Archive for the 'Get out the K-Y' Category

President Abraham who?

He may be the president who governed during the Civil War, freeing the slaves, but under a new curriculum proposal for North Carolina high schools, U.S. history would begin years after President Lincoln, with the presidency of Rutherford B. Hayes in 1877.

State education leaders say this may help students learn about more recent history in greater depth.

“We are certainly not trying to go away from American history,” Rebecca Garland, the chief academic officer for North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, told Fox News. “What we are trying to do is figure out a way to teach it where students are connected to it, where they see the big idea, where they are able to make connections and draw relationships between parts of our history and the present day.”

As the North Carolina curriculum stands now, ninth-grade students take world history, 10th-graders study civics and economics and 11th-graders take U.S. history going back to the country’s founding.

Under the proposed change, the ninth-graders would take a course called global studies, focusing in part on issues such as the environment. The 10th grade still would study civics and economics, but 11th-graders would take U.S. history only from 1877 onward.

Emphasis mine.

Let me get this straight. When North Carolina Students are 16 to 17 years old, and 1 year from going out into the world, and not only that, are 1 year from VOTING, you want to take away their freshest and most adult study of our country’s history, and in fact, its founding? When they can be taught what Jefferson and Hamilton, Madison and Adams, fought for and won? What those men believed would be the best form of government?

Un. Real. But to be expected.

My favorite quote was from “Rebecca Garland, the chief academic officer for North Carolina Department of Public Instruction”:

“The students are in school for 13 years,” said Garland. “They certainly are taught U.S. and North Carolina history in middle school.”

I am sure that the 6th grade history curriculum discusses the Declaration on a Highlights for Kids level, which is pretty much where you damned hippies want to leave them. Any discussion of the Federalist Papers (noticably missing from the Highlights archives….) won’t be necessary at the 11th grade level, you see, because it was studied earlier… trust us.

This is exactly why public schools are failing. This is why one of the most important things parents can do is to be active in PTAs, be active in knowing the decisions local school boards are making, what the states boards of education are doing, and in fact, perhaps even running for one of those seats to prevent these revisionists from taking the next generation and teaching them that their exhalations are killing Mother Gaia.

I am so glad that my children are not becoming dumber by attending North Carolina schools.

Side by side comparisons of Bush’s State of the Union, and President Obama’s 2010 SOTU address.

There is something familiar.

Oh. I know. Its empty platitude filled rhetoric from politicians.

Gotcha.

Hat-tip to the Insta-dude...

These started to get old, but this one seems to be pretty well done…

Sorry it has been the “Bigfoot Show” the last month or so, but thanks for picking up my slack there guy!

Now that the Senate Democrats (and their fellow-traveler independents) have found their way to pass the current health care bill, we will have seen an historic event presaging the very end of the American experiment in a Constitutional federal republic comparable to the repeal of the 17th Amendment and other events that opened a hole in the Constitution to allow the growth of an all-powerful central government.

Here is what is unprecedented:

1) Both houses of Congress have voted that to annex from states and individuals responsibility for and control of the provision of health care to every American citizen. This is a breathtaking expansion of the Federal government’s claims over the citizens and individuals that will irreversibly alter the balance of power between the Federal government and the states or people, putting a nail into the coffin of limited central government. Having reached a critical mass of power, there will be no limit to future expansions of federal power.

In other words, Congress (in conjunction with the Executive Branch) have now laid claim to health care as its exclusive province.

And as history demonstrates time and time again, once the Federal government accrues and arrogates power unto itself, it does not willingly surrender it back to the people (or states). The flow of power almost always runs towards greater centralization at an accelerating rate.

Read the rest of this entry »

Damn the science: full speed ahead

According to a Fox News story today, the EPA is set as soon as tomorrow to “officially declare carbon dioxide a public danger, a trigger that could mean regulation for emitters across the economy”.

And since every living being is an emission source for CO2, coming soon, mandatory CO2 scubbers for every American man, women, and newborn? Or perhaps breathing taxes – and meters so that heavy breathers pay more?

Want to do those aerobic exercises? Or how about those erotic exercises, those night-time romps in the sheets? Be prepared to pay for those additional emissions.

Plus, the EPA will now have power to regulate every source of CO2 emissions, from power plants to industrial production to farming lawn mowers or backyard barbecues. Don’t you just love that enumerated powers section of the Constitution that gives an unelected Federal executive agency the power to control every waking moment of our lives?

The story also goes on to state this:

The announcement would also give President Barack Obama and his climate envoy negotiating leverage at a global climate summit starting next week in Copenhagen, Denmark and increase pressure on Congress to pass a climate bill that would modify the price of polluting.

