Anti-Positivist

Sunday, September 09, 2007

Ron Paul Envy

"... and humility goes before honor." Proverbs 15:33

Who suffers from Ron Paul envy? Mike Huckabee, amongst many other candidates -- Republican and Democrat alike. But, back to Huckabee ...

While Paul has the courage to say it like it is, Huckabee can only grasp for some standard political sophism to shake of Paulian logic. Yet, there Huckabee stands before the camera as just another political hack playing the populist card. Mike, you've been exposed because that card's been played and subsequently trumped by Dr. Paul.

I would like Huckabee to quantify the cost for the "honor" he seeks. How many parents, wives, husbands, and children will have to lose their loved ones in order to satisfy Huckabeean honor?

You, sir, lost any honor you might have commanded. Let Justin Raimondo tell the rest of the story ...

-- Jim

From AntiWar.com:

September 7, 2007

Ron Versus the Huckster Antiwar Republican sets the terms of GOP debate
by Justin Raimondo
We know that Ron Paul did great in the Republican presidential debate sponsored by Fox News and held in Durham, New Hampshire, because how else can we explain neocon Andy McCarthy's exclamation of despair over at the National Review group blog? "Why," he cried out in anguish, "is there so much cheering for Ron Paul?"
continue reading ...

Saturday, September 08, 2007

It's all about the kids. Yeah, right!

It's all about the kids. Please. Ask the teachers unions whether children come before tenure for the incompetent or an agenda of perverse, socialist nonsense. Or, simply note the union stance at the bottom of this article from Paul Jabob of Townhall.com. In addition, read and listen to the reports from ABC's John Stossel. One thing that can be said in the defence of unionized teachers, they come right out and state their agenda. It's the taxpayers and parents who choose to ignore and look the other way.

- Jim

Stop the bus, my kid is getting off
By Paul Jacob
Sunday, September 2, 2007

Washington, D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty took full control over his city's long suffering public schools earlier this summer. But he sends his own twin girls to a private school.
Does that make him a hypocrite? Does it make him a bad mayor?

Or, perhaps, just a good father?

Fenty is not alone. Politicians and other erstwhile members of the public school establishment demonstrate their preferences every time they choose to educate their own children outside public schools. Mayor Bloomberg of New York City sent his kids to elite private schools. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa currently enrolls his children in private institutions. A 2003 survey of members of Congress by The Heritage Foundation found that 41 percent of U.S. representatives and 46 percent of U.S. senators now send or have sent at least one of their children to a private school.

This isn't just a matter of the upper crust. A far greater percentage of public school teachers around the country — especially in urban areas such as New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. — send their own kids to private schools than does the general public.
Meanwhile, only 12 percent of U.S. school children are educated privately.

The first public/private schooling decision to receive national hype occured back in 1993, when President Bill and First Lady Hillary Clinton chose the exclusive Sidwell Friends School rather than a D.C. public school for their then 12-year old daughter Chelsea. They were roundly criticized. Yet, to me, their decision was reassuring, indicating for the first time that Bill and Hillary might actually place something ahead of their own political advantage.

One of the reasons Bill offered was that the private school would allow Chelsea "more control over her destiny." For once, Mr. and Mrs. Clinton and I saw eye to eye — as parents.

Granted, there is rampant hypocrisy at work. These people stump for public schooling, opposing systems of school choice. And yet, they choose to opt out of the system they allegedly shore up . . . from competition. The kind they themselves rely upon.

Years ago, during a campaign for public office, Fenty indeed pledged to send his kids to public schools. So, if voters want to hold that against him, they have every right to do so. But my point is only that had Fenty — or any of these politicians and educators — made the alternative decision, wouldn't that be even worse?

Mayor Fenty's choice boils down to this: Should he put the public schools ahead of his own children? Or should he put his children ahead of the public schools?
Which would you put first?

Shouldn't we seek a world in which education is made to fit the child and not the other way around? Computers and blue jeans and TV programs and fruit smoothies fit the customer. Why not schooling?

We certainly shouldn't force everyone to suffer an equally poor education! And certainly no politician should make his child suffer to benefit his political position.

How did we get to a point where the institution of public schooling could possibly come before the actual education of our kids?

Short answer: We have given up our roles as customers. Oh, sure, we pay the bills. But we don't direct any of the money. That responsibility landed in the laps of self-interested politicians.

Worse yet, politicians have themselves passed the buck, allowing the school biz to be monopolized by the hired hands. The teachers and school workers unions are organized and politically powerful. Parents are not. So the decisions that govern and drive the schools are made by politicians scared of union bosses, not parents.

The impact drives down deep. Apple, Inc. CEO Steve Jobs was on to something earlier this year when he asked

What kind of person could you get to run a small business if you told them that when they came in they couldn't get rid of people that they thought weren't any good? . . . I believe that what is wrong with our schools in this nation is that they have become unionized in the worst possible way. This unionization and lifetime employment of K-12 teachers is off-the-charts crazy. . . .
Mayor Fenty is facing this music. His Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee (who sends her child to a bilingual public D.C. school) wants to fire a number of unionized employees in the school system's notoriously inefficient central office. But that would mean suspending some of the provisions in the union contracts protecting these workers from actually having to perform to keep their jobs.

To me, and I think to Mayor Fenty, it is a question of cleaning up the mess in the D.C. public schools so that kids might get some benefit out of the billions being spent on their education.

Not so to Joslyn Williams, president of the Metropolitan Washington Council of the AFL-CIO. She quickly signaled that of course the union will fight for its members over non-dues-paying schoolchildren. She told reporters, "This is a question of political will and political power."

