleveland County deputies said just after 10 a.m. a masked man armed with a canister of pepper spray entered Padgett’s BP gas station on Polkville Road in Shelby, NC.

They said the store owner immediately realized he was being robbed and drew his gun from its holster and pointed it at the suspect.

The suspect ran from the store, and the owner followed him, according to the sheriff’s office.

A person pulling into the store parking lot saw the suspect fleeing and followed him in his vehicle.

They said the man was able to detain the suspect until deputies arrived.

Hartman doesn’t appear to be a rocket scientist, but at least he was smart enough to know that attempting to arm a good guy with a gun was going to end poorly for him if he continued to press the issue. He’s currently in jail on a common law robbery charge, with a $20,000 bail.

The store owner in this instance did the right thing by holding fire. It is doubtful that law enforcement or the local district attorney would consider Hartman’s pepper spray a lethal force threat justifying his firing the gun in most circumstances.

As in the vast majority of defensive gun uses, it was the mere display of a firearm that was enough to end an attempted crime.

Non-firing gun defenses like this play out every year in the United States to little fanfare, between 500,000 and 3 .2 million times.

Training Begins In Texas School Marshal Program

1 Comment

This is from Weasel Zippers.

More states need to follow Texas’ lead with similar training programs.



Eeny, meeny, miny, moe which teacher is armed


The trainers from the new school marshal program began their first day of training in San Marcos on Monday. The program will allow a designated school official to carry a gun on campus.

19 participants are taking part in the class at the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center in San Marcos. They will learn the curriculum of the program then take it back to their communities and train the school staff members who want to participate.

The program was created through the passage of House Bill 1099 in the last legislative session. It allows staff members to act as marshals in armed shooter and other emergency situations when police are still minutes away.

All prospective marshals must pass a mental health evaluation, attend active shooter and emergency situation training, and take ten times the amount of firearms training required for CHL holders.

North Carolina is the only other state to pass this legislation. It has yet to be implemented.

House passes ‘Undetectable Firearms Act’ renewal, with 1 ‘No’ vote

1 Comment

This is from The Examiner.

I sent my Congress Critter an email expressing my

disappointment with his vote.

I hope the Tea Party comes up with someone to oppose

Larry Buschon.


On Tuesday, December 3, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 3626, a ten year extension of the “Undetectable Firearms Act,” by voice vote.According to Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), he was the onlyonly “No” vote (although since it was a voice vote, that will be hard to verify).

Not only did House Republicans overwhelmingly support this infringement on that which shallshall not be infringed, the bill waswas introduced by North Carolina “conservative” Republican Howard Coble. Coble has an “A” rating from the NRA. Admittedly, Gun Owners of America have awarded him the same grade, but in their case, there is reason forreason for confidence that Coble will downgrade significantly. In the NRA’s case–not so much.

One interesting aspect of H.R. 3626 is the “Constitutional Authority Statement.” For the last several years, House rules have required that every bill be accompanied with a statement outlining what provision of the Constitution empowers Congress to pass the law in question. Rep. Coble would like us to believe that this bill is justified by “Article I. Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution.” That, of course, is the long-abused “interstate commerce clause.”

Perhaps Rep. Coble would like to explain how an item one produces on a 3-D printer in one’s own home, for one’s personal use, has anything to do with “interstate commerce.”

Ironically, the greatest remaining hope for killing this legislative atrocity lies in the anti-gun Senate Democrats who are most enthusiastically in favor of it. From McClatchy D.C.:

Some Democrats reportedly think the bill doesn’t go far enough and may vote against it.

. . .

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement on Monday that the House bill was “better than nothing, but it isn’t good enough.” Schumer said it was necessary to close a loophole that allows guns to be made out of plastic as long as they have some metal in them, even if it’s an easily removable part.

Schumer is referring to what he and the doubly dishonestly named “Think Progress” (which advocates neither thought nor progress) call the “loophole” of the current ban’s requirement that a gun contain a certain minimum quantity of metal, but not requiring that the metal comprise a part of the gun that is absolutely necessary for the gun’s function:

Renewed twice since 1988, the federal law bans firearms that go unnoticed by a metal detector and requires them to be shaped like a gun. However, the law by itself does not fully address the threat of plastic guns made from 3D printers, because a loophole permits some plastic guns even if the small metal piece that triggers detectors is removable. One legal model lets owners carry firearms with a removable nail that would not be picked up by metal detectors and X-Ray machines.