How’s that hope and change, evidence-based EPA working out for you Obama voters? There’s no deliberate attempt to use science manipulate the political process here, is there? Nothing here about politics trumping science, right? It’s only Republican administrations that we are allowed to (wrongly) levy such charges against, now – got it.

With its remarkable sense of timing and “sticking its fingers in its ear and humming louder” – the EPA looks determined to respond to Climategate and previous accusations of suppressing scientific dissent among its staff by simply ignoring the evidence and proceeding to ram the icebergs dead ahead, since these icebergs really aren’t there according to the climate global warming models.

Well the only sure thing from here is that this EPA announcement will only exacerbate CO2 emissions by lawyers, while killing millions of CO2 mitigating trees for legal briefs. And we all lose with that.

Responsible environmentalism takes another, perhaps fatal, blow in the face.

Ha! After I read this article I came up with some of my own answers.

Understanding the pros and cons of health overhaul

Q: How many people would be covered?

A: The Senate bill would cover 94 percent of eligible Americans under age 65; under the House bill, it’s 96 percent.

That’s a major improvement over the 83 percent now covered, but the safety net would have holes.

Some 16 million eligible people would remain uninsured under the Senate bill and 12 million under the House bill, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That’s not counting illegal immigrants, who would not be eligible for government assistance under either bill.

We shouldn’t be counting illegals! They should be LEGAL first.

Q: Why don’t lawmakers just provide coverage for everyone?

Uh because it would cost so much even the rich couldn’t afford it.

Q: How affordable is the new middle-class coverage going to be?

A: It depends.

Most people would remain in their employer plans. Self-employed people and those working in small businesses would be able to buy coverage through a new insurance marketplace, with government subsidies available for many.

The aid is substantial for lower-income households, but drops off rapidly for the middle class.

The evil IT DEPENDS answer. Red flag. As for many people remaining on employer sponsored plans, that’s a joke! Employers will drop the benefit of health insurance and pay the fine for it because it would be cheaper. The idiots crafting this bill KNOW this. And their counting on US to crawl to them for insurance.

Q: Twenty-year-olds don’t have many health problems. Would they be required to get coverage?

A: You bet.

Unmarried children could stay on their parents’ plan until age 27 in the House bill, 26 in the Senate plan. That change would start in 2010.

20 yr olds loose freedom. And unmarried adult children will remain children, who depend upon Mommy and Daddy until they’re seriously grown up and should be fending for themselves. A generation of free loaders in the making.

Q: Older people are concerned about what’s going to happen to Medicare. Should they be?

The article explains that NOOO, old people have nothing to fear because benefits won’t be taken away. Nope. Just by reducing the fee paid to the docs is ALL that’ll happen. What happens when they have less docs? Hmm.

Besides, old people hog all the resources anyway…they are useless to society so let’s cut them loose and let’em die. It’s gonna happen. We see it already with government panels changing the game by suddenly claiming breast exams and tests aren’t necessary until a woman is 50. That’s the beginning of OLD…and hell if they kill off enough women look at all the money saved…

I heard this wonderful little snippet that I had to rewind and hear about twenty times just to make sure I heard it come out of the President’s speech tonight:

A belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play. And an acknowledgment that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise.

This has always been the history of our progress.

In 1935, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it.

In 1965, when some argued that Medicare represented a government takeover of health care, members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, did not back down.

I will agree with the statement that hard work and responsibility SHOULD be rewarded with “some measure of security and fair play” in that if you work an honest days work, you should find yourself better off. SHOULD. There is no guarantee, never has been. Living is risk. Doing anything carries risk. You can work your butt off and circumstances could pop up and “BAM”, everything you worked for is gone. OR things go really, really well, and you are comfortable and wealthy beyond one’s wildest imagination. That is our history.

Not the GOVERNMENT having to come in to “help deliver on that promise”, though I’m not sure what the “promise” was.

And THEN he has the guts to come out and say that this is the way our “progress” has always been, using FDR’s New Deal and Johnson’s Great Society as examples of “always”. Yeah. Don’t go back to the Founders, but just back into the progressive era of this country where the foundations of socialism were set, where the soft tyranny could begin, complete with the nanny state we will all enjoy. This is a slow creep. Though it seems that the snowball has picked up momentum in the last few years or so…

We have gone from equality of opportunity to equality of results. We must now guarantee a certain level for each citizen to enjoy, regardless of effort or circumstance. And we must take away from others in order to do this. Once again, our Founders did not intend this.

Bah. I fundamentally differ with this man, and the majority of his party and supporters. They believe in “leveling” the playing field, implying that adversity, and overcoming it, are their jobs and not each individual citizens.

Before some lefty troll jumps in and starts sqwaking that I am talking all crazy anarachist here, let me say that the government, local, state and federal all have their roles, with the federals the weakest as far as what it should be meddling in. That being said, if laws are being broke to the detriment of one, then ofcourse the government steps in to the fray to correct it.

