August 24, 2014

Gale Minchew

How do you spell TAX?

August 20, 2014

Submitted by:  Veronica Coffin

The-Matrix-Public-Domain-300x300By Michael Snyder

The average American spends more than 10 hours a day using an electronic device.  And most of that activity is not even interactive.  The vast majority of the time we are just passively absorbing content that someone else has created.  This very much reminds me of the movie “the Matrix”, but with a twist.  Instead of humans being forcefully connected to “the Matrix”, we are all willingly connecting ourselves to it.  There is a giant system that defines our reality for us, and the length of time that the average American spends connected to it just continues to keep growing.  In fact, there are millions upon millions of us that simply do not “feel right” unless there is at least something on in the background.  Just think about it.  How much time do you spend each day with all electronic devices completely turned off?  Thanks to technology, we live at a time when more news, information and entertainment is at our fingertips than ever before, and we are consuming more of it than ever before.  But this also gives a tremendous amount of power to those that create all of this news, information and entertainment.  As I have written about previously, more than 90 percent of the “programming” that we absorb is created by just 6 enormously powerful media corporations.  Our conversations, attitudes, opinions and belief systems are constantly being shaped by those entities.  Unfortunately, most of us are content to just sit back and let it happen.

The following numbers regarding the media consumption habits of average Americans come directly from Nielsen’s most recent “Total Audience Report“.  The amount of time per day that Americans spend using these devices is absolutely staggering…

Watching live television: 4 hours, 32 minutes

Watching time-shifted television: 30 minutes

Listening to the radio: 2 hours, 44 minutes

Using  a smartphone: 1 hour, 33 minutes

Using Internet on a computer: 1 hour, 6 minutes

When you add it all up, the average American spends more than 10 hours a day plugged into the Matrix.

You have heard the old saying “you are what you eat”, right?

Well, the same applies to what we put into our brains.

When you put garbage in, you are going to get garbage out.

In my recent article entitled “It’s Official: Americans R Stupid“, I discussed how the U.S. population is being systematically “dumbed down” and how we are now one of the least intelligent industrialized nations on the entire planet.

A big contributor to our intellectual and social demise is the Matrix that has been constructed all around us.

Virtually every television show, movie, song, book, news broadcast and talk show is trying to shape how you view reality.  Whether you realize it or not, you are constantly being bombarded with messages about what is true and what is not, about what is right and what is wrong, and about what really matters and what is unimportant.  Even leaving something out or ignoring something completely can send an extremely powerful message.

In this day and age, it is absolutely imperative that we all learn to think for ourselves.  But instead, most people seem more than content to let the Matrix do their thinking for them.  If you listen carefully, you will notice that most of our conversations with one another are based on programming from the Matrix.  We all love to talk about the movie that we just saw, or what happened on the latest reality show, or what some famous celebrity is doing, or what we saw on the news that morning.  The things that matter to us in life are the things that the Matrix tells us should matter.

And if someone comes along with information that contradicts the Matrix, that can cause anger and confusion.

I can’t tell you how many times someone has said something like the following to me…

“If that was true I would have seen it on the news.”

To many people, the Matrix is the ultimate arbiter of truth in our society, and so anything that contradicts the Matrix cannot possibly be accurate.

Fortunately, more people than ever are waking up enough to realize that they have a choice.

It is kind of like that moment in the Matrix when Neo is being offered the red pill and the blue pill.

Admittedly, a lot of people that do begin to wake up choose to take the blue pill and go back to sleep.

But there are so many others that are grabbing the red pill.  That is why we have seen such an explosion in the popularity of the alternative media in recent years.  Millions of people all over the planet now understand that they are not getting the truth from the Matrix and they are hungry for real information.

Yes, the Internet is being used for unspeakable evil, but it can also be used for great good.  The Internet has allowed ordinary people like you and I to communicate on a mass scale like never before in history.  The Internet has allowed us to reclaim at least some of the power that we have lost to the Matrix.  I don’t know how long this period of history will last, so we should make full use out of this great tool while we still have it.

