"America": Banned from School Textbooks and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Not Politically Correct; Offends Latinos

One of the best books out there if you are interested in education policy is Diane Ravitch's The Language Police. It is a wonderful, well-researched bestseller by Ravitch, who has a Ph.D. in history from Columbia university and is a professor at New York University, about the purging of true American history and great literature in the public schools, replaced by "multicultural" trash and propaganda. At the end of the book, she gives a thirty-page list of words and situations that are banned from textbooks.

Here is one of them:

"America/Americans (use with care, because it suggests 'geographical chavinism' unless it applies to all people in North America, South America, and Central America; instead refer to people of the United States."

This is the rule for all Scott-Foresman/Addison-Wesley textbooks, Houghtin Mifflin textbooks, Harcourt textbooks, National Evaluation Systems, and New York state public schools.

Here is another:

"American policy, American economy (replace with U.S. policy, U.S. economy)."

Simply amazing. The proper title of our country, "America," has been banned, and we are no longer "Americans." Our country now is "United States" and we are "United States citizens."

This is patently false. The title of our country has NEVER been "United States." It has always been "America." For example, Georgia or Virginia are states in America; they are not states in "the United States."

Also, it is not "chauvinistic" to call ourselves "Americans." There is no continent called "America." There is a region called the "Americas." There is a "North America," which is a continent. There is a "South America," which is a continent.

There is a country, and that country is called "America." There are 50 states, and these states make up the country of "America." The citizens of that country are "Americans," not "people of the United States."

Even if it were somehow chauvinistic to call your country its proper title, it is time to simply and coolly tell Latin Americans to show some tolerance, something they tend to lack. By banning the name of our country to appease them will only incur disrespect and contempt from them for our weakness in trying to appease them.

Sadly, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) has kowtowed to liberals and has banned the proper name of our country from the customs forms. I was shocked when coming back from Panama a few months ago to find that the terms "America" and "Americans" had been completely erased. We are now "United States citizens" (of what country?) and we reside in the United States (of what country?).

Plea to all patriotic Americans: Refer to our country by its proper name, "America" and call yourself an "American." Don't give in to political correctness. If you have to abbreviate, use the abbreviation "U.S.A." and not "U.S."

Virginia Tech Jihadist "Palestinian Literature" Prof Wins Award; Giovanni Claims Middle Passage Facilitates Outer Space Travel for Blacks

Lesbian lovers Giovanni and Fowler love jihadist Salaita

Update on the wacky Virginia Tech English Department: Virginia Tech's jihadist "Palestinian literature" professor and ungrateful immigrant Steven Salaita, whom I have written about before, is winning many awards for his latest book, Anti-Arab Racism in the USA: Where it Comes From and What it Means for Politics Today, including this one. (How a "Palestinian Literature" professor who received his B.A. from party school Radford University and doctorate in Native American Literature from University of Oklahoma is qualified to write about the history and politics of Israel and "Palestine" is beyond me). His thesis is if Americans do not support Palestianians, it is because we are racist. He cleverly attempts to give Muslims, who killed over 3000 Americans on 9/11 a "grievance status" by making Muslims into an Arab race. Of course, that is what Muslims have always believed: Arabs are not really Arabs unless they are Muslim, hence the second class treatment of Arabs who are Christian or Jew. Muslims are the racists, not Americans. For example, if jihadist Salaita wants to see REAL racism, see how Malays treat the Chinese in Malaysia, the Chinese being the ones who have built up the economic power of Malaysia. However, I doubt that Salaita knows a thing about the real world outside of America.

By the way, I have studied in Malaysia and have worked in Thailand and know that no Muslim would consider himself a citizen of a country unless that country has sharia law. Therefore, Muslims do not consider themselves "American" except for pretending to be loyal in order to better subvert the country.

It is amazing how Virginia Tech's English department has been transformed since they hired Nikki Giovanni--who only has a B.A.--back in the 1990's. Here is an excerpt from a famous poem of hers, "The True Import of Black Dialogue, Black vs. Negro":

"Do you know how to draw blood/Can you poison/Can you stab-a-Jew/Can you kill huh?/ Ni**erCan you kill"

I've written about how radical Giovanni is before here and here, but one naive commenter has claimed that I just don't get it:

"You are reading the poem in terms of black and white. You are looking at what the text says but you are not looking INTO the text. She is sending a message here. Not that you would understand. This is a message for Black people. Over the decades the Black population has fallen and not for something positive. Nigger is not Black people, it is ignorance. In this piece she asking them to leave Nigger (the context of ignorance) behind and rise as a people."

