March 08, 2006
Illegal Education Expenses
So, what could you do with an "extra" $210 million PER YEAR? The state of North Carolina has decided that the people of NC don't need that money, so they're going to take it and give it to people who openly break and flaunt the law. That's the current estimated cost of
educating criminal aliens.
Those who support such massive expenditures are quite generous with other people's money, of course, as all government agencies are. They will even point to the NC Constitution which guarantees a free education for the state's citizens -- but seem to miss the point that these are NOT state citizens, but are criminals who are actively breaking the law.
At what point does it become too expensive? Supporters will claim that having the criminals more educated will help everyone -- but how much is too much? Wouldn't the entire world be better off if everyone in Africa had a Ph.D. in some science? Why don't we just raise taxes enough to pay for that?
If you're not a citizen, if you're breaking the law by entering this country illegally, you are owed NOTHING. If you want an education, learn the language first.
Posted by: Ogre at
12:08 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I read all this and think about all the little hitlers we have in the U. S.All the people who watched shindlers list and said 'I would have never taken part in that". It's the same thing here and now,then it was required blonde hair and blue eyes made you a human now it comes down to what side of a line you were born on! Don't speak for me what an awful way to respect your ancestors who migrated here either due to the need americans had for workers during the first world war,or becouse they were the few left after the Mexican War when Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna sold Mexico's northern most territories to the U.S How un educated you all are I can read your statements but where is your proof? Spoiled bratz and greedy fools! I can bet that there is not one of you that can trace there family tree all the way back to start in the U. S Yeah thats right and you use to think it was cool that you were of another decent. You seem to forget the core of the battle is on immigration, So if you want to take away the rights of people born in the United States if there family tree was not started here then YEAH I will go but you have much farther to travel then I to get home. All I have to do is go to Texas. Why don't you show some respect for the ancestors and pay a visit to Ellis Island Do you even know what it is ? Do you know how your family got here? Read all the things about how immigration has hurt the U.S they are not just talking about people from Mexico there not the only ones nor are they the first to come here by boat! YOU WERE! it disgust me to watch you cry about how your education and culture is being stolen when if you actually were educated and knew anything about your culture you would not be putting your foot in your mouth!
Posted by: gcardenas at May 02, 2006 04:50 AM (wZLWV)
2
You, gcardenas, are a moron.
It's NOT about race or appearance, it's about CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. There's ZERO comparison between the illegal, criminal invasion of immigrants today and those who came to America to WORK through Ellis Island. On Ellis Island, the people OBEYED THE DAMN LAW! The people came here to WORK and didn't DEMAND FREE education, health care, housing, and everything else from those who ARE working. Get a clue or shut up.
Posted by: Ogre at May 02, 2006 11:25 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 07, 2006
Dangerous Weapons OK in schools
I can't say
this is really surprising in a Canadian school. The Canadian Supreme Court has ruled that bringing dangerous weapons to school is perfect okay with them, in a unnanimous 8-0 decision.
In a ruling based on religion, children are now allowed to take large metal knives with them to class. If you have kids, you are welcome to have them join my religion. It's called Cali-burr. Everyone has to carry a gun to be a member -- everywhere. And anyone who stops you is supressing your religion.
Posted by: Ogre at
01:05 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.
1
That's right -- they're so consistent -- they want to disarm adults and arm children. Makes perfect sense, doesn't it?
Posted by: Ogre at March 08, 2006 12:36 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 06, 2006
Judge Succeeds in Bloodless Coup in NC
Oh, did you miss that one in the news reports, too? Well, it's been rather slow-developing, but steady. If you know or watch anything regarding the news and education in North Carolina, I'm sure you will recognize the Leandro case and
King Supreme Ruler Almighty Judge Manning. He has elevated himself even above the governor.
In 2002, he replaced the NC legislature, completely usurping the power granted to them in the NC Constitution to determine all state spending. He ordered additional spending on schools, and the state accepted his imperial edict and increased spending to the tune of $22 million. In 2004, the state supreme court supported his coup and removal of the Legislature from the legislative process. But he wasn't done yet.
Not satisfied with the idea that 22-million extra dollars had absolutely no effect on education or grades, the leader of the coup has now taken over for the school boards, removing them from power. The judge has determined that he, and he alone, will shut down schools next year and "not allow them to open" if they do not meet his personal standards.
Apparently there's no need to elect a school board, because they are not allowed to run the school systems any more. Someone want to explain to me how this isn't a coup? Well, at least there wasn't any bloodshed with this clear change in government. Maybe we could revolt and try a representative republic in his place. I've heard those work good, at least for a hundred years or so.
Posted by: Ogre at
04:03 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.
January 25, 2006
Government School Eye Scans
Well, yet again government has provided an incredibly expensive solution to a problem. The fact that there was no problem to begin with, of course, will not deter those in government from spending the money to solve the problem. In
this case, we've got almost $400,000 of federal tax money gone.
So, what solution did they create? They added eye scan technology to schools in NJ -- so all parents and teachers get their eyes scanned before they're allowed to enter the schools, and all visitors and activities of all scanned people can be tracked.
This will certainly solve that pesky problem with the school shootings done by students -- oh wait, no it won't. It must solve that problem of terrorist attacks on schools -- well, actually, it won't do much to stop a bomb or a bomber.
I guess it will solve that problem of so many non-students trespassing on school property when they weren't supposed to. Oh, that's not a problem? As I first said -- leave it to government to find massively expensive ways to either just create problems, or to attempt to solve problems that don't exist.
Is there any possible reason left to allow government to run anything remotely associated with education? No, there is not.
Posted by: Ogre at
01:04 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 220 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I guess I'm with you in not understanding why this was needed. Other then it was a fine waste of money.
Posted by: Contagion at January 25, 2006 01:47 PM (Q5WxB)
2
Government is simply incapable of NOT spending money.
Posted by: Ogre at January 25, 2006 02:01 PM (/k+l4)
3
Saw that in the news earlier. It is idiotic, it will do nothing but be a nuisance for people who go to and from the school; a terrible waste of money.
Posted by: Blue at January 25, 2006 07:13 PM (Lv180)
4
What? You dare say that government might "waste" money?!? HERETIC!
Posted by: Ogre at January 25, 2006 08:07 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 24, 2006
More Taxes For The Children
Wake County commissioners' chairman Tony Gurley says it's time to ask the N.C. General Assembly to let all counties raise sales taxes to pay for school construction if they want, and also floated the idea of a real-estate transfer tax, the N&O reported.
Why do people keep electing this socialist morons? Why can this type of person see every single solution as spending more money that's not theirs? Is there no way to stop this total and utter nonsense?
There is a very simple solution that would not only not need a tax increase, but could actually result in LOWER taxes -- but that would require that morons like Tony Gurley give up some power and control, so it's highly unlikely. That solution? Get government the heck out of the way of the free market.
If government would stop spending billions of dollars on bureaucrats in education, education would suddenly get very inexpensive. A very simply solution of tax credits where the money followed the student would completely stop this demand for money for the damn children.
Yes, it really is that simple. The schools would cost a great deal less, more people would be gainfully (and profitably) employed, the quality of the schools would drastically increase, and taxes could be reduced. But there are so many people currently sponging off the system that they will never willingly give up their power and control.
So where's the hope? What can be done? Elect better people. Get this idiot Tony Gurley out of office and put someone in there who can think about something other than spending other people's money. Do NOT give school boards MORE power and the ability to raise taxes on their own!
Posted by: Ogre at
12:10 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.
1
School boards being allowed the power to raise taxes ameks as much sense as home owner associations having that same power.
