Thursday, July 07, 2005


In April, police in Fairfax County, Virginia pulled over a van making an illegal u-turn. The constables soon discovered the illegal u-turn was not the only statutory violation committed by those in the van for twelve inside were illegal aliens.

After being processed by Immigration and Custom Enforcement, all eleven passengers were released and instructed to show up for final review; they were let lose onto our streets for the sake of the children and all. Unless the mother was some kind of tramp and did not know which hombre was the father, can anyone justify why every last one of them should have been allowed to go?

Furthermore, if these parents cared so much for their progeny, wouldn’t they have applied to come to this country in the proper manner? Regular, real Americans have had their own children snatched over less serious infractions of the law.

Needless to say, none of those released with the promise to return did so. But one does not have to be a PhD to figure out that was going to happen. With the drivel filling the minds of the overeducated these days, it’s probably an insight available only to those whose minds have not been corrupted in this manner.

Unfortunately, the poison of such diseased thinking is not confined to the otherwise unemployable in the ranks of media, government, and academia. Many average Americans are more than eager in promoting the surrender of this great nation.

One deluded soul posting on the messageboard commenting on the story posted, “If you ‘processed’ all the ‘illegals’ out of the United States, we would have economic collapse....Who the heck picks your fruit and vegetables? Cleans up your building? Cleans restrooms? Cooks your fast food? Does the dirty work that no one else wants to do? Many Americans have grown too fat and entitled to do the physical and ‘menial’ wok. Selfish people...afraid you won’t be able to afford that big fat SUV and wide-screen television?”

Such comments were probably made by one of those selfish people who has never done any menial work in their life. Usually, those clamoring for unfettered borders are the ones that have “too much” ---- if we are now going to hurl invectives against the blessings of liberty --- and want to ensure that the good life remains the exclusive province of the elite by importing laborers for the purposes of driving down wages and increasing their own wealth and power.

Instead of complaining about the laziness and girth of the average American (as if from appearances the average immigrant has missed too many meals), perhaps we should be asking how many toilets the likes of George Bush, John Kerry, or Ted Kennedy have scrubbed over the course of their lifetimes since the only thing they ever did to be entitled to their vast resources was spring from their parents loins. Hillary Clinton acted like it was revelation handed down from on high when she realized janitors are people too.

It’s not so much Americans have grown “too entitled” to do menial labor but rather don’t see why wages should be driven down for the work that they do. For the elites do not allow the invasion of the United States to proceed unabated to elevate the status of lamentable Third World peons but rather to drag down the living standards of all people to make it easy to rule over all of us as subjects of the New World Order.

Maybe if most forms of immigration were abolished and the proper steps taken to interdict transborder vagrancy, perhaps the elites would be forced to take the hit in their own pockets rather than the pockets of the average American. John Kerry and George Bush can afford to alter their lifestyles a lot more than can John Q. Public.....

More here

The perils of PC history

Napoleon Bonaparte once said, "History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon." True enough. Depicting history is, and always has been, a collective enterprise. But our modern, relativistic culture has made separating fact from fancy increasingly difficult, as political correctness often trumps truth. As a result, we are rewriting history. Nowhere is this more evident than in American classrooms, where our children's history lessons change with the political winds. Anti-bias guidelines and fears of offending special-interest groups permeate history textbooks, smudging out historical accuracy.

Our Founding Fathers are now referred to as androgynous "framers." According to a 2004 Washington Times report, words such as "man," "mankind," "aged" and "suffragette" are now banned from textbooks. In 2003, reviewers found 533 factual or interpretive errors in social studies texts submitted for adoption to the Texas State Board of Education. While publishers agreed to 351 revisions, they stated that the remaining errors were simply a "misunderstanding" of the textbook.

However, nothing changed to ensure that students would not fall victim to the misunderstandings. The result is that millions of American schoolchildren are misinformed about important historical events and documents. In 2002-2003, only 55 percent of North Carolina high school students were considered proficient in U.S. history. This is no surprise, given the widespread deficiencies in our history curriculum: The Fordham Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based education organization, gave North Carolina's Social Studies Curriculum an "F" in a 2002-03 evaluation of state history standards.

Our teachers are unschooled in the fundamentals of American history. Chester Finn, president of the Fordham Foundation, said that only 31 percent of middle school history teachers and 41 percent of high school history teachers actually majored in history as undergraduates. Just like the character in Sam Cooke's song, "Wonderful World," our teachers "don't know much about history." So, why does it matter whether students (and teachers) understand American history? For starters, the success of a representative government is predicated upon having informed citizens.

Past generations have understood this: One reason for beginning mandatory "common" schools in the early 1800s was to teach children the specifics of American democracy. Children learned answers to the questions, "Why does the government have three branches? What is the Electoral College? Why are federal judges appointed?" Without a foundation in political, economic and social history, our newest citizens enter adulthood ill-equipped to vote, serve on juries, lobby Congress or model civic values.

What can be done? First, we need to take a hard look at our history courses, and push back against the rising tide of political correctness. Alexis de Tocqueville's view of history was one of a "gallery of pictures in which there are few originals and many copies." We need to ensure that our historical copies, or textbooks, closely resemble the originals. Students ought to study the original documents providing the infrastructure for our government, legal and judicial systems -- documents such as the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.

Second, parents (and citizens) need to be willing to supplement school programs at home. For those fed up with "revisionist" history, the Bill of Rights Institute (www offers a reasoned, accurate alternative. This Virginia-based nonprofit organization, founded in 1999, offers programs that teach students about America's founding principles and their importance to a free society. Their program, The Bill of Rights for Real Life, a 10-unit teacher's guide and DVD set, provides valuable lessons about citizenship, the roots of our fundamental freedoms, and the role of civic values, the law and the courts in daily life.

We do a disservice to our children when we tamper with historical fact. America has a rich and colorful past, marked by victory and struggle on the road to freedom. If our children are to grow into citizens devoted to the protection of America's fundamental liberties and ideals, they must first understand what they are.


No comments: