Education Many believe our entire public-education establishment is going in exactly the wrong direction. Rather, having a goal of real achievement, the trend seems to be toward reaching some kind of educational parity, to make sure no students feel badly about themselves. The liberal educational theoreticians tell you that bad grades only serve to discourage underachievers. The primary objective of Outcome-Based Education is to avoid humiliating a student. We should be educating the student first. Students are passing courses and graduating because of lower requirements, because of this new philosophical belief that no one should be held back. Colleges and universities are finding out that a high-school diploma is meaningless in terms of real achievement. The liberal school establishment lowers standards, ignores human nature, refuses to reward success and doesn't punish failure.
ENJOY YOUR LIFE: TURN OFF THE TV The image of America that comes to us in daily news broadcasts is a grim one, problems (real and faked), heartache, dysfunction and hardship. That is simply the nature of television news: crisis after crisis, a drumbeat of constant negativism. Millions upon millions of people in "real" America are enjoying the good things the nation has to offer have come to feel that their positive experiences are somehow the exception. The vast majority enjoy the best country in the history of the world. As an experiment, try going a month without watching any news. Don't watch the evening news, don't watch local news, don't watch political discussions. You will have a much more positive outlook about yourself and about America!
Ground Zero of American Political Debate Bipartisanship, Bill Clinton recently told The Washington Post that he wanted to "help flush the poison from the atmosphere." Which would be a beautiful thing... though some of us would miss David Bonior's press conferences. On the eve of his second inauguration, the Clinton made a failed attempt to declare ideological victory. He said that "the battles of his first term largely settled the debate over the role of government in his favor, clearing the way for a new season of cooperation". The President is very wrong. Even The Washington Post couldn't swallow the President's spin whole: "Yet even as Clinton predicted that Republicans will be more accommodating to his philosophy, his comments in a 55-minute Oval Office interview underscored the extent to which a president who arrived here four years ago with a vastly more expensive and partisan agenda himself has yielded to GOP priorities." That phrase, "yielded to GOP priorities," is just one rare sentence in one news article; in short, historians will record that: Conservatism has reordered every political reality of the day.
HOW TO STAY PROSPEROUS & FREE IN THE 21st CENTURY Americans have always understood that that this nation is unique among nations in the long march of human history, and as we speed into the next century, we seem to be at a crossroads. We are worried that with so many things out of whack; the traditions and institutions that made America great are under attack, standards continue to be lowered, so many minds seem clouded by the fog of liberalism. So let's stay positive; the personal freedoms we still enjoy; the widespread prosperity and bounty unimaginable in any other time and place; the innovations and progress in medicine, technology, communication, science, business, and more; the standard of living never before attained by so many among a nation's citizens...we wonder, will it last? The questions remain. What will ensure that America continues? Can our culture be reclaimed? How can we stay free in the next century? While people of other countries have been restricted m to pursue prosperity, bounded only by the limits of his or her imagination. Besides, only a conservative would ask how we can STAY prosperous and free in the 21st century. A liberal would whine that only a few are prosperous--the evil rich who have somehow gotten rich off the backs of the poor. Liberals don't notice, or understand freedom. They see victims; the oppressed, the downtrodden, and the have-nots. America has had the original ideas of self-government and self-reliance; for which we must thank our Founding Fathers.
The Myth of the Angry White Male What has sprung up is a strange kind of thinking. . . . Americans are unhappy with their lot. They are feeling insecure - layoffs and corporate downsizing have made their future uncertain. Stirred up by talk radio, the theory goes, large numbers of formerly sensible people have embraced 'hate' and 'extremism.' Most of these, according to the media, are white guys. A Washington Post/ABC pre-election poll asked voters if they were angry 'about the way the federal government works.' Four out of five white males said no. 62 percent of white men voted for Republican House candidates (38 percent for Democrats in 1994, a ten-point increase from the 1990 midterm elections). But was this special to their gender? In 1994 white women voted for Republican House candidates by a 55 to 45 percent majority. Significantly, there isn't single article decrying 'angry white females.'
Regarding Ronald Reagan: In point of fact, the image of Ronald Reagan, the man responsible for shaping that decade (the 1980s), should be carved into Mount Rushmore, minted into coins, and emblazoned in a place of honor in every school child's history text as a constant reminder of this great man's contributions to world freedom, national pride, and individual prosperity. With the truth, the term 'Reaganomics' will be used only as a term of endearment and respect.
Regarding Ronald Reagan: Liberals correctly perceive the Reagan record as their most dangerous enemy. Why? Because what happened during the 1980s - prosperity at home (the longest period of peacetime growth in this nation's history, strength abroad - directly contradicts every liberal belief. Bill Clinton has confused many about the 1980s and the Reagan legacy. His patently false mantra states, "The rich got richer, the poor got poorer. The rich didn't pay their fair share, etc." The 1980s have been intentionally mischaracterized by slick liberal politicians with the complicity of the mainstream media.
In Colma, a suburb of San Francisco, California there's a proposal pending to tax . . . the dead. If proponents get their way, grave sites will be taxed $5 dollars - per grave, per year - for eternity. In Colma the dead outnumber the living by a ratio of roughly 1000-to-1, including such notables as: Wyatt Earp, Levi Strauss, and William Randolph Hearst. And they, apparently, haven't paid their fair share. For liberals, when it comes to taxes . . . nothing is sacred.