Sorry, I don't buy it. Next thing you know this commenter will be stating that Steven Salaita doesn't really advocate the destruction of Israel and a new Holocaust; he just wants them to "rise as a people."

Steven Sailer has written an excellent article, published in FrontPage Magazine, about just how radical this feminist, Giovanni, is. Lately, though, she just seems to be losing her mind. In her faculty profile she states:

"The recognition of Middle Passage as our porthole to prolonged space travel is a unique way to understand both slavery and space which I explore in Quilting the Black Eyed Pea."

We should not lose sight of the fact, though, that this eccentric who also writes children's poetry is at the core a radical who hates America and Israel. Want proof? The fact that she and her lover just hired Steven Salaita, an extremely radical Muslim hater of Jews, in 2006 offers proof that Giovanni is every bit as radical as when she wrote "The True Import of Black Dialogue."

What was a decent department back when I was a student there has been transformed by hiring radicals and terrorists into a department that produces such students as Cho Seung Hui. "Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit." (Matthew 7:17)

Latest outrage: Just a year after the Nikki Giovanni student, Cho Seung-hui, guns down 32 students, including Jewish hero Liviu Lebrescu, who does Virginia Tech's English department praise (look at bottom right corner in link)? None other than Steven Salaita, the professor of "Palestianian literature" who believes that Israel has no right to exist and that the state should be destroyed. They are boasting that he has won a prestigious award for his B.S. that there exists rampant "anti-Arab racism" in America.

Can Virginia Tech's department become any more corrupt than it already is? Back when I was a student there, Virginia Fowler, radical feminist, had just hired her lesbian lover, the radical feminist Nikki Giovanni. The first thing that Giovanni did was to insult all the English professors in the Collegiate Times.

What were Nikki Giovanni's qualifications? She has only a B.A. and she is Virginia Fowler's lesbian lover. Talk about third-world style corruption.

Anti-Jewish radical Nikki Giovanni is the campus celebrity of Virginia Tech. How does she use her celebrity status? By bullying the campus into hiring more radicals that fit her radical, anti-Jewish agenda.

So who did the lesbian duo hire in 2006? None other than Steven Salaita, a Palestianian jihadist, to teach "Palestianian literature." Question that Virginia Tech refuses to answer: Did English major Cho Seung-hui take any classes from this anti-American and anti-Israeli terrorist/"English" professor, Steven Salaita either in Fall 2006 or Spring 2007? Hmm, I wonder where "Ismael Ax" came from.

Take a look at this unbelievable praise for Steven Salaita, who dislikes any portrayal of Muslim women being mistreated in the Middle East (women are much worse treated in America), believes that Israel has no right to exist and that Obama is too conservative to vote for because Obama now claims to not want Israel to be destroyed:

The Department is delighted to welcome this fall Dr. Steven Salaita, who joins us as an advanced assistant professor of American and Ethnic American Literatures. Steve is no stranger to this part of the country, having grown up in Bluefi eld, Virginia, which is still home to his parents. After completing his undergraduate work at Radford University, he entered the doctoral program in Native American Literature at the University of Oklahoma, where he received his Ph.D. in 2003. Although his primary focus at Oklahoma was Native American literature, he also studied Palestinian and Arab American literature. For the past three years, Steve has been an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin/Whitewater, where he has taught a range of courses in American and ethnic American literatures.
Steve’s research primarily takes the form of literary criticism, but he is also drawn to the essay, particularly the political essay, and to creative non-fiction. Because his parents are both immigrants, he fi nds that his own writing, critical and creative, is preoccupied with themes of immigration, American-ness, dislocation, cultural multiplicity, xenophobia, and racialization. In terms of research, 2006 has been an annus mirabilis for Steve, who will have three books published by year’s end:
Anti-Arab Racism in the USA: Where It Comes from and What it Means for Politics
Today (Pluto Press, UK); The Holy Land in Transit: Colonialism and the Quest for
Canaan (Syracuse University Press); and Arab American Literary Fictions,
Cultures, and Politics (Palgrave Macmillan).

