12 votes

I will be speaking next month to 150 high school seniors - need some info/advice - PLEASE

I have been asked by a Civics teacher at a local public school to come in to speak early next month to several classes of his students about getting educated and involved in our political system. The teacher is quite liberal, but he is very fair. He knows me well, knows my views, and has asked me in to speak 5 times previously over the last 5 years.

The brunt of my speech, which will be about 20 - 25 minutes, will be on educating YOURSELF - in other words, seeking out information that one doesn't normally hear on the TV news, in high school textbooks, or in normal everyday conversations. I'd love to get some ideas from the Daily Paul folk here on some startling news items that are 100% verifiably true, but not generally known to the public.

Here are some stipulations to consider ...

1. I am a Republican Central Committee member, and my views are also known to my Chairman. This Chairman, as you probably would guess, is not a big fan of RP, and is very suspicious and leery of what I will say to the students. He has a son in one of the classes, so it is not like I can get away with saying something that will not get back to him.

2. The teacher is fine with me presenting my views, but will draw the line if I start promoting one Party's line over the other. I'm fine with that. I my past speeches, I have used the Constitution as my guide, and he is fine with me doing so.

3. I want to come up with about 4 or 5 news items or events or quotes that are really shocking to the students, but it MUST BE VERIFIABLY TRUE (the teacher does not want me coming in tossing around conspiracy theories to the kids) and I also want items that point out the hypocracy of BOTH PARTIES so as not to appear partisan. Of course, it should go without saying that all of the items must support the liberty viewpoint.

I've come up with several ideas, but I'd like to hear from the Daily Paul contingent. Any ideas will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Drone strike the same day as Boston Bombing

There was a post on here about the 20 people killed and 100 more injured by collateral damage in Pakistan the same day as the Boston marathon. Where was the new on that one. That might be something to bring up to these students.

Outstanding stuff!

Thank you all. I will definitely use several of these ideas. By the way, Joeneesima, I won't need to tell students to turn off phones. As I mentioned in my original post, I have spoken before his classes 5 times previously, and made several speeches at other schools - I am quite experienced at this. I don't mean to toot my own horn here, but my speeches are very dynamic. I command their attention. I am hoping to get the speech videotaped, but I'm running into some opposition. We'll see.

Anyway, thank you all once again.

I take my marching orders from the Constitution!

Maybe it's in the delivery, rather than the content

I'm envisioning handing out a script to each kid, grouped in different areas of the room. Say these 10 kids get 'businessmen' scripts where each has a different 'small infringement' act on it and a number for the order to speak it. Another 6 get 'politician' scripts with the same. One gets president and 2 get banker scripts.

Have each kid in a group read their line and defend it on moral grounds. Rig them so each seems benign.

Then have them speak their lines in order playing out some major event that's verifiably true and caused some major evil we fight today.

Then, mention a few other events like those in the comments below.

Then top it off with some agenda of the bankers to control money scarcity into the system so they can corrupt each of the other groups. Explain how we each play a role and lots of small liberty infractions lead to massive problems.

Just a thought. I bet it would stick though.

Quotes

Declaration of Independence quote:

______________________________________________________
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
_______________________________________________________

Source (official):
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transc...

------------------------------------------------

On the subject of Shays's Rebellion a quote from Baron Von Stuben speaking about the "very small number of respected gentlemen" soliciting congress under The Articles of Confederation to "help" suppress the continuation of The Revolution in Massachusetts.

_______________________________________
,,,would Congress dare to support such an abominable oligarchy?
_______________________________________

Source:
http://www.amazon.com/Shayss-Rebellion-American-Revolutions-...

Shays's Rebellion: The American Revolution's Final Battle

Footnote 25 Chapter I
5. Selectmen of Pelman to Selectmen of Amherst, July 18, 1786, Jones Library, Special Collenctions, Amherst, Mass.

-----------------------------------------------

On the subject of secret proceedings organized to Consolidate the Republic into a Nation State (complete with National Debt and ONE LEGAL MONEY).

Martin Luther quote

___________________________________________
But, Sir, it was to no purpose that the futility of their objections were shown, when driven from the pretense, that the equality of suffrage had been originally agreed to on principles of expediency and necessity; the representatives of the large States persisting in a declaration, that they would never agree to admit the smaller States to an equality of suffrage. In answer to this, they were informed, and informed in terms that most strong, and energetic that could possibly be used, that we never would agree to a system giving them the undue influence and superiority they proposed. That we would risk every possible consequence. That from anarchy and confusion, order might arise. That slavery was the worst that could ensue, and we considered the system proposed to be the most complete, most abject system of slavery that the wit of man ever devised, under pretense of forming a government for free States. That we never would submit tamely and servilely, to a present certain evil, in dread of a future, which might be imaginary; that we were sensible the eyes of our country and the world were upon us. That we would not labor under the imputation of being unwilling to form a strong and energetic federal government; but we would publish the system which we approved, and also that which we opposed, and leave it to our country, and the world at large, to judge between us, who best understood the rights of free men and free States,ans who best advocated them; and to the same tribunal we could submit, who ought to be answerable for all the consequences, which might arise to the Union from the convention breaking up, without proposing any system to their constituents. During this debate we were threatened, that if we did not agree to the system propose, we never should have an opportunity of meeting in convention to deliberate on another, and this was frequently urged. In answer, we called upon them to show what was to prevent it, and from what quarter was our danger to proceed; was it from a foreign enemy? Our distance from Europe, and the political situation of that country, left us but little to fear. Was there any ambitious State or States, who, in violation of every sacred obligation, was preparing to enslave the other States, and raise itself to consequence on the ruin of the others? Or was there any such ambitious individual? We did not apprehend it to be the case; but suppose it to be true, it rendered it the more necessary, that we should sacredly guard against a system, which might enable all those ambitious views to be carried into effect, even under the sanction of the constitution and government. In fine, Sir, all those threats were treated with contempt, and they were told, that we apprehended but one reason to prevent the States meeting again in convention; that, when they discovered the part this convention had acted, and how much its members were abusing the trust reposed in them, the States would never trust another convention.
_______________________________________________

Source:
http://archive.org/stream/secretproceedin00convgoog#page/n14...

Secret Proceedings of the Federal Convention

--------------------------------------

On the battle to stop the Criminals that called themselves Federalists by that False Flag.

George Mason quote

___________________________________________________
Mr. GEORGE MASON. Mr. Chairman, whether the Constitution be good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers that it is a national government, and no longer a Confederation. I mean that clause which gives the first hint of the general government laying direct taxes. The assumption of this power of laying direct taxes does, of itself, entirely change the confederation of the states into one consolidated government. This power, being at discretion, unconfined, and without any kind of control, must carry every thing before it. The very idea of converting what was formerly a confederation to a consolidated government, is totally subversive of every principle which has hitherto governed us. This power is calculated to annihilate totally the state governments. Will the people of this great community submit to be individually taxed by two different and distinct powers? Will they suffer themselves to be doubly harassed? These two concurrent powers cannot exist long together; the one will destroy the other: the general government being paramount to, and in every respect more powerful than the state governments, the latter must give way to the former. Is it to be supposed that one national government will suit so extensive a country, embracing so many climates, and containing inhabitants so very different in manners, habits, and customs? It is ascertained, by history, that there never was a government over a very extensive country without destroying the liberties of the people: history also, supported by the opinions of the best writers, shows us that monarchy may suit a large territory, and despotic governments ever so extensive a country, but that popular governments can only exist in small territories. Is there a single example, on the face of the earth, to support a contrary opinion? Where is there one exception to this general rule? Was there ever an instance of a general national government extending over so extensive a country, abounding in such a variety of climates, &c., where the people retained their liberty? I solemnly declare that no man is a greater friend to a firm union of the American states than I am; but, sir, if this great end can be obtained without hazarding the rights of the people, why should we recur to such dangerous principles? Requisitions have been often refused, sometimes from an impossibility of complying with them; often from that great variety of circumstances which retards the collection of moneys; and perhaps sometimes from a wilful design of procrastinating. But why shall we give up to the national government this power, so dangerous in its nature, and for which its members will not have sufficient information? Is it not well known that what would be a proper tax in one state would be grievous in another? The gentleman who hath favored us with a eulogium in favor of this system, must, after all the encomiums he has been pleased to bestow upon it, acknowledge that our federal representatives must be unacquainted with the situation of their constituents. Sixty-five members cannot possibly know the situation and circumstances of all the inhabitants of this immense continent. When a certain sum comes to be taxed, and the mode of levying to be fixed, they will lay the tax on that article which will be most productive and easiest in the collection, without consulting the real circumstances or convenience of a country, with which, in fact, they cannot be sufficiently acquainted.
__________________________________________________

Source:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/ratification/elliot/vol3/...

The Debates in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Virginia on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution
In Convention, Richmond, Wednesday, June 4, 1788

--------------------------------------------------

On The Constitution Usurpation directly in opposition to The Declaration of Independence

The Constitution quote
______________________________________________________
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
______________________________________________________

Source (official):
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_trans...

----------------------------------------------------

On THE PRIZE eventually purchased on the backs of The American People.

The Constitution quote

___________________________________________________________
Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.
___________________________________________________________

Source (Official):
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amend...

Source (official):
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

---------------------------------------------

On Generalismo Washington by Murray Rothbard.

Morray Rothbard quote

____________________________________________
Washington Transforms the Army

In June of 1775, George Washington was appointed Major General and elected by Congress to be commander in chief of the American revolutionary forces. Although he took up his tasks energetically, Washington accomplished nothing militarily for the remainder of the year and more, nor did he try. His only campaign in 1775 was internal rather than external; it was directed against the American army as he found it, and was designed to extirpate the spirit of liberty pervading this unusually individualistic and democratic army of militiamen. In short, Washington set out to transform a people's army, uniquely suited for a libertarian revolution, into another orthodox and despotically ruled statist force after the familiar European model.

His primary aim was to crush the individualistic and democratic spirit of the American forces. For one thing, the officers of the militia were elected by their own men, and the discipline of repeated elections kept the officers from forming an aristocratic ruling caste typical of European armies of the period. The officers often drew little more pay than their men, and there were no hierarchical distinctions of rank imposed between officers and men. As a consequence, officers could not enforce their wills coercively on the soldiery. This New England equality horrified Washington's conservative and highly aristocratic soul.
_____________________________________________________

Source:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard171.html

Generalissimo Washington: How He Crushed the Spirit of Liberty

------------------------------------

On the act of Crushing The Spirit of Liberty by George Washington.

George Washington quote:

___________________________________________________
And whereas, it is in my judgment necessary under the circumstances of the case to take measures for calling forth the militia in order to suppress the combinations aforesaid, and to cause the laws to be duly executed; and I have accordingly determined so to do, feeling the deepest regret for the occasion, but withal the most solemn conviction that the essential interests of the Union demand it, that the very existence of government and the fundamental principles of social order are materially involved in the issue, and that the patriotism and firmness of all good citizens are seriously called upon, as occasions may require, to aid in the effectual suppression of so fatal a spirit;
_________________________________________________

Source:
http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/whiskey/...

Full Text of the
Whiskey Rebellion Proclamation
BY AUTHORITY
By the president of the United States of America
A Proclamation

-----------------------------------------

On Hamilton's plan to execute the Fraud of National Debt.

Hamilton quoted:

_____________________________________________________
But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "in countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.

To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter.
_______________________________________________

And an explanation of the Free Market Design of a Democratic Federated Republic.

Quote

________________________________________________
Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right.

Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government,the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely.
_____________________________________________________

Source:
http://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-American-Revolution-Kentuck...

Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy

How complete is the CRUSHING of The Spirit of Liberty when the victims insist upon sound bites to satisfy their perceived need for entertainment?

Joe

Startling News Items

76 men, women, and children were tortured and killed by agents of the United States government on April 19, 1993. None of these people had hurt anyone until government agents attacked their community in Waco, Texas. No evidence justifying the initial attack by government agents was ever found.

Over 100 defenseless men, women, and children were killed by agents of the United States government on April 15, 2013. None of these people had hurt anyone until government agents attacked their communities in Iraq and Afghanistan. No evidence justifying these attacks has been found.

Cyril's picture

Item 3 ... shocking news?

Item 3 ... shocking news?

Well, if they can handle this:

How about breaking to them that the money they (we) have on their (our) checking accounts AND savings is completely fake and can possibly be worth nothing or close to zero... overnight?

Facts explained, in just under 10 minutes, here:

http://youtu.be/NZO9Io3PSmk

I reckon, though: that's a bit tough to swallow, first time.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Work the non agression

Work the non agression principle in. And how answers are found in freedom not less freedom!

To make your presentation

To make your presentation relevant to them, you may want to get them involved right away. Treat it like a stage act. First find out from the teacher who the most popular students are and make one or two of them part of the point of your "act". For example, you could pretend both are running for president and ask them their views on student loans, privacy and jobs, then ask them to see how their views fit into our Constitutionally protected rights. Could be a real eye-opener.

I would educate them on how

I would educate them on how important it is to understand your rights. And if you don't know your rights you don't have any rights. And why it's important to fight for your rights. Constitution and Bill of Rights dead letters, etc. Good luck. We need to get them early!

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

Maybe ask them what they

Maybe ask them what they THINK are their rights... versus what rights are real.

Always start with taking "polls" as it were: ask questions to

which they are to respond by raising their hands. (Good for involvement and keeping them engaged--plus blood flow after lunch, etc. if that's the case.)

One idea is to push a rather heavy agenda, so of course just ignore these suggestions if they seem like "too much" or over-the-top:

Questions along the lines of (and phrased as such):

1. How many of you believe there is really a difference between what Democrats and Republicans in general do in federal government? [Say with a little attitude maybe? Or deadpan?]

Foreign policy? Civil liberties? Monetary policy? Etc.?

If they seem cynical in a way that indicates they are largely aware of the scam government or at least know not to blindly trust authority, then good. And groups of young people like it when you credit them with some awareness and intelligence! (Everybody likes to feel "in the know"!) You can move along to other issues after establishing that as things are now, we have no real power to determine certain outcomes as long as the system is allowed to continue in dysfunction.

The way in to fixing things is at the local, grassroots level: so get involved!

Other possible thoughtstuffs:

Make the Constitution relevant to their lives today, perhaps.

Who gets rich from war.

Eeww! A BIG ONE: How few organizations actually OWN (PWN) all media outlets! Where their money enters politics.

Point out how both sides are "bought" by lobbying interests and big corporate donors. Offer proof and numbers. Hypocrisy abounds, so no trouble here! Obama literally = Bush in verifiable policy, so nothing has changed!

Make them question, but empower in so doing. This is tricky. It is also a little manipulative, but then nearly ALL education they receive is. We have to sell Liberty. This is edutainment / a sales pitch meant to make them aware of how things are... and how they *should be*.

Maybe to wrap up (?): You may or may not want to appeal to the fact that they literally are the generation which may save or allow to be destroyed our country as it should be, as this is HEAVY and could be off-putting. Dunno.

Just suggestions.

Let 'er rip, and have fun!

What would the Founders do?

I'd Order Some Pocket Constitutions From This Site:

Top right hand corner:

http://www.nccs.net/

I ordered some in 2008 and still have a few, the price is right, and free shipping.

Met a high school senior at an extended family event, a few months ago and apparently they are not being taught anything about how the USA began, {Civics 101} she seemed very attentive which made me feel good, as I went through my spiel about Constitutional money.

Good luck.

beesting

I'd begin by asking questions

I'd focus on what a central is, how it works, roberts rule of order, how people get elected or appointed.. how the central committee can work with city councils, county, board of supervisor, other counties in the district and state and even naltionally.. talk about resolutions, by-laws, inniatives, conventions..

