Cato Institute Chart of the Day

While the flat trend lines for overall achievement at the end of high school mask slight upticks for minority students (black students' scores, for instance, rose by 3-5 percent of the 500 point NAEP score scale), even those modest gains aren't attributable to federal spending. Almost that entire gain happened between 1980 and 1988, when federal spending per pupil declined.

And, in the twenty years since, the scores of African American students have drifted downward while federal spending has risen stratospherically.

I noticed recently that when talks arise about making cuts to education people cringe at the idea of cutting federal money going to help our children. Many have forgotten that there was the time when the Department of Education did not exist. Before the government convinced us that it was entirely their duty, their moral responsibility to educate are children by throwing endless sums of money at a problem which seems to get worse with each passing year. Many in my generation, kids who have grown up with an uncanny sense of entitlement not rivaled by any previous generation, question how it's possible that we managed to educate our children before 1979 the year Jimmy Carter first signed the Department of Education Organization Act into law. This is similar to the question of how anyone survived being poor before the government started its "war on poverty" or how anyone afforded a house before the government started its "affordable housing act." These questions seriously scare me because they signal that the truth about government spending is not reaching the kids in my generation. They hear only that the government is spending; not what, if anything, those expenditures have accomplished. If a kid in my class hears that the president's budget is 3.7 trillion it makes no difference to him because he has nothing with which to compare it to. I am optimistic about the future and hope that truth with shine through these liberal lies and gimmicks. My only hope is that my friends don't wake up one morning and realize that what they have is not what they bargained for.

~Danny~

Burton Folsom’s New Deal or Raw Deal

Recently, I read an excellent book by Burton Folsom titled New Deal or Raw Deal. This book analyzes Roosevelt's New Deal policies and highlights how economically and socially destructive they really were. The reason this book is so great is, for one, because it is an easy read that anyone can understand. Two, and more importantly, it covers Roosevelt's childhood and helps try to explain where his liberal philosophy originated and explain why it was wrong. For me this book couldn't have come to my attention at a better time. I first found out about this book right before my history class (With a very liberal teacher) began learning about Roosevelt and the New Deal Era. By reading this book before class I was able to avoid being brainwashed by my teacher into thinking that Roosevelt was the best president ever and that his New Deal was actually a success. Unfortunately, not to my surprise, the rest of my class was brainwashed. This is not so relevant now, but when you understand that the reigns of the nation will be in these same kid's hands in the near future it can be very disconcerting. On a better note I'm planning on using this book, with its incredible source of factual information, to write my history term paper about the new deal. I guess we can just say that this paper will be my pay back!

Health care is not a “right”

Besides doing nothing to help competition, cost, and those who are uninsured, Obamacare is based on a misconceived notion – The notion that healthcare is a god given “right” and that the only one who can provide this right is the government. Liberals constantly say “I believe that everyone should have healthcare because it is a fundamental right. Why do I have any more of a right to health than someone who is poor – we are all created equal.”

First of all healthcare is not among the god given rights provided in the Constitution. The founders, who were no less intelligent then us, did not believe that all people were given the same talents and merits and therefore not everyone was destined for the same fate. When Liberals protest that healthcare is among the most important of human rights, and that you cannot deprive anyone of it, they are wrong. There are several other, much more important fundamental preconditions of human existence, such as food, shelter, and clothing. Even though no one denies that everyone should have shelter, clothing, and food many people are homeless and starving. And yet no one suggests that you have a right to a healthy, balanced diet, or that the government would be the best at providing this for all Americans. So how is health care any different?

Secondly, and this one is hard to accept, but your mother is wrong when she says that “all people are created equal”. All people were not created equal, all people should be treated equal and not discriminated against because of their race or religion, but all people were Not created equal. For instance, I would love to be a professional baseball player, but if god hasn’t blessed me with great eye-hand coordination and a wicked arm I simply have to except that I’m not going to make it in the big leagues. This is the harsh reality of our world that has been driven out of our minds by a government who wishes to make us believe that there is some sort of “utopian society” that can only be achieved by government control. This is not true simply because god created us all in his image, but he did not create us all to be perfect.

This notion of “universality” is closely linked to the notion of “equality”, which has been the liberals talking point dating back for decades. And even today they are being disingenuous when they convince people Obamacare is going to provide “equality.” Just because there is equality does not guarantee things will be good for everyone. For instance, if they can manage to provide everyone will equal healthcare that says nothing to the fact of whether it will be good healthcare. After all 70% of Americans with health insurance already rate their coverage as good or excellent!

The liberals use this concept of equality to prey on those who don’t want to be called “unsympathetic” or “merciless”, when in fact the ones who throw in with the government are the ones lacking sympathy. If they had real compassion they wouldn’t care about proving it to the world they would rely on their own acts of kindness to speak for themselves. They would spend less time boasting about being compassionate and more time actually helping people. But you see for the left and Obama it’s all about the image of compassion and not about actually getting results. If your plan is labeled “helping the homeless”, but the plan doesn’t actually help any homeless people you shouldn’t be boasting about anything.

That is one of the key differences between Democrats and Republicans on this matter. The Republicans realize the problem with health insurance in this country just as well as the Democrats do. But the Republicans realize that their decision will affect millions of lives and it is in the American people’s best interest to take the time to get it right. However, the Democrats exploit this realization in order to grow the government and inject it into every aspect of our lives. “Social justice” and “compassion” are catalysts that the Liberals use to make themselves seem genuine and trustworthy when in fact they are only attacking what makes us such a compassionate nation in the first place, our freedom.

Alan Grayson's comments prasied instead of demonized

Alan Grayson, the Democrat who took a shot at Republicans by saying to people "Don't get sick. And if you get sick, die quickly", is being praised instead of bashed. Grayson told a crowd of 2,000 Democrats that the GOP should change its name to " The Selfish Party." What is wrong with this picture? lets break it down.

The Democrats in Washington are proposing a bill that is going to destroy privet health care, skyrocket premiums, cause care to be rationed, and destroy any chance of improving "choice and competition".... and the Republicans are the ones that want people to die quickly????

The Democrats are trying to ram through a bill that would basically put peoples lives into dollar amounts..... and the Republicans are ones who wish people would live shorter lives???

Susan MacManus, a University of South Florida political Science professor, who was at one of the Democratic conventions, said "To these people he obviously reflects reality, to others he reflects incivility"

The problem isn't that the Republicans see Grayson's comments as deliberately discourteous, it's the fact that they are just not true!

If if wasn't for Republicans, mainly Conservatives, saying "whoa slow down here!!" this bill overhauling the health care system would have been passed 3 months ago in its disastrous entirety.

There would have been no discussion as to whether the bill included tort reform, which by the way the CBO is now saying could save the administration $54 billion. There would have been no debate about whether the public option would include illegal immigrants, which we found out there was language in the bill that said they were not included. And finally there would have been no outcry from the seniors who would have been in the dark about their Medicare benefits being cut. All of this information has come about because of those pesky Conservatives and their commonsense questioning!

But of course that was the Democrats plan all along wasn't it?! Pass legislation before anyone in Washington, or America for that matter, can find out what it's all about!

But now that America is much more "sober" and the Democrats realize that there plan has been foiled what shall the DNC do next? Well, judging by Grayson's remarks it seems that the Democrats have implemented plan B.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with "Plan B" this is the plan where the Liberal Democrats try to contain the mess they have created for themselves by attacking the Republicans saying that they are either a "selfish" and "unsympathetic" bunch or that they are somehow hoping you will "die quickly". This way Democrats can gain enough support to push their agenda through before even more information comes out about their proposed overhaul of the best heath care system in the world.

Anyway I'm glad to see that at least Grayson's own supporters think everything he said in his statement was true. (Oh wait they didn't)

"You've got to break a few eggs to get noticed by the media, and if there's a little bit of controversy because one or two words are wrong, I can live with that." said Kevin Baker, 38, of Palm Beach Gardens.

I'm not gonna even mention what's wrong with those last words because you're smart enough to figure it out on your own, but I will ask you this. Since when has a Democrat ever had trouble getting noticed by the media???

How to explain whats going on to your friends

Do you feel that when you talk to your friends about what's going on in our country they put a big "I don't get it" tee shirt on? Well I do and it drives me insane!!! I can't stand the fact that when I just mention something that's happening in the news my friends look at me as if I have to be crazy about politics to listen to the news once in a while or even read the headlines in the newspaper. You don't! And then the only response I get is "yeah well they're all just silly" or my favorite "What do I care I'm just a kid". Well I'll tell you why you should care! This is not about whether you like politics or whether your parents are Republicans or Democrats. (They are not the same by the way just to let you know, Republicans don't have radical Communists in their party) But back to my point. If you care even the slightest bit about how much you are gonna have to pay in taxes when you're older, or about whether you will have a job when your older, or even about what your country is gonna look like by the time you are all grown up you will listen to whats going on around you. You would think that that statement alone would be enough to wake up even your most stubborn friend, but shockingly it is not. I have repeatedly explained to my friends (In plain English) what Obama and the left in Washington plan to do and how it will effect them and their families in the future. And yet they still dismiss me as if I'm just some sort of crazzzy nut job. Well maybe I am crazy, but these are the same people who believe that nut job Al Gore when he tells them "Don't shoot that basketball too high! You'll bring down acid rain!" Why is it that we must believe a guy wearing a tin foil hat telling us the world is gonna end unless we all run out and purchase new priuses, but we won't listen to guys who tell us to look around at what's going on for our futures sake??? But I digress (Breathhhhh everything will be alright) As hopeless as these people may seem to be the answer is not to just give up. No one likes a quitter, so instead we must persist and try harder to get the message through loud and clear. And if we have to use colorful illustrations so be it, but lets not give up on these people now because I for one don't want to have to deal with them when they're all complaining about not having a job or how high their taxes are. To those complaints my juvenal answer will be "I told you so"

We Have a Beta Male as a President

American Thinker is a great website with real Conservative writers who not only give you a Conservative opinion on things, but back it up with real facts and findings as well. Here is a pretty interesting article I read today. It was titled "Did we elect a beta male as president?" To answer that question I think the answer is obviously yes. Check out the article to understand why.

Did We Elect a Beta Male As President?

October 05, 2009

By
Greg Lewis

We're all somewhat familiar with the body language dogs display when they greet each other. The dominant alpha male approaches directly, asserting his authority, while the beta male genuflects, crouches, tucks his tail, and may even end up on his back, exposing his neck in acquiescence, making sure the alpha male knows he has no intention of challenging him. With his "we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist" opening to the world's dictators, the President is exhibiting classic beta male behavior, in essence rolling over on his back and exposing his throat to them to make sure they know he has no intention of challenging their authority.

Of course, the problem is that he's not simply exposing his throat, he's exposing America's collective throat, sending the message that he's a typical beta male intent on submitting to all the alpha male leaders around the world, and damn the consequences. His response to the discovery of Iran's newest, and heretofore "secret," nuclear facility was, as Daniel Henninger (Wall Street Journal, October 1, 2009) points out, to have our State Department offer to start a direct dialogue with the tyrannical Burmese regime.

The Obama administration has also offered conciliatory gestures to the genocidal Sudanese leader Omar Hassan al-Bashir, and it has dispatched none other than John Kerry to meet with Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad. This, of course, is not to mention his somewhat more visible overtures to the world's alpha male thugs: Obama has consorted jovially with Hugo Chavez and his counterpart Daniel Ortega, he's bowed down to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, he's agreed to halt plans to install a missile defense system in eastern Europe to placate Vladimir Putin, and he's offered the aforementioned hand to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, despite the latter's expressed unwillingness to even agree to acknowledge the truly important issue of Iran's nuclear weapons in our talks, all quintessential beta male behaviors.

While we've all been seeking a political rationale for the president's actions, his behavior goes beyond the political to something deeper and more personal: like all beta males, Barack Obama simply does not have the temperament to confront tyrannical alpha males around the globe. In this light, even his inability to work with American allies Gordon Brown and Nikolas Sarkozy is a function of his being incapable of facing down the world's tyrants: to cooperate with our allies would require Obama to display alpha male behaviors, including demonstrating courage, something he's simply not capable of doing. The president's beta-male proclivities are arguably putting the safety of his constituents, the citizens of our country, in serious jeopardy.

Another cue to this unfortunate character trait of the president's can be found in the lack of assertiveness of his oratorical style. While many people insist that Barack Obama is a wonderful speaker, in fact, he exhibits less emotional range when he addresses a crowd than his predecessor, George W. Bush, did. He may have better speechwriters than W, but his delivery is monotonic and his cadences clipped, both signs of a beta male, unsure of himself, putting his words out there more for the purpose of seeking approval than of providing leadership.

The president's characteristic head tilt when he's speaking to an audience or having to deal with a tough question when he's being interviewed (although there are certainly very few instances of his having to do this) is another sign of submissive behavior. It crops up less than a minute in during an interview with Fox News's Bill O'Reilly (YouTube - Barack Obama Interview With Bill O'Reilly Sept 4, 2008 - FNC ) in answer to O'Reilly's question, "Do you believe we're in a war on terror?" After an initial "Absolutely," the Candidate begins to hedge, his head tilts as he explains the difficulty in sorting out the good guys from the bad guys in the Middle East. Like beta males everywhere, Obama is not about to commit to words that he might have to back up with assertive action.

Being a beta male is all about developing strategies for deflecting aggression, and for this reason, beta males do have an important place in society. Within the confines of a social unit, beta-male behavior can help to defuse aggression and maintain domestic peace. But in a world where other nations' alpha-male leaders are constantly probing for even the smallest signs of weakness, having a beta male president has thrown into stark relief the dangers to which this president's unfortunate character trait is exposing his country.

To return to the canine metaphor: It's the height of folly to think that other nations won't be doing everything they can to make President Obama their bitch.

Pasted from:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/did_we_elect_a_beta_male_as_pr_1.html

Time off

Hello and Shalom aleichem to all those who read this blog!

I know I know nobody actually reads this stuff, but don't worry I'm not like Ed Schulz on Msnbc who attacks Fox News because they have higher ratings in one day than he has in an entire year! I'm not blaming my poor following on anyone other than myself, but that is not the reason for this post. Back to the person(s) who read this blog. The reason I haven't been posting often and updating my links is do to the fact that I am in the 11th grade and have a terrible amount of work to do in preparation for the SATs. I don't know if you were like John Carry and were a D student in high school, but for someone who is at least attempting to get into a good college it's a lot of work I assure you. I am going to, for my reader(s) benefit, try my very hardest to update my blog with the latest articles and news stories as much as posible. Why, you say? Well because number one, it is a very good way for me to put my thoughts on paper and help me think more clearly. But more importantly I write because I am hoping that one day a liberal is going to come across my blog in some form or another and write something stupid. In that case I consider this a part-time teaching and education center for all the liberal idiots out there. So if you do read this blog and are reading this post right now I thank you for being patient and for your continued interest in my writings. For all the rest...well we can at least be sure they are not listing to Ed Shultz.

Sincerely,
Daniel Horowitz

My Thoughts on 9/11

Wednesday, September 16, 2009. Five days after 11 terrorist carried out a successful attack on our country demolishing the World Trade Center buildings at the heart of NYC. I remember how I felt on that day and it was not the feeling of deep sadness, not yet at least. No, that feeling came later with more understanding. My first reaction was more of a feeling of great confusion. I was in the third grade enjoying a beautiful clear September day at the beginning of a new school year. Even as the attacks were carried out my classes were not interrupted and i knew nothing of the tragic event that had taken place earlier that morning. I remember going to my mom, who happened to work in my school office, during recess and seeing tears in her eyes. I asked her what was wrong and she replied " some bad people flew planes into a very important building in the city today". My first reaction was puzzlement at the reason for doing such a thing. I didn't understand that there were truly evil people, terrorists, out there who chanted "death to Americans" and praised the killing of as many innocent civilians as possible.

We all know the rest of the story that occurred just 8 years ago, so why am i telling you about the commemoration of the 9/11 attacks five days after 9/11? Well because that is how long it took for us to return back to the pre-9/11 mentality. Shortly after 9/11 we came together as a nation like I have never seen before. We stopped the bickering and fighting, picked up a shovel, and helped our fellow neighbor. Yes, 9/11 was a time of deep mourning and sadness, but what followed the 9/11 attacks was also a time of great compassion and sympathy toward our fellow man. However that moment of seemingly perfect harmony lasted all but one week. After which we went back to the social bickering as if this heinous act hadn't taken place just 5 days before. Now, 8 years after the World Trade Center attacks what do we have to show for that compassion and togetherness we felt on 9/12? Has it all since faded from our hearts and from our minds? The answer, I believe, to that question is no. It has not faded from the minds and hearts of the true American people who dropped everything and volunteered to work through the night, giving blood and sweat for their fellow man. On that day we had the very generous spirit that Obama feels he must force on us today because he believes we are incapable of having it our selves. If 9/11 was not prof that this nation is one the most compassionate caring nations on the planet I don't know what is!

So why then are we denying the fact that this is still a war on terror? And why then haven't we built the freedom towerS stronger, 30 stories higher, and with a big fat "come and try that again sign" at the top???? It is because of the politicians and the special interest groups with their dam political correctness. That is why after 8 YEARS we still have a freakin hole in the ground and are debating whether or not to call it the "freedom tower"!!! Yeah apparently we can't call it that because it might offend people. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure I don't want anyone in this country who doesn't love freedom or agree with it!! So they are the ones holding the American people back! The American people would have rebuilt the towers back up with their bare hands if they had to and they would have finished them years ago!

