I found a new article.  One item there jumped out at me.

“Decades later, when examining the math textbook used by some young relatives of mine, who were living where I grew up in Harlem, I discovered that the math they were being taught in the 11th grade was less than what I had been taught in the 9th grade.”
Note the degradation of math presentation.  This is on purpose.  The socialist government can’t operate when there are people of knowledge who could oppose it.  The design originally was to allow those of different viewpoints to debate their various views and the view gathering the greatest support would then be tried.  It was not to be a power grab where someone in a bureaucratic office would get to dictate how the citizen’s lives ran.  The communist prefers people who will just work and follow directions – a slave plantation writ large.  What was one fear of the slave owners?  That their charges would obtain knowledge and weapons and become independent.  Here is the nugget of truth as to the dumbing down of the education system.
I hear frequently how much the kids now days are forced to work in school and the excessive amounts of information required of them.  Yet, I can check out at a store, provide an additional 2 cents to make even change and the young school educated checker can’t handle that calculation.  On conversation with one I was struck with the ability of them to site facts from the Amazon rain forest and random details of trivial things.  That’s when it struck me what the educational system was doing.  Kids presently are being presented trivia and calling it learning.  They learn facts and figures about meaningless things which have no practical import to their lives and are absolutely denied practical knowledge which could have an effect in altering their later voting patterns.  Example of what is being denied – I had kidinbox in school years ago and looked through an American history textbook.  There was a short entry on the impeachment of Clinton.  Opposition of the Republicans was presented.  There was not a syllable about obstruction of justice or perjury.  Real knowledge is being denied the kids.  It’s up to us to train them.  Teach them at home if you can.

……………Because that Liberal did “something” and has washed her hands of the results.
Butshe feels good about it- which is all that matters.

Which is all that matters whenever a Liberal does “something” to help—– and generally makes things worse.

But at least they feel good about “doing something”.

“Doing something” as an euphemism for actions without thought.  This may be, and I have just conjecture at this point, a result of never having to lose at a game, always receiving a participation trophy, being praised for anything done and absolutely no experience running a business.  Planning is required for a business and learning to lose at games at a young age is there to teach effects of decisions.  With them removed, this would be the expected result.

Read the Underground History of American Education and find out that is just the slightest hint of the cesspool of historical education.  Each chapter dives into another area of graft and corruption.  Sure there are fine individuals here and there, but the point is, the system is still horrendous.  Whitewash a turd and what do you have?

There is an excellent book out there called the Underground History of American Education.  It is divided up into sections very heavily researched showing influences of various kinds on education.  One of the items was business which wanted to destroy the craftsman and create a consumer.  Schools were designed with a day schedule an an excessive amount of calendar time to accomplish their goals.  From another book on another subject, but associated with the idea of retraining – Thomas Sowell – the only reason to have sex education for more than a single instructional period is to change what the parents are teaching at home.  The day is planned.  The goal is accomplishing profit for a corporation.  In a similar vein, I found this article.

A good guy with a gun.

How do you get good guys with guns?

Raise good guys and then train them.

Here is a good start.

For those whining about risk and not wanting firearms available, who do they want when the chips are down?  There just seems to be a responsibility issue with them not wanting to be responsible for their own safety.  If a person isn’t responsible for themselves, who will be?  Dr. Laura had a caller with whom she was working for a while, then finally had an exasperated moment – “Why am I working harder on your problem than you are?”  It was an interesting observation.  The caller wanted more effort from the other end of the phone than they wanted from the person in the mirror.

Now granted, for the most part, those who want everyone disarmed are simply playing the communist card and removing opposition to rule.  The second amendment was placed there precisely because our founders knew the depravity of man and desire to rule and provided the ultimate defense to the population against such a government.

I’m happy to see training on firearms being passed to another generation.  That provides me hope for our future.

I read through this article and noted a concept described, but not stated. That is the focus of an individual in regards to relationship to spouse and children.  In the 50s, there were television shows using entire families with each member showing the anticipated roles they played in society.  Using the female role mentioned in the article, note the disdain the teacher had for the role of mother. What is the main difference, personally speaking, between a mother and someone at a job?  The mother is working to care for others.  The woman in a job is working to care for herself.  This is not to disparage working moms who need to put food on the table.  I just want to recognize a concept using the scenario presented in the article – man supporting the family and woman supporting the home.   The child received a disparaging remark from her teacher that she should not consider caring for children as a worthwhile activity even though she was living the result of someone engaged in that action.  The teacher was trying to inculcate the child into selfish rather than selfless mindset.  The educator was trying to intrude in the family concept of the home life.  As an aside and quote I have used previously – Dr. Thomas Sowell noted that if one simply wanted to present sex education as the facts, it could be done so in a few classes.  The only reason to extend it over multiple years is to undermine the training received at home.  This demonstrates a similar retraining.

Arranged marriage – perfect name for the concept of deliberate action based on thought and conversation.  Emotions come and go.  Feelings run the gamut of ecstasy to discouragement.  Self absorption can only destroy a relationship.  Joy is recognized when shown in desire to give to others – in this case, the children.  She recognized how her dad gave to the family and the mom gave to the kids and him.  “It was never really spoken about to me, but those are just the ideas I developed and carried with me.”  She developed those ideas because she lived them.

The last comment (when I was reading) has some truth as well.

I saw a great poster with a photo of Sam Elliot, dressed as a cowboy. He (supposedly) said, “When you are dead, you don’t know you are dead. All of the pain is felt by others.

The same thing happens when you are stupid.”

The effect of modern education is seen in, for example, how one receives change at the register.  The kids there are taught not to think, and when presented with something different – like a few extra cents so I may receive a quarter change, they can’t mentally handle the information.  The mind is instructed to not work.  That’s really sad and also probably the main reason democrat politics based on race, ethnicity, feelings, etc, rather than factual analysis gets so much play.  If the population was actually educated to analyze and think, little that they desire would be able to be passed.

Here is the link.

Next Page »