April 19, 2004
John Leo flogs the DC press corps. Again.
Duke plans to end 8 a.m. classes because they're trying to figure out what to do to help sleep deprived students. Here's a thought: shut down all sales of beer in town at 9:00 p.m.. Trust me when I tell you that I know the Duke student body pretty well.
It is true that Americans have the rights to free speech and assembly. But we do not have the right to protest in all times and places. The Day of Silence takes place at school during classes. Teachers expect their students to speak when called upon, but will the Day of Silence become an exception? Students expect their teachers to teach, but will the Day of Silence become an excuse for teachers to cancel classes, or worse, to show inane videos?
What can you do to resist the Day of Silence? In any community, the answer is to organize a coalition of students and parents, and go straight to the local school board. Tell the school board that students do not have the right to carry on protest activities during the school day, and teachers should be expected to teach during their classes. Most importantly, demand that the school board ban all use of taxpayer money for supporting the Day of Silence.
Here's a question that comes to mind: when did our schools decide that their sole purpose in life was to promote whatever social agenda they could find rather than bothering to actually teach our children something? And lazy kids will use this as an excuse to not do the work. See if this looks too farfetched:
Teacher: Okay students, today is the day for your exam in speech class. Who wants to go first?
Student holds up sign which states that he/she is participating in the Day of Silence and therefore won't be participating.
Teacher: Oh goodness, I forgot. Silly me. All of you get an "A"
Teacher(if I were the instructor): Great. The first zero of the day. Who's next?
Vox Day offers some insight into the mind of a man. Excerpt:
Finally, it is not a bad thing to encourage the boy within the man from time to time. The man who cannot put aside the cares of supporting a family from time to time is a widow waiting to happen. The woman who not only accepts, but supports the male friendships of her husband will always be the most popular woman among the married men in her social circle. And learning even a little about football and holding a staunch opinion on which Sports Illustrated Swimsuit model is the prettiest will go a surprisingly long way in ensuring acceptance by the boys.
If a woman treats a man with civility and respect, maintains a cheerful attitude toward him and encourages him believe in himself, he will not only respond with love and affection, but will consider it an honor to lay down his life for her, both metaphorically and, if the occasion demands it, literally.
I think that I heard it put best the character Maurice on Northern Exposure:
Men are simple creatures, ruled by two things: their stomachs and their penises.
Doug Powers often makes me laugh and today's column is no different. Excerpt:
Trying to figure out what Kennedy is saying at a campaign rally often makes me appreciative of the skills of Timmy from Lassie. Where's Jon Provost when you need him?
"Ahnd ahftah muthna hahve olll crompushnin Johhhnn..."
"What is it, boy? Kerry needs our vote?"
"Nithmish nahd caheforea jah Kreee!"
"Bush must not be re-elected or there will be global Armageddon? Good boy!"
In addition to the occasionally comical slurry harangues, Ted can be absolutely shameless. When Kennedy is endorsing Kerry, he isn't even shy about touting the fact that Kerry once saved somebody from drowning this statement often causes more uneasiness and suppressed giggles in the room than the time Marilyn Monroe crawled out from under the podium after a JFK press conference.
Statements like this are the most telling symptom of Kennedy's ivory tower induced moral myopia. Ted Kennedy, without batting an eye, can proudly laud a colleague for saving someone from drowning? This takes some serious nerve right up there with Lizzy Borden praising the skillful hatchet work of Paul Bunyan.
I had noticed when Sullivan mentioned that he had an article out supporting a dollar/gallon tax on gasoline. Fisking it would have been easy. Also pointless, as Lileks rakes him over the coals better than I ever could. Excerpt:
Here I disagree. Low gas prices are bad for the economy and bad for drivers, he says - the sort of statement that makes you read everything that follows with wry detached amusement, the same way you'd regard an article on canine training that began "dogs respond remarkably well to feng shui." You read on because it can only get better.
He refers to gas as woefully undertaxed. If one uses the phrase woefully undertaxed one may be correct, but one should not be surprised when ones conservative bona fides are called into question. You could make the argument that cable TV is woefully undertaxed. Peanut butter is woefully undertaxed. Once youve identified a good that can be cured by additional taxation, well, everything is woefully undertaxed. There arent any pro-war movies being made! We could fund them with a movie tax! Popcornn is woefully undertaxed! He says:
The truly needy tend to consume less gas than their middle-class compatriots. Others say it penalizes those in remote and rural areas. So what?
Some conservatives say it's antithetical to the American Dream. Hooey.
Im not sure how I can argue with that.
89 queries taking 0.1276 seconds, 231 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.