Monday, April 30, 2007
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Could it be that Dick Cheney and James Dobson aren't the biggest threats to civil liberties, or the most likely culprits of a potential theocratic coup in Democratic nations?
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
This column disects the frustratingly un-informed nature of the American voter. It is a sobering assessment by National Review's Jonah Goldberg.
Somehow we all know Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is "guilty" of politically-driven down-sizing, but few can even pick the Vice President out of a line-up. Troubling, to say the least.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's back to his old antics with a radio address praising the "defeat" of America 27 years ago in the Iranian Hostage Crisis that lasted 444 days, and included a miserably failed rescue attempt by U.S. Forces (under the direction of the most incompetent President since whatever Liberal Democrat happened to be before him, Jimmy "Israel is an Apartheid" Carter).
If Yasser Arafat can win a Nobel Peace Prize, is our boy Mahmoud eligible for one of those respected awards after his visionary peace-making rhetoric in the past year (including "Israel will be driven into the sea very soon" and "the Great Satan [America] will be wiped off the face of the earth")???
Obama-rama is once again saying something...without really saying something. This time it regards the Israeli-Arab conflict in the Middle East. Exposing his naïveté, Freshmen Senator Barry (the name he went by for nearly 20 years, including his time at Harvard Law School) Hussein Obama reduced the historic struggle between the Jews and Muslims in Israel to nothing more than a game of empty rhetoric and catchy euphemisms (two things American Liberal Democrats know far too much about...as opposed to their knowledge and familiarity with history and words like "victory", "fortitude", and "honor").
In my home state, Illinois, considerable time and resources are being "used" to prove just how multi-cultural and tolerant we are. The state legislature is spending time that could be used to better allocate funds for school districts, making sure our "road-tolling" is that much more "open", or cleaning up the rampant corruption in nearly every elected position inside the city limits of Chicago...but, apparently it is vastly more important to ensure Muslims' meat is as "halal"-friendly (meat that has been slaughtered and blessed in the Islamic tradition; similar to "kosher") as it is advertised to be.
I guess something that eldues our competent law-makers, and the Muslim community in Illinois, is that America employs a Free Market system. Liberals love to flaunt how compassionate they are, yet have no problem needlessly squandering tax-payers' dollars and time to debate how much enforcement there should be to curb the rampant halal scams that are the subject of debate at dinner tables from McHenry to the Quad Cities.
Sharia Law and its customs are fine and dandy for adherents to the Koran; but for the rest of us (you know, the other 99% of Americans) we don't want/need to have our legislators addressing concerns that Muslims have that their local Islamic butcher is pulling the old switch-a-roo on them. You can always open your own Halal Butcher Shop, or tell your friends and neighbors that the store you currently shop at is a fake (and the market will produce a store to meet your need).
I know it is a small, seemingly unconsequential, point that I am making here. But, it drives me crazy to see Americans try and "up the ante" with Europe to see who can bend over backwards and compromise their own cultural heritage first to Muslims (who choose, freely, to come and be apart of the great American experiment). Make no mistake about it: our lawmakers are terrified of being called racists, bigots, or...God forbid...a traditional, Conservative American. It is easy to captiulate to vocal Muslims because we're all waking on egg-shells with how reactionary we've seen other Muslims become in Western, civilized, democratized nations (England, Canada, and Australia).
When Christians or Jews in America are fed up with a lacking in theological-friendly products, services, or companies, they do something radical...start their own. Hebrew National Hot Dogs are available because someone started the business to meet the need. Catholic schools are littered thoughout the Chicago-land area because religious parents wanted a school for their kids that didn't teach secular, liberal ideology. Christian bookstores are booming and meeting the demand of God-fearing readers.
Instead of encouraging Muslims and immigrants to participate in the beauty of our way of life (Free Market Democracy), our enlightened politicians spend their time making sure Islam is front-and-center in terms of respect and classroom time in public schools, Halal butchers are up-to-code (of course with a $75 registration fee which the government keeps), and that Clerics and Imams pray at every Democrat National Committee meeting possible. When 75% of the country describes themself Christian, and every President in our nation's history has publicly endorsed the Judeo-Christian faith, why is it that front-page headlines in the nation's 3rd largest city announce the government's time-consuming adventure into Islamo-appeasement?
A better use of time and resources?....American Economics, History, and English classes for all Muslim immigrants.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
"People do not remain loyal to institutions when they no longer believe in their importance. The importance of the church is essentially tied to the reality of the Gospel. When people no longer believe that faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation, the church becomes a time-consuming irrelevance.
The main problem behind the crisis of the church in Germany is theological, not financial or demographic. American Christians should observe Germany's closing churches with this haunting awareness -- it could happen here too."
Monday, April 23, 2007
Presidential hopeful, Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY/whatever state she happens to be in), continues to change her stance on the War in Iraq. During a recent press conference, when asked about her previous promise (made a few months back in Iowa) to pull all troops out of Iraq “if, and when” she was elected leader of the Free World, the chameleon-like, shape-shifter of a candidate said that it would be “irresponsible” to completely pull out of Iraq in any sort of “set time-frame”. Yeah, “irresponsible” is precisely the word that comes to mind when I think of the Liberal Democrats in Washington concerning National Security (or anything for that matter).
Their careless and schizophrenic proclamations regarding the need to win/maybe win in Iraq begs us ask the question: Do they even care what happens in Iraq, or is their own political victory in 2008 really that much more important?
Let us speak frankly here for a moment. Put aside your personal feelings toward the literal war in Iraq, and look at the situation from a broader, pragmatic perspective. Admittedly, war is not a game, and there are real lives and real deaths involved here (all sides “lose” in some way or another); but, I have to believe that there is no one in this country (outside of Hollyweird), nor in the Western Civilized World (outside of radical mosques in Europe), that actually wants America to lose. Our defeat would be Freedom’s defeat. In the face of aggressive, unapologetic Islamic totalitarianism and religious bigotry toward all other faiths (or whatever you want to call Atheism and Agnosticism), America must stand and fight (and win).
Human nature being what it is, and rejecting the defeatist, pluralistic, appeasement-rich, self-loathing, liberal obsession with “playing nice” and foolish notion that “everyone’s a winner”; deep down we all know that America breeds winners. It’s in our nature, regardless of ethnic heritage. To be born American (and even many who’ve simply immigrated here) you are blessed with an inherent, optimistic, self-sacrificing hard-drive that comes from nearly two and half centuries of ingenuity, prosperity, and bravery.
No matter how hard Banana Republic and VH1 try to feminize the masculine, warrior culture that America has been, beneath that “metro” skin-deep surface of superficiality lies a beating heart filled with the fighting spirit and entrepreneurial moxy that we collectively share as a nation. There’s never been, nor ever will be, a place such as this on God’s green earth.
When our collective minds are set to a task, and the moral, technological, and physical will of the American people are behind it, nothing stands in the way of the free market-based juggernaut we truly are. All one must do is review some pertinent facts from the Second World War to better appreciate this reality. (I know some of you have stomachs that have dropped after reading my thought thus far; but I would have to ask why it puts you in an awkward position to be reminded just how amazingly blessed the United States has been?)
WWII should be taught as a required Freshmen course entitled “American Exceptionalism: 101” in every university in the nation where students learn what creativity, duty, service, honor, and sacrifice look like in a united, free country during a time of war.
The victories in the Pacific and “Fortress Europa” were due in large part to the military might exhibited by G.I. Joe’s from farms in Iowa, stockyards in Chicago, the dugouts of Fenway Park and Yankee Stadium (Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio), and even the Silver Screen in Hollywood (Jimmy Stewart and Charles Bronson). More important, and often under-appreciated, was the “cornering” of the technological market exhibited by General Motors, U.S. Steel, and manufacturing corporations all across the fruited plains.
Less than four years after the cowardly attack on Pearl Harbor (diplomats from Japan were in Washington at the time of the attack attempting to assure nervous U.S. officials that no aggression would come from Japan) the American military had drafted, trained, and mobilized 15 million servicemen and women. A two-ocean Navy had been built, essentially from the ground up. Manufacturing companies had produced nearly 90,000 aircraft and 100,000 armored vehicles. On average, a “Liberty” ship (cargo vessels that came to symbolize American industrial output capabilities during the war) was launched every single day of the war. The two most expensive military projects in American history (the construction of the B-29 bombers and completion of the Atomic Bomb) were successfully undertaken and the latter meant that one B-29, with one bomb, could do the work of 1,000 bombers.
