Yeah, but they teach self-esteem blended cleverly with no skills and no information so as to make the students ignorant and talent free and proud of it. - - The difference between a 'golden' age and the 'gilded age' is that, during a 'golden' age the entire civilization is at what is regarded to be at a 'high' point as defined according to the criteria of the 'type' of 'golden' age that's being referenced (the 'golden' age of Impressionism, for instance), whereas 'the gilded age' refers to the age of the moneyed industrial tycoons and 'robber barons' of the late 1800s - early 1900s. 'Gilt' is clearly not 'golden'. I'd confused the terms in a previous post and then corrected the mistake. - sorry. -|- Gilt: A thin layer of gold or something simulating gold that is applied in gilding. 2. Superficial brilliance or gloss. 3. Slang. Money. - AHD

Marie, Thanks for the often overlooked insight. You might also want to reference the book OVERTHROW : 'America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq' by Stephen Kinzer. It, to some extent, mirrors WHY WE FIGHT. If you love John Wayne, you'll hate this book. If you want insight, you'll appreciate this book.

Well, the Quran appears to be another work (akin to the Bible, the Talmud, the Vedas, etc.) promoting generally sensible conventions in a person's approach to living a life well in a society. It's a shame that not one of these traditions is immune to the exploitations and perversions of emotion by those of extreme temperament, little thought and base motivations. Each of these traditions has had its dark times and each is tempted to point the finger at the others in blanket knee-jerk fashion when other outlets for personal or national dissatisfaction are absent. Equally problematic is the human propensity to 'read into' any text things that simply aren't there and then to 'believe' them. The suspension of critical thinking in deference to belief always signals the death-knell of good sense. There are no exceptions - especially for those who 'believe' otherwise and are, thereby, the proof of the pudding.

E. Archer: IMHO (lol) What TJ referred to as 'elementary' education was what he regarded as comprising a 'minimal requirement' for competent citizenship - AT THE TIME. In today's world you're lost if you only have what is generally taught in the first 12 grades. That gets you fry cook or 'domestic help' status and NO appreciation of the workings of government or corporate influence let alone international or even intra-national political acumen. I know you think TJ was against compulsory education but, when I read what he said (with what I read to be the reluctant voice of resignation to the 'facts on the ground' in terms of what would be politically possible), I get the most distinct sense that, had it not been politically suicidal at the time, he would have pushed for just that. TJ was nobody's fool. He knew which way the winds were blowing and that such winds would be ignored at one's own political peril. Indeed, it never seemed sensible to me that a complete lack of knowledge of the political system shouldn't make one unqualified to vote. The danger there is who decides what level of knowledge is adequate. Besides, just exactly what percentage of the American population would actually qualify if they can't even find their own state on a blank map? Were there to be some process of certification for voter competence, it would surely be subject to the most extreme abuses as it was in the South when some states allowed 'literacy tests' as a way of disqualifying black voters. Allowing every citizen to vote appears the lesser of two potential evils. I mean, I can just envision Brian D. Pickett & Co., Tampa, Florida rubbing their hands together a la Scrooge at the mere thought of having literacy tests to screen out 'non-whites' ('Aryans' are, after all, Indo-European speaking tribes) - LOL. BTW, I guess I regard a 'signed' oath to be worth the paper it's written on. What counts is an internalized commitment. I mean, would you want your BEST friends, confidants and family members to 'SIGN' an oath of allegiance to you? Would you not suspect the very act to be treasonous under duress of alienation? Would not the very act of doing so undermine your trust? True, the paper is static. Hearts are not always so.

Logan, I think I got Mike's point - at least what he regards as a point (of morality). Poor thing, he never checked his premises for validity. He makes stuff up out of thin air. You can't arrive at a valid conclusion (no matter how sound the intervening logic may be) if you start with a faulty premise. (Paranoid personalities frequently have impeccable logic conjoined with illusory premises. Their reasoning is perfect. Their assumptions are fantastic. Their conclusions, by way of perfect logic, necessarily then end up being as fantastic as their premises.) You can't reason your way out of a faulty premise or fantasy. Mike's 'point' was off the mark by the degree to which his obsession with some 'socialist' bogeyman has narrowed his field of vision. This quote is from a context within a case in which a corporate reorganization was asserted by the IRS to have had no function other than to reduce the tax burden. The IRS lost their case. If we're going to now insist on viewing the quote through our own favorite individual ideological (fantastical) prisms and divorce it from its intent then we can of course assert whatever we wish to assert. BTW, don't you think your 'analogy', such as it is, is just a tiny bit strained - to the point of not passing the giggle test? One more thing, we have a federation of republican governments (republic: A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them. - AHD) whose collective Constitution spells out the bounds of the powers that accrue to which body. If you can convince your 'elected' representatives that your ideas have merit then you should do so. I certainly, along with not just a few others, I imagine, am inclined to think the tax code is too unwieldy. I don't, however, think you or I or anyone else would be very happy for very long if our favorite government functions ceased, for lack of resources, to work tomorrow. Please let me know what aspects of our government you regard as 'socialist'. I really have no clue. As far as I can detect, this obsession with 'socialist'/'socialism'/'socialistic' is as faddish recently as the nation's fantastic obsession with 'communism' was during the Joe McCarthy/HUAC years. You remember that time don't you? - LOL

