Counterculture Con HQ

May 7, 2010

Montebello High School in California — 2006

This has been in the CCHQ vault for a while now, and it deserves to see the light of day.  In 2006, students at Montebello High School in California desecrated an American flag in what might be called an act of sedition, which was in response to proposed federal legislation regulating illegal immigration.  The image of the American flag subsumed to another on American soil is the sad, but logical and inevitable result of the Left’s obsession with racial identity politics and their failed multicultural experiment.  The attempt by Chicano activistas to impose “Mexico” on American hispanics– most whom have never even been there and have few, if any, cultural connections to it– makes me ill.

I speak for countless hispanic Americans who deplore what’s transpiring on our southern border.   We are American, not Mexicans.  Mass illegal immigration is not conducive to assimilation, but to colonization, balkanization and annexation.  This is especially true because Mexico is right across the border, rather than beyond a vast expanse of ocean as was the case with previous immigrant waves.  In fact, colonization and annexation of our Southwestern states (to them, “Aztlan”) is the stated goal of the pro-illegal immigration Chicano movement. We have their stated goals, and we have the facts on the ground.  What more do we need before we decide it’s time to take the situation seriously?  I suggest we put an end to it now, or the day will come when your children and grandchildren will live to witness our Southwestern states descend into ethnic/racial strife.

Neither you nor your friends and neighbors will see these pictures on the front cover of the New York Times, nor as the lead story on any of the major networks.  Their primary job is to manage and control you, the American citizen, not to inform you.  Their supposed interest in ratings and profits comes a distant second (unfortunately) to that imperative.  So if you want your friends to see these, it’s up to you to forward it to them.  Send it to them regardless of their race, religion, or political party affiliation.  This concerns all Americans of goodwill.  And don’t worry about “stigmatizing” latinos.  The American people aren’t stupid, and they know right from wrong.  This isn’t about race, it’s about securing our borders, enforcing our laws, and ensuring social order today and in years to come; and don’t let any traitorous chicano activista or insipid white do-gooder tell you otherwise.

May 6, 2010

Students Sent Home Over American Flag Shirts on Cinco de Mayo

By George Kiriyama — On any other day at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, Daniel Galli and his four friends would not even be noticed for wearing T-shirts with the American flag.  But Cinco de Mayo is not any typical day especially on a campus with a large Mexican American student population.

Galli says he and his friends were sitting at a table during brunch break when the vice principal asked two of the boys to remove American flag bandannas that they wearing on their heads and for the others to turn their American flag T-shirts inside out. When they refused, the boys were ordered to go to the principal’s office.

“They said we could wear it on any other day,” Daniel Galli said, “but today is sensitive to Mexican-Americans because it’s supposed to be their holiday so we were not allowed to wear it today.” The boys said the administrators called their T-shirts “incendiary” that would lead to fights on campus.

“They said if we tried to go back to class with our shirts not taken off, they said it was defiance and we would get suspended,” Dominic Maciel, Galli’s friend, said.  The boys really had no choice, and went home to avoid suspension. They say they’re angry they were not allowed to express their American pride. Their parents are just as upset, calling what happened to their children, “total nonsense.”

“I think it’s absolutely ridiculous,” Julie Fagerstrom, Maciel’s mom, said. “All they were doing was displaying their patriotic nature. They’re expressing their individuality.”  But to many Mexican-American students at Live Oak, this was a big deal. They say they were offended by the five boys and others for wearing American colors on a Mexican holiday.

“I think they should apologize cause it is a Mexican Heritage Day,” Annicia Nunez, a Live Oak High student, said. “We don’t deserve to be get disrespected like that. We wouldn’t do that on Fourth of July.”  As for an apology, the boys and their families say, “fat chance.”

“I’m not going to apologize. I did nothing wrong,” Galli said. “I went along with my normal day. I might have worn an American flag, but I’m an American and I’m proud to be an American.”  The five boys and their families met with a Morgan Hill Unified School District official Wednesday night. The district released a statement saying it does not agree with how Live Oak High School administrators handled this incident.


