by Madison Ruppert
Editor of End the Lie

May 05, 2012

from EndTheLie Website



Previously I reported on the New York school system’s move to not only ban words but entire topics and concepts from their tests as if that would somehow make facts of life like poverty disappear.

I found this especially insane since it was essentially based on the assumption that if an incredibly impoverished child didn’t have to answer questions that included poverty on a test, they would somehow forget about the empty dinner table they have to go home to.

Obviously this is so absurd that it is truly hard to believe that anyone is actually imbecilic enough to believe such a thing makes any sense whatsoever.

Unfortunately, it is not just the United States which is plagued by bureaucrats seeking to control speech.

Indeed, recently it was reported that teachers in a small town in British Columbia have been informed that they cannot display quotes from the popular children’s author Ted Geisel (better known as Dr. Seuss), supposedly because they are political messaging.

I always suspected that “green eggs and ham” was actually about environmentalism and police, and thankfully it appears that the bureaucrats overseeing the town of Prince Rupert have uncovered these hidden meanings and are now protecting our children from them.

After all, there could never be such a thing as whimsical and humorous children’s books without an ulterior motive or hidden message, right?

Of course, Dr. Seuss actually did include some much deeper and more important concepts than just oddly colored eggs, but last time I checked it was a good thing to challenge young minds and encourage them to think critically.

One such work was Horton Hears a Who which has been said to subtly deal with issues of prejudice and civil rights while The Lorax is seen as a cautionary tale about the dangers of ignoring environmental degradation.

Hilariously (although unsurprisingly), Fox News claimed that the Lorax film based on the Dr. Seuss book released this year was trying to,

“indoctrinate our children” with an “anti-industry message.”

Don’t you just love how the establishment media - which increasingly spews out intellectually bankrupt garbage like never before - can create conspiracy theories with absolutely no evidence whatsoever, while anyone pointing to real evidence of real conspiracies throughout history is painted as a loon?

This all started with Bill 22, which came into effect in March 2012 and ended the teachers’ strike and brought in a mediator:




Teachers & Allies Rally to Stop Bill 22

March 2012, Victoria BC

by bandcroft
March 6, 2012

from YouTube Website

From the BC Federation of Labour website (

February 28, 2012

"Today the BC Liberal Government has introduced Bill 22, imposing 2 years of no wage increases and seeking significant concession from teachers regarding learning conditions and professional development. At the same time, the BC Liberals eliminate teachers' right to job action. After three terms this tired government has not learned anything when it comes to respecting workers' democratic rights."






Teachers have been protesting in the typically aggressive manner in which teachers operate - by wearing T-shirts, signs and bumper stickers expressing their disappointment.

A 1st grade teacher at Prince Rupert elementary school was told that she could be disciplined for wearing a Dr. Seuss quote on her clothing or vehicle while on school property.

What was the quote they deemed so offensive?

“I know, up on the top you are seeing great sights, but down here at the bottom we, too, should have rights.”

Some might remember this line from the book Yertle the Turtle when Yertle organizes his fellow turtles to stand on top of each other so Yertle can climb to the top and see a great distance.

This was far from an isolated incident.


As of late April, eight teachers in this particular school district had been issued letters informing them that they could face disciplinary actions for allegedly displaying political messages.

According to the president of the Prince Rupert District Teachers’ Union Joanna Larson, this is because the administrators do not want to let students even see these messages.

“We feel very censored here right now. We have feelings that our rights to freedom of expression have been violated,” Larson said.

I wouldn’t qualify that as a feeling, as it is a clear, objective fact.


Their rights to freedom of expression are indeed being violated in a truly absurd manner.

Other teachers who are trying to avoid getting the letters - which sound eerily like threats - have to park away from the school’s property in order to continue to display their bumper stickers in opposition to Bill 22.

“If they try to use a heavy-handed approach, we just have more people trying to exercise civil disobedience,” Larson said.

However, what they’re doing is probably the least aggressive form of civil disobedience possible.


This makes me see their suppression of dissent amongst the teachers that much more insane.

It is important to note that indeed Geisel had a political bent, evidenced by his work as a political cartoonist, although I think it is equally important to note that very few young children could likely recognize these messages without having them pointed out to them.

If the administration could show that 1st graders were able to tease out the deeper meanings in Horton Hears a Who or The Lorax, they might have grounds to do this, but I seriously doubt many youngsters are capable of that literary analysis.

Judith Morgan wrote a book on Geisel entitled Dr. Seuss and Mr. Geisel, and she says that he was indeed writing about the evils of,

“greed and destruction of the planet and narrow-minded, close-minded types.”

“Seuss’ work continues to resonate with kids and parents because it is honest; it battles prejudice; it sends the imagination soaring and fits the wonder of a young child’s mind and dreams,” Morgan added.

She said that banning the Dr. Seuss quote is,

“very upsetting” to teachers and “it’s the ridiculous nature of it that makes it almost unbelievable.”

I couldn’t agree more, as Dr. Seuss books still line the walls of countless libraries and the bookshelves of many children who enjoy the stories not because they speak to their inner revolutionary but because they are incredibly imaginative and enjoyable.

There might be an even larger point here, which Larson brings to the fore in saying that the ludicrous actions of the administration perfectly exemplify the “ridiculous human nature” Dr. Seuss wrote about.