Unfortunately Ogre, you are dead on here, and at the center of the matter is....unions...again. In this case, (for you numbskulls trying to comprehend the adult pages here), it is the teachers unions specifically. But they are just doing what a union is supposed to do....protect it workers (and its' own) wallet and livelyhood.
So....how long vefore it is cheaper to outsource our childrens education by sending them to school in another country for a cheaper and better education...kinda' like the criminal aliens do with theirs?
Posted by: kender at January 24, 2006 05:21 PM (R/l0+)
2
Amazingly, I haven't given up hope yet. We still have the power to control the legislatures, which can ignore the unions...but do we have the numbers and the guts to do it?
Posted by: Ogre at January 24, 2006 08:02 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 19, 2006
Liberal Professors Targeted
No, not through an infrared 10x scope -- by
their own alumni at UCLA!
An alumni group is offering students up to $100 per class to supply tapes and notes exposing professors who allegedly express extreme left-wing political views at the University of California, Los Angeles.
How's that for turnabout? And I absolutely LOVE the liberal's reactions to it:
Some of those targeted say it's a witch-hunt reminiscent of Sen. Joseph McCarthy's anti-communism crusade in the 1950s.
Folks, why are these people so scared of having their views heard? These ultra-left wing professors slam Bush and force-feed them socialist propaganda -- but they're afraid of a group that wants to hear what they have to say?
Perhaps it's because they know their views are way out of line with America, and that they can only succeed in spreading them when they have a captive audience that cannot respond to them without being retaliated against (via failing grades).
I hope this spreads -- and the Alumni group doesn't even need to DO anything -- just collect the information that the liberals spew, and post it on the internet for all to see. Then even more people can see the crap that's going on in your government-funded education system.
(H/T to Raven).
Posted by: Ogre at
01:04 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 216 words, total size 1 kb.
1
From Vox today:
Unlike the fascist feminist movement, I force my views on no one. Only an ideology that is logically and intellectually bankrupt needs to call for the forcible re-education of its critics.
Posted by: Echo Zoe at January 19, 2006 04:34 PM (K+h36)
2
Bingo. Those ideas don't work when there's choice.
Posted by: Ogre at January 19, 2006 08:39 PM (/k+l4)
Posted by: Roger at January 25, 2006 12:23 PM (2Q7l1)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 17, 2006
Success measured by Tax Dollars
For those who support as large a government as possible, and those who are strong supporters of socialist ideas, North Carolina Education is #1, as The very socialist Charlotte Observer
points out. When speaking about the huge dollars spent by the state and subsidys given away to college students in North Carolina, the Observer says,
That's evidence that tax dollars spent on those resources are good investments. But it's also a mandate to keep state tuition and fees from boiling out of reach of ordinary citizens.
But that's not enough. Despite the taxpayers providing a majority of the cash to pay for college educations in the state, the Observer wants even more:
But the legislature must also pay a greater share of the university's operating costs.
In other words, the taxpayers should pay for colleges, and a college education should cost nothing to those who get it. Well, that's what socialists and the left believe -- if you work, you should be punished by being forced to pay for other people who do NOT work. That's plain wrong.
And yet, even that's not enough for the Observer! Despite there being no evidence that class size has any effect on education -- and some studies in North Carolina actually show a smaller class size can REDUCE the number of students who get good grades and pass, they still want even MORE money spent on colleges:
In Chapel Hill the student/faculty ratio is 14:1; in Charlotte it's 19:1. The only way to overcome that disadvantage is by improved state funding.
Money is not the answer. It never has been. Government is ill-equipped to run the education system -- they've been doing it for decades, and the system is much worse than it was before.
Government should get completely out of the education business -- from pre-K to colleges. They have absolutely proven that they cannot educate people, so they should stop trying. The free market really does work.
Posted by: Ogre at
12:17 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 336 words, total size 2 kb.
1
The only problem I have with private education is that no regulation will exist for the education. This could eventually turn into a case of the more you pay the better the student. This in turn will seperate the lower class from the upper class furthering the divide.
I would like to see at least some regulation, some commonality between the schools. I don't mean government regulation but a national body from the actual schools could regulate them.
Posted by: Arbitratorofall at January 17, 2006 01:53 PM (5+Jvh)
2
I don't see a problem with paying more for a better education. That's already the case, whether people want to admit it or not. Harvard University costs more than the local community college.
People need to understand that education is NOT for everyone. Basic reading and writing skills WILL be taught -- people were MUCH more literate before government started running education.
But not everyone needs or wants a college education. But government WANTS everyone to have one -- so they can pay for it and control it.
If there's no government regulation, there will be self-regulation, which is FUN in a free society.
For example, look at the computer industry -- there's no government regulation (for the most part), but there's standards for hardware and software, and there's dozens of accrediting bodies that can certify people in all sorts of ways.
I'd LOVE to see that in education, too!
Posted by: Ogre at January 17, 2006 02:04 PM (/k+l4)
3
I agree with that for colleges but not K-12 which is what I was referring to. I don't think K-12 should turn into a spending fest to determine your childs future. Soon it will turn into picking food or education for your children.
The problem with regulations in computers is that the government has or had a say in its creation and still has some say (RIAA and FCC) in decisions and standards.
Posted by: Arbitratorofall at January 17, 2006 02:49 PM (5+Jvh)
4
I know government will never get out of education -- there's too many people making money from the nightmare -- but the least we could do is fix it -- let the money for the students follow the student. That's how nearly every other country with government $ works -- and they're all doing better than we are.
Posted by: Ogre at January 17, 2006 07:22 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 11, 2006
Education Money Silliness
The left is sure weird when looked at through a lens of reality and logic.
I don't know about where you live, but in Mecklenburg County, NC, every single year the government-run monopolistic education system ("public" education) "needs" more money. The school board asks for, and liberals (including the Charlotte Observer) demand more money.
And when they get their 25-50% increases in spending, all is good because the left can then spend money better than you know how -- on administrators and other non-education related things in the school budgets.
However, when it comes to higher education, where customers (the students) actually have to pay for their own education, suddenly it costs too much and tuition should be paid on a sliding scale (the rich pay more), AND prices should actually be CAPPED!
Now why is it that when the government is paying for education, it's simply not possible for it to cost too much, but when individuals have to pay, no matter what the actual cost, they shouldn't have to pay anything?
Posted by: Ogre at
01:03 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Ogre, buddy... we've gone over this. It's because the new American mentallity is something for nothing. When the government is paying, people don't see it as they are paying, even if it comes out of their taxes.
Posted by: Contagion at January 11, 2006 01:44 PM (Q5WxB)
2
No matter how many times I see it, I'm still just amazed at the ability of the left to completely and utterly defy any sense of logic.
Posted by: Ogre at January 11, 2006 02:04 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 29, 2005
Education Money Myth
Yet still the myth continues. There are still some groups that simply live and die spreading the myth that money = education. Sorry, but that's a complete lie, only designed to get more cash out of the taxpayers hands and into government. Of course, "It's for the Children."
Another lie-filled "advocacy" group has announced an astounding fact -- that poor counties in North Carolina are spending less money than rich counties on education. Their solution? Of course, to steal more money from productive citizens and give it to the "poor" counties.
MONEY DOES NOT EQUAL EDUCATION. It never has, and it never, ever will. There are ZERO studies that even suggest that any amount of increase of $1 or $1000 has ANY effect at all on education. None. Zero.
Increasing funding for education does have ONE effect: it steals money from the economy so that hard-working people get less for their work. It violates the North Carolina Constitution that says, "We hold it to be self-evident that all persons are ... endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, the enjoyment of the fruits of their own labor."
All government spending on education should be reduced to zero. EVERYONE will benefit tremendously -- well, except for the bureaucrats and "advocacy" groups.
Posted by: Ogre at
11:01 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I don't think you are entirely correct.
For example, would soldiers learn their skills if we zeroed out the military budget? Surely SOME money is necessary for operations...although more money does not guarantee squat.
I'm also reminded of America's history regarding education. In Massachusetts, for example, educational facilities were established from the gitgo. In South Carolina, only the white and well-heeled received a proper education. Consequently, there were more educated folks in Mass, and less in SC...although the few in SC may have received a better education than their northern counterparts. Maybe not though.
Everyone should be given tools and access, and ideally everyone could, one day, be given a first class education, even if it meant watching college courses on their TV or computer.
America needs more education, not less. We are ignorant enough, and crime is only getting worse.
Think different and better, not removal.
The current admin has squandered and squandered, and now want to cut important services to make up for their wrongheadedness.
If they simply gave back all they stole and diverted, we wouldn't have to even talk about cuts to programs.
Hi there!
Posted by: anonymoses at December 29, 2005 03:57 PM (ELJo9)
2
"There are ZERO studies" is poor English. Try "there are no studies" instead.
Thank you
Posted by: The Free Range Pedant at December 29, 2005 05:48 PM (5GlMm)
3
Sorry, but I have to disagree. Stop spending money on education? Are you mental?
You seem to have some sort of issue surrounding class and social strata as you mention "stealing" money from "productive" citizens and giving it to the poor..whoa horsey! That's what the income tax system is all about...everyone pays tax, it goes into a central fund and is then drawn back out for schools, hospitals, roads etc. That's the way it works, it's not about stealing.
Are you seriously suggesting reducing Government spending on education to zero? Where would the money for schools come from then? Maybe I'm not reading your post correctly but that's what I think you're saying. I have to say that's the most absurd thing I've ever heard, seriously, ever!
And as for your point that there have been no studies to show that spending money has any effect on education...that's nonsense! It doesn't take a report or a study or a rocket scientist to work out that if you have a school in a disadvantaged area where there is one teacher to 40 students and then a school in an affluent area that has one teacher for every 15 students that the pupils in the more affluent school are going to, in the main, have more opportunities educationally. Here in Ireland, there was a study done on one particular poorer suburb of Dublin and it showed that only three per cent of it's students went on to third level or college education compared to a more affluent suburb in Dublin where about 60 per cent of its students went on to college. That sure says something to me! (The study was done some years ago and I'm not sure if it's online so can't provide a link but I'll try to find something)
Investing money in education is the ONLY way forward for all countries. The more educated our people, ALL of our people, are the better our lives and our world will be. Apathy towards education is what is destroying our communities. As the last poster said, we need more investment in education, not less!
Posted by: Kaz at December 29, 2005 07:37 PM (bbfEz)
4
There is so much waste in the public education system that the details defy description.
One step to improving education is to see that children achieve the proper level of proficiency in reading. And the proven way to do this is through a coordinated series of basal readers. But the textbook lobbyists see to that the readers are republished every few years so that more money has to be shelled out--taxpayers' dollars, of course. Add to that the fact that many counties don't see to it that all the schools within any given system use the
same series of basal readers.
Furthermore, the stats are homeschoolers put to shame the proficiency levels of the public school system. And why is that? Effective homeschool parents grab ahold of a curriculum from a particular publisher and stick with it. The public system could take a lesson from that practice.
Remember the days of the
McGuffey Readers? Some of the greatest intellects of the previous century learned from those simple books.
Get rid of the bells and whistles, and kids will learn.
Posted by: Always On Watch at December 30, 2005 02:14 AM (6krEN)
5
Correction: the stats
on homeschoolers
Posted by: Always On Watch at December 30, 2005 02:15 AM (6krEN)
6
Thanks for all the comments, folks!
Anonymoses -- Would soldiers learn their skills with no budget? You betcha, without ANY doubt.
As for comparing today's society to that of 400 years ago, I don't think you can. Today, EVERYONE in America, including illegals, felons, criminals, and the so-called "poor" ALL have the opportunity for education, without any exception at all.
Government has very few and limited purposes. Anything else it attempts, it does wrong. Education is NOT government's business. They are complete and utter failures at it.
Kaz -- nope. I'm not mental at all. Government should not spend one dollar on education. Do you really think for even one second that there would be no education without government? Seriously? Imagine what would happen if ALL government-run education shut down tomorrow -- it would be awesome. No less people would be educated. In fact, I think MORE would be educated, and without any doubt, the quality of education would skyrocket.
As for your example on spending, in fact your illustration is not actually true. Have 15 students for 1 teacher versus 40 students for one teacher has absolutely no effect on the education. Being raised in a so-called "poor" neighborhood has MUCH more effect than on the money spent on the education.
And yes, Smokey, you're right on my thinking. Government stinks at educating people. The free market works infinitely better and always will.
You bet, AoW. "Dick and Jane" taught millions to read. Why can't we use it now? Because the government monopoly will not let people. Follow the insane amounts of money, people, follow the money.
Posted by: Ogre at December 30, 2005 09:33 PM (s2+Ck)
7
I think the Federal Government should stay out of education because it is unconsitutional to have the Federal Governement run state programs. However, education creates more productive working citzens. What would happen Ogre if no one was required to learn history or civics?
Posted by: Mindflame at December 31, 2005 07:21 PM (SlODe)
8
What would happen? People would learn it anyway. Do you really think that no one would learn history? How many people do you know that would be willing to teach what they know to others?
I'm not saying there should be no organized education -- just that the government shouldn't be doing it.
Posted by: Ogre at December 31, 2005 07:41 PM (s2+Ck)
9
Oh, and I KNOW for a fact that if the government got out of the way, many classical education schools would immediately open up. I'd open one within a week myself.
Posted by: Ogre at December 31, 2005 07:42 PM (s2+Ck)
10
IÂ’m curious. You support federalism, right Ogre? So letÂ’s say that the Government in Washington stayed out of education and the Department of Education was disbanded tonight. Would you not support the right of the states to have this program if their voters divided on it even if you apposed it for your own state?
Posted by: Mindflame at January 03, 2006 04:27 AM (SlODe)
11
Sure -- because I could move out of my state and to one that believed in the free market.
Posted by: Ogre at January 03, 2006 10:47 AM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 14, 2005
Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools
Are a total mess and a nightmare. But if you live anywhere near here, you'd know that. Of course, if you live elsewhere and support a strong socialist idea of an education system, then you worship and adore the Charlotte-Mecklenburg System (CMS).
A year ago, a LARGE number of parents tried to secede from the school district. They wanted to break the gigantic, massively unresponsive school system up into smaller, more manageable districts. Of course, since the North Carolina General Assembly is Democrat, there was NO way they would succeed because it would require government to shrink.
So instead, in a miserably feeble attempt to appease these parents, the Democrat-controlled school board set up a "task force" to "study" the problem. The results of the "task force" are in. And yes, once again, I could have saved the state millions of dollars on the task force -- because the results were known before the task force even met for the first time.
more...
Posted by: Ogre at
03:03 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 663 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Ogre why are you so against public education? Despite its unavoidable problems, public schools and state universities are a clear social benefit. Even from an economic point of view, public education must be considered a positive externality. That is it is good for the free market in the long term.
Posted by: Brian at December 14, 2005 06:36 PM (qe/Un)
2
Primarily because the current system of government education has absolutely nothing to do with educating anyone. The sole purpose of those in the administration of school systems is to protect themselves and obtain more money.
State Universities are even worse.
We now have a system that forces students to learn. Why? Because the school system gets more money the more students they have enrolled. It doesn't matter if they actually educate the students, they just have to be enrolled.
I know it's not a popular view right now, but it is true that school is NOT for everyone. What's good for the free market is to allow the free markets to compete and run schools and educate those who want to be educated!
Posted by: Ogre at December 14, 2005 07:03 PM (/k+l4)
3
If you honestly believe that neither students nor society as a whole gains from public education then we are in basic disagreement. I agree school is not for everyone but you must concede that generally people today are better off with an education. We force students to stay in school because they are not mature enough to make that decision. They can drop out at 16 if they so choose. When I was 10 years old and somebody asked me if i wanted to sit in school all day or go play basketball i would have no doubt chosen to go have fun. However, that would have been the absolute wrong choice and i am glad i wasnt in a position to make it. I went to public school for 12 years and spent 1 year at a state college and I know for sure that I am better off and when I graduate society will be better off as well. The willing and able to pay analogy is incorrect. Everybody wants to be educated on some level but not everybody can afford it. Why should only the rich be taught? Education is not in the same category as cars or boats or other luxuries that people buy based on their willingness to pay.
Posted by: Brian at December 14, 2005 08:54 PM (qe/Un)
4
Up here in New Jersey we have over 600 different school districts. Every town has one (sometimes two if the secondary schools are regional and the elementary are not). The cost of education funded by local property taxes has grown such that regionalization and the loss of local input is seriously being considered. Proponents envision the consolidation of services as a savings but forget the layers of beaurocracy that would insulate the local parent from the leadership of the schools.
Posted by: joated at December 14, 2005 11:15 PM (M7kiy)
5
Brian -- I never said education of the public was a bad thing -- but the current system of monopolistic government education masquerading as "public" education is total crap.
It has absolutely nothing to do with rich vs. poor. In Charlotte, the "poor" get upwards of $10,000 per student spent on "public" education. Those that are better off get LESS spent on them.
I reiterate -- the current system has quite literally NOTHING to do with educating students and zero interest in any sort of education of anyone. The current system in place is ONLY interested in cash money.
And Joated, I hope you stay away from consolidation. ANY sort of government consolidation is a very, very bad thing. It takes control away from the people and gives more and more control, power, and money to government -- which is always a bad thing.
Posted by: Ogre at December 15, 2005 12:51 AM (uSCkp)
6
Ogre, when is the last time you were in school? I was educated, my brothers were educated, my friends were educated. If public education is such a damn cash cow than why did i have 30 kids in my classes in high school and why is my dorm room falling apart around me. Who is pocketing all of this money? As far as rich v poor, you must agree that if all education was private than the lower class would have a very hard time affording school.
Posted by: Brian at December 15, 2005 01:16 AM (qe/Un)
7
The state of our public education system in Palm Beach County is faltering every day. It truly is scary. I always swore I would keep my kids in public schools, as I went to them, yet my kids are in private. I always swore my kids would go to public high school... yet last month, I was so appalled by things I'm seeing in our newspaper about our school district, that I am for the first time considering private high school as well.
It pisses me off.
And our school district is something like the 5th largest in the nation. It is so big, and unable to think outside the box, that when Wilma hit, the schools north of Southern Blvd (Iknow you know the area) were fine, but those south were seriously damaged, So... ALL the schools in PBC stayed CLOSED until those south of Southern could open. 2 weeks of education EVERYONE lost because our district is so big.
It's a sad state of affairs down here too.
Posted by: Bou at December 15, 2005 03:58 AM (iHxT3)
8
Where is the money, Brian? CMS is on a "search" for a new superintendent. His salary will be at LEAST $350,000.00. And that's not counting benefits, automatic retirement, cash accounts, company car, etc. The money is wasted by the administration.
In Charlotte, they also waste billions on buildings. Instead of making one blueprint and just building every school that way, they spend literally millions for every new school on architects to make the school unique. Doing so also makes the buildings massively expensive.
And no, if all education was privately-RUN, then the rich and poor alike could afford it. Tax credits would allow everyone the exact same opportunity.
For some reason the nationwide trend recently was to join all school districts in larger districts. Everywhere it's happened (Palm Beach, Charlotte) it's made a mess of the schools. I wonder why they think smaller classrooms are good (there's zero evidence it is), but smaller districts are not (with much evidence they are).
Posted by: Ogre at December 15, 2005 10:15 AM (uSCkp)
9
I don't get this 'smaller classroom' push either. It's a nice to have, but I went to school with 28 kids in a class.
My kids go to a small Catholic school that has between 26-30 kids in a class. I wish it were smaller as it is A LOT of work for the teachers in the lower grades (the difference between 24 1st graders and 28 is a lot), BUT that said the class is very organized and poor behavior cannot be tolerated. My kids are doing fine there, overall.
Posted by: Bou at December 15, 2005 12:44 PM (iHxT3)
10
The smaller classroom myth (sounds like a book title, maybe I should write that) is just a way to get more money. There's zero evidence that having a smaller class size increases learning, especially from 40 students to 30 students.
Posted by: Ogre at December 15, 2005 12:57 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 12, 2005
Melting Pot vs. Salad
Here's just another example of anti-Americanism that's snuck into the government-run monopolistic education system. I'm sure it's not new news to those on the "inside" of education, but I hadn't heard of it before.
It used to be that America was The Great Melting Pot. The idea was that there was a unique American culture. This American culture was a great culture -- this was one of the primary reasons that people came to this country -- to join in with freedom, capitalism, and rugged individualism.
As people came to the country, they learned how this culture worked. They worked hard to learn the English language and to assimilate into the culture so they could effectively participate and work together and be a part of this superior culture.
Now I'm told this is all different. Apparently in education circles, including the horrible government-run system, there is no longer any melting pot. America now is supposed to be considered a "tossed salad."
Instead of joining in and becoming part of the unique, superior culture, immigrants are supposed to transplant their own culture and NOT adjust at all to America.
They are expected to bring their own traditions and culture (like macho drunk driving) and not only not assimilate, but to reject the American culture as inferior to their own, thereby creating a large group of different cultures that are specifically NOT American.
This was tried most recently in France. How'd that work out for them?
Importing various different cultures with ZERO assimilation is simply a recipe for total disaster. Cultures clash -- they ALWAYS have, and they always will. By teaching people that diversity is good, just for diversity's sake are plain wrong.
This forced diversity brings us things like saying it's a good experience for students to be in classrooms with convicted sex offenders (as is the case in Charlotte-Mecklenburg skills). This "tossed salad" brings us dangerous gangs (like MS-13) that are accepted as a different, diverse group of "undocumented workers."
This new "enlightenment" of mandated diversity provides us with pedophiles accepted as "alternative." It has brought us generations of welfare families that demand and expect everything to be given to them.
The tossed salad has wilted and grown moldy. It is nothing more than a potful of smelly garbage. Unfortunately, I think it may be too late for America to regain it's superior culture.
Posted by: Ogre at
01:04 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 403 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Have you ever seen a salad that was in the fridge too long? It turns into a big gooey mess. Have you ever seen when a melting pot sits too long? It turns into a hardened cohesive lump of material.
Keep that in mind when thinking of how you would like your country to be? Wilted, runny and disgusting or Hard, unified and strong.
Posted by: Contagion at December 12, 2005 01:55 PM (Q5WxB)
Posted by: Ogre at December 12, 2005 01:58 PM (/k+l4)
3
Sigh. I'll have to make sure I teach my kids it is the melting pot...
Posted by: vw bug at December 12, 2005 04:15 PM (SCN6v)
4
You're going to, because the government isn't.
Posted by: Ogre at December 12, 2005 04:26 PM (/k+l4)
5
One more arguement for homeschooling.....
Posted by: Kari at December 12, 2005 05:48 PM (/HZs0)
6
Most certainly, Kari -- a strong argument!
Posted by: Ogre at December 12, 2005 05:56 PM (/k+l4)
7
hee hee hee, he said "tossed salad" hee hee hee
Posted by: Machelle at December 12, 2005 06:23 PM (ZAyoW)
8
You tossed your what, Machelle?
Posted by: Ogre at December 12, 2005 06:37 PM (/k+l4)
9
I think that has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. Naturally, people from other cultures, new to America are going to stick together and try to help one another, just as our ancestors did. And it's not a bad thing to celebrate some of the things from their native country. If you think about our traditional holiday meals, you'll realize that a lot of us still celebrate our ancestral heritage with food.
To become a true American you MUST adopt American traditions, ideals and values. You must learn the American language and our history. It is absolutely wrong to discourage imigrants from doing these things. It isolates them, and prevents them from ever feeling that they really belong, or are even wanted here.
There is no reason new imigrants can't become true Americans and still celebrate the good and meaninful things about their heritage.
Posted by: Patty-Jo at December 12, 2005 07:39 PM (tIPJZ)
10
Exactly right, Patty-Jo -- but that IS the opposite that is being taught in schools. This is the current result of diversity being more important than, well, anything else in social engineering, I mean, education.
Posted by: Ogre at December 12, 2005 07:47 PM (/k+l4)
11
Can you tell me what a "true American" is? Cherokee? Mohegan? British?
Posted by: M D R at January 03, 2006 09:48 PM (7smj9)
12
A "true American" is not defined by their historical origins.
Posted by: Ogre at January 03, 2006 10:02 PM (s2+Ck)
13
This is a really dumb comment. First of all who ever said America is the USA??? Let's not forget that there is a Northern and Asouthern Part to the continent. Second, all these imigrants are the one creatiating lots of revenue for this country and making it interesting. They are a economical, political and social force and many politiciand rely on their votes. Third, Since when are "Americans" native of this country to begin??. Lastly,I can see that our unity creates a sense of xenophobia. " American people" have never truly had the sense of union that Latinos, Indians, Chinesse ect have installed in their culture. Therefore, you fear because Amrica had always been told to be superior than others. Yet,Without those minorities and imigrants "America" is invisible.
Posted by: Dayanna at March 05, 2006 07:22 PM (Ffvoi)
14
Ummm...yeah, you're right -- that was a dumb comment. The "A" in USA stands for "America."
Posted by: Ogre at March 05, 2006 09:04 PM (CyQ4M)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 08, 2005
NC Teachers
The Charlotte Observer has
an editorial a
news story with the following headline:
Keeping N.C. teachers will take more than pay, licensing efforts
As usual, the headline is rather misleading. The news article doesn't mention any ideas by anyone for actually doing anything OTHER than giving more cash and relaxing licensing requirements.
Instead, the article focuses on the lack of teachers, the various school districts that cannot hire enough, and the various cash incentives and bonuses that are being used to attempt to attract teachers.
The easy solution is the one that's overlooked -- if the state can't find enough teachers, stop trying. Seriously. There's no reason that the state should be the only provider of education. The state should simply give up, perhaps starting at the high school level -- just stop providing high school, let the market take over, and give tax credits to anyone with school-age children.
Of course, the politicians are way too entrenched to ever give up any power, so that's not going to happen.
If you cannot attract employees with cash, try another option -- give the damn teachers some authority. Change their working conditions so THEY are in charge of the classroom, not the children.
Allow teachers to dictate what will happen in the classroom. Allow teachers to throw children out of the classroom when they are disruptive. Don't send convicted felonious sex offenders into the classrooms with the teachers. Allow teachers to arm themselves against the gangs and violence. EXPEL students who are involved in felonious assaults and gang wars on school grounds.
But then, you'd have to get rid of students who won't learn -- and that would reduce the federal funding -- so that's not going to happen, either.
So what's the solution? Take your own children and get them out of the government school system and let it collapse under it's own weight.
Posted by: Ogre at
10:05 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I agree with you on giving teachers more power. They should have the say on what goes on in their classroom. I also think they should allow bus drivers to kick off trouble kids and make them walk home even if they are on the road/interstate!
Posted by: Arbitratorofall at December 08, 2005 12:34 PM (/k+l4)
2
The buses are another issue -- if we weren't transporting students 30-40 miles to get to school, they wouldn't even be an issue. But the Mecklenburg School is vehemently opposed to people actually having ANY freedom of association, so they continue to use forced busing -- and always will as long as Democrats run that board.
Posted by: Ogre at December 08, 2005 12:42 PM (/k+l4)
3
Fundamentally public education has a number of issues. Allowing teachers to have very little authority is a big problem.
Another issue is there is common understanding of the purpose of education. Why are kids who cause trouble in school? To give them an education! What does that mean? Well they are suppose to learn. Are they learning? Well no.
People have been trying to fix education for several decades, and things have only gotten worse. What is the line about doing something you have been doing, but hoping for different results.
As you say at the end of your post, the answer for any parent who can is to get their children out of the public schools.
Posted by: Henry Cate at December 14, 2005 11:50 PM (3c3/D)
4
Here in Charlotte, we have convicted felonious sex offenders in class -- so others can experience diversity. And the school board sees nothing wrong with that. Anyone else want to volunteer to be a teacher?
Thanks for stopping along, Henry!!
Posted by: Ogre at December 15, 2005 12:54 AM (uSCkp)
5
The teachers' unions are the people who lobby to restrict their authority in the classroom. It gives them an excuse to ask for lower class sizes and more money.
Maybe all the teachers in NC are up here in Illinois. There is a surplus here who can't get work. The perks here must be better and they can't be fired.
Posted by: Lennie at December 15, 2005 03:24 AM (3eRXR)
6
I know a number of teachers that have quit here in North Carolina, and a couple who haven't. They all say that the working conditions are just horrible. They have zero authority over anything that happens in the classroom, including classroom discipline. They can remove no one from their classrooms, short of witnessing and actual felony, and even if that happens, the student will only be suspended a couple days. Seriously.
And we don't have unions here -- that's why we don't have a surplus -- the free market works better without unions.
Posted by: Ogre at December 15, 2005 10:19 AM (uSCkp)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 23, 2005
Free Speech
It's just
freedom of speech, right?

Your right to free speech ends when you require me, at gunpoint, to pay for it. Government has NO business in education.
Update: The anti-American bastard is no longer taking my money. Good riddance.
Posted by: Ogre at
07:28 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 44 words, total size 1 kb.
1
What level of education are you talking about???
Posted by: David Anderson at November 23, 2005 09:16 AM (65LxF)
2
For government to get out of it? All levels. In today's society, the free market will educate people. At the very least, the federal government should have zero to do with education -- the entire department of education at the federal level should completely go away.
At the state level, states have no need to run alleged institutes of higher learning -- let the private sector take over -- it will do a better job and it will be MUCH cheaper.
Posted by: Ogre at November 23, 2005 09:59 AM (/k+l4)
3
While I agree on the advanced education level, I believe that for grades 1-12 our best future is determined by smoothing out cultural and financial differences. Some states place a higher value on education, thus investing in their future while other states have more immediate problems and may not see education as a good way to overcome their current problems.
I do not believe that all should go to university nor that all kids should be required to finish high school instead a trade school or apprentice program is more appropriate. I have a personal experience in my family where my brother is not very good with books but is a true artist when working with metal or just about anything "hands on".
