Top 10 of A Conservative Blogger in 2010

Another year for the books! For this blog, 2010 saw a large jump in readership, and for that, I thank all of you for reading my blog posts, for passing my posts on to your friends to read, and for linking to those posts on your blogs or on your social networks. It is my hope that my messages about freedom, liberty, protection of property rights, and love of life, and the battles to improve and strengthen these things, have inspired and motivated you, and maybe taught you a little something too. There were a lot of great posts in 2010- based on reader feedback (emails and comments and discussions), here are the top ten:

Obama: Didn't Waive the Jones Act, Made Gulf Spill Worse:
Occasionally I break a major story, like this one, which I was on well in advance of the MSM:

In reply to the emails from snarky liberals who ask 'just what do I expect Obama to do about the Gulf oil spill', the reply is 'get the hell out of the way'... Let loose the power of free markets and civil society and restrict government to limited and defined roles, and the world will be a better place. In this particular case, just 'what can Obama do'? Here is one of dozens of examples that are specific and have few drawbacks but Obama isn't doing- Obama can temporarily waive the Jones Act....

McSweeney's Account of His Little Daughter's Randian Objectivism
I'm told by some that the original account may have been a satire, but what makes the satire so interesting is how it could easily be the truth, as I have documented dozens of related experiences on my blog:

...Sometimes I think I'm going a little too far with the raising of my kids, talking to them like that and reading them the Bible weekly and stuff, but then over at Pundit & Pundette I read a similar account from Timothy McSweeney...

Obama Nicknames
Every President has a nickname- Reagan was the Gipper, Bush was W, Clinton was Slick Willy- so here are some of the top Obama nicknames I have seen...

On The Texas Board of Education Decision
This is one that I recently talked about on a radio interview (yes, you can contact me about doing radio if you want a good conservative teacher on your panel)...

Manhattan Community Board 1 Approved Ground Zero Victory Mosque: Details Here!
Another major story that I was on the ground floor on and provided some original research to:

One of the main reasons used by liberals and Democrats in defense of this project is that "the project was approved in a non-political and non-religious and purely objective way." I reject this premise, as man is by nature a political animal, and this particular project was is a political and religious statement and anything but objective. This boards approval of the mosque was not an objective decision based on separation of church and state- no, this was a political statement by a group of radical liberals....

President Obama Defends Slavery?
The Republican Party fought to free the slaves. The GOP passed the Civil Rights Act. Conservatives fight for liberty, freedom, property protection, and protection of life. So it does not surprise me when Obama defends slavery:

President Barack Obama said something pretty darn surprising in a speech recently. He said "(?) have been the labor force of our farmers and agricultural producers for generations. So even if it was possible, a program of mass (?) would disrupt our economy and communities in ways that most Americans would find intolerable."... So, do you think that President Obama was arguing in favor of slavery or in favor of illegal immigration?

Oppose Race to the Top: Reasons Why Conservatives Should Oppose RTTT

Recently, Michigan Senate Majority leader Mike Bishop asked me for my opinion on the President's Race to the Top program. I told him that I didn't support it, and he looked at me in a way that said "I thought you were a conservative" and "I thought you wanted to help education." At the time, I struggled to explain why I didn't like the program- I didn't really know all the details to it, but suspected that I was indeed correct in opposing it from what little I knew. He thought I was just a tool of the teachers unions, who also oppose RTTT, but I knew that for some reason I didn't like this initiative by Obama, and it wasn't just paranoid anti-Obama sentiment.... Today, via theblogprof, via Right Wing News, I came across the an article called "Ten Rules for Anti-Government Republican Radicals in D.C. ." As an anti-government conservative radical, the kind that our founding fathers were, the kind of people that built our nation and made our country a great success, I find these rules to be useful in helping me begin to articulate why I oppose Race to the Top....

A Personal Story: Teaching Global Studies Last Year:

Last summer I decided to earn an extra few bucks by teaching a summer school class called Global Studies. Global Studies class is supposed to be a survey of the countries of the world, and touch on their geography, history, economic systems, and current political issues... I met with the teacher who taught in full time during the year who showed me the way the class was supposed to be taught....

Obama's New NASA Policy- Yet More Broken Promises and Lies
American Exceptionalism is being killed by Obama, in ways big and small. Once America was a great nation that put men on the moon- an exceptional nation capable of spaceflight and exploring new worlds. Once it was... after Obama and the Democrats I wonder:

Out of all of the broken promises of President Obama, this one is probably not the biggest to a lot of people. Out of all of the phony and lying rhetoric about hope and change, this latest policy announcement that kills hope and changes things for the worst is probably not the most backstabbing that he has uttered. But that does not mean that Obama's plans to destroy NASA's budget and redirect its mission away from exploration is not big or important to me....

The NEA Should Support Republicans: The GOP is Better for Education
A rising tide floats all boats, teachers included...

Lastly, I'd like to thank the bloggers from Pundit & Pundette, theblogprof, Vox Popoli, Right Michigan, Doug Ross, and all of the many others who have become regular readers and have taken what I have written over the past year and passed it on to their readers. Great work everyone!

FCC Seizes Power to Regulate Internet

Until now, I haven't really commented on the FCC's latest ruling granting it control over the internet. For those of you who don't know, last week citizens for the first time got federally approved rules regulating what they view on the Internet. These rules are not based on any sort of constitutional provision and clearly do not fit with our tradition of a limited and defined national government. The new regulations will likely lead to future regulation, control, censorship, and taxes of companies and citizens that use the internet. The Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday voted 3-2 (3 Democrat appointments vs 2 Republican appointments) to back (Democrat appointed) Chairman Julius Genachowski's plan for what is commonly known as "net neutrality," or rules prohibiting free companies from deciding how they run their businesses in an environment of competition and openness. Democratic President Barack Obama, in classical double-speak, said that having a limited number of unelected rules control our behaviors in a free society will "help preserve the free and open nature of the Internet."

The move to take freedom and future property from free citizens was prompted by liberal groups that love power and authority over freedom. Recently private companies have begun to experiment with ways to handle the growing problem of network congestion. But the Chairman of the FCC felt that instead of having private industry experiment with the best way to run its business that he wanted to instead control that business, even though he lacks the long record of experience and accumulated wisdom of being in business of all of those trained professionals whose whole life is running internet companies. In politically-appointed Mr. Genachowski's opinion, instead of selectively slowing certain traffic to cope with congestion he thinks providers could consider charging consumers for how much data they consume, but no one was listening to him, so he issued a royal decree to make people listen to him. He doesn't have to live with the consequences of that decision or have thousands of employees salaries be dependent on that position, and is unaccountable to voters, and thus this move marks yet another way that our nation slips into tyranny and oppression.

Our elected branch of officials, who are given the just and moral power to make decisions such as this, decided not to give this power and authority to the FCC. But the FCC didn't like that, and so unjustly and immorally seized this power and authority. A tyranny is marked by such behavior and such decisions. Decisions that were made by Democrat appointments. Vote appropriately next election, and for fun, read this book: Law and Disorder in Cyberspace: Abolish the FCC and Let Common Law Rule the Telecosm.

Barnes and Noble Should Go Out of Business

When I was growing up, I used to love my dad's old books from the 1950's-1970's. He had boxes of them; books that he had read growing up, books that he read in high school, books that he read in college, and books that he read as a young adult. They were science-fiction, fantasy, non-fiction, and adventure books, and I loved all of them. And now that I am getting older, I have been buying books and saving books imagining that someday, my children will inherit these books and treasure them as much as I have. But that dream may have shattered a bit today after my recent visit to Barnes and Noble bookstore, as I now think that perhaps physical books and sellers of them should be replaced.

Honestly, I still read physical books and haven't made the switch to a Kindle, although I am increasingly fascinated and wouldn't mind doing so if anyone would like to buy me one as a late Christmas gift (Kindle DX, 9.7", $379). Mostly this is because I really like my old books, and a lot of the books that I buy are not on the Kindle yet. Even still, my experience at Barnes and Noble was so bad that I may just make the switch.

