If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight? by Dean Garrison

January 15, 2013

The following was written and posted by Dean Garrison on January 03, 2013.  With his permission it is reposted, word-for-word, here.  Please visit his original posting of this article here: http://dcclothesline.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/if-they-come-for-your-guns-do-you-have-a-responsibility-to-fight/

I post this for many reasons and look forward to any comments regarding what Mr. Garrison has put forth.

 

If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

I feel a tremendous responsibility to write this article though I am a little apprehensive. Thinking about the possibility of rising up against our own government is a frightening thing for many of us. I am not Johnny Rambo and I will be the first to admit that I do not want to die. The reason I feel compelled to write this, however, is simply because I don’t think the average American is equipped with the facts. I feel that a lot of American citizens feel like they have no choice but to surrender their guns if the government comes for them. I blame traditional media sources for this mass brainwash and I carry the responsibility of all small independent bloggers to tell the truth. So my focus today is to lay out your constitutional rights as an American, and let you decide what to do with those rights.

About a month ago I let the “democracy” word slip in a discussion with a fellow blogger. I know better. Americans have been conditioned to use this term. It’s not an accurate term and it never has been a correct term to describe our form of government. The truth is that the United States of America is a constitutional republic. This is similar to a democracy because our representatives are selected by democratic elections, but ultimately our representatives are required to work within the framework of our constitution. In other words, even if 90% of Americans want something that goes against our founding principles, they have no right to call for a violation of constitutional rights.

If you are religious you might choose to think of it this way… Say that members of your congregation decide that mass fornication is a good thing. Do they have the right to change the teachings of your God? The truth is the truth. It doesn’t matter how many people try to stray from it. Did I just compare our founders to God? In a way I did, but please note that I am not trying to insult anyone. For the purpose of the American Government our constitution and founders who wrote it are much like God is to believers. It is the law. It is indisputable.

Our founders did not want a “democracy” for they feared a true democracy was just as dangerous as a monarchy. The founders were highly educated people who were experienced in defending themselves against tyranny. They understood that the constitution could protect the people by limiting the power of anyone to work outside of it much better than a pure system of popularity. A system of checks and balances was set up to help limit corruption of government and also the potential for an “immoral majority” developing within the American People. We have forgotten in this country that we are ultimately ruled by a constitution.

Why is a democracy potentially just as dangerous as a monarchy? Let’s look at something that Benjamin Franklin said because it answers that question more fully and succinctly than I can.

    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.   Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin

Even 230+ years ago our founders were perceptive enough to realize that democracy was a dangerous form of government. How so? Because the citizens of a country can become just as corrupt as any government. We have seen evidence of this throughout history. Ask Native Americans and African-Americans if this population can become corrupt.

I think in 2012 we are seeing evidence of what Franklin was trying to tell us. Just because a majority of people may support certain ideas it does not mean that those ideas are just. In simple terms, just because most Americans love our president and voted for him, it does not mean that he has the power to go against our constitutional rights.

Next I’d like to review the text of the second amendment. It is very clear. This is the law of this land. So when Senator Feinstein or President Obama talk about taking your guns, you need to think about something. Are they honoring their sworn oath to uphold the constitution?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This is a pretty clear statement. The fact is that it took 232 years for the Supreme Court to even rule on this amendment because it has never been successfully challenged. In 2008 a case of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a handgun ban in Washington D.C. was unconstitutional. One also has to take this into consideration. The Supreme Court supports your right to own guns. If you want to research this decision further you can start here.

For those who try to debate the spirit of the 2nd amendment, they are truly no different from people who will try to take Biblical quotes out of context to try to support their immoral decisions. The founders were very clear on the intent of the 2nd amendment. Let me share a few quick quotes here:

The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good. -George Washington

The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. -Samuel Adams

I could find hundreds of quotes like these. This country was built on the right to bear arms. It was built on the rights of an individual to bear arms, regardless of what his government or neighbor happened to think. This is crystal clear. Ironically the people who voice their opinions against this right have their free speech protected by your guns. Without guns in this country, all other amendments become null and void, simply because “We the People” will lose our power of enforcement.

We need to keep this in mind as our “representatives” try to push gun bans. I don’t care if 99% of people are in support of gun bans (which is far from the case), it is a violation of our constitutional rights, plain and simple.

A constitutional republic protects the rights of the individual even when their ideas are very much  in the minority. If I were the only person in America who believed in the 2nd amendment, I would still be within my rights to call upon it. You would all think I was insane and possibly celebrate if I was gunned down, but in the end I would be the only true American among us.

Our framers were very clear on this. If my government comes to take my guns, they are violating one of my constitutional rights that is covered by the 2nd amendment.

It is not my right, at that point, but my responsibility to respond in the name of liberty. What I am telling you is something that many are trying to soft sell, and many others have tried to avoid putting into print, but I am going to say it. The time for speaking in code is over.

If they come for our guns then it is our constitutional right to put them six feet under. You have the right to kill any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty. I am thinking about self-defense and not talking about inciting a revolution. Re-read Jefferson’s quote. He talks about a “last resort.” I am not trying to start a Revolt, I am talking about self-defense. If the day for Revolution comes, when no peaceful options exist, we may have to talk about that as well. None of us wants to think about that, but please understand that a majority can not take away your rights as an American citizen. Only you can choose to give up your rights.

Congress could pass gun ban legislation by a 90%+ margin and it just would not matter. I think some people are very unclear on this. This is the reason we have a Supreme Court, and though I do not doubt that the Supreme Court can also become corrupt, in 2008 they got it right. They supported the constitution. It does not matter what the majority supports because America is not a democracy. A constitutional republic protects the rights of every single citizen, no matter what their “elected servants” say. A majority in America only matters when the constitution is not in play.

I just wrote what every believer in the constitution wants to say, and what every constitutional blogger needs to write. The truth of the matter is that this type of speech is viewed as dangerous and radical or subversive, and it could gain me a world of trouble that I do not want. It is also the truth. To make myself clear I will tell you again. If they come for your guns it is your right to use those guns against them and to kill them. You are protected by our constitution.

Most of the articles I am reading on the subject are trying to give you clues without just coming out and saying it. I understand that because certain things in this country will get you on a list that you don’t want to be on. I may well be on that list. This blog is small and growing so I may not be there yet, but I have dreams. I also have my own list of subversives and anyone who attempts to deny my constitutional rights is on that list.

I am not the “subversive” here, it is the political representatives who are threatening to take away my inalienable rights. If they come to take my guns and I leave a few of them wounded or dead, and I somehow survive, I have zero doubt that I will spend a long time in prison and may face an execution. But I would much rather be a political prisoner than a slave.

If I go down fighting then I was not fighting to harm these human beings. I was simply defending my liberty and yours. It is self-defense and it is what our country was built on. We won our freedom in self-defense. We would not be ruled by a tyrannical government in the 1770′s and we will not be ruled in 2012 by a tyrannical government. There is no difference.

This is a case of right and wrong. As of now the 2nd amendment stands. It has never been repealed. If Feinstein or Barack have a problem with the constitution then they should be removed from office. They are not defending the constitution which they have sworn an oath to protect. It is treasonous to say the least. They would likely say the same about me, but I have the constitution, the founders, and the supreme court on my side. They only have their inflated egos.

I am not writing this to incite people. I am writing this in hopes that somehow I can make a tiny difference. I have no idea how many of my neighbors have the will to defend their constitutional rights. 2%? 20%? I am afraid that 20% is a high number, unfortunately. When push comes to shove many people may give up and submit to being ruled. I believe that our government is banking on this.

What I do know is that this country was founded by people who had balls the size of Texas and Patriotic Americans take shit off of no one, especially our own government. For evidence of that, you might research the Revolutionary War. My question is how many Patriots are left?

I would hope that our officials come to realize that, regardless of our numbers, we still exist because they are calling Patriotic Americans to action. They are making us decide if we want to die free or submit to their rule. I can not tell you where you should stand on that. I do know that it may make the difference between living a life of freedom or slavery.

You must start thinking about this because I believe that the day is coming soon and I personally believe it has already been planned. Not all conspiracy theories are hogwash. They may throw down the gauntlet soon and my suggestion is that you prepare yourself to react.

I mean no disrespect to our elected officials but they need to understand that “We the People” will not be disarmed. If they proceed then it is they that are provoking us and we will act accordingly. We are within our rights to do so.

For those who are in support of taking the guns, you need to ask yourself a very important question, and I am not just talking about the politicians, because if you support them, you have chosen your side.

Are you willing to die to take my guns?

Sen. Tom Coburn Endorses Howard Houchen for State Senate

October 1, 2012

Senator Tom Coburn Announces Endorsement of

Oklahoma State Senate District 5 Candidate Howard Houchen

 

For Immediate Release: Oct 1, 2012

CONTACT: info@howardhouchen.com; (888) 230-4856

 Hugo, OK — On the heels of endorsements and public support from the National Federation of Independent Business, Oklahoma Labor Commissioner Mark Costello, and Senate President Pro Tempore Brian Bingman, Oklahoma 2A second amendment rights organization, Dr. Tom Coburn, the junior U.S. Senator for Oklahoma steps forward to ask for support and the vote of Oklahomans for State Senate Candidate Howard Houchen.

 Dr. Coburn stated, “We need leaders in the Oklahoma Senate who have the courage and commitment to find and eliminate wasteful spending, limit the growth of state government, and hold politicians and bureaucrats accountable to taxpayers.”

 “I expect Howard Houchen to be that kind of legislator, and I hope the voters of Senate District 5 will elect him on November 6.”

 Houchen responded, “I am so honored to have the giant of fiscal responsibility and a man of courage to speak the truth and find my candidacy worthy of public support. Dr. Coburn has been an inspiration by showing that government can work better, differently, and smaller, and we would be all the better for it. I intend to take the principles espoused by Dr. Coburn to the floor of the State Senate, showing my neighbors how we can improve our economic future by implementing common sense policies and rolling back hurtful ones in order to create a better future for Little Dixie and our Great State of Oklahoma!”

 Houchen recognizes that Constitutional principles trump special interests, and the guarantees of Life, Liberty and Property must be protected. He announced his campaign earlier this year to unseat long term politician Jerry Ellis, who is term-limited by law and will be required to vacate his seat halfway through the next term. Houchen is the only candidate on the ballot for the race that can serve the constituents of Oklahoma Senate 5 the entire four year term of office.

#  #  #

Choctaw County Chairman Endorses Houchen for State Senate

June 6, 2012

 

Choctaw County Republican Party

P.O. Box 714 Boswell, Ok 74727 580-372-5276 choctawcountyokgop@wildblue.net

June 5, 2012

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CHOCTAW COUNTY CHAIRMAN ENDORSES HOUCHEN FOR STATE SENATE

As Choctaw County Republican Party Chairman I wholeheartedly endorse Howard Houchen for Oklahoma District 5 State Senator.

His commitment to conservative principles is unquestioned. He is tireless in his mission to understand and expose the dangers we face from an ever expanding government. As a private citizen Howard makes countless trips to Oklahoma City, spending his own time and resources, to inform legislators. He is always reliable and ready when called upon, whether for a quick answer, or to speak to a group of voters.

Howard is completely devoted to the Little Dixie area of Southeast Oklahoma and will represent it with energy and enthusiasm.

Without hesitation I totally support Howard Houchen for District 5 State Senator.

 

Carol Bone, Chairman

SE Oklahoma Should Not Be Left Behind

June 6, 2012

The outcome of Wisconsin’s Recall election is a clear expression by the citizens of Wisconsin — which echoes the sentiments of the majority of Americans across the land — Enough is Enough!

Beginning with many special elections prior to the 2010 cycle, which saw a near Republican sweep, through the historic 2010 election where Oklahoma Republicans realized clear majorities in both State houses and the entire slate of statewide elected positions, the direction of Oklahoma and of America has changed.

This shift is as unmistakable as it is necessary. It is imperative that SE Oklahoma not be left behind as America and Oklahoma direct their efforts toward pro-growth, pro-business policies while promoting individual liberty, economic freedom, and the protection of our natural rights.

Just as the voters of Wisconsin made a clear and decisive choice for true conservative and principled representation to compliment this shift and repudiate the failed policies of big government spending, intrusiveness, and progressive ideology, the voters of SE Oklahoma will have a clear choice on Nov. 6. We can choose to stay on the same old path and be left behind or we can choose the proper path of less intusive and more effective government.

Howard Houchen is the right choice for Oklahoma State Senate.  Let’s not be left behind.


www.howardhouchen.com

Costello Endorses Houchen for State Senate

May 30, 2012

 

OK LABOR COMMISSIONER MARK COSTELLO ENDORSES HOUCHEN FOR OKLAHOMA SENATE

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 29, 2012

CONTACT: info@howardhouchen.com; (888) 230-4856

 

Oklahoma City, OK –  In what promises to be a key pickup for Senate Republicans in the “Little Dixie” region of the state, long known for entrenched Democrats, Howard Houchen (R-Hugo) is gaining notice early in the race by picking up the high profile endorsement of Oklahoma Labor Commissioner Mark Costello.

