Wednesday, May 30, 2007
If the consensus underlying American public education has disappeared, why shouldn't the institution?
Should America have public schools, or would we do better without them? Nothing is more important to this country than the transformation of children into educated American citizens. That's what public schools are for, and no institutions are better suited to the role--in principle. They used to fill it with distinction.
But there's no reason we must have public schools. Granted, the public has a strong interest in educating America's children, at a cost that's divided equitably among all taxpayers and not borne by the parents of school-age children alone. But these requirements don't imply any need for public schools. We need an Air Force, and the Air Force needs planes. Taxpayers pay for the force and the planes. But the pilots are supplied directly by the government, the airplanes by private companies (with government oversight and assistance). Schooling might be furnished on either model: mainly by public or mainly by private organizations. We know that private schools are perfectly capable of supplying first-class educations. So the question stands: Why have public schools? How should we decide whether to have them or not?
... American public schools have become Chairman Mao's re-education center ... They are as dangerous to us as aQ.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Monday, May 28, 2007
A few writings ago, I got full of myself (again) and wrote that we, as a nation, have forgotten how to fight. It seemed to make some sense to some of you; it sure did to me. Here are a few more thoughts on this fighting stuff.
For me, and many like me, this war is about real people out dying and getting blown apart because of a few incompetents. Our generals, the most senior of the military, are to blame for this. They are the very root of our demise, our malaise and our inability to win.
... FUBAR Generals AND King George WIMPY Bush! ... our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines, however, ARE SUPERB!
Sunday, May 27, 2007
... repeating the same mistakes over and over and over ...
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Thursday, May 24, 2007
WASHINGTON – A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc.
The final report, published in English, Spanish and French, is scheduled for submission to all three governments by Sept. 30, according to the Center for Strategic & International Studies.
... "The results of the study will enable policymakers to make sound, strategic, long-range policy decisions about North America, with an emphasis on regional integration," explains Armand B. Peschard-Sverdrup, director of CSIS' Mexico Project. "Specifically, the project will focus on a detailed examination of future scenarios, which are based on current trends, and involve six areas of critical importance to the trilateral relationship: labor mobility, energy, the environment, security, competitiveness and border infrastructure and logistics."
... this is called premeditated merger ...
A similar thing happened many years ago when the government forced racial school integration throughout the South. The Southerners, except for a few holdouts in Alabama, having lived with blacks all their lives, adapted very quickly. It was the Bostonians, you may remember, who had such a hard time with it. No sensible person would argue that integration should not have occurred, however the "integration" was done in a completely incompetent manner. Local schools that once held a high level of academics, discipline, and pride reduced all rules of behavior, discipline, and academic criteria to the lowest common denominator. Florida public schools, before those days, were rated within the top 10% of schools in the country. They're now rated near the bottom.
The same sort of thing will happen as we integrate more and more with Mexico, then the rest of Central and South America. We are well on our way, folks ... and the direction we're headed is down.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
by Frosty Wooldridge
In tomorrow's America of suffocating political correctness and clashing cultures, unrestricted immigration will prove a merciless weapon of war. It's importing conflicting languages, barbaric rituals such as female genital mutilation, deadly diseases like tuberculosis and leprosy, cultural antagonisms and loss of a cohesive national identity. California is our national harbinger of things to come. It is called Third World Momentum.
California citizens die in emergency rooms because hospitals suffer an onslaught of immigrants who can't pay. Because of no family planning in their countries of origin, this endless line of immigrants is pushing us toward 200 million added people vying for diminishing resources past the mid century. For starters, how about a glass of water in the drought prone West?
This is not about race, creed or color. It’s about too many people and an unsustainable society in the long term. It’s about accelerating unsolvable problems. Minimum population projections add four to five million people to every state in the union. California will add 20 million. Can your state add millions of people without horrific consequences? It’s important that you enter this accelerating debate on our nation’s future.
What is at stake? Our children, the viability of our nation and our way of life. It’s about law and order along with citizenship. In short, it’s about America. It’s about you.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Lipset's observation about the indispensability of religious practice to American life came to mind recently with the release of a study on the societal benefits of religion. Released last December, "Why Religion Matters Even More: The Impact of Religious Practice on Social Stability," has not gotten a lot of publicity in the media; but its findings are increasingly relevant, especially now as debates over religion's proper role in society continue to rage, and as the impact of religion on our politics has emerged as a decisive national campaign issue.
Authored by Pat Fagan, William H.G. Fitzgerald Research Fellow in Family and Cultural Issues at the Heritage Foundation, the report examines the last ten years of empirical research on the effects of religion on a host of social indicators.
Fagan's conclusion? Religion has never mattered more: to individuals, families and society at large.
The progress in the past three short months in Iraq is unmistakable. Since General Petraeus has taken command of MNF-I forces in mid February, the convergence of developments has fundamentally changed the outlook in Iraq. While “The Surge” has dominated discussion – be it on operational tempo within Baghdad or withdrawal timetables within the DC Beltway – progress on several vital fronts is beginning to reshape realities on the ground.
As the contentious internal American political debate continues, our leaders and the American public would do well to acknowledge the significantly changing situation.
In Baghdad, for example, the over-hyped Muqtada al-Sadr has long made tracks for the more hospitable climes of Iran. The Baker Commission’s Iraq Study Group Report estimated the Mahdi Army (Jaish al-Mahdi or JAM) to consist of 40-60 thousand armed fighters. In the absence of its leadership, Sadr’s ‘army’ has splintered into the various bands of Shia street thugs they always were. Sure, there are exceptions, such as the particular hard core ‘extremist’ extra-judicial killing (EJK) cells hunting Sunnis to stoke Iran’s much-desired Iraqi civil war. But an estimated 3,000 Iranian-backed extremists in EJK cells still roaming the streets must be seen as an undeniable improvement over the tens of thousands recently under the Mahdi Army banner.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
"Bush is the chief culprit. He's wanted this from day one. In fact, we played a sound bite yesterday of him gleefully looking forward to the Democrat-controlled New Congress last Fall! At last he could push through his ultra-internationalist agenda."
The Bush Administration has renewed its 2004 request that the Senate ratify the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). While UNCLOS contains provisions that would be marginally beneficial to the U.S. Navy, other provisions of the treaty, such as those regarding the settlement of disputes, royalties on the exploitation of resources on the deep seabed, and the empowering of an additional U.N.-affiliated international bureaucracy, pose far greater risks to U.S. interests. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is likely to have unintended negative consequences for U.S. interests. Nothing has occurred since 2004 that should lead the Senate to reverse its earlier decision to decline to take up the treaty.
Much to Lose, Little to Gain ...
One example of U.S. interests being thwarted by bloc voting is the new U.N. Human Rights Council. The U.S. was a strong proponent of creating a new body to replace the discredited U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which had became a haven for human rights abusers to protect one another from scrutiny and censure. Once locked into negotiations over the specifics of the new council, however, the U.S. was repeatedly outnumbered and isolated. As a result, the council has minimal requirements for membership, and China, Cuba, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and other repressive states have won council seats. Unsurprisingly, the council has performed just as badly, if not worse, as its predecessor, and the U.S. has declined even to seek a seat on it.
Further, U.N.-related multilateral treaties often create unaccountable international bureaucracies. The UNCLOS bureaucracy is called the International Seabed Authority Secretariat, which is headed by a secretary-general. The Secretariat has a strong incentive to enhance its own authority at the expense of state sovereignty. Thus University of Virginia School of Law Professor John Norton Moore describes this sort of treaty as a “law-defining international convention.” The law that is being defined and applied by international bureaucrats is one designed to govern the actions of the participating states, not to serve their joint interests. For example, a provision of UNCLOS that would impose direct levies on the revenues of U.S. companies generated through the extraction of resources from the deep seabed reveals this bias against state sovereignty.
... there is much more to this long article of great importance and significance. It would be wise to be aware of these non-descript treaties slipping in under the radar. Ignoring them will be our doom.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Sellout.” It may be harsh, but it’s the most accurate and succinct way to sum up how conservatives feel right now about President Bush and Senate Republicans, who have cut a deal that would grant amnesty to the estimated 12 million illegal aliens living in the U.S. — not to mention the parents, spouses, and children of these illegals.
Title VI of a draft copy of the bill breaks down amnesty visas into three categories:
Z-1 — Illegal aliens present and working in the United States up to Jan. 1, 2007.
Z-2 — Parents and spouses of illegal aliens qualifying under the Z-1 category.
Z-3 — Children of illegal aliens qualifying under the Z-1 category.These “Z Visa” holders can stay in the “Z” status indefinitely, which means they never have to pursue “a pathway to citizenship.” They also would be able to get Social Security numbers and benefit from some welfare programs. Shockingly, there is no cap on the numbers of amnesty recipients in the draft language. The only thing the Z Visa holder can’t do is vote — until, that is, a liberal judge declares this limitation unconstitutional or until a liberal president can railroad through a “technical corrections” bill.
The amendment, which was co-sponsored by Mr. Reid, Nevada Democrat, died in a 67-29 procedural vote, with 47 Republicans, 19 Democrats and one independent blocking the plan to start a troop withdrawal in 120 days and cut off funds March 31 to most military operations in Iraq.
... the Dems rhetoric haven't matched their actions as long as I can remember! No principle, absolutely none! Same as the Repubs!
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
"Quite clearly, suspension is a requirement by the Security Council, and I would hope the Iranians would listen to the world community," ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said in remarks published by the New York Times and confirmed by an IAEA official.
"But from a proliferation perspective, the fact of the matter is that one of the purposes of suspension - keeping them from getting the knowledge - has been overtaken by events," ElBaradei said.
... firstly, ElBaradei heading the IAEA is like al Sadr controlling the Catholic church; secondly, the Bush admin was never going to do anything about Iran anyway. Israel, it's your move (but your leadership is as weak as ours!)
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Although he opposed NAFTA in 1993, Giuliani recently declined to call for building a fence on the United States border with Mexico, and he has supported a guest-worker program.
Columnist Michelle Malkin also has documented that while mayor of New York City, Giuliani kept the municipality a sanctuary city for illegal aliens, adhering to a policy first established by Mayor Ed Koch in 1989.
Now comes a new report about Giuliani's involvement with public-private-partnership projects that include NAFTA Superhighway funding and his open borders record on immigration questions, all of which could undermine his otherwise tough policy on terrorism that has resulted from the 9/11 role Giuliani played in managing New York City's response to the attacks on the World Trade Center.
... roughly 60 percent of LOST’s provisions have to do with the supranational management of two-thirds of the world’s surface and its resources.
... photo is the USS Pueblo. remember her? If America wishes to continue to press its power via the world's oceans, signing this into Law will be a gross mistake. Any action taken by the American Navy in International waters could be adjudicated and made null and void!
Today, Tuesday, May 15, is the 59th anniversary of the day Israel was established. For the Palestinians, this day is Nakba (“Catastrophe”) Day. That is, the “catastrophe” is not Israel’s conquest of the West Bank and Gaza in June 1967, nor even its victory in the (1948-1949) Independence War and the emergence of the Palestinian-refugee issue, but the creation of Israel itself on May 15, 1948.
That event remains, for the Palestinians, the quintessential catastrophe despite two facts. First of all, according to the UN Partition Plan (November 29, 1947), the Israel that was supposed to arise on that day would have been a tiny, chopped-up country consisting of a strip of land along the Mediterranean coast, the eastern Galilee, and the Negev desert, with Jerusalem an international city. Second, according to that plan the rest of the land would have been the proverbial Palestinian state—which the Palestinians (along with the rest of the Arab world), not for the first time or the last time, rejected hands-down, preferring instead to join five Arab armies in an attempt to wipe out the nascent Israel.
... let's see if the Bush Administration acknowledges this day!
Monday, May 14, 2007
In a move that echoes the hearts-and-minds strategy of the Vietnam War, the U.S. military is planning to build two "super-madrassas" in Afghanistan in an effort to win over religious leaders and to convince parents not to send their children to madrassas in Pakistan run by Islamic extremists.
The planned super-madrassas, under construction in the border town of Paktika, Afghanistan, will accommodate 1,000 boys each, the London Telegraph reported.
Madrassas – Islamic religious schools – provide not only religious education, but room and board for children. During the period when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan, most conventional schools were closed down. For many parents, the choice has been between a religious education or no education at all.
For many in the border regions, the madrassas of Pakistan have been the only option. Those schools, often under the control of hardline clerics, have often been little more than incubators for hatred against the West and, at times, recruiting centers for jihad.
... this is called; ENABLING TERRORISM!
Under his control, the New York City Corp. lost a lawsuit against the federal government over Republican-crafted welfare reform legislation that required state and local authorities to report illegal aliens to the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
The law stipulated that only citizens and certain legal immigrants were to receive food stamps and imposed financial penalties on states that did not verify the legal status of those applying for the stamps.
Giuliani said the final welfare reform bill, signed by President Clinton in 1996, was “anti-immigrant” and, “although I do think the bill does some good, in the end I believe it does more harm than good.”
... a Liberal by any other name is still ...
Sunday, May 13, 2007
... UPDATE: New Article!
Saturday, May 12, 2007
... Mr. "G" is wrong on several counts; Murder is Not a Choice, Abortion is NOT a Right, his Divergence from Conservatives on issues Does Disqualify him, and Bad Laws should be Stricken or Changed. You're running as a candidate for the wrong party, "G". Then again, perhaps you're not!
Friday, May 11, 2007
2. We would be better off if less people voted.
3. Men are better equipped than women to do certain jobs.
4. Racism is not the biggest problem that black Americans face any more.
5. The only practical way to make peace between the Israelis and Palestinians is for the Israelis to transfer the Palestinians and take their land.
... and I would add:
6. We should never again refer to the "Global War On Terror", instead let's call it what it is and should be; The Global War On Radical Islam.
Speaking last December before journalists assembled by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, Peter Berger had some explaining to do. Berger, an emeritus professor at Boston University, is a rightly esteemed sociologist of religion. "We live in an age of overwhelming religious globalization," he began. But, as late as a quarter-century ago, neither he nor most other academics saw it coming. Most analysts, he explained, had the same stale orthodoxy about religion's inevitable demise. "The idea was very simple: the more modernity, the less religion. . . . I think it was wrong."
... Spiritualpolitique lesson one is that even in stable representative democracies, intra-national religious cleavages, whether long-buried or out in the open, always matter to who governs and to what ends.
...Spiritualpolitique lesson two is that constitutionalism, not democratization, matters most where religious differences run deepest or remain most intense.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
The director of international economics at the Council of Foreign Relations has launched a scathing attack on sovereignty and national currencies.
Benn Steil, writing in the current issue of CFR's influential Foreign Affairs magazine, says "the world needs to abandon unwanted currencies, replacing them with dollars, euros, and multinational currencies as yet unborn."
In the article, "The End of National Currency," Steil clearly asserts the dollar and the euro are temporary currencies, perhaps necessary today. He argues "economic development outside the process of globalization is no longer possible."
His inevitable conclusion is "countries should abandon monetary nationalism."
... a long way off, IMO, but nevertheless, we're headed there.
In Pakistan, an estimated 100,000 people demonstrated on April 15 in Karachi, the country's largest city, to protest the plans of a powerful mosque in Islamabad, the Lal Masjid, to establish a parallel court system based on Islamic law, the Shari‘a. "No to extremism," roared the crowd. "We will strongly resist religious terrorism and religious extremism," exhorted Altaf Hussain, leader of the Mutahida Qaumi Movement, at the rally.
... now, if we could only sight one in America! OH! Wait, Mr. beck says these guys are "moderate". I'll hold my opinion on that.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
The message that got Michelle Incanno's blood boiling reads:
"Why in moments of crisis do we ask God for strength and help? As cognitive beings, why would we ask something that may well be a figment of our imaginations for guidance? Why not search inside ourselves for the power to overcome? After all, we are strong enough to cause most of the catastrophes we need to endure."
This is not the first time a message on a Starbucks cup has caused controversy.
... Well I'll be! No wonder I've never been in a "Ben and Jerry's"