Paul Jacob is a Senior Advisor at The Sam Adams Alliance, a Townhall.com member group. His daily Common Sense commentary appears on the Web, via e-mail, and on radio stations across America.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PaulJacob/2007/09/02/stop_the_bus,_my_kid_is_getting_off

Times have changed, but why the American soul?

When I was growing up, I was told how America never crossed the line and committed evil acts. That's not to say that the odd occurence never happened, just that policy was based on rights and justice. Remember, you also heard it, the Nazis and Soviets tortured and held without trial while the Americans granted rights and justice to all.

Times certainly have changed, and I could never tell my children that our government does not advocate and engage in such acts; that would be a lie.

Was the story I heard as a young boy just a myth? Or, was it the right way stand out from an evil world? I believe it was the latter. But, how do I tell my children that the US is still special?

Time to reconsider who we are, and what legacy we want to leave for the next generations.

Friday, September 07, 2007

Ron Paul Second Fox GOP Debate - Going the Distance!

An excellent Rocky-style account of the debates. Paul rocks!

Thursday, September 06, 2007

Action Alert from EdWatch

From EdWatch.org, Jim

Wednesday September 5, 2007

ACTION

New NCLB Plan Establishes International Education For All

UN International Curriculum

Contact Your U.S. Congressman here.

Or call 202-225-3121.

Tell them:

Oppose re-funding NCLB

Oppose National/International Curriculum Standards

Support the A-PLUS Act.

Sign on as a cosponsor of A-PLUS.

Contact the House Committee on Education & Labor

Committee members

Details here

Leaders of the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee would institute international education standards in all public schools as part of their proposed changes to the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). "International education standards" translated mean requiring that schools teach the beliefs and values of the UN. It does not mean having higher standards than we now have.

The newly released federal House Education Committee proposal would move all states into national/ international curriculum standards. This means that America's classroom curriculum will be not be determined by teachers, by elected school boards or state legislatures, or even within our own country. America's curriculum will be set by international agencies, specifically by UNESCO, the education arm of the UN.

International Baccalaureate (IB) is the framework for an International Curriculum. According to the IB website, IB (and mational/international curriculum standards) are all about beliefs and values. It is pure multiculturalism.

For example, IB curricula teaches that the American Creed -- that is, the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that all men and women are created equal, with inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that government exists to protect those rights, and limited government-- may be highly regarded by some Americans, but it lacks universal truths and values that are good for all Americans and it certainly isn't good for other nations. Rather, International curriculum standards promote the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR] as the highest, universal principles.

The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution are fundamentally opposite from the UDHR. A few examples are these (see "The IB Curriculum"):

The right to bear arms -- UDHR has no right to bear arms.
No double jeopardy -- UDHR has no prohibition of double jeopardy.
Church/state separation -- UDHR promotes an earth-worship spirituality.
Limited government -- UDHR has no limits on government.
Reserved powers -- UDHR has no reserved powers.
Recognition of natural law -- UDHR does not recognize natural law.
Guarantee that property cannot be taken by government without just compensation -- UDHR has no such guarantee.

The Tenth Amendment to our Constitution states:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution ... are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

That is, human rights belong to the people, and government has only those rights given it by the people. Our rights have higher standing than government. The biggest difference between the American Creed and international education is this: Our Declaration of Independence states that government exists to protect the God-given, inalienable rights of all persons.

The UDHR, however, has the exact opposite view of human rights. It says: "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." [UDHR, Paragraph 29, Article 3] This means that under the UDHR, people have only those rights the UN says they have. But under the U.S. Bill of Rights, government has only those rights the people say it has.

The NCLB proposal "incentivizes" all states to get fully on the national/international curriculum standards track, meaning states pay a financial penalty for not climbing on board. Congress recently already passed a huge subsidy for International Baccalaureate in the America COMPETES Act, rewarding states that prioritize it. NCLB guarantees all states will prioritize international education.

There are numerous other highly objectionable parts to this NCLB proposal. It brings on more testing, not less. It adds in the use of subjective "portfolios" so teachers can game the system, for example, and it brings most other subject areas into the federal testing mode. English Language Learners (ELL) will take their assessments in their own foreign language, not English, for up to seven years -- not counting the first year when they won't be assessed, and non-compliant states are slapped with a 25% reduction of federal education dollars.

The hearing for this proposal will be next Monday, September 10th, less than two weeks after the massive 435 page document was released to the public. And this is only Title I, which is the first chapter of the current ten Titles, 670 pages of Public Law, and $13 billion of public spending.

Tell your U.S. Member of Congress:

Oppose re-funding NCLB
Oppose National/International Curriculum Standards
Support the A-PLUS Act.
Sign on as a cosponsor of A-PLUS.

Committee Chairman, George Miller

Phone: (202) 225-2095

Fax: (202) 225-5609

Ranking Minority, "Buck" McKeon

Phone: (202) 225-1956

Fax: (202) 226-0683

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

Frank Chodorov hits his target

Frank Chodorov on the state (from The Need of a Golden Calf):

"Is not the State an idol? Is it not like any graven image into which men have read supernatural powers and superhuman capacities? The State can feed us when we are hungry, heal us when we are ill; it can raise wages and lower prices, even at the same time; it can educate our children without cost; it can provide us against the contingencies of old age and amuse us when we are bored; it can give us electricity by passing laws and improve the game of baseball by regulation. What cannot the State do for us if only we have faith in it? And we have faith. No creed in the history of the world ever captured the hearts and minds of men as has the modern creed of Statism."

