Obama recently decided to grant waivers to the states for NCLB (No Child Left Behind) (EDWeek.com). This will give states exemptions from many of the standards schools are forced to meet under NCLB. Instead, they will have to agree to national standards that take place of the ones set by the states. This gives the federal government even more control over your children and their education, a goal for Obama and the Democrats. But I believe it also serves another purpose.
NCLB has began to embarrass some schools and expose what most parents already know: teachers, and their unions, are failing in educating our children. According to the Christian Science Monitor, at least 178 teachers and principals have been caught artificially raising student scores in Atlanta to show the progress required by NCLB (Yahoo! News). There are other allegations throughout the United States of similar improprieties.
The Obama waivers will help take attention away from these allegations by dismissing the NCLB standards. Many teachers complain the standards are too high, and Obama's move validates this claim. Not to mention that these waivers are completely unconstitutional. Obama is acting like a king, handing out waivers for NCLB, ObamaCare, and refusing the enforce laws he does not agree with (NYTimes.com).
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Monday, September 19, 2011
Cupcakes
Michelle Obama's big push to make children more healthy involves trying to make the right choices when it comes to what foods to eat, especially in our schools. (ABCNews.com). But how far will this go? And what is really the goal?
It's my nephews first time in elementary school (kindergarten to be exact), and his parents would like to send cupcakes for his birthday. The teacher was opposed to this, stating that only cupcakes without frosting were allowed. Furthermore, the school, as a whole does not allow unhealthy snacks, and that parents should only send healthy snacks with lunch. This outraged many of the parents at school. So the questions arise: Should the school have the ability to control what our children eat? Why can't parents chose what foods their children are exposed to?
This is systematic of a larger issue, and a "nudge" toward healthy eating (there is a reason for the quotes, stay with me). Bake sales, a staple of fund raising programs for school activities, is now banned in New York City. (NYTimes.com). Mayor Bloomberg made this move to combat childhood obesity, saying that bake sales promote the wrong eating choices. But this is not limited to the City of New York. According to CNSNews.com, a proposed bill in Congress, backed by the White House, would give the federal government control over bake sales in schools (full article here). In the article, Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocate for the bill states that, "Most parents don't want their kids to use their lunch money to buy junk food. They expect they'll use their lunch money to buy a balanced school meal." I don't believe parents think that junk food or bake sales don't exist and don't expect their children to partake. Plus, who is she to presume what a parent wants for their child? That is up to the parent to decide.
Let's also not forget the story of the shutdown lemonade stand, and the little girl who got a $500 fine for it (CBSNews.com).
Now, remember I asked what is the real purpose here, and placed the word nudge in quotes. Here is why. Glenn Beck exposed a White House appointed Czar, Cass Susstein, who wrote a book, Nudge, on how to properly control people. Basically the book describes how to force choices onto people by making the other choices hard to choose (details here). The first page of the book talks about school cafeterias, and how to force the "right" choices onto children. This is just like the bake sale ban, where bake sales are still allowed, just at odd times or with restriction (details in articles above). It's hard for me to imagine that there is not an alterior motive here when there are people tied to the White House writing books about controlling what people do.
There has been protest over this from students and parents. Students have sent out a petition against the bake sale ban (PIX11), and parents are angered over it (TheVillager.com). Even outrage in the lemonade stand case caused the government to back off somewhat (details in the above article). That gives me hope that people are not allowing their liberties to be infringed upon. I've encouraged my nephew's parents to complain to the school board and organize against this, and I encourage others in similar situations to do the same.
It's my nephews first time in elementary school (kindergarten to be exact), and his parents would like to send cupcakes for his birthday. The teacher was opposed to this, stating that only cupcakes without frosting were allowed. Furthermore, the school, as a whole does not allow unhealthy snacks, and that parents should only send healthy snacks with lunch. This outraged many of the parents at school. So the questions arise: Should the school have the ability to control what our children eat? Why can't parents chose what foods their children are exposed to?
This is systematic of a larger issue, and a "nudge" toward healthy eating (there is a reason for the quotes, stay with me). Bake sales, a staple of fund raising programs for school activities, is now banned in New York City. (NYTimes.com). Mayor Bloomberg made this move to combat childhood obesity, saying that bake sales promote the wrong eating choices. But this is not limited to the City of New York. According to CNSNews.com, a proposed bill in Congress, backed by the White House, would give the federal government control over bake sales in schools (full article here). In the article, Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocate for the bill states that, "Most parents don't want their kids to use their lunch money to buy junk food. They expect they'll use their lunch money to buy a balanced school meal." I don't believe parents think that junk food or bake sales don't exist and don't expect their children to partake. Plus, who is she to presume what a parent wants for their child? That is up to the parent to decide.
Let's also not forget the story of the shutdown lemonade stand, and the little girl who got a $500 fine for it (CBSNews.com).
Now, remember I asked what is the real purpose here, and placed the word nudge in quotes. Here is why. Glenn Beck exposed a White House appointed Czar, Cass Susstein, who wrote a book, Nudge, on how to properly control people. Basically the book describes how to force choices onto people by making the other choices hard to choose (details here). The first page of the book talks about school cafeterias, and how to force the "right" choices onto children. This is just like the bake sale ban, where bake sales are still allowed, just at odd times or with restriction (details in articles above). It's hard for me to imagine that there is not an alterior motive here when there are people tied to the White House writing books about controlling what people do.
There has been protest over this from students and parents. Students have sent out a petition against the bake sale ban (PIX11), and parents are angered over it (TheVillager.com). Even outrage in the lemonade stand case caused the government to back off somewhat (details in the above article). That gives me hope that people are not allowing their liberties to be infringed upon. I've encouraged my nephew's parents to complain to the school board and organize against this, and I encourage others in similar situations to do the same.
Friday, September 16, 2011
Boehner At It Again
Boehner must be removed from office, and, failing that, from the Speakership. What is this nonsense about him wanted to work with Obama on his recent jobs bill? This bill is no more than another tax and spend bill that will help no one. There are taxes in this bill that wouldn't even pass a Democrat Congress back when they had super majorities, and it is unpopular amongst Democrats today (Investors.com). I just can't get over how weak the Republican leadership is. Are they completely ignoring recent results that put Republicans in control of the House in a nationwide historic election? This is just getting silly. Honestly, ever since I saw Boehner cry for the first time I thought he was a weak establishment Republican. He has to understand that the Republicans were put in power to stop Obama, not work with him. But, he will never accept that, so he needs to go!
I'm not as optimistic as Rush Limbaugh, who theorized, but did not like, the idea that Boehner may be trying to out maneuver Obama (9/15 radio show - RushLimbaugh.com). Limbaugh suggested that perhaps Boehner was just taking away Obama's claim that Republicans are blocking the bill. But I don't trust that Boehner is truly doing that. I think he is a man obsessed with being on the defensive, reacting to the White House, and listening more to the Republican Washington insiders than the American people.
I'm not as optimistic as Rush Limbaugh, who theorized, but did not like, the idea that Boehner may be trying to out maneuver Obama (9/15 radio show - RushLimbaugh.com). Limbaugh suggested that perhaps Boehner was just taking away Obama's claim that Republicans are blocking the bill. But I don't trust that Boehner is truly doing that. I think he is a man obsessed with being on the defensive, reacting to the White House, and listening more to the Republican Washington insiders than the American people.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
New York Congressional 9
Congratulations to Bob Turner!
I believe this was a great victory for conservatives in New York. I doubt many would have believed that a Republican would have won a seat held by Democrats since 1922. This was a 3 to 1 Democrat area, with 40% blue collar workers (primarily Democrat), and 40% Orthodox Jew (also primarily Democrat). It should have been easy pickings for the Democrat party, yet they failed to capture it. Obama's economy killing policies and anti-Israel stance seem to have finally caught up to him, and I couldn't be happier about it!
Another part of me screams warning . This cannot lead to overconfidence. It went Republican this time, but the pessimist in me believes this to be a one time event. I'm hard pressed to believe that in the next election cycle Republicans will hold the seat. Plus, there are rumors that the seat will be eliminated in the redistricting (NYDailyNews.com - Blog).
The fighter in me though is proud. This is the culmination of a lot of hard work by so many people all over the country who, despite the traditional media's constant defense and promotion of Obama, have managed to get the conservative message out. I know that these victories (NY-9 being only one of many) will continue into the 2014 elections.
I believe this was a great victory for conservatives in New York. I doubt many would have believed that a Republican would have won a seat held by Democrats since 1922. This was a 3 to 1 Democrat area, with 40% blue collar workers (primarily Democrat), and 40% Orthodox Jew (also primarily Democrat). It should have been easy pickings for the Democrat party, yet they failed to capture it. Obama's economy killing policies and anti-Israel stance seem to have finally caught up to him, and I couldn't be happier about it!
Another part of me screams warning . This cannot lead to overconfidence. It went Republican this time, but the pessimist in me believes this to be a one time event. I'm hard pressed to believe that in the next election cycle Republicans will hold the seat. Plus, there are rumors that the seat will be eliminated in the redistricting (NYDailyNews.com - Blog).
The fighter in me though is proud. This is the culmination of a lot of hard work by so many people all over the country who, despite the traditional media's constant defense and promotion of Obama, have managed to get the conservative message out. I know that these victories (NY-9 being only one of many) will continue into the 2014 elections.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Obama Losing Popularity... Among Liberals?
I'm sorry, but I am not fooled by the all of the polls and liberals coming out claiming that Obama may not be the man they believed him to be. Some are claiming that Obama is giving in too much to Republican demands (The Examiner.com). The White House claims it is worried about the polls (Yahoo News). And leading up to his big jobs speech, it was leaked that it won't be a big grandiose speech, rather a piece of a much larger plan and series of speeches (a little more on that later) (Foxnews.com). And these are just a few exmples. So what is really going on here.
Could liberals truly be turning against one of their own? Not likely. The last thing they want is to elect a Republican, and it seems that no primary opponents to Obama have come around to challenge him. So he is what they have, and he is what the want over any Republican.
Or, could it be that they are tearing him down just to build him up again? This to me seems the more likely answer. The country is in bad shape, and the traditional media knows this. If they can convince everyone that things are really bad now and show they can be critical of Obama, then when the elections grow near they can play down the bad economic news and play up how Obama has heard the American people, gotten serious, and looks great. I am also pretty convinced that the media and the White House will figure out some way to put the unemployment figures below 8%, because no president historically has been re-elected with employment above 8%.
And as for that jobs speech, no doubt it was a political one, not a jobs one. I think the timing had more importance than the substance. Obama was trying to drive people away from the Republican debates. The last thing he wants is to see all of his potential opponents sounding better than him. The media helped by trying to make this job speech to be so important and grand. When it was clear he wouldn't get it on the time and day he wanted, they played it down as just another speech.
Could liberals truly be turning against one of their own? Not likely. The last thing they want is to elect a Republican, and it seems that no primary opponents to Obama have come around to challenge him. So he is what they have, and he is what the want over any Republican.
Or, could it be that they are tearing him down just to build him up again? This to me seems the more likely answer. The country is in bad shape, and the traditional media knows this. If they can convince everyone that things are really bad now and show they can be critical of Obama, then when the elections grow near they can play down the bad economic news and play up how Obama has heard the American people, gotten serious, and looks great. I am also pretty convinced that the media and the White House will figure out some way to put the unemployment figures below 8%, because no president historically has been re-elected with employment above 8%.
And as for that jobs speech, no doubt it was a political one, not a jobs one. I think the timing had more importance than the substance. Obama was trying to drive people away from the Republican debates. The last thing he wants is to see all of his potential opponents sounding better than him. The media helped by trying to make this job speech to be so important and grand. When it was clear he wouldn't get it on the time and day he wanted, they played it down as just another speech.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Republican Debates
As the Republican Primary Debates get underway I am reminded of who the traditional media, and therefore the Democrats, want us to chose as the Republican Presidential Candidate: Mitt Romney. The Northeast Republican, of which almost none are conservative, has been the favorite for among the mainstream media, which should make him very unattractive to Republicans. I am always very skeptical of Northeast RINOs, and in Romney's case, I am convinced he is the wrong man for the job. For example, Romney's view on global warming is far from the conservative view. Romney reportedly commented that he believed the United States as well as foreign nations need to "reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases," saying they "may be significant contributors" to climate change.(CBSNews.com, view full article here) This after the Climategate scandal and ever mounting scientific evidence pointing away from man-made global warming.
Also, don't forget that he was the governor that signed the Massachusetts health-care bill, which is very similar to Obama Care. This is not just a problem for Romney, it should be his undoing. According to CATO Institute's website, Romney care over the next 10 years is projected to cost about $2 billion more than the original $1.8 billion budget. Plus, the goal of the reform was to create universal healthcare for all in Massachusetts, and "between half and two-thirds of those uninsured before the plan was implemented remain so. That’s a far cry from universal coverage." (the entire article can be seen here).
Therefore, Republicans would do well to ignore the polls that claim Romney is the best choice to beat Obama. The traditional media would never offer us truly helpful advice. If anything, Romney should be completely ignored. I am hopeful though, for he was not the winner of the Iowa Straw Poll.
Also, don't forget that he was the governor that signed the Massachusetts health-care bill, which is very similar to Obama Care. This is not just a problem for Romney, it should be his undoing. According to CATO Institute's website, Romney care over the next 10 years is projected to cost about $2 billion more than the original $1.8 billion budget. Plus, the goal of the reform was to create universal healthcare for all in Massachusetts, and "between half and two-thirds of those uninsured before the plan was implemented remain so. That’s a far cry from universal coverage." (the entire article can be seen here).
Therefore, Republicans would do well to ignore the polls that claim Romney is the best choice to beat Obama. The traditional media would never offer us truly helpful advice. If anything, Romney should be completely ignored. I am hopeful though, for he was not the winner of the Iowa Straw Poll.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)