Now I know without a doubt that people in Texas are stupid

I'm a wee bit curious, update history books sure, but why do they need to cull history? Are they trying to cut costs - paper/ink? Are they going for a standard sized book, therefore the need to excise a few names? Has there been a bumper crop of recent important history and/or people that justify or outshine the groundbreaking accomplishments of Lincoln et al?
Perhaps when Bush said he'd let the history books decide, the Texas board of Education took that on as a challenge.
Then again, they've messed with ancient history as well... from creationism up.

Ceili wrote:

I'm a wee bit curious, update history books sure, but why do they need to cull history? Are they trying to cut costs - paper/ink? Are they going for a standard sized book, therefore the need to excise a few names? Has there been a bumper crop of recent important history and/or people that justify or outshine the groundbreaking accomplishments of Lincoln et al?
Perhaps when Bush said he'd let the history books decide, the Texas board of Education took that on as a challenge.
Then again, they've messed with ancient history as well... from creationism up.

It's fair to say that there is a limited amount of space in textbooks; but this is far more than that.
It's an attempt to shape the next generation from the ground up, and not just in Texas, but across the nation.

Cycloptichorn

In retrospect, I think that it would have been much better to have admitted Texas to the Union . . . .

Maybe Neil Armstrong wouldnt have been noteworthy if he hadnt walked on the moon, but he did.
That is IMO still one of the greatest scientific achievements in my lifetime