Tuesday, February 7, 2017

The fight against Nancy Devos by the left -- is a fight to protect indoctrination centers from public takeover

Elisabeth Devos was barely approved by the U.S. Senate (by a vote of 51-50) as Donald Trump's Secretary of Education. Vice President Mike Pence cast the deciding vote today. This was the first time a sitting VP has ever cast a deciding vote for a President's nominee for public office.

It makes sense that democrats would try hard to stop her from being the nominee, as she is a champion for a voucher system. Such a system would allow parents to choose what schools their kids go to, even if they are religious schools.

This would be devastating for the liberal movement. They have altered the American educational system in such a way that has turned the public school system into liberal indoctrination centers. This makes it easy to teach kids that global warming is real, that the world is overpopulated, that high taxes big government are good, and other liberal themes.

Such schools also prevent kids from being exposed to religion, or from learning the truth about American Exceptionalism. They don't want kids learning what life was like before the U.S. existed. They don't want kids to learn about the founding intentions. This is because the majority of Americans do not support their agenda, and the only way they've been able to move forward is by "liberally defining" the Constitution.

Allow me to give you an example. Liberals believe that guns kill and people don't. They believe that if they can get rid of guns, they can more easily control the people. They won't tell you this, but it's what they believe. In order to take guns away from the people, they have to convince kids that this is a good idea.

Here is the text of the 2nd amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

You and I know what this means. The history here is that at the time of the founding, it was common for rebellions to take over governments. This was possible because governments could take away the natural right to own guns. To give Americans the ability to fight against such groups, the founders made sure they were able to form militias, and therefore own guns.

Basically, militia is an army of the people.

Liberal teachers tell kids that a militia is the military. So, their interpretation of it is that only the government military can own guns. This is the liberal interpretation of the 2nd amendment. If they can convince enough kids that this is true, then this makes it all the easier for them to regulate and ideally force people to hand their guns over to the government.

Imagine if the liberals control education, healthcare, and global warming regulations.If they control those, then they control the people. They control what what kids learn. They control what you eat and how many kids you can have. They control what you can drive and who can open a business. They control everything.

Now, here comes Donald Trump who says, "Enough!" He nominates Betsy DeVoss, a lady who has programs set in place that will allow poor black kids get the same education as rich people.

Let me ask you a question: Who has access to better education: rich people or poor people?" The obvious answer here is: rich people. Obama sent his girls to the best private schools in Washington D.C. At the same time, he supports public schools that are free, so poor black kids have no choice but to go to them.

So, even though it's obvious Obama thinks government run schools aren't good enough for his girls, You'd think he'd be all in favor of vouchers, so poor black kids can get the same education as his girls. But, he can't do this. He can't because, to do so, would be to admit that government run schools are indeed liberal indoctrination systems.

Liberals don't have to worry about what kids are learning when they have 8 experts, ideally liberal experts, sitting in an office in Washington deciding what kids learn. They cannot force schools to teach their agenda. However, they can if they give "reverse incentives." By this, I mean that they tell schools if they don't do what the government orders, they will lose funds. So, they have no choice but to comply. This is how common core gets approved by schools, even though a majority of parents hate common core.

(By the way, many people think common core is math. It's not: it's an entire system of educating kids based on the liberal agenda. They just call it common core to make it sound good. It's the same as when they called Obamacare "The Affordable Care Act." It's not affordable, but it sounds good. Okay, now I need to get out of these parentheses.)

If Obama really cared about kids, he would support some other program other than public schools. Actually, some public schools are good. I mean, here in Ludington, Michigan, we are fortunate to have a good public school system. But if parents in Detroit beleive their local public schools are failing their kids, they should be able to get vouchers to send their kids to the same schools rich people send their kids to.

I mean, this makes sense. Think of it this way: you are paying taxes to send your kids to school. So, if you decide to go to a private school, that money should follow you to that private school, not stay in the public schools.

And this is not taking money away from public schools. A lot of my liberal friends say, "How are you going to make schools better by taking away money." You are not. You are creating competition. Public schools that succeed, you are going to have other schools copy the formula they use. Parents will want to send their kids to succeeding schools. The schools that are not working will either have to improve or, sure, they will have to close their doors.

If we continue going the route we have been going with public schools over the past 30 years, this means just throwing more money at it. What good does throwing more money at a system that is failing kids do? The answer is no good. Proof of this is that America has one of the worse school systems in the world, and this is true despite spending more money per pupil than nearly every other Western nation. Okay. So, more money is not the solution.

De Voss wants to return the American education system into what it was before the Department of Education was formed. She wants to return it to teachers and parents. This would make me happier, because I want a say in what my kids learn. I want them to learn about the founding fathers. I want them to learn the true interpretations of the Constitution. I do not want them learning that theories are facts, such as the one that man is creating climate change. I don't want my kids coming home from school telling me that they are concerned because their teacher told them the world was overpopulated, and that too many people means too much carbon and rising global temperatures that are going to destroy the world. Why do they tell kids this stuff?

If they can succeed in convincing kids that they are responsible for the climate, then, when they get older, they will have an easier time convincing them to pass laws and regulations. These regulations tell people what cars they can drive, what foods they can eat, and how much cows can poop.

This would not be the case if teachers and parents were in control. And, if Devos gets her way (if Trump gets his way) the Department of Education will be disbanded, and education dollars will go back to the states, teachers, and parents -- a place where it should be.

So, you can see why liberals are rioting (not protesting -- they are rioting) in the streets. They were so close to controlling everything. They were convinced Hillary was going to win, and she was going to double down on a failing Obamacare. It would have been the same as education, where they keep spending more and more money at a failing program, and nothing gets better.

So, despite their opposition, Nancy De Voss is confirmed. Then she tries to go to a public school in Washington D.C., and she is blocked by a handful of "reprobates." She is forced to go back into her SUV. One person was blocking the road shouting, "Shame! Shame! Shame!. As Rush Limbaugh said on his program on February 10, 2017:


"This is not time-honored and wonderful and great American dissent. It’s human debris who have had their minds polluted and poisoned by the American left from the education system, to media, to pop culture. They’re just sick."
You want some poll results? One poll of democrats shows that 70% of democrats support vouchers and school choice. So, the democrats in power, the protestors, are out of touch with the majority even in their own party. In North Carolina, 65% of African Americans are more likely to support candidates who support school choice. Another poll showed that 72% of African Americans support vouchers. Blacks overwhelmingly support vouchers. Black parents want to be able to choose to send their kids to the same schools rich parents send their kids to. It's not even close.

Democrats in power don't care. Democrats claim to be the party of the little people, the down-trodden, and the poor. Yet they refuse to allow parents the opportunity,of school choice. Some public schools, perhaps not all, refuse to teach kids about the greatness of their own country. They are not preparing kids for college. Some of them are in run down neighborhoods. They have created a system where kids go to schools that are run down, and parent's don't like it, but they have no say because democrats are opposed to trying anything different, like vouchers.

Vouchers would be horrible for the Teacher's Unions. It would destroy their monopoly over thought. African American mothers, for example, who are given the ability to use vouchers, choose schools the rich people go to. Most of the time, they never go back to public schools. If those schools want parents to choose them, then they have to change, and change for the better. If they don't, then they should close.

Vouchers, or similar programs, would be great for parents. It would give parents, and teachers, the ability to decide what their kids are learning. Education should not be left up to the few -- it should be in the hands of the many. That is my opinion.

Betsy De Voss wants poor kids to be able to go to the same schools as the rich kids. She has ideas, she has programs, to do exactly that. She has programs that have been tried and tested, and they work. And liberals hate the thought of that. So, they protest.

Further reading: