Don’t just turn the page, close the book on the Iraq war – and all wars

from Wrights 2012 staff

It’s time do more than just “turn the page” on America’s foreign wars. We should close the book and put it pack on the shelf, said potential Libertarian presidential candidate R. Lee Wrights in response to President Obama’s address to the nation Tuesday night.

“President Obama said he was announcing that ‘the American combat mission in Iraq’ has ended and that it was time to ‘turn the page’ on a ‘remarkable chapter in American history,” Wrights said. “It is time to do more than just turn the page. It is time to close the book of war, put it back on the shelf, and never refer to it again.”

“There is nothing remarkable about this chapter in American history,” Wrights said. “If the president really wanted to end the war he would simply tell the joint chiefs to draw up a plan to remove every last American solider, sailor, airman and marine from the region as quickly and safely as possible.”

“If the president really wanted to honor the sacrifices made by America’s men and women in uniform, he would not continue to put them in harm’s way unnecessarily,” Wrights said.

Wrights said that President Obama was elected on the expectation that he would end America’s interventionist foreign policy, but from the words he used in this address it appears he is going to continue this policy and use different language to obscure his intentions.

For example, Wrights noted that while the president said the combat mission is ending, he said our commitment to Iraq is not. The president also said a transitional force will remain to advise and assist Iraqi security forces, support Iraqi troops in targeted counter-terrorism missions and protect civilians. In fact, as the last “combat” troops leave Iraq, fifty thousand troops will remain behind.

“In other words, our soldiers and marines will still be going on patrol, getting shot at, and possibly getting killed, but the president won’t call it combat operations,” Wrights said. He noted that the infantry brigades still in Iraq have been renamed “advise and assist” brigades.

“It is shameful the way politicians will parse words in order to justify and obscure their actions; and, it is disgraceful that any president who refers to himself as the commander-in-chief would use such a tactic to disguise the service of the men and women he is supposed to command.”

“It is disturbing the way the president casually dismissed the fact that this war was fought for a lie,” Wrights said. The president said that what began as “a war to disarm a state became a fight against insurgency.”

“It is distressing that President Obama admitted that the war has cost us one trillion dollars, most of it borrowed for other nations, and contributed to our debt, yet he doesn’t miss a beat in calling for even more government spending,” Wrights said. “He shows absolutely no signs that he is going to change anything in American foreign policy when he said America ‘must use all elements of our power to secure our interests and stand by our allies.’”

Wrights is considering seeking the presidential nomination because he believes the Libertarian message in 2012 should be a loud and unequivocal call to stop all war. He has pledged that 10 percent of all donations to his campaign will be spent for ballot access so that the stop all war message can be heard in all 50 states.

 

R. Lee Wrights is a writer and political activist living in Texas. He is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. Contact Lee at rleewrights@gmail.com.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Don’t just turn the page, close the book on the Iraq war – and all wars

from Wrights 2012 staff

It’s time do more than just “turn the page” on America’s foreign wars. We should close the book and put it pack on the shelf, said potential Libertarian presidential candidate R. Lee Wrights in response to President Obama’s address to the nation Tuesday night.

“President Obama said he was announcing that ‘the American combat mission in Iraq’ has ended and that it was time to ‘turn the page’ on a ‘remarkable chapter in American history,” Wrights said. “It is time to do more than just turn the page. It is time to close the book of war, put it back on the shelf, and never refer to it again.”

“There is nothing remarkable about this chapter in American history,” Wrights said. “If the president really wanted to end the war he would simply tell the joint chiefs to draw up a plan to remove every last American solider, sailor, airman and marine from the region as quickly and safely as possible.”

“If the president really wanted to honor the sacrifices made by America’s men and women in uniform, he would not continue to put them in harm’s way unnecessarily,” Wrights said.

Wrights said that President Obama was elected on the expectation that he would end America’s interventionist foreign policy, but from the words he used in this address it appears he is going to continue this policy and use different language to obscure his intentions.

For example, Wrights noted that while the president said the combat mission is ending, he said our commitment to Iraq is not. The president also said a transitional force will remain to advise and assist Iraqi security forces, support Iraqi troops in targeted counter-terrorism missions and protect civilians. In fact, as the last “combat” troops leave Iraq, fifty thousand troops will remain behind.

“In other words, our soldiers and marines will still be going on patrol, getting shot at, and possibly getting killed, but the president won’t call it combat operations,” Wrights said. He noted that the infantry brigades still in Iraq have been renamed “advise and assist” brigades.

“It is shameful the way politicians will parse words in order to justify and obscure their actions; and, it is disgraceful that any president who refers to himself as the commander-in-chief would use such a tactic to disguise the service of the men and women he is supposed to command.”

“It is disturbing the way the president casually dismissed the fact that this war was fought for a lie,” Wrights said. The president said that what began as “a war to disarm a state became a fight against insurgency.”

“It is distressing that President Obama admitted that the war has cost us one trillion dollars, most of it borrowed for other nations, and contributed to our debt, yet he doesn’t miss a beat in calling for even more government spending,” Wrights said. “He shows absolutely no signs that he is going to change anything in American foreign policy when he said America ‘must use all elements of our power to secure our interests and stand by our allies.’”

Wrights is considering seeking the presidential nomination because he believes the Libertarian message in 2012 should be a loud and unequivocal call to stop all war. He has pledged that 10 percent of all donations to his campaign will be spent for ballot access so that the stop all war message can be heard in all 50 states.

 

R. Lee Wrights is a writer and political activist living in Texas. He is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. Contact Lee at rleewrights@gmail.com.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Don’t just turn the page, close the book on the Iraq war – and all wars

from Wrights 2012 staff

It’s time do more than just “turn the page” on America’s foreign wars. We should close the book and put it pack on the shelf, said potential Libertarian presidential candidate R. Lee Wrights in response to President Obama’s address to the nation Tuesday night.

“President Obama said he was announcing that ‘the American combat mission in Iraq’ has ended and that it was time to ‘turn the page’ on a ‘remarkable chapter in American history,” Wrights said. “It is time to do more than just turn the page. It is time to close the book of war, put it back on the shelf, and never refer to it again.”

“There is nothing remarkable about this chapter in American history,” Wrights said. “If the president really wanted to end the war he would simply tell the joint chiefs to draw up a plan to remove every last American solider, sailor, airman and marine from the region as quickly and safely as possible.”

“If the president really wanted to honor the sacrifices made by America’s men and women in uniform, he would not continue to put them in harm’s way unnecessarily,” Wrights said.

Wrights said that President Obama was elected on the expectation that he would end America’s interventionist foreign policy, but from the words he used in this address it appears he is going to continue this policy and use different language to obscure his intentions.

For example, Wrights noted that while the president said the combat mission is ending, he said our commitment to Iraq is not. The president also said a transitional force will remain to advise and assist Iraqi security forces, support Iraqi troops in targeted counter-terrorism missions and protect civilians. In fact, as the last “combat” troops leave Iraq, fifty thousand troops will remain behind.

“In other words, our soldiers and marines will still be going on patrol, getting shot at, and possibly getting killed, but the president won’t call it combat operations,” Wrights said. He noted that the infantry brigades still in Iraq have been renamed “advise and assist” brigades.

“It is shameful the way politicians will parse words in order to justify and obscure their actions; and, it is disgraceful that any president who refers to himself as the commander-in-chief would use such a tactic to disguise the service of the men and women he is supposed to command.”

“It is disturbing the way the president casually dismissed the fact that this war was fought for a lie,” Wrights said. The president said that what began as “a war to disarm a state became a fight against insurgency.”

“It is distressing that President Obama admitted that the war has cost us one trillion dollars, most of it borrowed for other nations, and contributed to our debt, yet he doesn’t miss a beat in calling for even more government spending,” Wrights said. “He shows absolutely no signs that he is going to change anything in American foreign policy when he said America ‘must use all elements of our power to secure our interests and stand by our allies.’”

