STEFAN NICOLA of UPI International asks the question: "Does Europe face a clash of cultures?"
United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - Analysis: Islamophobia rising in Europe?
31 January 2006
20 January 2006
Study: Most College Students Lack Skills - Yahoo! News
Study: Most College Students Lack Skills - Yahoo! News
I'm shocked! Shocked! This is the most upsetting news I've seen in, umm, about ten minutes.
I am jesting, of course. Why should I, or anyone for that matter, be surprised at a story like this? American public schools are dismally poor at graduating students with even a modicum of traditional skills such as reading, writing and 'rithmatic, so why should those same students fare any better once they get to college?
This quote really makes me cringe:
"Most students at community colleges and four-year schools showed intermediate skills. That means they can do moderately challenging tasks, such as identifying a location on a map" [emphasis mine].
Since when is identifying a location on a map "moderately challenging"? I suppose it is to a fifth grader. The really tough assignments, that require really "proficient" skills, are interpreting a table about exercise and blood pressure, or understanding the arguments of newspaper editorials (oh, come on!) and comparing credit card offers with different interest rates and annual fees. Okay, so maybe that last one is a bit of a challenge, given the abstruse and convoluted way the credit card companies present those offers.
Our public education system needs to be scrapped, or completely overhauled. John Stossel of ABC's "2020" gave an excellent expose of the public system, and demonstrated quite well that where there is competition (in the form of vouchers) that students do much better. I agree. The only way to improve the public schools in this country is to introduce competition into the system. This will weed out the poorer performing teachers and educrats, and then at least some of our students will get a decent education.
Update: here is a great quote by John Stossel that I pulled from The Patriot Post:
"Not enough money for education? It's a myth. The truth is, public schools are rolling in money. If you divide the U.S. Department of Education's figure for total spending on K-12 education by the department's count of K-12 students, it works out to about $10,000 per student. Think about that! For a class of 25 kids, that's $250,000 per classroom. This doesn't include capital costs. Couldn't you do much better than government schools with $250,000? You could hire several good teachers; I doubt you'd hire many bureaucrats. Government schools, like most monopolies, squander money. America spends more on schooling than the vast majority of countries that outscore us on the international tests. But the bureaucrats still blame school failure on lack of funds, and demand more money." [emphasis mine]
I'm shocked! Shocked! This is the most upsetting news I've seen in, umm, about ten minutes.
I am jesting, of course. Why should I, or anyone for that matter, be surprised at a story like this? American public schools are dismally poor at graduating students with even a modicum of traditional skills such as reading, writing and 'rithmatic, so why should those same students fare any better once they get to college?
This quote really makes me cringe:
"Most students at community colleges and four-year schools showed intermediate skills. That means they can do moderately challenging tasks, such as identifying a location on a map" [emphasis mine].
Since when is identifying a location on a map "moderately challenging"? I suppose it is to a fifth grader. The really tough assignments, that require really "proficient" skills, are interpreting a table about exercise and blood pressure, or understanding the arguments of newspaper editorials (oh, come on!) and comparing credit card offers with different interest rates and annual fees. Okay, so maybe that last one is a bit of a challenge, given the abstruse and convoluted way the credit card companies present those offers.
Our public education system needs to be scrapped, or completely overhauled. John Stossel of ABC's "2020" gave an excellent expose of the public system, and demonstrated quite well that where there is competition (in the form of vouchers) that students do much better. I agree. The only way to improve the public schools in this country is to introduce competition into the system. This will weed out the poorer performing teachers and educrats, and then at least some of our students will get a decent education.
Update: here is a great quote by John Stossel that I pulled from The Patriot Post:
"Not enough money for education? It's a myth. The truth is, public schools are rolling in money. If you divide the U.S. Department of Education's figure for total spending on K-12 education by the department's count of K-12 students, it works out to about $10,000 per student. Think about that! For a class of 25 kids, that's $250,000 per classroom. This doesn't include capital costs. Couldn't you do much better than government schools with $250,000? You could hire several good teachers; I doubt you'd hire many bureaucrats. Government schools, like most monopolies, squander money. America spends more on schooling than the vast majority of countries that outscore us on the international tests. But the bureaucrats still blame school failure on lack of funds, and demand more money." [emphasis mine]
18 January 2006
Since when do we have a "right" to die?