Ouch, that hurts. Chodorov hits his mark dead center.

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

A financial hypocrisy

It's funny ... the Olentangy Local School District prides itself on the award the district receives for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), yet the superintendent likes to claim that anyone who quotes CAFR numbers for revenue and expenditures is attempting to deceive.¹

According to a district news release:

The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) provides a range of information on the district's financial position and is used for a variety of constituencies including area residents, federal and state governmental agencies and debt companies. The CAFR is the district's audited annual financial report prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The CAFR is comprised of three major sections: introductory, financial, and statistical. The introductory section provides general information on the district's structure, services and environment. The financial section contains the auditors' opinion, balance sheets, statements of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balance, and budget basis statements. The statistical section provides trend data and non-financial data for additional analysis of the district.

The CAFR was judged by an impartial panel according to such standards as whether the report demonstrates a constructive spirit of full disclosure and whether it motivates potential users and user groups to read the CAFR. The GFOA is a nonprofit professional association serving approximately 15,000 government finance professionals.

Note that the figures contained in the CAFR are audited, so they are as real as any number that a government agency can produce.² But, the district's CEO thinks anyone who used these numbers is playing a game of deception.

Try it sometime. Compare the district's actually cost per pupil -- as derived from the CAFR -- with that stated in ODE reports. You will find that the CAFR figures are much higher since they include (inter alia) the capital costs of running district programs. The superintendent, board, and administration like to pretend that such costs are nonexistent, yet they are right there on your tax bill.

Keep in mind, the game being played is the movement of as much expense as possible from the operating fund to the bond funds. It's a good game, but to the contrary of the superintendent, the costs are captured on the CAFR for all to view. So, the hypocrisy belongs with the district when they attack the veracity of the CAFR figures.

One other thing to consider: The CAFR is addressed to the board and community. Take some time to read it and understand where your money is going. Then, question the superintendent about the true cost of funding the district.

Note:

1. The award is based on format and presentation, not the financial practices of the district. And, keep in mind, the district pays a consultant to produce the report. So, it's the consultant that deserves the awards.

2. The whole concept of a financial report of a government agency is more than a little bizarre. Supposedly, the owners -- the taxpayers -- can see the equity they have invested in the district. Try to cash-out your supposed investment sometime and see what happens.

Monday, September 03, 2007

The Real Edith

I wrote a recent article for the Ludwig von Mises Institute (Mises.org) about the effects of rising property taxes on local residents. The point being that those who think a majority vote at the voting booth validates -- makes ethical -- their demand for tax support for programs they desire had better consider the ones who actually pay the bills.

The schools and their rent-seekers -- those who use government to obtained privileges and coerced goods -- claim that the community needs to pay for strings, sports, etc. Why should the community pay? Well, these folks claim that the schools provide a public good -- a supposed good that benefits the community as a whole.

Hogwash. These folks simply want others -- their neighbors -- to pay for family expenses. Public goods are an economic fallacy; they are simply wealth transfers from taxpayer to the schools and rent-seekers.

Funny, those who rebel against government welfare programs have no problem using the ballot box to obtain financial support from both their neighbors and those -- such as Edith (actually Treva) -- who can afford it least.

Sure, you can try to dress school programs as public goods done for the general welfare, but they are just another form of wealth transfer from taxpayer to tax recipient.

This Labor Day, keep in mind those who must work to pay for someone else's desires. And, remember them once again on voting day.

Read the Dispatch article (below) as well as my related articles(link and link) to understand what really goes on with regard to tax-supported school programs, and learn more about those who are forced to pay for them.

From The Columbus Dispatch:

Great-grandma gladly labors on
Job at Meijer helps 81-year-old stay independent
Monday, September 3, 2007 3:33 AM
By Tom Reed

After wiping rain off shopping carts, Treva Buck patted perspiration from her brow during a recent shift at a Meijer store.

Because of a scheduling glitch, the 81-year-old greeter was working her eighth consecutive day at the chain's Lewis Center location.

Yet the diminutive great-grandmother warmly welcomed customers as if they were Thanksgiving Day guests in her home. She directed a man to the automotive department, made faces to amuse toddlers and retrieved a newspaper clipping she had saved for a regular customer.

"Treva is awesome," said co-worker Jennifer Stangland, 33. "She is so friendly and has so much energy for a woman who's on her feet eight hours a day."

Her most admirable stand, co-workers and relatives say, is maintaining her independence.

The Liberty Township widow lives in her own house, drives everywhere and keeps punching a time clock -- even on a holiday created to give the working class a break.

"I volunteered to work Labor Day because it means time and a half," said Buck, who will celebrate her 18th year with Meijer on Sept. 11. "My family always asks, 'When are you going to quit?' But I enjoy what I do, and I want to keep my house, and working allows me to do both."

Buck is part of America's fastest-growing labor demographic, the 24.6 million workers who are 55 or older, according to a 2006 study by the Chicago consulting company Challenger, Gray and Christmas Inc.

In Ohio last year, 13.6 percent of workers were 65 or older, according to U.S. Department of Labor statistics.

Unlike many older Americans, however, Buck neither delayed retirement nor came out of it looking for work.

After raising six children, she took a job for the first time in 1989. She was 63 and alone after her husband, Wesley, died of cancer.

Losing her spouse of 44 years was difficult, she said. But the family matriarch with soft brown eyes needed an income and time away from a house full of memories.

"I lost my husband a year and a half ago, and it absolutely changes your life," said her daughter Janet Jewell, 65, of Delaware. "You either sit there, or you do something about it."

Buck also had to learn to drive, taking lessons from daughter-in-law Sandy Buck, who lives nearby. To practice parking, the older woman eased a 1979 Chevy Nova between tomato stakes in her backyard.

"Most folks learn to drive, get a job and then start a family," Buck said. "It's almost like I've lived my life backward."

Her career path has made for some age-related oddities.

Store director Weston Brubaker, 32, is younger than 10 of Buck's 12 grandkids. And three of her children already are retired.

"It really is remarkable," said her oldest son, Don Buck, 61, also of Liberty Township. "At the time, it made sense (for her to work). She needed the money, she was in good health and she wanted to.

"But I never thought she would still be doing it."

He and his siblings (three brothers and two sisters) frequently remind her that a comfortable retirement is only a "For Sale" sign away.

But she won't hear of it -- for now. Her full-time job, which pays $9.15 an hour and benefits, allows Buck to keep her white, split-level house with brick trim on 5 acres.

"If I didn't work, I'd have to pinch pennies," she said. "I don't want to do that."

Brubaker said he values his senior employees, including Cleo Terry, 88, of Delaware, the store's oldest worker, and Buck, who was employee of the month twice at another Meijer store.

He praised Buck's dependability, noting that she scheduled cataract surgery for a day off in July rather than take a sick day.

Sometimes, Buck admits, forgetfulness comes with age. Recently, she was about to announce over the intercom system that a car in the parking lot had its lights on and engine running -- until she realized it was hers.

Don't mistake her for a soft touch, though.

Two years ago, Buck, who barely tops 5 feet, suspected shoplifting when a man and a woman left the store with $800 worth of electronics gear in a cart.

"The faster they walked, the madder I got," she said.

She repeatedly asked to see a receipt until the flustered couple sped off in a car -- without the booty.

"We've told her a hundred times, 'Don't do that stuff; it's not worth the risk,' " Don Buck said. "I'd like to see her retire."

Her oldest son will have to wait to get his wish. His mother's goal is to work 20 years for Meijer.

"I might surprise you one of these days," she said. "But right now I want to keep working."

treed@dispatch.com

Copyright © 2007, The Columbus Dispatch

Sunday, September 02, 2007

Strickland's Energy Plan, the Republican Party, and Ron Paul

Let's see, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland has an energy plan; a plan full of rules, regulations, and governmental supports. Does anyone really think Strickland's vision will beat the functions of the free market? Or, have we finally reached the same conclusion that the Italians reached some 80 years ago? The conclusion that corporatism and state control -- in a word: Fascism -- are the solution.

It must be so, as no one really questions government interventions in any facet of life. We have turned from "Don't Tread on Me" and embraced government -- and its bureaucracies and minions -- as our savior. Obviously, 150 years of public education have drained the ideals of the Republic from the blood of this nation.

Ah, yes, Social Studies. Years and generations of such nonsense have done exactly what every totalitarian regime dreams of: the destruction of the individual and the strengthening of the state -- the collective.

Today we readily bow to the collective. Whether it's the local aggregation -- the community, or some larger grouping, we have allowed the collective conscience to rule our lives. And, we seem to like it that way, as we encourage the collective to regularly trump any remnant of the essential negative rights: Life, Liberty, and Property.

So, the collective decides everything; and Strickland has a plan. The Democrats will have no objection. That's pretty obvious. But neither will most Republicans object -- or, at least philosophically question such a plan anymore. Oh, they'll complain that a Democrat governor has no business setting energy policy, but they will then turn around and offer one of their own -- witness campaign promises last year from the supposedly conservative Republican gubernatorial candidate, Blackwell. He had his own plans, different but still corporatist nonetheless.

Whatever happened to Republicans of principle? Do they even exist?

Yes, and they are embodied in Rep. Ron Paul, presidential candidate. You can still claim that you are conservative and a Republican by supporting Ron Paul. Support any other frontrunner and you will voting for a collectivist -- a socialist; a Strickland with a big R beside his name.

Vote for Ron Paul -- the principled vote -- and get government out of energy and our lives. Tell government to leave us be: "Don't Tread on me." That's what united the Several States and their Patriots in Rebellion over 200 years ago. Let's unite once more to support the ideals that founded this nation.

Vote for Ron Paul.

Friday, August 31, 2007

The Next 30 Days by Lew Rockwell

From Lew Rockwell and LewRockwell.com ... It makes absolute sense ...

Rockwell's Next Thirty Days
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

Last time, I laid out my "Thirty Day Plan" for de-socializing America. But I didn't scrap all of big government; now it's time for more:

DAY ONE: Foreign junkets are outlawed. If anyone on the federal payroll wants to fly overseas, he has to buy his own ticket. The State Department, Congress, and White House go into hyperventilation.

DAY TWO: Medicare and Medicaid are abolished as illegitimate transfers of wealth that drive up the cost of care. HHS, whose insolent $30,000 clerks can't speak intelligible English, goes out of business.

DAY THREE: The Supreme Court reads the Constitution, and reverses every court decision of the last fifty years.

DAY FOUR: The doors of the Legal Services Corporation are nailed shut. The envious must now pay for their own anti-business lawsuits.

DAY FIVE: Marxist inheritance taxes are terminated as the moral equivalent of stealing pennies from a dead man's eyes.

DAY SIX: To help prevent the growth of a new welfare state, the franchise is restricted: no one on the dole, which includes government employees, may vote.

DAY SEVEN: Civil service is abolished, and the grand, old Jefferson-Jackson "spoils system" reintroduced. With "rotation in office," there is no permanent governing class of officials, and voters can actually change the government.

DAY EIGHT: Racial set-asides are repealed. The remaining government contractors are judged on ability.

DAY NINE: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is axed; 126 years after slavery, employers are freed. They can hire, fire, and promote on their property as they think best.

DAY TEN: The Food and Drug Administration is killed. The First Amendment now applies to commercial speech, and producers and consumers decide the content of food labels. Patients and doctors determine what drugs to use, and a host of life-saving drugs and medical devices are developed.

DAY ELEVEN: National Public Radio is replaced by static, a big improvement. Taxpayers no longer subsidize hysterical left-wing broadcasts about the oppression (i.e., non-funding) of transvestite Kenyan obukano street musicians.

DAY TWELVE: The war on drugs is no more. Prices and therefore street crime plummet, and hoodlums no longer grow rich, thus restoring the natural socioeconomic hierarchy.

DAY THIRTEEN: Mother-Knows-Best government is gagged: no more hectoring about tobacco and alcohol.

DAY FOURTEEN: NASA is blasted. Private businesses and scientific organizations now launch satellites at their own expense. If Star Trek fans want space exploration, they are free to pay for it.

DAY FIFTEEN: The Old Executive Office Building next door to the White House becomes a museum of big government. Although now housing just part of the president's personal staff, it once held the entire departments of War, State, and Interior.

DAY SIXTEEN: Head Start, the beloved but incompetent children's welfare program, is abolished as a scam on the taxpayers and an unwarranted intrusion into families.

DAY SEVENTEEN: The Office of the United States Trade Representative is abolished, along with every tariff, quota, and "free trade" agreement. Businesses negotiate their own deals with foreign governments, at no cost to the taxpayer.

DAY EIGHTEEN: The Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corp are shut down. American corporations doing business overseas must now bear their own costs.

DAY NINETEEN: Sixty-eight federal commissions, boards, and committees are scrapped, including the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Indian Arts and Crafts Board, and the Permanent Committee for the Oliver Wendell Holmes Device.

DAY TWENTY: Government and quasi-government museums like the Smithsonian are privatized, and soon discover that regular Americans won't pay to see left-wing, state-exalting, anti-American multicultural extravaganzas, or a mirror hanging on a wall and labeled: "Mirror."

DAY TWENTY-ONE: The Federal Emergency Management Administration is abolished. Disaster relief is left to private charities, which actually provide it, and there are no more FEMA schemes for "emergency" bureaucratic takeovers of the country.

DAY TWENTY-TWO: Any federal agency whose initials are incomprehensible to the average taxpayer is bumped off, including FHFB, FLRA, FMSHRC, and FRTIB.

DAY TWENTY-THREE: The Americans with Disabilities Act, which burdens businesses with new regulatory costs and shuts the most severely disabled people out of the work force, is killed.

DAY TWENTY-FOUR: The Seventeenth Amendment mandating direct election of U.S. senators is repealed, and state legislatures once again elect senators as their representatives, vastly strengthening the states as against the federal ex-leviathan.

DAY TWENTY-FIVE: Bankruptcy laws are repealed; debtors who refuse to pay their debts are treated as virtual thieves.

DAY TWENTY-SIX: The FHA, Ginnie Mae, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and all other agencies that subsidize housing are torn down. No longer is there malinvestment in this area.

DAY TWENTY-SEVEN: The U.S. Foreign Service, whose ambassadors live luxuriously in mansions with retinues of personal servants, is replaced with fax machines.

DAY TWENTY-EIGHT: To protect American sovereignty and independence, the U.S. left the U.N., the I.M.F., and the World Bank in my first 30 days. Now we leave 46 other globaloney outfits, including the International Labor Organization, the World Health Organization, and the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission.

DAY TWENTY-NINE: We continue, junking the International Jute Organization, the International Criminal Police Organization, the International Office of Epizootics [horse fungus], the International Office of Vine and Wine, and the International Rubber Study Group.

DAY THIRTY: Finally, we dump the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, the International Development Association, and the International Finance Corporation. Bankrupt foreign politicos must now apply to the Household Finance Corporation.

This article appeared in The Free Market for January 1992.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him mail] is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com, and author of Speaking of Liberty.
Copyright © 2007 Ludwig von Mises Institute
Lew Rockwell Archives

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Educators of public educators

You can't make this stuff up!

The following is the lead article from this week's Teachers College Record, published by Columbia University's Teachers College:

At the Interstices: Engaging Postcolonial and Feminist Perspectives for a Multicultural Education Pedagogy in the South

by Nina Asher — 2005

This article argues for a decolonizing multicultural education pedagogy, which engages the interstices - in-between, hybrid spaces - that emerge at the intersections of different cultures, histories, and locations. It also examines how those who work for social transformation are implicated in the very systems and structures they are attempting to deconstruct. The author draws on postcolonial and feminist theories, her own border crossings, and her reflections on her multicultural education pedagogy to discuss how she engages the particular interstitial identifications of her Southern students. Continue reading ...

What?!? As I have written many times before: Can't they simply teach math, and teach it right?

Read this nonsense in conjunction with the latest "research" adopted by the Olentangy Local School District (my post from yesterday) and it's obvious the socialist are winning the fight.

Can't figure one thing out: This is a supposed family-oriented, conservative Republican district, yet parents, taxpayers, and voters willingly spend their money and votes on the -ists and -isms that have no respect for Life, Liberty, and Property.

Are those that run the universities and public schools educators or educationists? You decide.

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

ASCD's The Whole Child

from the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) ... Keep in mind that there are five subtle conclusions hidden within this seemingly innocuous video: One, only the state through its unions can raise a child; Two, indoctrination (Olentangy calls it "tutoring") stands in place for real learning ; Three, public education defines the whole child as one who is continually exposed to the foulest actions of others - that's why they push perverse literature and disgusting assemblies; Four, parents have no place in the concept of the whole child ... don't believe me, then ask to be involved in the curriculum decisions and speak your mind ... see how far that gets you; Five, add some touching music and the viewer will gloss over the fact that public schools have created the mess they are claiming they can fix. Impossible.

Yet, your administrators get all choked up with such nonsense from ASCD, the organization that still adheres to and pushes the concepts of the New Soviet Man as adored by John Dewey.

Invest a little time on Yahoo, Google, and Wikipedia to learn and understand the movements leading public education. It's your kids and/or your tax dollars at stake.

Teachers Unions: Are the Schools Run for Them?

Well, of course they are. Still, this article written by James Brovard from The Freeman, a publication from the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE.org), is a worthy read. Eleven years after publication, it is still as relevant as when Brovard wrote it.

Teachers Unions: Are the Schools Run for Them?
By James Bovard

Public education is the most expensive "gift" that most Americans will ever receive. Government school systems are increasingly coercive and abusive both of parents and students. Government schools in hundreds of cities, towns, and counties have been effectively taken over by unions, and children are increasingly exploited, thwarted, and stymied for the benefit of organized labor.
continue reading ...

The Church and the state

Something to consider ... the state is not as innocuous as many believe ... a viewpoint from VisionForum.com ...

Cults do exist. They are wretched abominations which rightly should be denounced. But if people are going to raise the “C” word publicly, they had best be prepared to defend such a charge before the world, and if found guilty of defaming a legitimate work of Christ, they must be prepared to face the consequences which are rightly due to those who divide brethren and slander the servants of the Lord.
(From Doug’s Blog, August 2005)

By Geoff Botkin

Li Ying is serious about the Christian Faith. According to Voice of the Martyrs, she has been suffering in a Chinese prison for 2,339 days as of today’s date. She is serving a 15-year sentence for her role as editor of an underground-church magazine in China. In recent months, Li Ying’s mother has not been allowed to visit. Prison officials are increasing the pressure to get Li Ying to recant her faith and sign a document saying that she is part of an “evil cult,” meaning biblical Christianity. She refused to sign today. She will refuse to sign tomorrow.

American Christians should take some lessons from Li. She has learned a lot about serious, non-compromising spiritual warfare. She is willing to risk her life to publish the truth. She is not willing to allow the state to define the terms “evil” or “cult.”

Why? Li Ying knows the term “cult” is the perfect weapon of the anti-Christian state. With it, any government can enforce policies of arrest or genocide. With this one word, anti-Christian bureaucracies can eliminate Christian orthodoxy, the greatest enemy of the purpose-driven tyrant.

In America, many state leaders have purposefully pushed the federal government’s role beyond its Constitutional boundaries. In the name of the law, they have institutionalized lawlessness, rejecting God’s authority. This is why state hostility toward sane and principled Christianity is growing. Even non-believers can recognize this as dangerous. “Anyone who thinks that religion (meaning Christianity) is bad for society is out of his mind,” observes culture analyst Tom Wolfe.

The American state has largely lost all practical reference to its original moral foundations. Its growing bureaucracy, like the Chinese bureaucracy, now believes historic Christianity is bad for society. This bureaucracy is increasingly uncomfortable with principled, “applied” Christianity. Christian doctrines that strengthen the freedom of the traditional family are clashing stridently with the secular designs of today’s planned economy.

This great clash is noisy. It is not peaceful. Christians like Li Ying know that warfare involves conflict, and she stands her ground, even while suffering the torments of prison.

Li Ying could appease her tormentors and possibly be released to join a registered or approved Church which the government considers “good” for society. But she understands the dangers of a compliant church. How about the vast church-going American public?

There are millions of church-going Americans who do not represent the Faith of historic America or historic Christianity. Too many American churches now reflect the essence of a secular, state-dependent culture. Mainstream Christianity is desperately trying to conform itself to the heart and soul of a decadent and anti-Christian culture. It is succeeding. In the name of relevancy and salesmanship, a feel-good secularism is the new foundation of a church ready to appease the secular bureaucracy at all costs.

What does the secular bureaucracy want from the church? Co-existence on the state’s terms. Mega-compliance with all state requirements. Mega-churches can inspire this kind of compliance and do. So what happens when some Christian family fails to run with the herd? When any citizen fears the state, they fear noncompliance. They fear people who rock the boat. Wayward Christians could be turned in to the state, especially if that’s what compliant Christians “do.”

Or, they could simply be labeled with the “C” word.

Do American churchgoers know what happens when governments pretend to be on the side of Christianity, protecting society from dangerous religious extremists who attempt to apply rigorous forms of biblical morality? Orthodox Christianity is labeled “cultic” and is driven, by force, from society.

In order to destroy the church, anti-Christian governments can use a form of class warfare between compliant and non-compliant churchgoers. They need accusers who label serious Christians like Li Ying “cultic.” Once the “C” word is improperly used by the church, bureaucrats can take further liberties with the language and meaning.

American churchgoers need a strong, two-fisted warning: We must guard against the compromises of appeasement, and we must guard against the temptations to take up unwarranted reproaches against orthodox Christians who make us uncomfortable.

