Vox Popoli

SB does his best impression of Leonidas:

It may be true the public schooling was part of Nazi and Communist indoctrination. But it was introduced by the Puritans (and their allies against Monarchy, the Levellers, etc.). The reason it is so important in a democracy is that if a large group of people will be voting, they should be literate and sophisticated.

The Puritan system of schooling had died out long before the American Revolution. The present system hails from Andrew Bell’s importation of the Hindu schooling method, which was explicitely designed to preserve the caste system and instill a servile attitude in the sub-Brahmin castes. SB’s first logical flaw is revealed by his error in confusing a representative republic with a democracy, the second is his assumption a public school can reliably produce literate and sophisticated graduates.

I agree with you that leftists have taken over the educational arena. (When I went to school, we really were taught to be patriotic, with no apologies). I also agree that the government is not very good at running anything, and schools are no different. How far would you go in trying to remedy this? Eliminate all public support for education? It is not hard to see what this would lead to. This is a classic case of “free rider effect.” What’s good for the country is a populace which is very well trained and educated. We all benefit from that. If the full burden is returned to the parents, who compose only a small part of the population, and not a very wealthy part either, only the wealthiest will be able to provide an adequate education for their children even to reach their own level of success.

There is so much wrong here, factually and logically, that one barely knows where to start. In 2002, there were 3.1 million public school teachers in America and 54.7 million school-age children in public, private and home schools. Since the American birth rate is 2.07/woman, that means that there are around 50 million parents of school-age children, or one-sixth of the population. If one percent of the population suffices to maleducate 47.7 million children in the present public system, surely the sixteen percent who doubtless care far more for their children can manage to achieve results at least as good. And yes, I absolutely would eliminate all public support for education, as government funding inevitably destroys that which it is theoretically supposed to support.

It’s all well and good to say “Just let my wife figure out how to educate the children.” For most people, that is just not going to happen, because most people are not cut out to be educators. It’s true, as you say,that the government does not own our children. That is not the point. What’s good for the individual is not the same as what is good for the society when it comes to education. Our country must collectively support education or we really will be overwhelmed by the other countries which do support education.

If you allow the collectivist enough rope, eventually he will reveal his true colors and hang himself. SB clearly views der Staat as supreme, with precedence over the rights of the individual. But America rose to global dominance without the public school system. Despite its military power, America now appears to be in irretrievable long-term decline and the failures of the public school system – or rather, its success in creating a subservient middle class – are more than a little responsible for allowing this decline to take place. It is worth noting that it is only the private university system that competes favorably with the rest of the world; our centralized public schools are worse than most other public school systems which are smaller, less politicized and less prone to destructive intellectual fads.

CA explains why he is a homeschooling father now:

Thank you for reporting on the statistics of child abuse. Last year my seven-year-old son was verbally and emotionally abused by his first grade teacher. When he began saying things like “I want to die” and “just shoot me” in the morning before school I realized something was terribly wrong. Today is our FIRST day of homeschooling, he is not going back. I met with his new teachers last week. They told me how frightened he was of them. When a teacher approaches him, he either jumps to the opposite side of his desk and crouches down in the floor or runs to the back of the room and hides in a corner. I explained to them some of the things that happened last year and of course they didn’t believe me.

His first grade teacher is a monster and should be fired. I couldn’t go to the school board because this abusive teacher’s husband is a member. The principal and superintendent wouldn’t believe me. We have no way to stop this monster from harming more children. He has repeatedly asked to be homeschooled for about a year now. He says things like “they are pulling me back down the hill.” He hates school and is terrified of all teachers because of what one monster did.

Ironically enough, that monster may have done CA’s son a favor. Now he’ll receive a proper education from people who love him, and in eleven years not only will that teacher be forgotten, but he’ll have missed eleven years of maleducation and destructive socialization. CA’s son is one of the lucky ones, as his parents have been forced to confront the evil of the system instead of being lulled into complacency until it is too late.

Peter King momentarily indulges in a change of scenery by removing his nose from Brett Favre’s behind:

I think, at the end of the season, we will look back at one play as the most decisive and season-changing in all of pro football. And we will wonder: Why aren’t fumbles reviewable under the NFL replay system? Last week, with the Pack and Vikes tied at 31, Green Bay fumbled a kickoff in the final minute and there was a wild scramble for the ball. From the one FOX replay that showed anything, it appeared as though Vikings defensive back Derek Ross had his right arm covering the ball and holding it tight to his upper body before a pig-pile of players descended on him. “I just don’t understand it,” Ross said. “I had that ball cradled into me, and I had possession. There were people pulling and tugging at it, but it never left my possession. And when I stood up and showed the ball to the ref, all he said was, ‘Green Bay ball.’ I said, ‘How could you make that call! I got the ball!’ And he looks at me and says, ‘Green Bay ball.’ ” Problem was, the officials also saw Packers special-teamer Ben Steele with two hands on the ball. And director of officiating Mike Pereira told me that was the key. “If you’ve got more than one guy with possession, or more than one guy with two hands on the ball, the officials decided it’s an instance of co-possession, and the ball reverts to the team that had possession starting the play. In this case, that was Green Bay.” But why, I asked, couldn’t a fumble like this be reviewed, so that the ref would have a chance to see if one player — in this case, Ross — had possession of the ball before he got snowed under by bodies? “My experience is you could never be positive who had possession of the ball once the bodies start flying around,” Pereira said. Maybe. But maybe, in this rare instance, the ref would rule Ross had possession, or maybe would he rule it inconclusive. But at least the ref should have every possible aid in determining the outcome of the play that, in effect, determined that the Packers would be tied for first with the tiebreaker edge heading into the final seven weeks — instead of being two games behind with the tiebreaker disadvantage. “I am bitter,” said Ross. “Very bitter.” I don’t blame him.

No NFL team has been as reliably and consistently screwed by the league and its striped minions as the Vikings. You may think I’m just whining, but you weren’t there listening to Matt Millen (in his broadcast days) constantly going off on the Vikings for an entire game WHILE THEY WERE POUNDING ON THE PACK at Lambeau. I thought the White Buffalo was going to physically assault his TV for a while there. WB, Big Chilly and I all hate the Lions now because Millen is their GM. Oh, it’s been a glorious four years, hasn’t it, boys?

Yesterday was just another mind-bogglingly terrible anti-Vikings call to add to the collection. Harrington is in the shotgun and JUST BEGINS TO TURN towards the referee when the ball is snapped. The ball flies past him but the evil striped league servitor blows the whistle even though Harrington had definitely NOT called a time-out. He didn’t make the T or even face the ref until after the ball was past him – it wasn’t even CLOSE!

I’m still convinced that Atlanta was allowed four time-outs in the 1998 NFC championship game. I don’t know what the Vikings ever did that makes the league hate them so, nor do I know where they find these Vikings-hating refs, but it makes me proud to recall that my mother returned from the infamous 1975 Hail May game with an empty purse and without the usual game program. I’ve been a referee in a difficult game or two myself, and I still say that if you’re going to hand a playoff game to the visiting team by allowing them to blatantly break the rules, you deserve to get pelted with everything the fans can lay their hands on.

“WASHINGTON (AP) — Congress passed legislation Saturday giving two committee chairman and their assistants access to income tax returns without regard to privacy protections, but not before red-faced Republicans said the measure was a mistake and would be swiftly repealed.”

Why is it that if individual citizens “make a mistake” and get caught, they are punished, but when politicians “make a mistake” and get caught overtly violating the rights of American citizens, they get a do-over? By the quiescent tentacles of mighty Cthulhu, someone is going to have to arrest these oath-forswearing Constitutional criminals and lock them up before they do any more damage to the country.

I wonder if they’ll “forget” to swiftly repeal their “mistake”.

From Reason:

The film [The Barbarian Invasions] opens with a nun struggling down the corridor of a crowded ward to administer Holy Communion. Patients, health professionals, even electricians, are tripping over each other, packed into an environment of general confusion. And yet there is another floor of the hospital that is completely closed, thanks to a government directive.

The dying man’s son is a successful investment banker in London. He’s the kind of guy who can wriggle around anything. First he wrangles his way into the hospital’s management offices without a pass and corners the manager, who is completely isolated from the chaos outside. He offers her a bribe to get his father moved out of the zoo and into a private space on the empty floor. She quietly takes the bribe but points out that she can do nothing without the hospital employees’ union. The son pays off the union boss to prepare a private room on the empty floor. Painters, carpenters, and other workers quickly make it up.

Then, because there is virtually no access to PET (positron emission tomography) scans in Canada, the banker takes his father to Vermont to get one. One of the son’s friends in Baltimore — one of many Canadian doctors who have emigrated to the U.S. — examines the scan and informs him his father will have a much better chance in Baltimore than in Montreal. Remarkably, the father will have none of it: “I voted for socialized health care,” he proclaims, “and I’m prepared to suffer the consequences!”

Perhaps he is, but I’m not. Nor should Americans, not even those low-IQ idiots who are so willing to fall for the same lethal promises from the elite politicians who claim to be so very concerned about them.

The same logic applies to education, abuse prevention and almost every other government “service” you examine in detail. It NEVER works. Once you get that through your head, you can start looking at the real world.

William Safire tries to create a groundswell:

Like a cloud no bigger than a man’s hand, the 28th amendment to the U.S. Constitution is gathering on the political horizon. No, it’s not the anti-same-sex amendment that President Bush supports. Only if the Supreme Court strikes down the federal Defense of Marriage Act – or if it overturns the changes in state constitutions adopted to block recognition of same-sex marriages legal elsewhere – will that proposed amendment have a remote chance of gaining support of two-thirds of the Congress and 38 states.

The founders made it hard to amend the Constitution, but since the Bill of Rights, it’s been done on the average of once every 12 years. It’s time to end discrimination based on place of birth that denies the equal right of every citizen to run for president.

No one outside of Schwarzenegger’s immediate circle gives the smallest component of an iota of a damn about this. Seriously, if you ever doubted the idea that the political elite attempt to drive the the political debate, this should convince you. There is overwhelming support for a defense of marriage amendment, plenty for a flat tax, and yet media whores think that the debate should revolve around letting foreign-born citizens run for president.

Unbelievable. Safire is simply a waste of ink and paper. He even describes Schwarzenegger as a libertarian conservative although neither the adjective nor the noun can reasonably be applied to the man. What a joke.

Last week: 10-4. Overall: 84-58. Fantasy: 5-4-1 (4th place)

W-Philadelphia Eagles over Washington Redskins

W-Tampa Bay Buccaneers over San Francisco 49ers

W-Pittsburgh Steelers over Cincinnati Bengals

W-Seattle Seahawks over Miami Dolphins

W-Baltimore Ravens over Dallas Cowboys

W-San Diego Chargers over Oakland Raiders

W-Minnesota Vikings over Detroit Lions

New England Patriots over Kansas City Chiefs

W-Green Bay Packers over Houston Texans

W-Indianapolis Colts over Chicago Bears

W-Atlanta Falcons over New York Giants

L-Arizona Cardinals over Carolina Panthers

L-Jacksonville Jaguars over Tennessee Titans

W-Denver Broncos over New Orleans Saints

W-Buffalo Bills over St. Louis Rams

W-New York Jets over Cleveland Browns

It’s always been strange to me how atheists and other unbelievers have such a difficult accepting the Bible as a historical document, while swallowing outright every bit of secular history that passes before them. I’m quite interested in seeing Oliver Stone’s new movie on Alexander – a first for me, though I still probably won’t see it until it’s out on DVD – but I think it’s worthwhile to consider the following words about the very fascinating historian whose work is considered our most important source on Alexander’s career.

“Arrian’s Anabasis is our most important source on the reign of Alexander. The reason is that Arrian ignored Cleitarchus’ immensely popular History of Alexander and used other, better sources. In the prologue, Arrian explains why: ‘It seems to me that Ptolemy and Aristobulus are the most trustworthy writers on Alexander’s conquests, because the latter shared Alexander’s campaigns, and the former -Ptolemy- in addition to this advantage, was himself a king, and it is more disgraceful for a king to tell lies than for anybody else.'”

So, a Greek doctor speaking to eyewitnesses is inherently dubious because of what they said they saw, but a Roman politician writing more than 400 years after the death of his subject who believes that kings are more trustworthy than other men isn’t? Furthermore, Arrian’s accuracy must be further called into account based on his known preference for inaccuracy on the basis of aesthetic prejudice.

“More recent descriptions of India are quoted by several Christian authors and Arrian’s younger contemporary Philostratus, but Arrian chose to ignore these recent sources because they were written in so-called Koinê-Greek, which was considered ugly in the second century CE. Nearchus, on the other hand, had written decent ‘classical’ Greek and even though the contents of his Indikê were outdated, Nearchus was to be preferred.”

Just a little food for thought.

The vote [in Switzerland] is required as the federal authorities’ current mandate to levy taxes runs out at the end of 2006. “It is a peculiarity of our country that Swiss voters from time to time have to approve the tax situation,” said Finance Minister Hans-Rudolf Merz.

A clause in the Swiss constitution gives the federal state only a limited mandate to raise taxes. Any change or renewal has to be discussed by parliament and approved in a nationwide vote. The restriction is seen as a reflection of the federal system that grants the country’s 26 cantons a large degree of autonomy, including the right to levy taxes of their own….

Parliament had voted unanimously in favour of extending the mandate after proposals to enshrine federal tax raising powers in law were brushed aside.

I submit that a national referendum on the continued existence of federal powers of taxation every ten years is an EXCELLENT idea. If the government oversteps itself, it’s bye-bye federal revenues.