ARHP Foundation

An Educational Non-Profit Foundation

Better Assess Information Provided In The Public Sector

Better Assess Information Provided In The Public Sector

Engineer a total collapse of the world’s economies, and support political chaos.



Fully support the United Nations.



Destroy the Family Unit

Obama’s Deceptive Plan

to “help the family”

In reading the following article, remember the Illuminati-inspired One World Government group’s stated goal #4, “Destroy the family unit” and #9, “Engineer a total collapse of the world’s economies” in this case, the USA.

President Obama on Thursday unveiled plans to greatly increase federal assistance to working Americans struggling to afford child care.

Mr. Obama called for an $80 billion expansion of a federal program that provides child care subsidies to low- and middle-income families with children ages 3 and under, nearly doubling the aid and offering it to more than one million additional children over the next decade.

He promoted his plan to nearly triple, to $3,000 per child, the maximum child care tax credit. And the president said he would push to put more federal money into early childhood programs.

In his State of the Union speech, Mr. Obama argues that providing high-quality child care for families in which both parents work was an economic imperative.

A few excerpts from an article written in 1999 by the are as follows. Points of interest have been highlighted in bold.

“What we have done here is provide specifics from an experienced knowledge base which is neither “political” in nature nor supportive of the new approaches that sound good – but aren’t working. Our Policy Statements on Child Care and Education are clearly works-in-progress. Even in that state, they call for very major changes in the ways both fields do business. We concentrate first on what will work to help children. We seek to support, not criticize those professionals who need help to do their job. We believe that progressive and knowledgeable professionals in early childhood are helpful.”

Note that they put the word “political” in quotes, and mention that they believe “progressive” and knowledgeable professionals should be used in early childhood. One must ask what they mean by “progressive”

And so with that question in mind lets look at another excerpt from the same article and find the meaning.

“Does money exist for quality child care? Of course it does. Do we have the means and desire to switch current expenditures from funding failing programs to successful ones? Apparently not until the politicians and public understand what is meant by ‘quality’ and therefore, what we should be funding.

The standards for quality reviewed here, have been established by the child development field with the help of the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a Washington, DC-based membership organization. NAEYC is the national accrediting agency for the field. If a child care facility gains accreditation from the NAYEC, it is offering quality child care. It should be noted that there are child care agencies offering quality child care but not accredited by NAYEC. In most instances these facilities do not have the funds to go through the accrediting process. But, in fairness, we must add that these facilities are few and far between.”

So we see here that the liberal party believes that quality child car and education can only be judged by agencies approved by the NAEYC. And what do we find when we look at those in charge of the organization but a plethora of liberal and politically progressive leaders. The very founder of this organization was a woman named Patty Hill who is one of the leading founders of the progressive movement in the United Stated.  Should it be so surprising now that they have one of their most staunch politicians in office (President Obama) that he would propose a new bill right in line with the liberal agenda?

But just what is the liberal agenda?

A quick wiki search and we can find out a lot. Specifically (seeing as this pertains to the subject being addressed here) lets look at the liberals educational theory. In 1900–1920 liberals called themselves “progressives” while the progressive movement started in the 1890s the Liberals adopted the progressive beliefs on a number of issues including progressive stances as pertaining to education in which the likes of Lester Frank Ward started and had been known to have such beliefs that society could be scientifically controlled which was especially attractive to intellectuals during the Progressive Era which has been pushed into the modern era with the likes of men and women like President Obama.

But what does it mean when someone says they support progressive education?

Progressive education can be traced back to the works of John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

Let us look at John Locke. John Locke was an English philosopher and physician, regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers and known as the “Father of Classical Liberalism”.  He was also one of the leading minds behind the social contract theory. Let’s look at just what this theory entails.

“In moral and political philosophy, the social contract or political contract is a theory or model, originating during the Age of Enlightenment that typically addresses the questions of the origin of society and the legitimacy of the authority of the state over the individual. Social contract arguments typically posit that individuals have consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their freedoms and submit to the authority of the ruler or magistrate (or to the decision of a majority), in exchange for protection of their remaining rights.”

Take note of the word “tacitly” used here.

Obama and by association his liberal counter parts seek to tacitly take away your right to raise your own children with your own beliefs by creating incentives for you to let appointed officials whom I have already outlined as having liberal bias controlled by an organization with liberal bias while simultaneously eroding your own will to rely on yourself and imposing instead a need to rely on the government in yet another aspect of your life.

Hello nanny state, goodbye freedom.

~Jacob Danial Ellinger. Editor and Contributor to the ARHP foundation

Now let’s review the two Illuminati-inspired One World Government goals that this proposal supports, #4, “Destroy the family unit” and #9, “Engineer a total collapse of the world’s economies” in this case, the USA. In spite of how nice Obama’s proposal sounds; 1) the family unit is degenerated because no parent is around during working hours to guide the child, and 2) it puts the USA further in debt, furthering the goal to collapse the USA economy.

Remember too, that just recently, the One-World Government group was successful in reducing both the number of hours worked and the dollars-per-hour income of the average American. Since they control both the media and the methods the government uses to report statistics, they have muted the reporting of these facts and by changing the way unemployment is reported, they successfully made it look good.


Penetrate And Destroy

All Governments of The World