We are witnessing a wholesale assault on truth and reality, particularly on campuses. There’s a famous line, wrongly attributed to George Orwell, that ‘in a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

In that respect, we are revolutionary reality and truth tellers. We do it every day at the blog, and in our two main projects.

• CriticalRace.org
• EqualProtect.org

In the video, Weingarten took aim at former White House Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, Manhattan Institute’s Christopher Rufo, and American Federation For Children Senior Fellow Corey DeAngelis for advocating for school choice measures.

“They have not one thing that they offer as a solution other than privatizing or voucherizing schools which is about undermining democracy and undermining civil discourse and undermining pluralism because 90% of our kids go to public schools still,” she said. “They just divide. Divide. Divide. Divide.” //

Proponents of school choice measures have rebuked Weingarten’s remarks, arguing offering more education options to families accomplishes the opposite of what the union leader claims.

“This country was founded on the principle of individual rights. There is nothing democratic about forcing kids to remain in failing schools,” Angela Morabito, a spokesperson for the Defense of Freedom Institute (DFI) and former press secretary for the U.S. Department of Education, told Crisis in the Classroom (CITC). “The right choice for our country’s future is to allow families to access the schools where their children learn best.”

“Randi’s utopia is to have every kid in America stuck in a classroom that prioritizes failing standards, identity politics, and frivolous days of the year over academic achievement,” Michele Exner, a senior advisor at Parents Defending Education (PDE) told CITC. “She was the champion of school closures and is one of the main reasons students are suffering from historic learning loss.”

Recent polling suggests support for school choice is on the rise.

Funding should follow the student, not the school. //

gibbie | December 20, 2023 at 12:27 pm
If there is such a thing as systemic racism, its best example is the teachers unions preventing economically disadvantaged black children from attending better schools. //

Milhouse in reply to ChrisPeters. | December 20, 2023 at 8:40 pm

An argument can be made for public schools, as an education can help one to provide for oneself and to, in turn, contribute to our society.

Eating can help one keep on breathing, which is necessary for the above to happen, and yet that is not an argument for public commissaries. Instead we have private supermarkets, and those who need help are given subsidies by the taxpayer so they can shop there. The same goes for shoe stores; shoes are a necessity, but we don’t use that as an argument for setting up public shoe dispensaries. We make people shop for shoes at private stores, and we help those who need it. I can’t see an argument for why education should not be the same. Make everyone shop for their children’s education at private schools, and give vouchers to those who need help affording it.

This legislation is a Joe Biden Special, signed off after a bipartisan statute was delivered to his desk. Rep. Thomas Massie attempted to defund the mandate but his amendment was defeated in a 229 - 201 vote.

The kicker is that the technology demanded by Congress to accurately detect whether a person is intoxicated or incapacitated doesn't exist yet. It's effectively Congress taking control of private industry and demanding that they meet a requirement with a technology that they now have to develop quickly, and I can't imagine it being accurate or even safe right out the gate. //

If you think this is about drunk drivers you're sadly mistaken. That's just how it's being sold. What this will swiftly develop into is a way to control the movement of the populace. This is a technology that can be abused with reckless abandon. Authorities and politicians will be able to stop your car from moving for many different reasons.

For instance, if you're suspected of belonging to a group a politician in power doesn't agree with and has labeled as dangerous, they could find an excuse to shut down your vehicle in the name of public safety. They will follow the same guidelines as red flag laws for guns, requiring you to prove that you're not a danger to the public before they reactivate your vehicle.

This could also open the door for usage limits. Politicians may attempt to push environmental policies that involve fewer cars on the road for less time, forcing your vehicle to shut down after a certain amount of miles or time in use, and pushing you to utilize public transit for the sake of the "environment."

The possibilities for expansion and abuse of this are many, but at the core of it is the ability to monitor you while you're in your car. Your car is often considered an extension of your home, and while many state laws differ in the particulars on this, your car is your private property. What the government is doing is effectively installing a monitoring system in your car by which they can watch your performance and track your movements.

Turner's bill would extend Section 702 for nine new years, not fix any of the warrantless search problems; plus, it will require hotels, fast food places, etc., with public WiFi to hand over user data on demand.

My view is simple. Section 702 needs to go away. In the words of Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." //

We have tried this experiment with warrantless searches and have seen it turn out pretty much as expected. The privacy violations will only increase as AI matures and makes more sophisticated searches possible, and more and more of our lives are conducted using smartphones and various apps. There is no reason to believe that agencies that have violated Section 702 for two decades have suddenly decided to become civil libertarians.

Speaker Johnson should show some leadership and let this bill die. But we know how this movie ends, don't we? //

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."

• William Pitt the Younger, Speech in the House of Commons, Nov 18 1783

Nikki Haley made a huge unforced error Tuesday in the 2024 Republican presidential primary when she said that one of the first things she'd do as President of the United States is require that social media companies ban anonymous accounts and that they verify all of their users by name. Haley was roundly criticized over this likely unconstitutional plan, which is so tone-deaf that one could easily believe that she just spoke without thinking and would surely issue a statement walking it back a bit.

Nope. Apparently this is a plan she'd been thinking about and developing talking points about for awhile, because in addition to her initial comments on Fox News Channel, Haley said basically the same thing on the Ruthless podcast - only worse. //

Any time there's an attempted paradigm shift in the public discourse, those leading the way are generally vilified by those who benefit from the current system. It's not easy and can be personally and professionally dangerous to express views that aren't politically correct, or to expose corruption or malfeasance. That's why three of our founding fathers wrote the Federalist Papers under the pen name "Publius." It's why Benjamin Franklin wrote letters to the editor under the name "Silence Dogood." During the Constitutional debates, dozens of people on both sides of the issue (Federalists and Anti-Federalists) used pen names to publish tracts aimed at persuading the public. Sure, it's easier these days for foreign governments to employ this type of information warfare, but it's ignorant to think it didn't happen before. We know that foreign saboteurs have plied their trade here for centuries, and we've done the same.

That Haley either doesn't know all of this, or that she pushes for such government overreach despite that knowledge, is, in my opinion, disqualifying in a Republican candidate for President of the United States.

Todd Lewis
2 days ago
A proper education is so important on so many levels. Part of a proper education is that it be Christian education. In the past most educational institutions had a self-consciously Christian ethos. Part of that ethos is that men are evil by nature and must be restrained, if not transformed. It could easily be seen that history's struggle meant the restraining of evil and encouraging the good. But you also had to understand the difference. Most people don't understand the difference anymore. For example, if someone thinks there is such a thing as "better'' socialists and that they are able to get it right this time you are seeing a depth of ignorance that cannot be plumbed.