On my own website, I have felt called to mainly focus on economics in recent years.  And I will continue to chronicle economic conditions as we descend into the greatest economic crisis in U.S. history.  What is coming is going to be worse than 2008, it is going to be worse than the Great Depression, and it is ultimately going to be worse than most Americans would ever dare to imagine.

But I also want to take my readers on a journey down the rabbit hole.

Our world is about to get really, really strange, and I would like to be a light in the chaos.

Yes, I believe that great darkness is coming.  But I also believe that a great awakening is coming.

Personally, I believe that it is a great privilege to be alive at this time in human history.

It is a time of great evil, but it is also a time of great opportunity.

It is a time when everything that can be shaken will be shaken, but it will also be a time when those that stand for what is right will shine like the stars.

 

Submitted by: Veronica Coffin

H/T

http://owni.eu/files/2010/12/NetNeutrality.jpg

Written by  for the New American Magazine

After the FCC made its “Net Neutrality” rules public late last week, The New American began poring over the 400 pages of rules and comments in the document, officially entitled “Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order” in an effort to inform our readers about what is actually in the rules.

What we found affirms the statements by FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai that the rules are a threat to the future of the Internet and a danger to both liberty and a free market.

The report put forth by the regulatory regime is broken down into several parts. Before actually getting into the rules, the document spans 45 pages laying down philosophical and legal arguments for both the FCC’s justification and authority for regulating the Internet in the first place. Furthermore, the FCC document relies on and quotes from sources that have a history of attempting to abolish the free market capitalist nature of the Internet. As pernicious as those arguments and sources are, what’s actually in the rules is even worse.

The report repeatedly makes mention of the “bright-line rules” the FCC has created to keep the Internet open and free. “Bright-line” refers to rules, laws, or legal decisions that are clear and unambiguous. These are usually created when a previous rule, law, or legal decision left room for multiple interpretations. Cornell University Law School’s legal dictionary defines a bright-line as: “An objective rule that resolves a legal issue in a straightforward, predictable manner. A bright-line rule is easy to administer and produces certain, though, arguably, not always equitable results.” The USLegal website gives a similar definition and explains, “For example, in American statutory rape laws, the age of the victim and the age of the accused are the only relevant factors determinative of guilt or innocence. Because it is a bright-line rule, there is no balancing test to examine factors such as mistake of the accused, the misrepresentation of age by the minor, or the minor’s consent to sexual intercourse.”

So bright-line rules are clear, and do not allow anything other than the rule to be considered when determining a case.

What exactly are the bright-line rules the FCC has created to regulate the Internet?

1. No Blocking

“A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices, subject to reasonable network management.”

While this seems straightforward, the devil is in the details. The report offers the following “clarification” to this rule; “The phrase ‘content, applications, and services’ again refers to all traffic transmitted to or from end users of a broadband Internet access service, including traffic that may not fit clearly into any of these categories.” One is left to wonder why the categories are listed in the first place, if the definition is broader than the categories.

The report’s “clarification” goes on to explain, “Further, the no-blocking rule adopted today again applies to transmissions of lawful content and does not prevent or restrict a broadband provider from refusing to transmit unlawful material, such as child pornography or copyright-infringing materials.” This opens up a whole new Pandora’s Box of ISPs being put in a position to determine what is “unlawful material.” Might ISPs block traffic to torrent sites that host “copyright-infringing materials” alongside public domain materials?

Since the “No Blocking” rule bans ISPs from blocking “lawful content,” what are the ramifications for services such as American Family Online, which offer filtered Internet access to customers who want to have pornography and other materials blocked at the server level? Since such content is lawful and the bright-line rule does not allow the fact that the customer wants such materials to be blocked to be taken into account, one is left to believe it would violate the rule.

Notice, too that the rule allows blocking for “reasonable network management.” One can imagine a new set of bright-line rules in the next iteration of Net Neutrality to clarify what constitutes “reasonable network management.”

2. No Throttling

“A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application, or service, or use of a non-harmful device, subject to reasonable network management.”

Again, the details of the rule demonstrate its problems. The report explains, “With the no-throttling rule, we ban conduct that is not outright blocking, but inhibits the delivery of particular content, applications, or services, or particular classes of content, applications, or services. Likewise, we prohibit conduct that impairs or degrades lawful traffic to a non-harmful device or class of devices. We interpret this prohibition to include, for example, any conduct by a broadband Internet access service provider that impairs, degrades, slows down, or renders effectively unusable particular content, services, applications, or devices, that is not reasonable network management.”

Again, there is an exemption for “reasonable network management” that will undoubtedly need to be defined later.

The report continues, “For purposes of this rule, the meaning of ‘content, applications, and services’ has the same as the meaning given to this phrase in the no-blocking rule,” meaning lawful content of any type whether or not it fits any of the categories listed. As in the “No Blocking” rule, “unlawful material” is neither protected nor clearly defined: “Further, transfers of unlawful content or unlawful transfers of content are not protected by the no-throttling rule.”

Under the “No Throttling” rule, the commission is showing what it meant by its commitment to “forbear” regulating rates and plans. According to the continued explanation, “Because our no-throttling rule addresses instances in which a broadband provider targets particular content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices, it does not address a practice of slowing down an end user’s connection to the Internet based on a choice made by the end user. For instance, a broadband provider may offer a data plan in which a subscriber receives a set amount of data at one speed tier and any remaining data at a lower tier.” Sounds nice until the next line: “If the Commission were concerned about the particulars of a data plan, it could review it under the no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard.” So much for forbearance.

The “no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard” will be covered in more detail later in this article. Spoiler alert: It’s particularly nasty. By application of the “no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard,” the report seems to hint at regulating both rates and plans and much, much more.

3. No Paid Prioritization

“A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not engage in paid prioritization. “Paid prioritization” refers to the management of a broadband provider’s network to directly or indirectly favor some traffic over other traffic, including through use of techniques such as traffic shaping, prioritization, resource reservation, or other forms of preferential traffic management, either (a) in exchange for consideration (monetary or otherwise) from a third party, or (b) to benefit an affiliated entity.”

If it weren’t for the “no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard,” this would possibly be the most excrable rule of them all. “Paid Prioritization” is a name given to the practice of ISPs striking deals with content providers (often their own affiliates) to speed up traffic to and from those services to make them more attractive and valuable to the end user. The entire argument against the practice is that it is not “fair” to services who can’t or won’t pay the price to have their traffic sped up.

The report’s explanation for the adoption of this rule is that many of the people who participated in the public comment period don’t like this practice and fear the results if it continues. According to the report, “The record is rife with commenter concerns regarding preferential treatment arrangements, with many advocating a flat ban on paid prioritization. Commenters assert that permitting paid prioritization will result in the bifurcation of the Internet into a ‘fast’ lane for those willing and able to pay and a ‘slow’ lane for everyone else. As several commenters observe, allowing for the purchase of priority treatment can lead to degraded performance — in the form of higher latency, increased risk of packet loss, or, in aggregate, lower bandwidth — for traffic that is not covered by such an arrangement.”

Commenters further argue that paid prioritization will introduce artificial barriers to entry, distort the market, damage competition, harm consumers, discourage innovation, undermine public safety and universal service, and restrict free expression. Never mind that ISPs have expenses connected to bandwidth, network maintenance, and equipment — all of which are more costly for services that use higher bandwidth, particularly those that stream large video files. It only makes good business sense to pass part of that faster-connection cost along to the consumers they are trying to reach with their content; however, because “commenters” were “concerned,” the FCC has banned the practice.

For a bright-line rule to mean anything, there can be no exceptions, especially those that are handled on a case-by-case basis; however, that is exactly what the FCC is doing with this rule. According to the report, “Given the potential harms to the virtuous cycle, we believe it is more appropriate to impose an ex ante ban on such practices, while entertaining waiver requests under exceptional circumstances.”

The report explains the waiver process: “Under our longstanding waiver rule, the Commission may waive any rule ‘in whole or in part, for good cause shown.’ General waiver of the Commission’s rules is appropriate only if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule, and such a deviation will serve the public interest. In some cases, however, the Commission adopts specific rules concerning the factors that will be used to examine a waiver or exemption request. We believe that such guidance is appropriate here to make clear the very limited circumstances in which the Commission would be willing to allow paid prioritization. Accordingly, we adopt a rule concerning waiver of the paid prioritization ban that establishes a balancing test, as follows: The Commission may waive the ban on paid prioritization only if the petitioner demonstrates that the practice would provide some significant public interest benefit and would not harm the open nature of the Internet.”

So “No Paid Prioritization” really means that rather than the free market deciding this practice, the FCC will decide it on a case-by-case basis. It is a system wide open for favoritism.

After listing the bright-line rules which have dominated most of the discussion of the Net Neutrality issue, the report addresses the rule that is the vilest of all:

Preventing Unreasonable Interference or Unreasonable Disadvantage that Harms Consumers and Edge Providers.

This is not a bright-line rule by even FCC Commission Chief Wheeler’s definition. He describes it in his commentary toward the beginning of the report, referring to ISPs as “gatekeepers” because he claims they have the ability and the motive to manipulate the Internet. He writes, “The bright-line bans on blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization will go a long way to preserve the virtuous cycle. But not all the way. Gatekeeper power can be exercised through a variety of technical and economic means, and without a catch-all standard, it would be that, as Benjamin Franklin said, ‘a little neglect may breed great mischief.’ Thus, the Order adopts the following standard”:

Any person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably disadvantage (i) end users’ ability to select, access, and use broadband Internet access service or the lawful Internet content, applications, services, or devices of their choice, or (ii) edge providers’ ability to make lawful content, applications, services, or devices available to end users. Reasonable network management shall not be considered a violation of this rule.

What does Wheeler mean when he writes, “Gatekeeper power can be exercised through a variety of technical and economic means”? The body of the report puts it this way, “We believe that there may exist other current or future practices that cause the type of harms our rules are intended to address.” So now the report is attempting to protect end users from something that has not even happened yet, and the architects of this rule are not even trying to hide it.

How exactly will the regulatory regime go about enforcing a rule that prohibits something as nebulous as “unreasonably interfer[ing] or unreasonably disadvantag[ing]” the use of the Internet? On a case-by-case basis. The report states, “For that reason, we adopt a rule setting forth a no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard, under which the Commission can prohibit, on a case-by-case basis, practices that unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably disadvantage the ability of consumers to reach the Internet content, services, and applications of their choosing or of edge providers to access consumers using the Internet.”

Here is the greatest danger of the whole scheme. This is total control of the Internet. It is how digital freedom dies.

This rule allows the FCC to unilaterally decide everything from rates to plans, from equipment to content, from the introduction of new technologies to the number of ISPs in a region. Everything. On a case-by-case basis. With only the conscience of the commissioners as their guide.

This is why concerned citizens must defeat Net Neutrality. Congress could set it aside. The courts could overturn it.

Americans must act soon in order to save the greatest form of communication, education, information, and innovation man has ever known.

AND THERE’S MORE:

FCC Cites Soros-Funded, Neo-Marxist-Founded Group 46 TIMES In New Regs

New internet regulations finally released by the Federal Communications Commission make 46 references to a group funded by billionaire George Soros and co-founded by a neo-Marxist.

The FCC released the 400-page document on Thursday, two weeks after it passed new regulations, which many fear will turn the internet into a public commodity and thereby stifle innovation.

“Leveling the playing field” in that way has been a clear goal of Free Press, a group dedicated to net neutrality which was founded in 2003.

As Phil Kerpen, president of the free-market group American Commitment, first noted, Free Press is mentioned repeatedly in the FCC document. Most of the references are found in footnotes which cite comments by Free Press activists supporting more internet regulation.

The term “Free Press” is mentioned 62 times in the regulations. Some are redundant mentions referring to the same Free Press activists’ comments in favor of more oversight. In total, the FCC cited Free Press’ pro-net neutrality arguments 46 times.

And from Godfather Politics:
Based on references in the regulations alone, it is clear that Barack Obama’s takeover of the Internet was actually written – in large part – by radical Marxist-leaning organizations; and it has also come to light that radical socialist-leaning organizations funded by Billionaire Socialist George Soros and others have spent approximately 200 MILLION DOLLARS ($200,000,000.00) to make Barack Obama’s tyrannical and dictatorial takeover of the Internet a reality.

And we have only one hope of stopping this master plan to transform the United States into a socialist utopia. As of this writing, Representative Marsha Blackburn and 43 other Republicans have signed onto legislation (H.R. 1212: The Internet Freedom Act) that will totally reverse this dictatorial Obama-FCC dictate… but this legislation is stalled in committee because John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are in no rush to bring it to the floor of the House and the Senate for a vote… and that needs to change right now.

 

 

Submitted by:  Veronica Coffin

by Brooke Bosca

A Philadelphia man out for a walk last week was gunned down by three Black teens in cold blood. And when police found the man’s body, they made a heartbreaking find right next to it.

According to NBC Philadelphia, the three black teens got “bored” playing basketball and decided to go rob someone. After seeing one man with a large dog, and deciding not to rob him, they then saw 51-year-old James Patrick Stuhlman walking his terrier.

stuhlman

Stuhlman typically walked his dog with his 13-year-old daughter. But on the night of his murder, March 12, he had told her to stay home because it was getting dark out, which very likely saved her life.

As he walked down the street, Stuhlman, who owned a local landscaping company, saw three teens approach him. Then they grabbed and robbed him, and shot him once in the leg. They could have just taken his money and ran at that point. But they did not.

At one point, he did plead for his life,” Captain James Clark said Thursday at a news conference, according to the New York Daily News. “He said, ‘Please don’t shoot me, please don’t shoot me,’ and they still shot him one more time.

That second shot took his life.

So “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” really did happen — not in Ferguson — but in a Black-on-White capital murder in Philadelphia.

So can we expect Barack Obama and Eric Holder to demand a civil right investigation? Don’t bet on it.

On Thursday, 15-year-old Brandon Smith and a 14-year-old whose name has been withheld — because he is supposedly a “child” — were arrested by police. They said they decided to rob Stuhlman because his dog was smaller than their intended first target. The shooter, identified as Tyfine Hamilton, 15, is still at large. Philadelphia police consider him “armed and dangerous.”

Typically, the teens have all been in trouble with the law in the past.

black-monsters

Capt. Clark warned Hamilton at a press conference: “Get with your parent and turn yourself in before we come and get you…We know where you are.”

Philadelphia Police Lt. John Walker said that when police arrived at the scene Stuhlman was laying in a pool of blood and was already unresponsive. The family man still had his flashlight in his hand.

But  what police found next to him was heartbreaking. His dog was pawing him, sniffing at his face, and whimpering.

“The dog was lying next to him — appeared to be scared and in shock,” Walker said.

“His daughter goes for a walk with him almost every night,” added Clark. “For whatever reason, he said to her, ‘it’s a little late tonight I don’t want you walking with me.’ So in effect, he may have saved his daughter’s life.”

Smith has been charged in relation to the murder and is still in custody. But the unnamed teen was inexplicably just charged with robbery despite being an accessory to murder. Police are offering a $20,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of Hamilton.

Author’s personal note: I don’t usually do this, but feel I must. The media is censoring this story. You know why. They made the Michael Brown fraud front page news for months. But they will bury this REAL “Hands up, Don’t Shoot” horror. It is up to you to share this article with everyone you know. We can bypass the media censorship and get the truth out there. Thank you. -BB

 

Source

Wall Street Journal Reporter Found Dead After Controversial OPEC Investigation

March 22, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin  Written by John Vibes This Wednesday, the body of Wall Street Journal reporter David Bird was pulled from a New Jersey river. The 55-year-old journalist had been missing for over a year and investigators were unsure whose body they found until they were able to match the dental records […]

Read the full article →

What It MEANS to Be an American

March 22, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin  H/T Washington’s Blog Many blowhards attack those who criticize powerful people in America. They treat any questioning of “authority” as being “anti-American” or “anti-government”. Indeed, according to Department of Defense training manuals, protest is “low-level terrorism”. And see this, this and this.  Similarly, an FBI memo labels peace protesters as […]

Read the full article →

How Our Federal Constitution ‘Secures’ Our Unalienable Rights

March 22, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin By: Brent Parrish Since our public schools no longer teach civics, in any meaningful way, many Americans are utterly clueless when it comes to the U.S. Constitution and the enumerated powers contained therein. When the American people no longer know their rights, then any manner of usurpation and violation […]

Read the full article →

Obama and Kerry Seek to Finalize an Iranian Nuclear Deal as Nuclear Conflict Draws Near

March 22, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton As a nuclear pact with Iran draws near, signed in blood by John Kerry and Barack Obama, Iran’s Supreme leader Ali Khamenei calls for “Death to America” on Saturday. Could it get any more suicidally insane? Obama is urging Iran to seize an ‘historic opportunity‘ for […]

Read the full article →

See the Budweiser 9/11 Tribute That ONLY AIRED ONCE!

March 22, 2015

Submitted by: Veronica Coffin Follow VeronicaCoffin Like this:Like Loading…

Read the full article →

Let the Budget Battles Begin

March 22, 2015

Email this pageThe US budget is usually an inside the Beltway struggle with few folks paying it much attention, but it deserves it because the entire fate of the nation depends upon it. Submitted by:  Veronica Coffin By Alan Caruba The announcement of a new fiscal budget for the U.S. government always sets the stage […]

Read the full article →

Enemies on the Left, False Friends on the Right – Part 9

March 21, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin by Kelleigh “Can we regain our country and our freedom? The answer is, only if we can bear the truth that our forefathers knew and took for granted. If the generation of 100 years ago could come back today they would be appalled at the thinking of Americans today. […]

Read the full article →

Texas attorney general: U.S. is heading toward a constitutional crisis because of Obama flouting Congress and courts

March 21, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin  by Dr. Eowyn In an interview on Fox News yesterday, Ken Paxton, the attorney general of the State of Texas, was asked whether America is heading toward “a constitutional crisis” because of Obama’s total disregard for Congress and now the courts. (The segment begins at the 2:55 mark in the […]

Read the full article →

Minorities voting Dem disenfranchise themselves

March 21, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin By SeeingRedAZ While addressing the Impact Symposium* at Vanderbilt University in Nashville this past week, ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith said he believed every black American should vote Republican in one election to let the political parties know the African-American population wasn’t pledged to one party’s control. “What I dream […]

Read the full article →

Obama Funding Al-Qaeda

March 21, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin By Theodore Shoebat Newly Released Documents: Obama Administration Donated Millions To Al-Qaeda   Newly released court documents reveal that Al-Qaeda received two million dollars from United States funds under the Obama Administration, through the backdoor of the Afghan government. Shoebat.com was able to find this story thanks to the […]

Read the full article →

Michelle Obama Sending Government Monitors To Weigh Children In Daycare

March 21, 2015

Email this pageSocialism anyone? We need to get  Michelle Obama and the government away from our children!  –VC Submitted by:  Veronica Coffin By Robert Gehl I’m going to save Michelle Obama the trouble: My four-year-old daughter weighs 41 pounds. She’s very tall, Michelle – not fat. I’m not sure she’ll care, because her idiotic school-lunch […]

Read the full article →

Feds To Block FEMA Funds For States That Deny Man-Made Global Warming

March 20, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin   By Brian Anderson, March 20, 2015. Well, there’s one way to ensure that everyone buys into the man-made global warming hoax: extortion. Starting next year the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will stop funds from going to states that refuse to believe that humans are causing climate change. […]

Read the full article →

Be Sure To Tune In To CBS’ The Doctors Show on March 25th!

March 20, 2015

Email this pageSubmitted by:  Veronica Coffin Translator By: Brent Parrish Several days ago I was posting some images on Twitter showing what American students in our public schools are fed under Michelle Obama-approved school lunch program compared to what students in other countries are fed for lunch. The disparity is shocking. So much so, a […]

Read the full article →