Court upholds US right-to-die law - World - smh.com.au
The US Supreme Court held that the federal government does not have the right to interfere in the way states regulate the practice of medicine and the licensing of doctors. Basically this means that doctors in Oregon (and soon elsewhere) can dispense killer drugs to people they deem as being "terminal". Supposedly this will only be at the behest of the person who is dying anyway, a kind of "assisted suicide".
My question is this: since when do we have a "right" to die, or more accurately stated, a right to take our own lives?
The last time I looked at the Constitution, I didn't see anything that looked like a right to suicide. There are rights listed there, such as the right to free exercise of religion, the right of free speech, the right of a free press, the right to keep and bear arms, etc. Nothing about a right to die. I guess it's like the right to kill certain persons that the justices somehow "found" in the Constitution back in 1973.
The bottom line for me is this: Only the Creator of life has the right to give it and and take it away. Sometimes he delegates the authority to take life to human governments. He never delegates such authority to human individuals. When one human takes another human's life, and that human is not acting as an agent of a legitimate government, then the act is called murder, or homicide, or something along those lines.
God does not grant us a "right to die". He also does not grant us a right to assist another person in committing suicide. Suicide is murder - the unlawful taking of a person's life - even if that person is you.
The laws of this land are ultimately based on the fact that there is a universal Law-Giver. This remains true regardless of who believes it or is even aware of the fact. This is what makes abortion wrong, and it is what makes suicide wrong, no matter what the Supreme Court says.
God says "You shall not committ murder" in Exodus 20:13. God's law trumps man's law every time.
The US Supreme Court held that the federal government does not have the right to interfere in the way states regulate the practice of medicine and the licensing of doctors. Basically this means that doctors in Oregon (and soon elsewhere) can dispense killer drugs to people they deem as being "terminal". Supposedly this will only be at the behest of the person who is dying anyway, a kind of "assisted suicide".
My question is this: since when do we have a "right" to die, or more accurately stated, a right to take our own lives?
The last time I looked at the Constitution, I didn't see anything that looked like a right to suicide. There are rights listed there, such as the right to free exercise of religion, the right of free speech, the right of a free press, the right to keep and bear arms, etc. Nothing about a right to die. I guess it's like the right to kill certain persons that the justices somehow "found" in the Constitution back in 1973.
The bottom line for me is this: Only the Creator of life has the right to give it and and take it away. Sometimes he delegates the authority to take life to human governments. He never delegates such authority to human individuals. When one human takes another human's life, and that human is not acting as an agent of a legitimate government, then the act is called murder, or homicide, or something along those lines.
God does not grant us a "right to die". He also does not grant us a right to assist another person in committing suicide. Suicide is murder - the unlawful taking of a person's life - even if that person is you.
The laws of this land are ultimately based on the fact that there is a universal Law-Giver. This remains true regardless of who believes it or is even aware of the fact. This is what makes abortion wrong, and it is what makes suicide wrong, no matter what the Supreme Court says.
God says "You shall not committ murder" in Exodus 20:13. God's law trumps man's law every time.
17 January 2006
Did the Chinese Really Discover America?
Chinese map claims to back theory that China discovered America - Yahoo! News
I read parts of Gavin Menzies' book awhile back. He has a very facinating theory that Chinese sailors and explorers discovered America about seventy years before Columbus. According to him, they also planted colonies in various places, but were never able to maintain contact with them due to a changing political climate back home.
I read parts of Gavin Menzies' book awhile back. He has a very facinating theory that Chinese sailors and explorers discovered America about seventy years before Columbus. According to him, they also planted colonies in various places, but were never able to maintain contact with them due to a changing political climate back home.
03 January 2006
Self-help's big lie - Los Angeles Times
From the "I can't believe I'm reading this in the L.A. Times" category:
Self-help's big lie - Los Angeles Times
This is some very common sense, and refreshing, reading. I'm really surprised it made it into such a left-coast newspaper. I only hope that the educrats and teachers who might happen to read this will sit up and take notice.