Ain’t multiculturalism just grand!  Racial diversity is not a problem, but cultural diversity spells the end of the Union and the modern nation state.  Unfortunately, simple-minded dolts under the spell of the multiculturalist Left don’t know the difference.  Does mass Mexican immigration promote assimilation and loyalty to their new country?  Because without loyalty to country, we end up with Iraq and Afghanistan– warring tribes sharing a common geography, and then the eventual breakup of that geography along racial/cultural lines.  In other words, the end of the Union.

H/T: paleocon

April 30, 2010

Arizona Bans Chicano “Ethnic Studies”

Has the conservative counteroffensive really begun?  Arizona is taking their fight to save their state all the way to the halls of Academia.

Arizona legislature bans ethnic-studies programs

Just a week after signing the country’s toughest immigration bill into law, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer now must decide whether to endorse another bill passed by her state legislature — one that outlaws ethnic-studies programs in public schools.  The bill forbids Arizona schools from using any curriculum that promotes “the overthrow of the United States government” or “resentment toward a race or class of people.” It also disallows any curriculum that’s “designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group” or that seeks to “advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”

Arizona’s superintendent for public instruction, Tom Horne, has said he’s backing the measure because ethnic-studies programs encourage “ethnic chauvinism”; he’s also suggested that such programs could breed secessionist sentiment among Hispanic students.

Republican state Sen. Jack Harper also voted for the bill, saying that certain Hispanic-themed ethnic-studies programs are “trying to say that somebody who came to this country illegally is somehow oppressed. That’s crazy stuff.”



Arizona is storming the culture-destroying citadel of Academia.  These “ethnic studies” programs are little more than cover for racial/ethnic separatism promoted for decades by angry, radical–and yes, thoroughly ANTI-AMERICAN– Chicano intellectuals who believe the American southwest is a conquered territory called “Aztlan” that must be returned to its rightful owner, Mexico.  They are the Louis Farrakhans of the hispanic community, and academia happily shelters them.  Simply put, Chicano “ethnic studies” is a cultural Trojan Horse whose ultimate goal is the “reconquista” of the Southwest through the inevitability of racial and cultural demographics.  But don’t take my word for it, take theirs:

There are two ways that you can gain territory from another group. One is by conquest. That’s essentially the way we took California from Mexico and… Texas as well. But what’s going on now may end up being a kind of recolonization of the Southwest, because the other way you can regain territory is by population infiltration and demographic dominance …. The United States will be faced with the problem that Canada has been faced with… and which our system is not prepared to accomodate.

And this:

Mario Barrera, a faculty member of U.C. Berkeley’s Department of Ethnic Studies, admitted that multiculturalism “would help prepare the ideological climate for an eventual campaign for ethnic regional autonomy.”31 In January 1995, El Plan de Aztlan Conference at UC Riverside resolved that “We shall overcome…by the vote if possible and violence if necessary.”32 The rise of Mexican irredentism as a serious political movement “awaits only the demographic transformation of the Southwest.”


Arizona knows EXACTLY what they’re up against.  And this:

According to legend, Aztlan was the ancestral homeland of the Aztecs which they left in journeying southward to found Tenochtitlan, the center of their new civilization, which is today’s Mexico City. Today, the “Nation of Aztlan” refers to the American southwestern states of California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, portions of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, which Chicano nationalists claim were stolen by the United States and must be reconquered (Reconquista) and reclaimed for Mexico.5 The myth of Aztlan was revived by Chicano political activists in the 1960s as a central symbol of Chicano nationalist ideology. In 1969, at the Chicano National Liberation Youth Conference in Denver, Rodolfo “Corky” Gonzales put forth a political document entitled El Plan de Aztlan (Spiritual Plan of Aztlan).6 The Plan is a clarion call to Mexican-Americans to form a separate Chicano nation.


