Jon Christian Ryter's Conservative World

Eagle

Articles
Testimony
Bible Questions

Internet Articles (2016)
Internet Articles (2015)
Internet Articles (2014)
Internet Articles (2013)
Internet Articles (2012)
Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)
Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

20 years

A fake, look-alike ABC News web page circulated a bogus story that Barack Obama issued an Executive Order, #13738 banning the Pledge of Allegiance in America's schools—with a $10,000 fine and a year in prison for offenders.
It took less than three minutes to find out that Executive Order 13738 was bogus, since Executive Order #13738, signed by Barack Obama on Aug. 23, 2016 deals with workplace safety. It amended Executive Order 13673 which, of course, amends another EO and still another and another—but all of them deal with work place safety. None of them abrogated the need for America's next generation to pledge loyalty to the United States. Making the fake news report sound even more Obama-ish, the hoax website, ABC News.com.co writer declared that "...During the press conference [Mr. Obama] explained his decision was based on a personal belief that the language used in the Pledge is 'divisive' and 'contrary' to America's deepest held values...Under the new Order, it is now illegal for any federally-funded agency to display the Pledge or for any federal employees to recite, or encourage others to recite, the Pledge, while on duty. This law also applies to federal contractors and other institutions that receive federal funding such as public schools. Individuals who violate this order can face fines of up to $10,000 and up to one year in federal prison."

The writer continued—theoretically quoting Obama—but with the words a majority of the Americans right of center are convinced Obama thinks and feels: "The Pledge excludes so many Americans who are vital to making this country what it is. Asking someone to pledge their allegiance to our country excludes Jehovah's Witnesses, Amish, Muslims and many others whose religious beliefs prohibit strong displays of nationalism. By calling this 'one nation under God,' we exclude the millions of hard working atheists and agnostics who call America home. By saying 'liberty and justice for all,' we ignore the grievances of millions of Hispanics, African Americans who feel they have neither liberty or justice."

We know Obama didn't say those words on Oct. 20, 2016 when the article purports the statement was uttered. But, you know, the statement reeks of Obama. Do you remember the campaign speech US Senate candidate Barack Obama made on June 28, 2006 when he uttered the following statement: "Where we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation—at least, not just. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation and a Buddhist nation and a Hindu nation, and a nation of non-believers." Obama was sowing divisiveness and, to be frank, he never stopped. When Obama wrote his first book (something every wannabe president does to hype himself (or herself) for the job: In his book, Dreams From My Father, Obama said (on page 261): "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction..." Well, they did—and he did. And once in his life, Obama spoke the truth. In a more recent speech, Obama was quoted, saying: "The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam." Obama has now completely dropped his Christian facade. He openly joined an alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood and now openly acknowledges his Muslim roots, saying that "...the call to prayer is one of the prettiest sounds at sunset."

As an aside, when the co-presidency of Hillary and Bill Clinton were preparing for their re-election bid in 1996 (financed largely by Chinese People's Liberation Army money), Hillary—who envisioned herself as an actually elected co-equal president whose position was superior to that of Vice President Al Gore whom she evicted from the West Wing on Jan. 20, 1993, wrote her "re-election" book. You might remember it. Hillary was presenting her bonafides. It may as well have been a sequel of her communist mentor, Saul Alinsky's Rules For Radicals because it branded her for all time. It was called "It Takes A Village." (You don't get much more communist than suggesting that society has the right to instill their values in your chidren.)

By the way—the ABC News.com.co email appears to have originated in Columbia, or at least, the writer was using an email address whose country of origin was Columbia. The purported author, James Rustling is not a real person. What's more "jimmy rustling" is not even a name at all—it's a euphumism which denotes the strong emotions which are needed to emphasize the point of the speaker. And the hoax-writer who penned the ABC News.com.co article was practicing jimmy rustling at its best. While the article was woven from wholecloth, everything about it dovetails with what conservatives believe about Obama.

Needless to say, instantly the story went viral. And, why not? Because to a majority of the right-of-center American people who do not trust the guy in the big white house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, that's how he's perceived—the words "jimmy rustling" created were the words they instinctively believed Obama would have said if he could have issued such a proclamation, likely bringing about his impeachment.

In 1890 US patriotism and the pride of nationalism were at an all-time low as America painfully recovered from the hard-to-erase memories of the American Civil War. North and South were slowly healing, but the scars were still an ugly reminder of a time when there was no national unity, and neighbors killed neighbors.

In 1888, a magazine publisher, Daniel Ford, hired Francis Bellamy, a patriotic Christian Socialist minister and writer who authored the Pledge of Allegiance, to work for his nephew, James Upham who headed up the "premium" department in Bellamy's magazine, Youth Companion. Upham believed he could restore unity in America by using American flags as a premium to sell magazine subscriptions to every school in the nation. It was Upham's intention to place an American flag over every schoolhouse in the United States—both the North and the South—and it was Bellamy's desire to place his Pledge of Allegiance in the hearts of those attending those schools.

Four years later, by 1892 Upham had placed US flags over 26,000 schools across the country. Sales were lagging. Upham needed a new idea to stimulate sales since there were still multiple hundreds of unflagged schools.

Upham decided the best way to publicize Youth Companion was to create a National Columbian Public School Celebration to coincide with the World's Columbian Exposition. A flag salute was going to be part of the official Columbus Day celebration to be held in schools across the country. Bellamy's Pledge of Allegiance was published for the first time on Sept. 8, 1892 in the pages of Youth Companion, and was immediately put to use. Bellamy, a former educator, attended a national conference of school superintendents and, among them, the head of the National Teachers' Association which, in 1906, would become a US congressional corporation known as the National Education Association. It was funded by the US government which, contrary to the separation of powers, was determined to take administrative control of education away from the States. For money, the school administrators and the NEA were not opposed.

Initially, in America's schools, the Pledge of Allegiance was recited each morning when the flag was raised. Ultimately, the pledge was spoken in the classrooms, with student's saluting the flag as they recited the pledge. During World War II the salute was replaced with the right hand over the heart.

Oh—before I forget...the Pledge of Allegiance receives its protection from 4 USC 4 (Pub. L. 105–225, § 2(a), Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1494; amended Pub. L. 107–293, § 2(a), Nov. 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 2060; Pub. L. 113-66. div. A, title V, § 586, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 777.) Well, for whatever it's worth, once again, you have my two cents worth on this subject. Until next time...