She may have been taken already - by the politicians. - lol

E. Archer: I'd hate to see GW's transcripts. That would really be frightening. - - It's absurd to think you can 'force' anyone to pursue an education. TJ (in reference to INFANT members of society): "... It is better to tolerate the rare instance of a parent refusing to let his child be educated ... offering education gratis, and to strengthen parental excitement by the disfranchisement of his child while uneducated. Society has certainly a right to disavow him whom they offer, and are permitted to qualify for the duties of a citizen. If we do not force instruction, let us at least strengthen the motives to receive it when offered." - THAT ... doesn't sound like someone who thinks NOT being educated is a good idea. THAT sounds like someone who realized the nature of the mindset of uneducated farmers, who had no way of comprehending (this is not a result of any lack of desire to apply themselves arduously) the value of what they knew nothing about, but whose support he would need to even institute SOME sort of public education system. I do believe he said 'tolerate' and not 'regard as equal in value', 'rare instance' and not 'accepted norm', 'disfranchisement of his child while uneducated' and not 'to be regarded as equal', 'Society has certainly a right to disavow him whom they offer, and are permitted to qualify for the duties of a citizen.' and not 'equally able regardless'. - In reference to ADVANCED courses of study TJ proposes exactly what I've referred to when I said "students do have increasing leeway as they progress". TJ does NOT propose this approach to the education of, what he refers to as, "infant members" (of society). He knew better. He WAS educated. Instead he says; "We shall, on the contrary, allow them uncontrolled choice in the lectures they shall choose to attend, and require ELEMENTARY qualification only, and sufficient AGE." -|- Re Einstein: "... in 1891 (at age 12), he taught himself Euclidean plane geometry from a school booklet and began to study calculus. There is a recurring rumor that Einstein failed mathematics later in his education, but this is untrue; a change in the way grades were assigned caused confusion years later." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein -|- "... (at age 16), still without having completed secondary school, Einstein failed an examination that would have allowed him to pursue a course of study leading to a diploma as an electrical engineer at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. He spent the next year in nearby Aarau at the cantonal secondary school, where he enjoyed excellent teachers and first-rate facilities in physics. Einstein returned in 1896 to the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, where he graduated, in 1900 as a secondary school teacher of mathematics and physics. - http://www.humboldt1.com/%7Egralsto/einstein/early.html - It's a shame we aren't ALL just THAT gifted. -|- You're right, "It is ridiculous to assume that unless a person is 'taught' in a 'school' that he cannot learn to provide for himself and be a productive member of society." That's not the question. The question is whether you'll be happy cleaning bathrooms at the local Hyatt, flipping burgers at the local fast food joint, or whether you'd rather acquire the competence to run a business well or perhaps pursue a profession you would enjoy. You can be 'productive' in a sweatshop. I'm not sure it's the thing to promote through the acceptance or encouragement of ignorance and low skill levels though. -|- I'm sure your great grandfather was a well liked, bright, ambitious man of good character. None of those qualities would, in today's world, save him from losing his farm if he only had the knowledge he was able to acquire then. The fact that children are generally, if not always, eager to learn is not at issue. What's at issue is whether they will have access to the broadest possible range of materials from which to learn AND whether they will have access to the broadest possible range of ideas presented to them by people who can assess what underlies their inquiries 'on the fly', as it were, while addressing these inquiries in a manner that stimulates the development of critical thinking and further inquiry. That skill set is rarely the purview of the uneducated person. -|- As to whether I'd prefer to be stuck in a lifeboat on rough seas or in the Yukon in January with a bunch of dropouts or a bunch of Harvard Law or engineering graduates, I can tell you that, without a split second's hesitation, I'd go for the dudes and dudettes with the degrees. You don't have to look like Paul Bunyan to know what you're doing AND to do it better WITH an education. THAT'S from direct experience - both in the back country, in large corporations, and in dealing with management in the construction trades. -|- As for "So since the education of the individual is the responsibility of the individual". Clearly that's a dubious premise at best. There's simply no such thing as education (as we know it to be - the passing down of previously acquired knowledge) without the support, resources, exhortation, assistance, and encouragement of the society by way of its members. -|- 'You can lead a girl to Vassar but you can't make her think.' - it's a better pun if you also speak German.