Three cheers for Arizona.

The American southwest has put up with this crap for DECADES, and they’re fed up with it.  Arizona knows EXACTLY who these seditious bastards are and what they’re up to, even if the rest of America criticizes them from afar in their UTTER ignorance of what’s happening in our Southwestern states.  America is a multiracial country, and that’s fine.  But that should not be used as cover for the radical multiculturalism promoted by seditious Chicano activistas whose ultimate goal is the destruction of the Union.

April 12, 2010

Teachers, Leave those kidz Alone.

This one’s right out of the Twilight Zone.  Teachers forced to smile, and pupils armed with camera phones to enforce it.


Teachers at a secondary school have been ordered to smile at pupils at the beginning of every lesson, and to avoid making children “bored” by setting word that is too hard or too easy.

The orders were made in a memo from a senior teacher to staff at Buile Hill Visual Arts College in Salford, as part of an initiative to give pupils more say in how the school is run.  The note, listing student “entitlements” and issues arising from “student voice discussions”, told teachers: “Please don’t be surprised if you asked to explain your actions if you are found not to be working to the agreed expectations and supporting all colleagues in the school.”

A teacher at Buile Hill told the Daily Mail the management at the school had left staff feeling “undervalued” and “undermined”.  The incident came after Government initiatives to hand more power to pupils in respect of their schooling, which have been attacked for allegedly lessening the authority of teachers.

On Monday, it was reported that 20 pupils at a secondary school in Kent were issued with iPhones, enabling them to give senior staff instant reports on teachers. In one episode, a candidate for a teaching job was told to sing Bad, the Michael Jackson song, during an interview by a student panel, and was not offered the job after refusing to do so.

Ed Balls, the schools secretary, said some schools’ behaviour was “completely wrong” and “absurd”.  He said: “The idea that you would give out iPhones to secretly spy on teachers, that would be in my view, completely wrong. Any head teacher doing that, I think needs to look hard at themselves and consider the way in which they are doing things.”


This might make perfect sense to some baby boomers raised on Leftism and Pink Floyd’s “The Wall,” and whose worldview abhors “authority” and rejects the biblical notion of original sin.  Children, they believe, are only corrupted when the “society” (here, teachers) sink their nasty claws into them.  They believe it takes the purity of children to redeem us.  Below, one of those camera-armed adorable little tykes shows his schoolteacher around the place:

April 5, 2010

Study: Abuse in Schools 100 Times Worse than by Priests

This article puts into perspective the scourge that is pedophilia within the Catholic Church, and the Liberal Media’s obsession with it.  The Left’s obsession with pedophile priests has nothing to do with concern for children, and everything to do with their hatred of the Catholic Church, and Christianity in general.

WASHINGTON, DC, April 1, 2010 – In the last several weeks such a quantity of ink has been spilled in newspapers across the globe about the priestly sex abuse scandals, that a casual reader might be forgiven for thinking that Catholic priests are the worst and most common perpetrators of child sex abuse.

But according to Charol Shakeshaft, the researcher of a little-remembered 2004 study prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, “the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.”

After effectively disappearing from the radar, Shakeshaft’s study is now being revisited by commentators seeking to restore a sense of proportion to the mainstream coverage of the Church scandal.  According to the 2004 study “the most accurate data available at this time” indicates that “nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career.”

“Educator sexual misconduct is woefully under-studied,” writes the researcher. “We have scant data on incidence and even less on descriptions of predators and targets.  There are many questions that call for answers.“  In an article published on Monday, renowned Catholic commentator George Weigel referred to the Shakeshaft study, and observed that “The sexual and physical abuse of children and young people is a global plague” in which Catholic priests constitute only a small minority of perpetrators.

While Weigel observes that the findings of Shakeshaft’s study do nothing to mitigate the harm caused by priestly abuse, or excuse the “clericalism” and “fideism” that led bishops to ignore the problem, “The narrative that has been constructed is often less about the protection of the young (for whom the Catholic Church is, by empirical measure, the safest environment for young people in America today) than it is about taking the Church down,” he writes.

Weigel observes that priestly sex abuse is “a phenomenon that spiked between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s but seems to have virtually disappeared,” and that in recent years the Church has gone to great lengths to punish and remove priestly predators and to protect children. The result of these measures is that “six credible cases of clerical sexual abuse in 2009 were reported in the U.S. bishops’ annual audit, in a Church of some 65,000,000 members.”

Despite these facts, however, “the sexual abuse story in the global media is almost entirely a Catholic story, in which the Catholic Church is portrayed as the epicenter of the sexual abuse of the young.” Outside of the Church, Shakeshaft is not alone in highlighting the largely unaddressed, and unpublicized problem of child sex abuse in schools. Sherryll Kraizer, executive director of the Denver-based Safe Child Program, told the Colorado Gazette in 2008 that school employees commonly ignore laws meant to prevent the sexual abuse of children.

“I see it regularly,” Kraizer said. “There are laws against failing to report, but the law is almost never enforced. Almost never.”  “What typically happens is you’ll have a teacher who’s spending a little too much time in a room with one child with the door shut,” Kraizer explained. “Another teacher sees it and reports it to the principal. The principal calls the suspected teacher in and says ‘Don’t do that,’ instead of contacting child protective services.”

“Before you know it, the teacher is driving the student home. A whole series of events will unfold, known to other teachers and the principal, and nobody contacts child services before it’s out of control. You see this documented in records after it eventually ends up in court.”

“Isn’t it news that the number of public school students who have been abused by a school employee is more than 100 times greater than the number of minors who have been abused by priests?” he asked.  “All those reporters, columnists, talking heads, attorneys general, D.A.’s, psychologists and victims groups who were so quick on the draw to get priests have a moral obligation to pursue this issue to the max.  If they don’t, they’re a fraud.”


Where is the Lib Media in all this?  The answer is they will never focus any attention on the vastly greater incidences of pedophilia (and coverup) in the public schools because they consider the public school system a Liberal project in direct competition with Catholic schools.  Just like Abu-Graib was headlines for 60 days straight, remember that?  So will the Catholic Church be.  It’s the new Abu Graib.  Why?  Because that’s how the Lib Media rolls!  They aim to damage, not inform.

March 24, 2010

The Leftwing riots Again, shuts down Ann Coulter’s speech

Hippie: Free speech for me, not for you

Campus liberals get their fascism on.

DRUDGE: Flash:  Ann Coulter Ottawa speech shut down… 2,000 protesters surrounding building with rocks and sticks — pulled fire alarm in building. Blogs calling for Coulter to be hurt.  Cops shut it down! MPs were banned from going, Coulter denounced by an MP in the Parliament.

More details here:

OTTAWA — After protesters at the University of Ottawa prevented Ann Coulter from giving a speech Tuesday night, the American conservative writer said it proved the point she came to make — free speech in Canada leaves much to be desired.

Then she said what she really thought of the student protesters who surrounded Marion Hall, making it to unsafe, in the view of her bodyguard, for the pundit to attempt entry.  “The University of Ottawa is really easy to get into, isn’t it?” she said in an interview after the cancelled event. “I never get any trouble at the Ivy League schools. It’s always the bush league schools.”

Coulter said she has been speaking regularly at university campuses for a decade. While she has certainly been heckled, she said this is the first time an engagement has been cancelled because of protesters.  “This has never, ever, ever happened before — even at the stupidest American university,” she said.

Coulter remarked on the reception she has had since entering the country.  “Since I’ve arrived in Canada, I’ve been denounced on the floor of Parliament — which, by the way, is on my bucket list — my posters have been banned, I’ve been accused of committing a crime in a speech that I have not yet given, I was banned by the student council, so welcome to Canada!”

