Obama: Teach sex ed in kindergarten

The depravity that these morons possess is staggering. When they're not writing about fellating Cambodian boys, these pervs are trying to get sex ed in kindergarten. From ABC:

ABC News' Teddy Davis and Lindsey Ellerson Report: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told Planned Parenthood Tuesday that sex education for kindergarteners, as long as it is "age-appropriate," is "the right thing to do."

"I remember Alan Keyes . . . I remember him using this in his campaign against me," Obama said in reference to the conservative firebrand who ran against him for the U.S. Senate in 2004. Sex education for kindergarteners had become an issue in his race against Keyes because of Obama’s work on the issue as chairman of the health committee in the Illinois state Senate.

"'Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners,'" said Obama mimicking Keyes' distinctive style of speech. "Which -- I didn’t know what to tell him (laughter)."

"But it’s the right thing to do," Obama continued, "to provide age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in schools."

"Age-appropriate" for five-year-olds, huh? I can see it now: "Little Johnny has a corndog, and he wants to put it in Little Suzy's lunchbox. Here, let's demonstrate!" Of course, the San Franistan edition would feature Little Adam and Little Nigel trying to roast weenies during a camping retreat, but I digress.

Bad news for teachers unions

That means good news for parents of school-aged children. The Supreme Court recognizes the right to homeschool your child. From the Washington Times:

It is no secret that home-schooling is growing and gaining credibility as a viable educational alternative.

More and more colleges are actively recruiting home-schooled students, each year there are an estimated 50,000-plus home-school high school graduates who find work or go to college and thousands of new curriculum products have become available over the past five years. Meanwhile, the number of home-schoolers continues to grow by 7 percent to 15 percent each year, more states are reforming their laws to remove the burdens from parents who want to home educate, and home-schoolers continue to excel in national competitions as well as on standardized tests. In short, home-schooling is a major success story.

Now, for the first time, home-schooling has been recognized in an opinion by a U.S. Supreme Court justice as a viable educational alternative. Morse v. Frederick, which recently made national headlines, involves free speech and whether a public school can regulate what a student says. The 5-4 decision said that the school principal, Deborah Morse, did not violate the free speech rights of Joseph Frederick when she took down his pro-marijuana banner, which said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus." The student had violated school policy and was advocating illegal drug use.

While the Home School Legal Defense Association agrees with the ruling in this specific case, it is a reminder to all families that when your child enters the public school, you have virtually ceded your parental rights to the public school.

The clearest explanation of this view was expressed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Fields v. Palmdale, when it said, "While parents may have a fundamental right to decide whether to send their child to a public school, they do not have a fundamental right generally to direct how a public school teaches their child."

This is the reason many parents have chosen to home-school, especially those parents who have a religious worldview, because they know their children will be taught secular values by the public system.

In Morse v. Frederick, however, Justice Clarence Thomas said, "If parents do not like the rules imposed by those schools, they can seek redress in school boards or legislatures; they can send their children to private schools or home school them; or they can simply move."

This is the first time the Supreme Court specifically has recognized home-schooling as a viable educational alternative. HSLDA has worked for 24 years to advance a parent's right to home-school and to promote home-schooling to the general public.

After 24 years, it is gratifying to read the words of a Supreme Court justice who rightfully placed home-schooling on a level playing field with public and private schools. This kind of recognition is tremendously significant to the home-school community.

It's another step on the long road to raise home-schooling to the point where, when the terms public, private or home-school are used in the same sentence, they all will be seen as mainstream educational alternatives.

Home-schooling is a modern education success story and HSLDA urges all parents to carefully consider their educational options. Home-schooling should be front and center because it is a viable alternative that has helped hundreds of thousands of children become mature, productive citizens.

If you don't like how your local government school is educating Little Johnny, you can either move to a different school district, enroll him in a private school, or home school. That's it. Efforts have existed for years by the NEA (leftist teachers union) to eliminate homeschooling, since homeschooling makes their job of indoctrinating and dumbing down your kid considerably tougher.

No, I am not bashing all or even most public school teachers. I am blessed to know far more decent, competent, and dedicated teachers than those who are not. I also recognize that some parents are about as sharp as a velvet bag full of styrofoam peanuts and probably aren't serving their children well by educating them directly. However, I reflexively defer to parents in determining the best interests of their kids until it can be demonstrated that the contrary is occurring.

Maybe homeschooling is for your kids. Maybe it's not. The good news is that it's your choice.

Teachers' free speech trumps union politics

Once in a while, the Supreme Court gets one right. From WND:

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a decision that could impact millions of public-sector employees nationwide, concluded today the First Amendment right of teachers trumps the speech privileges of organized labor.

The decision, in the consolidated Washington vs. Washington Education Association and Davenport vs. WEA cases, found organized labor, such as teachers associations, have no "constitutional right" to use money collected as "agency fees" from nonmembers for political purposes.

"We are elated that the U.S. Supreme Court has honored the First Amendment rights of teachers by overturning the state Supreme Court's decision," said Bob Williams, president of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, which has worked on the case for a decade. "The court understood that the constitutional rights of teachers should be protected and are not superseded by the union's statutory rights.

"This ruling will help protect non-member teachers from having their agency fees used on union politics against their will," he said.

Booker Stallworth, communications director for the foundation, told WND the case originated with a list of teachers who had a variety of complaints about the Washington Education Association's dedication of its financial resources to help causes to which the teachers objected, including homosexual marriage and abortion issues.

Some of the teachers appreciate collective bargaining but don't like union politics," he told WND. "Some of the teachers are pro-life, some are against homosexual marriage. For a number of reasons they preferred to not have the union speak for them politically and have their own dollars used against them."

Diane Lenning, an English and history teacher, said, "My major objections to the NEA are that there is an operative glass ceiling for moderate and conservative Republicans, independents and Christians."

Added Cindy Omlin, a speech pathologist. "There were many political causes that they were funneling my union dues toward that I found to be very offensive."

"I wanted to be congruent with my beliefs," said Karen Petty, another instructor. "My dues were going to causes that personally I would go against."

The case focused on a Washington initiative, approved by voters, that required labor organizations to get permission from nonmember workers before using mandatory dues for political purposes.

In many cases, workers are not required to be union members but must pay a fee equivalent to union dues because they are the beneficiaries of collective bargaining.

Unions, however, are increasingly active politically, and many times support causes such as homosexual marriage and the abortion industry under the guise of "rights" -- issues Christians and others would choose not to back.

WEA had admitted to multiple violations of the Washington law during an investigation then was fined more than $590,000 for its actions. However, on appeal, the Washington state Supreme Court concluded the "free speech rights" of the union superseded the First Amendment rights of the individuals.

"The agency-fee cases did not balance constitutional rights in such a manner, because unions have no constitutional entitlement to nonmember-employees' fees," the U.S. Supreme Court countered. "For First Amendment purposes, it is immaterial that [state law] restricts a union's use of funds only after they are within the union's possession. The fees are in the union's possession only because Washington and its union-contracting government agencies have compelled their employees to pay those fees."

"As applied, … [Washington state law] is not fairly described as a restriction on how the union can spend 'its' money; it is a condition placed upon the union's extraordinary state entitlement to acquire and spend other people's money," the Supreme Court said.

"The next step is to make sure the law is strongly enforced … to ensure the WEA and other unions are in compliance," Williams said. "The WEA has been busily attempting to undermine the law while it was under Supreme Court review." ...

This is good news for teachers everywhere who object to their unions spending their dues on grotesque liberal policies and agendas.

NY public school teacher sends poorly written note to parents

From FNC:

A New York City educator is in hot water after sending out a scathing note to parents riddled with spelling and grammatical errors.

Michael Levy, a health academy dean at Markham Intermediate School in Staten Island, N.Y., sent home the letter to around 100 eighth graders on Monday after a rowdy food fight in the cafeteria, the Staten Island Advance reported.

In the letter, Levy used "unexcecpable" for "unacceptable," "activates" for "activities" and "caferteria" for "cafeteria."

The letter was also filled with contradictions. Levy wrote that the students would be collectively punished and prohibited from attending the prom and the year-end class trip, according to the Advance. He then wrote that the students' punishments would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. (Maybe Sen. Kerry wrote that part for him? - Ed.)

The note also promised to bar students from the prom if the letter was not signed by parents and returned to the school.

The school's principal, Emma Della Rocca, said the letter was unauthorized and that Levy would be evaluated at a conference on Friday. But parents are still scratching their heads over the error-filled note.

"I'd be worried that somebody was educating my son that doesn't know how to spell," Lucy Farfan-Narcisse, a parent whose child attends the school, told WCBS-TV. "That would be a great concern."

Persunelly, I thank speling iz hiely over-rayted!

Republicans correct educrats' snub of Jeb

From the Orlando Slant-inel:

Just a few weeks after the University of Florida's faculty Senate voted against awarding Jeb Bush an honorary degree, a Republican-controlled House council decided this morning to make the university name its entire college of education after the former governor.

The University of Florida's education school would be renamed the "Jeb Bush College of Education," under an amendment approved this morning by the House Schools & Learning Council. What's more, UF would also have to erect "suitable markers" noting the college's new name and include the revised name in all university documents, including catalogues and brochures.

The provision, which was inserted into a broader bill (HB 621) renaming buildings at various state universities, was offered by Rep. David Rivera, R-Miami. Rivera's a top lieutenant to House Speaker Marco Rubio, who has long admired Bush and regularly seeks counsel from the former governor.

Personally, I object to the actions of the legislature. Why? Because I like Jeb too much to ever associate him with UF!

Speaking of "free iPods"...

From the Detroit News:

We have come to the conclusion that the crisis Michigan faces is not a shortage of revenue, but an excess of idiocy. Facing a budget deficit that has passed the $1 billion mark, House Democrats Thursday offered a spending plan that would buy a MP3 player or iPod for every school child in Michigan.

No cost estimate was attached to their hare-brained idea to "invest" in education. Details, we are promised, will follow.
...
Their plan goes beyond cluelessness. Democrats are either entirely indifferent to the idea that extreme hard times demand extreme belt tightening, or they are bone stupid. We lean toward the latter.
...
The range of options, according to Rep. Steve Tobocman, D-Detroit, includes raising the income tax, levying a 6 percent tax on some services, and taxing junk food and soda.

We wonder how financially strained Michigan residents will feel about paying higher taxes to buy someone else's kid an iPod.
...
For example, Dillon says he would shift the burden of business taxes to companies that operate in Michigan, but don't have a facility here. The certain outcome of that plan is to drive even more businesses out of Michigan.
...
Stop the stupidity. Michigan can't tax or spend its way out of this economic catastrophe.

The only responsible option is to bring spending in line with current revenues. The mission must be to expand the tax base, rather than to expand taxes, by crafting a budget that encourages growth.

We won't get there by wasting money on early Christmas presents for Michigan kids.

In case you wondered why I have certain posts like this one labeled "economic ignorance", wonder no more. Michigan is one state that has not enjoyed the benefits of the nation's booming economy, largely due to its own economic ignorance and liberal legislators. Businesses have been leaving, so Michigan's brilliant answer is...to tax those remaining businesses remaining in order to buy Junior an iPod?

As long as the good people of Michigan keep electing economic illiterates (i.e. Democrats) to get them out their mess, they deserve to wallow in said mess.

Schools' anti-terrorism drills "realistic"?

Yet another sad story in the War and Peace-sized novel being written on the sad state of affairs in the public education system in this country. From New Joisey:

The scenario has played out in real life across America: Gunfire echoes through a school and students are held hostage.

But police, faculty and staff lived out their own make-believe version yesterday of just such a tragedy at Burlington Township High School, complete with Kevlar-clad officers, armed suspects and students portraying the wounded and dead.

The purpose of the drill was to test the reactions of police, faculty and administration.

“You perform as you practice,” Superintendent Chris Manno said prior to the exercise. “We need to practice under conditions as real as possible in order to evaluate our procedures and plans so that they're as effective as possible.”

"Practice under conditions as real as possible"? Makes sense. But if that's the intent, then why this?

