I think the problem with the voter ID bills is that they sound so reasonable to people with valid government-issued identification. I mean, you need a photo ID to drive, to fly, to get into most workplaces. Why wouldn’t you need one to vote, right?

And then you realize just who you’re disenfranchising. And how very, very rare voter fraud actually is—despite how easy it would be to commit.

Watch on redstarpilot.tumblr.com

The Partisans - Police Story (Full Album HQ)

Common Core critics contend that national education standards will erode local decision-making on school issues while promoting a national curriculum of sorts. Most Core proponents generally dismiss these concerns as unfounded.

But Bill Gates, a major financial backer of the standards, was atypically direct about what peddlers of standardization are trying to accomplish during aPolitico event on Monday. Rather than defend Common Core from accusations of creeping nationalization, he finally confirmed that yes, this is exactly what Core proponents are trying to accomplish—less local autonomy is a good thing, as he says in the video:

"Common Core I would have thought of as more of a technocratic issue. The basic idea of, ‘should we share an electrical plug across the country?’ Well, you can get partisan about that I suppose. Should Georgia have a different railroad width than everybody else? Should they teach multiplication in a different way? Oh that’s brilliant [sarcasm], who came up with that idea? Common Core, the idea that what you should know at various grades, that that should be well-structured and you should really insist on kids knowing something so you can build on it, I did not really expect that to become a big political issue."

There you have it. Gates views the education system—the many myriad ways Americans could pass on knowledge to their children—as akin to choosing the correct railroad track size. The implication is obvious: after all, there is only one right railroad track size! Similarly, there is only one correct way to teach children, and all children must be taught that way, according to Gates.

This way of thinking goes against everything the reform movement has come to understand over the last few decades about what works in schools: greater standardization is not the answer; schools languish under stifling centralization; every kid is unique and has different educational needs; and local authorities—especially parents—are best suited to the task of plotting their children’s educational paths. 

Nurturing the mind of a child is an infinitely more complex task than choosing an electrical plug. It’s not as simple as plugging the right cord into a child’s brain and flipping a switch.

Gates says that Georgia shouldn’t teach multiplication a different way than the rest of the country. But what if there is a style or method that works in Georgia but not New York? What if Georgia discovers a better way? 

And even if it were true that all U.S. student should be learning the exact same thing in the exact same way, no reasonable person could be persuaded that Common Core is it. That’s because scant evidence exists in Common Core’s favor—backers are relying on little more than their faith in an unproven methodology.

Standardization isn’t good, and these specific standards aren’t good (or at least, there isn’t a lot of evidence in their favor). Which side in this debate is being unreasonably ideological, again?

And the NDP motion to make question period more accountable, and make sure questions are answered and are on-topic, has been defeated. Too bad 12 conservatives couldn’t find it in their hearts to support what seems to be a very relevant and non-partisan motion.

Oh, yeah Calandra, he voted against it. Never saw that one coming. Apparently only 3 conservatives voted for the motion. 3.

All parties widely supported this but the conservatives. Shame.

In a bit of good news for those who of us who cherish liberty, another federal judge has ruled that the word “state” means “state”. That’s crazy, huh?

When last we left this line of cases, the Democrat-packed D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals had just vacated the decision in Halbig v. Burwell that struck down subsidies on the federal Obamacare exchanges. The D.C. Circuit decided that it would rehear the case en banc, something largely perceived as merely a partisan delay of the issue. That left just King v. Burwell out of the Fourth Circuit, and that decision upheld the IRS rule expanding subsidies.

Well, another federal court finally chimed in (there’s a fourth still pending in Indiana). A district court in Oklahoma struck down the IRS rule providing federal subsidies in the case of Pruitt v. Burwell. You can read the decision here. Scott Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general, sued on behalf of the state, individuals, and employers to block the IRS rule, which the plaintiffs in all three cases contend was issued by IRS in violation of the law.

Like the now-vacated decision in Halbig, the judge in Pruitt could not find any statutory authority for IRS to offer tax subsidies to individuals that purchased insurance on the federal exchanges.  And, unlike the court in King, the judge in Pruitt does not find that “wiggle room” (his term, no joke) to find the statute ambiguous enough to approve the IRS rulemaking.

The main problem with this narrative, though, is that it’s incomplete. It takes us, semi-reliably, through the post-war rebirth of evangelicalism and the peak years of Billy Graham’s influence, but it cannot account for the decades that follow all that. It doesn’t tell us the rest of the story — the emergence of politicized fundamentalism, the rise of the religious right, and the way the fundamentalists of the religious right have swallowed, reshaped and redefined Neo-evangelicalism into a partisan voting bloc that is, today, more a subset of the Republican party than of the Protestant religion.

The narrative, in other words, doesn’t tell us how it was that we got from Billy Graham to Franklin Graham. It doesn’t explain how the post-fundamentalist Neo-evangelicals gradually morphed into the post-evangelical partisans of 21st-century white “evangelicalism.”

To understand that part of the story, we need to turn to religious historians like Randall Balmer, who tirelessly explains how anti-abortionism became the surrogate expression of anti-integrationism. And we need to turn to political historians like Rick Perlstein, who can help us to understand how the Dixiecrats turned into the Reagan Democrats before ultimately settling in as teavangelicals. Because, really, if you want to understand white evangelicalism ca. 2014, you don’t need to study the religious career of Billy Graham, you need to study the political career of Strom Thurmond.

Today tolerance appears again as what it was in its origins, at the beginning of the modern period—a partisan goal, a subversive liberating notion and practice. Conversely, what is proclaimed and practiced as tolerance today, is in many of its most effective manifestations serving the cause of oppression.
—  Herbert Marcuse, 'Repressive Tolerance'.

Partisan of the “Gardes De La Manche”

  • Dated: 1679
  • Maker: Jean Bérain
  • Place of Origin: France
  • Medium: iron, wood, textile
  • Techniques: wrought, chased, engraved, gilded
  • Creation place : France
  • Measurements: height: 2,58 m; width: 0,10 m

The marriage by proxy of Charles II of Spain and Mademoiselle d’Orléans, niece of Louis XIV, was celebrated on 31 August 1679 in Fontainebleau. This was a chance for the King of France to welcome representatives from Europe’s leading figures and sign treaties with Sweden and Denmark, following the Dutch War.

On this occasion, the Gardes de la Manche (King’s guards) were given new partisans, whose decoration expressed the royal ideology and world view of the King of France. The Gardes de la Manche (literally “guards of the sleeve”) were the closest guards to the King, so close they touched his sleeve.

In 1679, they were given new tabards and weapons. The Herculean symbolism, inherited from Henry IV, was replaced in their decorations by the solar symbolism adopted by Louis XIV circa 1662. Indeed, the iron of the partisans represents the world (a globe) above which flies a chariot driven by Mars, the god of war (the King).

This chariot, drawn by four horses, crushes the eagle (the Holy Empire) and the lion (often associated with England but representing Spain in this context). The King is crowned with the victor’s laurels by an allegory of Renown, under the radiant sun surrounded by the motto "NEC PLURIBUS IMPAR".

Jean Bérain (1640-1711) was entrusted with making these weapons. In 1675, he began designing the costumes and decorations for the events - carrousels, funerals as well as parties and operas - held at the Court of France.

Source: Copyright © 2013 Musée de l’Armée

Captain Nieves Fernandez, the only known Filipino female guerilla leader and formerly a school teacher, shows U.S. Army Pvt. Andrew Lupiba how she used her long knife to silently kill Japanese soldiers during the Japanese occupation of Leyte Island. Pvt. Lupiba was a bellhop at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, California before entering service. Mabuhay Las Piñas, Leyte Island, Philippines. 7 November 1944. Image taken by Stanley Troutman.


Gilded partisan of Louis XIV’s personal bodyguard.  The Gardes de la Manche (literally “guards of the sleeve”) were the closest guards to the King, so close they touched his sleeve. In 1679, they were given new tabards and weapons with solar symbolism that proclaimed Louis’ role as the Sun King. A detail near the hilt shows the King trampling an eagle (the Holy Roman Empire) and a lion (England and Spain) beneath his chariot. Also note that he’s trampling the Earth covered with French fleurs-de-lis! Via the Musée de l’Armée, France.


Engraved and Gilt Partisan

  • Dating: late 17th century
  • Culture: European
  • Measurements: height 190.5 cm

The weapon has an iron head with a large, straight-edged cusp-blade, ribbed at the centre, with wings, tapering socket provided with rings at both edges, while the upper one is smooth with three rings.

The surface of the lower half of the blade blade, from its half to the socket, is decorated with engravings and remains of gilding; featuring symmetric effigies of flowers, grotesque masks and spirals, on dotted ground.

The wings are shaped and engraved as exotic birds and snakes, the socket decorated with floral bands. Antique, wooden haft of circular section, comes with longitudinal, fluted decorations alternated to rows of brass studs.

Source: Copyright © 2014 Czerny’s International Auction House S.R.L.

Issue #16 (June 2013) - We’re welcoming summer back with an ENTIRELY new magazine design and store. This is insane for us. Thank you for all of your support. Welcome to the new Highlight Magazine, it’s great to meet you.

Who’s Inside: You Me At Six (ten page spread), While She Sleeps (four page spread), Ryan Cabrera (four page spread), The Plot In You (two page spread), Sharks (four page spread), Capital Cities (four page spread), Spitalfield (two page spread), Sugar Glyder (two page spread), Keltie Colleen (industry Highlight), our FESTIVAL SURVIVAL guide & MUCH more.

Click here to purchase a digital download of this issue for $1 (plus tons of sneak peak screen caps) in our webstore. You can NOW also subscribe to Highlight Magazine and get 12 digital issues for only $10 right here.

Connect with Highlight: Twitter / Facebook / Instagram / Webstore / Subscribe


Parade Partisan 

  • Dated: 18th century
  • Culture: German
  • Medium & Technique: blued, etched and gilded steel, wooden haft with original steel base spike, silk tassel with alternating blue and gold bands
  • Measurements: overall length 258.45 cm (101 3/4 inches); weight 3.68 kg
  • Inscriptions: AUGUST WILHELM/DG DUX BRUNS EA LUNEB [August Wilhelm, by the Grace of God Duke of Bunswich and Lüneburg]; 1718 HAW II [Herzog August Wilhelm]; PARTA TVERI [Defend your acquisitions]

The partisan was used by the Bodyguard of August Wilhelm, Duke of Brunswick - Wolfenbüttel [1662-1731].

Source: Copyright © 2014 Cleveland Museum of Art

Too many have denied the Holocaust. Even more have perpetuated the myth of passivity, the fallacy that six million Jews went docilely to their deaths, like lambs to the slaughter. It is important that future generations should know this to be untrue. In reality, wherever there was the slightest opportunity, Jews fought back. The Jewish people did their utmost to survive under unfathomably difficult circumstances in the forests, in the ghettos, and in the camps. We all fought for our lives and for the lives of our loved ones. Many fought with weapons in hand in the ghettos, as underground fighters in occupied cities and villages, as partisans in the forests, and simply as individuals who resisted those who came to destroy them.
—  Faye Schulman, part of the Jewish armed resistance against the Nazis, in A Partisan’s Memoir: Woman of the Holocaust