The “accusation” of which Coulter speaks is a reference to an e-mail she received from University of Ottawa vice-president and provost Francois Houle on Friday, warning her that freedom of speech is defined differently in Canada than in the U.S. and that she should take care not to step over the line.

Coulter said that letter set the tone for and encouraged the protesters. She said it’s well known on the campus speaking circuit that conservatives need to travel with security staff, as she did.

“I’m pretty sure little Francois A-Houle does not need to travel with a bodyguard,” she said. “I would like to know when this sort of violence, this sort of protest, has been inflicted upon a Muslim — who appear to be, from what I’ve read of the human rights complaints, the only protected group in Canada. I think I’ll give my speech tomorrow night in a burka. That will protect me.”

Canadian conservative political commentator Ezra Levant, the other speaker travelling with Coulter on the three-city tour, presented by the International Free Press Society of Canada, told the half-filled hall that no more people would be able to enter and that Coulter had been advised it would not be safe for her to appear.

Coulter’s bodyguard ultimately made the judgment, after conferring with security staff on site.

In a short speech, Levant said Tuesday was “an embarrassing day for the University of Ottawa and their student body, who could not debate Ann Coulter . . . who chose to silence her through threats and intimidation, just like their vice-president did.”

Levant laid the blame squarely on Houle.  “A fish rots from the head down,” he said. “Francois Houle got his wish. He telegraphed to the community that the University of Ottawa is not a place for free debate.”  Houle could not be reached for comment Tuesday night.  Levant said the spectacle showed “just how eroded our Canadian values of free speech have become” — especially on university campuses.

“I think this has turned into a teaching moment for the entire country, a reminder that freedom of speech is a Canadian value,” he said.  Rita Valeriano was one of several protesters inside the hall who, with chants of “Coulter go home!” shouted down the International Free Press Society of Canada organizer who was addressing the crowd.

Valeriano, a 19-year-old sociology and women’s studies student, said later that she was happy Coulter was unable to speak the “hatred” she had planned to.  “On campus, we promise our students a safe and positive space,” she said. “And that’s not what (Coulter) brings.”

Topan was pleased to hear the students behind her shout, “Hate speech cancelled!” in unison.  “I think that’s great. I think we accomplished what we were here to do, to ensure that we don’t have her discriminatory rhetoric on our campus,” she said.  Jonathan Reid, 18, a Carleton political science student and a fan of Coulter, brought a book to be signed.


Don’t forget, gentle readers, you are the violent and intolerant ones!  lol  That’s their story, and they’re sticking to it!  But I get that Ann Coulter is a bomb thrower.  I get why she pisses Libs off.  She tweaks them and she provokes them.  It’s obvious she isn’t trying to make nice with them.  I get all that.  But she’s not anymore controversial or offensive than, say, a Bill Maher is.  He hates us, and we loathe him right back.  End of story.  I don’t see any conservatives driving him out or shutting him down, do you?  That’s the difference between conservatives today (who are basically JFK Liberals), and what counter culture Liberalism has become.  That’s why conservative speakers need bodyguards on a university campus, while nobody else does, not even Islamists.  Can you imagine, an Islamist is safer on a university campus than a christian conservative?  Truly we have lost the culture.  We have lost the West.  Long live the Caliphate.

March 17, 2010

Post-gender: Mixed dorm rooms gaining acceptance

Academia still at the cutting edge of cultural evolution, welcome to post-gender America.

In the 1970s, many U.S. colleges moved from having only single-sex dormitories to providing coed residence halls, with male and female students typically housed on alternating floors or wings. Then came coed hallways and bathrooms, further shocking traditionalists. Now, some colleges allow undergraduates of opposite sexes to share a room.

College officials say the movement began mainly as a way to accommodate gay, bisexual and transgender students who may feel more comfortable living with a member of the opposite sex. Most schools say they discourage couples from participating, citing emotional and logistical problems of breakups. Officials say most heterosexuals in the programs are platonic friends.

“College students are adults,” said Chang, who is gay and is now a law student at Rutgers University in New Jersey. “They have every single right to choose the person they feel most comfortable living with.”  He estimates that at schools where the option exists, only 1% to 3% of students living on campus choose a roommate of the opposite sex.

“If we are going into a post-gender world, then the regulation of private behavior is just not practical,” he said.

But at colleges, he said, “I think those old-fashioned ways of thinking are kind of dissipating. . . . Over the years, this division between men and women, which was so big, is slowly closing.” Eland’s and Pronto’s living arrangement won’t last long.  Both will be studying overseas next fall, she in Spain, he in Costa Rica, and they are not sure where — or with whom — they will live when they return to school.


March 3, 2010

SecProgs: Homeschooling promotes “insularity”

The Romeikes: cultural refugees

SecProgs create the West’s first refugees since WWII:

The Romeikes are not your typical asylum seekers. They did not come to the U.S. to flee war or despotism in their native land. No, these music teachers left Germany because they didn’t like what their children were learning in public school – and because homeschooling is illegal there.

“It’s our fundamental right to decide how we want to teach our children,” says Uwe Romeike, an Evangelical Christian and a concert pianist who sold his treasured Steinway to help pay for the move.  Romeike decided to uproot his family in 2008 after he and his wife had accrued about $10,000 in fines for homeschooling their three oldest children and police had turned up at their doorstep and escorted them to school. “My kids were crying, but nobody seemed to care,” Romeike says of the incident.

One of the Romeikes’ concerns was about their kids getting bullied. But their main objection involved what was being taught in the classroom. “The curriculum goes against our Christian values,” Uwe says. “German schools use textbooks that force inappropriate subject matter onto young children and tell stories with characters that promote profanity and disrespect.”

And then there are the social aspects of going to school. Homeschooling parents tend to want to shield their children from negative influences. But this quest often runs counter to the idea that schools represent society and help promote tolerance. “No parental couple can offer a breadth of education [that can] replace experienced teachers,” says Kraus, of the German Teachers’ Association. “Kids also lose contact with their peers.”

Concerns that homeschooling could lead to insularity – or worse, as Kraus puts it, “could help foster the development of a sect” – are shaping policy debates in European countries. In Britain, for example, Parliament is considering legislation that would create a new monitoring system to ensure that homeschooled kids get a suitable education.

In Sweden, where parents have to apply for permission to teach their children at home, the government is planning to impose even tougher restrictions on homeschoolers. And in Spain, parents are not allowed to educate their children at home. Period. If a child has special needs that prevent him from attending school, a teacher will be sent to his home.

By contrast, homeschooling is legal in all 50 U.S. states, some of which don’t require families to notify authorities of their intent to teach their children at home. Tennessee is among the states that require some form of notice as well as periodic assessment tests.


Notice in their stated objections there is nothing to suggest home schoolers are any less prepared academically.  They are in fact some of our better prepared students when they hit college, and consistently outperform students from traditional school environments. The main concerns the SecProgs seem to have with home schooling is that it may promote cultural “insularity”.  As if such a thing is a crime and not a virtue in this post-modern cultural sewer they’re attempting to foist on us.  But if, on the other hand, said insularity were the result of muslim ghettoization instead of christian homeschooling, that would be called “diversity”!  And “multiculturalism”!  See how that works, gentle readers?  Christianity is sectarian insularity, while Islam is religious diversity and multiculturalism!   Heads they win, tails you lose!  When the SecProgs came calling on the Romeike’s, their first mistake was being Christian.  Their second was not showing up at the door under a burqa.

February 24, 2010

SecProgs: Ten Commandments Irrelevant

Every day the Secular Progressives of academia provide us with grist for the mill.  Here a survey reveals a little bit of the mindset of the Academy and the impact having a college education makes on people’s beliefs about God and country.