I also agree that Government is too big. I would vote for any politician that could deliver a 50% immediate cut in everything government followed by a serious program to attack the remaining fat.
My problem with free market for education is that free market is "what have you done for me today" and education is long term unfortunately the characteristics are incompatible. It is true that some companies support education but I believe they do it not because they think it is a good long term idea for their company but because it helps them attract and retain personnel in the immediate or very near term.
Tough question, this could be debated for a long time.
Posted by: David Anderson at November 23, 2005 10:13 AM (65LxF)
4
Indeed, it is a tough one, and I'm certainly with you on the trade school and everyone not completing a college education.
Right now, through government schools, grade 1-12 education is horrible. They are not educating students -- that is not even their admitted purpose any more.
School boards everywhere I have seen are more interested in getting money than educating. Everything is about how much money they can get with zero regard to actual education. That's wrong.
To get government out, allow the free market in, but still not leave "the poor" out, how about tax credits? Then everyone has the means to educate, AND the free market allows people to choose what kind of education they want! And still everyone has the opportunity for education.
Posted by: Ogre at November 23, 2005 10:18 AM (/k+l4)
5
I agree on the money hungry boards. Government, in all forms, is a self growing entity that just keeps getting bigger and bigger and it seems that no one wants to put a stop to it. Schools are no exception.
Tax credits are a problem, what about people who do not make enough money to pay taxes, should their kids be denied access to eduction. At some level there must be support, just because a kid is born into a bad situation that should not compromise his possibility to break out if he has the gumption to do it.
This is a really tough question for me. I have been really poor, not because I did not want to work, just couldn't make enough to support my family. At that time the Italian safety net kept my kids healthy and educated. Later I became rather successful and have since paid my share and that of 1,000s of others so I feel the pain of high taxes and inefficient government, but what if there had not been public education, and in my case public health services?
Before going after education I would rather cut all government infrastructures starting with the publically elected officials. Let's kill their perks, attack pork, make direct and indirect kickbacks a life sentence, fire people who do not do their jobs, and kill any and all subsidies nad/or tax credits. If we are true free market this should not be a problem.
Posted by: David Anderson at November 23, 2005 10:52 AM (65LxF)
6
I have no problem with a public safety net. In fact, I've got a post wandering about in my mind about the public safety nets. It used to be that the safety net was just that -- a very temporary, barely enough net to keep you alive and healthy. Today, that safety net includes a house payment, better health insurance than most people can afford, and all the food you can eat, even while earning (now completely disposable) cash.
Yes, I agree with cutting government almost anywhere. I just think education is one of the currently largest wastes of money. In my area, spending is OVER $10,000 per student. That's just insane.
Posted by: Ogre at November 23, 2005 11:40 AM (/k+l4)
7
I understand about the 10k per student. It is absurd. My question is whether or not this is where we get the most bang for the buck. I feel education is extremely important particularly for those who happen to be born into the unfortunate situation of financial difficulty (for whatever reason). I would have a hard time supporting a cut to education while congress raises its salary, benefits, etc. or members of appropriations commitees are receiving all kinds of kick-backs. I would prefer taking on the more visible grunge before getting bogged down in a very emotional question like Education.
Posted by: David Anderson at November 23, 2005 12:11 PM (65LxF)
8
I agree with David. My high school was not the "rich" school so the board didn't really help them with any required purchases like a second gym after ours burnt down. I think the board should be the one that is restricted. The budgets they call for are unbelivable. Also they are going to cut free lunch for those that cannot afford it.
The biggest problem with Cabarrus County is the super-idiot err intendent who doesn't know anything about the outside world in Cabarrus County. The kick backs given to certain companies is atrocious. Even worse is the treatment of anyone who is not a teacher.
My father, for one, is a high school graduate who couldn't afford to go to college and took a Head Custodian job at my high school. The last real raise he and other support personal got was well over two or three years ago. My father has been working there for over 21 years and will soon make less than a second or maybe first year teacher does.
The problem with schools, as stated above, is not the lack of money but where the money goes and how it is used. Perhaps private companies would work, but I am afraid nothing will change in the long run.
Posted by: Arbitratorofall at November 23, 2005 12:38 PM (/k+l4)
9
David, we could certainly agree to cut government. I say start anywhere, but education clearly is just one of a number of HUGE wastes of money.
And most of the money that does go into education does NOT go into support or classrooms. Mecklenburg county is "searching" for a new superintendent of schools. Without counting tens of thousands of dollars in benefits, they are STARTING the search with a salary requirement of OVER $300,000. Anyone who doesn't see MAJOR problems with that has no concept of finances, money, or economics.
Posted by: Ogre at November 23, 2005 01:58 PM (/k+l4)
10
It sounds like none of you attended college, so I can understand the resentment. Free-market schooling would be a haven for corruption and discrimination. Once government was out of it they'd be free to gouge prices. There are plenty of private schools in existence right now. They are over priced and for all intents and purposes monopolies. Without State schools private school tuition would go up even higher. No big corporation are going to subsidize new schools and even if they did few could afford to attend "coca cola U"
secondly, to the man who's dad is a janitor, maybe teachers deserve higher wages because they are teachers with college educations, not janitors who are a necessary though less skilled cog in the educational machine. Superintendents, who perform difficult jobs that require a large and specialized skill set, could easily get a job paying the same amount in teh private sector. Surely a group of conservatives doesnt expect a highly talented individual to take a decrease in pay out of the charity in their own heart?
lastly, not only is $10,000 dollars a drop in the bucket, but state scholarships to state schools are usually actually discounts that serve only to diminish the profit a state school otherwise would make off of a student.
furthermore, i sincerely doubt that you guys, as uneducated hicks, pay $10,000 in taxes to anywhere.
Posted by: Troll at July 03, 2006 04:42 AM (k7Q1E)
11
Troll, thanks for stopping by and living up to your name. One day you may meet the real world and see how things actually work.
Posted by: Ogre at July 09, 2006 10:49 PM (6PiYg)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 21, 2005
Tax $ for Hatred
Once again, we see the same claims of free speech being screamed while tax dollars are being used to support the enemy and to encourage sedition. Yet again there's
a college "teacher" who is being paid with my tax dollars and he wants all American troops to murder other American troops.
See, this is yet ANOTHER reason that government shouldn't be involved in education. This is MY tax dollars at work. Yes, you have the right to freedom of speech, but you do NOT have the right to have me PAY YOU for a platform for your freedom of speech.
And if government got out of the education business altogether, this would NOT be an issue at all.
(Linked to Stop the ACLU Open Trackbacks).
Posted by: Ogre at
01:03 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 133 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Ogre, thanks for the link. As to what you said, I couldn't have said it better if I tried. Good stuff mi amigo, damn good stuff.
Posted by: GM Roper at November 21, 2005 04:44 PM (uL3la)
2
Thanks for pointing this @^^$ out to the rest of us!
Posted by: Ogre at November 21, 2005 06:05 PM (uSCkp)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 16, 2005
Higher Education Bias
Some people continue to point out the obvious, that state-run institutions of "higher education" are crammed full of super-ultra-liberals who support communism, socialism, and various other philosophies that abhor freedom, capitalism, and Christianity.
And if you point out those facts, YOU are the one bringing politics into the classroom, according to Judith Wegner, not surprisingly, the chairwoman of the faculty at UNC with a clear vested interest in keeping herself and her friends in place, no matter how much they might hate freedom and America.
She is defending people like UNC English lecturer Elyse Crystall who emailed all her students in her classes to attack one of her students who didn't think gays should be celebrated and have special rights -- no free speech for you in Elyse Crystall's classes.
She defends people like Steven E. Jones from BYU, loony extraordinaire, who thinks that there were no Muslims or terrorists involved in the 9-11 attack on America.
