Now isn't this awesome? Liberals in our own country give Reagan little credit for anything he did, but the Brits are going to honor him with a statue.
Â
Â
Â
Â
An $800,000 statue honoring former President Ronald Reagan is set to be unveiled on Independence Day, joining monuments to Franklin Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower in the heart of the British capital.
Â
At a time when the much-celebrated “special relationship†between the U.S. and Britain is widely seen to have frayed, about 2,000 people are expected at the ceremony. Organizers say that is about ten times the typical crowd for such an event.
Â
Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who served as Thatcher’s Secretary of State for Scotland, recalled that Britons were initially skeptical of Reagan due to his perceived lack of experience. However, the Conservative lawmaker – who also served as Britain’s foreign secretary – said many were won over by the former actor’s “good judgment, good instincts and guts.â€
Â
“The qualities he had served both countries very well at the end of the Cold War, which was a crucial period in history,â€Â Rifkind told msnbc.com. To this day, Rifkind said, “people here respect his achievements.â€
Â
Click here or here to read more.
Â
**********
Â
Fascinating. One of the comments on the post above said that they've also honored Reagan by naming a highway, trade center and pub after him.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 18
Second, the 'liberals' have to guard against others learning because when people learn they find that just 'good intentions' do not deliver results, and they begin to question such things as how we will pay for all the spending. Obama is a good example, he only talks about taxes never about spending except to say how we need more of it based on his 'good intentions' and he is very uncomfortable answering these questions about how we can everything he wants.
THe teachers unions don;t have an agenda about teaching or what is taught, they have a single, they want to get re-elected. It isn't about the kids, the schools, about the adminstration (other then they are the teacher nemisis the requires a union to do battle with), it isn't about budget (aside for getting more/looking like they are, budget problems are big opportunities for them), nor is it about, having an educated community. All unions are made up of political people, no different than the public elected offices. Their personal and professional needs are about their constituents liking them or believing the are getting the best from them.
The issue about who is changing books and why, I think, are more about book sales and who will most actively support those sales. I will admit that if schools are buying new books, at least in some cases that necessitates more training time for unoin members and in some cases added payments to those members. But I would shift more to the political structures of those selecting the books and those writing them. As an example as best I can tell history hasn't change since I went to school, aside from a soft covered supplement the recent events, the information is the same.
I agree, from my limit experiences I have not see nor heard of a union requesting changes in curriculms. I have never heard them offering any changes to improve the success in learning of the students, i never heard them resist the creation for curriculm planner, lessening the burden on their members.
Though I have seen them request more compensation (more time) for adapting to the changes, I have seen them fight tooth and nail to prevent accounntablitlity of their members, I have seen them fight hard to prevent changes in tenure or any means that would facilitate the poorest perfroming teachers from being reassigned or worst of all being let go.
The teachers unoins were not created to do anyhting about education, they were form for the benefit of the poorest performing unoin member, as long as there is some doing poor than me then I am safe.
The unions seem to make a great effort to stay out of the academic issues.
It has a lot about the teachers' unions and how they HAVE affected the curriculum of schools throughout the land.
Duane, I don't know how long ago it was when you were in school, but from the time I was the history has been rewritten with the liberal agenda. When I was in school, European history included information about the struggles between Catholics and Protestants. American history included the real story about Thanksgiving, not the story that some schools are now teaching - that the Pilgrims and Indians met and ate and thanked each other. What?
What every parent and teacher needs to understand is that "separation of church and state" is not something in our founding documents. Most states have guidelines that SAY they're teaching about Christianity or supposed to be because it WAS a huge influence in our founding and history. The Supreme Court is okay with the teaching and they do not see a need for "equal time" for other religions because they were not part of our history.
Gateways to Better Education has some excellent resources for students, teachers, parents and grandparents about what can and cannot be said or done in school about the Christian faith. It has some great resources for holidays.
On one page it explains:
In a 1962 case (Engle v. Vitale), the Supreme Court ruled that schools could not direct and require prayer in the classroom. Some educators and parents think that this means religious expression cannot occur in public schools. However, the Court ruled only on organized or state-authorized times for prayer. It did not prohibit students from praying individually or in groups, or from talking about their faith during the school day.
Prayer can be viewed as an issue of free speech as well as freedom of religion. Students are free to speak to their Creator anytime and anywhere they want to as long as it does not disrupt others or interrupt educational activities.
In 1998, the U.S. Department of Education issued guidelines on students' rights of religious expression on public school campuses. It stated, "The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment does not prohibit purely private religious speech by students. Students therefore have the same right to engage in individual or group prayer and religious discussion during the school day as they do to engage in other comparable activity. For example, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable nondisruptive activities….Generally, students may pray in a nondisruptive manner when not engaged in school activities or instruction, and subject to the rules that normally pertain in the applicable setting. Specifically, students in informal settings, such as cafeterias and hallways, may pray and discuss their religious views with each other, subject to the same rules of order as apply to other student activities and speech. Students may also speak to, and attempt to persuade, their peers about religious topics just as they do with regard to political topics. School officials, however, should intercede to stop student speech that constitutes harassment aimed at a student or a group of students."
:) I saw in an article done by a guy who started as a stock boy at Walmart in the 50s and retired as a Sr. VP in the 80s. He said that most people have 5 senses, but successful people have 2 more - horse sense and common sense.
Interesting that you'd decide to use small letters for a small man.