( College professors are more likely than the average person to believe that the Ten Commandments are irrelevant today — and to think that America is a corrupting influence on good people, according to a new study released Monday.

Those who teach on American college campuses are more likely to agree with the statements “America corrupts otherwise good people” and  “The Ten Commandments are irrelevant today,” according to the report, which was unveiled at a news conference at The Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., conducted  by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, an educational organization based in Wilmington, Del.

Dr. Richard Brake, director of ISI’s Culture of Enterprise Initiative, cautioned that the survey results DO NOT say that all–or even most–college teachers think that America corrupts otherwise good people — or that the Ten Commandments are irrelevant.  “But they are more likely to think that having taught college, and they are more likely to think that compared to the rest of the population,” Brake said.

Brake explained that ISI randomly sampled 2,508 Americans from all walks of life, asking them 39 questions designed to elicit their beliefs, including the question: “(Do you agree or disagree): America corrupts otherwise good people.”

“When we filtered all those other impacts that might influence the way you might answer that question and just looked at the impact of being a teacher in college, we found that there were six propositions that (teaching at a college) had a significant statistical influence on. Number one was, ‘America corrupts otherwise good people.’

“Being a college teacher made them more likely to agree with that proposition,” Brake added.

Likewise, professors were also more likely than other Americans to agree with the statement: “The Ten Commandments are irrelevant for today.”  “Now, again, even college professors don’t (all) think the Ten Commandments are totally irrelevant, but they believe that much more so than the regular population.” Brake told

College professors, according to the report, were also more likely to agree with the statement: “Educators should instill more doubt in students and reject certainty.”  That’s not surprising, Brake said, given that today’s professoriate was trained from the 60’s and 70’s onward to be skeptical, adhering to the mantra of “Question Authority.”  “These are the people that are now our professors–the ones that said ‘Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Civ has got to go,” Brake told

In 2006 and 2007, ISI administered a 60-question multiple-choice exam testing 14,000 college freshmen and seniors on their knowledge of  American history, government, foreign affairs and market economics. The students failed on average in both years.In 2008, the focus shifted toward comparing the civic literacy of college graduates to non-college graduates. Seventy-one percent of Americans taking the test flunked and college students were not much more knowledgeable about American history and institutions than other citizens.

In 2010,  the study’s principal findings, Brake said, are that those who possess college degrees are more likely than those who don’t to favor same-sex marriage and abortion on demand, and less likely to agree that “anyone can succeed in America with hard work and perseverance” or that teachers should be allowed to lead prayers in public schools.

The rest, here.

Well there you have it.  The more edumacated you are the less you give a rat’s ass about the very foundation of Western culture–The Ten Commandments.   It seems to me the Academy goes out of its way to prove the tenuous link between a person’s wisdom and his intelligence or education.  If there is any correlation at all you might be forgiven for thinking it’s an inverse one.

Notice also their hatred for America is right up there with their disdain for the Bible.  The reasons are manyfold.  Their contempt for regular Americans and their backward “desert religion” (that’s how they see christianity), even though they will deny till they’re blue in the face America is a christian nation; our foreign policy which doesn’t tilt Left enough for them; our capitalist system which will never be quite socialist enough for their tastes (compare the welfare state of present-day America to how it was before the New Deal).  In short, we aren’t the SecProg utopia of their fantasies yet.  But although they believe America “corrupts” you, don’t you dare question their patriotism!  Hoo boy!  lol.  Try to make sense of that one if you can.

It boils down to this, gentle readers.  Secular Progressivism has become a replacement religion to these folks.   Everybody has got to believe in something higher.   The result is that Christianity has been placed in direct competition with these Utopians and their Earthly religion.  I don’t think it had to be that way, at least not in the U.S. which never had a state Church propping up the status quo.  But that’s how it ended up.  They believe Christianity stands in the way.  Thus they have made it a contest between the two– their religion vs ours.  And because you cannot serve two masters, you have to choose one.  These intellectuals have chosen their’s, and so have we.  We are at odds, and there is no avoiding it.

These are the people educating your children and future generations of the West.  Your little Johnny goes off to college, and he never comes back.  So parents, choose wisely where you decide to send your money.  Because everything you taught little Johnny to believe is up for grabs once he falls into their clutches.   The Left’s fertility rate is far lower than the Right’s.  This is how they keep up with us.  You have the child and raise him, then send him off to replenish the Left’s diminishing ranks after you did all the hard work.  Works out pretty good for them!

February 18, 2010

When Do Liberals Favor Teaching Religion in Schools?

Filed under: Education, Religion — Tags: — Jesusland @ 00:05

When are Liberals in favor of teaching religion in schools?  When it’s not Christianity!

GOLDIE HAWN is in talks to set up a Buddhist school in the United Kingdom.

The actress’ Hawn Foundation already teaches kids Buddhist techniques in schools across America, and now she wants to take the initiative across the Atlantic, and use the teachings to help British children build social and emotional stability – and curb violent outbursts in the classroom and playground.

Hawn says, “We need to rethink our whole approach to classroom education, integrating neuroscience with the latest social and emotional learning techniques.

“A peaceful, happy child is the first step towards a peaceful world.”


It’s not “religion” they want to keep out of schools, gentle readers, it’s Christianity.  In fact, that’s why they love “diversity” and multiculturalism so much.  Why?  Because it’s not Christianity!  Sadly, Europe is so deep in the multiculti thrall that even some UK conservatives have expressed interest in the idea.

February 11, 2010

Secular Progressives Sexualizing Your Children

In the early days of the sex ed debate, traditionalists would challenge the new schoolers with the question, “How young is too young to begin teaching kids about sex?  13?  12?”  The very notion that kids so young should be exposed to sex was considered outrageous and extreme.  They never did get an answer.  To be fair though, the question was only rhetorical.  But it was also scarily prophetic.

( — A new report from the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) says comprehensive sex education should be provided to children as young as 10 years old but abstinence-based sex education as promoted by religious groups, such as the Catholic Church and Islamic schools, is ineffective and should not be utilized.

“Young people have the right to be fully informed about sexuality and to have access to contraceptives and other services,” said Bert Koenders, minister for Development Cooperation for the Netherlands government, in the foreword to the report, “Stand & Deliver: Sex, Health and Young People in the 21st Century.”

“These rights are enshrined in various internationally agreed human rights conventions and treaties, but — unfortunately — they are still not universally respected,” wrote Koenders.  The report says, “Culture, religion and traditions are some of the biggest obstacles in implementing sexual and reproductive health programmes for young people.”

“Currently, many religious teachings deny the pleasurable and positive aspects of sex and limited guidelines for sexual education often focus on abstinence before marriage (although evidence shows this strategy has been ineffective in many settings),” claims the IPPF. “The reality is, young people are sexual beings and many of them are religious as well. There is a need for pragmatism, to address life as it is and not as it might be in an ideal world.”

“The entire program is based on a faulty assumption,” said Donohue. “IPPF says that, ‘The taboo on youth sexuality is one of the key forces driving the AIDS epidemic and high rates of teenage pregnancy and maternal mortality.’ Nonsense. In the 1950s, there was no sex education in the schools, the pill was not commercially available and AIDS didn’t exist. Yet the out-of-wedlock birth rate was comparatively miniscule and sexually transmitted diseases were relatively rare. All because of taboos.”

Ok, we get it.  Secular progressives are kooks and perverts on a crusade to redefine what’s normal (or destroy “normal” altogether).  It’s an upside down world we now live in, gentler readers; where the culture infantilizes adults and sexualizes our children.  Read the rest, here.

« Newer Posts