 “When I ran for Labor Commissioner in 2010, I campaigned on my commitment to bring sound business practices and constitutional principles to State Government.  Howard Houchen shares these values and will be an invaluable asset to southeastern Oklahoma. He is unabashed in his love for his home region, and unashamed to stand strong for what is right for Oklahoma in general and right for SE Oklahoma in particular. I am proud to offer my endorsement of Howard Houchen as the right choice for State Senate, District 5,”  Labor Commissioner Mark Costello stated.

 Houchen will be facing Jerry Ellis (D-Valliant) on the November general election ballot. This race also has an unusual twist: Democrat incumbent Ellis, due to term limits, is only eligible to serve two years of the upcoming four year term. He will be forced to vacate the seat midway through the term if he is re-elected.

 Houchen commented,  “Commissioner Costello has a proven record of increasing government efficiency and accountability while controlling, and even decreasing, the costs to the hardworking taxpayers of Oklahoma. I share that vision and appreciate his leadership. I look forward to ensuring that the interests of the good folks in SE Oklahoma are heard loud and clear in Oklahoma City as we all work to achieve a more economically free and prosperous tomorrow.”

 Houchen is a graduate of University of Oklahoma with a degree in Political Science, and boasts an MA in National Security Studies from the American Military University. With extensive international and small business expertise, he is extensively published in multiple conservative publications. He proudly raises his two sons alongside his wife Jeannie in the S.E. Oklahoma community of Hugo. He and his family are avid hunters and sportsmen, treasuring the bountiful natural resources that are plentiful in our beautiful state and rural communities.

 #  #  #

Houchen for State Senate Receives OK2A Endorsement

May 9, 2012

 

The Oklahoma Second Amendment Association announced their endorsement of Howard Houchen for State Senate District 5 on Monday according to Tim Gillespie, Director of OK2A.

OK2A has been an active and positive force supporting the natural right to keep and bear arms of all law-abiding citizens by supporting pro-2nd Amendment legislation and opposing legislation which attempts to water-down or restirct those rights.

Houchen says:  “This is an honor to receive an endorsement from a group so dedicated to securing our 2nd Amendment rights.  I have been fortunate to have worked with OK2A and Tim in supporting and lobbying the Oklahoma legislature for good pro-gun legislation.  OK2A is a great example of the power of grassroots activism.” 

Howard has been a very public, unwavering proponent of 2nd Amendment rights and looks ahead to being able to bring that experience and support to the Oklahoma State Senate as a member of the majority: “SE Oklahoma deserves a seat at the table, during all aspects of the legislative process, and I’m prepared to represent the views and principles of Senate District 5.”

Houchen says Sen. Ellis Presents SB1327 as Something It Is NOT

May 8, 2012

Also available in The McCarville Report: http://mccarvillereport.com/archives/5490

SB1327 is a bad bill for SE Oklahoma and does little to nothing to ensure we have a voice.
 
05 May 2012 (Hugo, OK) — Oklahoma Senate District 5 challenger, Howard Houchen, states:  “Senator Ellis says he wants to strengthen local control but in advocating for passage of SB1327, he is doing exactly the opposite!”

Sen. Ellis has made a hearty endorsement of the House amendment to Senate Bill 1327 but the changes made to this bill can hardly be thought of as an amendment.   SB1327 was actually gutted and replaced l with the language of another measure, HB2914.  HB2914, the “Regional Water Planning Act” was a highly problematic bill intended to create nine regional councils to manage Oklahoma’s water planning which would add another layer of government onto the already profoundly complex issue of water rights and water management.  The amended SB1327 now mandates the establishment of nine Regional Councils to manage our water.

Sen. Ellis is particularly pleased with the alteration to SB1327 that would require the members of these new Regional Councils be elected rather than appointed and to Sen. Ellis’ credit, if we are going to add yet another authority to manage our water resources, then indeed, some representation is better than none.  But this does not mean, as Sen. Ellis says, “the interests and needs of local communities would have representation in the decision making process.”  Source: The McCarville Report May 2, 2012
Oklahomans should know that SB1327 stipulates that the role of the Regional Council is advisory only.  They have no regulatory authority or any other authority.    This means that the Regional Councils do not have the power necessary to represent the people in any real sense.
“I believe Ellis’ intentions are good”, says Houchen,  “but he is totally missing the fact that regional management of our water resources will inevitably make the decision making process less local, not more.”