The Allies (America) drowned the Axis Powers in resources. When we landed on the beaches of Normandy in June of 1944, it was a near mathematical impossibility for the Nazis to defeat the size and scope of forces that were now coming for them.
Logistically speaking alone, what America did in WWII was incredible and breath taking. To think that we did all this, and de-mobilized troops back home, all in less time than has been spent in Iraq is disheartening on one hand (because our enemy in Iraq seems so dilapidated and thus should be easier to defeat), but also sobering on the other (because it shows how much more similar this War on Terror will be to the Cold War, which took half a century to win).
I’d be the first to say that I naively, but genuinely, believed that the blitzkrieg-like manner in which we dismantled Saddam-controlled Iraq in 2003 would be indicative of the ease in which we could turn that country around. Guess what? I was wrong. More importantly, Generals, Civilian analysts, and our Commander-in-Chief largely got it wrong too. Should they have listened to the minority of voices pleading for more initial troops? Probably. Looking back now, I cannot see how that fact is avoided.
But, in the stampede of Monday-morning quarterbacks (i.e. every Democrat, every member of the American media, and every tenured professor in American universities) to be the loudest voice of retrospective criticism, some key facts are lost in the grand-standing of consistently inconsistent politicians and blowhard pundits. If the only indicator of success is the death toll of U.S. soldiers, we might want to re-think our views of every other war we’ve ever engaged in, because the losses in Iraq are small potatoes compared to the Revolutionary, Civil, both World, and Vietnam Wars.
Between Afghanistan and Iraq, there are now 50 million people who are free for the first time in decades (even centuries). Nearly 85% of the general population of eligible voters (including women for the first time, other than in Israel, in Middle Eastern history) risked life and limb to cast their ballots in legitimate (key word) elections. We are lucky to get even close to 40% in Presidential elections, and 30% in mid-term Congressional ones. Men and women in Afghanistan and Iraq went through Islamic pre-death rituals before leaving to vote in this last election, assuming that they would meet their maker at the hands of radicals who despised the very thought of a free society where women were allowed to vote and Islamic Sharia Law did not govern every aspect of public life.
By the end of the first year of Operation Iraqi-Freedom, over 100 independent news publications were up in running in contrast to the two state-controlled ones under Saddam. (I wonder who the Iraqi-version of Katie Couric is?) Schools, roads, and water treatment facilities have been rebuilt and offered hope to millions of Iraqis who express their gratitude to the troops (even if they want them to leave as soon as possible, which is totally legitimate). Fourteen of the sixteen provinces in the country are stable and beginning to flourish.
150,000 American troops (all volunteer) defeated Talibani and Republican Guard troops with ease, deposed two tyrannical regimes, and have gone above-and-beyond the call of duty to ensure humanitarian rights and civil safety is procured for even their self-described enemies. The pathetic, cowardly actions of insurgents and terrorists (supplied and encouraged by Iran) have made our fighting tactics more complicated than at any other time in our nation’s military history. But, through it all, our heroes in uniform continue to exceed and surpass all expectations of courage and honor.
Where else in life’s experience do we find it wise counsel to completely abandon a decision that was overwhelmingly accepted as legally and morally “correct” when it was made? History has taught us that America is more capable, more willing, and best suited to engage in a struggle for freedom than any other nation the world has known. If it is the right thing to do, as it was in the 1940’s to save the world from tyranny, then let us fight with all we have as a grateful nation.
If it truly is wrong to defend ourselves from terror (including pre-emptive action against state-sponsors of it), then bring the troops home and let us build a fence, restrict immigration, and become isolationists. This would be the only feasible way to remain even relatively safe. Any takers on that course of action? Didn’t think so.
If we want freedom, we must be willing to protect it; and no one is better suited than we to do so.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
www.steynonline.com (read it, but don't weep)
Friday, April 20, 2007
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
It seems to me that when things are really good, or really bad, Americans naturally turn to a Higher Power to either give thanks, or appeal for relief and strength. In our darkest hours especially, the comfort and solace one finds uniquely in the spiritual arms of a Church, Synagogue, etc. is somehow transformed from a delusional “crutch” to a sturdy foundation from which ascension toward the light of hope seems possible. After a horrific terrorist attack or senseless homicide the terms “good” and “evil” no longer seem like such Neanderthalic rhetoric, reserved for “cowboy” Presidents and close-minded, conservative Christians. This should tell us something about ourselves specifically, and human nature in general.
Monday we once again saw the inhumanity that is all too possible in a fallen, sinful world. The campus of Virginia Tech was the site of the worst killing spree in our nation’s history. As of now, there are 33 students and faculty who will not be coming home for Summer Break. There is one less psychotic, suicidal maniac walking the earth, but that fact will do little to comfort the bereaving families, friends, and colleagues of those tragically murdered in Blacksburg yesterday morning.
I never seek to pretend that I can comprehend the intense and wide-ranging emotions that those directly affected by such monumental tragedies experience during times like these. It is an often-made mistake in America for anyone and everyone who has ever even been to a place like NYC or the campus of VA Tech to unfairly and symbolically place themselves in the epicenter of trauma after days such as 9/11 and now 4/16/07. The suffering in Virginia should be primarily reserved for those on the “front-lines” (www.townhall.com/columnists/DennisPrager/2007/04/17/youre_dead,_im_healing).
But, and this speaks to my larger point, the natural (and largely appropriate) reaction for Americans is to sympathize (if even to a fault) with the victims of evil acts and seemingly unnecessary suffering. It is right for us to feel for the families who have lost loved ones. We are a culture (despite the deplorable practice of abortion) of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is inherently American (especially since Europe has rendered itself largely non-religious) to turn our lamentations and cries of pain toward the Heavens.
The pictures and stories of groups huddled together in prayer from Ground-Zero on that fateful September day six years ago still reverberate in my mind. Naturally, we then rallied around our President, our first-responders, and our country. It became en vogue for late-night comedians and sports anchors to sign off with “God Bless America”. We talked as a nation about “healing” and “hope”. Personally I was moved on numerous occasions at the outpouring of love, charity, and support the American people exhibited for months after.
The President of VA Tech held a press conference yesterday afternoon and spoke of the “healing process” that will now begin at his school. Students appeared on every major news network to their recount tales of horror and shock and wondered aloud how they were to “go on from here”. Still-shots of sobbing co-eds and incredulous Frat-boys relayed the emotional state of the campus better than any other written or verbal description ever could.
How in the world do we make sense of such madness? What is the university’s President implying by calling for students to gather together for a time of convocation and healing?
At my alma mater, Taylor University (a Christian liberal-arts school), last spring, at about this time (April 26), a horrific car accident took place on the interstate highway a matter of miles from campus. A number of students and a faculty member sadly passed away, and the student body of about 2,000 was left to deal with the near-impossible task of dealing with the questions “Why did God allow this to happen?” and “How do we pick up the pieces?”
Interestingly enough, the response from this religious institution of higher learning was, in some ways, similar to that of the public’s reaction to 9/11 (and likely to this recent killing spree). People gathered together to pray, mourn, and implore the Almighty for some sort of “answer” to the questions on everyone’s mind.
What Taylor University had that many other people don’t have is that they grieved but with Hope. Hope in the Resurrection of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
This accident made a lot of kids at Taylor think about their lives and change it’s course with turnaround decisions with Christ as the basis.
What lies behind this natural cultural phenomenon of instant religiosity after a tragedy is that people, no matter their background, want to believe that life on earth has a purpose, and that this (the “here and now”) is not all we have. I think of my grandmother’s death in February of 2001 and all the pain and sadness that I felt, and I cannot comprehend how anyone goes through such an event and is able to come out the other end anything but suicidal if they honestly believe there is no God and ultimately no point to our lives.
Church attendance was at Christmas-time levels the first Sunday after 9/11. People were correctly searching for something. Even if they were not quite sure what they needed, they knew where to look for it. This is worth meditating on. Why are we so apt to run into the comforting arms of God when life offers us its most basic view of reality, but the rest of the time we walk around with large dividers, attempting to separate any correlation between faith and reason? Religious people are just as guilty of this spiritual short-term memory loss.
It is a trademark of America’s recent obsessive desire to stress individualism that we so quickly turn our back on the reflective conclusions we reach during times of duress and hardship. God suddenly returns to a silly, antiquated notion the moment He is done helping us get over our trials and tribulations. Maybe when things go really well, we’ll give a “shout out” to the Big Guy upstairs, but other than that we are the masters of our own destiny for the 98% of the time our life is relatively “normal”. That other 2% is what pastors and clergy are for, right?
The truth is that simply owning a Bible and attending Church on the high holidays is not enough to brace yourself for the inevitable pain that awaits us all. Our eyes are “magically” opened to this fact when trouble strikes. Suddenly it seems less tacky to hold hands with strangers and pray for strength. Instantly the self-constructed walls of isolation melt away and words and emotions begin to pour out of you that you never knew were there.
As a Christian I happen to know/believe that my faith is the right one. As an American, I beseech every one of my fellow countrymen to honestly assess what exactly it is they personally believe. How do you answer the ever-present problems of evil, death, and disappointment? What gives you the motivation to see the sun rise tomorrow? Why does it make so much sense, and feel so right, to talk of “healing” and “hope” after a tragedy like the VA Tech mass slaughter?
It is during times such as these that God’s confirmation that life is worth living; that the relationships we form here on earth matter; and, that it is okay to admit that our soul cries out for a purpose (and the author of that purpose), can be most vividly and clearly seen. Our purpose after all is to glorify Christ. While our enemies around the globe cheer the actions of suicide bombers (even if they are children), Americans soberly reflect on the unavoidable fact that life is precious, death is tragic, and healing is only possible through spiritual lines of communication with a power bigger than ourselves.
May God comfort the grieving families in Blacksburg, VA today.
Monday, April 16, 2007
If this story doesn't knock you off your chair, I don't know what will.
Are all Liberal appeasers satisfied now that diplomatic options have run out? When your enemy is doing something everyone agrees is unacceptable, and you exhaust a year of negotiations with no success, is it then okay to take action...or do we wait until Jerusalem is incinerated to admit that we've wasted precious time?
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Friday, April 13, 2007
On a scale from 1 to "The Only Columnist You Need to Read"...Charles Krauthammer is.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
It was Game 3 of the 2001 World Series. The country was on edge and attempting to recover after the worst terrorist attack on American soil. President Bush and Mayor Rudy Guiliani had the full support of the American people.
I was watching the game at home, and had been told that the President was to throw out the first pitch. All I could think about was that I desperately hoped he wouldn't throw a "bouncer" to the plate on this world-wide stage. The country NEEDED a "strike"; and that's what he threw.
I'll never forget that sense of pride and optimism and unity I felt watching him deliver an off-speed bullseye. The roar of the crowd; the chants of "U-S-A!" echoing in the New York night; the cameras flashing like synapses. It was not just a baseball game, and he was not just a President. We were Americans, this was our National Pastime, and he was our Leader.
As I re-lived those emotions today (via YouTube), what struck me the most was the realization that when America stands united against a common evil enemy, and allow our Commander-in-Cheif to actually be able to fight (without his hands tied and arm-chair general-ing from Congress), there is no force, no ideology, no nation that can defeat us.
Please take the time to watch this clip, and for five minutes imagine what a different place we'd be in as a nation if our media reported the heroic stories from Iraq; or if Nancy Pelosi publicly promised to keep Democrats quiet for one full year so our President and troops could finish the major military combat; or if our top priority was not men marrying other men, but was survival.
Make no mistake about it; we will prevail in our current War on Terror. Perhaps it will take another attack on our homeland to convince a great deal of short-sighted and ignorant people that "united we stand, together we fall" is more than just a cliche.
We will move forward and America will remain the shining "city on a hill" for a long time. Think today what part you wish to play in the history which will be taught in schools ten, twenty, one hundred years from now, and let that be your guide to determining whether this war is worth fighting/winning.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Tony Blankley from the Washington Times puts yesterday's announcement by Ahmadinejad, that his country is further along in their uranium-enrichment capabilities, into starkingly clear perspective.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Public schools are a gift and blessing that this nation has provided for over 150 years, and countless millions have been directly, positively, influenced as such. Teachers, principals, administrators, and parent-run school boards do their best to provide the best possible curriculum, facilities, and support for local children to have a chance at learning and experiencing lessons (scholastic and “life”) that will hopefully equip them with the necessary tools for a successful career and life.
I am a product of public schools (but don’t it against them). The teachers and coaches I had along the way played a large part in my development as a student, an athlete, and most importantly, a well-balanced member of society. I learned how to interact with different personalities, religions, and races.
However, as is the case with almost anything the government tries to run, the current state of education in America is at all-time low. We’ve dropped to the bottom of the barrel in crucial categories such as science and math. Increased spending has had a negligible effect in stemming the tide of illiterate and ill-prepared high school students. Something is not working. I think a big part of this very real problem is the monopoly of power the Left has in our educational systems (over 80% of public school teachers voted for John Kerry in 2004).
Horace Mann, known as the “father of public education”, was the first Secretary of Education in Massachusetts. Starting in 1837 Mann traveled New England for more than a decade making the case for free, government-sponsored education for all. His main point of contention was that because of how important education was to every child, it was the government’s “duty” to provide it. Mann believed that schools should remain secular, but welcome students of all faiths and ethnic backgrounds, and encourage the vibrant religious culture that had become an American hallmark. He also thought that free schooling would allow poorer families to overcome the “handicap of their position” in society. Overall, very reasonable and noble goals.
In Milton Friedman’s classic, Free to Choose, the greatest economist of the last century gives more historical insight into the origins of public education. He cites historical sources to show that the crusade for free schooling was not led by concerned parents, but by bureaucrats, and “well-intentioned” intellectuals, administrators, and governmental officials. The truth was that most parents already sent their kids to private schools (with the money they soon would be paying to the government for schools they would have little control over), and were generally content with the quality of it.
Friedman says that the thinking of these pioneers in free education was that if the government, not parents (who had for the previous century been responsible for either home-schooling or paying for private education), were running things; there would be greater job security (unions), more control over curriculum, and better salaries. However, that socialist line of thinking would never “sell” to a capitalistic society; so sugar-coated mantras of “civic duty” and “societal responsibility to our youth” were used to win public support. After all, who wants to be the on the opposing side to free school for little Jamie and Johnny?
Let me stop here to happily and emphatically interject my own personal deepest respect for teachers. I have many friends who have chosen that as their profession. No matter what one might say about their desire for three months (or more) off each year in vacation time, or the seductiveness of a tenured position and a rising pay scale, it is unimaginable that anyone enters the field of public education without wanting to positively impact kids’ lives. (This column is about the frustration many feel toward the administrators, school boards, and unnecessary federal involvement.)
But, the time has now come for concerned parents and voting citizens to re-assess what is really going on in their local school districts. In the 19th century, Americans turned a large percentage of control over in their schools to Uncle Sam and un-elected educational officials. Hoping to get a better overall “product” and enable low-income families to educate their children, we put our faith in the generally non-existent ability for arbitrary “professional educators” to leave their own personal biases, opinions, and worldviews out of the classroom and simply prepare kids for life after high school and college. We’ve been shipwrecked on an island of socialism (the public school system) in a sea of capitalism.
Originally, the tradeoff for parents to relinquish the direct power over where their children went and what they were taught was that the federal government promised to keep the decision-making control in the hands of local, city, and state authorities. District and county elections were to provide a checks-and-balance system for parents to have at least the semblance of input into what was taught and how their tax money was spent. But, post Great Depression and FDR’s “New Deal” expansionary programs, as could be expected (and was predicted by FDR himself); the federal government systematically seized more and more control (i.e. tax money) of the education system in America.
At that time in our nation’s history, the American people had lost a lot of faith in the virtues of capitalism and the free market, and this sentiment was the bedrock upon which modern liberalism has built their rickety “house upon the sand” in educational sectors (and basically anything else they touch). Continuing on into the days of Cultural Revolution and “Great Society” ideals that embodied the 1960’s, previously non-existent roles of public schools were introduced. Far from the original tasks of engaging students in the three R’s, and promoting commonly held American values, we’ve entered into a world where political indoctrination, religious discrimination, and ultra-tolerance of any and all behavior or lifestyle dominate classroom time and lesson plans.
Now we have schools where fourth graders cannot even use the colors green or red around Christmas time so as to not offend non-Christians (forget the fact that it is a federally recognized, national holiday). We have high school English teachers showing propaganda films like the anti-capitalistic “The Corporations” and the conservative news-bashing “Out-Foxed” (those must have been in the sections right after Thoreau and Emerson). “Mixers” solely for gay students can be seen on school calendars from sea to flamboyantly shining sea.
Things have reached a boiling point for many concerned parents around the country. Enrollment in private schools, and home-schooling, are both at all-time highs. More Moderate and Conservative candidates are running for positions on school boards to help reign in the secular-progressive agenda that has run rampant for far too long. Parents are beginning to resent the blatant attempt to mold young minds in the fashion decided upon by previously unaccountable officials and administrators.
In my own district (#214 in the Chicago-land suburbs) there have been recent, heated town hall meetings and inflammatory editorials in local newspapers between the entrenched liberal positions of the overwhelmingly lopsided, left-leaning, school board, who are content with the status quo; and the new conservative candidates who wish to have their voices heard and new policies adopted.
Most have characterized this as some sort of religious coup or hijacking of the schools by religious zealots who want to suppress free speech and force teachers to read the Ten Commandments before each lesson. The concerted effort of the local Left has been to portray the proponents of needed change as crazy, extreme, and out of touch with “mainstream” constituents. The real issues (over-budget spending, declining graduation rates, and blatantly inappropriate material being taught in classes) are all but ignored; and the focus (and sole strategy) of sympathetic journalists and liberal city/county officials are vicious ad homenin (personal) attacks on the conservative candidates running for school board.
The reality is that in District 214 we are seeing Democracy in action. Just because many parents have neglected to get directly involved in the decision-making processes (that directly affect their child’s education), and Left-leaning candidates have found it easy to get elected up until now (because the public has been misinformed), the other members of the school board and their allies are now trying to “project” their own attempts at indoctrination on the benign intentions of truly dissatisfied parents who merely want things “cleaned up” in their tax-paid school systems.
This problem and conflict is not unique to my area. Debates over what should be taught, how it should be taught, how best funds should be allocated, etc., are raging all across the nation. The established educational proponents are up in arms to defend the current powers they possess, and privileges they enjoy. It is easier for most citizens to retain their collectivist outlook and assume everyone in the education system has their child’s best intentions in mind (and actually respect their own family’s values). The best way to ensure that a fairer representation exists in the decision-making processes for school policies and curriculum is to welcome debate and dialogue from those most directly affected: students and their tax-paying parents.
In District #214 we are vastly over-budget and have lower graduation rates then neighboring areas. Many parents have legitimate concerns over what books are being used in classes and have been asking tough questions (no one wants to burn or even singe any literature). There are seven total board members, and currently there is a single, lone voice that isn’t a lock-step liberal. Two new candidates have decided to run on a conservative platform of reform and accountability, and the reaction from the local press, administrators, and current board members would make one think that former followers of the Hale-Bopp Comet cult had promised to bring purple shrouds and cyanide-laced kool-aid to our schools.
Why would we see such a backlash from these groups if they were so confident that their own views were actually the mainstream, and thus incumbency would be a “sure thing” in the upcoming election? What makes so many of us so afraid to challenge entrenched bureaucracies? Let both sides get their views out (that means newspapers actually have to print what Christian Conservatives say too), and the public will choose. Socialism is where the power of the masses are in the hands of a few, largely unaccountable politically-minded officials who, like all humans, thrive on self-interest and personal security.
Monday, April 09, 2007
Friday, April 06, 2007
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
I don't know how to better explain the absolute lunacy of the Left in Congress (and America), who constantly take the side of our enemies in a time of war, than to simply have you read this well-written account of a recent vote in the House of Representatives. Good luck defending this position, Dem's!