The stated reasoning behind opposition to critical thinking skills was that such education programs “focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.” As Hunter described this logic:
Critical thinking, of course, is what allows a person to differentiate between fact and hokum. I will assume that this is the peeve being addressed by the party plank (which, as it turns out, doubles as a handy paddlin’ board). Differentiating between fact and hokum sounds all fine and good until it leads to questioning your elders. When elders spout hokum, now that needs to be properly respected. If your elders say the Loch Ness Monster is proof that evolution never happened and that Noah’s Ark was actually a hovercraft, you had better damn well not start using your newfound critical thinking skills on picking apart that. Believing something contrary to your parents counts as behavior modification only if the original behavior was a full-on brainwashing.
Desperate to buy time to avert a financial meltdown, eurozone country leaders were set to meet June 28 to propose a long-term plan for some sort of banking and/or fiscal union to shore up weaker economies. But Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel remained adamant that her country couldn’t afford to bankroll the effort.
“We must return to our Founders’ dream of every state deciding who it can turn away at its border. I believe that when I head home to Connecticut after work, I should have to show my papers — especially after they drag off my driver, Luis, for forgetting his!
It’s easy: 50 states, 50 immigration policies. Every state gets its own bird, right? If Georgia can say ‘yes’ to the brown thrasher, why can’t South Carolina say ‘no’ to the brown Guatemalan? (Justice Antonin) Scalia is right — if Arizona is a sovereign state, it should have its own immigration standards, its own standing army, its own currency, its own Olympic team, its own space program, and its own debts to China!”—
STEPHEN COLBERT, reacting to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in United States v. Arizona, on The Colbert Report.
Of Arizona’s right to enforce its own racist immigration laws, Scalia wrote “In the first 100 years of the Republic, the United States enacted numerous laws restricting the immigration of certain classes of aliens,” which included convicts and freed slaves.
To which Colbert replied “Yes, the first hundred years of the Republic — the good old days.”