The powerless Regional Councils do have a mandate to fulfill, however.  This bill, supported by Ellis, requires the Regional Councils adhere to the ever evolving Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan as a guide for their recommendations on the water management of the nine regions, as has been predetermined by the Oklahoma Water Resources Board.

This is a terrible trade off according to Howard Houchen who explains that his campaign is invested in carefully examining the water issues that face Oklahoma .  “Right now our cities and counties have quite a bit of power when it comes to the water policy decision making process.   I am worried that by establishing these Regional Councils our local governments will end up being mere administrators of the OWRB’s plans and that is not representative government.”

The entire reason for the creation of these Regional Councils comes directly from the 2012 Update to the Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan which recommended that the Legislature authorize the creation of regional planning groups.    No matter how the Council members are chosen, elected or otherwise, the constraints remain the same.  The Regional Councils will follow the dictates of the Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan, a plan that has been soundly criticized by many including Sen. Ellis himself.
Sen. Ellis is to be applauded for his concern for adequate representation of the citizen however, dividing the state into nine new political voting regions is not the answer. Do we really need to be so hasty to enact such a drastic alteration of our traditional government structure?

If Sen. Ellis has so little faith in the statewide plan why would he support a measure that will create a mandate that effectively binds water management throughout the state to the plan?  This does not provide the constituents of SD5 or any Oklahomans with the representation that they need and deserve.
It is clear that If we continue on the path that Sen.  Ellis is endorsing, Oklahomans can expect to have less control over their natural resources, not more.   

  
Howard Houchen
OK State Senate D5 – Candidate
P.O. Box 353
Hugo, Oklahoma 74743

Houchen Announces Candidacy for Oklahoma State Senate – District 5

April 13, 2012

Howard Houchen Announces Candidacy for Oklahoma State Senate

13 April, 2012 (Hugo, OK) – Howard Houchen, a former U.S. Congressional candidate from Hugo, Oklahoma, is very pleased to announce his campaign to represent the good folks of Oklahoma Senate District 5 in the upcoming election.

Houchen, a 4thgeneration “Okie”, is a successful small businessman and a graduate of the University of Oklahoma with a degree in Political Science and a Masters degree in National Security Studies from American Military University.  He is a devoted husband and father that has built a solid reputation as a grassroots leader but feels compelled to do more, stating that;

“I have called SE Oklahoma home my entire life.  There is no doubt we are the “Heart” of the heartland.  I have witnessed the increasing encroachment of government into our private lives and businesses, to the detriment of us in rural communities. We have seen jobs leave and populations decline throughout much of this district.  After so many calls for me to seek this position, there is no way I can just stand idly by and simply watch as Oklahoma City carves away at our ability to sustain and promote individual liberty and personal responsibility in the place we call home.”

Howard Houchen is well known in Oklahoma for his outspoken support of legislation which protects Life, Liberty, and Property while being very active in informing and resisting, and even defeating, legislation that threatens the freedoms of all Oklahomans and does not cater to party politics.  He stated:

“What is right is right and what is wrong, is wrong; regardless which party proposes the legislation. In 2012 and beyond, District 5 will be facing critical issues such as natural resources, property rights, job creation and retention, and just plain having a voice in how we govern ourselves.  How we handle these issues may make or break the livelihoods of many in this area, it is my duty to do everything in my power to make sure that these issues are handled with the citizens of District 5 best interests in mind.”

Houchen looks forward to an active campaign as an opportunity to better know his neighbors in SD5 and fully understand their concerns more deeply so that he can help produce and support the best solutions possible, as their State Senator, and actively resist those actions which are not. “It is time to return to government ‘of, by and for ‘We the People’ 

Oklahoma Senate District 5 is comprised of the entirety of McCurtain, Pushmataha, and Choctaw counties and the southern portion of LeFlore County and the eastern portion of Atoka County.  “The ultimate “stakeholder” in our system of government is we, the citizens.  Not special interest groups, not lobbyist, and certainly not politicians. I look forward to hearing from as many citizens in SD5 as possible so we can all work together to realize the prosperous future we and our children deserve.”

