Martin Luther King Day

[Naturalized-Texan]

In his famous "I Have a Dream" speech on August 28, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." Today, more than 43 years after Dr. King's speech, liberals still judge people "by the color of their skin," while conservatives still judge people by the "content of their character."

Liberals force inner-city blacks to beg for government handouts and to live in fear for their lives in squalid slums. Liberals force the children of inner-city blacks to attend sub-standard schools where the main curriculum consists of drugs, gangs, guns, sexual promiscuity, and illiteracy. Liberals consider all inner-city black women of childbearing age to be little more than breeders who are given monetary incentives to produce ever-increasing numbers of welfare babies. Then, if an inner-city black single mother dares to violate liberal welfare rules by allowing the father of her children to live with her and help raise their children, the liberal government social workers punish her by taking away her benefits.

Dr. King must be spinning in his grave over what liberals have done to his people.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

So very, very true NT. http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/icon9.gif

Not to mention, those who have persevered under those crippling weights, such as Clarence Thomas, Condolezza Rice, etc., are then lambasted for achieving the very thing Dr. King was praying for -- being known for the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

[midnite]

Can anyone explain why we see no MLK sale days advertized in our local papers like we see for every other holiday?

[Longhorn_Platinum]

:smirky: Because it's okay to commercialize the births of Jesus, Columbus, Washington, & the good ol' U. S. of A., but it would be a sacrilege to commercialize the birth of the Rever-und Doctor Martin Luther King, Junior.

:moo: Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I'll go celebrate Dolly Parton's birthday.

[DesertFox]

Unfortunately, at the end of his life King had evolved in the direction Malcolm X had evolved away from. Had he survived, I'm afraid King would be all for the Jesse Jackson extortion ring. I do think, though, that he would have encouraged blacks to help themselves, too.

[cerberus]

Actually DF, the Boondocks episode that ran last night had that exact scenario. It presumed MLK merely slipped into a coma after he was shot, only to wake up in 2000 and then followed how he got on in America. It was actually quite insightful (for a cartoon) and in the end had Dr. King denouncing "urban culture" and african-american stereotypes that are so destructive to blacks. King then quits and moves to Canada. A darn good episode.

[MichaelS]

This is the most pathetic and egregious exploitation of a respected man's legacy for an ill-founded political diatribe I have seen in a very long time. Congrats NT.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

This is the most pathetic and egregious exploitation of a respected man's legacy for an ill-founded political diatribe I have seen in a very long time. Congrats NT.

As opposed to rather commercializing it with "Martin Luther King, Jr. Sales Days" days at J.C. Penney's and K-Mart (etc.), such has been done after the birthdays of presidents Washington and Lincoln were lumped together to create "President's Day"?

Get real -- his points were very relevant. The race-baiters and perpetuators of racial tension are the very ones who claim themselves saviors of the oppressed.

[Naturalized-Texan]

This is the most pathetic and egregious exploitation of a respected man's legacy for an ill-founded political diatribe I have seen in a very long time. Congrats NT.
So, you are opposed to the truth. Why am I not surprised?

There's no denying that the racism of today's liberals is diametrically opposed to the principles Dr. King expressed in his famous "I Have A Dream" speech. Fortunately, we conservatives represent the embodiment of those principles - we conservatives have always judged people by the "content of their character" and we still do.

Liberals believe that blacks aren't smart enough to compete, so they lower educational standards so that they (the liberals) can pretend that they care. That's pure racism. Even worse, liberals block every effort to improve the quality of education so that everyone can compete without lowering standards. I'm convinced that liberals do that on purpose in order to keep ever increasing numbers of minorities poor and ignorant and dependent on government handouts.

Liberals do the same with Hispanics, but it's even more insidious because liberals believe that Hispanics aren't smart enough to even learn English, so they insist that they be taught in Spanish ensuring that they won't be able to compete in an English-speaking nation.

[MichaelS]

As opposed to rather commercializing it with "Martin Luther King, Jr. Sales Days" days at J.C. Penney's and K-Mart (etc.), such has been done after the birthdays of presidents Washington and Lincoln were lumped together to create "President's Day"?

Get real -- his points were very relevant. The race-baiters and perpetuators of racial tension are the very ones who claim themselves saviors of the oppressed.
Say what you will, but NT's rant has as much relevance and legitimacy as Kanye West's, "George Bush doesn't care about black people." But, unfortunately, there will always be those that give credence to such inanity.