Who is the encomium about the jihadist Steven Salaita written by? None other than Virginia Fowler. Don't think for one moment they hired Salaita for any other reason than his hatred for America and Israel.

Last year--after "Ismael Ax" gunned downed 32 students--A Feast of Words, The Virginia Tech English Department's publication, was gushing about jihadist Steven Salaita's two recent publications, The Holy Land in Transit and Anti-Arab Racism in the USA: Where it Comes From and What it Means for Politics Today:

Here is what The Holy Land in Transit is about, according to Syracuse University Press:

"Beating The Drums Again. STEVEN SALAITA, assistant professor of English of Virginia Tech, says the Palestinians are currently involved in one of the world’s last colonial wars. In The Holy Land in Transit he sees parallels in the Zionist settlement of Palestine with the colonial conquest of the New World and the consequent displacement of the indigenous peoples. This theme is worthy of further exploration, he says, ‘even though Natives and Palestinians have no other historical connection to speak of...’ Just as Indian attacks on white settlements were a natural reaction to a European colonial invasion, so too Palestinian attacks on the highways and suicide bombings in towns are a consequence to Jewish proliferation in the land.

He sees the European settlement of the New World, at the expense of the Native Indians, as ethnic cleansing, and ascribes the same blame to the returning Jews as they settle the Holy Land at the expense of the original few Palestinians who were living there. "Beating The Drums Again. STEVEN SALAITA, assistant professor of English of Virginia Tech, says the Palestinians are currently involved in one of the world’s last colonial wars. In The Holy Land in Transit he sees parallels in the Zionist settlement of Palestine with the colonial conquest of the New World and the consequent displacement of the indigenous peoples."

It seems the untold story from last year's Virginia Tech massacre is the following:

A disturbed Korean-American teenager enters the Virginia Tech English program. Instead of being guided in the right direction--the love of virtue, God, country, and Western Civilization--he takes classes from disturbed radicals, such as Nikki Giovanni and Virginia Fowler. Instead of learning about our great Western heritage, he gets constant left-wing propaganda from anti-American professors. He very well could have taken Salaita's "Palestinian literature" class. Being already disturbed, he becomes even more disturbed by taking classes from deranged "English" professors. He gets no religious guidance at Virginia Tech except by Muslim sympathizers, including perhaps Steven Salaita and Nikki Giovanni. Then "Ismael Ax" goes on a rampage gunning down students and professors.

Virginia Tech's English Department bears a lot of blame for this massacre.

Joseph McCarthy: Catholic Hero

I'm working on a Master of Arts in Catholic Theology from Christendom College, one of the most rock solid, truly Catholic universities in the nation.

Recently, there was a talk at Christendom by Dr. William Carroll about Catholic Joseph McCarthy, the American hero that liberals and socialists love to slander.

Let's me review my history:

Just after WWII we stupidly give Josef Stalin all of Eastern Europe. In Asia we incredibly allow Stalin to take over Manchuria and North Korea after the War is over. We refuse to defend free China, a place of paramount importance, and it falls in 1949. The Soviet Union tests its first nuclear weapon in 1949, thanks to espionage in the United States. We tell North Korea, China, and Russia we will not defend South Korea and do not let it arm itself, and North Korea invades the South in 1950.

And yet liberals and socialists want us to believe that communism did not exist at the highest levels of the government?

Only liberals would be stupid enough to believe that. That is about as believable as stating that most Social Foundations professors in the top notch Schools of Education are not socialist. No wonder the average American was up in arms and elected Eisenhower. Probably at no time until now, with the prospect of Muslim/Marxist Barack Hussein Obama getting the Democratic nomination, has our nation been under such threat as it was in the 1930s and 1940s from an alien ideology counter to Western tradition.

Here is a great excerpt for the talk at Christendom on hero Joseph McCarthy about his importance and key place in American history:

"If you are Catholic and have believed any of the slanders against McCarthy, you should know first of all that Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin was a loyal Catholic who was buried with a rosary around his neck,'" Carroll said at the beginning of his lecture. “Surely such a man deserves at least a hearing before the tribunal of your soul before you condemn him on hearsay evidence.”

It is amazing how much benefit our nation has received from loyal, conservative Catholics (Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, John Roberts, Joseph McCarthy, Rick Santorum, Laura Ingraham, etc.) and how much damage has been inflicted by reprehensible, liberal "Catholics" (John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi)--those who call themselves Catholic but are in reality simply traitors both to the Catholic truth and the American ideal.