Other, more sane people, want there to be some balance. They don't want people hired to higher education positions based on their politics -- but people like Judith Wegner do not like the idea that people can be free, so she supports continuing the policy of specifically hiring only those who have the correct political beliefs.
A bill was introduced in the NC Legislature last year to give students the actual right to disagree with professors -- and the Democrats promptly crushed it to ensure that no freedom of speech, nor even thought, would be allowed in the schools of North Carolina.
Explain to me again why government needs to be involved in education at all? The entire state university funding system should be completely shut down. Let private industry handle education -- they can do everything else better than government -- and then this would not be an issue, nor a HUGE financial expenditure.
Posted by: Ogre at
06:04 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.
November 04, 2005
UNC Volunteers Your Cash
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, also well-known as the Berkley of the East,
has revealed that slavery existed in the United States in the late 1700s and early 1800s. Apparently no one knew about that before today.
"This university was built by slaves and free blacks," said Chancellor James Moeser. "We need to be candid about that, acknowledge their contributions."
Again, good thing they revealed this, as until they made this announcement and spent millions of taxpayer dollars building exhibits, displays, monuments, and statues to admit it, apparently no one had any idea that slavery existed. Or maybe some people knew there was slavery, but they just assumed the slaves didn't actually DO anything.
Far down in the news story, we find out the real purpose for this:
Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree. But he believes those found to have had links to slavery should pay reparations.
There you have it. The University, since someone did something 200 years ago, wants to take MORE money from you, the taxpayer, and give it to someone else who had nothing to do with anything. Isn't that nice of them?
Once again, it is NOT charity; it is NOT good, nice, or honorable, to TAKE money from one person and GIVE it to another. Explain to me again why in the hell education can only exist with government running it? Oh yeah, because people who were accountable wouldn't consider such moronic ideas.
Posted by: Ogre at
05:09 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 250 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I've said this before, if reparations are to be paid to slaves in exisitence 200 years ago then my family deserves reparations from the Japanese who enslaved Korea for 50 years. My aunt, uncle and countless others were alive at the time.
So, Japan! Pay up or else I'll sick UNC on you.
I refuse to pay reparations to someone to whom I did nothing to. In fact, I'll go a step further. If there is a person among us living today who was a slave 200 years ago then I will pay reparations. If not - NEXT!
Posted by: oddybobo at November 04, 2005 09:06 AM (6Gm0j)
2
Oddy, you just don't understand. This is not about facts, it's about feeling. And cash. Lots of cash. So facts are completely unimportant to people like this.
Posted by: Ogre at November 04, 2005 10:00 AM (/k+l4)
3
And don't forget . . .
In 200 years, they will be asking for reparations for THIS cash grab. And those like it.
Too bad we can't stop the atrocities as they happen, isn't it?
Posted by: The Small Town Hick at November 04, 2005 09:08 PM (ZINSp)
4
I am continuously amazed at what people will do for money in this country -- because keep in mind that is ALL this is about.
Thanks for stopping by!
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2005 07:03 AM (7PCNv)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 31, 2005
CA officially selects a religion
Christians are now persona non gratis in the University of California school system. The state of California is now officially, according to the University system, a state sponsor of the naturalist religion and no other religions will be tolerated or allowed in the University system.
In related news, the United States Air Force agrees to punish Christians as well.
The University system is now rejecting any course that has been taught by any private, home, or religious school that contains any reference to creationism or intelligent design; or even any that actually mention that FACT that Darwin's theory of evolution is actually a theory.
They are also rejecting any history course that mentions Christians, including a course called "ChristianityÂ’s Influence on American History," even if the courses are actually based on facts. Since the course NAME contains the word "Christian," it is verboten in the California University system.
This is what happens when the government gets too involved in the education system. The STATE has no business, indeed NO need, even no real reason to be in the business of education. The state does not need state schools. The entire state university system should be scrapped -- private institutions will very quickly and easily take their place.
Unfortunately, there are too many with vested interests in the state-run education system for reason to enter into the system. Watch this case closely, as it will likely reach the Supreme Court (after getting through the morons on the 9th circuit court), and could have a very far-reaching impact on ALL education and religion in this country.
(Hat tip to Cross Blogging).
Posted by: Ogre at
07:28 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 279 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I expect to see the ACLU jumping all over this any time now!!!
(*)>
Posted by: birdwoman at August 31, 2005 08:02 PM (Sc2Wh)
2
Sure, sure. That's the ACLU, standing up for religious liberty everywhere, right? Hello? ACLU?
*chirp, chirp*
Posted by: Ogre at August 31, 2005 08:09 PM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 17, 2005
Marine Student Fined For Being Marine
Nice story out of Texas today. It seems a Marine was told he had to pay a fine for being in the Marines. He was
denied in-state tuition from a community college because he had spent years in Iraq. He has current and active bank accounts in Texas; a voter registration, and a TX driver's license -- but no in-state tuition, so the Community College doesn't consider him a resident.
Here's a tip for you, Carl Basham: tell them you're from Mexico. If that doesn't work, you're free to come to North Carolina and tell the community college here you're from Mexico -- that gets you "in-state" tuition rates in this state.
Posted by: Ogre at
04:43 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Disgusting! Here in PA, if you are active in the Military, you don't pay state taxes (you do in other highly military states like VA). Anyway, If he paid taxes in Texas, doesn't that count? Also, does that mean he is a resident of Iraq?
Posted by: Oddybobo at August 17, 2005 05:06 PM (6Gm0j)
2
I wonder if they'll still let him vote.
Posted by: Ogre at August 17, 2005 05:37 PM (L0IGK)
3
I can't believe the residents of TX are going to put up with that. Someone big will get wind of this and it'll go away...
Posted by: Bou at August 17, 2005 09:57 PM (5JHEt)
4
Sure, they'll change it now...hopefully. But that just goes to show the ignorant rules that get invented by government idiots.
Posted by: Ogre at August 17, 2005 10:02 PM (L0IGK)
5
How ridiculous!
I don't get it. As a military dependent, I have been able to move to other states and as long as there were proof of orders, I was able to get instate tuition.
He should get to go to a community college for free in my opinion.
What a bunch of bull!
Posted by: Sissy at August 17, 2005 10:23 PM (uXS+O)
6
Yes, but then you weren't hated by liberal academic quite so much because you weren't the actual baby-killer, just the innocent dependent.
Posted by: Ogre at August 18, 2005 06:11 AM (L0IGK)
7
A few things, Texas does not have any State income taxes, just sales taxes, property taxes, sin taxes, lottery taxes (oops, that's another issue), so there are no records there, but it DOES show he filed his FEDERAL taxes as a Texan for the last few years even tough he was either in Iraq or stationed in other states.
Second, he DID enlist in the USMC while in Louisianna (his parents moved there and he had to finish high school there, but that was at least 6 if not 8 years ago now). Personally, Sissy, I'm with you in a way. In one sense you CAN go to a community college free as a veteran, because you have the Montgomery GI bill and in Texas (which this veteran SHOULD receive) the Hazlewood act (which pays either 2 or 4 more semesters in full once the GI bill runs out). My thoughts are these, if you are a veteran, once DISCHARGED (other than dis-honorably), you should be able to go to ANY state to begin your education and be GUARANTEED in-state tuition, only once you've chosen that state and started school could the other 49 states charge you more. Trust me, we have the state comptroller and a few state representatives battling for Cpl Basham, I won't be surprised if he doesn't have a healthy grant or scholarship when this is over. (BTW - Ogre - Sorry for the long comment)
Posted by: Smoke Eater at August 18, 2005 01:02 PM (WJO7V)
8
Right, Smokey.
