by Here’s a blog entry that shows, yet again, why liberals shouldn’t be elected dog catcher, let alone to a real job. The prime quote:
Principal Paul Richards said a key reason for stopping the practice [ed. of printing the names of honor roll students in the local paper] is its contribution to students’ stress level in “This high expectations-high-achievement culture.”
Students’ stress level? I’ve got a news flash for you, Paul: Most kids don’t give a damn about your little grading scheme and the few who do are the ones who’ll be trying to keep the Chinese from kicking the hell out of us economically and technically in the next few decades.
So go ahead, make their jobs that much harder by not recognizing their achievements and by bringing them down to the level of Joe Average, the C student who never got his name in the paper. That’ll definitely help things.
Happily, there is some good news: 87% of respondents to the related survey think this is bullshit.
How does liberal get into this? Conservative=Resistant to change. Liberal=Acceptance of change. However, this guy defies common sense. Someone can be conservative or liberal and still have common sense (in spite of what the conservatives think). I do not know if common sense can be taught from a book. I think it is more of an apprenticed thing and the more practical things you learn about your total environment the more common sense you have because a considered solution to problems comes from a sifted mix of a quantity. The more the experience the more product to sift. This guy obviously does not understand human nature and should not be in charge of our children.
I agree with your analysis.
Personally I define Liberal = Acceptance of capricious change. That is why the term and those it applies to bring out the attack dog in me. I see that by your definition that my reactions aren’t entirely justified. (Perhaps) I’ve make a mistake in mentally apportioning logical change to the domain of the conservatives, something that’s not entirely justified. Something to think about…
In this specific case, however, I submit to you that Mr. Richards’ policy fails the logical and passes the capricious sniff test and is based on standard anti-competitive, pro unearned-self-esteem liberal dogma. It is yet another step in the wrong direction, educationally speaking, and makes me sick, personally.