Classic Book Recommendation: Richard Henry Dana's Two Years Before the Mast

Would you like a great book recommendation, a book that is easily one of the very best achievements in American literature? Here it is: Two Years Before the Mast by young Richard Henry Dana, Jr. It was published in 1840 and was a huge success. I just finished reading it, and, believe me, it is one of the best books in American literature.

Yet, sadly, very few Americans have even heard of this book, which demonstrates the power that liberals and Marxists have had in censoring our great literary heritage. Having a Master of Education from University of Virginia, I know first hand the prevalency of censorship by Social Foundations education professors, and it is well documented by others.

It is time to take back our heritage. Unethical liberals and Marxists censor in very many subtle and underhanded ways. The chief way--ever since the late 1980's--has been to replace any piece of great literature by "dead white males" (the stupid, racist, and disparaging term these self-hating, liberals gleefully employ) and replace it with dull, shallow, "multicultural" pap.

It generally takes 50 years or so to declare a work a "classic" because it is all too hard to separate fad from greatness, as liberals are proof of. Of course, liberals automatically canonize anything new and "multicultural"as great. Then, they teach this junk, which means replacing truly great literature that has stood the test of time and generations.

Another way I have noticed liberals censor literature is by picking only literature that is most easily "deconstructed," in their opinion. To "deconstruct" a "text" for liberals and Marxists simply means to trick gullible students into believing that a "text" supports Marxist beliefs, when, in fact, none exists. You can often see this on the summaries on backs of books recently published, often to the most absurd degree. For example I've actually seen 1984 being advertised as a work that shows how "conformity" can cause a nightmarish regime. No, not communism or socialism but, rather, "conformity." Liberal professors and editors love to employ this trick on Charles Dickens' works, in which they often place a liberal, social message that simply is not the major component to his works. However, they would have gullible students believe that it is.

Another artful way that sneaky liberals and Marxists use to censor works is simply not to teach any uplifting works. For example, I never have understood why Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter is always taught in high schools and never his sunny, uplifting (and much better, in my opinion) The House of the Seven Gables. Why always F. Scott Fitzgerald's depressing The Great Gatsby and never Ray Bradbury's appealing, intriguing, and poignant Dandelion Wine and William Saroyan's The Human Comedy, with the same qualities?

Answer: Liberals and Marxists dislike students getting anything that uplifts the soul and makes students look at America with pride in her achievements and lifestyle. Therefore, they should only get gloomy and depressing Hemingway and Fitzgerald in modern American literature, for instance. Fitzgerald is great, but there is no reason why The Great Gatsby should always be taught. Of course, liberals love it to hoist some sort of anti-capitalism message upon students. Hemingway, though, I find to be grossly overrated, in comparison with other classic American literature.

The most prevalent way to deny our citizens our heritage, both Western and American, though, is to simply censor any works that have the least bit of objectionable, un-PC material. Entire works have disappeared from the corpus of great literature taught to students: Ivanhoe, The Royal Road to Romance, Brave New World, Typee, A Christmas Carol, The Three Musketeers, Pilgram's Progress, She Stoops to Conquer, Gone with the Wind, Robinson Crusoe, Kim, and Lord Jim come to mind. They all have scenes or attitudes that sanctimonious, insufferable liberals feel students should not be exposed to at all. Because these authors were not enlightened enough to espouse the modern liberal opinions of these postmodern gnostic censors, these works ought to be purged from our Brave New Liberal Utopia. Thanks to these intolerant liberals, much literature of great merit has been completely eliminated. An example in the post just below is how many Americans have never even heard of Christina Rossetti's wonderful poem "In the Bleak Midwinter."

Richard Henry Dana's Two Years Before the Mast fits into this latter category. It is a magnificent work. Young Dana takes time off from Harvard College to join a merchant vessel bound from Boston for a two years voyage around Cape Horn to California in 1834 and 1835. He writes extremely eloquently about his adventures on board, the hard but rewarding work of a sailor, his impression of California and the Spanish and Indian natives there, and the often terrifying challenges at sea. For example, on the return voyage around the Cape in the middle of winter is terrifyingly suspenseful.