Barnes and Noble would not take any of my returns, even returns of books that I could see in the store, even though I was willing to take the lowest price of the item in recent months. They could have taken the books from me that I could see in the store, given me a sale price, and then sold it at full price, and everyone would be a winner. Instead, their return policy is so strict that I couldn't return my books there- instead, I'll sell them online at Amazon.com or Half.com, and turn around and buy more books off those sites too, thereby giving someone else my business. Barnes and Noble has no customer service- no one helped me find books and there were no reviews of books for me to read, both of which you can find on Amazon (see links on my site to link to amazon). Barnes and Noble has a poor selection of books- I printed out my amazon wishlist of over 200 books and probably could only find two dozen or so of them. Granted, I have a lot of obscure reads on my amazon wishlist- books like The Ganymede Takeover, The Warlord of the Air (The Oswald Bastable Series), or Lankhmar Book 1: Swords And Deviltry- but still, a lot of well-known authors and their books were unable to be found in this 'bookstore.'

Barnes and Noble needs to go out of business, so that people who currently do spend their money there will be forced to look at the alternatives, which will provide these customers with more selection, cheaper prices, and better service, all from the comfort of their own homes. This is tough for me to say, being a lover of traditional books, but such was my experience and thoughts today.

Volokh: Who Really Owns The One Ring of Power?

Of course, no holiday in my family could be complete without long discussions on nerdy topics such as who really legally owned the One Ring of Power from the Lord of the Rings. Via The Volokh Conspiracy:

Property Acquisition in J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings

Literary critics have unaccountably ignored the fact that J.R.R. Tolkien’s fantasy classic The Lord of the Rings was written for the purpose of explicating the different modes of property acquisition under the common law. Nonetheless, a close examination of the work demonstrates that nearly all the different methods of acquisition are described in detail, and their ethical implications examined. During the course of the story, a variety of characters acquire possession of the Ring of Power using every conceivable legal device.

I. Acquisition by Creation.
The Dark Lord Sauron forges the Ring of Power with the help of knowledge gained from the elven smiths of Eregion. His right to the Ring is thereby based on creation. The claim may be tenuous because it is not clear whether he made illegal use of the elves’ patented production processes (the suspicion of illegality is strengthened by the fact that Sauron made every effort to keep the elves from finding out what he was doing).

II. Acquisition by Conquest.
The Last Alliance of Elves and Men defeats Sauron in battle. The human King Isildur cuts the Ring off of Sauron’s finger (along with the finger itself), thereby acquiring it by right of conquest. Even assuming that the conquest was legitimate, it is not clear whether the law would support an exclusive claim of ownership by Isildur, without any rights simultaneously vesting in the elves (who played an equal role in winning the battle).

III. Acquisition by Find.
On his way home from the war, Isildur is ambushed and killed by orcs. The Ring is lost. Centuries later, it is accidentally found by the hobbit Deagol and his brother Smeagol (AKA Gollum). Deagol claims a property right based on his status as finder.

IV. Acquisition by Adverse Possession.
Gollum kills Deagol and takes possession of the Ring, which he retains for many years. Over time, he comes to think of himself as the real finder of the Ring, and he is strengthened in this opinion by the passage of an enormous length of time. Because Gollum’s possession of the Ring is open and notorious, under a claim of right, and for an extremely lengthy duration far beyond the statutory time period, he may have a claim based on adverse possession. However, Gollum’s claim is defective because a claim of adverse possession cannot succeed if it resulted from a criminal act by the claimant. In addition, adverse possession cannot normally establish title to personal as opposed to real property.

V. Acquisition by Agreement.
Gollum loses the Ring to the hobbit Bilbo Baggins in a riddle contest in which the Ring was a mutually agreed stake.

VI. Acquisition by Gift.
Bilbo gives the Ring to his nephew Frodo Baggins. His intention to give Frodo the ring is clear (though he waivers initially), and he hands the ring over in person, thereby effecting proper delivery.

VII. Temporary Acquisition by Necessity.
While Frodo lies unconscious, his servant Sam Gamgee temporarily takes possession of the Ring in order to save both of their lives from imminent danger.

VIII. Attempted Reacquisition by Self-help.
After Frodo regains the Ring from Sam, he plans to destroy it by throwing it into the fires of Mt. Doom. Both Sauron (who believes that he is the rightful owner) and Gollum (ditto) attempt to get the Ring back before Frodo can destroy it. They both resort to illegal self-help remedies rather than bringing the appropriate common law action and a preliminary injunction against destruction of the Ring before the case can be heard. Gollum succeeds in regaining the Ring from Frodo, but falls into the fire, destroying both the Ring and himself.

Moral of the Story
Much trouble could have been avoided if only the parties to this extended property dispute had properly followed the law of acquisition

Based on my own readings of property law and some guesses on other laws, I would rule that the One Ring of Power belongs to the elven smiths of nation of Eregion, who used patented processes to create the One Ring, and thereafter had an employee (Sauren) use those processes on his own to create in secret his own product. It is unclear who legally inherited the property and rights of the nation of Eregion when it was destroyed, but its survivors and descendants went to Rivendell, Blue Havens, and Lothlórien, who are ruled by Elrond, Círdan, and Galadriel, and so it is my ruling that the One Ring properly and legally belonged to one of those three elves. The claim on the One Ring was never abandoned by them- after learning of its whereabouts, they always sought to recover it. And all subsequent actions thereafter were merely the trading of stolen property.

Yet two of those three had an opportunity to reclaim the ring- indeed, it was offered to them and they turned it down and stated that the ring was indeed Frodo's. Based on this reasoning, I would rule that Frodo did indeed have legal ownership of the ring after that until its destruction. So in reality, the Lord of the Rings was simply a story of a disgruntled employee who took company property and refused to give it back until said property was destroyed.

For more information on the history of the One Ring, see The Lord of the Rings: 50th Anniversary, One Vol. Edition, The Annotated Hobbit, and The Silmarillion.

Obama Orders Reversal of Bush Era Policies Regarding Wilderness Lands

Back in the hellish years of Republican domination of our nation, back when economic growth was a respectable number, unemployment was low, and things generally were happier, there was a period of time for several months when our nation debated rules regarding whether or not public lands should be developed and how that development should work. Columnists wrote about it, policy advisers debated it, talking heads discussed it, and a rousing public debate was held in an open and free society on the issue. Ultimately, in 2003 Bush decided to order the Bureau of Land Management to allow more forests and wilderness lands to be open to road building, so that firefighters could more easily fight deadly forest fires that destroyed these forests and wilderness lands, and to restore the power to manage wilderness areas and forests back to the states, which had held this power from 1866 to 1979.

Look back at the historical record- go to http://www.google.com/, type in search terms like 'wilderness' or 'public lands' or 'Bush', customize your search by date, and narrow it down from the years 2002 to 2004, and you'll see this debate, see the analysis, see all the time and effort and due thought that a guy like Bush put into this small but important change on federal policy.

Today, with no discussion, analysis, thought, regard, public debate, open forum, editorials, round-table discussions, or any real analysis, the Obama administration decided to suddenly announce that the federal government was claiming once again the sole power to decide how all lands in our nation should be managed, including lands that environmentalists and fanatics think about pretending to claim are 'wilderness' or 'forest land', and in doing so will result in lower economic development of these lands, less jobs, less prosperity, more forest fires, less access to these lands for citizens enjoyment, less ability to manage them, and a general worsening of society. As is usual with Obama, his attempts through this policy to make the world a better place will in the end result in the world a far worse place, and as is usual with Obama, his actions were conducted in a manner more fitting of a despot or dictator than the leader of a free nation.

By contrast, type in http://www.google.com/, type in search terms like 'wilderness' or 'public lands' or 'Obama', customize your search by date, and narrow it down from the years 2009 to 2010, and you'll see the lack of debate, the absence of analysis, no time and effort and due thought that a guy like Obama put into this small but important change on federal policy- par for the course for a despotic dictator, but not at all what a nation of free people should tolerate from our President. Of course, liberals and Democrats cheer this, but then again, they cheer and support and like it when unelected bureaucrats, life-time appoint judges, and dictators make choices for free people, usurp their authority, and violate their sovereignty.

Our nation slips bit by bit into tyranny, and the damage to our Republic is growing so great I fear that we will never again be able to recover from it. The damage comes in ways large and known, such as Obamacare or the Porkulus bills, and in ways small and hidden, such as the EPA unilaterally rejecting Congress' role in our system of government and deciding that it will install cap-and-tax on us, or the EPA violating the 10th amendment and attacking Texas, or the FCC seizing control of the internet in violation of a liberal Congress' will. Obama is a Democrat, his actions can not be checked because citizens of some states voted Democrat in the last election, and our only hope that actions such as these can be mitigated is because some residents of some states voted Republican. Republicans have their problems and commit their fair share of blunders and bad decisions to, but it is the Democratic Party and their elected officials who today represent the greatest threat to your life, liberty, and property.

