Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lorianne
What is an appropriate response to that implication?

There is no such implication. I merely stated what happened. I advocated no prior restraint on lobbyists of any sort.

On the other hand, I do not believe we are required to roll over and play dead every time our political opponents win one on Capitol Hill. Hell, that happens every day. The set of ideological Marxists is much larger than the set of feminist ideological Marxists. We have environmentalist Marxists who ultimately want to take us back to collective agriculture powered by the Sun; globalist Marxists who want us to pay taxes to the UN so they can do to developing countries what Marxists have already done to Russia and Eastern Europe; we have almost every kind except economic Marxists. We used to have those, too, but then the Marxist economies imploded, putting lie to the idea that Marxism has any value as an economic theory. But that doesn't stop people from advocating it as an ideal. As Gorbachev said, "Communism is a beautiful-sounding idea. But it does not work."

So anyway, what we have in this case is a bunch of academic Marxists who managed to lobby their way into having a gigantic bureaucracy with lots of federal money and authority over the education system. They now use this to implement their vision of a utopian gynocratic socialism in which men are basically uneducated worker bees who are kept off in the corner somewhere so that the lesbians running this effort could actually get to be in charge.

I think parents of sons need to have their antennas out for this phenomenon, and if it's happening in their school, they need to get their sons out of there. The people running that show do not have their sons' education as a goal. Their real agenda is more at emotionally and intellectually crippling him so that he can't compete. That's not really anything a sane person would want for their child.

305 posted on 04/24/2002 3:16:20 PM PDT by Nick Danger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies ]


To: Nick Danger
I completely agree. Well said. Especially the last part about it being the responsibility of parents to look out for the best interests of their child. First, get involved in your kids school and find out what is going on ... then take them out of the school if you don't like what you see .... OR be vocal about the changes you expect to take place.

I do this at my kid's school. Example: They started this silly program of anti-discrimination "quotas" on being sent to the principal's office. A teacher couldn't send disruptive students to the principle or discipline students unequally numerically by sex or race ... no matter who was actually being disruptive. After a hard fight, I (and others) put a stop to that ridiculous practice.

Believe me, if you don't get involved and/or aren't paying attention you have NO idea the silly things they can come up with in schooling. But this is not a new thing. Remember phonics, then _poof_ no phonics allowed, and now all of a sudden phonics is back in vogue? There is literally no end to the silliness that can ensue in our schools (or I guess in any big bureaucracy). Vigilance is in order.
306 posted on 04/24/2002 3:38:44 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson