Understanding the new U.S. history

By Ryan Graczkowski

When I was younger, I remember that some of my favorite books to check out from the library were history books. I was a big fan of the ‘olden days.’ Lincoln, Washington, both of them were heroes of mine. I breathed the American Revolution for a while, then went over to the Civil War for a while, and then back again. Because, honestly, they were just the coolest things.

Why? It wasn’t the Constitution, or the abolition of slavery. It was because war was where all the cool stuff happened – guns and explosions and men being men and all of that. It took me a long time to really get it – that without the Revolution, we couldn’t have the Constitution, the very core of our identity as a nation and the ultimate guide of the (little r) republican experiment we are a part of today. And without the Civil War, an African-American would still be three-fifths of a person, without rights or representation.

Now, the subject of how 1877 is a poor starting place for a historical education has been covered. It’s been more than covered. And I’m not going to go into some big spiel about how it’s wrong and all of that. But what I am going to do is attempt to understand why it is that the state wants to do it.

And at the end of the day, it’s very simple. It’s not some kind of Orwellian control scheme, and it’s not liberalism at work either. Ms. Garland made her reasoning quite clear – she is concerned over the lack of depth of knowledge of our history.

1877 is not Year 1

By Nina Kilbride

The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction is in the process of overhauling the curriculum for North Carolina public schools.  The DPI has asked for feedback on the proposed curriculum through Feb. 15.  I reviewed the proposed curriculum.

There is a glaring problem with the proposed history instruction in North Carolina high schools.  The proposed curriculum eliminates the teaching of United States history prior to 1877 in North Carolina public schools. A few pre-1877 concepts are covered in other parts of the curriculum, but the proposed curriculum would not teach children:

Who came to the Americas and why
The states were once colonies of England
We fought a war to free ourselves from an imperial crown

Abbreviated history

By William R. Toler

North Carolina high schoolers could get relieved of the first 200 years of American history if the Department of Public Instruction has its way.

According to FOX News, DPI wants to start the U.S. History curriculum with the presidency of Rutherford B. Hayes…in 1876. With the proposed curriculum, student’s wouldn’t learn the aspects of the pre-Columbian era through the Civil War, which could be considered the most important history of the nation.

But Rebecca Garland, DPI’s chief academic officer, told FOX News the goal isn’t to move away from American history. “What we are trying to do is figure out a way to teach it where students are connected to it, where they see the big idea, where they are able to make connections and draw relationships between parts of our history and the present day.”

Rubbing shoulders with a rising star

By Ryan Graczkowski

I was actually given the privilege of meeting John Edwards once.

I was part of a National Youth Leadership Conference when I was in the 10th grade. One of the ways in which the conference was supposed to make better leaders of us was to meet the leaders for our state. Edwards was one of them. We attended this sort of a news conference where he answered a bunch of questions.

But to tell you the truth, I don’t remember much about that speech. I just remember meeting a man made out of oil – all smiles and flashing teeth and smooth answers like what you’d expect to find from a robot rather than a person.

I came away from it with the first of many bitter tastes of politics. I was only 15 – heck of a time to get jaded.

Dismantle ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’

By Thomas Brock

The big buzz around the Camp Lejeune/Jacksonville area is this directive from President Obama’s State of the Union address last week:

“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. It’s the right thing to do.”

It’s a good directive. Ending the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy regarding gays in the American military will strengthen the armed forces. Recruiting and retention efforts will see an upsurge. American society will be pushed just a little more toward being a whole society.

It took a similar effort from President Truman to desegregate our military to openly accept African-Americans. Truman did it by executive order, bypassing a Congress ruled by Southern white Democrats that would’ve stonewalled any legislation.

President Obama would do well to learn from President Truman. An executive order may be the only way to allow gay military members to live openly. Republicans have long hid behind a wall of lies related to the effects of allowing openly gay Americans to serve in our military.

In eastern N.C., 2010 is 2008

By Thomas Brock

As my first post here at IndieRegister.com, I’d like to highlight what will likely be a very public mudfight: The race for eastern North Carolina’ss 3rd Congressional seat.

2010 appears to be a semi-replay of 2008 in several ways. Congressman Walter B. Jones Jr., the Republican incumbent, will probably face primary competition from former Onslow County Commissioner Joe McLaughlin. McLaughlin faced Jones Jr in the 2008 primary election. An early follower of the Tea Party group, McLaughlin targeted Jones Jr for his lack of conservative credibility and flipping on his previous support for the ongoing occupation of Iraq.

McLaughlin lost to Jones Jr after not being able to raise the money necessary to generate much interest. McLaughlin has stayed out of the limelight until recent letters to editor of the Jacksonville Daily News began indicating his interest to run against Jones Jr again.

CCC burns First Amendment

By William R. Toler

In an earlier post, the I.R.’s Corey Friedman wrote “Sometimes…a cigar is a cigar. And sometimes, it’s the First Amendment.”

This time, it is the First Amendment.

In trying to keep in line with a tobacco-free policy, administrators at Craven Community College removed a decorated auto hood from the student center because it featured a charicature of autobody instructor Bob Hall smoking a cigar, according to the New Bern Sun Journal.

The hood was airbrushed by students of the autobody program for Hall’s drag racing car. Hall told NewsChannel 12 that the students were disappointed. “They’re hurt,” he said, “because the students that worked on it wanted to show their project.”

Decision imperils abortion rights

By Nina Kilbride

In law school, I learned that the party who succeeds in framing the question to be decided has a better chance of winning in court. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, decided last week, is the ultimate example. The Supreme Court did not have to review in this case, and certainly did not need to issue such a sweeping opinion.

The lawsuit sought injunctive and declaratory relief about whether the Citizens United, an anti-abortion rights group, could run its anti-Hillary Clinton video on pay-per-view during the 2008 election. This particular case is factually moot. The election is over. The only reason to keep going is to change the law — in short, to legislate by judicial decision.

Generally, courts only decide matters that are actually in controversy. But sometimes, when a factual situation is common but cannot be dealt with on an individual basis in a timely manner, the Supreme Court will review a case anyway because the problem is “capable of repetition, yet evading review.” It’s not surprising that the cases cited for this proposition often involve abortion rights.

Haiti hatemongers: Our mirror image

By Ryan Graczkowski

You’ve all seen the advertisements on television. Some time, right in the middle of your primetime viewing, you see a child with a desperate, staring face, surrounded by a shack. Cue the sob story — no parents, barely getting by on hope and a dream and your donations, if you choose to give them.

I hate to admit this, especially in my first piece, but I have to say that my first thought is: How in the world does that rich white guy with the beard not get robbed? It certainly isn’t for the horrors that these people are enduring on a day-by-day basis. I don’t consider them. I don’t imagine that you do, either.

Please don’t misread me. I’m not trying to pass a moral judgment here. I’m just saying that I’m more inclined to think about my bills and getting gas in my car. I think that’s normal, so I’m saying that you are probably the same.

Haiti doesn’t let us have that excuse anymore.

A congressional con artist

By Nicole Navarro

Taking advantage of other people’s misfortune and fears certainly isn’t a new concept. But it is a concept that is spreading — all the way to the U.S. House.

As was expected, the recent disaster in Haiti had scam artists ready to take action. Within 24 hours of the massive quake, the first spam scam e-mails were reported. There also reports of phone calls from people claiming to be survivors of the disaster or family members of survivors asking for money.

Mental images that come to mind when I think of Haiti right now don’t include Haitians sitting around on their cell phones dialing random numbers to ask for help. 

I would like to think if someone called me, they wouldn’t get too much further than “Hey, I am a survivor in Haiti” before either I hang up or try to collect information in an effort to report it to authorities.