Not sure if this was one of the decisions that made it in Bush's book- I still need to read Decision Points.

Merry Christmas! But why do we celebrate it today?

Merry Christmas everyone! Here is something you probably didn't know about Christmas:

On December 25, Christians around the world will gather to celebrate Jesus’ birth. Joyful carols, special liturgies, brightly wrapped gifts, festive foods—these all characterize the feast today, at least in the northern hemisphere. But just how did the Christmas festival originate? How did December 25 come to be associated with Jesus’ birthday?

The Bible offers few clues: Celebrations of Jesus’ Nativity are not mentioned in the Gospels or Acts; the date is not given, not even the time of year. The biblical reference to shepherds tending their flocks at night when they hear the news of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:8) might suggest the spring lambing season; in the cold month of December, on the other hand, sheep might well have been corralled. Yet most scholars would urge caution about extracting such a precise but incidental detail from a narrative whose focus is theological rather than calendrical.

The extrabiblical evidence from the first and second century is equally spare: There is no mention of birth celebrations in the writings of early Christian writers such as Irenaeus (c. 130–200) or Tertullian (c. 160–225). Origen of Alexandria (c. 165–264) goes so far as to mock Roman celebrations of birth anniversaries, dismissing them as “pagan” practices—a strong indication that Jesus’ birth was not marked with similar festivities at that place and time. As far as we can tell, Christmas was not celebrated at all at this point.

Finally, in about 200 C.E., a Christian teacher in Egypt makes reference to the date Jesus was born. According to Clement of Alexandria, several different days had been proposed by various Christian groups. Surprising as it may seem, Clement doesn’t mention December 25 at all. Clement writes: “There are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord’s birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place on (May 20 in our calendar), or (March 21), or (April 21), or (April 15), or (April 20 or 21).”

Clearly there was great uncertainty, but also a considerable amount of interest, in dating Jesus’ birth in the late second century. By the fourth century, however, we find references to two dates that were widely recognized—and now also celebrated—as Jesus’ birthday: December 25 in the western Roman Empire and January 6 in the East (especially in Egypt and Asia Minor). The modern Armenian church continues to celebrate Christmas on January 6; for most Christians, however, December 25 would prevail, while January 6 eventually came to be known as the Feast of the Epiphany, commemorating the arrival of the magi in Bethlehem. The period between became the holiday season later known as the 12 days of Christmas.

So, almost 300 years after Jesus was born, we finally find people observing his birth in midwinter. But how had they settled on the dates December 25 and January 6?

The first theory is popular (based on existing pagan celebrations) but doesn't hold up under further analysis- early Christians rejected pagan connections and tried to be different, and there isn't even a hint mentioned that Christmas was based on pagan traditions until the tenth century. So I reject this theory and instead point you towards the second (lesser known) one:

Around 200 C.E. Tertullian of Carthage reported the calculation that the 14th of Nisan (the day of the crucifixion according to the Gospel of John) in the year Jesus died was equivalent to March 25 in the Roman (solar) calendar. March 25 is, of course, nine months before December 25; it was later recognized as the Feast of the Annunciation—the commemoration of Jesus’ conception. Thus, Jesus was believed to have been conceived and crucified on the same day of the year. Exactly nine months later, Jesus was born, on December 25.

This idea appears in an anonymous Christian treatise titled On Solstices and Equinoxes, which appears to come from fourth-century North Africa. The treatise states: “Therefore our Lord was conceived on the eighth of the kalends of April in the month of March [March 25], which is the day of the passion of the Lord and of his conception. For on that day he was conceived on the same he suffered.” Based on this, the treatise dates Jesus’ birth to the winter solstice.

Augustine, too, was familiar with this association. In On the Trinity (c. 399–419) he writes: “For he [Jesus] is believed to have been conceived on the 25th of March, upon which day also he suffered; so the womb of the Virgin, in which he was conceived, where no one of mortals was begotten, corresponds to the new grave in which he was buried, wherein was never man laid, neither before him nor since. But he was born, according to tradition, upon December the 25th.”

In the East, too, the dates of Jesus’ conception and death were linked. But instead of working from the 14th of Nisan in the Hebrew calendar, the easterners used the 14th of the first spring month (Artemisios) in their local Greek calendar—April 6 to us. April 6 is, of course, exactly nine months before January 6—the eastern date for Christmas. In the East too, we have evidence that April was associated with Jesus’ conception and crucifixion. Bishop Epiphanius of Salamis writes that on April 6, “The lamb was shut up in the spotless womb of the holy virgin, he who took away and takes away in perpetual sacrifice the sins of the world.” Even today, the Armenian Church celebrates the Annunciation in early April (on the 7th, not the 6th) and Christmas on January 6.

Thus, we have Christians in two parts of the world calculating Jesus’ birth on the basis that his death and conception took place on the same day (March 25 or April 6) and coming up with two close but different results (December 25 and January 6).

So, there you have it- the reason why we today celebrate Jesus' birth on December 25. Merry Christmas!

New on Blogroll: Law and Multiverse blog- Legal Issues and Superheroes

My gift to you, dear readers, is a recent addition to my blogroll for you to put on your must-read list. It is called the Law and the Multiverse Blog, and is about superheroes, supervillains, and the law and addresses such subjects as:

Superhero Contract Law:
....In a world where superheros and supervillains exist, it would seem likely that the lawyers in that world would advise their clients to include appropriate clauses to deal with the possibility of a super-related disaster, particularly when contracting directly with a superhero....

Superheros and Immigration Status:
...Immigration creates a whole new set of problems for superhero characters, and a character that wants to stay on the right side of the law is going to need to figure out how to make this work. Fortunately, there appears to be an existing path to admittance and even citizenship for super powered characters in the form of the priority E1 visa....

“Gadget” Superheroes and Federal Arms Control Laws:
...We can probably see how a company like Stark Industries or Wayne Enterprises could find the resources to develop weapons like the ones used by Batman and Iron Man, but actually using them, particularly in international contexts, seems to run up against a federal prerogative the government seems unlikely to abandon....

Superhero Privacy Rights, Part One:
...The intrusion form of invasion of privacy likely protects superheroes from highly offensive intrusion into their secret identities and headquarters, but not from more casual inquiries. Villains should think twice before demanding that Batman take off that mask....

or Supervillains and Insurance: Who’s Gonna Pay for That?:
...A world with recognized and regular supervillain rampages would probably develop a way to insure against that sort of thing, but traditional property insurance would probably exclude such losses. States would need to create residual pools, much like the way they have for earthquake and hurricane losses.....

Embrace your inner nerd and enjoy this blog every day!

UPDATE: Also, on an unrelated note, by popular demand, you can now comment on my blog posts. I do this for you!

My Thoughts on the New START Treaty

President Change and his party in Congress continue to cause trouble, even though most of us have turned our attention to happier things during this holiday season. For the first time ever in our nation's history, a lame-duck Senate confirmed a major arms treaty, defying convention and tradition and the historical role of the Senate to give due deliberation to treaties of this sort in favor of a quick ratification in recognition of the fact that the treaty is a bad one and the next Senate would never ratify it because it is bad. The AP and media though hail the win without thought or criticism:

The Senate on Wednesday ratified an arms control treaty with Russia that reins in the nuclear weapons that could plunge the world into doomsday (suggests the writers of the AP story), giving President Barack Obama a major foreign policy win in Congress' waning hours. Thirteen Republicans broke with their top two leaders and joined 56 Democrats and two independents (a Socialist and a Democrat) in providing the necessary two-thirds vote to approve the treaty. The vote was 71-26.

Most major arms control treaties are passed by votes of 98-2 or 100-0, but this one (which is claimed to be 'bipartisan' under the AP policy that 1 GOP member voting on the bill makes it bipartisan) had a quarter of the Senate rejecting it because it was a bad treaty. Oh, I know Obama needs a victory, and the Democrats are desperate to make it look like Obama is doing a good job, and during the campaign season everyone is going to say 'Obama passed a major arms control treaty', but it is a bad treaty.