[MichaelS]

So, you are opposed to the truth. Why am I not surprised?
:smack:

The rest of it is more of the same. I guess the saddest part is that you actually buy into the BS you're shoveling.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Say what you will, but NT's rant has as much relevance and legitimacy as Kanye West's, "George Bush doesn't care about black people." But, unfortunately, there will always be those that give credence to such inanity.

And there will always be those which fail to see the truth, even when it's staring them straight in the face.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

:smack:

The rest of it is more of the same. I guess the saddest part is that you actually buy into the BS you're shoveling.

This coming from the pile, http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/biglaugh.gif.

[TotallyAtPeace]

Because it's okay to commercialize the births of Jesus, Columbus, Washington, & the good ol' U. S. of A., but it would be a sacrilege to commercialize the birth of the Rever-und Doctor Martin Luther King, Junior.
:blush:

[Naturalized-Texan]

This coming from the pile, http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/biglaugh.gif.
Lefties fail to recognize themselves because they live in an alternate universe where they can ignore inconvenient facts and pretend that their policies aren't racist. Maybe these facts will help set the record straight:

There are numerous examples of liberal programs that were designed specifically to produce ever-increasing numbers of poor and ignorant people dependent on government handouts. The following summarizes the most egregious those programs as described by Thomas Sowell in The Vision of the Anointed, 1995, Basic Books, pp 7-30:

The "War on Poverty" - This liberal program was sold as a program to end poverty and end the dependence on government welfare. In the words of Lyndon Johnson, the purpose of the "War on Poverty" was to "break the cycle of poverty" and to make "taxpayers out of taxeaters." "The percentage of people dependent on the federal government to keep above the poverty line increased. Although the number of such dependent people had been declining for more than a decade before the "War on Poverty" programs began, this downward trend now reversed itself and began rising within a few years after the program got under way." The "War on Poverty" completely met the REAL goal of liberalism.

Sex Education - One of the liberal crusades of the 1960s was to spread sex education into the public schools. The stated purpose of sex education was to end teenage pregnancy and eliminate sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). At the time of this crusade, teenage pregnancy and STDs were on the decline. Teenage pregnancy rate is now 50% higher than it was in the 1960s. Moreover, there has been a skyrocketing increase in STDs in the last 30 years, not only in AIDS, but also in syphilis, gonorrhea, and herpes. Sex education, as formulated by the liberals, has met the REAL goal of liberalism.

Criminal Justice - Another liberal crusade of the 1960s was to stress rehabilitation of criminals rather than punishment. The stated goal of rehabilitation was to "cure" the criminal so that he will become a model citizen and then to release him back into society. The theory was that rehabilitation would eliminate criminal behavior. Again, at the time of this crusade, the murder rate had been declining dramatically. Since that crusade started, the murder rate has more than doubled, and a citizen's chances of becoming a victim of a major crime has more than tripled. Rehabilitation has met the REAL goal of liberalism. (Note: In the more than 39 states that have enacted right-to-carry laws, the incidence of violent crime has declined dramatically.)

Education - The stated goal of the liberal program to take control of American education was to improve the quality of education. At the time of the takeover, education quality was very high with only about a 10% illiteracy rate. Today there is about a 30% illiteracy rate. In the last 40 years there has been a precipitous decline in the quality of education. There is a direct correlation between the decline in education quality and the increase in Federal control of education. There is also a direct correlation between the decline in education quality and the evolution of the National Education Association (NEA) from a professional organization to a labor union begging for federal aid. Liberal education programs met the REAL goal of liberalism. BTW, I wrote an essay on this subject that can be found at:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/9694/ioVan.html
There are 4 other of my essays there that you may find interesting.

[Lazarus]

This coming from the pile, http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/biglaugh.gif.Cha-Ching! High five, Homegirl...:thumb:

What's the matter Lil Mikey? Wont they let you join Lefties R Us until you get banned from FC? Trying to earn your Liberal merit badge?...

You seem to be trying awfully hard to get thrown out of here... I understand if you disagree with some opinions posted here - We do have a handful of regular libs here who disagree with us on a fairly regular basis - We tolerate anyone who debates in a polite respectful way... But you seem to put that extra effort into being as offensive and rude as possible...

Question: Is this a deliberate effort on your part or just your natural abrasiveness?

Now run along young Mikey and report all you have seen to your liberal friends... Im sure they are impatiently waiting for you to verify how superior they are to us... Please dont keep them waiting...