Two Years Before the Mast obviously has been banned by liberals because Dana's opinions on the lazy Californians does not conform to Marxism. In addition, he has a concluding chapter in which he proposes how the life of a seaman can be improved (and it sure isn't through big government). Education is important but not enough. It must include religion (censor time!): "With the sailor, as with all other men in fact, the cultivation of the intellect, and the spread of what is commonly called useful knowledge, while religious instruction is neglected, is little else than changing an ignorant sinner into a powerful one."

To Dana, knowledge of the tenets of the Bible and practicing them are necessary factors in improving lifestyle and character. He documents abuse of sailors, but he never portrays them as victims, something modern liberals and socialists would do.

Is this not evident today in the public schools, where the neglect of student character has allowed for all sorts of societal ills, from gangs to poverty to teen pregnancy to shallow consumerism? Thank you liberals, including Social Foundations education professors.

Two Years Before the Mast, one of the greatest achievements of American literature is unfortunately, thus, not well known. It has extremely valuable documentation on the lifestyle of 1830's California, the day-to-day work of a merchant sailor, and the adventure and danger of the seas that recommends it as a great American classic. The remarkable American character is evident in this book. Unfortunately, liberals have attempted to purge Two Years Before the Mast from the American canon. Thankfully, it was a recommended book on the "Ravitch-Atkinson Sampler of Classic Literature" found in the back of Diane Ravitch's excellent and highly recommended The Language Police, her bestselling expose on censorship in public schools.

Gloucester Cathedral Choir - In the Bleak Midwinter

We sang this song at my church, St. Michael's Catholic Church, last Sunday as the opening hymn, and I was really impressed with this song. It is a beautiful song and perfect for this frigid midwinter.

In the Bleak Midwinter is wonderful poetry and one of the rare great poems that also makes a great song. It is certainly one of the best poems about the Christmas and winter season.

This has to do with education in the sense that so few Americans are familiar with this great poem by the devout conservative Anglican Christina Rossetti. Why? For the same reason that so few are familiar with their heritage. Liberals in the schools and education schools have pushed horrendous multiculturalism upon students and censored any works with the least bit of religious sentiment. Thus, students are completely unfamiliar with a huge amount of our heritage, especially since the some of the best achievements have been religious in nature.

Sense and Social Foundations

Classic literature can be a great place to learn about education policy and philosophy because classic literature by nature has such keen insights into man's behavior and relationships, which is why the literature is considered "classic" in the first place.

For example, Charles Dickens' Hard Times, equally as great as his more famous works, is a terrific novel about the follies of utilitarian and vocational education, which became all the rage among the Progressives (today called "liberals" or "socialists") in the early 1900's, such Columbia's Teachers College's Edward L. Thorndike, whom Diane Ravitch states in Left Back is "broadly recognized as one of the foremost leaders of progressive education" and William Heard Kilpatrick, who literally influenced the entire nation's education philosophy by training nearly all future education professors in the early 1900's from his base at Teachers College. To Kilpatrick, subjects should only be taught if they have socialist utilitarian value. Goodbye to an education in the humanities. Hard Times is an insightful expose into the follies of this utilitarian style of education that has so influenced today's liberals and socialists, including nearly all of the "Social Foundations" professors and other educationists in today's education schools.

Today's liberal educationists are equally as utilitarian as their predecessors in that they believe that all subjects exist only to promote socialism and "social justice." Therefore, math and science are only useful as far as they promote multiculturalism or environmentalism, for example. The Humanities are only valuable if postmodern interpretations can hoisted upon students. Education for its inherent worth is anathema to today's liberals and socialists who dominate education faculties. Their motto: If you can't "deconstruct" it to promote socialism, Marxism, feminism, multiculturalism, gay "rights," and other philosophical errors that they slavishly adhere to in opposition to our classical, Western, and Catholic heritage, it is not worth teaching.

I just finished Jane Austen's wonderful novel Sense and Sensibility. Jane Austin is one of the authors whom liberals and socialist college professors and other shallow, unethical people such as Hollywood screenwriters most absurdly attempt to "deconstruct" and make into a proto-feminist or socialist. In fact, she would be considered a "conservative" or "traditionalist" in today's parlance, which is why she must be "deconstructed" by Orwellian college professors.