Well, to be correct, it isn't a bad treaty, it just is one that my six-year old daughter could have negotiated, if she did a bad job. It is a treaty that gives everything away with getting little in return, and a fair and honest assessment of the treaty leads one to lead to a 'no' vote on it and to be critical of Obama. Of course, politics and scoring wins are very important to Democrats, so they don't really care about the reality of the treaty, but I do, and so I think Obama did a bad job with this treaty, 71 Senators voted incorrectly to confirm it, and those who celebrate its passage are weak-minded fools.

The treaty does restart the verification process, so Obama can correctly claim that he has restored 'trust but verify' and the media can celebrate his restoration, but the verification process that he restored is a watered down form of it, weaker and easier to circumvent than the verification processes established in previous treaties. Inspectors are barred from more facilities, have fewer inspections, and there are few barriers to the Russians increasingly MIRVing their missiles under this new treaty (thus negating any benefit of less missiles).

The US and Russia both do lower the number of missiles under this treaty, but the US and Russia were both going to lower their numbers regardless- the US under Obama was planning to let our nuclear forces wither away and atrophy, while Russia under Putin was planning to retire older missiles and modernize their nuclear forces with fewer but vastly better missiles. Agreeing to this arrangement therefore is not really any sort of victory, but rather an acknowledgement of what is happening with additional clauses that are bad, like the worse verification process and the barriers to missile defense.

The missile defense clauses are the most controversial. These clauses bar any more development in missile defense systems, the kind that would give the US some sort of protections from a rouge nation threatening or (god forbid) firing a missile at the US. Although Obama has already slashed funding for these sorts of operations, agreeing with enemies and terrorists abroad that it is unfair of the US to protect itself from attacks from terrorists and rouge nations, determined scientists in the US do continue to make advancements on this front. The US claims that the clauses are not binding, but the Russians claim they are- this sort of disagreement means that the Russians could feel that we are breaking the treaty and thus they don't have to follow other important provisions in it. This is just the sort of disagreement that leads for treaties to be considered poorly done.

Let's look at what this treaty does in the wider scope of international affairs. Under this treaty, the US becomes a weaker nuclear power, less able to defend itself from attacks, less able to keep tabs on its main nuclear rival, and less able to attack other nations using nuclear weapons. Of course no one wants to ever attack anyone using nuclear weapons, but the main way this is done is to be just crazy enough to threaten overwhelming nuclear attacks (for evidence see the continued existence of the world after US adopted this policy). Russia knows this is the best way to get things done too, and is letting its conventional forces weaken while it strengthens its nuclear weapons (at lower numbers) (under Obama's watch), because then it will continue to wield international power without having to maintain all those conventional forces. Iran and North Korea both also see that the US is weaker and less able to check their advances and so will continue building up their nuclear forces (under Obama's watch) free from the threat of nuclear annihilation (although we all know it never would have happened, the possibility was always there).

Under my analysis, this treaty is not a very good one. Obama did a poor job in negotiating it and Senators, like the two from my state, should not have voted to confirm it. Our nation and the world is lessened by their actions.

See The new START Treaty: central limits and key provisions.(Treaty on the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, 2010, United States-Russia)(Report): ... Service (CRS) Reports and Issue Briefs for more research.

2010 Was Interesting- Jib-Jab Sums it Up in a Funny Video

2010 is coming to an end, and like any year in which our nation was run by progressive liberal Democrats, it was a year of change, crisis, calamity, and collapsing values and systems. You probably can't even remember all of the major events that marked 2010 under Democratic control- times were just too darn interesting to keep all of the events close to short term memory. This shouldn't be a surprise- I predicted these sort of years in my post shortly after the election of 2008 called May you Live in Interesting Times.

"May you live in interesting times" is actually a Chinese curse. Uninteresting times, such as the 1920's, 1950's, 1990's, or early 2000's, were times of very little upheaval, of steady but unspectacular economic growth, of domestic tranquility, and rather boring cultural changes. But some people though don't like peace, tranquility, steady growth, and static cultural norms- they want change. And once you start changing things, times get interesting- but usually not better. And 2010 proves the case.

Looking back, 2010 rivals only 2009 as years when the most change occurred- rock-solid companies collapsed, major stunning environmental disasters unfolded, people were shockingly fired, rogue nations made surprising advances in acquiring weapons of mass destruction, and there were major leaks of intelligence. 2010 was sure an interesting year!

Jib-Jab sums it up in usual humorous fashion. Enjoy!

Check out Terry Pratchett's book Interesting Times for a good read! Or better yet, since it is Christmas time, for a good laugh and a fun read check out Pratchett's Hogfather- Death plays the role of Santa and saves cultural norms!

200 Countries, 200 Years, 4 Minutes: Healthy Living and Income Plotted Out

Professor Hans Rosling is a man who revels in the glorious nerdiness of statistics, and here he entertainingly explores their history, how they work mathematically and how they can be used in today's computer age to see the world as it really is, not just as we imagine it to be. Rosling's lectures use huge quantities of public data to reveal the story of the world's past, present and future development. In the following four minute film, he tells the story of the world in 200 countries over 200 years using 120,000 numbers - in just four minutes. Despite its light and witty touch, the film nonetheless has a serious message - without statistics we are cast adrift on an ocean of confusion, but armed with stats we can take control of our lives, hold our rulers to account and see the world as it really is. Plotting life expectancy against income for every country since 1810, Hans shows how the world we live in is radically different from the world most of us imagine. Enjoy!

Hans Rosling has written a textbook too- check out Global Health: An Introductory Textbook.

A Children's Letter Book on How to Regulate Freedom, from Doug Ross

Doug Ross has put together a wonderful gift for the holidays- a letter book of US regulations for children! Sure to by a favorite for future czars and bureaucrats! Over at the original link you can see all the pictures that go with each letter, but if you want to just use your imagination, here are the letters:

The Obama Administration's Official Alphabet Guide for Learning Government's Role in Your Life

Hi, I'm Omar, the Obama administration's official kid's ambassador. Today I'll be guiding you through some of the many necessary regulations that government imposes on us for our protection -- and we'll learn the alphabet at the same time!

• A is for auto. The size, speed, fuel and bumpers of autos must be regulated to protect us from ourselves!
• B is for business. Government must levy taxes, regulations, fees, surcharges and paperwork on businesses, lest they take advantage of workers.
• C is for cupcakes. Every aspect of child nutrition must be controlled -- because we can't leave it up to the parents!
• D is for doctor. Health care guidelines make sure every doctor practices medicine the same way.
• E is for electricity. Americans must expect to do without electricity from time to time, because we use so much of the world's resources. That is why American coal, nuclear, gas and other sources of energy must be restricted.
• F is for fare. Cab fares must be tightly controlled down to the tenth-mile because small business owners simply can not be trusted.
• G is for ginkgo and other medicinal herbs, which can not be sold without oversight by the FDA, state and local agencies. They're looking out for us!
• H is for Happy Meals. Selling toys with food is an evil marketing tactic, which kids and parents should not be exposed to!
• I is for immigrants, documented or not. We must welcome everyone into our country, because open borders and a welfare state promote tolerance and unity.
• J is for junk-mail. No longer can marketers promote their products without a complete review by federal, state and local authorities.
• K is for knives. Even pen knives and bottles of shampoo represent threats to airline safety and must be confiscated for our protection!
• L is for lollipop. Only organic lollipops that contain less than 25 grams of sugar can be sold in the U.S. It's for our protection!
• M is for MRI machine. Overrated tests and diagnostics aren't always needed for seniors, based upon the government's "Complete Lives System", which ensures fair and equitable treatment for most healthy Americans.
• N is for NEA, the teacher's union that has its first priority educamating us kids (after electing big government politicians, that is)!
• O is for oil, the source of automotive energy around the world. Government must prevent drilling for oil because cars represent freedom to move around the country.
• P is for prescription drugs. For safety reasons, government must put drug manufacturers through decades of testing and regulatory hoops even if certain patients could use experimental drugs. These dying patients could actually die if they're exposed to drugs that aren't ready for the market!
• Q is for QWERTY keyboards, the electric current, operation and safety for which must be reviewed by multiple agencies for our protection.
• R is for the rich. At some point, they've made enough money. Those who have grown too wealthy on the backs of the workers should have their excess riches confiscated for redistribution.
• S is for shower-head. Unrestricted flow wastes water, which is why government must regulate how all shower-heads work.
• T is for toilet. All toilet designs must be reviewed by federal officials to ensure less wasted water.
• U is for unions. Unions are collectives of workers who band together to protect workers and elect big government politicians.
• V is for vending machine. Government needs to set standards for what kinds of drinks and snacks may be sold to gullible consumers.
• W is for warmal colding, the climate change phenomenon caused by humans which results in crazy streaks of hot and cold weather.
• X is for X-ray machine. X-rays are discouraged in medical settings (for cost reasons) but used extensively in airline security.
• Y is for yacht. Democrat leaders like John Kerry use yachts to visit constituents, but others who own them should be considered overly rich.
• Z is for zebra-suits -- the nickname for federal prisoners who violate the hundreds of thousands of regulations that protect us 24 hours a day!

