Kids to Meet Marx in School – Care of Hollywood and The History Channel
Written by Patrick Courrielche

Children are uniquely malleable beings, readily convinced of magically colorful tales – Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are the first that come to mind. This innocence is beautiful, but it is a quality that can easily fall victim to radically foreign ideas if taught consistently and pervasively at an early age. One need only look at the birth of fascism or socialism to see a recipe for how radical ideas become ubiquitous among a nation’s youth.

Enter Howard Zinn – an author, professor and American historian – who, with the help of Hollywood and the History Channel, intends to change the way our pre-K through high school children learn American history. His current curriculum suggestions, like introducing three-year-olds to the lynching of African-Americans, or quizzing seven-year-olds on which Presidents owned slaves, should be a red flag to parents.

Zinn has spent a lifetime teaching college students about the evils of capitalism, the promise of Marxism, and his version of American history – a history that has, in his view, been kept from students. His controversial 1980-book The People’s History of the United States paints traditional American history as a façade – one that has grotesquely immortalized flawed leaders and is based on principles that victimize the common man. In 2004, Zinn wrote a companion book entitled Voices Of A People’s History Of The United States, which includes speeches and writings from many of the people featured in The People’s History.

These two books have now become the basis for a new documentary, entitled The People Speak, to be aired December 13th at 8pm on the History Channel. The trailer portrays the documentary as a collage of compelling one-person readings, told through the words of “ordinary” people who have struggled throughout American history against oppression. Produced by Zinn, Matt Damon, Josh Brolin, and Chris Moore, the documentary appears to be cloaked, ironically (given Zinn’s admitted socialist agenda), in many of the traditional ideas that were behind our founding. The verdict is still out on the doc, but it is not for the books that inspired the film as well as the educational initiative associated with it.

For the rest of the story please go here:

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pcourrielche/2009/12/07/next-week-on-the-history-channel-hollywood-stars-introduce-your-kids-to-marxism/

Face Forward Comments:

I saw some of the material that is going to be used for this, Documentary.  It is a very one sided presentation that continues the attack on the heart of the nation.  It promotes racial division, and supports the belief held by this administration that we are an arrogant people and should pay for it.

Unless you want your child feeling guilty about something they had nothing to do with, wish for them to be a Marxist, or really think that history needs to be rewritten, I suggest you skip out on this family entertainment.

Chamber Renounces Cap and Trade Statements as  a Hoax

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce on Monday said that a press release declaring the group had dropped its opposition to climate change legislation was a hoax. The fake press release, which declared the Chamber had done an “about-face on climate policy” following the defection of prominent members, was briefly picked up by Reuters and several other media organizations.

But the Chamber sent out a counter-release setting the record straight.

“Public relations hoaxes undermine the genuine effort to find solutions on the challenge of climate change,” spokesman Thomas Collamore said. “These irresponsible tactics are a foolish distraction from the serious effort by our nation to reduce greenhouse gases.”

He said the group would call for law enforcement to investigate.

But Politico.com reported that the liberal activist group The Yes Men took responsibility for the hoax — apparently part of a broader effort to undermine the Chamber in its opposition to cap-and-trade legislation and other Obama administration priorities.  Politico.com reported Monday that Democrats in Congress and the White House are doing an end run around the Chamber of Commerce to weaken their political influence by dealing directly with individual CEOs.

For the rest of the article please go here:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/19/chamber-statement-announcing-support-climate-hoax/

Here is a second headline

U.S. hunters, anglers lobby for climate bill

A nationwide survey the NWF commissioned in 2006 found that half of all licensed hunters and anglers counted themselves as “evangelical Christians,” a heavily Republican group.  A 2008 NWF poll of over 1,000 hunters and fishers found that over half classified themselves as “politically conservative.” The respondents were mostly white, male and middle-aged — classic Republican demographic.

Even so, 85 percent agreed with the statement: “We can improve the environment and strengthen the economy by investing in renewable energy technologies that create jobs while reducing global warming.” Lindsey Graham, a conservative Republican senator from South Carolina, broke ranks with his party and outlined a compromise to limit carbon emissions in a New York Times opinion piece he co-wrote with Democratic Senator John Kerry.

That won him praise from national hunting groups and local ones in South Carolina, which has a robust outdoor sports culture woven into its rural fabric

For the Rest of this article please go here:

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE59H0VY20091018?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=11621

Face Fwd Comments:

This is what we call propaganda.  The first one has been caught and refuted the second will soon be.