So what must we do from this day forward? We need to unite as a nation now more than ever, just as we did on the subsequent days after 9/11. However, we need to keep that awareness with us wherever we go not just when commemorating the attacks. We will carry on with our lives and time will fill voids in our hearts, but we must never forget the pain and suffering that we felt as a nation on that day. We must never forget the togetherness that we felt on that day because if we do, and we let our guard down, the terrorist will be knocking at our door once again and it will lead to the very downfall of this great nation.

Let us take 10 seconds from our day to pray for the victims, for their families, and for the brave men and women who put their lives in harms way on that somber day.....

Sincerely,

Daniel.Horowitz

9/12 March On Washington

Yesterday upwards of a million people marched on Washington to let their grievances be heard to a government that is out of control and is leading us down a path we do not want to travel. Here are some of the pictures of the enormous crowd that the media played off as "tens of thousands". The police even refused to take a full estimate of all the people in attendance.

These are real Americans that are angry with their government for spending money they don't have, doing a terrible job at trying to rejuvenate our economy, and making an outrageous first attempt at reforming health care. While this enormous grassroots rally was taking place in Washington Obama was off in Minneapolis giving a very unpresidential speech to a crowd of hand picked supporters. Let me ask you a question, have you ever seen a president speak and act in a way that Obama acts on a daily basis? I mean constant "town hall rallies", attacking people who disagree with him, and saying that he is going to call out republicans. What kind of president does those things. It appalls me to see that he is diminishing the great prestigiousness of the executive office and abusing his power. However, i am not surprized. Obama has shown us his radical agenda time and time again we are just refusing to listen and call him out for it.

We have sene the same reaction from Obama and the media to these opponents time and time again, they just simply ignor whats going on! How can you have an outcry like this and simply play it off as "astroturf" or a "rally against Obama". This is not about Obama, and this is not just Republicans it is Democrats and Independants as well, and this has been a long time coming! I think we need to take a page from Glenn Beck and start at the root of this conflict. What is the root of this conflict you may ask? Well Washington of course. Today we start a long and hard political fight to take back Washington from courruption, but we will get there. We will take back Washington and appoint representative who not only say they will uphold the Constitution, but actually do it.

Van Jones has layed more hints at what Obama's agenda really is than any other radical advisor in the White House!

I know I know Mark Levin is right we need expose these people for what they are and then move on! So this will be my last post on Van Jones. Unless he says something really really radical, but you know what are the chances of that???

I've been following what this guy has been saying for a while now and with every word he seem to expose Obama just a little bit more. It's almost as if with every sentence Van Jones completes, he puts another piece of the Obama socialist puzzle in place. We have to listen to this audio clip very carefully and question with boldness as Glenn Beck would say. He starts off by saying
"One of the things that has happened too often to progressives is that we don't understand the relationship between minimum goals and maximum goals." He then gives the example of how after Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat they didn't try to pass too radical of an agenda because they knew people would never stand for it. So instead they slowly took it one step at a time, not asking for too much, slowly chipping away until "complete revolution was on the table for this country." Now let me just stop here for a second is Van Jones trying to compare the revolution of giving black people equal rights to Obama's revolution of taking over health care, nationalizing EVERYTHING, and killing the privet sector? Because that's like comparing Obama's wisdom to that of Abraham Lincoln and it seems to me one of those revolutions is just a little bit more diabolical than the other. Take a wild guess at which one...

Jones then says that "we are saying we want to move from suicidal gray-capitalism to some kind of Eco-capitalism" What the hell does that mean "suicidal gray capitalism"!? How about free market capitalism Mr Van Jones, ever hear of that? Ooh that's right probably not, you were too busy becoming a COMMUNIST in jail I forgot!!!

So now we know that the Obama administration, because that's the "WE" he's referring to right, wants to kill the evil free market and replace it with some sort of Eco-capitalist market. So how do they plan to implement this plan without the support of the people who actually work in the free market? Well the same way they did it back in the 1960's of course. "So the green economy will start off as a small subset and we are going to push it and push it and push it until it becomes the engine for transforming the whole society"

You see they are laying the ground work right before our eyes today! If they are arrogant enough to just come out openly and tell us that they want to transform our nation, then they must think we are too ignorant to see whats coming. I along with many other Americans see the path they want to take us down and will not stand for it! We need to, now more than ever, listen and respond to what these people are saying. Don't take the old "I wasn't aware that was in the bill" or "how did that get in there" as answers to your questions. No, if they can't provide you with a clear concise answer demand that in 10 seconds if they don't have a truthful complete answer for you you will turn into their worst political nightmare...an angry constituent on election day!