More People Think Ghosts are Real than Think Congress Is Doing a Good Job

A poll over the summer of 2010 showed that 18% of Americans think that Obama is a Muslim and 34% think he is a Christian. Another poll shows that 40% of people from India and China believe that aliens walk among us disguised as humans, and that 22% of all the men in the world believe aliens are here on Earth. 21% of voters in a recent poll said that the explosion and massive oil spill that resulted from the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig made them more likely to support offshore drilling. Polls report that 27 percent of Americans believe in ghosts, and 25 percent in astrology. What is notable about all of these polls is that more people believe in aliens, ghosts, astrology, and other notions than believe Congress is doing a good job.

According to recent polling data by Gallup, only 13% of Americans approve of the way that the Democratic-controlled Congress is performing its job. More people believe in ghosts than like the job that Democrats are doing in Congress. More people believe that aliens walk among us disguised as humans than think that Democrats who run Congress are doing a good job working and passing legislation. More people think that as astrology works better than a Democratic-run Congress works.

These numbers are shocking- I'm sure with time and energy I could convince 14% of Americans anything, and yet Congress can't convince that many people that they are doing a good job running our legislative branch, passing legislation, exercising oversight over the executive branch, confirming justices or treaties, or running worthwhile investigations into matters of public interest.

The approval rate for Congress also sets a new record for the lowest approval rate ever in the history of Gallup polling- this Democratically-run Congress, with Democrats controlling the House and Senate, has a lower approval rate than any Republican Congress at any time ever in the history of this poll. The prior low approval rating for Democratic-run Congress in 14% in July 2008 when the United States was dealing with record-high gas prices and the economy was in recession- but these Democrats who were elected in 2008 managed to mess things up even more and demonstrate their unsuitability for their jobs even more than those other Democrats.

My prediction though is that the approval rate of Congress will again rise, because starting next month, Congress changes and at least part of it will be controlled and run by the Republican Party. Perhaps the approval ratings could again rival the approval that Americans had for the Republican Congresses from 1994-2006, when approval ratings for our legislative branch was usually higher than 40%. Although I don't always based everything on what is popular and what the American public thinks, you have to respect how thoroughly the Democrats have done a poor job and convinced everyone as to their unsuitability to retain office.

UPDATE: Welcome readers of Political Realities! Be sure to check out all my other great posts!

The Speak Truth Curriculum- Taxpayer Supported Leftist Indoctrination of Innocent Students?

Big Government reports about a new human rights curriculum that was recently introduced to middle schools and high schools all across New York. So this is what your tax money goes to- this controversial curriculum that promotes leftists values was funded and designed by the taxpayer-supported Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice & Human Rights and the teacher-dues supported New York State United Teachers union. These two groups came together and used precious education resources to create lesson plans for teachers that focus on corporate “greed,” landmine awareness, Chinese labor camps, and abolishing the death penalty.

The general agenda of this program is typical teacher-mumbo jumbo speak that seeks to hide a real leftist agenda of dumbing down students while they learn to submit to learned authority. It says that the goal of Human Rights Education, or HRE since it quite obviously needs an acronym to shorten it into an unrecognizable subversive element, is to:

Explore the development of protected human rights from a historical perspective as well as present-day declarations, conventions and covenants and the continuing evolution of human rights knowledge, the various challenges to the full enjoyment of human rights, and the factors that contribute to human rights abuse, and develop critical understanding of real life situations, questioning the barriers and structures that prevent the full enjoyment of rights and freedoms.

Yeah, I like human rights too- the kind of human rights that we are all born with, such as the right to live and not be aborted or killed, the right to live in freedom and make choices as we see fit on a range of issues from healthcare to what we eat, and the right to keep and own property free from government interference and seizure. I like human rights such as the right to speak freely without the government interfering in it, the right to carry a firearm able to deliver deadly force to those who would take my rights from me, the right to be secure in my possessions from snooping government agents, and other rights guaranteed to me by the US Constitution.

Browsing through the so-called 'Human Rights Education' curriculum, I get the sense that students who follow it and learn from it are not going to respect my human rights because they, in all their great wisdom, will feel that other people's human rights are not being protected or supported or fully embraced until I lose all my rights and am reduced to the state of an animal, hunted because of my conservative beliefs. The HRE education is hostile to the US Constitution, hostile to the Bill of Rights, and hostile to natural rights philosophy, instead embracing the Universal Declaration of Rights, embracing a strong government that will redistribute wealth, and embracing communist philosophy.

The fact that tax-payer supported institutions helped build this curriculum and the fact that schools are implementing it makes me sick and once again hammers home my points about education being a universe that is dominated by liberals and leftist views. Although I am a strong supporter of public education, if my students went to a school that implemented this sort of garbage I would pull them out and homeschool them rather than expose their minds to this sort of pollutant trash that is the Speak Truth to Power curriculum.

For those who are interested, check out Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling or The Underground History of American Education: A School Teacher's Intimate Investigation Into the Problem of Modern Schooling.

UPDATE: Welcome readers from Doug Ross! Wander around my site and enjoy some of my blog entries- I'm sure you'll see I have a real niche in the blogosphere that you are sure to enjoy!

Democrat Ex-Governor and Other Democrats Indicted of Extortion, Bribery, and Fraud

Via Detroit News:

A federal grand jury has indicted former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, his father Bernard Kilpatrick, former Kilpatrick aide Derrick A. Miller, Kilpatrick pal Bobby Ferguson and former Detroit water chief Victor Mercado, the U.S. Attorney's Office said today.

The 38-count indictment charges them with racketeering conspiracy and accuses them of extortion, bribery and fraud. The indictment alleges Ferguson received "tens of millions of dollars from municipal contracts" after the power of the mayor's office was used to coerce others to steer work his way.

Some of that money was then shared with Kwame Kilpatrick and his father, Bernard, the indictment alleges. Kilpatrick and his dad also are accused of extorting hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, free flights and other benefits from a variety of contractors. Some of the allegations date back to Kilpatrick's days as a state representative, before he was elected mayor in 2001.

Today's charges are another blow to what was once one of Michigan's most powerful political families. Kwame Kilpatrick was a rising star in the Democratic party, having won the mayor's office after becoming a young leader in the state House. His mother, former U.S. Rep. Carolyn Cheeks-Kilpatrick, was a powerful Detroit congresswoman until she lost a primary this year in the wake of her son's legal difficulties. His father, Bernard Kilpatrick, was a top aide to the late Wayne County Executive Edward H. McNamara.

Let's be quite clear with this- Kwame was a Democrat, his father was a Democrat, and his mother is today STILL a voting member of the Democratic caucus in the House (not a "former" US Rep!). Kwame was a rising star in the Democratic Party, and his aides and friends and supporters extended throughout the Democratic Party. He donated money to Democrats, they donated money to him, and thus his faults and corruption do indeed reflect on the larger Democratic party.

After years of Democrats in Michigan and around the nation ranting about how the Republican Party was a 'culture of corruption', the evidence increasingly piles up that it is mainly Democrats who cultivate a culture of corruption, whether it is in Illinois, New York, or Detroit Michigan. The love of power, the love of control, and the desire to use the power of government to enrich friends and supporters naturally is more corrupting of government officials than those who believe in limited government and conservative values.