Wrights is considering seeking the presidential nomination because he believes the Libertarian message in 2012 should be a loud and unequivocal call to stop all war. He has pledged that 10 percent of all donations to his campaign will be spent for ballot access so that the stop all war message can be heard in all 50 states.

 

R. Lee Wrights is a writer and political activist living in Texas. He is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. Contact Lee at rleewrights@gmail.com.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Trapped in the wrong government school

by John Stossel

If you’re a public-school student, your chances in life may be largely dependent on where you live — not just which country, not just which state, but which little bureaucratic zone.

In San Jose, Calif., many parents want to get their kids in Fremont Union schools because they’re so much better than neighboring schools. So parents sometimes cheat to get their kids in. At least cheating is what local officials call it. Steve Rowley, district superintendent, said, “We have maybe hundreds of kids who are here illegally, under false pretenses.”

Illegally. False pretenses. Sounds like the kids are criminals. All they’re doing is trying to get a good public-school education. Don’t the public schools’ defenders insist all children have a right to a good public-school education?

Inspector John Lozano goes door to door to check if kids really live where they say they do.

At one house, a mother and daughter answer the door, so Lozano sees that the daughter is there, but he still tells them that he needs to look inside the house to make sure. The school district police can go into your daughter’s bedroom, even go through drawers and closets. “Well,” he said, “we have a computer, we have some ‘Seventeen’ magazines. We have pictures of the student and her friends on the wall.”

So she passed the inspection.

But then he went to an address listed by Esterlita Tapang, whose grandson attends a Fremont Union high school. He told the man who answered the door, “She said she lives here and her grandson is going to live here so he can go to the high school.” The man shook his head and said she didn’t live there. “Caught,” Lozano told us. “She’s definitely caught!”

Granted, Tapang broke the rules. The rules said her grandson, because of where he lived, wasn’t entitled to the quality education Fremont Union schools provide. But which is worse: a system that traps students in bad schools, or a grandmother who lies to save her grandson from being denied a decent education? I asked her, “Isn’t it creepy that they force you to go to the black market to get your kid a better education?”

She thought it was. “I was crying in front of this 14-year-old,” said the grandmother. “Why can’t they just let parents get in the school of their choice?”

Why can’t they? Changing schools can change a child’s life. In Florida, Patty Bower’s kids were stuck in a school that wasn’t teaching them. But then they got vouchers, which let them attend a private school that works with kids who have special needs.

“Joey has been brought up four grade levels in reading,” Bowers said. “He’s gone from C’s, and D’s to being an honor roll student.” But the Florida Supreme Court this month killed a similar choice program, and Patty fears her kids will soon be forced back into public school. “If they take the McKay scholarship away, I don’t think — I’m sorry. I don’t think Joey will finish school.”

Why can’t she choose her child’s school? Most countries that beat America on international tests give their students that choice. In Belgium, the government spends less than American schools do on each student, but the money is attached to the kids. So they can go wherever they want — to a state-run school, a Montessori school, or even a religious school.

“I wouldn’t send my child to an American public school,” said Maria Loth. “Not even for a million dollars.”

Her son lives in Belgium now, but when he was 6, his family lived in America. “In America, I had to beg, please, please give me good school for my child. And here in Belgium, they’re all over the place.”

That’s right. In public education, our land of the free is now a bunch of local fiefs, where petty-bureaucrats-turned-lords-of-the-manor decide whether you can get a decent education, and parents must go to them, begging for their children’s future. Meanwhile, in Belgium and much of the rest of the world, students and their parents have the freedom to choose their schools — and the opportunity that comes with that freedom.

 

Originally published at Townhall.com January 25, 2006.

 

John Stossel – arguably the highest-profile libertarian journalist in the world – joined Fox News Channel (FNC) and Fox Business Network (FBN), effective October 2009, to begin a weekly show that may well be the most consistent, intelligent, ongoing presentation of libertarian views in television history.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Trapped in the wrong government school

by John Stossel

If you’re a public-school student, your chances in life may be largely dependent on where you live — not just which country, not just which state, but which little bureaucratic zone.

In San Jose, Calif., many parents want to get their kids in Fremont Union schools because they’re so much better than neighboring schools. So parents sometimes cheat to get their kids in. At least cheating is what local officials call it. Steve Rowley, district superintendent, said, “We have maybe hundreds of kids who are here illegally, under false pretenses.”

Illegally. False pretenses. Sounds like the kids are criminals. All they’re doing is trying to get a good public-school education. Don’t the public schools’ defenders insist all children have a right to a good public-school education?

Inspector John Lozano goes door to door to check if kids really live where they say they do.

At one house, a mother and daughter answer the door, so Lozano sees that the daughter is there, but he still tells them that he needs to look inside the house to make sure. The school district police can go into your daughter’s bedroom, even go through drawers and closets. “Well,” he said, “we have a computer, we have some ‘Seventeen’ magazines. We have pictures of the student and her friends on the wall.”

So she passed the inspection.

But then he went to an address listed by Esterlita Tapang, whose grandson attends a Fremont Union high school. He told the man who answered the door, “She said she lives here and her grandson is going to live here so he can go to the high school.” The man shook his head and said she didn’t live there. “Caught,” Lozano told us. “She’s definitely caught!”

Granted, Tapang broke the rules. The rules said her grandson, because of where he lived, wasn’t entitled to the quality education Fremont Union schools provide. But which is worse: a system that traps students in bad schools, or a grandmother who lies to save her grandson from being denied a decent education? I asked her, “Isn’t it creepy that they force you to go to the black market to get your kid a better education?”

She thought it was. “I was crying in front of this 14-year-old,” said the grandmother. “Why can’t they just let parents get in the school of their choice?”

Why can’t they? Changing schools can change a child’s life. In Florida, Patty Bower’s kids were stuck in a school that wasn’t teaching them. But then they got vouchers, which let them attend a private school that works with kids who have special needs.

“Joey has been brought up four grade levels in reading,” Bowers said. “He’s gone from C’s, and D’s to being an honor roll student.” But the Florida Supreme Court this month killed a similar choice program, and Patty fears her kids will soon be forced back into public school. “If they take the McKay scholarship away, I don’t think — I’m sorry. I don’t think Joey will finish school.”

Why can’t she choose her child’s school? Most countries that beat America on international tests give their students that choice. In Belgium, the government spends less than American schools do on each student, but the money is attached to the kids. So they can go wherever they want — to a state-run school, a Montessori school, or even a religious school.

“I wouldn’t send my child to an American public school,” said Maria Loth. “Not even for a million dollars.”

Her son lives in Belgium now, but when he was 6, his family lived in America. “In America, I had to beg, please, please give me good school for my child. And here in Belgium, they’re all over the place.”

That’s right. In public education, our land of the free is now a bunch of local fiefs, where petty-bureaucrats-turned-lords-of-the-manor decide whether you can get a decent education, and parents must go to them, begging for their children’s future. Meanwhile, in Belgium and much of the rest of the world, students and their parents have the freedom to choose their schools — and the opportunity that comes with that freedom.

 

Originally published at Townhall.com January 25, 2006.

 

John Stossel – arguably the highest-profile libertarian journalist in the world – joined Fox News Channel (FNC) and Fox Business Network (FBN), effective October 2009, to begin a weekly show that may well be the most consistent, intelligent, ongoing presentation of libertarian views in television history.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Trapped in the wrong government school

by John Stossel

If you’re a public-school student, your chances in life may be largely dependent on where you live — not just which country, not just which state, but which little bureaucratic zone.

In San Jose, Calif., many parents want to get their kids in Fremont Union schools because they’re so much better than neighboring schools. So parents sometimes cheat to get their kids in. At least cheating is what local officials call it. Steve Rowley, district superintendent, said, “We have maybe hundreds of kids who are here illegally, under false pretenses.”

Illegally. False pretenses. Sounds like the kids are criminals. All they’re doing is trying to get a good public-school education. Don’t the public schools’ defenders insist all children have a right to a good public-school education?

Inspector John Lozano goes door to door to check if kids really live where they say they do.

At one house, a mother and daughter answer the door, so Lozano sees that the daughter is there, but he still tells them that he needs to look inside the house to make sure. The school district police can go into your daughter’s bedroom, even go through drawers and closets. “Well,” he said, “we have a computer, we have some ‘Seventeen’ magazines. We have pictures of the student and her friends on the wall.”

So she passed the inspection.

But then he went to an address listed by Esterlita Tapang, whose grandson attends a Fremont Union high school. He told the man who answered the door, “She said she lives here and her grandson is going to live here so he can go to the high school.” The man shook his head and said she didn’t live there. “Caught,” Lozano told us. “She’s definitely caught!”

Granted, Tapang broke the rules. The rules said her grandson, because of where he lived, wasn’t entitled to the quality education Fremont Union schools provide. But which is worse: a system that traps students in bad schools, or a grandmother who lies to save her grandson from being denied a decent education? I asked her, “Isn’t it creepy that they force you to go to the black market to get your kid a better education?”

She thought it was. “I was crying in front of this 14-year-old,” said the grandmother. “Why can’t they just let parents get in the school of their choice?”

Why can’t they? Changing schools can change a child’s life. In Florida, Patty Bower’s kids were stuck in a school that wasn’t teaching them. But then they got vouchers, which let them attend a private school that works with kids who have special needs.

“Joey has been brought up four grade levels in reading,” Bowers said. “He’s gone from C’s, and D’s to being an honor roll student.” But the Florida Supreme Court this month killed a similar choice program, and Patty fears her kids will soon be forced back into public school. “If they take the McKay scholarship away, I don’t think — I’m sorry. I don’t think Joey will finish school.”

Why can’t she choose her child’s school? Most countries that beat America on international tests give their students that choice. In Belgium, the government spends less than American schools do on each student, but the money is attached to the kids. So they can go wherever they want — to a state-run school, a Montessori school, or even a religious school.

“I wouldn’t send my child to an American public school,” said Maria Loth. “Not even for a million dollars.”

Her son lives in Belgium now, but when he was 6, his family lived in America. “In America, I had to beg, please, please give me good school for my child. And here in Belgium, they’re all over the place.”

That’s right. In public education, our land of the free is now a bunch of local fiefs, where petty-bureaucrats-turned-lords-of-the-manor decide whether you can get a decent education, and parents must go to them, begging for their children’s future. Meanwhile, in Belgium and much of the rest of the world, students and their parents have the freedom to choose their schools — and the opportunity that comes with that freedom.

 

Originally published at Townhall.com January 25, 2006.

 

John Stossel – arguably the highest-profile libertarian journalist in the world – joined Fox News Channel (FNC) and Fox Business Network (FBN), effective October 2009, to begin a weekly show that may well be the most consistent, intelligent, ongoing presentation of libertarian views in television history.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Trapped in the wrong government school

by John Stossel

If you’re a public-school student, your chances in life may be largely dependent on where you live — not just which country, not just which state, but which little bureaucratic zone.

In San Jose, Calif., many parents want to get their kids in Fremont Union schools because they’re so much better than neighboring schools. So parents sometimes cheat to get their kids in. At least cheating is what local officials call it. Steve Rowley, district superintendent, said, “We have maybe hundreds of kids who are here illegally, under false pretenses.”

Illegally. False pretenses. Sounds like the kids are criminals. All they’re doing is trying to get a good public-school education. Don’t the public schools’ defenders insist all children have a right to a good public-school education?

Inspector John Lozano goes door to door to check if kids really live where they say they do.