When you begin to talk about the gop explain what motivated you and your personal story..

I'd spend about 5 minutes on each and the rest of the time questions an answers.. ask questions.. "give homework".

Dress nice, relax and HAVE FUN!! And if you can, have something to pass out.. could be a copy of your central committee home page, if you have Ron Paul constitutions.. offer them.

The very first thing you should say

is turn off your cell phones, iPads and computers. Otherwise you will be ignored because Facebook and texting is much more interesting.

Talking from experience...sad that it's a true, but it is...even at the college level.

Suggestion for topic:
Blowback: The Cost and Consequences of American Foreign Policy
http://www.ecclectica.ca/issues/2003/1/baker.asp

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

I Disagree Completely

As a student, I find it very disruptive for any educator to require such policy. Some people just do not care to pay attention, they have higher priorities than the the content of a class; so be it. Other people such as myself, are always on electronic devices digging deeper into the content of an educator's presentation. Sometimes it is to get more backround information on the topic. Other times, it is to explain wholes or errors in an educators arguments. What if another student asks the educator a question they do not know the answer to? A person like me can go on the internet and research it on the spot and potentially provide feedback momentarily. Any good educator knows not to fight technology, and I will advise the same.


That is horribly rude ...

... if you are listening to a speech or a lecture, you should be listening to the person speaking. If you want to research the content, do that on your own time and come back later to discuss it.

Besides that, if you are not paying attention, then how in the hell can you get good grades when feeding back what the professor wants to hear is the key to getting the grades?

If I were giving a speech, and I saw people on their phones, I would ask them to put them away. If they refused, I would kick them the f**k out.

Quotes

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
-- Joseph Goebbels

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money."
-- Barack Obama

"Bind them down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper."
-- George Bush

Ask them if they know how many American soldiers have died

since the last time Congress declared war?

Regarding

"the new truth" about historic events, please consider history is being rewritten to suit agendas. Please research. I would sooner trust accounts written immediately after an historic event than someone's research today, other than an archeological discovery.

Also, regarding your comment on RP, just tell them to look back at, who, in government, has been saying the same thing for 30 years and the prophetic wisdom of what he said, as well as what others have predicted.

Knowledge takes research. With enough of it the truth emerges. Save your old history books

Here are a few for you

The Businessmen's Plot - attempted overthrow of the US government, Bushes involved. Opening with that one will tickle your liberal teacher friend, I suspect. Wiki tries to spin it as "crazy theory" but even they admit the committee that investigated it found the accusation credible, then did not prosecute anyone.
I think it is a great topic for "educate yourself" - leave them to research and decide what they think. If you can, leave a copy of "War is a Racket" with them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot

The USS Liberty incident - the evidence against our own government (the PRESIDENT ordered rescue ships AWAY from the beleaguered ship, survivors were ordered to be silent about the attack) is quite damning.

The Gulf of Tonkin incident, the "weapons of mass destruction" that never were, the truth about Pearl Harbor.... then ask them to be discerning EVERY TIME there is a push for war, if you can get away with it.
That would be my tactic - good luck with whatever you decide to present!

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

A friend has a speaking course called "Brave Enough to Fail"

A friend has a speaking course called "Brave Enough to Fail". He goes around to schools in CT as a motivational speaker, especially to the inner cities where dropout rates are appalling.

I never listened to his speeches, but one thing is obvious: Experiences in life, including failures, are better teachers than anything one might get in a class room.

The more experiences, the better to recognize risk, and not be afraid to take risks.

"Cowards & idiots can come along for the ride but they gotta sit in the back seat!"

Wow! Sounds like an exciting challenge ...

... some ideas that come to mind:

- The Gulf of Tonkin incident, though I don't know if current high school text books include this or not,

- The 5th & 6th Amendments to the Constitution vs. the NDAA and the media's lack of discussion

- All the students are or will soon be 18 years old, so Charlie Rangle's proposal to re-institute the draft might be a big deal to them

- The federal budget deficit is getting huge -- got big under Bush and bigger under Obomba -- and that money is going to come out of THEIR pockets more than any other generation, yet the Penny Plan (Connie Mack & Rand Paul) would make it "easy" to balance the budget for real, but it is rarely discussed in the media

- Recent declaration by government commission that both Bush and Obomba have engaged in torture

- Obomba's claim that 90% of Americans want gun control vs. recent polls showing only 5% do -- walk them through the process of how one would determine which side (if any) is giving truthful information

You only have about 20 minutes and the rabbit hole is so deep and with so many passages that it is hard to know where to start. So, I would probably try to develop a theme, maybe come up with 3-5 examples, and try to leave them questioning each other and offering up my email address if they want to ask me more questions later.

It is a VERY important thing you are doing. So, good for you.

Good luck!

Henry Louis Mencken

Still a respected thinker, essentially a libertarian "extremist," dealt in principles, hilarious, one of the most quotable writers ever, and nearly all of his ideas are shocking to liberal sacks of filth.

A good way to get anti-state ideas across while not being put in a box. His style is also water in the face. Wakes people up to the notion that everything they've been taught just might be horseshit. His life and times also reminds us that in past eras the most intelligent and rebellious members of society thought socialism was a sad joke.

If it was me, I'd use him as a lead-in to telling kids that the greatest, most consistent, most revolutionary philosophy--individualism--has been hidden from them by 20th century "intellectuals," and their lives and futures are being destroyed as a result.

Second the US as in Just US Constitution

Here are 5 extremely eye opening verifiable facts right out in the open.

1.
The Articles of Confederation constituted and example of a Democratic Federated Republic where tax payers could shop around in a Free Market Government Country and that Market Force was Forcing the quality of government up and that Market Force of many Free Tax Payers Choosing better from worse was Forcing the cost of government down.

The Constitutional Convention was a Con Job put up by Slave Traders and Monopoly Bankers from the South and North States and they intended to make Slavery Legal as they could not do so under The Articles of Confederation. This is all verifiable in the writings of the times, and I can provide you book links and web pages if you care to look.

2.
A subset of 1 above is the fact that Slavery was made legal by those dirty dealers who removed the Free Market aspect of government in the United States, and that effort to make Slavery Legal was called The Dirty Compromise. Previous to The Constitution a State could find their Slaves running away from their Masters and those Slaves could find sanctuary in another State in the Voluntary Union under The Articles of Confederation. The Dirty Dealing Dirty Compromise was done to appease the Southern Dirty Dealers with the Three Fifths Clause, the promise to return Slaves who run from one State to another State, and in the North the Central Banker, Monopoly Banker, Debt Slavers like Hamilton would get their power to enforce One Money in exchange for the right of Masters to enforce Slavery Nation Wide.

3.
This goes along with 2 and 1 above, as a precedent was set under The Articles of Confederation and this precedent was the actual inspiration to begin efforts to make that Dirty Deal in Philadelphia, to get Generalisimo Washington out of retirement, braking his promise to never return to politics, as there was a revolt in Massachusetts called Shays's Rebellion whereby criminals had taken over the State government of Massachusetts and they were financing Wars of Aggression into Canada, losing their Criminal Wars of Aggression in Canada, and passing on the costs of their loses to the Tax Payers in Massachusetts through fraudulent money manipulation whereby Gresham's Law drove gold out of the State. Ex-Revolutionary War Soldiers like Danial Shays's were making their own money at home to replace the gold that was driven out of the State, and that money was Whiskey, and so the Criminals running Massachusetts then taxed Whiskey, where the tax was payable in Gold, and so the last Battle of the Revolution occurred in Massachusetts UNDER THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION, a Republic at that time, but the Rebels lost that battle. The point here is to point out that the Rebels fled to Vermont as run away Tax Slaves running away from Massachusetts, and they found sanctuary in Vermont. That is the "dangerous precedent" that could not be tolerated by the Masters who were propping themselves up as Masters and making their Slave Trade Legal in their eyes, be it Legal Fraud Monopoly Money Debt Slavery, or out in the open Legal Race War Slavery, in either case it is still Slavery made Legal, and there ain't no slave who thinks slavery is legal anywhere on this planet Earth.

