Cut the ED budget, in whole.

Vic Biorseth, Monday, March 28, 2011
http://www.Thinking-Catholic-Strategic-Center.com

(This article, and others like it, was written as part of the Shut Down Unneeded Bureaucracy effort to cut spending.)

Regarding the US Dept of Education (ED) – Education is not listed under Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, so why is the US government concerning itself with education? Did America not have any education, and were all Americans illiterate, before we had the ED? Does American education need the US government to continue to exist and operate?

We’re talking about a Cabinet-level department here, born of the Department of Education Organization Act, signed into law by Jiminy Carter in 1979, going into effect in 1980. If the purpose of this law was to harm American education and increase illiteracy, then it has been wildly successful. This act divided the Department of Health, Education and Welfare into the ED, and the Department of Health and Human Services. None of these functions are the legitimate responsibility of the Congress or of the federal government, but here we shall talk about the ED alone.

The ED mission is claimed to be to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. But there is nothing equal about the access. Some races and minorities receive preferential treatment at the expense of other races and minorities, and at the expense of the majority. This is purely discriminatory treatment, much of it based on race, which is to say, much of it is racist. It is not possible to give favorable treatment one race or one minority over any others without simultaneously giving unfavorable treatment to another race or group, based solely upon race or minority status. Unfavorable treatment based on race is, definitively, racism. All of it is flat out discrimination, and purely discriminatory treatment. “Equal Opportunity” and “Equal Access” programs do the very discriminatory things they falsely claim to be trying to oppose.

The claim that American “public”, i.e., government, education is “decentralized,” as compared to other countries, and that the federal government is not heavily involved in determining curricula, education standards and accreditation is patently false. The Secretary of Education is advised by the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity on all matters pertaining to accreditation, eligibility and the certification process for institutions of higher education. ED formulates, controls and administers giant federal funding programs, including college financial aid, and collects massive amounts of data to aid in enforcement of federal civil rights laws.

When ED says “Jump,” every government funded educational institution in America says, “How high, how far, and when can I come back down?”

There are some trends in government education that are clearly obvious and universal, from Kindergarten through the university, and, I submit, all of them have their deepest roots in the highest levels of government. At the top of the list are, of course, the Big Three. Government education officially demands that the false and unproven theories of Darwin, Freud and Marx be taught as if they were true and as if they were proven, thus, leading American education, and America, into clear falsehood. Building upon this false foundation are many other purposeful malicious teachings, done under the direction of ED. Here are a few of them.

• Opposition to Christianity and to all expressions of Christian religion, including opposition to Christian prayer, Christian moral norms, mention of God (even in the Pledge of Allegiance,) any Christian symbols or even small Christian references.
• Opposition to the notion of parental first-authority over their own children; establishment and increased emphasis on ever increasing state authority over children, and the reduction of the importance of family.
• Notions of equality of status, wealth and material goods, based on Marxism.
• The teaching of the normalcy, admirable nature and social acceptance of openly expressed homosexuality.
• Teaching the mechanics of “safe” fornication, “protected” sodomy and “discrete” promiscuity.
• Promotion of unlimited abortion as a “women’s health” issue, a “women’s rights” issue, and a “right to choose” issue.
• Promotion of grossly exaggerated and even false natural or earth-sciences teachings, such as anthropomorphic global warming; limitations on fossil fuels; harm caused by burning fossil fuels; danger posed by natural elements (lead, carbon dioxide, etc.,) effects of pollution, etc., etc., etc.
• The general notion of the evil and unnaturalness, of man, versus the good, and naturalness, of other living beings, feeding the notion that HBAACOTE.

Here is a look at the component parts of the ED and what we’re paying for.

1. Office of the Secretary (OS)
1. Office of Communications and Outreach (OCO)
2. Office of the General Counsel (OGC)
3. Office of the Inspector General (IG)
4. Office of Legislation and Congressional Affairs (OLCA
5. Office for Civil Rights (OCR)
6. Institute of Education Sciences (IES)
• National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)
• National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
• Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)
7. Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII)
8. Office of the Chief Financial Officer
9. Office of Management
10. Office of the Chief Information Officeer
11. Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Devolpment
• Budget Service
12. Risk Management Service
13. Chief Operating Officer
2. Office of the Under Secretary (OUS)
1. Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE)
2. Office of Vocational and Adult Education (OVAE)
3. Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA)
4. President’s Advisory Board on Tribal Colleges and Universities (WHITCU)
5. President’s Advisory Board on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (WHIHBCU)
3. Office of the Deputy Secretary (ODS)
1. Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE)
• Office of Migrant Education (OME)
• Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs (SASA)
• President’s Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans
2. Office of English Language acquisition, Language Enhancement and Academic Achievement for Limited English Proficient Students (OELA)
3. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS)
• National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR)
• Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
• Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA)
4. Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools (OSDFS)
5. Office of Innovation and Improvement

A major part of this bureaucracy rests in the fact that a major part of its survival and growth mechanism is the effort to get people dependent upon it, or upon parts of it, so that whenever it is threatened, there will always be a “constituency” that can be motivated to stand up in protest and demand to be heard. That’s all part of the Marxist stratagem to divide and conquer while hiding behind the false facade of unifying and being kind and charitable to someone.

We already recommended elimination of ED in the Shut Down Dept of Education page when the Wisconsin situation blew up. Even before that, we recommended eliminating public education in the old Opposing Public Education page. This rehash is done here simply as part of the effort to write the Shut Down Unneeded Bureaucracy page, containing each federal bureaucracy for consideration for reduction or elimination. This new page and all it’s links provides some information needed for serious - serious - budget cutting. The ravages of Obamunism leave us no choice. Whole departments need to go.

I submit that there is no excuse for ED to continue to exist. It should be cut completely out of the budget.

Reference Material

Return to Shut Down Unneeded Bureaucracy page

Return to Web Site Log (Blog) page

Return to HOME PAGE

Build/Host/Maintain Your Own Personal Website using SBI! (Advertisement)

Date: Sun Apr 03 02:21:51 2011
From: V V S
Email:
Location:
Comment:

Hi Vic,

Bill Gates once said that while the rest of the world was ensuring education of their young people in hardcore science and math, especially in schools, America was going the other way around, and that America is losing its dominance in eng and tech. Obama is saying the same thing. There is a lot of truth in it. Look at NASA. Look at the universities. Americans are a minority and engineers from other countries dominate. It is not about flowery penmanship or literacy any more, that age is long gone. It is now all about teaching the sciences and math to get the kids equipped to face the global race for tech dominance. Schools lay the foundation for this. The resultant bureaucracy is just a necessary evil.

The Catholic Church has gone about establishing schools for hundreds of years now, even public schools supported by the state. The Jesuits almost do nothing else. You think every church leader and pope got it all wrong? If you find public education that distasteful, don't send your kids in. Home school them, it is that simple. But if your kids later curse you for being incompetent and lacking academic credentials to get into universities, you will have only yourself to blame.

There is a reason why the Christian fundamentalists want the ED gone. When no one is there to oversee the curriculum or the syllabus, they have every chance to push through their stupidities like Creation science and other crackpot theories in textbooks. That is precisely what we want to avoid. Please do not jump on that particular bandwagon.

Regards,

VVS

Date: Sun Apr 03 12:55:10 2011
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

VVS:

You’ve gotten several things almost totally backward, my friend. First, the reason American students are so far behind the students of some 28 other nations, across the board in all areas of academics, is, precisely, the declining quality of education in public (government) schools. American students who are home schooled or who go to private or parochial (religious of some type) schools are far, far ahead of American public school graduates, at all grade levels up to and including 12th year. The more tax dollars are spent on it, the worse it gets. Yet throwing more and more money on it is the unchanging plan of the American Communist Party. (I mean Democrat Party.)

Saying things like “It is not about flowery penmanship or literacy any more, that age is long gone.” shows an extremely narrow view incapable of properly discerning even the scope of the education problem. Literacy comes before everything. I submit that you cannot properly teach mathematics to an illiterate. The reason that the best higher education institutions are called “Universities” is that they are intended to impart a Universal education to students, not limited in scope to mere engineering or mathematics or some technical field, but to open the young mind to every field of knowledge, specifically to avoid being stuck in a one-track subject rut, with no knowledge or interest in whatever is outside of that rut.

Among the last people I would trust for advice about proper education would be Lefties like Bill Gates or Barrack Hussein Obama. Bill Gates, like many other successful billionaires, never got a college degree. While he’s a pretty sharp thinker, his politics lean Left and that means that he supports Marxism to some degree, while Obama is indeed a flat out America-hating Marxist.

Once upon a time the Jesuits were the preeminent educators in Western civilization, in all subjects, but those days are long gone. Today, when I hear the word Jesuit, what comes to mind is not some great world class scholar, but the member of a borderline-heretical order who teaches heterodox theology, a fact that, to me, calls into question all of his other teaching as well.

No Catholic school is supported by tax dollars; that is expressly forbidden by American law. No Catholic school is a public school. All Catholic schools, including even those in which the teachers are Jesuits, produce students who test out higher than public school students at every single grade level. In current day America, the students best equipped for higher (college) education are home schooled; the second best equipped are parochial or private school students; dead last, by a very wide margin, are tax payer funded public school students. That’s just the way it is.

Question: How many Catholic schools teach Creation Science as part of the curriculum?

Answer: None; as in, not a single one.

Question: How many Public Schools teach Darwinian Evolution, both as science and as dogma?

Answer: All of them; as in, every single one of them, dogmatically, to the exclusion of any other possibility.

Now, Catholic schools certainly do teach biological evolutionary theory, but public schools most certainly do not teach so-called creation science, or anything to do with Christianity, or any contradictory theory of or for life. It is forbidden. The reason is that the American public school system is purely atheistic, and its first goal is to secularize, i.e. athe-ize, society. Therefore public education is steeped in the fraudulent falsehoods of Darwin, Freud and Marx. The goal is to educate children into error, and Dawinian evolution is the most basic and perhaps even foundational dogma of the religion of atheism itself.

Every other fraud is that is educationally perpetrated against American children have their foundation in that initial teaching, and there are many, all subtly or even overtly aimed at slowly recruiting children away from religion, family and tradition and into the Marxist cause.

Public schools begin instilling the notion that HBAACOTE by teaching them about the bogus and fraudulent Human Population Problem, and convincing them that it is true. Despite the fact that Belgium has a higher population density than India, and England has a higher population density than China, and Hong Kong has a higher population density than Bangladesh. Go figure.

And they instill the false and fraudulent notion that the harmless HIV retro-virus has something to do with AIDS, and what to do about that. And, of course, what to do about it has nothing whatsoever to do with chastity, but with condoms, and the mechanics of safe fornication, protected sodomy and responsible promiscuity.

And they instill the false and fraudulent notion of anthropomorphic global warming; and the horrors – yes, horrors – of not properly recycling; and the clear falsehood of the world’s short supply of oil, and on, and on, and on.

Clearly the goal of ED is not to educate. It is to recruit and motivate. I have spoken elsewhere about the educational field plowed by Dewey, famous as the educator of the educators at Columbia, and of his disciples Fromm and Maslow. Here is their highly prized “Revolutionary Man” that they hoped to educationally create:

“The revolutionary is the man who has emancipated himself from ties of blood and soil, from his mother and his father, from special loyalties to state, class, race, party, or religion.”

A child imbued with this antagonistic view of life is like an isotope – an atom that is out of balance, with an unequal number of protons and electrons. An unbalanced atom is an unhappy atom; it is unstable; it will do something.

No private schools, no parochial schools, no home-schoolers and no paid tutors in their right minds teach any of this crap. What does it all have to do with education? I submit that it has nothing to do with education and everything to do with eventual revolution.

Public school teachers or employees hand out condoms to other people’s children without parental knowledge, let alone consent. They couldn’t do that with an aspirin, but they can do it with a condom. They smuggle other people’s children out of school to abortion mills, sometimes even across state lines, and back to school, without parental knowledge let alone consent. If an ordinary citizen did that he would be criminally liable under the Man Act.

What are we paying our tax dollars to have ourselves gradually turned into?

ED has no good reason to continue to exist.

Regards,

Vic

Date: Mon Apr 04 09:44:58 2011
From: VVS
Email:
Location:
Comment:

Hi Vic,

I have painstakingly read through all of your other articles and it is obvious to me that you are no idiot. But why do you cross over to the language of irrationality while referring to Obama? Even accepting that you dislike the ED, the ED was here long before Obama became president. It would remain no matter who becomes president. Does Sarah Palin have the guts to publicly say she would do away with ED if she becomes president, does any politician??

Jesuits? Borderline heretical? I do not know what you mean by that. I am not a Christian but I studied in Loyola school which was run by Jesuits. I have never encountered sharper or brighter minds. All their activities were blessed by the catholic church. I distinctly remember Cardinal Varkey Vithayathil coming in to inaugurate a number of school functions. If Jesuits have a problem with the catholic church, would that happen?

Catholic schools do not teach creationism? Maybe not, but catholic schools are not the only schools in America. Do away with public schools, and all the other churches (you do have some nutjob churches in America, don't you, like Westboro) will jump the opportunity and push through their brimstone-and-fire, homophobic, creationist ideology through to the curriculum. Catholic schools might not do it, but would people like Pat Robertson or Discovery institute sit still?? Whatever else you believe, you know this is true. It will continue to be indoctrination, no matter what. I would rather take my chance with the govt than with creationists, go with the smaller devil, so to speak.