In fact, when you're in the military, you can quite literally claim ANY state as your home state. You will then pay taxes in that state (if any). You can get a car registration, bank accounts, etc., just by claiming that state as your home state.
This is nothing more than an educational institution trying to get a load of cash out of someone, nothing more.
Posted by: Ogre at August 18, 2005 01:15 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 11, 2005
Intelligent Design, Part 2
Yesterday
I responded to a question from the
Christian Views Symposium regarding intelligent design and schools. In the comments to that post, and on his own blog,
Pixy Misa said:
ID simply isn't a theory in scientific terms. Evolution is. We can perform experiments in evolution, but in the main it is observational, like astronomy. It's still science
Well, that's not entirely correct. If evolution is observational, why can't intelligent design be observed? After all, evolution CANNOT be observed happening today, only "evidence" of it can be observed. If that's the case, evidence for intelligent design can be just as easily observed.
more...
Posted by: Ogre at
08:01 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 906 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Great job! I'd love to see a heated debate between you and Rightwingnuthouse. But I have one question, without evolution how do you explain Ogres.
Posted by: Jay at August 11, 2005 09:23 AM (2FcUc)
2
So, um, where is the evidence for ID? Your attack on evolution was decent but you didn't make a single statement to support any other theroy. Couldn't we take your arguement and conclude just about anything? "Evolution doesn't add up so life must always have been here" "there isn't enough evidence for evolution so Vishnu danced us into existance"
Posted by: clark at August 11, 2005 09:55 AM (hJ+03)
3
Jay, Ogres don't have to explain Ogres...

And Clark, I haven't gone into evidence for intelligent design in this post (I figured it was already too long for many people to read it). There is evidence for ID, including the idea of irreducible complexity, information theory, and a few others. I'll put all them in another post if you're interested (actually, I'll probably do it even if you're not interested, just because you asked.)
Thanks for stopping by!
Posted by: Ogre at August 11, 2005 10:01 AM (/k+l4)
4
Clark has a good comment. A deity creating everything ex nihilo can be used to explain anything. If everything's perfect, that's the way the deity created them. If everything's flawed (and men have nipples for no reason), that's the way the deity created them (or is that Satan's doing?) If fossils of homo erectus exist, the deity created the Earth with fossils in it. There's a problem with a theory if two entirely different and contradictory sets of observations lead to the same conclusion. This is essentially the same thing as saying that observation's don't matter.
Posted by: Karlo at August 11, 2005 12:20 PM (HoLw7)
5
I haven't listed the evidence for intelligent design yet, Karlo. I've just shown that evolution is a religion based on deeply-held religious beliefs and is simply not a valid scientific theory that can be supported with any evidence that has been observed. I'll get to the evidence for ID -- I'd like to get it up tomorrow, but it might not make it up until Saturday or Monday.
Posted by: Ogre at August 11, 2005 12:37 PM (/k+l4)
Posted by: TF Stern at August 11, 2005 01:49 PM (dz3wA)
7
Good stuff there, TF! Good stuff with excellent links and supporting. I've got some reading to do!
Posted by: Ogre at August 11, 2005 02:41 PM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 15, 2005
Mayor McCrory & Education
Charlotte Mayor
Pat McCrory is the perfect example of what is termed a "RINO" (Republican in Name Only). Each year he runs on the Republican ticket, and he gets the votes of the Republicans. Every year he votes and works for the Democrats, so he gets the votes of the Democrats. He has been mayor of Charlotte since 1995, and he is
running again this year, basically unopposed.
As of the writing of this article, his web site does not have any information. However, I heard a clip of his announcement on the radio. He claims he's working to expand light rail (liberal plan), reduce crime (not possible with Democrats on the city council), and tell our children what is acceptable in a polite society (liberal plan).
Well, Mayor (who has absolutely no say or control regarding the schools, that's for the school board) McCrory -- you want to know what's wrong with our schools? How about them encouraging cheating and then insisting that nothing is wrong with it?
more...
Posted by: Ogre at
05:03 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 569 words, total size 4 kb.
1
We operate on a system with three six-week terms per semester. Our district has a policy of "no grades below a 50", on the theory that the lower grades could make it impossible for a kid to ever pass. We teachers don't have a problem with that per se -- except when it comes to the third six-week term. After all, there is no way a student can "recover" from the final term of the semester. What's more, the kids know this, and some figure their average and "slide" during that third term, knowing that they cannot fail the semster if they do so.
And we won't get in to the question of a kid who misses 90% of the semester but ends up with a grade of 50.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at July 20, 2005 09:24 AM (3VVx3)
2
I can see the reasoning behind that sort of system, but I do think it's still dishonest. If the child did 20% of the work the first third, they deserve a 20. If they do 100% of the work the remaining two-thirds, that averages out to 73. Some people aren't supposed to have high school diplomas, and some people simply do not want them. Why do we FORCE people to get them, especially when they have so little meaning anymore?
Posted by: Ogre at July 20, 2005 10:32 AM (/k+l4)
3
"Government schools really do stink?" Excuse me. Which government schools? Where? How, exactly do they stink and why? Does not the fact that someone blew the whistle indicate that at least someone is at least trying to do right within this single school?
Certainly there is administrative stupidity in some schools, but not the majority. If that was true, we would be facing a very real, national disaster. We are not.
If a school board is filled with ninnies, the voters--and here we assume they are not themselves ninnies--have the means to eject them from office and replace them with capable people. That ninnies retain control of school boards is not a comment on the schools and the teachers who struggle mightily to improve them, but on the public who all too often, just don't care.
Posted by: Mike at July 20, 2005 09:23 PM (G5PGV)
4
I went to school in Charlotte back in 74-76. The system was atrocious then. Anyone who had money sent their kids to private school. (We didn't have money.)
One of my closest friends moved to Charlotte five years ago. The system is still atrocious. Two of her kids are in private school. The other is in public school. N- has the math and language skills of an eighth grader but will be graduating this next year. The school passed her in all her classes, despite the fact that she failed most of them, at least by grade.
It's at least as bad as this post describes and I don't see how people can't know it. But they don't act on it. That's obvious. Otherwise, thirty years later, it wouldn't still be terrible.
Posted by: Suzi at July 21, 2005 12:23 AM (3TZQi)
5
Mike -- the fact that someone blew the whistle was good -- but it was a former employee, and the school actually admitted that they lied and cheated, but then declared that NOTHING WAS WRONG. How can anyone consider a system that claims lying and cheating is not wrong is anything but garbage?
Also, I do believe we are facing a national disaster. Take a look at how many people who have high school diplomas from the 21st century that cannot calculate their own overtime pay, find France on a map, or name the second president of the United States.
As for the school board being replaced, you have to realize that the voters do not have that choice. In Mecklenburg County, the school board is ruled by the Democrats who gerrymander districts to absolutely ensure there is zero competition for the school board -- no one else has a chance -- and the elections are rigged in that illegal votes are counted in the very corrupt system.
Suzi, I think the biggest reason people don't act on it is that they don't want to admit "their" school is bad. If they did that, they've have to admit that their child was getting by. It's much easier for people to just look the other way, send them to private school (as you mentioned), or just teach them at home.
It is a horrible, broken, garbage-filled system. Government should absolutely and entirely get out of the business of schooling because they simply cannot do the job. The education system today is about money and power and has absolutely nothing to do with actual education or learning.
Posted by: Ogre at July 21, 2005 07:32 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
122kb generated in CPU 0.0355, elapsed 0.109 seconds.
103 queries taking 0.0867 seconds, 314 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.