Not long ago my daughter brought home one of those innumerable fliers from school. At least this one wasn't begging for money, but something in it did catch my eye.
The flier said that the kids were going to be learning how to measure lengths and distances. They would be using cubes and craft sticks as measuring devices.
It occurred to me that it might be easier and more productive to just "skip the middle-man" and use rulers and/or tape measures.
Why say that your desk is 15 cubes wide when it's just as easy to say that it's 2 feet wide?
Is it just me or is that just plain logical? Apparently, in the environs of the Government schools it isn't, because when I suggested it to her teacher, she looked at me as if I were speaking some lost language from the darkest reaches of Borneo.
It's no wonder that our kids aren't being taught how to actually think in these schools: their teachers don't know how to think! You can't teach something that you don't know.
I'm sure that she can teach the kids all about diversity, environmentalism and bullies, but her college never taught her how to be in the least bit logical. Apparently, rational thought isn't important to the "educational community", which would explain why they're all liberals.
I would give my left arm to put my daughter in a private school but, unfortunately, it's not in the budget and, at present, there's no way that it can be.
Which brings me to another of those points that are just too obvious and nobody seems to ask: whenever you mention school vouchers, the usual suspects always say that "It would take money away from public education". Well, yes it would. But if the child using that voucher is no longer in the public education system, you don't need the money for that child. Right?
If the child isn't going to be in their school, they shouldn't care that there's no money to pay for that nonexistent child.
Why have I never heard anyone who matters ask that question? I can't be the only one who's thought of it. And if someone would actually ask it, maybe we could point out that they really don't want the money "for the children" as they always claim, but are using it to hire more "grief counselors", administrators, vice-vice-principals and anyone else who can jack up the numbers on their union rolls.
Yes, I may be more logical than a lot of people out there, but I'm not Spock! I honestly think that people are trying to think so deeply about political subjects, that they miss the easy questions that would blow the Left's arguments out of the water. I know they would, because whenever I ask them, people are left blinking and stammering for an answer. Because there is no answer.
I take that back. There is an answer, but they would have to admit their real motives, and I don't even think that they can do that to themselves.