Self-help's big lie - Los Angeles Times
This is some very common sense, and refreshing, reading. I'm really surprised it made it into such a left-coast newspaper. I only hope that the educrats and teachers who might happen to read this will sit up and take notice.
07 December 2005
Present or not, Saddam's trial to continue - World - theage.com.au
What I want to know is, why don't they just drag the man's butt in there and force him to attend the trial? Since when do defendants in a trial get to set the rules? What kind of crazy system do they have over there, anyway?
24 August 2005
Vacation Pictures
I decided to take a few pictures while we are here, so I started with some shots of Schatzie. Here is a nice one outside our hotel:
23 August 2005
On Vacation
MaryAnn and I are taking some time off for "R & R" - reading and relaxation. Right now we are in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Not exactly your ideal resort getaway spot, but the weather is beautiful and the price was right. Schatzie is along with us, but she doesn't know how to read, so she is just relaxing.
We are staying in a Candlewood Suites hotel, which is ok. The first night we got here, the room
air conditioner wasn't working right, so we had to move to another room. Unfortunately, we didn't figure that out until AFTER we unpacked everything, so moving into a different room was quite a hassle. Fortunately, it was just across the hall, so we didn't have to go very far. We also got an upgrade to a larger suite for the same price, so it worked out ok.
We found a neat little used book store / coffee shop called "The Attic". Why they call it the attic, I don't know. There didn't appear to be anything other than the ground floor, and it didn't look like an attic. However, I picked up some pretty good books at a cheap price, so who cares what they call the place! On the window is painted the words "Good Books - Great Coffee". I told MaryAnn that two of the most pleasant sounding words in the English language are "Books and Coffee". If I ever open up a book store, I think I'll call it "B.C.".
Here are the books I picked up:
Faith Alone by R.C. Sproul
The Talmud and the Internet by Jonathan Rosen
Introduction to St. Thomas Aquinas ed. by Anton C. Pegis
The Contemporary Christian by J.R.W. Stott
The Matter Myth by Paul Davies and John Gribbin
God - The Evidence by Patrick Glynn
Biblical Preaching by Haddon Robinson
I've finished reading the book by Patrick Glynn. He is a recovered atheist who posits that we are living in a "post-secular" world. The sub-title of the book is "The Reconciliation of Faith and Reason in a Postsecular World". I thought it was a good read, although much of the information I have read previously in other books. I'm not very good at book reviews, so if you're interested you can read some good (and not so good) reviews here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0761519645/104-2112399-0537549?v=glance
I have started reading The Matter Myth by Davies and Gribbin. I know its a bit outdated (it was published in 1992) but I have seen the book referenced by other authors enough times that I thought it would be a good idea to read it. Read some reviews here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0671728415/qid=1124838850/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-2112399-0537549?v=glance&s=books
I'm also reading some books that I brought with me:
The God Who Risks by John Sanders
Encountering Evil - Live Options in Theodicy ed. by Stephen T. Davis
Stone Campbell Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1
Across the Spectrum by Greg Boyd and Paul Eddy
The Canon of the New Testament by Bruce Metzger
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades by Robert Spencer
Another book that I bought to read on vacation, but that I finished before we left, was a book called
Freakonomics : A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything by Levitt and Dubner. This was an interesting book, especially the authors' conclusions about cause of the dramatic decline in the youth crime rate in the 90's. Whether or not his conclusions are true, it is an interesting (and troubling) hypothesis. A recommended read. Here are some reviews: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/006073132X/ref=cm_rev_prev/104-2112399-0537549?%5Fencoding=UTF8&customer-reviews.sort%5Fby=-SubmissionDate&n=283155&s=books&customer-reviews.start=1
I know that there is no way to get through all of the books I brought along, but if I can knock out a few of them, and get started in the majority of them, I'll he happy. Linc-Up classes at Lincoln Christian College begin the week we get back, so my reading time will be greatly diminished. I have a paper to write while I'm up here in preparation for the first class, so I'd better get started on it.
We are staying in a Candlewood Suites hotel, which is ok. The first night we got here, the room
air conditioner wasn't working right, so we had to move to another room. Unfortunately, we didn't figure that out until AFTER we unpacked everything, so moving into a different room was quite a hassle. Fortunately, it was just across the hall, so we didn't have to go very far. We also got an upgrade to a larger suite for the same price, so it worked out ok.We found a neat little used book store / coffee shop called "The Attic". Why they call it the attic, I don't know. There didn't appear to be anything other than the ground floor, and it didn't look like an attic. However, I picked up some pretty good books at a cheap price, so who cares what they call the place! On the window is painted the words "Good Books - Great Coffee". I told MaryAnn that two of the most pleasant sounding words in the English language are "Books and Coffee". If I ever open up a book store, I think I'll call it "B.C.".
Here are the books I picked up:
Faith Alone by R.C. Sproul
The Talmud and the Internet by Jonathan Rosen
Introduction to St. Thomas Aquinas ed. by Anton C. Pegis
The Contemporary Christian by J.R.W. Stott
The Matter Myth by Paul Davies and John Gribbin
God - The Evidence by Patrick Glynn
Biblical Preaching by Haddon Robinson
I've finished reading the book by Patrick Glynn. He is a recovered atheist who posits that we are living in a "post-secular" world. The sub-title of the book is "The Reconciliation of Faith and Reason in a Postsecular World". I thought it was a good read, although much of the information I have read previously in other books. I'm not very good at book reviews, so if you're interested you can read some good (and not so good) reviews here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0761519645/104-2112399-0537549?v=glance
I have started reading The Matter Myth by Davies and Gribbin. I know its a bit outdated (it was published in 1992) but I have seen the book referenced by other authors enough times that I thought it would be a good idea to read it. Read some reviews here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0671728415/qid=1124838850/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-2112399-0537549?v=glance&s=books
I'm also reading some books that I brought with me:
The God Who Risks by John Sanders
Encountering Evil - Live Options in Theodicy ed. by Stephen T. Davis
Stone Campbell Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1
Across the Spectrum by Greg Boyd and Paul Eddy
The Canon of the New Testament by Bruce Metzger
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades by Robert Spencer
Another book that I bought to read on vacation, but that I finished before we left, was a book called
Freakonomics : A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything by Levitt and Dubner. This was an interesting book, especially the authors' conclusions about cause of the dramatic decline in the youth crime rate in the 90's. Whether or not his conclusions are true, it is an interesting (and troubling) hypothesis. A recommended read. Here are some reviews: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/006073132X/ref=cm_rev_prev/104-2112399-0537549?%5Fencoding=UTF8&customer-reviews.sort%5Fby=-SubmissionDate&n=283155&s=books&customer-reviews.start=1
I know that there is no way to get through all of the books I brought along, but if I can knock out a few of them, and get started in the majority of them, I'll he happy. Linc-Up classes at Lincoln Christian College begin the week we get back, so my reading time will be greatly diminished. I have a paper to write while I'm up here in preparation for the first class, so I'd better get started on it.
09 August 2005
According to a recent report by George Barna, Most Adults Feel Accepted by God, But Lack a Biblical Worldview:
"...in spite of the fact that most Americans consider themselves to be Christian, very few adults base their moral decisions on the Bible, and surprisingly few believe that absolute moral truth exists. These are among the findings from a new national survey conducted by The Barna Group among a representative sample of 1002 adults. "
The Church in America is a mess. Maybe the whole Church worldwide is a mess too, but I can't comment on that because I don't know enough about it. I do know about American Christianity, because I'm part of it.
"Overall, then, just one out of every six adults (16%) claim they make their moral choices based on the content of the Bible."
This is not surprising, because most adults have hardly read the Bible, let alone understand what it says enough to base a moral choice on its contents.
"...in spite of the fact that most Americans consider themselves to be Christian, very few adults base their moral decisions on the Bible, and surprisingly few believe that absolute moral truth exists. These are among the findings from a new national survey conducted by The Barna Group among a representative sample of 1002 adults. "
The Church in America is a mess. Maybe the whole Church worldwide is a mess too, but I can't comment on that because I don't know enough about it. I do know about American Christianity, because I'm part of it.
