In another case of a public school trying to teach students a twisted, polarizing version of politics, a Wisconsin mother has publicized her 16-year-old’s classwork. The student, who goes to Nathan Hale High School in Allis, Wisconsin, was given an assignment where it was up to him to match quotes with the political party that most closely resembled the ideology. So far, so good. But it was the quote that supposedly matched Republicans that has the mother – and many conservatives – fit to be tied.
According to the assignment, “We should not help the poor, it’s a waste of money,” is a quote that should best be labeled as Republican in nature. The woman’s son chose “fascist” for lack of a better option, but the teacher helpfully corrected him. According to an interview with Fox News, the boy asked his mother that afternoon what she would have chosen. She told him that she didn’t know “any political party that espouses not helping the poor.” Once she got a good look at the assignment (and the teacher’s correction), she was furious.
“If a 16-year-old believes that a Republican or conservative doesn’t believe in helping the poor, they may view themselves as liberals at a young age … and incorrectly,” the mother told EAGnews.com.
She took her concerns to the superintendent. The school district released a press statement insisting that the quiz was meant only to help students find themselves on the political spectrum, but that’s not really consistent with the look of the assignment. Nor is it an acceptable excuse, since the mother’s concerns are then even more valid. If you twist a political ideology to mean whatever you want it to mean and thrust that definition upon unsuspecting students, you can’t expect them to pick the right one. Who is going to agree that helping the poor is a waste of money?
If this was about one teacher, one school, or even one school district, it wouldn’t be worth mentioning. Unfortunately, these stories keep coming. From far and wide, we see examples of schools trying to indoctrinate their students rather than teach them the unbiased facts. And while it’s true that any lecture on social studies is going to be subject to bias, examples like this one go well beyond the acceptable margin of error.
What makes this instance especially noteworthy is that it provides a glimpse into how liberals see the other side of the spectrum. Rich, greedy conservatives. Always out for themselves, never willing to spare a dime for the less fortunate. And it just couldn’t be further from the truth. First of all, there are plenty of poor conservatives. Second, studies have shown that conservatives are far more charitable than liberals. Third, there is a gulf as wide as the Grand Canyon between “helping the poor” and subsidizing a lazy, unproductive portion of the population through unrestrained entitlements. Helping the poor is sustainable. Helping them rise above their circumstances is progress. Giving them welfare for the rest of their lives, their children’s lives, and their children’s children’s lives…yeah, that is a waste of money. Worse, it’s a waste of three generations.
So put that in your quiz, liberals.