The statement that the Cap and Trade spin masters use, “we can improve the environment and strengthen the economy by investing in renewable energy technologies that create jobs while reducing global warming” is such a set up statement.  Which part of the confusing question are you answering?  Are you answering that you believe in the American spirit that we can create new technologies?  Are you agreeing that we can improve the environment?  Or are you endorsing a claim of global warming?

Notice how the first part of the question says, “We can improve the environment”.  Every outdoorsman believes that the environment can be improved and should be.  In Hypnotism that is called an agreement statement.  When working to put an individual in a trance, you lead them with two absolutes then adding a third part that may be plausible (but not necessarily true). “While setting  in the chair (1) with your hands in your lap (2) your eyes are getting heavy (3)”.  Carefully crafted questions can lead the person being asked the question to answer in the manner desired. 

Here is an excerpt on hypnotism you may find interesting found at www.inducetrance.com:

Agreement tactics in conversational hypnosis are very functional. You will learn to use these for two different reasons. The first reason to use agreement tactics is to put the critical factor in your subject’s mind to sleep.

The critical factor which tells people whether or not something is believable needs to be turned off in order to induce a good trance and to make suggestions that will hold true when the person is not under hypnosis.

This is the second reason you will use agreement tactics. Once the critical factor is turned off you will want your suggestions to seem realistic, agreement tactics do just that. They get the listener in the habit of agreeing with you and lend you the authority in their altered state of mind.

The hunting question is just one of many examples.  Listen to Obama’s speeches.  He (or whomever is crafting the questions) is a master at asking agreement statements then leading the listener to agree to statements that when asked by themselves would have never be agreed to on their own.

Between the hoaxes, propaganda, hypnotic tactics, and false surveys we are under attack like never before.  It make sense now when you hear that the White House is trying to take down Fox news, the opposition news.  Read and research to discover what is real.  Listen not only to what is being said, but to how it is being said, and you may discover the hidden “lies” in the information being released from the Obama Administration.

The White House escalated its offensive against Fox News on Sunday by urging other news organizations to stop “following Fox” and instead join the administration’s attempt to marginalize the channel. White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN that President Obama does not want “the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox.”

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went further by calling on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox is “not a news organization.”

“Other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way,” Axelrod counseled ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “We’re not going to treat them that way.”

By urging other news outlets to side with the administration, Obama aides officials dramatically upped the ante in the war of words that began earlier this month, when White House communications director Anita Dunn branded Fox “opinion journalism masquerading as news.”

On Sunday, Fox’s Chris Wallace retorted: “We wanted to ask Dunn about her criticism, but, as they’ve done every week since August, the White House refused to make any administration officials available to ‘FOX News Sunday’ to talk about this or anything else.”

The White House stopped providing guests to ‘Fox News Sunday’ after Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, in August. Dunn said fact-checking an administration official was “something I’ve never seen a Sunday show do.”

“She criticized ‘FOX News Sunday’ last week for fact-checking — fact-checking — an administration official,” Wallace said Sunday. “They didn’t say that our fact-checking was wrong. They just said that we had dared to fact-check.”

“Let’s fact-check Anita Dunn, because last Sunday she said that Fox ignores Republican scandals, and she specifically mentioned the scandal involving Nevada senator John Ensign,” Wallace added. “A number of Fox News shows have run stories about Senator Ensign. Anita Dunn’s facts were just plain wrong.”

For the rest of the story please go here:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/18/white-house-escalates-war-fox-news-1925819282/

Face Fwd Comments:

This should scare every American.  It’s not that I always agree with everything that is said on Fox but I agree with the constitution and the fact that they have the right to say it.

I understand that Fox has an agenda and it is very right of the presidents viewpoint.  I also know that they are very intersted in the fact that they have been able to build a huge following based on that viewpoint.  The battle between the White House and Fox is not going to make it any easier to figure out what is truth.  Based on the inability to deliver the truth, I have no doubt that the attack on Fox is in large part to keep the truth blured.

Media Control admitted by Anita Dunn

President Obama’s presidential campaign focused on “making” the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was “controlled,” White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference.

Anita Dunn is the interim White House Communications Director. Previously, she was a Democratic political consultant with a Washington-based consulting firm, Squier Knapp Dunn Communications, and was a top adviser to Barack Obama's presidential campaign

“Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,” said Dunn.

 ”One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters,” said Dunn, referring to Plouffe, who was Obama’s chief campaign manager.

“We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it,” Dunn said.

Continued Dunn: “Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying.”

For the rest of the article please go here:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113347

Face Fwd Comments:

Of course they have tried to control the media by feeding what they wanted them to know.  But I blame the media for being such “lap dogs” and not doing discovery.  And now you know why the Obama administration is so mad at Fox.  They are the only network that won’t play ball.