When your children aren’t your children

I reject the notion that the Federal government and its employees are in any way responsible for the upbringing or education or even the personal happiness of my children… as suggested by this tweet from the White House:

Obamamunist Tweet 141204

Education and the power and money that goes with it, is simply NOT in the constitution.

Who Protests Minority Catholic Choice Schools?

What kind of people protest and vandalize Catholic schools full of young African-American children? Nope, not those Tea Party People. You’d think that would be the case, considering our vice president thinks they’re terrorists and our president says they’re all racists. But nope. Not Tea Baggers.

Those obviously racist anti-choice protesters in the video below are some SEIU union thugs, some public employees (teachers) and according to someone at the end of the video clip, just some normal people who aren’t working on a nice summer day. They are the ones protesting at a Catholic Choice School full of smart kids.

The problem? Scott Walker is there reading them a story and commending them for doing such a great job. You know… teaching, learning, getting ready for college? Bad stuff.

CREDIT: Jeff Sainlar at http://www.jsonline.com/

This is what racist, anti-choice people do in Wisconsin: They go out and protest Scott Walker and expose his evil plan to give young African-American children a decent education.

Part of the deal with this day’s protest includes vandalizing the mostly minority Catholic “School Choice” school (the school is non-union, hence the SEIU ‘Purple Shirts’ in the mob.) Did I say SEIU goons did it? Not me.

All I’m saying is that maybe they should have protested at a poorly performing public school where Walker was visiting. Protesting this mostly minority Catholic school that sends 85% of its graduates on to college, doesn’t make these mostly white, mostly non-residents of this lovely recovering neighborhood look very good, does it?

CREDIT: Breann Schossow at http://www.jsonline.com/

Did I mention that most of the students at this Choice School are African American? Did I mention that this school alone might be responsible for DOUBLING the value of the houses in the  neighborhood in which it was built? (Re-watch the video. It’s in there.) Use your imagination and see if you can imagine that these people are from the up-and-coming neighborhood in which this 6 million dollar school compliments. Doesn’t work , does it?

Why The Hate?

CREDIT: Tom Lynn at http://www.jsonline.com/

Isn’t this (loud, hateful, mean spirited, minor vandalism) kind of protest something that only those Tea Partiers  would do?

To be sure, the protest was about the governor, Scott Walker and about school choice (but not for everyone) and about who should be getting the money for educating children — public employees and government contractors, or any entity that actually WORKS FOR THE KIDS?

Let’s revisit a STUNNING example of human decency at [2:47] shall we?

“What do you believe he’s done that’s so great that he … that he deserves the attention of your students?”

“I’m ashamed to have you in my neighborhood.”

I’m wondering if that was a nun he was talking to? To be sure, if this spiteful boy were speaking to the black principal of this school, he’d be a racist, right? Just like people who say insensitive things about the president? Coming from the mouth of one of those Tea Party people… you would say that was hate speech.

Don’t you dare say it’s not true.

Sheeple Crossing: The Earth Day Rap

Here’s another post for the “Compulsory” basket. This one will be a little easier, since all you have to do is watch it. But that won’t make it any easier to stomach, unless you are a shepherd and enjoy watching the future dictators leaders of our country practice becoming little anarchists and informants (on their friends, then parents, then neighborhood, then the company they work for… if they can get a job.)

[YouTube pulled the video… but I saved the lyrics. The video of brainwashed children trying to rap this out was pretty sad anyway. It’s just as well it got pulled.]

Oh yes… urban powertry:

The sky is high and the ocean is deep,
But we can’t treat the planet like a garbage heap.

Don’t wreck it, protect it, keep part of it wild,
And think about the future of your great-grandchild.

Recycle, bicycle, don’t you drive by yourself,
Don’t buy those plastic products on the supermarket shelf.

Boycott, petition, let the big business know,
That if we mess it up here, there’s nowhere else we can go.

Don’t shrug your shoulders, say, “What can I do?”
Only one person can do it and that person is you!

Is environmentalism the new patriotism?

I put this in the Learning vs. Schooling category because this is a perfect example of the difference between learning and schooling. These children are being “schooled.” They aren’t learning anything of value, other than the fact they are helpless to truly impact their world by thinking for themselves.

Do people evolve into sheeple, or are they taught?

Will they be the future pollution-buster that comes up with some new invention that really might save the planet? Doubtful. They will  be too busy protesting, pointing fingers (watch the “moves” of these future American Idols!) and writing letters to “Big Business” and their government to please, please, please stop wasting our precious resources. It’s almost like we are making environmentalism their duty, their new social compact. It’s like instead of linking freedom and liberty with the American experience, we are replacing patriotism with environmentalism.

These children will not be contributing to society. These children will only feed off society. And they’ll be pissed off in the process because society will be constantly doing things that they have been told to believe, pollutes and DESTROYS the planet!

The sheeple of tomorrow won’t have time to think for themselves, so why include critical thinking in their schooling? Best to use our E-M-O-T-I-O-N-S and feelings. Best to write cute songs that paint with broad brushes. Plastic/Bad, Blind Sheeple Activism/Good. This kind of emoti-think has been used in the environmental movement for decades. Remember the poor Indian Native-American sitting by the garbage dump, crying? We’ve been made to feel guilty for decades!

Maybe rightly so. And maybe it worked. Have things gotten cleaner in the past thirty years? Sure have! Are we better off over-all here in America because we cleaned up our act? Sure. But forget all that. We have a GLOBAL crisis to think about and worry about and cry about now! Something damn near impossible to prove, let alone solve.

When did weather reports become climate issues?