# # #

AxXiom for Liberty_3-30-12 — OKD2 Republican Candidate Debate

March 30, 2012

Tonight on AxXiom for Liberty, from 6:00 to 8:00pm CST, Kaye and I welcome four of the six Republican Candidates for U.S. Congress in Oklahoma’s 2nd. Congressional District.  All six were invited but, only four chose to participate.  We welcome Dustin Rowe (www.roweforcongress.us), George Faught (www.georgefaught.com), Dwayne Thompson (www.dwaynethompson.org), Wayne Pettigrew (www.pettigrewuscongress.com), Dakota Wood (www.dakotawoodforcongress.com), and Markwayne Mullin (www.mullinforcongress.com).   Wayne Pettigrew and Markwayne Mullin will not be participating tonight…Kaye and I will explain, during opening, the reasons given to us for this and we will present and discuss the same type questions relative to Wayne and Markwayne as if they were appearing.  Kaye and I will ask the questions the grassroots want answered and have relayed to us over the past several months.  These are questions you will not be heard asked in candidate debates or forums…We ask the tough questions!

Tune in to AxXiom for Liberty on 102.3FM if you are in the OKC area.  If not, log-on to www.logosradionetwork.com to Listen Live.  You can also dial 512-485-9010 and listen via your phone.

NCLB Waivers and The Truth in Oklahoma

March 30, 2012

I am very proud of my hometown newspaper, and have been my entire life.  In the 28 March 2012 Edition of The Hugo Daily News, there was published two competing opinions relative to the upcoming decision by the Oklahoma State Board of Education to implement new “rules” regarding a “New School Grading System”.  Not a change in how our children are graded, rather a change in how each Independent (yes, that’s a joke but that’s what we are told) School District school is graded by the state.  The following is what I have submitted to my local paper in response to reading both opinion pieces.

29 March, 2012

             In Wednesday’s Edition of The Hugo Daily News there were two competing opinions published relative to a new “School Grading System” that is being considered by the Oklahoma State Board of Education.  The opinion of Hugo ISD Superintendent Karen Lyles runs counter to the opinion of our State Superintendent of Education, Janet Barresi.  Super. Barresi begins by stating that “robust public discussion is one of the best tenets of a free society” and I could not agree with more.  Super. Lyles states that “in a state that has been working to limit the role of government, a state grading sy7stem as complex as the proposed is not limited government but is an expansion of bureaucratic regulation” and I fully concur with her assessment of the proposal.

There are two key points that I picked up on when reading both opinions: 1). I am willing to bet that Super. Lyles is NOT alone in her assessment that this new grading system represents an expansion of government regulation and regulatory control over local school districts, 2). Super. Barresi’s statement that “the granting of our waiver from No Child Left Behind is contingent upon the  approval of  rules”.

The Point #2 is the really important one here.  We should not, for one minute, think that the waiver from No Child Left Behind (an arguably atrocious policy that has only served to install more central control over public education) is a good thing.  If No Child Left Behind were repealed…that would be a good thing as long as it was replaced with more state and local control.  What Super. Barresi does not tell us is that the No Child Left Behind waiver was granted by the U.S. Department of Education so that Oklahoma could pursue a path of even MORE central control by allowing Oklahoma to apply for more Federal dollars (our money, anyway…with LOADS of strings attached) in Race To The Top grants (the current administrations debacle that is only slightly worse than No Child Left Behind).  This waiver (and this new grading system rule adoption) also paves the way for Common Core State Standards (CCSS).  CCSS is near the pinnacle of absolute and total Federal control of public education in Lolo Montana, San Francisco California, and Hugo Oklahoma.  Super. Barresi will tell you that this is a state-led initiative…and she is partially correct.  The problem is that it is state-led, at the behest of the Federal government, and is subject to all the rules, regulations, and mandates that Federal government can dish out.  Always remember:  State-Led = Fed-Controlled!  Every Federal dollar (our money that has become touched by overzealous bureaucrats looking to justify their position) has a string attached.  Federal education dollars have a tendency to have LOTS of strings (mandates) attached.

I stand firmly behind our Hugo ISD Superintendent, Karen Lyles, on this issue and many others relative to our children’s learning and the proper course of action our schools should take.  Perhaps Ms. Barresi could solicit, and actually listen to and adhere to, the opinions and advice of those closest to and responsible for our children learning in a public education environment.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,318 other followers