Austen in Sense and Sensibility has wonderful insights into education philosophy and how education influences character. Therefore, it is well worth analyzing for students studying education philosophy and policy. She be considered to be a promoter of the type of "character education" that education traditionalists promote and liberals despise.

The shallow, pleasure seeking character of Willoughby is amazingly like what the type of male public schools shape and then put out in droves, and Marianne, who is attracted to and jilted by Willoughby, is exactly the type of female you get from today's public schools. Willoughby and Marianne are entirely influenced by their sensibilities and have very little sense. On the other hand, it is apparent in the novel that traditional morality and a strong academic, humanistic education, combined with virtue--the kind that is sadly absent in most of today's schools--produce people like Elinor and Colonel Brandan, characters with virtue, sense, and charity, exactly the type of individuals that American schools should be forming but aren't.

Austen describes the selfish character of Willoughby through Elinor's perceptions of him:

Elinor made no answer. Her thoughts were silently fixed on the irreparable injury which too early an independence and its consequent habits of idleness, dissipation, and luxury, had make in the mind, the character, the happiness, of a man who, to every advantage of person and talents, united a disposition naturally open and honest, and a feeling affectionate temper. The world had made him extravagent and vain. Extravagence and vanity had made him coldhearted and selfish. Vanity, while seeking its own guilty triumph at the expense of another, had involved him in a real attachment which extravagence, or at least its offspring, necessity, had required to be sacrificed. Each faulty propensity, in leadijng him to evil, had led him likewise to punishment. The attachment from which against honour, against feeling, against every better interest he had outwardly torn himself, now, when no longer allowable, governed every thought; and the connection, for the sake of which he had, with little scruple, left her sister to misery, was likely to prove a source of unhappiness to himself of a far more incurable nature.

Jane Austen could easily be describing, 100 years beforehand, the negative effects of the foremost "progressive" education philosopher John Dewey's education principles: The error that education ought to be based on the "experiences" of the child and governed solely by the interests and whims of the child. He believed this style of education would produce a more just style of government, for him socialism. He is right on the latter (except that socialism is never just), ironically, because his style of education produces, as Austin notes, selfish, coldhearted individuals concerned with shallow pecuniary values (for the good of themselves, not others) and an elite status, exactly the type of individuals who would support John Dewey's socialism--as long as they are in the elite in this socialist government. Everyone gets poorer, but they remain in the elite. It is not surprising that Dewey was a big fan of the Russian Revolution and even visited Russia in the late 1920s.

These type of individuals that Dewey's philosophy and today's public schools, which have been so influenced by him, produce care only about their own pleasures and have no care for traditional morality or other's happiness. Austin writes about Willoughby, "'The whole of his behaviour,' replied Elinor, 'from the beginning to the end of the affair has been grounded on selfishness. . . .His own enjoyment, or his own ease, was in every particular his ruling principle.'" In other words, John Dewey's philosophy that education should be guided by the students selfish whims.

The Catholic belief that Natural Law is unchanging and immutable can explain why Jane Austin a century beforehand so accurately describes the rotten fruits of John Dewey's "education as experience" philosophy and its numerous recycled fads that it has created: "discovery learning," the self esteem movement, learning through projects, students learning "at their own pace, "fuzzy math," and constructivism. No wonder the public schools produce shallow, self-destructive, pop-culture oriented individuals, similar to Willoughby, and those with all sensibility and no sense, similar to Marianne, who self-destructively are attracted to individuals like Willoughby.

When Marianne, through experience, finally gains some sense, she explains how to become a better person. This could easily describe the goal of today's conservative education reformer and traditionalist: "The future must be my proof. I have laid down my plan, and if I am capable of adhering to it my feelings shall be governed and my temper improved. . . .As for Willoughby, to say that I shall soon or that I shall ever forget him would be idle. His remembrance can be overcome by no change of circumstances or opinions. But it shall be regulated; it shall be checked by religion, by reason, and by constant employment."

Religion, reason, and employment (hard work): Exactly the three things "progressives" most deny today's grade school and college students. They get rid of all aspects relating to God in school and society; they destroy reason through their assault on our European, classical, and Catholic heritage and their promotion of barbaric cultures through "multiculturalism." They, through affirmative action and other forms of promotion not based on merit, war against employment and assiduity.

No wonder our society produces so many Willoughbys and Mariannes, and so few Elinors and Colonel Brandons.