"Overall, then, just one out of every six adults (16%) claim they make their moral choices based on the content of the Bible."
This is not surprising, because most adults have hardly read the Bible, let alone understand what it says enough to base a moral choice on its contents.
Notorious Muslim Cleric flees Great Britain
In the London based "Times Online", notorious Muslim cleric Bakri Mohammed stated that he is forbidden by Islam to inform police of any known planned terrorist attacks:
"In the telephone interview, Mr Bakri Mohammed said that he would return to Britain to clear his reputation, adding that he had never committed a crime. But the cleric reiterated his belief that it would be "against Islam" for him to inform the police of any terrorist attacks that he knew were being planned in Britain."
"I say publicly, Islam forbids me to report any Muslims, even if he is oppressive, you see, to the British police," he said. "Islam forbid me, that don't mean I know about crime."
This should be a warning to the American government (as if they don't already know). Muslims are forbidden by their religion to inform against other Muslims. Regardless of what some American Muslim leaders claim, we should base our understanding of Islam on how the majority practice it.
In the London based "Times Online", notorious Muslim cleric Bakri Mohammed stated that he is forbidden by Islam to inform police of any known planned terrorist attacks:
"In the telephone interview, Mr Bakri Mohammed said that he would return to Britain to clear his reputation, adding that he had never committed a crime. But the cleric reiterated his belief that it would be "against Islam" for him to inform the police of any terrorist attacks that he knew were being planned in Britain."
"I say publicly, Islam forbids me to report any Muslims, even if he is oppressive, you see, to the British police," he said. "Islam forbid me, that don't mean I know about crime."
This should be a warning to the American government (as if they don't already know). Muslims are forbidden by their religion to inform against other Muslims. Regardless of what some American Muslim leaders claim, we should base our understanding of Islam on how the majority practice it.
16 November 2004
Pentagon Bureaucrats Bow to ACLU
Pentagon drops Boy Scouts
Thanks again, ACLU, for continuing to tear apart the moral foundations of our nation.
The Boy Scouts are one of the few great organizations left that can teach young boys the moral, spiritual and physical lessons they need to grow into the kind of men that we need to lead our country. We, as a nation, need to encourage the Scouts - not keep chipping away at their support until they are destroyed.
If you want to know what you can do help save the Boy Scouts, click here.
Pentagon drops Boy Scouts
Thanks again, ACLU, for continuing to tear apart the moral foundations of our nation.
The Boy Scouts are one of the few great organizations left that can teach young boys the moral, spiritual and physical lessons they need to grow into the kind of men that we need to lead our country. We, as a nation, need to encourage the Scouts - not keep chipping away at their support until they are destroyed.
If you want to know what you can do help save the Boy Scouts, click here.
15 November 2004
Who ARE These Unpatriotic Buffoons?
Asia Pacific Media Network :: US: 'Apology for Bush win' website is a big hit
Don't you people understand the concept of living in a republic? Don't you understand that by "apologizing to the world" for our freely elected president you continue to debase our country in the eyes of the world? What ever happened to "One Nation Under God"? Obviously you have bought into the false notion of "Two Americas". I wasn't happy at all with President William J. Clinton, but I didn't apologize to the world for him. He was my president - he was elected by the people of America, and I lived with it.
George W. Bush is your president. You don't have to like that fact. If you want to be an American, you do have to live with it. Next time, maybe your guy (or gal) will win. Until then, remember that we are Americans first.
Asia Pacific Media Network :: US: 'Apology for Bush win' website is a big hit
Don't you people understand the concept of living in a republic? Don't you understand that by "apologizing to the world" for our freely elected president you continue to debase our country in the eyes of the world? What ever happened to "One Nation Under God"? Obviously you have bought into the false notion of "Two Americas". I wasn't happy at all with President William J. Clinton, but I didn't apologize to the world for him. He was my president - he was elected by the people of America, and I lived with it.
George W. Bush is your president. You don't have to like that fact. If you want to be an American, you do have to live with it. Next time, maybe your guy (or gal) will win. Until then, remember that we are Americans first.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)