President Obama is now likely to be the number one salesperson for homeschooling.  For the last 8 years, he has already been the number one salesman for guns and ammunition.

Every time Obama talks about guns or gives any hint of an executive order or any kind of legislation regarding guns, the sales go way up.  Sales of guns and ammunition have skyrocketed since before Obama even took office.  He speaks, and sales soar.

You almost have to wonder if Obama owns shares in gun companies. He is unable to actually implement anything significant, yet he keeps driving gun sales.

Now he is trying to do the same thing with homeschooling.  He will accomplish more than what the homeschool advocates have been able to do.

The Obama administration recently issued “guidance” to public schools.  The schools are being told to allow transgender students to use whichever facility matches their self-identified gender.

First, let’s discuss the issue of transgenders and bathrooms.  I believe that many believe oppose this policy not out of opposition to transgenders, but just out of opposition to the whole idea of people being able to self-identify.  Women aren’t worried about Bruce/ Caitlyn Jenner using the ladies’ room, at least in most cases.  They are worried about some pervert who decides he is going to self-identify as a woman that day so that he can access the ladies’ room.

This will be especially problematic with kids.  Imagine when the students get word of this.  It is not hard to imagine some middle school boys daring a friend to self-identify as a girl in order to use the girl facilities.  Are the adults at the school going to stop the boy, or will they be afraid of being accused as anti-transgender, or whatever the latest PC name is?

This whole issue of transgenders and bathrooms is all about political correctness and government control.  It is about setting up more group rights.  The problem is that when we talk about “rights” in this context, we are not talking about the right to life, liberty, and property.  It typically means rights in the sense of depriving others of their liberty.

In the case of the North Carolina law, the state government was not depriving rights.  It was the opposite.  They are saying that private owners may decide for themselves of the policies of their own property.  This is as it should be.  This was overriding certain local jurisdictions, so there is a libertarian argument for decentralization against the North Carolina law.  But other than that, it is completely compatible with liberty.  It is not depriving transgenders of any rights.

I think a majority of people do not agree with the politically correct position of the establishment.  Many will keep their mouths shut because they don’t want to be labeled as anti-transgender.  It may be a silent majority, although there are certainly some who are not silent.

Regardless of what you think of this whole issue, there is little question that Obama and his administration have completely overstepped their boundaries.  The entire Department of Education is unconstitutional in the first place.  Now he is pushing some kind of dictate from the White House, without even going through Congress.

It is still not clear if this “guidance” is enforceable at all.  It is basically a bribe, telling public schools they have to obey or else risk losing federal funding.  But isn’t it supposed to be Congress in charge of funding?

The governor of Texas said they would not submit based on bribes.  But that is what the entire Department of Education is, along with many other federal departments.  The states don’t have to adopt common core.  They really don’t have to follow any of the instructions of the federal government.  But they risk losing federal dollars.

If I were a state legislator, or even a local school board member, I would vote in favor of refusing federal money for education.  That frees up the system from the federal dictates.  It doesn’t take away from the fact that it is a state-run school that is run with taxpayer money, but at least it is an improvement.

What justification is there of taking taxpayer money and then not sending it back to one particular state or area because they refuse to follow the federal government’s instructions?

As a libertarian, I understand that taxing people is theft no matter what the money is spent on.  But I think a lot of non-libertarians will see things clearer if federal education money is not sent back to a particular area, despite those people having to still pay the same amount in taxes.

There is going to be a lot of rebellion over this latest Obama move.  We can only hope that some state will actually reject this and risk losing federal funding.

If Donald Trump were smart, he would come out and say that he is proposing to end the Department of Education and all of the crazy dictates that come with it.  He can propose a small tax reduction somewhere to offset this reduced expenditure.  I know that the budget is far from balanced and would still be far from balanced even with the elimination of this department.  But a commensurate tax reduction would be a great political ploy on his part.

It is ridiculous that these people in Washington DC are making policy for 320 million people.  One of the big focuses right now for libertarians should be on decentralization.  Who can argue with decentralization when it comes to something like this?

Overall, I am happy that Obama did this.  It will just outrage people.  I hope more parents hit their breaking point and pull their kids out of the public school system.  State-run schools deserve to die.  Taxpayers and our kids will be so much better off when the state does not control the thinking of our young minds.

Keep going Obama.  You have another 8 months to go for selling more guns and more homeschooling.