Date: Mon Apr 04 10:09:18 2011
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

VVS:

You will have to point out whatever irrational things I have said about Obama. I’m sure you will agree that if they are true they are not irrational. Yes, Sarah Palin has the guts to say it and to do it, as do many others. ED was brought into existence, in relatively recent history, by legislation, and it will be taken out the same way. Reagan tried to end it but was thwarted by Marxocrats in Congress. Sooner or later it will happen.

Jesuits, as an order, are “Liberal” in their theology, which is to say, their theology is heterodox. They are quite often at odds with the pope and the magisterium, particularly in areas of homosexuality, feminist language in missals and Scripture, who has access to sacraments and a host of other issues. It is doubtful if Ignatius of Loyolla himself would be admitted into the order today. The Jesuits, through history, have been suppressed once, and quite often censured and at odds with Rome on issue after issue. Jesuits today push a Left-Liberal agenda, and oppose “rigid” adherence to Church doctrine. I submit that one either adheres to Church doctrine, or he should find another Church, let alone another order. Fr. Mitch Pacqua of EWTN fame is a great conservative Jesuit scholar who is today the exception to the rule. Once upon a time he would have been the typical Jesuit.

“Nutjob” churches in America already teach nutjob stuff to the children of nutjob families who pay for them to be educated there. Nothing will change there. I suppose they already teach whatever you take issue with, and that will not change. There are plenty of other private schools and non-nutjob church schools around for families to freely choose from. All of them produce students better prepared for higher education than public schools.

My own formative education was public school education; I had to go to Catechism class every Saturday to get my religious education, while all the other kids were out playing ball. In those days, teachers still taught pupils how to think. However, I believe that if I had been taught at a school by the likes of a Pat Robertson rather than a public school, I would have been better educated in the end, and none the worse for wear.

You seem to be really hung up on Creation Science, and you seem to think it is very widespread and popular; if so, your perception is way off. Also, you seem to think that it is somehow very harmful for pupils to be taught about any possible relationship between life and God. But, at the same time, you do not see any harm in institutionally force-feeding children the pure religion of Darwinism to the rabid exclusion of any other possibility, while pretending that it is science.

Do you see nothing wrong with that approach? You do believe in God, don’t you?

If you are an atheist, do you think atheists should have the right to use education and state power to force the religion of atheism on the rest of any culture, as you fear the religionists might be doing in private schools? Do you not see the open hypocrisy here?

Regards,

Vic

Date: Tue Apr 05 10:16:31 2011
From: VVS
Email:
Location:
Comment:

Hi Vic,

f I have to point out the irrational things you said about Obama, of course I will. Your entry regarding Obama's visit to India was very illuminating, to say the least. The entry was steeped in paranoia. What were expecting him to do? Come back in loads of Indian commandos in the planes and conquer US or something? These kind of idiotic statements make you look stupid, Vic. Asking everyone to get your guns ready sounds pretty idiotic, doesn't it, especially since Obama is back now and no dire events that you feared actually took place. Being a god-fearing catholic is fine, Vic, as long as you do not join the band of the religious nutjobs who believe Democrats are antichrists or worse.

Again waiting for you spittle-flying fury to unleash itself,

Your humble friend,

VVS

Date: Wed Apr 06 06:53:01 2011
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

If there is something in there that I specifically said, I missed it. I said nothing about any Indian commandos – you did. If that statement is idiotic, then, it is the author of that statement – you – who is the idiot.

I just warned you after your last comment on the Haditha Investigation page about your change in tone, and you are beginning to blither here. This is your last warning. Wipe the spittle off your face and calm down, or don’t expect to see any more of your submissions published here.

Regards,

Vic

Please note the language and tone already established in this Website. This is not the place to stack up vulgar one-liners and crude rejoinders. While you may support, oppose or introduce any position or argument, your comments must meet our standards of logical rigor and of civil discourse. We will not participate in trading insults, and we will not tolerate participants trading insults with each other. Participants should not be thin-skinned or over sensitive to criticism, but should be prepared to defend their arguments when challenged. If you don’t really have a coherent argument or counter-argument of your own, sit down and don’t embarrass yourself. If you have something serious to contribute to the conversation, please keep it civil. We apologize to religious conservative thinkers for the need to even say these things.