[Beowulf]

This is the most pathetic and egregious exploitation of a respected man's legacy for an ill-founded political diatribe I have seen in a very long time. Congrats NT.

Is it really, Michael? Dr. King preached equality based on character and even qualifications. Instead, we now have Affirmative Action and even quotas based on race. One good example is in the military, where by regulation there must be a certain percentage of black Non-Commissioned Officers. I don't remember Dr. King preaching quotas nor do I remember in his teachings for colleges, (University of Michigan) giving bonus points for admission for race.

I for one respect Dr. King and feel that what he taught is NOT what is being practiced. I suppose now you are going to tell me that I'm full of BS too! It would figure!

[Eagle1]

shhhhhhh!!!!

michael doesnt want people to know that dems really want to keep blacks in the ghettos and poor and on gov aid so they keep voting dem

out of bondage and into servitude

[Elgalad]

Got in trouble today for advancing the notion that perhaps it isn't entirely useful to have a 'Martin Luther King' day.

Qualifications first..

I Have nothing but respect for the memory of Martin Luther King Jr. I admire greatly what he did, promoting a policy of non-violence even while he fought adamantly for social change. His murder was a national tragedy. But while it was very likely that his untimely death had a greater impact on our culture and heritage than his work while alive, his legacy continues today. The goal of a colorblind society where all citizens are Only judged by their individual character is one that many Americans including myself have embraced.

Now that being said..

If this day is made to celebrate the struggle for Civil Rights, then it should be noted as such. Martin Luther King Jr. was One of the leaders of this movement, but it had its roots in the birth of our nation and some of our earliest founding fathers had Abolition as their goal. I don't doubt for a second that when the words 'All men are created equal' were scribed into the Declaration of Independence that they were meant to exclude Anyone. If this is the goal of the holiday, then it should be called 'Freedom Day' and it should be used to remember All the men and women who fought to preserve the civil rights of Every American.

On the other hand, if this day was made to celebrate the life and works of Martin Luther King Jr., then great! But why should only one great American receive such an honor when there have been so Many outstanding citizens who never get more than a passing mention outside of history texts? Why shouldn't we have a day called 'Great Americans Day' where we can remember the great scientific contributions of people such as Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein, or Benjamin Franklin, or the music of Scott Joplin, Louis Armstrong, and Elvis Presley, or the courage of our brave Pioneers in the Space Program, art by Grandma Moses, literature by Thoreau, Twain, and Poe, etc? Why does this civil rights leader Martin Luther King deserve a special day when we have none to remember Rosa Parks or Booker T. Washington or Frederick Douglas? Celebrate him, but also celebrate All of our fellow citizens who have helped make this the greatest nation on Earth! :thumb:


Predictably though, I was told that my suggestions only proved what a bigot I was. :rolleyes:



-Elgalad

[Tumblehome]

Even worse, liberals block every effort to improve the quality of education so that everyone can compete without lowering standards.

This is new to me. Liberals up here push for exactly the opposite (increased funding and standards for the education system) and up here it is the conservatives that don't show strong support for education.

I wonder why it'd be the opposite on either side of the border (assuming what you say is true).

[Tumblehome]

Instead, we now have Affirmative Action and even quotas based on race. One good example is in the military, where by regulation there must be a certain percentage of black Non-Commissioned Officers. I don't remember Dr. King preaching quotas nor do I remember in his teachings for colleges, (University of Michigan) giving bonus points for admission for race.

It may shock some here, but I completely oppose affirmative action and any other type of institutional racism or sexism.

But I must ask, do you really think this is a purely "Liberal" thing? If conservatives were so dead set against it, why does it still exist after so many years of the Bush administration, a majority government that also has control of the senate? Could it be that americans on both side of the political spectrum have fallen into this affirmative action nonsense?

[Warlady]

NT I believe this thread may be your finest hour. I want to ensure this thread gets into the Hall of Fame Archives. Fox? Do you agree? Fox is our resident Hall of Fame Archives tendee.

[Warlady]

Tumblehome, there is a difference between throwing more money at something and offering real reform such as vouchers to allow the poor to attend better schools. A lot of the increased funding you are referring to is going to the administrators...not better school buildings, books or teachers. Just ask Moo. He'll tell you. He's in that quagmire as a teacher who really does care about his students.

[Tumblehome]

I don't doubt for a second that when the words 'All men are created equal' were scribed into the Declaration of Independence that they were meant to exclude Anyone.

