LaClair in News Again

[Guest bob]

You're helping Matthew with his research?

Matthew will probably have that figured out later this week.

A note of support!

Let the healing begin...

[Guest Bob]

That's fair, but some news reports have young LaClair apparently exaggerating the supposed bias in the book.

Standing up for integrity should be done with integrity.

I'll note that I haven't read the book, but I've looked at the CFI report, and at least one of Matthew's statements seems to go much farther in its criticism than does the report.

That type of exaggeration was also present in young LaClair's letter to the school administrators regarding Mr. Paszkiewicz.

If you haven't read the book, you don't know if Matthew exaggerated or if the report understates the problem.

I take it you're pro-bias.

[Guest Guest]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...,0,247646.story

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...0,5311132.story

Wilson's response is very defensive, not to mention much of it isn't true. The CFI report quotes the text verbatim.

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2008/...0-the-kids.html

Top 10: The kids are all right

The best, the brightest, the movers, the shakers and the thinkers came out, but it was a New Jersey high school student who took the Number 1 spot in the week's most popular Opinion stories.

[Guest Guest]

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2008/...0-the-kids.html

Top 10: The kids are all right

The best, the brightest, the movers, the shakers and the thinkers came out, but it was a New Jersey high school student who took the Number 1 spot in the week's most popular Opinion stories.

"Give me the lesson without the spin"? Give me a break.

"Throughout my life, my teachers have told me that school is a neutral environment where my classmates and I can count on teachers and textbooks to provide us with the factual and unbiased information that will equip us for life."

What planet has this kid been living on? It just shows his lack of understanding of the world and the issues people want to label him as a hero over. I guess when he gets to college he won't notice the liberal spin on those textbooks.

What a load of BS.

It's even funnier that he is shocked, as he puts it, to find himself in the midst of another controversy.

[Guest Guest]

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2008/...0-the-kids.html

Top 10: The kids are all right

The best, the brightest, the movers, the shakers and the thinkers came out, but it was a New Jersey high school student who took the Number 1 spot in the week's most popular Opinion stories.

"He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."

[Guest Guest]

"He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."

Said Gandalf to Saruman.

Notwithstanding the source of the quote, it's total non-sequitur, having precisely nothing to do with either Matthew or Paul. They've broken nothing--if anything, they've fought to maintain what many people would like to see broken.

[Guest Guest]

"He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."

He that posteth a misplaced aphorism has a screw loose.

[Guest Guest]

"Give me the lesson without the spin"? Give me a break.

"Throughout my life, my teachers have told me that school is a neutral environment where my classmates and I can count on teachers and textbooks to provide us with the factual and unbiased information that will equip us for life."

What planet has this kid been living on? It just shows his lack of understanding of the world and the issues people want to label him as a hero over. I guess when he gets to college he won't notice the liberal spin on those textbooks.

What a load of BS.

It's even funnier that he is shocked, as he puts it, to find himself in the midst of another controversy.

It's interesting that you whine about liberal textbooks, but you can't cite one.

It's also interesting that you completely ignore the fact that the textbook he complained about contains factual errors. That was the essence of his complaint. Do you think he should ignore it?

Maybe you think ideals don't matter any more. He thinks they do. That's what people admire.

Speaking of bias, he didn't say he was shocked to find himself in another controversy. He said he wasn't looking for one.

[Guest Guest]

It's interesting that you whine about liberal textbooks, but you can't cite one.

It's also interesting that you completely ignore the fact that the textbook he complained about contains factual errors. That was the essence of his complaint. Do you think he should ignore it?

Maybe you think ideals don't matter any more. He thinks they do. That's what people admire.

Speaking of bias, he didn't say he was shocked to find himself in another controversy. He said he wasn't looking for one.

Did you read the author's letter? Probably not. You're in denial.

[Guest Guest]

Said Gandalf to Saruman.

Notwithstanding the source of the quote, it's total non-sequitur, having precisely nothing to do with either Matthew or Paul. They've broken nothing--if anything, they've fought to maintain what many people would like to see broken.

Says you.

[Guest Guest]

QUOTE (Guest @ May 5 2008, 09:41 PM)

It's interesting that you whine about liberal textbooks, but you can't cite one.

It's also interesting that you completely ignore the fact that the textbook he complained about contains factual errors. That was the essence of his complaint. Do you think he should ignore it?

Maybe you think ideals don't matter any more. He thinks they do. That's what people admire.

Speaking of bias, he didn't say he was shocked to find himself in another controversy. He said he wasn't looking for one.

Did you read the author's letter? Probably not. You're in denial.

Yes I did read it.

How about you put your money where your mouth is. Matthew has a textbook in which he found specific errors. Go thou and do likewise.

[Guest Guest]

Says you.

Says me and the vast majority of the world exposed to the LaClair family.

[Guest Guest]

Says me and the vast majority of the world exposed to the LaClair family.

Wrong again. The vast majority of the academic world is left leaning and so are the text books that they choose to teach from.

[Guest Guest]

QUOTE (Guest @ May 5 2008, 09:41 PM)

It's interesting that you whine about liberal textbooks, but you can't cite one.

It's also interesting that you completely ignore the fact that the textbook he complained about contains factual errors. That was the essence of his complaint. Do you think he should ignore it?

Maybe you think ideals don't matter any more. He thinks they do. That's what people admire.

Speaking of bias, he didn't say he was shocked to find himself in another controversy. He said he wasn't looking for one.

Yes I did read it.

How about you put your money where your mouth is. Matthew has a textbook in which he found specific errors. Go thou and do likewise.

The authors, one conservative and one liberal, have addressed the points that supposedly only our hero could find. Once again, another LaClair non-issue.

[Guest Guest]

The authors, one conservative and one liberal, have addressed the points that supposedly only our hero could find. Once again, another LaClair non-issue.

Where have they addressed any of it? They haven't.

How do they explain the statement that the Supreme Court has ruled that children cannot pray in public schools? They can't.

You make these claims, but where is your support for them?

[Guest Guest]

Wrong again. The vast majority of the academic world is left leaning and so are the text books that they choose to teach from.

You make that claim, but you don't back it up. Pick a textbook, give some examples, then we'll talk.

[Guest Guest]

Where have they addressed any of it? They haven't.

How do they explain the statement that the Supreme Court has ruled that children cannot pray in public schools? They can't.

You make these claims, but where is your support for them?

The author of the book addressed it in his letter to the newspaper that was linked in a previous post. Wake up numbnuts.

[Guest Guest]

You make that claim, but you don't back it up. Pick a textbook, give some examples, then we'll talk.

How about the maniac professor comparing the people that were killed in the WTC attack to Nazis. Is he left wing enough for you. I don't know if he has any text books out or not, maybe you could enlighten me.

Let's stop the nonsense ok. Pick up any grammar school math book and look at some of the word problems. John and Jane have been replaced by Jose and Shaquilla. If that isn't left wing political correctness than I don't know what is. But I guess now I've hurt your little feelings and you'll call me a racist.

[Guest Guest]

The author of the book addressed it in his letter to the newspaper that was linked in a previous post. Wake up numbnuts.

He tried to address it, but he couldn't. Wilson's Op-Ed piece was defensive and ignored several points he simply cannot answer. For example, he and DiIulio removed one photograph and a caption on school prayer, but the eleventh edition still says that the Supreme Court has ruled children cannot pray in public schools. The statement, which is still in the textbook, is untrue. He didn't address it.

Then, as if to prove how biased his writing can be, he refers to two of his critics as "space scientists." This guy should write Republican political commercials. And as if that language isn't bad enough, it isn't even true. James Hansen is a top scientist at NASA, but Michael McCracken is head of the Climate Institute. He's not a "space scientist." Apparently truth doesn't mean much to Professor Wilson, which means that he shouldn't be writing student textbooks.

Then he protests that he doesn’t believe the United States “was founded on an idea of original sin.” He says that the criticism on this point, and all the other criticisms, are ridiculous. Here is the exact quotation from his textbook. “To the colonists, all of mankind suffered from original sin, symbolized by Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. Since no one was born innocent, no one could be trusted with power. Thus the Constitution had to be designed in such a way as to curb the darker side of human nature.” The criticism isn’t ridiculous. It’s exactly correct. Wilson and DiIulio explicitly state that the Constitution was designed as it was because of the colonists’ conception of original sin. That is exactly what it says. The fact that Wilson now has to backpeddle in an effort to defend himself proves that he wrote that part of the text for political purposes.

Wilson can’t even defend himself. Matthew wiped the floor with him in these two Op-Ed pieces.

[Guest Guest]

1. How about the maniac professor comparing the people that were killed in the WTC attack to Nazis. Is he left wing enough for you. 2. I don't know if he has any text books out or not, maybe you could enlighten me.

3. Let's stop the nonsense ok. Pick up any grammar school math book and look at some of the word problems. John and Jane have been replaced by Jose and Shaquilla. If that isn't left wing political correctness than I don't know what is. But I guess now I've hurt your little feelings and you'll call me a racist.

1. I never heard of him, and anyway, it's not the point.

2. In other words, you don't know of any.

3. And with good reason. It is racist.

[Guest Paul]

The author of the book addressed it in his letter to the newspaper that was linked in a previous post. Wake up numbnuts.

It’s sad that James Q. Wilson chooses to attack his critics instead of correcting some obvious errors in his textbook. The worst problem with his essay in the Los Angeles Times is that he is being intellectually dishonest, at best.

Both the 10th and 11th editions contain the following statements on school prayer:

“The Supreme Court has ruled that children cannot pray in public schools . . .”

“Since 1947, the Court has applied the wall-of-separation theory to strike down as unconstitutional every effort to have any form of prayer in public schools . . .”

