Public schools are brain dead and on life support...pull the plug on them, give them a decent funeral, and let better alternatives take root and flourish. Education is what we must save and regenerate, not an obsolete proven flop that has been in a persistent counterproductive condition for decades. The time has come to slaughter a sacred cow.
read more | digg story
Friday, September 22, 2006
Thursday, September 21, 2006
"The Decider" without limits
Jacob Hornberger’s Commentary Thursday, September 21, 2006
Amidst all the brouhaha in the UN regarding President Bush and Iran President Almadinejad, Americans should keep in mind a very important point: We now live in a country in which one person — the president — decides whether the United States will go to war against another nation.
When it comes to attacking another country and killing tens of thousands of foreigners in the process, no one can deny that President Bush — and he alone — is the decider. He — and he alone — has the power to make that determination, even though the Constitution requires him to secure a congressional declaration of war as a prerequisite.
Keep in mind also that the president, through the use of “signing statements,” also now wields the power to ignore laws enacted by Congress that purport to limit his powers as a military commander in chief.
Question 1: If the president has the power to flagrantly ignore one provision of the Constitution — and an extremely important one at that — why shouldn’t he feel that he has the power to ignore other restraints on power in the Constitution, such as those that require due process of law, right to counsel, the prohibition against unreasonable searches, bars against cruel and unusual punishments, and the right to keep and bear arms, especially if the American people don’t care?
Question 2: When the power to ignore constitutional restraints is combined with the power to ignore congressional restraints with “signing statements,” how exactly is the power that President Bush is now wielding different in principle from the type of dictatorial rule that characterizes the very countries that President Bush wants to “liberate” from dictatorial rule?
Amidst all the brouhaha in the UN regarding President Bush and Iran President Almadinejad, Americans should keep in mind a very important point: We now live in a country in which one person — the president — decides whether the United States will go to war against another nation.
When it comes to attacking another country and killing tens of thousands of foreigners in the process, no one can deny that President Bush — and he alone — is the decider. He — and he alone — has the power to make that determination, even though the Constitution requires him to secure a congressional declaration of war as a prerequisite.
Keep in mind also that the president, through the use of “signing statements,” also now wields the power to ignore laws enacted by Congress that purport to limit his powers as a military commander in chief.
Question 1: If the president has the power to flagrantly ignore one provision of the Constitution — and an extremely important one at that — why shouldn’t he feel that he has the power to ignore other restraints on power in the Constitution, such as those that require due process of law, right to counsel, the prohibition against unreasonable searches, bars against cruel and unusual punishments, and the right to keep and bear arms, especially if the American people don’t care?
Question 2: When the power to ignore constitutional restraints is combined with the power to ignore congressional restraints with “signing statements,” how exactly is the power that President Bush is now wielding different in principle from the type of dictatorial rule that characterizes the very countries that President Bush wants to “liberate” from dictatorial rule?
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Four of PA's top five employers are the government!
This just in from the Center for Workforce Information & Analysis (CWIA):
Four of our top five employers are the government!
1 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
2 *PENNSYLVANIA STATE GOVERNMENT
3 WAL-MART ASSOCIATES INC
4 CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
5 SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA
6 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
7 PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
See the full list here: http://www.paworkstats.state.pa.us/reports/paagg_t50.pdf
Is it any wonder that Forbes ranked Pennsylvania one of the 10 worst states for business?
Let's turn things around!
www.JamesBabb.com
Four of our top five employers are the government!
1 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
2 *PENNSYLVANIA STATE GOVERNMENT
3 WAL-MART ASSOCIATES INC
4 CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
5 SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA
6 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
7 PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
See the full list here: http://www.paworkstats.state.pa.us/reports/paagg_t50.pdf
Is it any wonder that Forbes ranked Pennsylvania one of the 10 worst states for business?
Let's turn things around!
www.JamesBabb.com
Pa. Supreme Court Has Issued A Ruling Reinstating Judges' Pay Raises�
The state Supreme Court on Thursday reinstated pay raises for 1,200 elected judges and district judges in a decision adding new fuel to an issue that has roiled Pennsylvania politics for more than a year. (Who would ever think judges and politicians are self-serving?)
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Monday, September 11, 2006
U.S. Democracy and the Role of the Media, By James Bovard
In the United States, "pack journalism" predominates - and the pack rarely strays from the government reservation. There is almost never any liability for a journalist who peddles false information from the government - but they risk their careers if their criticisms of government turn out to be unsubstantiated.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Government: Where professional incompetence is now an acceptable resume heading.
An excellent evaluation of the current state of politics from school board to the presidency: "Worse yet, truly qualified, honest, administrators are NOT hired precisely because they are not seen as "controllable" by the power brokers. Real pros are not willing to do whatever a board or council asks so they can cash the big checks."
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Saturday, September 09, 2006
Rep Rubley & PSEA Agree: Parents Can't Be Trusted
Libertarian James Babb: Parents Ultimate Authority on Children’s Education
Teacher's Union Disagrees, Endorses Babb's Opponent in PA's 157th
September 8, 2006
Lower Providence, PA – James Babb, Libertarian candidate for PA House 157th district, was not surprised at the Pennsylvania State Education Association’s (PSEA) endorsement of his incumbent opponent, "She shares their agenda of increasing government power over parents.”
“While being interviewed by the PSEA board”, Babb explained, “I asked them to support my plan to remove roadblocks limiting parental choice in their children’s education and to eliminate compulsory attendance at Pennsylvania’s schools. This seemed to horrify the board. They expressed contempt over anyone, including parents, who would question state education policies.”
Babb continued, “To be perfectly clear, I asked them point blank who the ultimate authority is when it comes to my child’s education. They confirmed that the state is that authority because parents can’t be trusted. And they support criminal penalties for parents who refused to comply with government education policies.”
“This is worse than big brother,” observed Babb, “it’s big parent.”
Babb offered, “Voters in the 157th district need to know that the PSEA’s PAC endorsed candidate is incumbent Republican Carole Rubley, who best represents the teachers’ union special interests. Those interests are in direct conflict with the interests of parents and children.”
Taxpayers are also victims of the PSEA’s agenda. The union threatens teacher strikes to effectively coerce high salaries and expensive benefits from taxpayers, even in poor rural counties. On the PSEA website they boast: "The pace of life is slower, the communities less affluent and in most cases, the economy is stagnant. Yet, PSEA members who live in these counties enjoy very good salaries and low or no contributions to health care costs."
The Patriot-News recently reported that "Pennsylvania had more teacher strikes than the other 49 states combined in both of the last two years." According to StopTeacherStrikes.org. "The ‘strike threat’ is used by the union during contract negotiations in order to extract tax dollars via local school boards. Taxpayers, innocent children, and the surrounding business community are negatively impacted.”
Babb concluded, “The group that has embraced Carole Rubley is the same one that recently made an enormous $235,000 contribution to Democrat Ed Rendell’s campaign. It’s the same PSEA that routinely opposes merit based pay and shields teachers from accountability in spite of rising costs and falling test scores. As the Libertarian Party candidate, I stand apart from the two parties that sell out our childrens’ futures and spend the taxpayers’ money for special interests.”
More information about the campaign can be found at www.JamesBabb.com.
Contact:
Ken Krawchuk, Babb for Pennsylvania Media Relations
215-881-9696
Media@JamesBabb.com
or
James Babb
610-539-8825
Jim@JamesBabb.com
Teacher's Union Disagrees, Endorses Babb's Opponent in PA's 157th
September 8, 2006
Lower Providence, PA – James Babb, Libertarian candidate for PA House 157th district, was not surprised at the Pennsylvania State Education Association’s (PSEA) endorsement of his incumbent opponent, "She shares their agenda of increasing government power over parents.”
“While being interviewed by the PSEA board”, Babb explained, “I asked them to support my plan to remove roadblocks limiting parental choice in their children’s education and to eliminate compulsory attendance at Pennsylvania’s schools. This seemed to horrify the board. They expressed contempt over anyone, including parents, who would question state education policies.”
Babb continued, “To be perfectly clear, I asked them point blank who the ultimate authority is when it comes to my child’s education. They confirmed that the state is that authority because parents can’t be trusted. And they support criminal penalties for parents who refused to comply with government education policies.”
“This is worse than big brother,” observed Babb, “it’s big parent.”
Babb offered, “Voters in the 157th district need to know that the PSEA’s PAC endorsed candidate is incumbent Republican Carole Rubley, who best represents the teachers’ union special interests. Those interests are in direct conflict with the interests of parents and children.”
Taxpayers are also victims of the PSEA’s agenda. The union threatens teacher strikes to effectively coerce high salaries and expensive benefits from taxpayers, even in poor rural counties. On the PSEA website they boast: "The pace of life is slower, the communities less affluent and in most cases, the economy is stagnant. Yet, PSEA members who live in these counties enjoy very good salaries and low or no contributions to health care costs."
The Patriot-News recently reported that "Pennsylvania had more teacher strikes than the other 49 states combined in both of the last two years." According to StopTeacherStrikes.org. "The ‘strike threat’ is used by the union during contract negotiations in order to extract tax dollars via local school boards. Taxpayers, innocent children, and the surrounding business community are negatively impacted.”
Babb concluded, “The group that has embraced Carole Rubley is the same one that recently made an enormous $235,000 contribution to Democrat Ed Rendell’s campaign. It’s the same PSEA that routinely opposes merit based pay and shields teachers from accountability in spite of rising costs and falling test scores. As the Libertarian Party candidate, I stand apart from the two parties that sell out our childrens’ futures and spend the taxpayers’ money for special interests.”
More information about the campaign can be found at www.JamesBabb.com.
Contact:
Ken Krawchuk, Babb for Pennsylvania Media Relations
215-881-9696
Media@JamesBabb.com
or
James Babb
610-539-8825
Jim@JamesBabb.com
Friday, September 08, 2006
Education: Free and Compulsory, By Murray N. Rothbard
Individuality is suppressed by teaching all to adjust to the "group." All emphasis is on the "group," and the group votes, runs its affairs by majority rule, etc. As a result, the children are taught to look for truth in the opinion of the majority, rather than in their own independent inquiry, or in the intelligence of the best in the field. Children are prepared for democracy by being led to discuss current events without first learning the systematic subjects (politics, economics, history) which are necessary in order to discuss them. The Mole effect is to substitute slogans and superficial opinion for considered individual thought. And the opinion is that of the lowest common denominator of the group.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Anti-war Congressional Candidate Arrested in Pennsylvania Capitol!
John A. Murphy, an independent candidate for Congress in suburban Philadelphia, was issued the non-traffic citation from Capitol Police after the incident Tuesday morning inside a state-government office building in Harrisburg. Murphy, 60, said Wednesday he did use a barnyard epithet, slap his hand on a table and call another man "a fool,"�
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
A Real Free Market Benefits Workers, by Sheldon Richman
There is only one test for whether an arrangement of wealth and income is fair or not: is it the result of voluntary transactions? If so, there is no role for public policy, because that would mean forcible interference with people
�s peaceful exchanges. If not, then the proper remedy is abolition of privilege.
read more | digg story
�s peaceful exchanges. If not, then the proper remedy is abolition of privilege.
read more | digg story
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Free Association: Missing the Boat -- Again
Free Association: Missing the Boat -- Again
"We live in a corporate state, not a free economy. What are we arguing about? Whether the corporte state treats workers better than the left says it does? Big deal! What does that do to advance the cause of liberty?"
"We live in a corporate state, not a free economy. What are we arguing about? Whether the corporte state treats workers better than the left says it does? Big deal! What does that do to advance the cause of liberty?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