Not sure what you meant by this. Are you saying that they were or were not meant to exclude?

A simple reading of US history shows that they meant white land owning males.

To suggest that the US was based on the ideal of ending slavery is pretty laughable. The US owes much of its current strength to slavery, which very much got it moving strong when it was primarily an agrarian society. As industry in the north came to dominate, slavery became less and less vital and people questioned the morality of it.

This is a point sometimes raised by poor nations with bad human rights records. They claim that the US (and many other current leading nations) got strong with methods that were less than admirable by today's standards and call the first world nations hypocrites in criticizing them in diong likewise.

King is remembered as somebody calling out to change this paradigm, I think for the better.

[RayChuang]

...Is the fact that the King family does not allow the broadcast of the complete speech on the radio or TV without compensating them. Having actually seen the complete speech on tape (which is actually much more powerful in full than the sections we all regularly hear), it's small wonder why the King family wanted it this way--much of the full speech calls for blacks to have strong morals and have self responsibility for their own success, something that I don't think today's NAACP would agree with! :eek:

[Tumblehome]

This is new to me. Liberals up here push for exactly the opposite (increased funding and standards for the education system) and up here it is the conservatives that don't show strong support for education. I wonder why it'd be the opposite on either side of the border (assuming what you say is true). <!-- / message -->

Tumblehome, there is a difference between throwing more money at something and offering real reform such as vouchers to allow the poor to attend better schools. A lot of the increased funding you are referring to is going to the administrators...not better school buildings, books or teachers. Just ask Moo. He'll tell you. He's in that quagmire as a teacher who really does care about his students.

Didn't realize you followed Canadian politics as well as politics in the US Warlady. I think you are far off the mark. No vouchers have been proposed by conservatives here.

[DoctorDoom]

This is new to me. Liberals up here push for exactly the opposite (increased funding and standards for the education system) ...The libs here also believe that increased funding is the univesal panacea for every social ill. They conveniently ignore that the school districts with the highest per-student funding are usually inferior in the quality of education. One reason is the top-heavy bureaucracies, with bloated administrations that do nothing but suck up tax dollars while the schools go to hell.

Another factor is the dominance of the hyperliberal NEA, once a teachers' union, now a RAT PAC. Any attempt to create standards by which the quality of teaching can be judged are rejected and vigorously agitated against by NEA lobbyists. Education is the last thing on the minds of the NEA.

Furthermore, the Three Rs have been deëmphasized in favor of feel-good crap such as sex education, "gay" studies, sensitivity and tolerance training, and other meaningless bullshit. I've seen the results.

On a visit to NYC not long ago for a Broadway show, I stopped into a Roy Rogers fast-food emporium, with high-school-age kids and one adult behind the counters. Their computer had a brain fart and they were attempting to use a calculator to tally the charges. No one had a clue about how to use the calc to add the meal tax, and it's doubtful that any customer's tab was accurate.

This is where we have gone with our public education system. NYC has one of the highest per-student ed budgets in the country, but its quality of education is, to be kind, lacking. And liberalism's solution is invariably more funding.

[DoctorDoom]

For the record, here's the complete MLK speech.

<hr>
<center>Martin Luther King, Jr.: "I Have a Dream"

Delivered 28 August 1963, at the Lincoln Memorial, Washington D.C.</center>

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds."

But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone.

And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.

We cannot turn back.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."¹

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."²

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.

Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride,

From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.

And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!

Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!

I Have A Dream (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/Ihaveadream.htm)

Here's an MP3 of the speech (note: 6,823,936 bytes).

I Have A Dream (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/mp3clips/politicalspeeches/mlkihaveadreamattgo1.mp3)

Right-click the link to save it.

[Naturalized-Texan]

This is new to me. Liberals up here push for exactly the opposite (increased funding and standards for the education system) and up here it is the conservatives that don't show strong support for education.

I wonder why it'd be the opposite on either side of the border (assuming what you say is true).
Increased funding and standards are not the solutions to the failures of the education system. Competition is.

I was referring, of course, to the vehement liberal opposition to school choice where parents would get vouchers allowing them to send their children to the schools of their choice - private schools or government schools. School shoice has been very popular and successful with minorities in several inner-cities - e.g., Milwaukee, WI - and has vastly improved the quality of education in those areas. The prime advantage of school choice is to introduce competition in the education system. Competition improves the quality of every product and would do the same for education, yet liberals are vehemently opposed. School choice will raise the quality of education in both private schools and government schools, yet liberals are vehemently opposed.

In stark contrast, since the liberals have been in control of the education establishment, the quality of education has declined dramatically, especially among minorities in inner-cities. I am convinced that liberals actually want the education system to fail, especially in the inner-cities, so that more and more people, especially minorities, become poor and ignorant and dependent on government handouts so that they will vote for the liberals who will keep those handouts coming.

[ldb83]

Furthermore, the Three Rs have been deëmphasized in favor of feel-good crap such as sex education, "gay" studies, sensitivity and tolerance training, and other meaningless bullshit. I've seen the results.

On a visit to NYC not long ago for a Broadway show, I stopped into a Roy Rogers fast-food emporium, with high-school-age kids and one adult behind the counters. Their computer had a brain fart and they were attempting to use a calculator to tally the charges. No one had a clue about how to use the calc to add the meal tax, and it's doubtful that any customer's tab was accurate.

This is where we have gone with our public education system. NYC has one of the highest per-student ed budgets in the country, but its quality of education is, to be kind, lacking. And liberalism's solution is invariably more funding.

First off, what makes pubescent or near pubescent children learning about the origin of their life and the purpose of their genitals "meaningless bullshit?" You really think kids should stay clueless about that? How can you expect children to have morals with regard to sex if you withhold all truth about the matter from them in the first place?

Second, where have the three R's taken a back seat to sensitivity training and gay studies? I'm not saying they haven't, but I just honestly have never heard that. I've only seen such "bullshit", as you call it, as small and distant electives at large universities. Courses like that aren't even required for any real degree. They're purely electives. The three R's, however, are still required at both a highschool and collegiate level, we just suck at them as a nation. We ranked 20th out of 26 developed nations in mathematics recently. Ouch. That's gotta be more than just quality of education. Our students' desire to learn seems to be inferior to many other countries, and I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the variance is due to that.

I don't know what the best answer is for fixing it, and although it'll inevitably involve one type of funding issue or another, I really don't think the answer is anywhere near as simple as "more funding".

[Charity]

First off, what makes pubescent or near pubescent children learning about the origin of their life and the purpose of their genitals "meaningless bullshit?" You really think kids should stay clueless about that?

It is not, I repeat NOT the place of a government worker to teach our chidren about this topic. This is a personal thing that these kids need to learn from their parents and not in a classroom full of other kids.

[DoctorDoom]

First off, what makes pubescent or near pubescent children learning about the origin of their life and the purpose of their genitals "meaningless bullshit?"However did America survive without braying liberal jackasses telling children to wear rubbers when they f**k?

You really think kids should stay clueless about that? How can you expect children to have morals with regard to sex if you withhold all truth about the matter from them in the first place?Teenage pregnancy has skyrocketed since SIECUS imposed its amoral "education" on kids. It's not a coincidence. And any attempt to teach responsibility and self-control re one's sex organs is protested as violating the separation of church and state, as though only Christians oppose promiscuous sex.

Sex ed teaches the mechanics of sex. It's equivalent to driver ed teaching how to operate a car but not teaching about the rules of the road.

Second, where have the three R's taken a back seat to sensitivity training and gay studies?Come on up to eastern Massholechusetts.

[dajoga]

This is the most pathetic and egregious exploitation of a respected man's legacy for an ill-founded political diatribe I have seen in a very long time. Congrats NT.

You could prove your point if you can show that the less-educated, especially minorities, tended to vote for Bush more than Gore or Kerry. Can you?

[DoctorDoom]

I want to ensure this thread gets into the Hall of Fame Archives.Done.

[ldb83]

Sex ed teaches the mechanics of sex. It's equivalent to driver ed teaching how to operate a car but not teaching about the rules of the road.

When did you take sex education? My sex ed class was not so simple as you explain it. Being all of 12 years old at the time, they stressed abstinence more than safe sex, and stressed anatomical functions more than sexual mechanics. I'm sorry to hear if your sex ed class was like that though. That's a real shame.

Come on up to eastern Massholechusetts.

Massachusetts 4th grade scores are #1 in the nation in reading in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Massachusetts 8th grade scores are #1 in the nation in reading in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Massachusetts 4th graders rank 2nd in the nation in writing in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Massachusetts 8th graders rank 2nd in the nation in writing in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Massachusetts 4th grade scores are #1 in the nation in math in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Massachusetts 8th grade scores are #1 in the nation in math in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Massachusetts is #1 in the country for having the highest percentage of public school 4th graders scoring at the highest levels in science.

