All that you know is about to change…

That’s what Aslan said in the trailer. He was trying to warn you to not go see this movie. I won’t spoil it for you other than to say that this movie barely resembles the book from which it was derived. Please allow me to introduce to you a verb that we created a while back.

Eragon verb

1. To destroy what might otherwise have been a fine movie adaptation of a popular piece of literature, recent or otherwise, by radically deviating from the book’s plot or by changing a central character’s nature, motives, or personality. e.g. This movie was total crap! They totally eragonned it!

The movie Eragon was a horrible adaptation of its namesake book, which was rather unfortunate. The most recently eragonned movie was The Spiderwick Chronicles. If you saw the movie without ever having read the books you won’t know what I mean. But the original namesake and The Spiderwick Chronicles can’t hold a candle to what they did to Prince Caspian.

To say that they eragonned the movie is too kind an assessment. We were excited to see the next installment of the Narnia series. We even went to see the midnight premier. What we saw was more than merely disappointing. What we saw would have C.S. Lewis turning in his grave fast enough to power a small city. People actually got up and left the theater during the show. We sat through this train-wreck hoping that at some point it would improve but alas, it did not. We might have left too, but were too polite to get up in front of all the other viewers (we were in the middle of the row, 3 rows up from the walkway in a newer Cinemark).

If this movie makes all of its money back, I’ll be surprised. I will not pay full price to see another sequel directed, produced or written by the same team. In fact, I want my money back. I want my two hours and twenty minutes back. Disney and Walden Media should be ashamed of what they’ve done to C.S. Lewis’ work. Boo!

It’s rather interesting to read about schools these days. A year or so ago, I’d have been quick to jump on the allegations of threats and attacks made a few days ago. I’m glad that I don’t have to print a retraction now. Have a look. I think her parents are doing the right thing letting her face the consequences of her choices. They’ve been dignified in apologizing to all involved and in letting everyone know that the proper authorities will be handling things from this point. It does illustrate a point — it’s not always the parents’ fault if a child misbehaves. I can’t say for sure that such is the case here, but it certainly seems as though the parents have been trying to do the right things at home, based solely on their reaction to what unfolded.

In other news, a girl was beaten by six of her classmates for thirty minutes at someone’s home. The perpetrators filmed this incident and posted video footage of the attack on YouTube, apparently in retaliation for things the victim had posted on MySpace. As cold and callous as these acts are by themselves, the behavior exhibited by some of the perpetrators as they were in the process of being arrested and booked into the local jail goes even farther:

Judd said the most shocking thing about the attack is how lightly the alleged assailants took their actions. Vieira asked him if they showed any remorse when they were arrested.

“None at all,” he said. “When we had them arrested and in detention, they were laughing and joking, ‘Guess we’re not going to go to the beach on this spring break.’ One girl actually asked our detective, ‘Am I going to be released in time to go to cheerleading practice tomorrow?’ “

I can’t even begin to understand such cold inhumanity. Apparently one girl tried to warn her, but what of the remainder? I don’t understand. Are they desensitized to violence? Are they so filled with aggression that they no longer behave as rational humans but rather as creatures of base instincts and passions?

Schools may not be the problem, but they certainly don’t seem to be helping the problem either. My own memories recall a certain prey or be preyed upon element to school, but no one ever dared take it as far as these girls did.

The victim suffered a concussion, loss of hearing in her left ear and reduced vision in her left eye. According to this report the victim will be homeschooled now. I can’t say that I blame her. Going back to school would be rather difficult, leave alone the psychological mending which will need to take place before she will feel safe around her peers again.

How do you teach your children to treat others with dignity and respect? The victim apparently wrote some rather threatening and incendiary things about the other girls on MySpace. This doesn’t make the beating justified — not by any stretch. But would the perpetrators have had a reason to even consider attacking her if she’d treated them with dignity and respect? Why did the perpetrators feel like their animalistic, violent attack on the victim was justified? Didn’t their parents teach them to resolve their differences in more constructive ways? Did they not get that memo? If they did, what made them set it aside and choose to behave so cruelly? What about the girl who made false accusations? Does she not realize how damaging false accusations can be to someone’s character and destiny?

Man’s inhumanity to man apparently knows no bounds. I believe that the best way to combat this is to begin at home. Parents have the duty and obligation to teach their children to respect others: Respect their beliefs, respect their personal boundaries, respect their culture. Treat them as you would like to be treated — with respect and dignity. If children don’t learn these things at home, the chances that they’ll learn them on their own at some future point drop dramatically. What do you think? How do you feel?

The recent tragedy in Colorado has had me thinking.  I can’t say that this wouldn’t have happened if the children were homeschooled.  First and foremost because I would feel like I was exploiting someone else to boost my agenda.  And second, because I couldn’t feel like I was factually correct in even suggesting such a thing.  Forced-entry into homes happens all over the world on a daily basis and subsequent tragedy, be it sexual assault, murder or theft of property, is all too common in such cases. The bottom line here is that even though the school had some kind of protections in place, this came out of the blue and there was nothing they could have done to prevent it.
I pondered how I might have felt if something like that had happened to one of my daughters, or the daughter of a close friend.  I even tried to place myself in the shoes of the parents whose daughter was killed by this creep.  I can’t truly imagine what they must be going through, but I extend my deepest condolences to them.  I extend my condolences not just to them, but to all of the victims and their families.  It is truly unfortunate that we in our society must confront this manner of evil.

I also extend my condolences to the family of the perpetrator.  Having a brother/son/uncle go off the deep end and do something so surprising must be agonizing.   I have often wondered how difficult it would be in such a situation and my heart goes out to you as well.
Please remember that the victims in this scenario are still our brothers and sisters — part of the human family —  and they need our love, support and prayers just as much as anyone else.

I think it only fair and reasonable to expect would-be voters to provide proof that they are eligible to vote.

House bill to require voter ID – The Washington Times
The House yesterday passed legislation that would require voters to show a valid photo identification in federal elections over the overwhelming objections of Democrats who compared the bill to segregation-era measures aimed at disenfranchising Southern blacks.

I don’t see this as a way of disenfranchising any voters who have a legal right to vote.  This would provide a way for considerably reducing voter fraud.  I won’t say eliminate because fake IDs are still likely to be used to vote on behalf of the infirm or the deceased.  As a side note, imagine showing up at your voting precinct only to discover that you’d already voted, or rather that someone pretending to be you voted in your stead!  In any case, a measure like this seems fair and reasonable.  Why would anyone oppose it?  Why do the Democrats oppose it so uniformly?

It is not unreasonable to suggest that the Democrats stand to lose only fraudulent votes as a result of this measure.  Is that why they are opposed to it?  Are there a significant number of Democrat-voting people who do not have some form of government issued photo identification?  It seems to me that this is the only legitimate complaint the Democrats can lodge in this case, and yet it rings very hollow.  It is fair and reasonable to expect proof of eligibility to vote.

I spent two years of my life in Japan.  I almost married a Japanese girl.  I don’t consider myself an expert, but I believe I have enough knowledge and insight to make a few valid observations.

My observation is that it’s about time Japan stood up and regained some of its national pride!

Japan’s Abe, Poised to Lead, Offers Nation Vision of Pride – washingtonpost.com

Japan carefully tread the waters of regret and apologizing for past atrocities for many decades.  The generation directly involved is all but passed away.  Japan has much for which they should take pride.  They have a phenomenal economy, they make some great electronics and automobiles, they have a rich and vibrant culture with a long and colorful history.  How much longer ought we, or any other nation, hold the descendents of one generation responsible for actions they haven’t committed?  The national guilt bit has long past worn thin.

Japan has also demonstrated that as a democratic society they act with responsibility and decorum.  Why shouldn’t they be allowed to have a real military?  Even Germany was allowed that, and much sooner than Japan I might add.  Japan wishes to shoulder more of its own weight, militarily speaking?  I’m all for it.  They are the ones who stand to bear the brunt of any aggression from North Korea, they should be prepared to face it.  Their “Self-Defense Force” does not constitute the level of preparedness needed, so I say: “Go Japan!”

I found this story floating around the web in many of my frequented haunts.  I wouldn’t even bother to fisk the content, but I find myself drawn to comment.  I have my own problems with what this young woman had to say.  You have a reading assignment before you attempt to fisk what I write.  Read John Taylor Gatto’s book, The Underground History of American Education, especially chapters 5-9, 11-13 and 16.

The piece in question, by Carrie Luce.

I find it troubling, to say the least, that she would accuse those who choose to educate their own at home of treason.  Treason?  Actively working against the interests of the USA or in support of her enemies?  She comes to this conclusion not based on any legal basis or any demonstrable case, but rather based on her perceptions of how we as citizens ought to behave in regards to society and the State.

To really understand this, you need to know what goes on in a public school. It isn’t all reading and math and rote memorization – really in today’s society all of that is less important than the SOCIAL IDENTITY of the children that pass through the halls of public school. Almost since their inception, public schools have been a means of molding the children into adults with a social conscience that benefits the society they live in.

I actually agree with her in this statement.  I believe she’s the first person who has admitted this, that I have come across, who actually both believes and agrees with this philosophy.  Forget what you may have believed about the purpose of public education in America.  Its real purpose is what she claims it is.  But most who are in the know will declare in no uncertain terms that education in America is about education, not social shaping. Why does she say differently? She’s a “True Believer,” to use John Taylor Gatto’s parlance.  If you check her profile page, you can see that both of her parents were public educators.  This revelation isn’t intended to condemn, nor is it intended to alter your persuasion, but it does serve to suggest where the “True Believer” mentality may have originated.  Don’t know what a “True Believer” is?  You were supposed to do the required reading. Read chapter 5.

Ms. Luce’s attempt to whitewash public education by mentioning the societal good the public school system did in educating children about basic sanitation, or facilitating the immunization of all school children is feeble.  While recent years have most assuredly brought curriculum designed to teach equality of the races and genders (gender studies remain unresolved in the minds of many, but taught they are), this is extremely different from the public schools of a century ago.  Perhaps Ms. Luce would do well to learn about the eugenics movements and the role public education played during those years, not to mention the segregation which continued until only a few decades ago.

Perhaps Ms. Luce’s most glaring oversight is trumpeting the value of so-called specialization.  Read Chapter 11 of Gatto’s book for insight into the relationship between the assembly line and public education.  The most damning quote I have ever read regarding public education is a statement made by President Woodrow Wilson:

We want one class to have a liberal education. We want another class, a very much larger class of necessity, to forgo the privilege of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks.

Hmmm.  I don’t get the idea that this President Wilson had “homogenization” of society in mind.  Do you?  This is clearly a class divide.  The vehicle that was to be used to achieve this divide was education.  Some would be fitted to lead by the education they would receive.  The rest would receive an education that would “fit [them] to perform specific difficult manual tasks,” in lieu of the unstated but inferred benefit which would accompany the “privilege of a liberal education.” Great! Specialization! But at what cost? A “liberal education,” as Wilson would have understood it, was the kind of education that teaches the mind not just mathematical facts and the rudiments of science and language, but an education that teaches one how to think. This method of education had benefits — benefits the president himself acknowledged — but in spite of these benefits and the superior skills associated therewith, the President at that time was asking a large majority of the nation’s children to “forgo” these benefits.

What many home educators believe is that all children will benefit from a true liberal arts education.  This differs greatly from what has been come to be associated with that moniker.  Rather than an education in an ivy bedecked academy studying from “liberal” professors, I speak of an education to rival that of Thomas Jefferson (If you are unfamiliar with the amount of learning and knowledge that great man obtained, you should do some research).  We do not believe that being fit to perform manual tasks is in our children’s best interest, nor do we believe that the homogenization of society is healthy.  Having a rigorous curriculum and well-rounded education prepares one to not only excel at what one chooses to pursue, but aids in choosing what to pursue.

I believe that this is more beneficial to my children.  You may disagree, but that is your right.  Well educated children serve society better and in more ways than they otherwise could.  To suggest that society is harmed by giving children a more rounded education is simply ludicrous.  That is unless you believe that society is better served by an army of laborers kept sated by the offerings of the State, too stupid to understand that they are only cogs in a machine — too blinded to see that they could be much more than they were led to believe.

Yes, Ms. Luce.  You are a “True Believer” in every sense conveyed by the words.  I am saddened that you truly believe that fitting individuals to perform one task, and one alone is the best hope for the future of our society. It frankly scares me that you believe it treasonous to do or believe otherwise. Fortunately, we violate no laws when we educate our own at home. May it forever be so.

There’s nothing like buddies to reinforce bad choices. Now we have 3 of these bozos in a tight geographical area.

Bolivia’s president-elect denounces free markets

Bolivian President-elect Evo Morales, fresh from a visit with Fidel Castro, launched a world tour Tuesday by joining with Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez in a denunciation of free-market economics — a sign of the growing relationship among the three leftist leaders.

Denouncing free markets…hmmm. Seems to me this is a sure sign that they aren’t understood very well by Mr. Morales. Perhaps he should read a relatively short publication, slightly more than 200 years old by a certain Adam Smith:

If you’re a regular reader of this weblog, you know that I predicted that Hugo Chavez will not go quietly when his term as “president” of Venezuela comes to an end. I predicted that he’d set himself up as another Socialist Dictator, like Castro, since the two seem to be buddies. It appears that I underestimated Chavez. He’s aiming to be much more like another famous dictator. Let’s see if you can figure out who I mean:

A Perilous Hanukkah with Hugo

Celebrating on December 24, Chavez said “Christmas is a rebellious, revolutionary, socialist Christ…the descendants of those who crucified Christ have taken ownership of the riches of the world, and they have concentrated it in a small number of hands.” Chavez said he was “decided” to change history, and he said that every day, he is joined by a “greater quantity of Chiefs of State and leaders in that struggle.” Among those are Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, with whom Chavez recently met. On December 14, Ahmadinejad described the Holocaust as “a myth,” months after he suggested that Israel should be “wiped off the map.”

Amazing, isn’t it? The association with Holocaust deniers may be coincidental, but in light of his statements can you honestly believe that he wishes Jews well?

This is a disturbing development in the Chavez Watch chronicles. I hope that no violence against anyone on the basis of their ethnicity or political leanings results from Mr. Chavez’s apparent quest to become a tin-pot dictator.

I was too busy to post this yesterday, but rest assured that I remember Pearl Harbor. My grandfather was there. He survived.

Remember Pearl Harbor? WWII vets worry that it is just a history lesson: South Florida Sun-Sentinel

Remember Pearl Harbor?

The battle cry that once stirred troops to action has become a question that now stirs anguish in vets.

These days, few cast their minds back to Pearl Harbor, and some people under 30 are hard pressed to recite what happened on that “Day of Infamy” exactly 64 years ago.

“I have no idea whatsoever,” said Kristina Krakehl, 23, of Boca Raton.

“It’s not really that significant,” Brinsley Elliott, 20, of Fort Lauderdale, said after being told why Dec. 7, 1941, is notable in U.S. history.

I was utterly appalled and thoroughly dismayed to learn that some young people believe Pearl Harbor is “not really that significant.” I’ll bite my tongue and won’t say what I would like to say. Instead I will say this: It is extremely significant. The country as we now know it is a product of the events of the past, good and ill. Even if you disagree with policy decisions made by the various administrations the country has seen, the entire world economy is vastly different from what it might otherwise have been because of two nations, primarily the USA and Japan. Own any products made by Sony? Or perhaps you drive a Toyota? Post WWII, the USA helped to rebuild Japan. Japan went on to become a world financial power. If you have no care for the lives lost or the war fought as a result of Pearl Harbor, you can’t deny that Japan has affected the world in a major way.