4.
Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and John Adams were all in on the crime of the century, crushing Liberty, and the proof is abundant for anyone caring to look, Alexander Hamilton began the creation of National Debt, George Washington crushed the second Whiskey Rebellion in Pennsylvania with his Whiskey Rebellion Proclamation, and his power to conscript, which is another form of slavery, a National Army of draftees, and John Adams later proved the extent at which the "Federalists" (actually Nationalists hiding behind a False Front of False Federalism) would go as John Adams enacted The Alien and Sedition Acts which actually drove James Madison out of the False Federalist den of vipers as James Madison teamed up with Thomas Jefferson to pen their Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions in the futile effort to contain the runaway Legal Crime Ring that James Madison helped create. If you have, yourself, any doubts about any of this a good start for you would be an Essay written by Murray Rothbard titled Generalisimo Washington.

5.
This is the most obvious and yet the most well hidden fact that should blow any one away, anywhere, once they, on their own, realize this fact, and this fact goes along with 4,3,2, and 1 above. The honest productive people from which all surplus wealth is created are the LENDERS in this current Federal Reserve System of Legal Fraud and Extortion, and that is exactly what the Extortionists like Ben Bernanke report to all these many victims, in the words The Good Faith and Credit of The American People. So We The People are the LENDERS of last resort, and yet those Central Bankers are claiming that they are doing this LENDING to us, and those Criminals with Badges then charge us INTEREST on the money they BORROW from us.

Take that to your Monopoly Bank and cash it.

Redeem your earnings in lawful money?

I hope and trust that you will learn something from your adventure.

Joe

JustLiberty4US's picture

Talk about the State and our

Talk about the State and our eroding civil liberties. The leftest are supposed to be supportive of this. Provide examples (like the Monstano Bill). Will you be using PowerPoint?

All great ideas ....

... thanks. I think I will use some of these. How about some quotes? Would love to get some quotes by politicians that reveal their true agenda - especially if they are quoted on video so as to prove that it is not a conspiracy.

Thanks once again in advance.

I take my marching orders from the Constitution!

Use historical events...

Historical events are often written by the victor and thus twist the actual reality of what occurred. I'm sure you can research into some major historical events that initially were taught, even in the USA, with a certain view to only later be altered due to new evidence. Also take into consideration that what we are taught has someone's personal view of the situation. In some countries the Holocaust is taught to never have existed. A good case would be that of Che Guevara. He clearly was a symbolic figure for the socialist movement, but he also murdered many people to achieve his goals. Thus he preached freedom, yet infringed on freedom in the most horrific way possible, with other people's lives. In Latin America, where I live, Che is a hero.

Closer to home, an excellent historical event that you could mention is that of the civil war. You, as was I, were taught that the civil war was about the abolition of slavery. It made the war sound honorable, especially for the victor, while almost demonizing the defeated. Most likely, it would have been difficult for the war to have occurred only because of slavery alone, thus other more important factors could have been involved.

Encourage the students to always read up on the opposing view of any situation and thus analyze for themselves what is more rational.

One of the biggest problems in Congress, that both sides....

acknowledge, is the unintended consequences of bills not being read.

The passage of Obamacare, The Patriot Act, and other long, hard to understand bills, causes objections that both the liberal and the conservative voters complain about. For some help here:

www.downsizedc.org

www.downsizedcfoundation.org

They are working on two other sites as well:

denyconsent.org

zeroaggressionproject.org

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

how about the "Constitutions"

you can start by telling them there are two. One written by the founders in 1787 and a fraudulent one 'adopted' in 1871.. That might get them thinking.

1787 Constitution FOR the US - good
1871 Constitution OF the US - not good

OR - bring a deed to someone's home and teach them how they can be a "tenant" on the bankers' property. No U.S. deed refers to the occupant of the property as 'owner', but tenant.

Give a shout out

to Hillsdale College if only to point out free online courses and lectures.