Another example of how liberals teach our children — even when they’re unclear on the concepts themselves
Readers of my blog know that one of my personal bête noires is liberal indoctrination in public schools. I blog about it frequently. My last outing on that subject was here, and I’ll get back to that in a little bit. First, though, I’d like you to see how one public school teacher saw fit to educate American children about America’s involvement in WWII, as well as the response of one politely appalled man who was actually involved in the historic moment at issue.
Not only is this kind of indoctrination par for the course, it’s produced at least one generation of people who can throw out conclusions to their heart’s content, but are incapable of backing them up with common sense or actual knowledge. And that’s how we wrap around to that post of mine that I mentioned earlier. If you link over to it, you’ll see that I spoke with my daughter about a teacher’s facile and ill-educated assertion that “all civilized countries” have socialized medicine.
I carefully led my daughter through a few fairly uncomplicated facts. A lot of uncivilized countries (North Korea, Cuba, the former Soviet Union) have socialized medicine. I also pointed out what is undoubtedly true, which is that those countries with socialized medicine cannot maintain them. They work well initially when a big chunk of taxpayer money is poured into them, but that they then go downhill: they don’t generate revenue themselves and, since they suck up wealth, they leave the taxpayer pool less wealthy and therefore less able to pay for them. This isn’t rocket science and, more importantly, it’s not ivory tower theory — it’s actual real world fact, as proven by real world, actual events.
What’s interesting is what happened with my post when it got picked up on a liberal thread at reddit.com (the thread is entitled “libertarian” but it’s clearly not, as the tenor of the comments indicates). The liberals are very angry at what I wrote, but they don’t have substance to back up their anger. Lots of insults, lots of conclusions, but no facts and no coherent, sustained argument. Here are a few comments, plus my replies:
Wow, there is actually book that describes why the mother is an idiot, it is called Economics 101 – look in to it. [Insult, conclusion; no argument.]
Also, dear mother: You do realize you already pay for the uninsured, right? You just pay 20 times as much as you should. Why is this not considered a tax? [Boy is s/he unclear on free market concepts. If the market wasn’t stultified by thousands of government regulations, not to mention the perverse incentives of mass buying by employers, there shouldn’t be uninsured. Also, I don’t think I should be for the 30% of uninsured who are illegal aliens under any circumstances.]
Unfortunately, this kind of overly simplistic thinking is exactly why the tea party has no credibility. As cutesy as the exchange is, “Momma” didn’t address the fact that universal health care is working in many countries in Europe (not that it’s sustainable, but that’s not that point). [I’m delighted this person thinks I’m cute, but the fact is that if universal health care is unsustainable, it’s not working in Europe, no matter how much you wish it was. As it sucks money out of the economy, the initial benefit vanishes, with the health care system in Britain the perfect example. You don’t need a Harvard PhD to figure that one out.]
Not only that, but the link that was posted at the end about the girl getting the abortion:
a) has absolutely nothing to do with the exchange about health care. b) I don’t see why the girl should be forced to tell her parents…we should be expanding the rights of the youth, not restricting them. [Had the person read my post, s/he would have realized that it was relevant, as I explained, because it goes to the way in which public high schools indoctrinate students, right to the point where they bypass parents entirely when it comes to political hot topics such as abortion.]
tl;dr? As a hardcore libertarian, I think this article reeks of sensationalist neocon. [Uh, I don’t read hardcore libertarian here. I read Progressive troll.]
That was a lot of stupid in one place. Too bad the teacher did not point out that the CBO said that the bill saves money, not costs money. [Where to begin. Here, perhaps. The person also doesn’t understand that the CBO was forced to work with the numbers that Congress used as predicates for the bill, rather than actual real world costs. Even with that, as Paul Ryan carefully explained, the bill is affordable only because of accounting jiggery-pokery and because of deferred costs.] Perhaps they are wrong, but that mom had better go over the figures and say where they are wrong. Then the teacher could point out how the bill helps small businesses get health care for employees. Then there was that deep dishonesty that North Korea having universal health care, both false and distracting from Europe and Canada and all that. [All communist countries have universal health care because they have no private enterprise. To the extent there is any health care, it comes from the government. Of course, perhaps what this person meant is that North Korea has no health care at all, because the government has run out of money and the people are eating dirt.]
Insults, conclusions, false facts, ignorance — what are they teaching young people nowadays?
UPDATE: If you’ve come this far in the post, you’ll know that the history teacher who put a unique spin on WWII history had edited the iconic Iwo Jima photograph to turn the flag into a McDonald’s arch with Arabic writing. Perhaps that teacher was educated at the same schools as our president who managed, in his Easter message, to edit Jesus Christ out entirely, including the part in which he quoted from a WWII pastor. (See also Flopping Aces, which tipped me off to this one, and which adds some more information.)
I understand that the president of a multicultural United States must be careful not to speak in such overtly religious terms that he sounds more as if he’s giving a sermon, than a speech. One cannot avoid, however, the fact that Easter is a Christ centered religion. (Unless, of course, Obama is actually celebrating the Pagan rite of spring which involved fertility goddesses and suchlike.) For Obama, who professes to be a Christian to edit Christ out entirely from a message that should, in theory, resonate personally with Obama, is somewhat surprising.