A professor at the Department of Religious Studies at the University of California has been researching the ways American Christians wrongfully accuse one another. “My working definition of a cult,” he reports, “is a group that you don’t like. And I say that somewhat facetiously, but at the same time, in fact, that is my working definition of a cult. It is a group that somebody doesn’t like. It is a derogatory term, and I have never seen it redeemed from the derogatory connotations that it picked up...in the 1930s.”

America has a problem. The “C” word has been unleashed by infantile Christians. For several decades it has been doing damage. It will continue to weaken the Faith each time it is recklessly bantered about in Christian circles. The government has taken notice of this childish indignation that Christians can manufacture against one another.

The professor’s definition of “cult” has been institutionalized by careless, proud, and disobedient Christians. This is not the proper definition of the word, and the professor knows it. His point is that Christians have abused the language, destroyed the word, and lowered the meaning to the most childish level of the playground insult. This is the only definition needed by the statist enemies of God’s people who can criminalize anything they don’t like.

Can the household of faith recover some semblance of maturity and order, or will Christians become easy prey to our enemies? Can the word “cult” be redeemed? Yes, it can. It is the duty of all Christians to assume responsibility for every word spoken or written. It is also our duty to be holy and precise. Language has been given to us as a gift of God for representing His interests accurately and righteously. Gentlemanly theological discourse between Christian men is a great privilege and a great necessity in every age. But it is not righteous or just when one Christian refuses to have gentlemanly discussion with another and simply attacks him on the internet...or initiates this theological conversation with the state: “Go arrest that other Christian. I don’t like him. He’s part of an evil cult.”

The “C” word is an important word in the English language. It is important to the science of theology. There is such a thing as treason, heresy, and cultic activity. These are evils that must be properly defined and resisted with truth. We must address these evils accurately and biblically. Any compromise in the meaning of these words compromises the great weapons that can identify and defeat evil.

Li Ying was fighting a righteous literary battle when she was accused of a great evil and silenced. Pray for Li Ying’s release. Pray for the freedom of her tongue and pen. And pray that bold, courageous, gentlemanly, accurate, restrained, and loving words would become the new standard for free discourse between Christians. We must redeem our language before we can redeem our culture.

Click here for a report on how last week’s CNN feature, “God’s Warriors,” attempts to “Talibanize” Christianity in America and equate anti-feminism within Christianity with the extremes of Islam.

Monday, August 27, 2007

Four books from Mises.org

note: I recently finished reading the following four books ...

Here are four great books to add to your reading list from the Ludwig von Mises Institute: The Free Market and Its Enemies:Pseudo-Science, Socialism and Inflation, lectures by Ludwig von Mises; Economics and the good life: essays on political economy by Bertrand de Jouvenel; Capital and Production by Richard von Strigl; and The Failure of the "New Economics": An Analysis of Keynesian Fallacies by Henry Hazlitt.

The Failure of the "New Economics": An Analysis of Keynesian Fallacies is as fresh today as when it was written 50 years ago. The fallacies of Keynes never seem to go away. In fact, they continue to drive government policy. This despite Hazlitt's clear refutation of Keynesian economics. Read and arm yourself against the ideas that are still taught to our children.

Economics and the good life: essays on political economy is a very interesting read on "the good life." That said, I do not agree with de Jouvenel on every matter, though he is certainly thought-provoking.

Capital and Production is a detailed analysis of the role of capital in any economy. Strigl will guide you through the Austrian view of capital with just a few errors. Despite the errors, the reader will learn the intertwining complexities of the various forms of capital. And, the reader will come away understanding that no central planning agency -- or local, state, or federal agency -- can ever direct an economy; other than one bound for starvation and deprivation of course.

The Free Market and Its Enemies ... lectures by Mises ... what more needs to be said ;-)

These books and many others are available at The Store on Mises.org.

Sunday, August 26, 2007

Hollywood and God

Something to think think about ...

Saturday, August 25, 2007

Wise Words from Will

From James Bovard's article What Do Citizens Owe Government on LewRockwell.com:

Will Rogers suggested long ago, “The way to deal with traffic
congestion is to have business provide the roads and government the cars.” But
though this hasn’t been done, politicians still expect thanks from citizens,
despite potholes as far as the eye can see.

New stats from the National Center for Education Statistics

According to the latest figures just published by the National Center for Education Statistics, $489 billion will be spent on public education this school year. What a waste!

Reason Foundation's list of occupations licensed by states

Though the list is incomplete, it is still an amazing testimony to our belief in the omniscience of the state. After reading, ask yourself one question: Do you really feel safer knowing that the state requires licenses for these professions? (hint: Remember it is the state that requires the license, usually based on pressure from those already in the occupation as a means to keep others -- new competitors -- out of the occupation: The modern guild societies.)

From Reason Foundation policy study, Occupational Licensing: Ranking the States and Exploring Alternatives:

California, Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire Restrict the Most Jobs
Hair braider, fortune teller, florist and interior designer are some of the jobs for which states require licenses

Do you want to be a fortune teller in Maryland? Your future better include a license from the state. How about being a hair braider in Mississippi? You'll need 300 to 1,500 hours of training and government permission. Want to sell flowers in Louisiana? Only licensed florists can do that. And almost every state requires certification if you want to move furniture and hang art while calling yourself an interior designer.

In California, there are a total of 177 different jobs that require a special license or credential, the most in the country, according to a new Reason Foundation study examining occupational licensing trends.