According to OpenSecrets.org, Bernard Kilpatrick defrauded taxpayers out of millions of dollars and funneled some of that money to Democratic candidates such as Debbie Stabenow and Barack Obama. Kwame Kilpatrick used corruption and racketeering to enrich himself and also sent some of that tainted money to Democrat candidates such as David Obey and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Bobby Fergusan, also indicted, donated money to Kwame's mother and Bernard's wife, Democrat Carolyn Kilpatrick. Derrek Miller, another indicted Democrat, gave money to Stabenow, Obama, and Kilpatrick. This indeed is a culture of corruption and money-laundering, where Democrat crooks steal from taxpayers to support with campaign cash other Democrats.

This culture of corruption isn't exclusively Democrats- there are Republicans that are corrupt too- but it is increasingly true that those who seek power and influence over others and increasingly calling the Democratic Party home.

Amazing Job Opportunity! Earn 250K/year as Associate Director of Minority Inclusion!

Via Doug Ross:

Should you need additional proof that the Democrat-controlled federal government is completely and utterly out of control, may I present Exhibit 9 Bazillion?  The last paragraph is important: after all (Democrat-passed) regulations failed to avert the mortgage crisis (thanks especially to Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and Maxine Waters), the Democrats are busy building up new agencies and new offices to oversee the same losers that failed the last time. Democrats don't mind that the country is bankrupt. They've emptied the Treasury with trillions in failed spending programs. And still they spend, hiring new bureaucrats as greedily as Michael Moore hordes french fries at Johnny Rocket's. By the way, if you want to apply for the job, please contact Marisa Harper, a Human Resources Specialist at Federal Housing Finance Agency in Washington, DC. Please be polite and tell her I sent you. Maybe I'll get a referral fee.

This is the reason that America is in a recession and has an increasingly hard time recovering from it. There are leeches on the system, sucking at productivity and labor of our nation so that they can engage in community activism and indulge in their personal power trips. Teachers are doing more and more with less, and yet more and more money goes into education- the disconnect is because union staff and ISD's suck more and more money out of the system. Civil servants are doing more and more with less, and yet more and more money goes into government- the disconnect is because salaries are skyrocketing at the top levels of government and more and more agencies are being added, sucking more and more money out of the hands of productive civil servants. America is being dragged down by inefficient, highly-paid, top-level bureaucrats and union leadership, who are using their political connections and expensive lawyers to transfer more wealth to people who do less work.

Liberal Media Seizes on False Controversary Regarding Palin and Again Demonstrates it Sexism

Via memeorandum, I see that Sarah Palin is accused of bringing a hairdresser with her on her trip to Haiti. In typical mass media fashion, the major pundits have jumped into the fray in the absence of any other details and had a lot of fun making a big deal about this issue. Apparently in liberal world, women are not allowed to look good (indulge now if you want in your own personal bashing on the personal looks of Helen Thomas or Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi), although men are supposed to always be fashionable, and no questions or comments are to be made when Obama brings his stylist with him on trips.

This incident once again speaks the the raging sexism that continues to exist in politics in our nation. Last election, Sarah Palin was a very low paid Governor and had very little money to go buy the fashionable clothes needed for such a high-profile election, and so was given many expensive outfits to wear in all of the campaign events she was involved with. Those clothes were later auctioned off and raised lots of money for charity. The media spin on it was that she was a typical woman who cashed in on her fame by going shopping. On the other hand, last election Obama was a relatively wealthy Senator who had enough money to buy fashionable clothes, and was given many expensive outfits to wear, and his wife and daughters were also given many expensive outfits to wear, and they kept them all. The media spin on this was that he and his family were fashionable, they were put on the cover of GQ and Rolling Stone on the basis of their fashion, and the meme was that he was being a typical man and looking good in fancy clothes. Sexism reared its ugly head and played a role.

This incident is to be recalled in the light of recent events. The Associated Press recently released a photo from Haiti of Palin captioned, "Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, center, has her hair done during a visit to a cholera treatment center set up by the NGO Samaritan's Purse in Cabaret, Haiti, Saturday Dec. 11, 2010. Palin arrived Saturday in Haiti as part of a brief humanitarian mission. Dieu Nalio Chery / AP". The Daily Mail and Huffington Post both duly follow the lead of their liberal partner in the media with stories about Palin being ready for a photo-op and Palin saying something dutifully girly.

The reality? The person who was doing Palin's hair was actually her daughter, Bristol Palin. Via the Free Republic:

The photo does indeed show Sarah Palin standing with her husband Todd as a woman whose face is obscured uses two hands to fix the hair on the right side of Palin's head. However, one can observe that the woman is white, with her brown hair pulled back in a ponytail, wearing a white shirt with a bulky scarf and dark pants.

In other photos from Saturday, Todd and Sarah Palin's white, brunette, eldest daughter Bristol, who accompanied her parents on the trip to Haiti, is wearing the exact same clothing and ponytail as the "hair stylist" in the AP photo. That's right, what the Palin-hating AP and others fail to report is that the "hair stylist" is Bristol Palin.

The AP photographer who sent the caption would have known that it was Bristol Palin, but by not mentioning her the AP was able to do a media hit on Palin but still be able to claim they told the "truth" with the caption.

Pictures accompany the story to demonstrate the lack of morality and intelligence demonstrated by AP, Huffington Post, Daily Mail, and any other liberal media outlet that ran with this story.

It is liberals who are willing to play on sexism, even when they know the basis of the fear is lies, in order to win your votes. The appropriate response to that sort of behavior is to punch liberals in the face. Since doing that will probably net you a felony, option two is to vote out of office anyone who demonstrates any liberal tenancies.

For your reading pleasure, try these books by Sarah Palin: America by Heart : Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag or Going Rogue: An American Life.

UPDATE: Via Doug Ross:

To reiterate, a daughter helps fix a loose strand of her mother's hair, and it becomes an international scandal. Amazing. James Lewis is right: for some reason, the idea of President Sarah Palin terrifies the Left. Which is why I grow more comfortable with the idea by the day.

Embracing Ebooks? The Parent Trigger? Education Challenged!

Unlike most teachers who have a snow day today (I blame global warming), I'm busy teaching, but during my prep hour as I wandered around the internet looking for current news stories to link to concepts my students study in class, my eye did stop on a couple stories about education. Both of these links are originally via Conservative Hideout 2.0.

The first story is from Conservatives on Fire, and prompts an interesting question- exactly how far do we go in creating the schools of the 21st century?

I find books to be something almost sacred. So when I read this article in “The American Spectator”, which was based on this article in “Houston Press Blogs” I was dumbfounded. This story takes place in Houston, Texas.

Principal James McSwain of Lamar High School….has thrown out nearly all the books and filled the space they were unnecessarily taking up with couches and coffee and food and told his students that they can access the exciting world of reading through e-books! And if they don’t have a laptop of their own and Internet access to do so, they can use one of the laptop computers in the library coffeeshop!

He’s even expanded the library coffeeshop hours to 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. which works great if you’re one of those kids with your own transportation and not one who is too young, too poor or with rotten parents who won’t let you drive to school yourself rather than riding the bus. And he’s bought 35 new laptops! For a Houston ISD flagship school with more than 3,000 students in it.

Now let me be clear. I think the internet is the greatest educational tool ever. I love it. But come on! I’ve read many books on-line and I’m sorry but I find the experience a far second best to reading a real book. To hold in your hands the thoughts and visions of another person is just not the same thing as reading on-line. And for a highschool to literally throw away the books from their library is utter foolishness, a sacrilege. So am I an old fuddy duddy that has fallen behind the times? What do you think?

This is a great question- how hard do we fight to hold on to the time-honored learning styles and technology of the past? I'm sure there is some research out there about ebooks, but myself, I'm still holding off on buying one- not only can I not afford one (as a struggling teacher whose readers don't donate any money to nor buy books from amazon.com through my name) but I still think there is something to holding that book in your hands and flipping those pages as you read. I'm moving closer towards ebooks- after all, I get the news now online, and once upon a time I couldn't imagine not getting it in a nice crisp paper- but I'm still not sure if I'm ready to embrace it in schools.

The second story is from Maggie's Notebook, and is about an initiative that I am unfamiliar with called 'The Parent Trigger':

A new California law known as “The Parent Trigger” allows parents to take over failing schools and oust the teachers and their unions. Governor Arnold Schwartzeneger is praising the movement spurred by Parent Revolution, an organization based in Los Angeles.

