The boy must take after his mother.

Randy Barnett wrote in an article in the Tennessee Law Review that (in the context of advocating the repeal of the 16th and 17th Amendments):

"[T]he post-New Deal judiciary disagrees only on whether other unenumerated rights may also receive protection and, if so, which ones. But whatever few additional "fundamental" rights may be recognized, they do not include the protection of any so-called "economic liberty" that might inhibit the national regime of economic regulation...

[T]the courts allow Congress to exercise unchecked power over the national economy and everything that may affect it, limited only by the express guarantees of the Bill of Rights.... The original scheme of islands of federal powers in a sea of liberty has been transformed into a regime of islands of rights in a vast sea of national power."

Federalist 84 argued against a Bill of Rights, saying that:

"They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted... [I]t is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power."

Our liberty hangs on a slender thread.

It's obvious that Dick Vitale didn't draft this bracket; Duke is nowhere to be seen.

How did you respond to a comment that's below your response?

Can I quote you?

About a month ago I told my wife that if the Dems don't take the House and hold the Senate in 2014, Obama is going to find a reason to resign the Presidency. She looked at me as if I had a cyclopian eye in the middle of my forehead (she often looks at me that way). But with everything that's happening now, I'm more convinced than ever that I'm right.

"Nothing in his life became him like the leaving it." - Macbeth, Act 1, Scene 4

Question: In the lesson plan video, was the aim one of teaching the text within the context of the time and circumstance under which it was written, or to merely examine the "4 corners" of the document in order to learn how to divine meaning from the document itself? If it's the latter, it seems that they're engaging in mere puffery by using "foundational texts" for a much more pedestrian, though nonetheless important, purpose.

There's the little issue of it being the responsibility of the states and local school boards to control education, not the federal government. There's the little issue of teaching to the test, which means that schools will have to revamp their curricula to conform to the standards. There's the little issue of data collection that is part and parcel of the program, and the fact that rules have recently been re-written so that parents don't have to be informed. You're either not a parent or your being terribly naive if you don't think these things are a big deal.

Stu doesn't deserve you.

The National Governors' Association is a private lobbying group.

Read the white paper, then come back. I'm not saying this to diss you, but there are too many things about this program that we don't know about.

Joan:  I'll see your soup and raise you a dessert. Inspired by a dessert I recently enjoyed at the City Grocery in Oxford, Mississippi, I just downloaded a recipe for a vanilla bean chevre cheesecake with red wine poached cherries. 

The Gates Foundation is a major underwriter of the project:

"Because NGA (National Governors' Association) and CCSSO (Council of Chief State School Officers) led its creation, the Common Core State Standards Initiative claims that it is a state-led effort, implying that it had legislative grants of authority from individual states. In fact, through 2008, the Common Core Initiative was a plan of private groups being implemented through trade associations, albeit trade associations that had “official”-sounding names. Since 2007, NGA, CCSSO, and Achieve11 accepted more than $27 million from the Gates Foundation alone to advance the Standards and the connected data-collection and assessments."

From page 10 of the "Common Core Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy":

"Through extensive reading of stories, dramas, poems, and myths from diverse cultures and different time periods, students gain literary and cultural knowledge as well as familiarity with various text structures and elements. By reading texts in history/social studies, science, and other disciplines, students build a foundation of knowledge in these fields that will also give them the background to be better readers in all content areas. Students can only gain this foundation when the curriculum is intentionally and coherently structured to develop rich content knowledge within and across grades."

From the white paper:

"Nor do the ELA standards validate Common Core’s boast of “college-readiness.” Dr. (Sandra) Stotsky analyzed the high-school examples of “complexity” in Common Core and concluded that “the average reading level of the passages on the common tests now being developed to determine ‘college-readiness’ may be at about the grade 7 level.'”

Are we to conclude from these two quotes that while it's desirable that students be exposed to a broad swath of English literature and history, they need not work too hard at it?

From a column by Sol Stern in City Journal:

"In fact, many of the original Massachusetts reformers have argued correctly that the Common Core standards don’t aim as high as the standards that their state adopted in 1993 (see “The Massachusetts Exception”). The Bay State would have done better by its students if it had said no to the Obama administration and stuck with its already excellent standards—which were also heavily influenced by Hirsch’s work."

If Massachusetts' standards were higher than Common Core, what motivation beyond money would make them adopt Common Core rather than retaining their own standards?

The white paper makes the point several times that the standards are intended to prepare students for "nonselective community colleges" rather than 4 year universities.

In theory, it's not a bad idea to enhance the education of students who will spend a lifetime in a static work environment rather than a a career path. However, these standards are intended to be universal, meaning that 4 year colleges and universities will be obliged to accept students who meet the minimum Common Core standards. It's bad enough that many students need remedial help when they go to college, but to make that the norm rather than the exception is outrageous.