12 comments on “UPDATED: So….About that ‘Quality’ Education Offered in ‘Public’ Schools…

  1. Pingback: DTG: I Usually Don’t Discuss Politics | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  2. I saw this on the news this AM. There is a fight going on with the Fort Worth ISD over this… It was the first time I’d seen that bizarre symbol.

    As I understand it, the Regime is attempting to leverage the Civil Rights Act to cover these gender confused, mentally ill people. If their attempt is successful, you’ll have concrete proof that “the rule of law” is meaningless and that we’ve officially and truly moved into Banana Republic territory.

    The answer from any given State to the reduction of funds from the Fed.Gov SHOULD be to equally withhold some or all of the taxes collected on behalf of the Regime. I believe once that occurs, this year, next year or in five years, that will be seen (in the future) as equivalent to the shots fired at Lexington.

    Jeff B.

  3. “The mind boggles at the calm acceptance of these ‘edicts’ by the populace.”

    Exactly so…rule by and of nitwits. “Rule of Law,” it’s quaintly called. Ha, I’d say archaically.

    Get it? The answer isn’t to tweak the ruling; it’s to eliminate it. A society can’t rule its way into sanity; that’s why it’s never happened. You can’t fool Mother Nature and there’s only one way to sanity—choice. If you could actually force a person to focus and think rationally, it might be worth considering. But it’s moot because you can’t, so it isn’t. Thugs gotta be stopped; everyone else can use their minds. End of story. Consensualism.

  4. How’s this for consensualism? You’re welcome to your opinion, however, you miss the mark on ‘ruling’ Americans. If an edict comes down, such as the one in the links, even though it technically doesn’t have the ‘force of law’ but states there are consequences, it’s outside of the ‘rule of law’ and is, in fact, rule by fiat/decree/order. That’s a fundamental transformation of our law in and of itself, and as such, deserves no consideration. Further, when it comes to ‘rule,’ I am, and have always been, a proponent of ‘limited governance according to the framework laid down by the unanimous Declaration, the Constitution, and the principles of the Founding. Governance is not ‘ruling’; governance is the voluntary consensual agreement, by custom and choice, of the people being governed. The problem lies in the lack of consequential action taken by the consenting people when the government oversteps its bounds (like in the post) and sees no reason not to continue to do so.

  5. I can assure you that Obama’s daughters have the protection of the SS when they visit a restroom. Those girls will have protection the rest of their lives because someone will take revenge on their father through them.

  6. The US government gets money from the States, then refuses to give it back in the form of education funds- EXTORTION

  7. That is why it is called “Public Education”. I call it Public Extortion.

  8. Anyone still unsure about what needs to be done to deal with this? You’re the hammer and they are the nail.

  9. 1) More than half the people in the US did NOT consent to the actions of the current administration.

    2) There is no *consequential action* consenting people can take against the administration, they can only bide their time until the next election and try again.

  10. Every year there are 125,000+ NEW instances of parents removing their children from criminal grip of the US gov’t, and each year that amount increases by 10-15%.

    They can only control you if you play their game.
    Play your own game, of life.

  11. That’s all fine; I well understand the motives for your position. As I’m sure you recognize, they have their motives too. And no, they’re not equivalent…yours are reasonable and honorable and for the most part, theirs are not. The part I think you may not recognize, is that socially this doesn’t matter. People choose and that’s that. Of course there should be–are, really–consequences, but absent rights abridgement it’s not for someone else to dish out those consequences. Reality does a fine job of it.

    I’m speaking generally here, not this topic. Here’s the FACT you’ve got wrong—“Governance is not ‘ruling’…” Sorry, but yes it is. Not only that, it’s nothing else. As we both know, a government (as has existed on Earth) has absolutely no tool at its avail EXCEPT force.

    You can SAY, “governance is the voluntary consensual agreement,” but it’s not, at least for someone who doesn’t consent. As you note, consent is an affirmative action, a choice. If a person is not free to make it, then it’s not a choice; it’s a rule and one that must be enforced. These are all facts and it’s your choice whether or not to acknowledge them. Just as a commie-lib can’t change the monstrosity of socialism into “public good” just by saying so, so you can’t change non-consensual governance into consensual agreement by saying so. The righteousness of your position has nothing to do with that fact. Things are as they are, not as we say they are.

    Nothing to argue about really; just thought I’d mention. I’m pretty sure neither of our positions suffers for lack of clarity!

Feel free to comment! Debates are welcome, so long as they add to the discussion. Ad hominem attacks, accusations, uncontrolled vitriol, thread hijacks, personal threats, or any comment that otherwise detracts from DTG's stated mission will not be approved or posted. Repeat violators will be banned.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s