“. . . long after the Supreme Court had decided that praying and Bible reading could not take place in public schools . . .”

So for starters, he is being dishonest when he defends himself solely on the grounds that one other statement, which says the same thing, was removed.

In his Op-Ed essay, Wilson protests that “the entire section of the book discussing school prayer makes it clear that the public schools may not support, encourage or finance prayer in the schools.” No, it doesn’t. It is simple enough for Wilson to make that point clear in his essay. Two simple words, “state-sponsored,” make the point perfectly clear. Yet they do not appear anywhere in that section of the book. His unqualified statements are simply wrong. Even if he wants to argue that he and DiIulio did not intend to mislead, there is still no excuse for not correcting these unqualified, false statements. He had no trouble making the point clear when he was writing to defend himself. All he need do is apply the same standard to writing his book.

On global warming, Wilson’s essay misses the point. The problem is not just that the authors are too critical of the global warming argument. The problem is that they dismiss the science as being politically motivated, completely ignore the growing consensus on the subject and use loaded phrases like “activist scientists” and “skeptical scientists” to make their unsupported point. Wilson’s argument, that he and DiIulio merely “wrote that there was disagreement among scientists about this matter,” is dishonest, intellectually if not intentionally. That is nowhere close to being all they said.

So you could stretch all reason to say that he addressed these issues, but he did not do so honestly or on point.

[Guest Guest]

He tried to address it, but he couldn't. Wilson's Op-Ed piece was defensive and ignored several points he simply cannot answer. For example, he and DiIulio removed one photograph and a caption on school prayer, but the eleventh edition still says that the Supreme Court has ruled children cannot pray in public schools. The statement, which is still in the textbook, is untrue. He didn't address it.

Then, as if to prove how biased his writing can be, he refers to two of his critics as "space scientists." This guy should write Republican political commercials. And as if that language isn't bad enough, it isn't even true. James Hansen is a top scientist at NASA, but Michael McCracken is head of the Climate Institute. He's not a "space scientist." Apparently truth doesn't mean much to Professor Wilson, which means that he shouldn't be writing student textbooks.

Then he protests that he doesn’t believe the United States “was founded on an idea of original sin.” He says that the criticism on this point, and all the other criticisms, are ridiculous. Here is the exact quotation from his textbook. “To the colonists, all of mankind suffered from original sin, symbolized by Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. Since no one was born innocent, no one could be trusted with power. Thus the Constitution had to be designed in such a way as to curb the darker side of human nature.” The criticism isn’t ridiculous. It’s exactly correct. Wilson and DiIulio explicitly state that the Constitution was designed as it was because of the colonists’ conception of original sin. That is exactly what it says. The fact that Wilson now has to backpeddle in an effort to defend himself proves that he wrote that part of the text for political purposes.

Wilson can’t even defend himself. Matthew wiped the floor with him in these two Op-Ed pieces.

Just quoting all of this to make sure it's seen. Very well-stated, and well-done by Matthew once more.

Please, o denigrators of the LaClairs, explain why the eleventh edition of the book still says that the Supreme Court ruled the kids can't pray in public schools.

[Guest Guest]

How about the maniac professor comparing the people that were killed in the WTC attack to Nazis. Is he left wing enough for you. I don't know if he has any text books out or not, maybe you could enlighten me.

Problems:

1. What professor? How about a name, at least?

2. You don't know if he has any textbooks? What part of PICK A TEXTBOOK do you not understand?

Let's stop the nonsense ok. Pick up any grammar school math book and look at some of the word problems. John and Jane have been replaced by Jose and Shaquilla. If that isn't left wing political correctness than I don't know what is.

You're right, you don't know what is. If not using 100% "white" names is the best example of 'leftism' in a school textbook you can come up with, then you've really made his point for him, haven't you?

But I guess now I've hurt your little feelings and you'll call me a racist.

I wouldn't say that--maybe you're just stupid.

[Guest Guest]

Problems:

1. What professor? How about a name, at least?

2. You don't know if he has any textbooks? What part of PICK A TEXTBOOK do you not understand?

You're right, you don't know what is. If not using 100% "white" names is the best example of 'leftism' in a school textbook you can come up with, then you've really made his point for him, haven't you?

I wouldn't say that--maybe you're just stupid.

Ouch, that really hurts.

[Guest Mr. T]

Just quoting all of this to make sure it's seen. Very well-stated, and well-done by Matthew once more.

Please, o denigrators of the LaClairs, explain why the eleventh edition of the book still says that the Supreme Court ruled the kids can't pray in public schools.

You will never see Patriot, 2smart4u or any of their ilk answer this or any other question. They don't care about the truth. Their belief is the center of the universe. It is all, the alpha and the omega.

That is why they will never answer this or any other intelligent question.

That is why they constantly repeat the same slogans over and over. It's all they have.

They are taking us back to the days when men settled arguments by duels and combat instead of reason. They will return us to the stone ages if we let them.

They don't realize how serious a problem this is. How many people do?