In other words, Schumer and “Think Progress” are asking the American people to believe that someone with murderous intent would print an all-plastic gun in order to sneak it onto an aircraft or into a courtroom (what about ammo?) if it were legal, but will not if the government tells him doing so is verboten. Sure, Chuck.

Schumer and fiends (that’s not a typo) apparently are not without allies in the GOP, according to MSNquoting a Kentucky Republican congressman who shares Schumer’s sick desire to “tighten up” the existing ban:

Representative Hal Rogers of Kentucky, a leading Republican, expressed concerns of his own, and said, “I’ll be looking to tighten up the process.”

Unfortunately for Schumer, he appears unlikely to win the Most Hysterical Panicked Screeching Award, despite his impressive effort. That award appears to be unshakably in the grasp of the Brady Campaign‘s Brian Malte, judging by this quote in the Guardian:

“We can’t let a minute or hour or day go by without having a renewal [of the ban],” said Brian Malte, a director of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. The group’s strong concerns about the availability of plastic guns were “no reason to hold up renewal”, he said.

Malte is evidently of the opinion that our hypothetical aspiring terrorist would print a plastic gun if the the law allows–for a minute (keep in mind that printing guns to date has invariably required a considerable number of hours), but will faithfully obey the law if it never lapses.

As this column has argued repeatedly, the anti-gun zealots’ real objection to printed guns has nothing to do with the silly non-issue of their being “undetectable,” and everything with them being uncontrollable, because a fighting arm that one can make for oneself is clearly not subject to background checks or arbitrary limits on its effectiveness.

And the best news of all is that no law Congress passes can do anything about that. Anyone who has any doubts about that statement is encouraged to check out the Terminal Cornucopia website, featuring weapons designs that can be quickly built from materials one can easily and legally obtain after passing through airport screening measures, with tools that one could legally have brought along. The sidebar video shows the “BlunderBusinessClass” shotgun, but that’s only one of several impressive designs.





Obamacare Premiums Higher than the Mortgage

Leave a comment

This is from The Black Sphere.

There are horror stories like this one needing told.

But  the Obama Media will try to suppress them.



By now every American is familiar with the ongoing unnatural disaster that is Obamacare, and most are familiar with the sky-high premiums of ACA-compliant plans.

Economists and health care providers alike warned of the impending, back-breaking expense entailed with insuring everyone in America, even those here illegally. But no one could have foreseen the degree of economic and personal destruction this egregious bill would cause.

Heritage Action contributor, Katherine Rosario, writes of a real-life couple she calls “Jen and husband” and their real-life experience with the ruinous bill.

Jen and her husband, North Carolina residents, selected a health insurance plan that had a low monthly premium.  The Blue Advantage Saver offered by Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) of North Carolina worked for them and fit their needs.

They received a letter dated September 24, 2013 that said, “We value your continued membership and want to let you know about some changes.”

But Jen found that the letter was about more than “some changes” as she read through the infuriating letter.  The letter outlined the three key ways her health care plan would be affected “due to the ACA regulations.”  Her BCBS plan would no longer be offered in 2014 because it did not match up to Obamacare requirements; it its stead, they offered her a “new plan that both meets the guidelines of the ACA and offers all the features you’re used to from BCBS.”

The letter added, “to make it easy for you, we have transitioned you to a plan that most closely matches the benefits of your 2013 plan.”

There was just one problem with the suggested plan, the Blue Advantage Bronze.  It was way more expensive.  In fact, Jen told said that the new premium was more than her monthly mortgage payment for her home.

I’m well aware of the verbiage. I, too, received one such letter, although my letter dated September 2013 was not mailed until mid-November 2013. I, too, was told my current Regence Blue Cross Plan was not ACA-compliant. Translation: your modest plan is deemed a “junk plan” by all of us enlightened elitists who know better than you.

And like Jen and hubby, I discovered that the wonderful plan Regence would transfer me to if I did nothing, the “Bronze” plan, was a mere 250% more per month than my current premium. That might be fine if money were no object. But, as an independent contractor who writes and edits to support myself, money is a huge constraint. Or should I say LACK of money is a huge constraint.

On Friday I received a follow-up letter from Regence instructing me that, since HRH Obama spoke “never mind, I shall allow you to keep your policies for one more year,” the Oregon Insurance division has generously agreed to comply with the Emperor’s wishes and I MAY keep my policy until December 2014. Except, pages 2 and 3 state I will need to re-apply and choose a new plan or choose a plan through Cover Oregon.

In case you’ve not heard, as of mid-November, Cover Oregon was non-functional and had yet to enroll 1 single Oregonian. In fact, all Cover Oregon can boast about is an insipid, hippy-influenced song.

And I did personally tell the CSR at Regence that I would rather die than sign up for Obamacareaka the government dole.

You see, this is why socialism is a bad idea. Everyone becomes poorer so that everyone can be “taken care of.” Premiums higher than mortgage payments be darned.

Hegel would be proud; Obama is preening.

And Americans, true patriots across this great land, will not be quiet in the face of ravenous socialism devouring our nation. We will protect the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domesticeven those residing on Pennsylvania Avenue.



Strange and deceitful new anti-gun tactic

Leave a comment

This is from JPFO.

The anti gunners tactics are lower than whale shit at

bottom of Mariana’s Trench.

Yet they will go lower than that just wait.


By Sean D. Sorrentino, November 28th, 2013
Article Source



Apparently the gun haters have decided that since they can’t convince business owners to post anti-gun signs, maybe they should post the signs themselves.

After Oct 1st I started to look for posted signs at my favorite establishments. I frequently go to a local chicken wing place in Greensboro and last week I noticed a simple sicker that pictured a pistol with red circle and line through it. I took it as no firearms allowed.

I was grabbing a to go order so I had already called it in. I was sad as this was going to be my last order as I wasn’t going to support them anymore. I REALLY like their wings. The manager is the one who brought me my order and gave me the customary “come again soon.” To which I replied “not likely as long as you have that” pointing at the sticker.

She was shocked and asked the hostess if she knew who put that there. She asked me to wait and went to the back. She came back with the chef who is the owner and he said he had no idea how that got there. He removed it and wished me a good day.

The story has a happy ending, but the follow up is even better.

Yesterday, I went back and the manager said she looked at the surveillance video and said late one night a customer put the sticker there just before closing on their way out. They confronted them as they are also a frequent customer. She stated that she does that all over town where ever she goes. The manager asked them not to come back anymore.

There’s a lesson here. If you see a gun ban sign, make sure to question it. It might be some anti-gun jerk posting the sign.

If you are the victim of some gun hater posting a sign like this, please let me know. I can put you in touch with the Grass Roots North Carolina leadership and we can publicly humiliate the person posting the sign. It might not be worth the effort to sue them for Tortious Interference with Business Relationships

Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor acts to prevent the plaintiff from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships. This tort may occur when a first party’s conduct intentionally causes a second party not to enter into a business relationship with a third party that otherwise would probably have occurred. Such conduct is termed tortious interference with prospective business relations, expectations, or advantage or with prospective economic advantage.

but we could get them on the news acting like jerks.

I can see how random people might start posting the “This home is proudly gun free” signs on the lawns of people who do crap like that.

UPDATE: Given that lots of people are coming in via Instapundit (Thanks for the link, Glenn!) it’s possible that many of you don’t know North Carolina law. In NC, any No Guns sign has the force of law. There is not standard mandated sign, like Texas’ 30.06 sign. Passing a “No Guns” sign while carrying a gun on a CHP is a Class 1 Misdemeanor.


The Left Alleges “Unregulated Abuses” Among Homeschoolers

1 Comment

This is from Politi Chicks.

When was the last news story about a homeschooling

female student being raped by a male teacher?

When was the last news story about a homeschooling

male student seduced and raped by a female teacher?

As far as I know there has never been such headlines.


As the Common Core curriculum is rolled out around the country, parents are just beginning to get a taste of what is in store for them and their children in the coming years, and many parents aren’t happy about what they see.  Add this to the reality of our already failing school systems and many parents are being forced to look at other options for their children’s education.  One option that is
standing out for many parents is the option of homeschooling.

Homeschooling, once considered to only be the choice of religious families, has suddenly become the choice of many non-religious families who are fed up with the schools in our country. As this happens, and homeschooling grows at a rapidly increasing rate, progressives around the country are starting to look for ways to discredit this type of education.  Why would the liberal progressives care whether or not a family chooses to homeschool?  Because if families choose home education over state run education, the liberal progressives can’t indoctrinate our children with their liberal propaganda, and God forbid that our country might actually have a few free-thinking individuals left to mess up the future of their socialist utopia. 

The liberal progressives suddenly have to come up with a way to stop, or at least slow down, the growth of the homeschooling movement and find a way to control the families that do choose to homeschool.  The best way to slow down the growth of homeschooling and inflict as much damage as possible is to discredit the movement as a whole and what better way to do this than to use the liberal media.  In a recent article published on the Daily Beast, called “The Sinister Side of Homeschooling“, the author equates homeschooling with abusive homes and families, stating that:

Some families [who homeschool] are simply trying to hide abuse and keep kids wholly under their control.

In the article, the author relays several stories about homeschooling children who have been abused, sometimes even killed, by the families who were homeschooling them. One story the author tells is about Erica Lynn Parsons, a girl from North Carolina who was being homeschooled by her adoptive parents.  Her adoptive brother reported her missing in August of this year and it was then found out that Erica hadn’t been seen since 2011.  The girl’s birth mother is now calling for greater regulation and oversight of homeschooling and pushing for a bill called “Erica’s Law”.

There is no doubt that the stories the author relays are heartbreaking, but these stories, and stories like them, aren’t the real reason for this particular Daily Beast piece.  Before we get to the real reason why the article was written, let’s first look at the supposed reason–which was to expose the sinister, abusive side of homeschooling.  According to the author’s statistics, there are approximately 1,500,000 homeschoolers currently homeschooling in the United States, and in the past 13 years there have been approximately 70 reported cases of abuse coming from homeschooling families.  (*I have seen numbers as high as 2.1 million but we will use her numbers for continuities sake) 

When you divide 70 by 13, we come up with a total of 5.3 abuse cases per year or approximately .00000353% of the total number of homeschoolers.  Now let’s compare the homeschool abuse statistics to child abuse statistics as a whole:

·  In 2011, there were 676,569 children abused in the United States or approximately .0091% of the total population of children under 18.

·  493,219 of the children abused were either school age or preschool age.

·  Children in the general population were 2,578 times more likely to be the victims of abuse than children in the homeschooling population alone.

Some might argue that the reason the number of abuse cases are so low within the homeschooling movement is simply because the children are “hidden” or as the author of the article said, “It’s easy for the world to forget that they exist”.  While this might be true in some cases, as a homeschooling mom who just started her third year of homeschooling, I can tell you that for most homeschooling families nothing could be further from the truth.  My children, and most homeschooling children I know, are well integrated into society.  These children attend any number of activities including homeschool co-ops, sports activities (including public school sports activities), church functions, dance classes, art classes, music classes, doctor’s visits, etc. It would be more than a little difficult to “hide” abuse when most homeschooling children are seen by numerous “outside” people daily, don’t you think?

So let’s get back to the real reason why this article was written:  to discredit the homeschooling movement as a whole—because if liberals can’t force homeschooling children to attend their liberal progressive schools, they will do everything in their power to control the families that choose to homeschool, and the best way to do that is through stricter regulation and oversight.

Throughout this article the author repeatedly calls for “greater regulation” of homeschooling.  She wants to make sure that all states make it harder for families to homeschool and she wants government to have a greater say in what we are allowed to teach our children.  These progressives are trying to force every child to fit their liberal mold so that the future of our country will be shaped by the next generation of young socialists (or communists).

As conservatives we must fight back against the lies that are being perpetrated against the families that are trying to break out of the public school mold and protect their children from the liberal progressive agenda. The best way to fight back is to point out the fallacies that are continually being told by the liberal propaganda machine, or in other words, the mainstream media.

Read the rest of this article here:


Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: