If you are still morally outraged and unflinchingly convinced that Target’s transgender bathroom policy is vile enough to warrant a committed, change-of-lifestyle-boycott, then it’s time (way past) to boycott public education as well.
When a family pays $4,446.50 for their kid to take classes and run track at the “free” local public school, private school starts to look like a thrifty option.
By the way, this is pretty much how Obama’s “free” health care scheme will work.
–>I love Rush, Ann, Glenn, and Dinesh, but nothing beats history for giving us a glimpse of things to come if radical Democrats are left unchecked.
It is with absolutely no apology that I post more from Nien Cheng’s book, Life and Death in Shanghai.
“One day, I was told by one of my remaining students besides Da De that Zhang Chunquiao, the Party boss of Shanghai, a Politburo member and a longtime associate of Jiang Qing [Mao’s wife], had said, “We would rather have socialism’s lower production figures than capitalism’s higher production figures.” The radicals in the rural areas took up his statement and proclaimed, “We would rather have socialism’s poor harvest than capitalism’s abundance.” Not to be left behind, other radicals declared, “We would rather have have socialism’s trains that are behind schedule than capitalism’s trains that are on time.” In such an atmosphere, the workers became fearful of doing too much, the peasants became reluctant to go into the field, and drivers of trains, buses, and even mules deliberately slowed down so that they could arrive behind schedule. The already strained economy took another tumble.”
After reading this, one can only stand back and, with a scratch to the head, say, “No way.” But before we castigate the Chinese for being hapless Kool-Aid drinkers, we need to take an honest look at the Kool-Aid consumption in the United States these days.
For hapless and Kool-Aid one need look no further than the Huffington Post. According to them, there is a Bright Side to Unemployment. Nothing beats having filthy rich liberals espousing the virtues of unemployment.
The New York Times, bless their fiscally dwindling souls, has Living With Less: The Human Side of the Global Recession. Here people can share ideas, like recipes, for how they are faring during this global crisis. If you’re looking for a cheaper way to live large while still professing to live green, the Times site won’t help. You’ll have to go to AlGoreGoesGreen.com.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m all about the occasional penny-pinch and scaling-down thing, but only when it’s my idea. Once the government tells me (via the media and unconstitutional taxation) that I’ve got to live with less, that’s when I start thinking someone’s being a tad intrusive.
So, are Americans as gullible as the Chinese were…are? The jury is still out. I’m holding out hope that, since we have been a very blessed and prosperous nation, the vast majority of Americans simply won’t put up with much more of the Obama Regime’s nonsense. China, on the other hand, hadn’t bathed in prosperity before the Cultural Revolution. For some, any change was welcome. And it was their lack of prosperity that, like sugar to yeast, fed the opportunistic Mao.
Which brings us to the underlying agenda behind every Democrat’s plan: Take away prosperity. Once prosperity is handily gotten rid of, the little bit the government will allow will seem like an abundance. You say, “This can’t be. This won’t happen in America.” Don’t be so sure.
Rush is right, the Democrats are destroying this country for a purpose, and that purpose is to secure power. This isn’t new. This isn’t change. This is tried and true, old-hat despotism. The only reason Obama got away with rebranding socialism with the word “change” was because he knew his uneducated voting base was…well, uneducated.
So far it’s been pretty easy going for liberal Democrats. Oh, there have been a few glitches in their master plan-Reagan comes to mind-but for the most part, their Marxist ideas have metastasized throughout mainstream America with little resistance.
All the Democrats have needed to pull off their power-grab is a couple generations that don’t know squat about history (and, for all practical purposes, judging by last year’s election, that day has arrived). And with their agenda-driven, liberal greenhouse called public education, this has been an easy coup for the Left to pull off. Using huge doses of guilt for even being American and revisionist history lessons as fertilizer, these little greenhouse saplings grow up to raise more little saplings who have zero cognizance of their own country’s past greatness. Once all lingering notions of American exceptionalism have been scrubbed from the brains of these future minions, socialism’s lower quality of life will, indeed, seem better than capitalism’s greedy abundance.
Bottom line: They won’t know any better.
These generations firmly in place, the conundrum of socialism versus capitalism will be moved from the theater of ideology to the theater of morality. To be a socialist will be morally right. To be anything else will be punishable. To work toward prosperity will be morally wrong. To barely scrape by will be noble. To stand in line for health care will be a privilege. To harbor a secret notion that you deserve better will be a sin. To be part of the collective herd will be patriotic. To think like an individual will be anathema. All that’s missing from this scenario is a pod of goo and a plug in the back of everyone’s heads Matrix-style.
Sure, I paint an Orwellian picture, but I might not be too far off. When in high school, I was told by a youth pastor that there would come a day when we wouldn’t be allowed have Bibles on school grounds. “Yea, right,” I thought. Those were the days when the Gideons still had access to the front lawn of our school to pass out Bibles to students every spring. America would always be America, I thought. I can be carefree, maybe even a little reckless at times, because I know there are responsible adults running this show.
Those were the days.
One can only hope that, unlike the Chinese, American’s don’t start buying off on the Democrat lie that socialism’s intrusions are better than capitalism’s freedoms.
This from Rush:
This from Nien Cheng’s Life and Death in Shanghai:
When Da De came a few days later, I said to him, “It’s ages since I took you to a restaurant.”
“We musn’t go to a restaurant now. In any case, all the good dishes have been taken off the menu. They are to be served only to visitors from abroad,” he told me.
According to Obama, our anti-American, anti-Semitic president, our children don’t spend enough time in school, and because of this, U.S. school children are lagging behind children in other countries.
It would be nice to think that he really gave a rat’s a…, but we all know he doesn’t.
But, pretending Obama really does care about quality education, his correlation between time spent zoning out in the classroom and academic success is, to use today’s teenage vernacular, lame. I contend that the amount of time spent in an American public school classroom has zero to do with academic success. American school children lag behind because the local pub ed doesn’t teach our kids squat.
American school children lag behind because the local pub ed is too busy teaching our kids how to think like liberals. (Which equates with not thinking at all.)
If the schools taught our kids how to think critically, then our kids would be able to see through the illogical and inane statements that come out of the mouths of our leaders. So when Obama says…
“We continue to call on Palestinians to end incitement against Israel, and we continue to emphasize that America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.
“The United States does Israel no favors when we fail to couple an unwavering commitment to its security with an insistence that Israel respect the legitimate claims and rights of the Palestinians.
“Nations within this body do the Palestinians no favors when they choose vitriolic attacks over a constructive willingness to recognize Israel’s legitimacy.”
…a student could process it and say, “Dude, did that make, like, any sense at all?” or “Woa! Obama just grabbed ankle for the Palestinians and, like, gave Israel the Heisman. That is so not good, man.”
If the schools taught our kids the truth about history instead of the Democrat Party mandated Communist-Utopian-EnviroBunny drivel, then our kids would be able to process the current events (otherwise known as the ObamaPalooza) and say, “Hey, didn’t Hitler want German kids in school all day too?” or “Hey, homey, didn’t Stalin screw with the farmers in Russia sorta like Obama is doing in California?” or “Woa! Mussolini’s thugs sound just like the Black Panthers!” and, my personal favorite, “Dude! History is repeating, like, for real!”
Sadly, this isn’t the case. What we have in America these days are a gaggle of adolescents who hate Bush but can’t conjure up an intelligent reason why; a gaggle of future voters who champion for Obama but don’t have a clue that they are cheering on their own enemy.
But let’s cut to the chase. When Obama waxes eloquent about wanting to ramp up our educational system via keeping the kiddos in school all the live long day, it’s not really about education-it’s about indoctrination. Obama wants America’s minions spending extra hours in the local pub ed getting as much liberal propaganda as their vapid little minds can hold.
This should piss us off.
This should make the hair on the back of your neck stand on end.
History teaches that narcissists like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and Mao knew that the best way to ensure their success in the future was to hijack the minds of the youth. It would seem the only people who study history these days are dictators and despots. We might want to change that.
Here’s a peek at the German pub ed in Hitler’s day:
Education played a very important part in Nazi Germany in trying to cultivate a loyal following for Hitler and the Nazis. The Nazis were aware that education would create loyal Nazis by the time they reached adulthood. The Hitler Youth had been created for post-school activities and schools were to play a critical part in developing a loyal following for Hitler – indoctrination and the use of propaganda were to be a common practice in Nazi schools and the education system.
Enforcing a Nazi curriculum on schools depended on the teachers delivering it. All teachers had to be vetted by local Nazi officials. Any teacher considered disloyal was sacked. Many attended classes during school holidays in which the Nazi curriculum was spelled out and 97% of all teachers joined the Nazi Teachers’ Association.
In America this is known as the NEA…
All teachers had to be careful about what they said as children were encouraged to inform the authorities if a teacher said something that did not fit in with the Nazi’s curriculum for schools.
I wouldn’t be breaking any new ground by listing all the similarities between Obama and Hitler. But it is important to wake up and realize that this man has actually come out and admitted that he feels your kids are better off in the possession of the government schools. Hear me on this: This has been done before with tyrants in the past (and Obama is a tyrant), and the damage done to those countries, not to mention entire generations of children, was monstrous.
At the risk of offending, if you take this lightly, you are being a fool.
It was Hitler who said, “How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.” It is criminal that the leader of our government thinks he has the right to take liberties with our children, but I contend it is an even bigger crime if parents let it happen.
While the temptation to run Obama’s speech to America’s school children through the satirical shredder is strong, I’m going to avoid it on the grounds that much of what he said was, indeed, true and inspirational.
Kids do need to realize that they are responsible for their education, and that they must work hard and persevere in order to make it in this world. All of our kids have something to offer. And, yes, the paths these kids choose will affect this country.
So what’s my beef? Well, for starters, it came from Obama, which automatically makes it suspect. A wannabe communist using conservative language can only mean one thing: He’s trying to pull a fast one.
You know, the Chinese government, during the Cultural Revolution, “inspired” the Chinese school children to work hard in their studies, but at the end of their school careers the government assigned them their jobs. So while Obama waxes eloquent to these students about them becoming doctors, writers, or innovators, he’s leaving out some very important stipulations. First, in Obama’s world, a doctor won’t be able to choose his specialty, let alone treat patients unless the government signs off on it. And, second, In Obama’s world, the only writing that will be allowed will be that which meets the approval of his publishing czar. (I know, he doesn’t have one, but give it time. My money is on Ariana Huffington.) Lastly, in the world Obama wants to create, there won’t be any new iPhones because there won’t be any large, evil corporations to produce them.
What Obama really mans when he says,
“And this isn’t just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you’re learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future.”
“Our educational policy must enable everyone who receives an education to develop morally, intellectually and physically and become a worker with both socialist consciousness and culture.” Mao Tse-tung
Another problem with Obama’s speech is that he really doesn’t believe anything he said. Kids shouldn’t spend all day in front of the TV? Who is he kidding? What better way to further the leftist Democrat agenda than to have an entire generation rendered unproductive and in need of social assistance because they won’t scrape their cans away from Comedy Central and its spot-on political analysis? Besides, if kids gave up their TV habit, they’d miss their president on Saturday Night Live. I’m telling you, he’s being very disingenuous here.
And finally, I find it rather irritating that Obama gets the green light to grace America’s school children with a nationalized address, but when G. W. Bush (then Vice-President) did it in 1991, congressional committees to investigate him spring up like paternity suits at a Kennedy family reunion. Wasn’t it Sen. Gephardt (D-MO) who said:
By the Democratic Party’s design, America’s school children are not being taught the truth about the history of this country and the rest of the world. Because of this, they are completely incapable of recognizing a socialist in capitalist clothing when they see one. This is too bad; Obama’s speech would have made for one hell of a teachable moment.
Well, here’s an argument for ditching school next Tuesday (and for home schooling). President Obama is planning to address America’s public school children on September 8th. Whether children will be strapped to their desks and forced to watch our bumbling leader remains to be seen. Suffice it to say, I’d be giving my kid the day off.
There is nothing wrong with a president addressing school children via the internet per se, but this is Obama we’re talking about. And it would be one thing if we knew the kiddos could flip up their laptops and hear our president wax eloquent on the greatness of America, but we all know that won’t be the case.
Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, claims that Obama will be encouraging students to work hard and set educational goals. I’ve got no problem with encouraging a good work ethic, except that having a good work ethic in America these days gets your corporate jet taken away. And educational goals? How about just getting out of that place alive and with your 8th grade reading ability. But let’s not be fooled here, after his obligatory nod to one of the DNC’s biggest contributors (that would be the National Education Association), I’m predicting he’ll teleprompt his way into talking about how America is doomed unless we have nationalized health care, green jobs, and an end to those mean right wing zealots who keep disrupting the town hall meetings. Spoiler alert: He might even mention something about not pulling the plug on grandma.
Best case scenario? While Obama drones on and teachers furiously scribble notes, classroom behavior will carry on as usual: Elementary students will be eating paste, junior high students will be sleeping, and high school students will be texting their friends with benefits. One can dream.
For the record, Obama’s message to America’s student body is pure, undiluted political narcissism. In the past, presidents who made efforts to reach out to school kids talked about and participated in things of interest to the kids. But that’s not how Obama rolls. He’s got an agenda to push down the throats of Americans, and what better way to do that than to propagandize their kids in the pub ed system? It worked for Germany.
“Those who have the youth on their side control the future.” Hans Schemm, leader of Nazi Teacher’s League
Sorry, it’s a comparison that’s a little hard to avoid.
In an effort to make the job of indoctrinating the students easier for the teachers, a manual will be provided that has suggestions for “guiding” the students through Obama’s speech along with questions for the students to answer after the speech. Hmm…liberal president giving liberal teachers a manual on how to help kids disseminate what promises to be a liberal speech. No harm there. Michelle Malkin has a story that illustrates the highly probable results of the aforementioned combination.
Like I said, I’ve got no problem with a president putting out an address to the nation’s school children. My problem is with Obama doing it.
“Place the lives of children in their formative years, despite the convictions of their parents, under the ultimate control of experts appointed by the State, force them to attend schools where the higher aspirations of humanity are crushed out, and where the mind is filled with the materialism of the day, and it is difficult to see how even the remnants of liberty can subsist…
“The truth is that the materialist paternalism of the present day, if allowed to go unchecked, will rapidly make of America one huge “Main Street,” where spiritual adventure will be discouraged and democracy will be regarded as consisting in the reduction of all mankind to the proportions of the narrowest and least gifted of the citizens.”
J. Gresham Machen
This muse is a product of a day spent going over my son’s history lessons. He’s been studying WWII for the last several weeks. And, as I grade his work and peruse his book list, my conviction that the vast majority in this country are frighteningly ignorant in the area of history grows ever stronger. If you doubt me, then you should be offended. I think I just insulted you.
My point is this: If the average wide-eyed, empty-headed student sitting in a public school classroom had access to, and were taught from, textbooks that weren’t written along politically correct lines, but, rather textbooks that sought to uphold the American values of freedom and individual liberty, they might actually learn something; they might actually be able to discern a socialist when he runs for president.
My son is fortunate enough to have access to such books. No, we aren’t one of those uber brainy home school families, we just happen to dig history. My mantra to my kids has always been this warning: “The best way to oppress a people is to keep them ignorant.” I’d say the educational system in this country is doing a bang up job in that area. Again, if you don’t believe me then answer this: How did a socialist chuckle head like Obama waltz into power without so much as a raised eyebrow?
The answer to that is simple: Because the majority of those who voted for Obama don’t even know what socialism is, thus, when the man spoke, they got thrills up their legs rather than chills down their spines.
Here’s a challenge for you. If you have a high school aged student living in your home, go grab his history textbook and open it to the section that “teaches” about Karl Marx, Socialism, and Communism. This could be a whole chapter, but I rather doubt it. It might be easier to check the index in the back. Now, read said portion of the textbook and, when finished, ask yourself this question: What’s so bad about Communism/Socialism?
After you have formulated your answer, read the comprehension questions my son had to answer today. I’ve included some timely quotes to drive home the point that, thanks to the good old American Public Education System (and the choke hold the libs have on the media), we are quickly trading our freedoms for tyranny.
What atheistic idea is foundational to Communism?
The idea of no absolutes is foundational to Communism.
How did Karl Marx view history?
As a record of class struggle between the wealthy and the poor.
Obama: “For over two decades, he’s [Bush] subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy- give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else.”
Obama: “Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control – and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous.”
What did he [Marx] believe was the source of all conflict?
Ownership of private property.
What did Marx claim was the greatest driving force in history?
What economic system did he oppose?
What economic system did he favor?
Obama: This is the moment when we must build on the wealth that open markets have created, and share its benefits more equitably. Trade has been a cornerstone of our growth and global development. But we will not be able to sustain this growth if it favors the few, and not the many.
Compare socialism and communism. How are they alike? How are they different?
Both philosophies enslave people in a system that deprives them of their freedoms and property. Socialists use legislation, regulation, and taxation to obtain what they seek while Communists obtain what they seek through the use of violent revolution.
Obama: To the extent that we’ve got a fiscal crisis right now, part of it is prompted by a bullheaded insistence on the part of the president [Bush], for example, that we should extend all of his tax cuts and make all of them permanent.
What did Marx call the “opiate of the people”?
Marx called religion the “opiate of the masses” because he believed that religion was like a drug that made people content with less in this life because they expect happiness only in the next.
What philosophy is at the foundation of Communist theology?
When was the Communist Manifesto published?
Name eight measures Marx and Engels advocated in The Communist Manifesto.
1) The abolition of private property and inheritance rights;
2) The redistribution of wealth through heavy, progressive income taxes;
Obama: I think when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody.
3) A central bank to control all credit and to manipulate the nation’s currency;
Obama: Instead of having a set of policies that are equipping people for the globalization of the economy, we have policies that are accelerating the most destructive trends of the global economy.
4) Government control of all means of communication and transportation;
5) Government ownership of all means of production (factories, farms, mines, power plants, etc.) and all natural resources;
Obama: “We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.”
Obama: So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.
6) The abolition of unemployment through social welfare programs;
7) The redistribution of the population (from cities to rural areas and vice versa); and
8) Mandatory state-sponsored and state-supported education.
Obama: We have an obligation and a responsibility to be investing in our students and our schools. We must make sure that people who have the grades, the desire and the will, but not the money, can still get the best education possible.
How is Communism a negative system?
Communism is a denial of everything that is true, righteous, and good. Some examples of the negatives of Communism are no God, no morality, no family ties…
Obama: I opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. It should be repealed and I will vote for its repeal on the Senate floor. I will also oppose any proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban gays and lesbians from marrying.
…no individuality, and no incentives.
So, how did your textbook fare? Lest you think my textbook is biased, I suggest you do some fact checking. If you’re a liberal, you may as well skip this.
Oh, and for the record, my youngest son’s history book teaches the states and capitals.
Obama: Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.
Warning: This post is long, slams liberal ideology, and is worthy of a plush seat and a tall cold one.
While the leftist, Hollywood Politico wing-nuts are running the show (and the election) in this country, I find it stunning that no one seems to be able to figure out why. But what I find truly disturbing is that conservatives are scratching their heads wondering how this could be happening.
I’ve got two words: Education and TV.
Once again, it’s time for a history lesson and a dose of reality. We’ll start with the history lesson.
The number one reason militant, immoral liberals are lauded and deified while they mock and tear at the very moral fabric of this nation, (and waltz into power) is because, for the past eight decades or so, America’s children have been subject to a nasty little version of behavior modification called Public Education. There, I said it. I’m finally coming out of my home school closet with the gloves on. It’s time to pay attention.
To fully understand the the culpability of America’s pub-ed system, we must take a little trip back in time. Think back to the one-room school house and those little minions who actually got an education. The Bible, in many cases, was the book that was used as the “reader” to teach the children to…well, read. Things were moving along rather well until…
…Jump to the early 1900’s -John Dewey and Co. What a guy. John Dewey was a pragmatist, and a proponent of what was then affectionately called Progressive Education. Dewey and his followers thought up a system to reform the schools. But the schools weren’t in need of reform. The seeds of an interminable, liberal, Democratic pattern were being sown.
Dewey and his cohorts denounced traditional schooling. You know, the type that actually educates and trains children to think critically. Dewey wanted to replace the traditional schooling method with a child centered approach. Bottom line: They weren’t so much interested in learning as in socializing children, getting them accustomed to group activities and taking the direction of the group. I call it Sheeple Camp. They proposed to use the schools as the entering wedge for transforming society. In short, they sought to use the schools as a training ground for collectivism (that would be Obamaism, otherwise known as socialism) under the guise of being progressive. (Think: Change and hope. History is repeating.)
Who were Dewey’s cohorts? John Gatto, former New York state Teacher of the Year, and author of Dumbing Us Down writes:
Edward Thorndike (he is the Thorndike of the Thorndike/Barnard dictionary), and John Dewey of Columbia’s Teacher’s College and their industrialist allies [John D.Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford, and J.P. Morgan], decided to bend government schooling to business and the political state just exactly as it had been bent in Prussia. A higher mission would exist too. Schools would serve as “instruments of managed evolution, establishing conditions for selective breeding before the masses take things into their own hands” (Quoted from a published essay by Edward Thorndike at Columbia Teacher’s college in 1911).
More from Thorndike:
It will, of course, be understood that directly or indirectly, sooner or later, every advance in the sciences of human nature will contribute to our success in controlling human nature and changing it to the advantage of the common weal.
Then there is this from the very first report issued by John D. Rockefeller’s General Education Board. This is their first mission statement:
“In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions of intellectual and character education fade from their minds and unhampered by tradition we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into men of learning or philosophers, or men of science. We have not to raise up from them authors, educators, poets or men of letters, great artists, painters, musicians, nor lawyers, doctors, statesmen, politicians, creatures of whom we have ample supply. The task is simple. We will organize children and teach them in an perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way”.
But let’s not stop there; here’s a montage of the ideas from the men behind the morphing of America’s public education system over the years.
“The children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming, where everyone would be interdependent.”-John Dewey
“Our schools have been scientifically designed to prevent over-education from happening. The average American [should be] content with their humble role in life, because they’re not tempted to think about any other role.” -William Torrey Harris, U.S. Commissioner of Education from 1889-1906.
“Ninety-nine [students] out of a hundred are automata, careful to walk in prescribed paths, careful to follow the prescribed customs. This is not an accident but the result of substantial education, which scientifically defined, is the subsumption of the individual.” -William Torrey Harris, U.S. Commissioner of Education from 1889-1906.
“Individual talent is too sporadic and unpredictable to be allowed any important part in the organization society. Social systems which endure are built on the average person who can be trained to occupy any position adequately if not brilliantly.” -Stuart Chase, The Proper Study of Mankind, 1948.
“Nothing is more central to the maintenance of social order than the regulatory mechanisms employed to control and socialize our children.” -Ronald Boostom, Coordinator for Juvenile “Justice” in California, 1980.
I won’t even go into how poorly American children do on those incredibly mind-numbing standardized tests, or how colleges are having to lower their standards for their incoming freshmen, and I’ll skip the part about how the schools are handing out diplomas to functional illiterates en masse. It’s old news by now. And for all the money the National Education Association lobbies for (…er…it’s for the children…), nary a dime goes into actually, educating the kiddos. Last time I checked, the Democratic National Committee got more than the students. But make no mistake, this is all by design.
Suffice it to say, the talk of “fixing” America’s schools is pointless. It would be right up there with such worthwhile endeavors as nailing Jell-O to a tree, or trying to convince Bill Clinton that sex outside of marriage is a bad thing. Based on history, public education in America (and the Clinton’s marriage) is chugging along exactly as planned. Where once there were Bibles, we now have condoms. Where once was taught history, we now have political correctness, environmentalism, and anti-America rhetoric. Where once the kids actually learned, now they are shot. Yes, I’d say things are moving along quite smashingly.
So, how does all this tie to the current election and the gaggle of lunatics who seem to be running the show? To answer that, another question must be addressed: Why does it seem as if no one really understands what is at stake in this election? Here’s the key, folks. Precious few truly understand because the goal of the progressivism that spawned our government-run educational system has been met. Vast amounts of our population are uneducated in history and economics (by the pub-ed’s design), unable to think logically or critically (by the pub-ed’s design), and thus, unable to see the danger that lies ahead (again, by the pub-ed’s design).
And just what is the danger? The danger is in the forfeiting of this nation’s sovereignty, and our liberty to the Democratic group-hug called collectivism, aka, socialism. Make no mistake, the founding fathers of public education were unabashed collectivists. And their heirs are no less determined.
And who are their heirs? Glad you asked. Tenured college professors who willingly and knowingly train future teachers in the art of social reconstruction, humanism, and globalism; the Hollywood elite who have cashed in on America’s steadily declining intellect and morals; prominent newspaper and media moguls who, over the years, have raked in millions from the very giants who blueprinted our educational system. In the words of Goose, “The list is long, but distinguished.”
But enough with history. Now for the dose of reality. It’s time for that smack between the eyes that nearly everyone, present company included, deserves. Because, while it’s easy on the conscience to point the finger at the left, the sad, unavoidable truth is this: The other reason the Hollywood Politico wing-nuts have been given credibility while they assault America with their congressionally protected degeneracy and their blathering hate-America political lunacy — the reason they’ve been awarded the big nod is this: Americans arrange their living rooms, and their lives around the television.
Think about it.
America worships at the shrine of HDTV. We can’t live without it, at least that’s what we are being led to believe. From TVs hanging from the ceilings of malls and Wal-Marts, the mini TVs running the CNN ticker at bank drive-through lanes, and the scads of idiot boxes in doctors’ and dentists’ offices, you’d think the average American incapable of a single moment lost in quiet thought.
Ah, but isn’t that the point? A person who engages in the thinking process is a dangerous person in the eyes of a liberal, even if that thinking is done during the ten minutes it takes to buy a gallon of milk. Which, by the way, is about all the time it would take to realize that The View is a complete waste of time.
Big conspiracy theory, right? I don’t think so. As we all know, the old-school way of getting TV reception (the use of rabbit ears or tin foil wrapped around the cat’s tail) will be a thing of the past by February 2009. And since that means the freeing of millions from the blatherings of Katie Couric, Oprah, and the rest of the main stream media’s highly trained journalists, the government had to save the (their) day. Salvation, my folks, is coming in the form of a taxpayer-funded voucher.
Now why would the government do that? Sounds kind of cryptic in a benevolent sort of way. Well, actually, it is. Anytime the government hands out money to “assist” people, it nearly always translates into the government using the tax payer’s money to further their agenda. In this case, and in the case of the NEA, the goal is to maintain a steady stream of liberalism flowing into the minds of Americans, young and old. And everyone knows that those who think like a liberal will vote like a liberal.
It’s genius, really.
So, again, talk of fixing the schools or holding the media accountable for its content is, in my estimation, a pointless endeavor. Both institutions are running exactly as intended, and the people running the show are in their positions by design. Did I mention it was genius?
If we can find alternative fuels (I’m still not on board with corn-fed cars, by the way.), then I’m fairly certain we can find alternatives to education and entertainment that won’t maim trees or deny mating space to the eastern Alaska snow rat…or Pamela Anderson. But are Americans, the conservative Americans who claim they are fed up, willing to educate their children or turn off their televisions?
Sadly, I think I already know the answer.
“When an opponent declares, ‘I will not come over to your side,’ I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to us already. . . . What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”
~Adolf Hitler The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, “Education in the Third Reich”
I’d wager Barney Frank’s bonus check that these kids don’t even understand what they’re singing about. Talk about child abuse.
I wonder how they’d feel if they knew Obama and his party are responsible for the sanctioned killing of nearly half their young generation. The little tykes might just change their tune.
Top image courtesy of Dr. Slogan’s Prescriptions.