Targeted is the city of Compton’s Compton Unified School District and specifically McKinley Elementary. The Los Angeles Times says school officials and “powerful teacher union leaders detest the Parent Trigger.” Parent Revolution was required to collect the signatures of at least 51% of the parents of the children at McKinley Elementary. A small group of parents gathered signatures in excess of 60%

One family reports that after signing the petition that will hopefully give their son an opportunity for a better life than they had, he was harassed on school grounds. Others were allegedly “threatened with deportation,” and “traumatized”  by teachers. Parent Revolution expects a lawsuit (to challenge their efforts or the law).

Now this is interesting, and really calls to question the education system- it is shocking that 60% of parents, who are the customers of the educational system, believe that the product that they are being forced to buy (educational services) because it has a government-sponsored monopoly is so bad that they should fire the entire management and employees and start over. Wow. That says something. The union should be shaking in their books and upset- they should be pissed at themselves and making changes faster than the parents can.
 
Unions are there to protect the quality of education and to supervise their own so that the government doesn't have to get involved, and in this case, the union let down their members and the parents of the district and deserves some sort of message sent.

Most Scientists in This Country are Democrats. That's a Problem, but Not a Surprise

From Slate:

....It is no secret that the ranks of scientists and engineers in the United States include dismal numbers of Hispanics and African-Americans, but few have remarked about another significantly underrepresented group: Republicans.


No, this is not the punch line of a joke. A Pew Research Center Poll from July 2009 showed that only around 6 percent of U.S. scientists are Republicans; 55 percent are Democrats, 32 percent are independent, and the rest "don't know" their affiliation....

...Yet, partisan politics aside, why should it matter that there are so few Republican scientists? After all, it's the scientific facts that matter, and facts aren't blue or red....

...Or could it be that disagreements over climate change are essentially political—and that science is just carried along for the ride? For 20 years, evidence about global warming has been directly and explicitly linked to a set of policy responses demanding international governance regimes, large-scale social engineering, and the redistribution of wealth. These are the sort of things that most Democrats welcome, and most Republicans hate. No wonder the Republicans are suspicious of the science. Think about it: The results of climate science, delivered by scientists who are overwhelmingly Democratic, are used over a period of decades to advance a political agenda that happens to align precisely with the ideological preferences of Democrats. Coincidence—or causation? Now this would be a good case for Mythbusters.

During the Bush administration, Democrats discovered that they could score political points by accusing Bush of being anti-science. In the process, they seem to have convinced themselves that they are the keepers of the Enlightenment spirit, and that those who disagree with them on issues like climate change are fundamentally irrational. Meanwhile, many Republicans have come to believe that mainstream science is corrupted by ideology and amounts to no more than politics by another name. Attracted to fringe scientists like the small and vocal group of climate skeptics, Republicans appear to be alienated from a mainstream scientific community that by and large doesn't share their political beliefs. The climate debacle is only the most conspicuous example of these debilitating tendencies, which play out in issues as diverse as nuclear waste disposal, protection of endangered species, and regulation of pharmaceuticals.

How would a more politically diverse scientific community improve this situation? First, it could foster greater confidence among Republican politicians about the legitimacy of mainstream science. Second, it would cultivate more informed, creative, and challenging debates about the policy implications of scientific knowledge. This could help keep difficult problems like climate change from getting prematurely straitjacketed by ideology. A more politically diverse scientific community would, overall, support a healthier relationship between science and politics....

This relationship is an interesting one, and is explained not by the fact that all Republicans are idiots and unscientific, but because Republicans are all busy actually doing things for society and not just getting government contracts to write papers that no one reads. Scientists are largely useless bureaucrats of a specialized sort today, performing little to no function for society but rather drawing off wealth from working engineers, businessman, and inventors who send their hard-earned tax money to government-run institutions who employ professional scientists to formulate government responses to government-related problems, and so it is no wonder they are all Democrats.

If you can produce a good, improve a product, design a new system, or contribute research that people actually will pay to get their hands on, then you aren't going to be a scientist, you're going to become a businessman, inventor, engineer, or something like that and give yourself a different label than "professional government controlled scientists".

Obama's Myth on Gitmo Joins Collapse of Other Myths of Left

"A system of morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true" Socrates once said. Over the past two years, much of the narrative of the left has been demonstrated to be nothing more than a mere illusion, a vulgar conception of reality that increasingly is proven to be untrue. Once the left seized power on in our nation, on most major policies they have simply continue the policies of 'conservative' George W Bush, who they emotionally railed against for 8 years, while adding to it other leftist policies that are bound to also be proven wrong. Whether it has been continuing the War on Terror, not withdrawing from Iraq or Afghanistan, continuing tax cuts, or keeping in place 'Don't Ask Don't Tell', the left has discovered that while spinning an illusion might fool voters into putting them in power, once in power reality hits and they no longer are able to indulge in their childish fantasies.

Just last week, reality rose up again and once again dispelled a major part of the illusion of the left- that of an evil Gitmo prison holding innocent goatherders that lawless George Bush ran to the detriment of the world and United States.

From The Wall Street Journal's article The Collapse of the Guantanamo Myth:

...For two years, President Barack Obama has pretended that terrorism is a crime, that prisoners are unwanted, and that Gitmo is unneeded. As a presidential candidate, he declared: "It's time to show the world . . . we're not a country that runs prisons which lock people away without ever telling them why they're there or what they're charged with." Upon taking office, he ordered Gitmo closed within the year.

But the president's embrace of the left's terrorism-as-crime theories collided with his responsibility to protect a great nation. Now the reality of the ongoing war on terror is helping to shatter the Gitmo myth and end its distortion of our antiterrorism strategies....

...All of this is having an impact on Congress, which this week voted overwhelmingly to de-fund any effort to shut down the Gitmo prison. It also barred the Justice Department from transferring detainees to the U.S. homeland...

Look, I've been in Michigan, which in 2002 decided to embark on a program of hope and change under Democrat Governor Jennifer Granholm. As she promised and talked, she put in place regulations, taxes, and schemes that resulted in a single state recession and some of the worst economic statistics in the nation. The illusion of her leftist beliefs met reality, and instead of facing that reality, she double-downed on leftist ideas, raising taxes in the midst of a recession, increasing regulation of businesses, attacking productive companies with taxes, and so forth. And the reality was a worse economy.

Reality is what it is, and although it is possible to change reality, you can't wave a magic wand of liberalism at it and hide it in illusions. Obama found on entering office that much of his belief system, much of what the American people bought, was based on illusions and myths. Obama was a child, lacking experience in business or government, uneducated about a great many things including history and economics and philosophy, whose ideas of the world were not reality. But once faced with reality, he has tried desperately to reconcile it with his existing ideas- jamming continuing the war and continuing tax cuts with Obamacare and cap-and-tax- in the hope that he was not completely wrong about almost everything.

But he is- on a range of issues, time is going to demonstrate that it was Reagan who made the economy boom in the 80's, it was the GOP Revolution of '94 that made the economy boom in the 90's, it was Bush who made the economy positive in the early 00's, and that it was Democrats and their leftist policies that drove our economy into recession, and then Obama and his policies that deepened and lengthened a recession into a depression. That's the narrative that's reality.

UPDATE: The following are not myths- they are real pieces of advice for you that you really show follow:

• In the event of that some is decapited, what you do is sit the victim's body in a chair as best you can, balance the head on top of the shoulders, and walk away whistling nonchalantly.
• You should always keep plenty of gauze around the house in case you invent an invisibility potion.
• In the event that someone you know sufferes a stroke, give them an eye-popping orgasm- it is always appreciated, no matter the situation.
• If someone you know is seriously injured, cradle his or her head in your lap and scream, "Why?"
• Make sure your first-aid kit always contains a large, frilly Victorian fan to revive fainting victims.
• If you are a hideous, disfigured hunchback and you see someone who is injured and unconscious, treat the person. Then, as the person begins to wake up, retreat into hiding. The person will always wonder who saved him or her, and the experience will be poignant in a bittersweet way. 
• If possible, try to be the guy who tells the victim, "Everything's going to be all right," while others do the actual work.

James Pethokoukis of Reuters Got His Hands on Secret GOP Plan to Bankrupt States!

James Pethokoukis of Reuters somehow got on the double-top secret email list of the Republican Party, and discovered something shocking- that the GOP has a secret plan to push bankrupt states to declare bankruptcy and then make them change some of the policies that led to bankruptcy! What is shocking to me about this secret evil plan is how incredibly evil it is. Oh, this is not an Onion story parody; it is a real story that a real journalist actually thinks is a real story:

Congressional Republicans appear to be quietly but methodically executing an (evil) plan that would a) avoid a federal bailout of (evil) spendthrift states and b) cripple public employee unions by pushing cash-strapped states such as California and Illinois to declare bankruptcy....

....Some Republicans hope the shock of the newly revealed debt totals will grease the way towards explicitly permitting states to declare bankruptcy. Indeed, legislation  amending federal bankruptcy law is currently being prepared by congressional Republicans. Local municipalities do declare bankruptcy from time to time, most famously California’s Orange County in 1994. But states can’t. Allowing them the same ability to renegotiate obligations could enable them to slash public employees’ lavish benefits, a big factor in their financial woes....

If it wasn't for mainstream journalists like James 'Genius' Pethokoukis, this evil plot by the Republicans might have remained hidden, and then we would have never known about the GOP's evil attempts to reign in deficit spending at the national level, force states to be honest regarding their liabilities and retirement systems, and put in place more sustainable spending systems.

Poor public employees, who for some reason needed to unionize even though they bargain with taxpayers for their salary and even though their safety and work standards are put in place by taxpayers, might lose massive unfunded entitlement programs that award them rich early retirements on the backs of my children who never agreed to that deal.

Yes, thank you Mr. Jimmy Pukalotpiss, for exposing this evil plot. It is much worse than the not-so-secret plot by the Democratic party to loudly and methodically execute a plan that would bankrupt our nation, continue to transfer money from states that live within their means to those that spend money irresponsibly, all while keeping the whole process secret. Ooooo... now that's a plan...

Obama Doesn't Know What the Official Motto of the US Is?

Via Gateway Pundit, here is a video of Obama telling an Indonesian audience that our national motto is E pluribus unum. It is from last month, and Obama was commenting to Indonesian students that the U.S. and Indonesia share a similar history. “It is a story written into our national motto's. In the United States, our motto is ‘E Pluribus Unum’ — out of many, one.”

The only problem is that since 1956 the official motto of the United States of America has been “In God We Trust”.

I don't really blame Obama or his advisers or speech writers that much for not knowing our official motto- to be honest, I didn't know what our official motto was and might have guessed E Pluribus Unum too. But the difference between Obama and me is that I'm not a Harvard-educated President of the United States who was giving a speech based around the idea that the United States is based on out of many, one. If I had gone to Harvard and was President of the United States and was giving a major speech, I would likely spend a minute or two and fact-check my speech and figure out what the official motto was.

As it is, Obama's entire speech was based around a false idea- the President was wrong when he suggested that America's history is a history based around the communal idea that from out of many come one, while to be correct our history is based around an idea that America was created by God as a shining city on a hill, something that a Muslim country like Indonesia might have an issue with.

Thoughts from Michelle Rhee on Educational Reform

My earlier post was about Michelle Rhee the person- what she did and what the results were of her actions. But this post will focus more on her actions with regards to educational reform and my thoughts on these issues.

Via Newsweek I saw this article- "Why Michelle Rhee Isn't Done With School Reform." Here are some selected passages from it:

...When I started as chancellor in 2007, I never had any illusions about how tough it would be to turn around a failing system like D.C.’s; the city had gone through seven chancellors in the 10 years before me. While I had to make many structural changes—overhauling the system for evaluating teachers and principals, adopting new reading and math programs, making sure textbooks got delivered on time—I believed the hardest thing would be changing the culture. We had to raise the expectations that people had about what was possible for our kids.

I quickly announced a plan to close almost two dozen schools, which provoked community outrage. We cut the central office administration in half. And I also proposed a new contract for teachers that would increase their salaries dramatically if they abandoned the tenure system and agreed to be paid based on their effectiveness....

Rhee offers up several structural changes to the system, increased efficiency in both facilities and in human resources, and changed the culture of the biggest aspect of education, the teachers. All of these proposals are fascinating, but it is the teacher's pay one that I am the most interested in.

According to wikipedia, Rhee had two proposals:

In 2008, she also sought to renegotiate how the school system compensates teachers. Rhee offered teachers the choice of: being paid up to $140,000 based on what she termed "student achievement" -- but losing tenure; or, retaining tenure -- but earning much smaller pay raises. This controversial move to end teacher tenure and promote "merit" pay was strongly contested by the teachers unions.

In 2010, Rhee and the unions agreed on a new contract that offered 20% pay raises and bonuses of $20,000 to $30,000 for "strong student achievement," in exchange for weakened teachers' seniority protections and the end of teacher tenure for one year. Teachers were observed by administrators and outside professionals for five 30-minute sessions during the year, and the teachers' performance was rated during those sessions. Teachers who received fewer than 175 out of 400 points were deemed ineffective and were dismissed. Teachers who received between 175 and 249 points were deemed minimally effective and given a one-year warning to improve their performance. Under this new agreement, Rhee fired 241 teachers, the vast majority of whom received poor evaluations, and put 737 additional school employees on notice.

As a teacher whose students achieve superior results on AP tests (I've taught 3 different AP courses in recent years and steadily raised test scores and enrollment in these courses) and on common assessments (I've taught 4 other classes in recent years and had my students (including mainstreamed students) outperform other teachers on our common exams), I'm quite comfortable with being judged on student achievement. And my worth isn't just measured in the classroom- I run the most popular club in the school, volunteer on our teacher leadership team, run several charities, mentor students during my prep hour, and coach part-time. It would be nice if I was rewarded for this sort of effort rather than watching teachers who perform at a much lower level make the same amount as me.

To think that I could be being paid like the professional that I am- with several advanced degrees and extensive background experience- rather than as a factory drone that simply moves students through the system! It is an exciting thought, but I don't want to dwell on how it would benefit me personally- imagine how exciting it would be to my fellow teachers who also perform exceptionally in the classroom. Because I'm going to let you in on a little secret right now- there are a lot of exceptional teachers in education, who haven't been drained and wearied and discouraged by the system and who make my efforts pale in comparison. I'm driven by these other teachers, who I am in competition with for test scores and achievement, and we are driven in spite of the system and not by it. It makes me excited to think that these other teachers could be rewarded for their tremendous efforts in education!

And the downside? Bad teachers lose their jobs. Teachers who are unqualified, teachers who do a poor job of teaching their students, teachers who do not achieve measurable results, and teachers who everyone in the building knows are bad will lose their jobs. Oh, it's no big secret who these people are- ask anyone in my building who would be fired first, and they'd look knowingly at you, since they know who these people are. There are not a lot of them, but they are there, sucking up resources and sucking down students, bad apples ruining the bunch, souring students on learning, while giving teachers a bad name. They'd lose their jobs.The union shouldn't be protecting them.

So what's the next step? Continuing from the Newsweek article...

....When you think about how things happen in our country—how laws get passed or policies are made—they happen through the exertion of influence. From the National Rifle Association to the pharmaceutical industry to the tobacco lobby, powerful interests put pressure on our elected officials and government institutions to sway or stop change.

Education is no different. We have textbook manufacturers, teachers’ unions, and even food vendors that work hard to dictate and determine policy. The public-employee unions in D.C., including the teachers’ union, spent huge sums of money to defeat Fenty. In fact, the new chapter president has said his No. 1 priority is job security for teachers, but there is no big organized interest group that defends and promotes the interests of children.

You can see the impact of this dynamic playing out every day. Policymakers, school-district administrators, and school boards who are beholden to special interests have created a bureaucracy that is focused on the adults instead of the students. Go to any public-school-board meeting in the country and you’ll rarely hear the words “children,” “students,” or “kids” uttered. Instead, the focus remains on what jobs, contracts, and departments are getting which cuts, additions, or changes. The rationale for the decisions mostly rests on which grown-ups will be affected, instead of what will benefit or harm children.

The teachers’ unions get the blame for much of this. Elected officials, parents, and administrators implore them to “embrace change” and “accept reform.” But I don’t think the unions can or should change. The purpose of the teachers’ union is to protect the privileges, priorities, and pay of their members. And they’re doing a great job of that.

What that means is that the reform community has to exert influence as well....

We have to exert our influence. That is why I blog- to change the system so that students and good teachers both can win, and by winning will make our nation greater.

For more on Michelle Rhee, check out THE BEE EATER: Michelle Rhee Takes on the Nation's Worst School District.