Conservatives are in the minority and face election defeats simply because of the direction public education took decades ago.
Leading educators started filling college students' minds of mush with idealistic socialist drivel, which filtered down through secondary and primary levels. In graduating millions with that mindset, their indoctrination efforts bore fruit beyond their wildest dreams, finally achieving their goal of majority status but not without paying a big price — quality education.
Their proudest success, the current White House occupant dissatisfied with the extent of dominance, proposed universal preschool for 4-year-olds. The result, in addition to mind control, would be baby-sitting funded by overburdened taxpayers.
Answers: to the failed education dilemma, parental choice; to the liberal voting majority, voter ID, which causes Democrats to howl like the devil sprinkled with holy water. Their objection, that it'd deny voting privileges, is hogwash. Their real fear is one vote per person.
Voter ID would have prevented an Ohio woman from reportedly voting six times in November. Unrepentant when charged with voter fraud, she bragged she would have voted more times if possible to elect Obama. An isolated case? You be the judge.
Daniel J. Colgan
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Blame misdirected
- Progress not reflected
- Voters capable
- Scapegoating easy; solutions not
- Not taxpayers’ responsibility
- Steel at stake, too
- Pedro must go
- Beware this Wolf II
- Reverse red-kettle ban II