Two Burlington Township police detectives portrayed the gunmen. Investigators described them as members of a right-wing fundamentalist group called the “New Crusaders” who don't believe in separation of church and state. The mock gunmen went to the school seeking justice because the daughter of one had been expelled for praying before class.

Wacked-out "Christian" nutbars fomenting terrorism, huh? I thought the aim was to "practice under conditions as real as possible"? We didn't see any self-detonating bandana-wearing camelhumping jihadists shrieking "Allahu Akbar." No, instead we saw the ever-present, always-dangerous, perennially violent...Christians. What a whitewash!

We've seen the same thing before in this country's schools:

"The exercise will simulate an attack by a fictitious radical group called Wackos Against Schools and Education who believe everyone should be homeschooled. Under the scenario, a bomb is placed on the bus and is detonated while the bus is traveling on Durham, causing the bus to land on its side and fill with smoke."

This is not a joke. A taxpayer-funded drill is using public school students to enforce anti-homeschooling bigotry under the guise of preparing for terrorism. Terrorism by whom? By Islamic jihadists who hijack planes and incinerate kids headed to Disneyworld. Islamic terrorists who take hundreds of children hostage in Beslan, force them to drink their own urine and shoot babies in the back. Islamic terrorists who groom toddlers as suicide bombers.

Our enemies are Islamic extremist murderers. Except if you happen to attend the Muskegon County, Mich., schools, where the menacing faces of terrorism belong to parents who make untold sacrifices to give their children the best education they know how by schooling them in the loving environment of their own homes....

I seem to recall the national teacher's unions telling us after 9/11 that we should go to great lengths to let our kids know that no group was responsible for the attacks. You know, so as to avoid any sweeping generalizations that could marginalize Muslims? However, when it comes to ticking off and marginalizing Christians and homeschoolers, knock yourselves out. After all, these linguine-spined educrats are certain that Christians aren't going to violently retaliate. The same cannot be said of the chronically-aggrieved Muslims.

Texas Republican to criminalize failure to meet with teachers

What a stupid #ss idea from a stupid #ss legislator! From tha AP via Yahoo News:

Parents beware: Miss a meeting with your child's teacher and it could cost you a $500 fine and a criminal record.

A Republican state lawmaker from Baytown has filed a bill that would charge parents of public school students with a misdemeanor and fine them for playing hooky from a scheduled parent-teacher conference.

Rep. Wayne Smith said Wednesday he wants to get parents involved in their child's education.

"I think it helps the kids for the parents and teachers to communicate. That's all the intent was," Smith said.

Kathy Carlson, a fifth-grade teacher at Furneaux Elementary School in Carrollton, said she's had a handful of parents who skip meetings with teachers, but she winced at the idea of charging them.

"I don't know if we need to call it criminal. I would rather see accountability brought a different way, rather than fines or punishments," Carlson said.

"On the whole, parents want what's best for their kids," she said. "Sometimes I think they think we're out to get them. When you're talking about fining and pressing criminal charges, it kind of reflects that attitude."
...
Parents could avoid prosecution if they have a "reasonable excuse" for not showing up. State education officials or local school districts would probably be responsible for defining reasonable.
...
Austin parent Mary Christine Reed has children in third and seventh grades and is involved in her parent-teacher association. She said she knows of some problems teachers have had, but as a parent, wonders if a steep fine or criminal charge would make them worse.

"If the idea is to create communication, to send them into the criminal justice system ... is going to do nothing but have a negative impact," Reed said. "It would make parents more scared of the school."

Here are what I consider "reasonable excuses" not to meet with teachers:

1. You don't freakin' feel like it! See that whole "freedom of association" thingy in that annoying First Amendment in the Constitution!

2. Your teacher stinks. Literally. I don't know about you, but I avoid smelly people like Barney Frank avoids a t#tty bar.

3. You still hold on to the quaint notion that YOU, not the school, know what is in your kid's best interest, and in YOUR determination, YOU will handle the situation how YOU see fit.

4. Did I mention "You don't freakin' feel like it"?

Obviously, parents should be involved in their kids' education. No question. However, does any sane individual out there think that criminalizing failing to meet with the teacher is constitutional, much less a great idea?