Re: "voluntary attendance -- let the students decide which subjects to study" Helo-oo! Students are STUDENTS in their early years because they DON'T know what to study and their parents usually know even less. You don't know what you don't know. That's WHY you rely in part on teachers and counselors to advise you before college, during college and even post-grad. Yes, students do have increasing leeway as they progress. The foolish ones fail to seek the advice of experience when exercising that discretion. In the pre-college years, 'voluntary attendance' gets you any ghetto in any city.

Re: "When's the last time you heard Bill Gates or George Soros advocating a proportionate scheme of taxation?" - Why would they? George Soros, a billionaire in his own right from dealing in the money markets, says "laissez faire capitalism has gotten so out of hand it is now the main enemy of our open society." He adds, "The cult of success has replaced a belief in principles." Soros insists we need progressive tax policies and more government regulations to correct the current obscenities in the rich-poor divide. - http://www.hpr1.com/archives/oct0903/gadfly.htm -|- "In his introductory chapter, 'The Deficiencies of Global Capitalism' ... Soros is clear in arguing for more investment in social development. He wants nations and entrepreneurs to be environmentally responsible. Considering the motives and history of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship, Soros is also an advocate of a strong regulatory role for the state." - http://human-nature.com/nibbs/04/soros.html -|- About 120 wealthy Americans recently signed a petition to OPPOSE (my caps) Bush's proposal to eliminate the estate tax. They include George Soros, billionaire financier; Warren Buffett, an investor considered the world's fourth-richest person, and William Gates Sr., father of the world's wealthiest individual, Bill Gates, chairman of Microsoft Corp. These wealthy folks understand that American democracy depends on equality of opportunity -- a meritocracy, rather than an aristocracy based on inherited wealth. -- http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/22/ED186491.DTL

Thank you E Archer! It's a shame that Jefferson was SUCH a promoter of the socialistic institution of public education in the elementary grades! I mean, don't you (collective plural + 'Brilliant Mike') think it should be up to each individual family to provide their own educational resources for their own offspring?

Good Grief! 'Accuracy' has nothing to do with this quote. It only says 'Don't pay more than the tax code says you owe'. The one tiny problem is that not even a single person at the IRS can make enough sense of the thousands of pages of it to be able to explain it. BTW, the notion that "the U.S. is a Christian Based Republic" is purest ignorant rot that's nevertheless earnestly wished for by some zealots in the same way they wish for some 'higher power' or 'sky fairy' to supplant their lost 'forgiving protector/causative agent' archetypes. The wish doesn't make it so. The assertion of a 'higher law' is always a good excuse for the likes of Tim McVeigh. It's the most tawdry, cheapest sort of hypocritical 'religion of convenience'. No wonder it's so popular.

We're going to miss you very much Art. Sometimes your humor goes over the head - as it should. It's one of the drawbacks of sophistication. Thanks for your humor for all these years.

It's 'ridiculous' - not 'rediculous'. It's 'opiate' - not 'opiat'. It's 'ecclesia' - not 'Ecclesiastes' (which is a book in the bible). It's ironic that someone who hasn't taken one economics course professes keen insight into actual economics. Perhaps 'WE' actually didn't attend public school. It's called 'sarcasm'.

E. A. - By that criterion I'd be "qualified, entitled, and morally obliged to evaluate the conduct of our" plane's captain (who is designated to be the SOLE AUTHORITY between the time of our embarkment and the time of our disembarkation) so as to 'judge' for myself 'whether circumstances warrant obedience or resistance to the commands of the' captain. (For the Flight 93 scenario we need to recall that the plane had LOST its captain.) There might be those who would object to the idea of my making such an evaluation despite my impeccable (LOL) flying and navigation skills or lack thereof. My 'freedom' (of expression maybe?) would have little to do with their objection. Granted, in the normal course of events, the sentiment expressed by the quote is valid. It would be misleading to take it quite so literally though. In the end, the quote is a call to 'follow one's conscience in one's actions' conflated with a moral obligation to do so, thereby vacating the agreement we have made to 'abide by the rule of law' (which may indeed be 'unjust' and which, in most cases ought to be addressed by the legislative branch of government, assuming it's functional, when that's the case). Locke is making the same argument that was made by the 911 hijackers in favor of a 'Faith Based Initiative'. - - Yes, yes, it's a miracle (oh, sorry, that would, of course, be 'Miracle') - or ... not so much maybe - lol.

Now, you know I really HATE to agree with D. L. Rosenthal because he's likely to attribute my comments to 'divine intervention' or something of the sort (LOL) ... BUT ... to think that ALL people are qualified to "to evaluate the conduct of our rulers" just has to be delusional. Helo-oo ... remember the initial GWBush popularity? I mean, there are clearly those of defective intellect and cognitive powers for whom the task of evaluation poses an insurmountable obstacle which they're just not up to tackling. - - "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Sir Winston Churchill - - Seriously though, there actually is a, thankfuly very small, minority of people whose minds aren't even up to feeding themselves, let alone reading, writing, or making political evaluations. Just that fact makes the use of 'all' a bit hyperbolic.

My, my, aren't we the sanctimonious ones! It's nice that none of us went to 'public' schools but were instead tutored privately in our parlors. I know we all have fond memories of the baby grand languishing in the background while we were being taught Greek and Latin as we sat at our very own personal secretaries during our grade, middle, and high school years. Thank goodness WE didn't 'take' public assistance to get from grade school through high school. It's also nice that most of our parents never took advantage of the 'GI Bill' to subsidize their higher education when college degrees were a relative rarity and that they wouldn't do it today. It was noble of them to never have taken advantage of VA loans to purchase their first house after WWII either but rather eschewed the federal ecclesia (we learned that term in our early Greek lessons by the glow of the fire in the hearth) and their socialistic programs. Oh yes, as I recall, we BOTH walked miles to the one-room schoolhouse through the snow AND had the tutors visit us in our cozy parlors - yeah ... that's it. - - PS, the undertaxed are those who make enough to pay no taxes at all.

LOL - There's that drug obsession thing again. I just have to wonder what that's REALLY about. I guess that if the shoe fits ... you just HAVE to show it off ... somewhere. "Not to be, but to seem, virtuous -- it is a formula whose utility we all discovered in the nursery." - C. S. Lewis

The "God of Nature" isn't exactly the 'God of man' - Genesis 1:26 - And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. - Genesis 1:28 - And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. || And that's been our approach to nature which has lead us to ignore the fact that NATURE ... doesn't care WHAT we do or what we think or the fact that we may not like that it doesn't care. It doesn't even care about the god of man - and doesn't care that man doesn't like it. BTW, will somebody please give Bush some fellatio so we can get on with his impeachment already.

It's a shame he didn't even try to live up to his words.

Anon, Reston is exactly on point here. Simpletons, however, seem to gravitate to the 'simple' idea of 'proportionate' taxation having never gotten their feet wet in the actual economics underlying the debate.

This from a president who spent like it was going out of style. Reagan's Social Security reform commission's plan increased government revenues by raising social security payroll taxes, a tax increase that left the poorest 40% of income earners with higher federal taxes than before Reagan's income tax cuts. To cover the budget deficit which was exacerbated by Reagan's military buildup, the administration borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, and by the end of Reagan's second term the national debt held by the public rose from 26% of GDP (1980), to 41% in 1989, the highest level since 1963. By 1988, the debt totaled $2.6 trillion. The country owed more to foreigners than it was owed, and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation. - source: Wikipedia.

Anonymous; That's the point of the quote. Thoreau had it right as well (per E A). recall the 'good' the white races did for the native Americans as well as all of the other peoples around the world whom they 'conquered' into empire. The trouble was, they had no place to run to.

Oh yeah, Anonymous, Tampa ought to get together with BRIAN D. PICKETT, Tampa, Florida, USA. - - Under: http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/Henry.Morgenthau.Quote.1C65 BRIAN D. PICKETT, Tampa, Florida, USA says "PS. Notice how fredoom hating scum like Anonymous never say who they realy are." but they (lol) both seem to fear 'non-whites'. Hmm, is it in Tampa's water?

The quote reflects a simplistic view containing some initial truth seasoned with the heavy hand of ideology. E Archer has hit on the 'secret tax' in his reference to 'managed inflation' which makes the debt 'worth less' as time progresses. In other words, the actual 'wealth' needed to pay back a debt is reduced by the inflation rate over time.

Anonymous; Thanks so much for that insight. - ROFL - It's amazing the things you can learn from anonyms. What on earth made me think that the idea of 'RACE MIXING', as a pejorative notion, had become passé along with the term 'colored'? FROM {http://www.melungeons.com/articles/mar2005.htm} we have the following: The Melungeon DNA Surname Project by Dr. Elizabeth Hirschman and Dr. Donald Panther Yates state that Abraham Lincoln was of Jewish ancestry. Dr. Hirschman writes "The DNA sample we have came from a Berry male from Tennessee whose ancestors had arrived in Virginia. The marriage of Abraham Lincoln's parents was performed in the home of a Berry (and not a church) suggesting that not only the Lincolns, but also the Berry's were of Jewish descent. We believe that many of the very earliest settlers who came to North America from England were actually Sephardic Jews."