Looks to me like the three R's aren't suffering too much in MA even IF they were really being compromised or backseated to things like "gay studies". I flat out disagree with that comment of yours, at least until I see anything indicating otherwise.

[Eagle1]

hahahhaa
the NAEP, you have got to be kidding

and class time has been set aside for things like sensitivity, diversity, and character studies. so yes, there is less actual teaching of things that should be learned in schools and more of what should be the parents job, and the only reason the schools do it is to further the liberal agenda

[The Hard Truth]

Education - The stated goal of the liberal program to take control of American education was to improve the quality of education. At the time of the takeover, education quality was very high with only about a 10% illiteracy rate. Today there is about a 30% illiteracy rate. In the last 40 years there has been a precipitous decline in the quality of education. There is a direct correlation between the decline in education quality and the increase in Federal control of education. There is also a direct correlation between the decline in education quality and the evolution of the National Education Association (NEA) from a professional organization to a labor union begging for federal aid. Liberal education programs met the REAL goal of liberalism.

Excellent points, NT. I agree with virtually everything.

So answer me this--why is George Bush spending many BILLIONS more taxpayer dollars on federal aid to education than Klinton ever did?

Ronald Reagan stated that the federal Department of Education needed to be abolished. Unfortunately he never lived up to his word, but at least he publicly stated what needed to be done.

Whereas Bush has joined hands with the liberals, and is flushing tens of billions of taxpayer dollars down the federal education bureaucracy rathole. As you correctly stated, the more federal aid to education, the worse things get.

So why is he wasting our money?

[sunsettommy]

Originally Posted by Elgalad
I don't doubt for a second that when the words 'All men are created equal' were scribed into the Declaration of Independence that they were meant to exclude Anyone.




Quote=Tumblehome]Not sure what you meant by this. Are you saying that they were or were not meant to exclude?

A simple reading of US history shows that they meant white land owning males.

Not true tumble.

It meant EVERYONE.

The problem was that SOUTH CAROLINA would not vote for it untill Thomas Jefferson scribbled out the lines he wrote about the abolishment of slavery.That is the reason why the words "'All men are created equal' seems out of place with the fact that slavery was still allowed after the passage of the Declaration of Independance.

The nation that later freed the slaves would have failed to exist if no such compromise was granted by Jefferson.

To suggest that the US was based on the ideal of ending slavery is pretty laughable. The US owes much of its current strength to slavery, which very much got it moving strong when it was primarily an agrarian society. As industry in the north came to dominate, slavery became less and less vital and people questioned the morality of it.

No it was true that despite the changes of that document.There were indeed people who wanted to END slavery.It went on for decades untill it was finally abolished in the 1860's.Various abolutionist groups existed from the start.

Slavery became less and less common partly because new states were being admitted as slave free states.Then too the economic changes made slavery less profitable and more and more morally indefensible by the decades.

It is true that EARLY America gained some strength due to slavery.However that ended in the 1860's,that is 145 years ago.So really your argument is weak since most of Americas industrial base was first formed in the slave FREE North.It slowly over the decades spread to the south as the plantation way of life dissipated.

This is a point sometimes raised by poor nations with bad human rights records. They claim that the US (and many other current leading nations) got strong with methods that were less than admirable by today's standards and call the first world nations hypocrites in criticizing them in diong likewise.

The same nations(U.S. and many leading nations) that send them TRILLIONS in aid over the decades and the result is still famine,poverty,anarchy,endless warfare,pestilence,peasantry and oh yes SLAVERY and so on.

The poor nations are often that way because they are run by tyrants with a record of mass murders under their rule.Africa is littered by such rulers.

The middle east has a poor record of it too even when they DO HAVE the money.Look at Iran,Iraq,Syria,Egypt,Lybia and so on.

Then we have,

Examples:

China killed over 30 million people.Plus a long history of Peasantry.
USSR killed over 50 million people.Plus a long history of Peasantry.
Vietnam killed over 2 million people in a short time.

America killed very few in comparison.Mostly lynching blacks by the Democrat led KKK and similar vigilante groups.

King is remembered as somebody calling out to change this paradigm, I think for the better.

Something Jessie Jackson and other race pimps care less about these days.

MLK was a million times better and that with his known faults he had.We miss him for it.