At one house, a mother and daughter answer the door, so Lozano sees that the daughter is there, but he still tells them that he needs to look inside the house to make sure. The school district police can go into your daughter’s bedroom, even go through drawers and closets. “Well,” he said, “we have a computer, we have some ‘Seventeen’ magazines. We have pictures of the student and her friends on the wall.”

So she passed the inspection.

But then he went to an address listed by Esterlita Tapang, whose grandson attends a Fremont Union high school. He told the man who answered the door, “She said she lives here and her grandson is going to live here so he can go to the high school.” The man shook his head and said she didn’t live there. “Caught,” Lozano told us. “She’s definitely caught!”

Granted, Tapang broke the rules. The rules said her grandson, because of where he lived, wasn’t entitled to the quality education Fremont Union schools provide. But which is worse: a system that traps students in bad schools, or a grandmother who lies to save her grandson from being denied a decent education? I asked her, “Isn’t it creepy that they force you to go to the black market to get your kid a better education?”

She thought it was. “I was crying in front of this 14-year-old,” said the grandmother. “Why can’t they just let parents get in the school of their choice?”

Why can’t they? Changing schools can change a child’s life. In Florida, Patty Bower’s kids were stuck in a school that wasn’t teaching them. But then they got vouchers, which let them attend a private school that works with kids who have special needs.

“Joey has been brought up four grade levels in reading,” Bowers said. “He’s gone from C’s, and D’s to being an honor roll student.” But the Florida Supreme Court this month killed a similar choice program, and Patty fears her kids will soon be forced back into public school. “If they take the McKay scholarship away, I don’t think — I’m sorry. I don’t think Joey will finish school.”

Why can’t she choose her child’s school? Most countries that beat America on international tests give their students that choice. In Belgium, the government spends less than American schools do on each student, but the money is attached to the kids. So they can go wherever they want — to a state-run school, a Montessori school, or even a religious school.

“I wouldn’t send my child to an American public school,” said Maria Loth. “Not even for a million dollars.”

Her son lives in Belgium now, but when he was 6, his family lived in America. “In America, I had to beg, please, please give me good school for my child. And here in Belgium, they’re all over the place.”

That’s right. In public education, our land of the free is now a bunch of local fiefs, where petty-bureaucrats-turned-lords-of-the-manor decide whether you can get a decent education, and parents must go to them, begging for their children’s future. Meanwhile, in Belgium and much of the rest of the world, students and their parents have the freedom to choose their schools — and the opportunity that comes with that freedom.

 

Originally published at Townhall.com January 25, 2006.

 

John Stossel – arguably the highest-profile libertarian journalist in the world – joined Fox News Channel (FNC) and Fox Business Network (FBN), effective October 2009, to begin a weekly show that may well be the most consistent, intelligent, ongoing presentation of libertarian views in television history.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Trapped in the wrong government school

by John Stossel

If you’re a public-school student, your chances in life may be largely dependent on where you live — not just which country, not just which state, but which little bureaucratic zone.

In San Jose, Calif., many parents want to get their kids in Fremont Union schools because they’re so much better than neighboring schools. So parents sometimes cheat to get their kids in. At least cheating is what local officials call it. Steve Rowley, district superintendent, said, “We have maybe hundreds of kids who are here illegally, under false pretenses.”

Illegally. False pretenses. Sounds like the kids are criminals. All they’re doing is trying to get a good public-school education. Don’t the public schools’ defenders insist all children have a right to a good public-school education?

Inspector John Lozano goes door to door to check if kids really live where they say they do.

At one house, a mother and daughter answer the door, so Lozano sees that the daughter is there, but he still tells them that he needs to look inside the house to make sure. The school district police can go into your daughter’s bedroom, even go through drawers and closets. “Well,” he said, “we have a computer, we have some ‘Seventeen’ magazines. We have pictures of the student and her friends on the wall.”

So she passed the inspection.

But then he went to an address listed by Esterlita Tapang, whose grandson attends a Fremont Union high school. He told the man who answered the door, “She said she lives here and her grandson is going to live here so he can go to the high school.” The man shook his head and said she didn’t live there. “Caught,” Lozano told us. “She’s definitely caught!”

Granted, Tapang broke the rules. The rules said her grandson, because of where he lived, wasn’t entitled to the quality education Fremont Union schools provide. But which is worse: a system that traps students in bad schools, or a grandmother who lies to save her grandson from being denied a decent education? I asked her, “Isn’t it creepy that they force you to go to the black market to get your kid a better education?”

She thought it was. “I was crying in front of this 14-year-old,” said the grandmother. “Why can’t they just let parents get in the school of their choice?”

Why can’t they? Changing schools can change a child’s life. In Florida, Patty Bower’s kids were stuck in a school that wasn’t teaching them. But then they got vouchers, which let them attend a private school that works with kids who have special needs.

“Joey has been brought up four grade levels in reading,” Bowers said. “He’s gone from C’s, and D’s to being an honor roll student.” But the Florida Supreme Court this month killed a similar choice program, and Patty fears her kids will soon be forced back into public school. “If they take the McKay scholarship away, I don’t think — I’m sorry. I don’t think Joey will finish school.”

Why can’t she choose her child’s school? Most countries that beat America on international tests give their students that choice. In Belgium, the government spends less than American schools do on each student, but the money is attached to the kids. So they can go wherever they want — to a state-run school, a Montessori school, or even a religious school.

“I wouldn’t send my child to an American public school,” said Maria Loth. “Not even for a million dollars.”

Her son lives in Belgium now, but when he was 6, his family lived in America. “In America, I had to beg, please, please give me good school for my child. And here in Belgium, they’re all over the place.”

That’s right. In public education, our land of the free is now a bunch of local fiefs, where petty-bureaucrats-turned-lords-of-the-manor decide whether you can get a decent education, and parents must go to them, begging for their children’s future. Meanwhile, in Belgium and much of the rest of the world, students and their parents have the freedom to choose their schools — and the opportunity that comes with that freedom.

 

Originally published at Townhall.com January 25, 2006.

 

John Stossel – arguably the highest-profile libertarian journalist in the world – joined Fox News Channel (FNC) and Fox Business Network (FBN), effective October 2009, to begin a weekly show that may well be the most consistent, intelligent, ongoing presentation of libertarian views in television history.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Trapped in the wrong government school

by John Stossel

If you’re a public-school student, your chances in life may be largely dependent on where you live — not just which country, not just which state, but which little bureaucratic zone.

In San Jose, Calif., many parents want to get their kids in Fremont Union schools because they’re so much better than neighboring schools. So parents sometimes cheat to get their kids in. At least cheating is what local officials call it. Steve Rowley, district superintendent, said, “We have maybe hundreds of kids who are here illegally, under false pretenses.”

Illegally. False pretenses. Sounds like the kids are criminals. All they’re doing is trying to get a good public-school education. Don’t the public schools’ defenders insist all children have a right to a good public-school education?

Inspector John Lozano goes door to door to check if kids really live where they say they do.

At one house, a mother and daughter answer the door, so Lozano sees that the daughter is there, but he still tells them that he needs to look inside the house to make sure. The school district police can go into your daughter’s bedroom, even go through drawers and closets. “Well,” he said, “we have a computer, we have some ‘Seventeen’ magazines. We have pictures of the student and her friends on the wall.”

So she passed the inspection.

But then he went to an address listed by Esterlita Tapang, whose grandson attends a Fremont Union high school. He told the man who answered the door, “She said she lives here and her grandson is going to live here so he can go to the high school.” The man shook his head and said she didn’t live there. “Caught,” Lozano told us. “She’s definitely caught!”

Granted, Tapang broke the rules. The rules said her grandson, because of where he lived, wasn’t entitled to the quality education Fremont Union schools provide. But which is worse: a system that traps students in bad schools, or a grandmother who lies to save her grandson from being denied a decent education? I asked her, “Isn’t it creepy that they force you to go to the black market to get your kid a better education?”

She thought it was. “I was crying in front of this 14-year-old,” said the grandmother. “Why can’t they just let parents get in the school of their choice?”

Why can’t they? Changing schools can change a child’s life. In Florida, Patty Bower’s kids were stuck in a school that wasn’t teaching them. But then they got vouchers, which let them attend a private school that works with kids who have special needs.

“Joey has been brought up four grade levels in reading,” Bowers said. “He’s gone from C’s, and D’s to being an honor roll student.” But the Florida Supreme Court this month killed a similar choice program, and Patty fears her kids will soon be forced back into public school. “If they take the McKay scholarship away, I don’t think — I’m sorry. I don’t think Joey will finish school.”

Why can’t she choose her child’s school? Most countries that beat America on international tests give their students that choice. In Belgium, the government spends less than American schools do on each student, but the money is attached to the kids. So they can go wherever they want — to a state-run school, a Montessori school, or even a religious school.

“I wouldn’t send my child to an American public school,” said Maria Loth. “Not even for a million dollars.”

Her son lives in Belgium now, but when he was 6, his family lived in America. “In America, I had to beg, please, please give me good school for my child. And here in Belgium, they’re all over the place.”

That’s right. In public education, our land of the free is now a bunch of local fiefs, where petty-bureaucrats-turned-lords-of-the-manor decide whether you can get a decent education, and parents must go to them, begging for their children’s future. Meanwhile, in Belgium and much of the rest of the world, students and their parents have the freedom to choose their schools — and the opportunity that comes with that freedom.

 

Originally published at Townhall.com January 25, 2006.

 

John Stossel – arguably the highest-profile libertarian journalist in the world – joined Fox News Channel (FNC) and Fox Business Network (FBN), effective October 2009, to begin a weekly show that may well be the most consistent, intelligent, ongoing presentation of libertarian views in television history.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

SAF files amicus brief in Nordyke case arguing for strict scrutiny

from SAF staff

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation has filed an amicus curiae brief in the long-running Nordyke v. King case in California, arguing that Second Amendment issues must be decided on a “strict scrutiny” basis, and that an ordinance in Alameda County banning gun shows at the county fairgrounds is unconstitutional because it would not withstand that standard of review.

This case was a catalyst for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear SAF’s case challenging the handgun ban in Chicago, because in an earlier Nordyke ruling – subsequently set aside in favor of a full en banc hearing by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals – created a conflict in the circuits over Second Amendment incorporation.

SAF’s brief was written by attorney Alan Gura, who argued the landmark 2008 Heller case and represented SAF and its co-plaintiffs in the recent McDonald case, and is currently working with the foundation on other cases in Maryland, Illinois, New York and North Carolina.

Alameda County passed an ordinance more than ten years ago prohibiting the carrying of firearms on county property following a shooting at the county fair in 1998. Russell and Sallie Nordyke operated a gun show at the county fairgrounds. The shooting incident was not related to their gun show, but county officials used that as an excuse to adopt the prohibition.

“This is a very important case,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “because it could establish the highest standard of scrutiny to which gun laws around the country would be subjected. While gun prohibitionists were upset by the 2008 Heller ruling and demoralized by our victory this year in the McDonald case, they are terrified of a strict scrutiny standard that could be established by the Nordyke case.”

The Nordyke case’s importance, Gottlieb stated, “cannot be underestimated, or understated.”

“Strict scrutiny is the standard of review to which all constitutionally-protected fundamental civil rights must be held,” he observed. “This case has survived for more than a decade, a fact in itself that is remarkable. We believe, in the wake of Heller and McDonald, that the Ninth Circuit must act decisively to protect the Second Amendment from willy-nilly regulation by anti-gun public officials.”

 

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

Read original article here

Sphere: Related Content

Next Page »