“This is why he did what he did,” she said. “I think he would think it’s absurd.”

All I can say is that I hope the administration comes to the realization that they’re making themselves look like the antagonist of a Dr. Seuss book in what must be one of the most nonsensical actions taken by a school bureaucracy in recent times.










Political Correctness or Political Insanity?

-   New York City Schools Ban Words and Topics From Tests   -
by Madison Ruppert
Editor of End the Lie

March 27, 2012
from EndTheLie Website


(Image credit: biologycorner/Flickr)


If anyone needed a single case to point to in order to show that political correctness has gone completely insane here in the United States, this is it. With the rise of such practices, we also see the growth of the “nanny state” which seeks to control every aspect of our lives.

The New York City Department of Education has banned several words in an attempt to be as politically correct as possible, although I see it as pure imbecilic nonsense.

There are some 50 words which are officially banned from being used on tests given to students by the city, the banning of which is outright absurd.

Some of the more insane choices are:

  • dinosaur

  • birthdays

  • wealth

  • poverty

  • Halloween

  • dancing

  • terrorism

  • divorce

  • references to disease

  • slavery

  • creatures from outer space,

...and many more.

In fact, it is not just these words that are banned, but indeed the entire topic cannot be included on any tests administered by the city.

This is supposedly because such references,

“could evoke unpleasant emotions in the students,” according to the New York Post.

These subjects were outlined in a request for proposals which was given to companies who compete to create standardized tests for English, math, science and other subjects which are administered multiple times per year.

Dinosaurs are banned because they supposedly might offend people who do not believe in evolution, yet this makes little to no sense given that even the most fundamentalist creationists seem to realize that there were, indeed dinosaurs.

Even the so-called “Creation Museum” in Petersburg, Kentucky includes a dinosaur exhibit called the “Dinosaur Den.” The only people who refuse to recognize that dinosaurs existed are likely delusional or potentially insane.


If the people behind the Creation Museum can agree that dinosaurs existed, as they actually have “a number of real fossilized dinosaur eggs, a Hadrosaur tibia, [and a] Triceratops skeleton casting,” on display, who out there refuses to acknowledge their existence?

Words suggesting either wealth or poverty are banned because they could supposedly make children feel jealous or saddened. I guess the New York City Department of Education believes that if you pretend it doesn’t exist, it simply doesn’t exist.

Seems to me that the Department of Education has a great deal in common with ostriches and babies under 7-9 months who have yet to develop object permanence, according to Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development.

This head-in-the-sand approach is also applied to divorces and diseases, since students might have divorced parents or might be sick in one way or another.

I guess they believe that if students don’t read the word “divorce” or anything to do with it, they’ll simply forget that their parents are divorced. That makes about as much sense as thinking that if no one says “cancer” or “disease” suddenly no one in the world will have cancer.

However, the Department of Education insists that this is not censorship and that this is a completely routine, typical practice

Unfortunately, our government has proven time and time again that they’re not the most competent individuals when it comes to logic and critical thinking.

“Some of these topics may be perfectly acceptable in other contexts but do not belong in a city- or state-wide assessment,” the request said.

Unfortunately, New York City is not alone and such “sensitivity guidelines” have actually been published by a group of states.


They said that tests should not mention group dancing, various luxuries, junk food, homelessness and even witches.

“This is standard language that has been used by test publishers for many years and allows our students to complete practice exams without distraction,” a Department of Education spokesperson said, as reported by the Post.

However, this fails to address the fact that New York City’s list is almost twice the length of those produced by others and has even fewer exceptions.

It is my humble opinion that censoring any topic from a standardized test (within reason, of course, as explicitly violent or erotic material obviously has no place on a school test) is nothing short of absurd and represents some of the more troubling ways the American “nanny state” has reared its ugly head.

According to the list, tests cannot mention homes with swimming pools and computers or anything which could be construed as potentially “disrespectful to authority or authority figures.”

Even more insane, they are not allowed to personify animals or inanimate objects, which makes even less sense than most of the items.

According to officials, this is not necessary an absolute ban, as some items can be included on exams but only on a case-by-case basis.

“The intent is to avoid giving offense or disadvantage any test takers by privileging prior knowledge,” Robert Pondiscio, a spokesman for the Core Knowledge Foundation, said to the Post.

“But the irony is they’re eliminating some subjects, like junk food, holidays and popular music, that the broadest number of kids are likely to know quite a lot about,” he added.

“If the goal is to assess higher-order thinking skills, controversial topics, for example, ones that are the subject of political debate, are exactly what students should be reasoning about,” Deanna Kuhn, a professor at the Teachers College at Columbia University, aptly pointed out, according to the Post.

One of the most common justifications for these nonsensical practices is that they are attempting to avoid offending people of certain religious beliefs.

  • birthdays are banned since Jehovah’s Witnesses do not celebrate them

  • witches and Halloween are banned since they could be interpreted as pagan

  • terrorism is banned because it might be scary

If you’re absolutely astounded by these choices, you’re not alone.


I honestly can’t even believe that such a thing is true, but I guess it goes to show just how far our country has gone down the rabbit hole of political correctness and the freedom-crushing nanny state.