ANOTHER ATTEMPT AT INFAMY

Once again we have experienced a mass shooting that took place in another gun-free zone. At Umpqua College, just like the preceding situations, Columbine, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, Fort Hood, and other locations the shooters felt they would be able to effect significant damage before anyone could show up to stop them. They would be able to “enhance their personal profile” even if it meant their own death.

I recently had a head spinning moment when I read an article on a left wing blog to which I subscribe. I found it just so far off the mark that I have to counter punch. I won’t name the blog because I may be their only subscriber and I don’t want to double the announced readership for this professional writers group. However, the posting is titled, “Data Proves Obama Right: Guns Deaths Are Bigger Threat To Americans Than Terrorism”.

The article quotes Democrats, other progressive and anti-gun blogs. It even includes a highly biased and dubious chart which professes to corroborate the president’s statement. I’m sure it works with semi-intelligent Obama worshipers who rage at FOX News or even CNN if there has been a differing fact or opinion presented. Of course, they get the distorted word through hearsay because most liberals cannot stand to directly access any information that doesn’t reinforce what they inherently know.  Thus they tend not to seek any truth.

What this article, as with most opinion biased presentations, fails to account for are the number of lives saved by guns. I can’t find any data regarding the number of lives saved by Obama’s cherished terrorists. Perhaps such data does exist, but I have tried five different search engines with no avail. The closest I can find through any of the search engines checked is an article on Homeland Security Today  titled “Inestimable Lives Believed Saved by Terrorist Watch List ” (emphasis added). The next closest might be “Waterboarding Saved Lives”, but the terrorists in that article did not save any lives through their own volition.

Gun Owners of America offers some fascinating historical facts that any liberal can only challenge by yelling racist, bigot, misogynist, homophobe or other derogatory term. I’m willing to bet that not one will attempt to dispute the footnote documented facts offered with anything less.

WORLD RELIGION FIELD TRIP

I cannot definitely identify the original source of this article because it can be found on many blog sites and news sources throughout the Internet without attribution to the writer. That said, according to an article by Tim Brown titled, “Public School Forces Girls to Follow Islamic Dress Code!” there might be cause for concern.

As I read the piece, my first thought was that coercing young girls to act like Muslims is wrong. However, as read on, I allowed myself the opportunity to see both sides of this argument. If this were a trip to a Mosque for indoctrination, I could understand the outrage. However, I refuse to be led by the phrasing of any source, be it from the left or the right, or if it is what I want to hear or opposing my beliefs. That is not to say I do not have strong opinions about many subjects.

The drawing card for above linked essay is in the following few sentences.

THERE IS A DRESS CODE FOR THIS TRIP: All students must wear appropriate long pants. Ankles must be covered. Girls must bring wide scarves or hooded sweatshirts for the mosque.

There should be no objection to showing respect at all venues attended on a field trip.  The portion that is easily missed is the following.

The world religions field trip is next Tuesday, January 13. We will be visiting the Denver Mosque, the Assumption Greek Orthodox Cathedral, and the Rodef-Shalom Synagogue. We will then eat lunch at Park Meadows Food Court. Students must either bring a sack lunch or money to purchase lunch at the food court.

This is a WORLD RELIGIONS field trip. There is much more to be concerned about beyond the kids entering a Mosque and hearing a little bit about one particular religion. Yes, the whole premise of the trip might be an indoctrination course for Islam. However, in reading the whole article, it doesn’t sound much like that. Some of the stories linked below this one are much scarier.

After reading this and similar articles, the questions I pose are: If there is such a barking about “separation of church and state” by the liberal educators, why is any religion or place of assembly and directed worship even in the curriculum? Is this the only scheduled field trip? Why are only these three religious sects considered? What about a Buddist Temple, a Catholic Church, Methodist and Baptist and Pentacostal churches? Why are the students, against the progressive principles of public education, being exposed to some but not even a well rounded look at religions? After all, this is professed to be a World Religions course.

Perhaps a more extensive look at religions might show how anti-female, angry, hateful, brutal and domineering one religion really is. Either that or let Christmas break and Easter week be so called once again and let Johnny bow his head on the playground.

Public education contradictions continue to astound me.

YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK

How does the government spend your tax dollars to educate your child?  I have blogged over and over that more money could be spent on the political and social indoctrination education of our kids if it weren’t for the multiple levels of administration.

I swear I could not make this stuff up if I wanted to.  An article from L.A. Times online revealed the truth for all to see.  “One of the largest elementary schools in the nation, Miramonte has about 1,500 students and a teaching and administrative staff of about 150”.

Given that the maximum allowable class size is 30 students per teacher, this reveals to me that the school might be somewhat admin heavy.  By dividing the 1,500 students by the maximum allowable class size requires 50 teachers.  And, given the article states there are about “150 teaching and administrative staff”, that breaks down to about 100 school overlords.

Any private enterprise that had two managers for every worker bee would either be: (a) illegal or (b) in business for about a week, or both.

It is imperative to soak the rich for more of their earned money to fund more of these highly efficient government programs.