And how the U.S. Constitution is being violated here requiring the use of federal power to correct a violation of a right is lost on me, and is just ignored as a non-issue. Because only those crazy Ron Paulians or nutty libertarians give a rats arse about that withered old parchment anymore. Shoot, there is a NEEEEEEEED. People are HUUUURRRRTTTING! Going BAAAAANKRUPT! Blah. Blah. Blah. I don’t say this to be harsh or cold, but the people spewing these sob stories are doing so not because they want me to help them, but so that I will let the government step in and help them, by taking away my choice and freedoms, confiscating more of my wealth and property, all to further their agendas that they can’t pay for. Yeah, that was a run-on sentence, I’m pretty sure, but I’m on a roll, so screw it.

On Fox, they’re discussing the cost, and how the President is pretty much got 10 pounds of crap stuffed into a 5 pound bag with his figures on how to pay for it. Not just the evil Repubs, but even Obama supporters are saying that he’s off. On CNN, they’re stuck on lamenting the “LIE” outcry during his speech that got Pelosi’s eyes bugged out and her hot under the collar, and anything else but the costs. I won’t even turn over to MSNBC where Matthew’s leg is quivering, Olbermann is frothing at the mouth, and Maddow, well, I can’t even look at her much listen to her smug Adam’s apple.

The question I have is, how are we going to fight this when it passes. And it will pass, in some form. Public option or not, the government will show its tentacles in the bathing suit areas of our liberties. Will the states say enough! We reassert our rights under that dusty and ill-used 10th Amendment, and since this has nothing to do with interstate commerce, you can go pound sand D.C. Or will individuals say that they’re rights are being violated because the federal government has come and ORDERED them, under penalty of law, to purchase a product. And this is NOT like auto insurance. IF I don’t own a car, I don’t have to purchase auto insurance. When this happens, and our freedoms continue to be whittled away for our own good, when is enough enough? And where do WE go to find freedom again?

Bah. I’m going to bed…

Taxachusetts is getting prepared for the swine flu – by crafting a bill that if passed, would give state and local agencies a broad set of powers, in the event of an emergency. Some of these would would be:

to require the owner or occupier of premises to permit entry into and investigation of the premises;

to close, direct, and compel the evacuation of, or to decontaminate or cause to be decontaminated any building or facility, and to allow the reopening of the building or facility when the danger has ended;

to decontaminate or cause to be decontaminated, or to destroy any material;

to restrict or prohibit assemblages of persons

The state would also be able to require citizens to be vaccinated or undergo “preventative procedure”, and able to isolate or quarantine those who are unwilling or unable to submit to the vaccination or procedure, if they are determined to be infected or exposed. Anyone knowing violating a quarantine or isolation order may be fined $1,000 per day while the violation continues.

On the other hand, if law enforcement or medical personel cause any harm (from Section 12 of the bill),

No law enforcement authority or medical personnel shall be held criminally or civilly liable as a result of an act or omission carried out in good faith in reliance on said order

Read the bill here. It’s 28 pages, pretty modest as far as legislation goes these days.

…if more of this sort of thing happens. If a cop making up law as he goes along isn’t scary, I don’t know what is. (via HotAir)

I wonder, if this protestor needs help defending his right to free speech, will the ACLU come to his aid? Or are they still busy taking photos of CIA agents and showing them to suspected Al Qaeda operatives? (Remember when outing a CIA agent was considered to be horribly evil?)

Would someone please explain to me how Congress has the power to pass this law that can prohibit this behavior?

Rachel Merrill, mother of three, was holding innocuous-seeming contraband in her hand at an Arlington Goodwill store earlier this month: a 1971 edition of “Little House on the Prairie.” This copy of the children’s classic had just become illegal to resell because of concerns that some old books contain lead in their ink.

Legislation passed by Congress last August in response to fears of lead-tainted toys imported from China went into effect last month. Consumer groups and safety advocates have praised it for its far-reaching protections. But libraries and book resellers such as Goodwill are worried about one small part of the law: a ban on distributing children’s books printed before 1985.

Where in the Constitution does it give Congress the power to do this? How does this fit into “interstate commerce”? If the book is not sold and then shipped across state lines, I am having a hard time determining exactly how this is possible? I mean, other than the fact that our Congress-critters have since decided that they can do whatever they damn well please as long as they tie it into protecting their flocks of sheep.

Sure, this is just a little thing. Children’s books and whatever. But they’ve also told me what kind of light bulb I can use in my house. They’re working on telling me what kind of insurance I need. I’m getting increasingly pissed. I am seeing these broad grabs at power, and I am afraid at what my country will look like in 50 years. If we continue to allow our federal government to make these power grabs, we won’t have a federal government anymore, other than in name anyways…