To say that Pearl Harbor is “not really that significant” is to deny the blood shed on that day, or to call the sacrifices made in defense of home, family and country a wash. I don’t believe that for a moment, and I salute those brave men and women who served their country nobly.

If you know someone who was in Pearl Harbor that day, tell them that you will not forget what happened that day. Pass on the memories to your children or grandchildren. Don’t let the “day which will live in infamy” die in infamy because some of the youth of today don’t think it significant enough to mention.

As if it weren’t enough that I admit that I see eye-to-eye with Jimmy Carter on something, now I feel compelled to admit that not all French people hate Americans because of evidence presented (Note: I’m being completely facetious. I never really believed that all French people were like the reports we get in our media).

Roger L. Simon: An American in Paris

October a year ago I was here for a week. I had been invited to a Hallowe’en dinner party prepared by a couple I know, both of whom are chefs. During the dinner, I was asked by another guest if I supported Bush or Kerry. With a smile, I quickly and firmly replied “President Bush.” To my surprise, the entire table – about 30 people altogether – burst out in applause. One woman said, “The U.S. did the right thing in Iraq. Chirac is on Saddam’s payroll. That’s the only reason our government has opposed yours there,” and all the other heads at the table nodded in agreement. This group included some people whom I know usually vote for the Socialist Party rather than Chirac’s UMP.

There are a few more similar stories he shares. Worth a read if only for a reminder.

Hat tip: Instapundit.

I mean, I agree with Jimmy Carter on something he said and the universe didn’t come crashing down around me.

Carter condemns abortion culture

Former President Jimmy Carter yesterday condemned all abortions and chastised his party for its intolerance of candidates and nominees who oppose abortion.

“I never have felt that any abortion should be committed — I think each abortion is the result of a series of errors,” he told reporters over breakfast at the Ritz-CarltonHotel, while across town Senate Democrats deliberated whether to filibuster the nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. because he may share President Bush and Mr. Carter’s abhorrence of abortion.

“These things impact other issues on which [Mr. Bush] and I basically agree,” the Georgia Democrat said. “I’ve never been convinced, if you let me inject my Christianity into it, that Jesus Christ would approve abortion.”

While I still fundamentally disagree with many of Mr. Carter’s policies and decisions, both in and out of office, on this one I can say I honestly agree. Those who ordinarily agree with him may not in this case. It will be interesting to hear of any responses to this.

UPDATE: I’m not the only one with this outlook.

…from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals:

CNN.com – School sex survey lawsuit thrown out – Nov 2, 2005

A federal appeals court Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit by parents outraged that the Palmdale school district in California surveyed their elementary school children about sex.

The three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the parents’ claim that they have the exclusive right to tell their children about sex.

Again I ask the question: To whom, ostensibly, does a child belong? Is a child the ward of his or her parents or the state? If the state is allowed to usurp parental authority, which in nearly all cases should be absolute with minor children, we have a state en route to a Soviet-style socialist utopia — a bad thing in my book, though there are plenty who think otherwise.

I watched Law & Order last night. It was a fascinating episode. The villain in this episode was a nurse in a free clinic who had taken it upon herself to be judge and jury of who was fit to reproduce — She was sterilizing girls without their knowledge or consent because they were drug addicts, or abusing their children, etc. The situation is different but the mentality is similar: I know better than you what’s best for you. This is antithetical to the freedom this country was founded on, and it’s wrong. The nurse in Law & Order was wrong, regardless of her motivations, and so is the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

School children know boring…or do they?

Telegraph | News | Marriage is just too boring, say children

Children do not want to get married because they think it will lead to a life of boredom, according to a survey conducted by the BBC.

Boring? Let’s read what John Taylor Gatto has to say about boring:

I taught for thirty years in some of the worst schools in Manhattan, and in some of the best, and during that time I became an expert in boredom. Boredom was everywhere in my world, and if you asked the kids, as I often did, why they felt so bored, they always gave the same answers: They said the work was stupid, that it made no sense, that they already knew it. They said they wanted to be doing something real, not just sitting around. They said teachers didn’t seem to know much about their subjects and clearly weren’t interested in learning more. And the kids were right: their teachers were every bit as bored as they were.

Boredom is the common condition of schoolteachers, and anyone who has spent time in a teachers’ lounge can vouch for the low energy, the whining, the dispirited attitudes, to be found there. When asked why they feel bored, the teachers tend to blame the kids, as you might expect. Who wouldn’t get bored teaching students who are rude and interested only in grades? If even that. Of course, teachers are themselves products of the same twelve-year compulsory school programs that so thoroughly bore their students, and as school personnel they are trapped inside structures even more rigid than those imposed upon the children. Who, then, is to blame?

We all are. My grandfather taught me that. One afternoon when I was seven I complained to him of boredom, and he batted me hard on the head. He told me that I was never to use that term in his presence again, that if I was bored it was my fault and no one else’s. The obligation to amuse and instruct myself was entirely my own, and people who didn’t know that were childish people, to be avoided if possible. Certainty not to be trusted. That episode cured me of boredom forever, and here and there over the years I was able to pass on the lesson to some remarkable student. For the most part, however, I found it futile to challenge the official notion that boredom and childishness were the natural state of affairs in the classroom.

Can boredom in the classroom translate into boredom in the home? Can children be taught that “the obligation to amuse and instruct” themselves is their own responsibility and that those who fail to do so are “childish people, to be avoided if possible”?

It seems to me that many homes are glorified boarding houses where children are merely tenants. All of their primary activities are outside the home (school, sports, friends) and all they do at home is homework, eating and sleeping with a bit of media, interactive or not. Naturally, such an existence will seem second rate. It is a good thing that children grow up and think better of parenthood as they mature.

Read the whole Gatto article. Boredom is a symptom of a severe societal malady. Until reading the Telegraph article I had never considered that relationships could be construed as boring, leave alone marriage. It saddened me that a full 27% of 2,000 7- to 11-year-olds thought of marriage as a “‘pointless’ union.” It’s downright discouraging to hear a 38-year-old mother of three answer the question, “What is the best thing about being married?”

The best thing about being married is having someone who puts the rubbish out on Wednesday night. It’s the only thing I can think of … it’s very handy and if you weren’t married you’d have to do it yourself.

How are the children supposed to have a bright view of marriage if parent’s views are as inglorious as that?

Hugo Chávez is still gunning to become the next Castro. Here’s the latest:

Chávez now aims for corporate-owned land

“There is no rule of law here,” said Puche, who accuses state officials of encouraging land grabs by declaring his and dozens of other farms state land.

Takeovers like this are part of President Hugo Chávez’s recently accelerated land redistribution campaign in which thousands of rural poor are being granted rights to till arable farmland traditionally concentrated in the hands of wealthy landowners.

After Mr. Chávez’s controversial land reform bill passed in 2001, the government began implementing the program by redistributing its own land holdings to poor families. Then last January, the government began to seize land held by private owners. But now the campaign, which remains popular here, is increasingly targeting land owned by large corporations, sparking fresh concerns that it is chasing out foreign investment.

The sanctity of private property rights are fundamental to true freedom, economic as well as personal. Mr. Chávez is doing exactly what I would have done, if I were bent on becoming a Socialist dictator — take away private property rights.

Do you remember the outcry when the SCOTUS recently ruled that eminent domain could be used to take someone’s private property and give it to another entity? This is because private property is one of the rights held most sacred in our nation’s founding documents. Do I think it is fair that 80% of the land in Venezuela is held by 5% of the population? Not really, but granting the government the power to take that land, with or without just recompense, is only going to come back to haunt the people of Venezuela.

The next thing I’d do if I wanted to become the next Castro would be this. Nothing like having your own television station to air your views, let alone aggrandize yourself and extend the reach of your cult of personality.