Northeastern states aren’t much better. Connecticut, Maine and New Hampshire all require job seekers to obtain a license before performing more than 130 jobs. In stark contrast, you can do most of those very same jobs - without a license - in Missouri, where just 41 careers require certification.

The list (incompete) of occupations that require an Ohio state license:

1 Accountants and Auditors
2 Aerospace Engineers
3 Appraisers and Assessors of Real Estate
4 Architects, Except Landscape and Naval
5 Audiologists
6 Barbers
7 Boiler Operators and Tenders, Low Pressure
8 Bus Drivers, School
9 Bus Drivers, Transit and Intercity
10 Chemical Engineers
11 Chiropractors
12 Civil Engineers
13 Computer Hardware Engineers
14 Cosmetologists, Hairdressers, and Hairstylists
15 Counselors, All Other
16 Dental Hygienists
17 Dentists, General
18 Dieticians and Nutritionists
19 Education Administrators, All Other
20 Education Administrators, Elementary and Secondary
21 Educational, Vocational, and School Counselors
22 Electrical Engineers
23 Electricians
24 Elementary (Public) School Teachers, Except Special Education
25 Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics
26 Engineers, All Other
27 Fishers and Related Fishing Workers
28 Funeral Directors/Embalmers/Morticians
29 Hearing Aid Dispensers and Fitters
30 Heating, Air Conditioning, and Refrigeration Mechanics and Installers
31 Home Health Aides
32 Industrial Engineers
33 Insurance Adjusters, Examiners, and Investigators
34 Insurance Sales Agents
35 Kindergarten Teachers, Except Special Education
36 Land Surveyors
37 Landscape Architects
38 Lawyers
39 Librarians
40 Manicurists and Pedicurists
41 Marine Architects
42 Marine Engineers
43 Materials Engineers
44 Mechanical Engineers
45 Medical and Health Services Managers, including Nursing Home Administrators
46 Middle (Public) School Teachers, Except Special and Vocational Education
47 Mining and Geological Engineers, Including Mining Safety Engineers
48 Nurses, Licensed Practical and Licensed Vocational
49 Nursing Aides, Orderlies, and Attendants
50 Occupational Health and Safety Technicians and Specialists
51 Occupational Therapy Assistants
52 Occupational Therapists
53 Opticians, Dispensing
54 Optometrists
55 Personal and Home Care Aides
56 Pest Control Workers/Pesticide Handlers, Sprayers, Applicators, and Dealers
57 Petroleum Engineers
58 Pharmacists
59 Physical Therapy Assistants
60 Physical Therapists
61 Physician Assistants
62 Physicians and Surgeons, All Other
63 Pipelayers and Pipelaying Fitters
64 Plumbers, Pipefitters, Gas Fitters, and Steamfitters
65 Podiatrists
66 Preschool Teachers, Except Special Education
67 Private Detectives and Investigators
68 Psychiatric Technicians
69 Psychologists, All Other
70 Radiologic Technicians, Technologists, and Therapists
71 Real Estate Sales Agents and Brokers
72 Registered Nurses
73 Respiratory Therapists
74 Secondary (Public) School Teachers, Except Special and Vocational Education
75 Securities, Commodities, and Financial Services Sales Agents
76 Security Guards
77 Ship and Boat Captains and Pilots
78 Social Workers, All Other
79 Speech-Language Pathologists
80 Stationary Engineers and Boiler Operators
81 Substance Abuse and Behavioral Disorder Counselors
82 Taxi Drivers and Chauffeurs
83 Teacher Assistants
84 Teachers and Instructors, All Other
85 Truck Drivers, Commercial
86 Truck Drivers, Heavy and Tractor-Trailer
87 Veterinarians
88 Veterinary Assistants, Technicians, and Wildlife Rehabilitators

Friday, August 24, 2007

Epistemology and Hoxby

As the Anti-Positivist, I do not believe that essential knowledge can be obtained via the positivist/empiricist approach, but that does not necessarily invalidate all empirical studies. I have, in other places, criticized studies by Hoxby, while on this blog, I have submitted for your review studies by her fellow econometricians and statisticians, such as Dr. Eric Hanushek, and others.

Read the note below, as well as the linked studies, and draw your own conclusions.

I think you will agree that the following topic (success of NYC Charter schools) deserves a dedicated post.

Caroline Hoxby is a MIT-trained, Harvard economics professor and Director of the Economics of Education Program at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a recognized expert on the econometrics of the U.S. public education system. She recently concluded an exhaustive study on Charter schools in the NY public school system and her findings are stunning.

The struggle to reform public education in NYC--one of the worst performing in the nation--is the most fascinating study in education transformation in decades, and illustrates the chasm that exists between the Education Sector and reality. It was only until NYC mayor, Michael Bloomberg (a results-driven former CEO), reached beyond the career "educator" ranks and chose a retired corporate CEO as schools chancellor (equivalent to our superintendent) that real change could take place (i.e.. taking control from the unions).

Here’s a good article on the study and NYC Charter Schools (by a founder of two of them).

Here's Prof. Hoxby's bio. She is a well-respected empirical researcher.
Here's a link to the Harvard Gazette profile on the study, which was begun in 2004 in response to the AFT's sham study indicting charter schools as inferior to their mob-run public counterparts.

And to her papers on the web.

Here's a link to her final study on NYC Charter Schools vs. Public Schools.
...and the homepage of the Harvard PEPG (Program on Education Policy and Governance)

And, finally, here's one additional study that you'll love this one--don't laugh too hard when you see the title. If you can get past the densely academic sections (I-III) it's pretty insightful.
Merry Christmas in August!