Oh, and a Bill of Rights would go through. But it would be ten pages long, guaranteeing us everything from an equitable education, to job security, healthcare and welfare. Because our entire idea of a "right" has shifted and we are no longer concerned with such "antiquated" ideas such as the right to the fruits of your own labor.

Jesse, what on earth are you even talking about? As to being hated around the world: we all saw the protests when Bush went to Europe. But did we see anything of the full two page spread thanking American forces for their service when our military left? Anything of the teary-eyed farewells from a generation that still remembered the Berlin airlift?

I agree, Warren. Or at the very least people who cared when they lie. But we have all determined "it's just politics" and don't put any weight on the stories when they occasionally do come out.

"we they" syndrome...maybe. Maybe not. Maybe many people are as ignorant about what is going on in their local public school as they are about what is going on in government. Admitting the problem forces action...and no one seems like that.

How about, "Knowledge is useless without wisdom?"

Very true.

Dictators seek to control education. Hitler, Mao, Lenin...We have a long history of trying to achieve some sort of social utopia through education in our history...Mann's common school idea is one of the foundational principles of modern American public education...but what has it gotten us? Children who cannot read and who are as likely, if not more likely, to turn to violence.

Ruling Virginia at the order of the king...loyal to the king and naturally not wanting the population to know anything better than "Mother England." Look what a little reading and printing of bibles brought to England not long before he was sent here...

I went to public school and I learned that if you are a conservative you have to be better prepared in discussions and had to have much more well researched and supported papers to get the A I was looking for. I think some of that is human nature...when you agree with the paper you are reading, it is harder to notice if the claims are not supported. But it certainly was not the intention of the teachers to strengthen my conservatism through opposition to it.

And that is what Germany is still doing with its stance against homeschoolers and the fear of "parallel societies." But not only them, but the entire European Union for their court in Strassbourg upheld Germany's stance in a ruling I wrote a lot more about this here: http://principleddiscovery.com/?p=275 but Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 states "No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions." The court essentially ruled that this means that the state oversees education and they must only respect a parent's convictions if they do not conflict with the goals of the state. Now Germany has decided that homeschooling is child endangerment.

Look at what UNESCO has for education...and the much coveted International Baccalaureate program. The institutions are slowly catching up with the philsophy.

Robert, are you aware of how little difference there is between NCLB and what Clinton did to education in office? And of the fact that NCLB was predominantly written by Ted Kennedy? And the fact that its strongest opponents in Congress are Republicans? The Democrats don't want to see NCLB gone...they just want to spend more money on it. True conservatives want to see control returned to local districts, something which Bush actually had in the original legislation as one of the four pillars but it was eventually defeated. Trevor, maybe that is the way the schools run in Canada, but it sure doesn't sound like schools here in the US! J Carlton, you are absolutely right. And worse than that, the high court ruled that homeschooling is child endangerment. But the law does not really go back to Hitler and we cannot so easily pass it off as something "those evil Nazis did." The process of centralization has a long history in Germany, ironically going back to Martin Luther. Under the Weimar Republic, the process was almost complete, with curriculum standardized and education compulsory. It left only two options for education: public and private schools. States rebelled a little, and it was never strictly enforced. But that law was from 1921 I believe. All Hitler's law was add the weight of enforcement to existing law and outlaw private schools. Hitler did not centralize education. The centralization of education is what made Hitler's grip on the country possible.

Source? It clearly says it is from the Wall Street Journal...or was that added after the question? And Robert, do you know anything at all about the history of public education in America? Modern American educational philosophy has its roots in John Dewey, His main pursuits were: "Dewey's support were women's suffrage, progressive education, educator's rights, the Humanistic movement, and world peace." http://dewey.pragmatism.org/

probably...because I couldn't hit a kangaroo with a boomerang if I tried, don't know where the budgerigars hang out in order to hunt them, and only have a vague knowledge of their spiritual rituals. What they value for their life is wholly unsuited to life in 21st century America and there would be no point to me taking the test. What good would an above average score be to me trying to land a job in a decent corporation?

Carlton, I couldn't agree with you more!

I find it ironic that those who scream loudest for freedom of speech are the same who would control thought.

Gee...does that mean if we ignore the evil of the terrorist we are accomplice to it? Or are we only accomplices if we have a different political affiliation to the President?

tyrants and patriots, J Carlton. And I believe it was Jefferson.

I didn't say you said anything about Bush in this particular quote. But on a good many, there are irrelevant remarks about him so I decided to throw one in the mix, too. Just because it seems the thing to do. : ) Blind faith has absolutely nothing to do with pointing out a ridiculous comparison between Hitler and Bush. I disagree with Bush on a good many things, but inane accusations do nothing but show complete ignorance of actual history. Throwing out "Nazi" and "Hitler" at every opportunity has only one goal: to subjugate reason by playing on fear. Have you heard of "argumentum ad nazium?" Quite relevant in these discussions. And weapons were taken away in a period of complete anarchy? I may or may not agree with the outcome, but there are those who wish for this to be the norm across all America at all times and it does not appear to be GW. To stretch for the ridiculous analogy of the Fatherland is a fear tactic. Infinitely more dangerous because it shuts down all reason and creates an irrational fear.

And if you had any idea of history, you would not be able to make such irrational statements.

Anonymous, I think it isn't possible that Bush is a Nazi for one reason...the American press would love him if he were.

"to forgo even ambition when the end is gained" Since everyone else seems to want to make these all about the war, I wonder if that is why our President has chosen to stay the course in this conflict despite apparent political cost.

What would be the point? It would be like hiding your light under a basket and liberty would hardly be furthered by that.

More interesting in context. He is talking about critics who don't know what they are talking about and criticize without reason. Fools rush in to judge, though they lack understanding. And America is full of them at the moment...open any newspaper.

Ken, I agree...but what are rights but ideas? Coming from Mencken, you would immediately have to question what he even means by what is true. After all, he seemed to prefer the government of Kaiser Wilhelm in autocratic Germany. And it is difficult to say exactly what he means by anything in a single quote since satire was his method of communication.