Who leaves their kids behind? Is it the government? Or … is it the parent! Have adults in this country truly become such sorry parents that they actually need the government to come in and tell them not to leave their child behind? Folks, No Child Left Behind should be a grass roots movement pushed and demanded by parents … and not the government!
It is the government’s job to support education and then get the hell out of the way. Have you ever stopped to wonder why the classic “super teacher” films of the past like To Sir With Love, The Black Board Jungle, or Lean On Me all depict troubled students with bad situations at home … and a teacher or a principle who steps in and acts as a surrogate parent and does what the parent should have been doing. These movies do not depict the government stepping in and spending billions of dollars on wasteful programs that do not work.
The biggest, most bureaucratic, most socialistic government in the world simply cannot take the place of a real parent who pushes their child to succeed, who supports their child’s educational goals, and demands a quality education for their child at the local level. A parent who meets with teachers, attends PTA meetings, votes in school board elections, demands to see homework and helps their child with that homework, and demands quality text books for their student sees that their child is not left behind.
Are there bad parents in the world … of course there are … and while it is sad, and tragic, and all that … the government can’t change that either! Be the best parent you can be … and quit asking the “village” to raise your kids!
Meanwhile, In California:
A California appeals court ruling has clamped down on homeschooling by parents without teaching credentials and sent shock wave across the state, leaving an estimated 166,000 children as possible truants and their parents at risk of prosecution.
“California courts have held that … parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children,” Justice H. Walter Croskey said in the 3-0 ruling issued on Feb. 28. “Parents have a legal duty to see to their children’s schooling under the provisions of these laws.”
Parents can be criminally prosecuted for failing to comply, Croskey said.
“A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare,” the judge wrote, quoting from a 1961 case on a similar issue.
Since when have California schools done any of those things?
California schools like to teach our children to be tolerant of families with two daddies or two mommies, and how to put condoms on bananas, and how evil America is and how we must tolerate our radical Muslim brothers and sisters who are trying to blow us off the face of the earth because we deserve it, and how to avoid taking personal responsibility for any of our actions, and that free-market capitalism is the devil.
They have forgotten how to teach reading, writing and arithmetic. and …. hmmmm lets see …. no more Pledge of Allegiance in school, you can draw demonic pictures, Hindu pictures, Buddhist pictures …. but no Christian pictures!
How about this story from California on Fox News:
A student and his family have filed a federal lawsuit demanding that a popular European history teacher at California’s Capistrano Valley High School be fired for what they say were anti-Christian remarks he made in the classroom.
Chad Farnan, a 16-year-old sophomore, says the teacher, James Corbett, told his students that “Jesus glasses” obscure the truth and suggested that Christians are more likely than other people to commit rape and murder.
Farnan recorded his teacher telling students in class: “What country has the highest murder rate? The South! What part of the country has the highest rape rate? The South! What part of the country has the highest rate of church attendance? The South!” Farnan said he took the tape recorder to class to supplement his class notes.
Or this one from Wisconsin:
MADISON, Wis. — A Tomah High School student has filed a federal lawsuit alleging his art teacher censored his drawing because it featured a cross and a biblical reference.
The lawsuit alleges other students were allowed to draw “demonic” images and asks a judge to declare a class policy prohibiting religion in art unconstitutional.
“We hear so much today about tolerance,” said David Cortman, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal advocacy group representing the student. ”
We are always being told by liberals how we must have tolerance for Islamic beliefs, Buddhist beliefs, Wiccan beliefs, atheistic beliefs, homosexual beliefs, …. but what I want to know is …. where is the tolerance for Christian religious beliefs? Isn’t the whole purpose of art to reflect the artists personal experience. To tell some high school student that his religious beliefs can legally be censored and then to give a grade of “0” for an obviously good drawing … sends the wrong message and is, I sorry, extremely un-American!
Folks, remember this concept? The government works for and derives its power from us … the people! If our public schools have become nothing more than secular-progressive, left-wing liberal, NEA protected re-education camps, then parents not only have the right, but they also have the duty to remove their children from these schools and … home school them if they so choose … and then vote to fire those officials and impeach those judges that are perpetuating this nonsense.
Remember Abe Lincoln … he was home schooled! Home schooling has been around a lot longer than these fruit loop, left-wing, liberal activist judges from California like Justice Croskey!
Obama Lama Ding Dong!
I was reading an article yesterday that was adapted from a lecture given by Charles R. Kesler, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College, at Hillsdale College on January 30, 2008. Charles Kesler raised some interesting points I would like to share with anyone who can think their way past gushing over Barack Obama’s rock star persona and catchy slogans!
Kesler’s discussion goes something like this:
Obama’s campaign creed is: “Yes, we can.” To which any thinking person might respond with: “can what?” Obama’s answer then, of course is: “Hope.” However again, a thinking person might respond: “Hope for what?” To which Obama would certainly answer; “For change.” In fact, Barack Obama signs all say “Change We Can Believe In,” …. in contrast, of course, to what might be termed unbelievable change?
However, what liberals seem to forget is that change is not always good. Change can certainly be for the better … but it can also be for worse! And … Liberals often tend to confuse the word change with the word improvement, or they often seem to think the two are synonymous … a flawed way of thinking that usually comes back to bite us hard in the tail end!
Liberals, because they are emotionally driven, always fail to weigh the costs and benefits of their proposed change, or to consider the unintended consequences of their changes. They never seem to consider what we just might need or want to conserve … and how we might go about doing just that, as Kesler says, “faithfully .”