IT IS A LOT BETTER TODAY for the American blacks.

[/quote]

[DesertFox]

Liberals don't want to accept, or recognize, that getting the Constitution to pass required a lot of compromise.

[Rhino]

One good example is in the military, where by regulation there must be a certain percentage of black Non-Commissioned Officers.Huh? Not in the Air Force. That would violate the regulations.

[DesertFox]

I never hearda that one in the Army, Beo. What's your source?

[Native American]

This is the most pathetic and egregious exploitation of a respected man's legacy for an ill-founded political diatribe I have seen in a very long time. Congrats NT.

Nothing "exploitive" about it whatsoever. On the contrary, it's an accurate description of how today's liberals and Democrats exploit The Negro for their own selfish and power-hungry purposes.

[Native American]

Originally Posted by Naturalized-Texan
Even worse, liberals block every effort to improve the quality of education so that everyone can compete without lowering standards.


This is new to me. Liberals up here push for exactly the opposite (increased funding and standards for the education system)

You're speaking of liberals wanting to "increase funding", whereas NT was speaking of improving the quality of education. Those are two entirely separate things, Tumblehome.

But hey, that's a classic liberal mistake you just made, confusing those two things, Tumblehome. You probably weren't even aware of your error.

and up here it is the conservatives that don't show strong support for education.

On the contrary, everywhere one looks in the country it is the conservatives who support school choice vouchers, while it is the liberals who oppose it!

[DesertFox]

That's just because those mean-spirited conservatives always insist that things work in the real world. The lovely, flower-haired liberals aren't so mean -- as long it sounds good, that's sufficient. I mean, come on, who can deny that liberals are nicer folks? And who wants to enact an agenda of the mean-spirited, just because it works?

[2nd_Amendment]

I'll be damned if I can sit here and watch this thing unfold thru all these various distractions and allow not one person to note that "Martin Luther King" is just a myth. His name wasn't Martin, he wasn't a Reverend(never "preached" before '47), he WAS a plagairist(including his "I have a dream" speech and his first "sermon"), he was an adulterer and his influence was already on the wane and out of his control at the time of his death...

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/m/mlk.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/mlk/legacy/legacy.htm

My point is that "King" the myth is a political tool. A handy martyr used to control people from elementary students in class to university educators. King the man was just a flawed fellow whose 15 minutes of fame wound up getting him killed.

A holiday in his name, streets changed to his name, this endless fawning of so many over his moldering corpse, all an insult to the true heros and builders of our nation, regardless of color.

May he rest in peace...and may people please forget his sorry ass.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Junker Axiom: Beware of those who say, 'I have a dream'.

They are the boring sons-a-bitches at work who say, 'Hey, I had this wild dream last night. Wanna hear it?'

Then they go on and on about how they had sex with sheep, rode unicorns and played with midgets. Then they try to connect the dots of what it all meant, referring to Jungian archetypes.

Meanwhile, your eyes glaze over. And you just wanna shout, 'It didn't mean shit asshole! Don't write it down. Don't think about it. Don't talk about it. Especially to me. You're wasting my time.'

Next time somebody says they have a dream, run. They are self-important headcases. And most dreamers just use their dreams to try to get laid by easy girls by showing 'em how deep they are.

If they say they have a dream in front of a bunch of people, on a really big stage. This kicks it up a notch. It means their ego has dropped into 6th gear and their narcissism is emitting white smoke.

I'll let you decide where this dreamer boy belongs.

[DesertFox]

2A, I agree to a point but can't agree on other points. King was indeed a liar, an adulterer and a big time plagiarist (he cribbed a good bit of his doctoral disseration); but he still did something that needed doing in America by getting rid of Jim Crow.

Jim Crow was very real. I remember in 1957 (I was eight) seeing a front page picture of three GI's who had done something newsworthy. The one in the middle was black and the guys on either side were white. The black guy had been carefully painted out. You saw the two white guys on either side and the silhouette of the black guy in the center. I also saw "colored" restrooms and drinking fountains.

That stuff had to stop. That our leadership has allowed it to be used for disgraceful purposes doesn't mean Jim Crow was okay. MLK was the guy who got rid of it.

I couldn't agree more that he has been given far too many honors and is treated with unwonted reverence, but all that's part and parcel of the phoniness of our age and of politics generally. I would wager than 500 years from now he'll be seen in proper perspective, somewhat as John L. Lewis is seen today, a man who was necessary in his time.