Reminds me of a phrase: What we expect, is climate. But what we get, is weather. And in Indiana, wait a few minutes and it’ll change. The point here, people, is that we are more susceptible to our emotions and feelings on certain rather large issues than we are likely to admit. Children are more open to this kind of mood teaching.

Teaching using feelings rather than facts leads to irrational and illogical conclusions no matter what the science might actually say. This is why “Global Warming” was changed to “Climate Change” a few years ago, because every winter, when it got real cold, people suddenly didn’t care about what environmentalists were saying (because it’s cold, doof!) even though the scientists were pretty darn sure that the coldest winter on record was, in fact, a result of global warming!!

If the Catastrophic Weather Events Don’t Get Us, the Irrationality Might | Discoblog | Discover Magazine What the weather’s like affects some people’s beliefs about global climate change, a new study found: On hot days, they’re all over it, but on cold days, not so much.

If you care about your children at all, you’ll consider skipping public school and doing something–anything– other than allow your children to be schooled into the herd. Environmentalism is becoming the new patriotism.

Admit it Liberals, You Hate (School) Choice

I think it’s really sad that some people only want to fund public education for some kids in only certain public schools, but not other public schools or any other workable educational options.

Why the discrimination people?

My Facebook friend, Nate Spencer says it’s about “money and power. Those other schools don’t tend to be NEA shops. Kids first indeed.”

I keep thinking that “money and power” are becoming old saws of late, Nate. Do you suppose there are other reasons? The “power” part I get… but I think it’s about the overall power that is derived from keeping a monopoly alive so that it feeds the millions of people that feed off of it. Only this monopoly doesn’t make a few greedy capitalist industrialists powerful, but rather several unions, contractors, suppliers, bureaucracies, workers, etc. etc. etc.

The Government Education Complex (read more about it on this blog: The Government Education Complex Defined) is the monopoly that uses taxpayer dollars (money taken by force) to keep itself alive via a political construct called districts. School districts are like mini fiefdoms, that require funding, not directly from the community they serve, but from the state and the federal governments, so that they can perpetuate themselves.

Over a century ago it was decided that taking our money by force through taxation in order to pay for the schooling of other people’s children is a good thing. It has been ingrained in our psyche that only public schooling is something worthwhile, and worthy of paying for with our tax dollars. But unfortunately for the Education Complex, along came a few different models of learning that happen to work better than the old factory school (districts) model and parents are now making choices, rather than abdicating their choice to the one and only government school closest to them. (Or in some cases, a non-local school that the government buses their children to because they determined some diversity quotas must be met.)

NOW… it’s suddenly not the right thing to pay for educating ALL children. NOW we should only pay for the kids who attend DISTRICT public schools. Not just ANY public school. Charters, and other options, you see, threaten the monopoly (and let’s face it.. the unions too; but that’s becoming an old saw as well.)

I guess all I want at this point in the debate is a little intellectual and moral honesty. If you are a Liberal and you believe Public Charter schools are all bad and shouldn’t exist because they are “pulling, stripping, stealing” money away from the district public schools, then pretty-please agree to the following… at least in principle:

1) Public School funding is really about funding “certain” children and not all children. IF you want to choose to go to a public school — ANY SCHOOL — that isn’t unionized or operates in a manner other than in a politically controlled district using master contracts that citizens can’t approve personally, you should have to pay for it yourself, just like all the other “rich” people who pay for private schooling. Your tax dollars can’t go to private schools or non-district schools. It hurts our old district schooling system too much and it hurts the children left in the poorly performing schools when you take your money and children out of the system. These systems must be fixed, no matter what the cost; even if it cheats some children out of a decent education.

2) Yes, yes, yes… I agree that charter schools are really public schools. I’ve been using the “charter schools aren’t public schools” and “charters get to pick and choose their students” lie because it furthers my agenda, which again, is the following: MY district school deserves taxpayer money before OTHER public schools and other educational choices receive money. The end justifies the means.

3) I realize that poor and “at-risk” children also might have parents who want to take advantage of charters or even vouchers. I feel for them. I really do. I’m a Liberal after all. We really really feel for these kids. That said, I have to admit that even though these options might in fact help these poor and disadvantaged students, it might actually hurt MY school district, therefore I can not support even poor and disadvantaged children receiving taxpayer support for THEIR choice to leave their assigned school district. It puts too many other kids at risk. And besides, how can we be sure the parents of poor and at-risk kids know what they’re doing? They can’t possibly know what’s best for their child’s education. They aren’t the professionals.

4) I’m still for choice!! I just have to look out for MY CHOICES first. You know what I mean? Therefore, I will work hard with my political friends and lobbyists in the statehouse, paid for with donations from my union dues, do make sure that all workable educational choice and reform ideas are aborted before they become viable law. I will, though, in the spirit of intellectual honesty, stop blaming Bush and NCLB for all of the problems we have today with our public school districts, especially with the prospect that Obama’s Race to the Top plan will be NCLB on crack!!

SEE!! That wasn’t so hard, was it? You really can be a pro choice Liberal and at the same time, deny ‘certain’ children their right to a good education of their parents’ choice. And people will probably still like you.

Admit these things, my liberal friends, public school district apologists and opponents in playful and philosophical discourse and I bet we can start to have more honest conversations about the future of education reform.

Quoting Thomas Jefferson: Public School Snob?

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” *

What a snob. What an elitist! What a Republican… wait. Oops. He was a Democrat, wasn’t he? I was looking through some quotes from President Jefferson, because I had been hearing way too much about how Jefferson was the master planner of the modern public school system, and how he wanted every child to be educated at the expense of the state. If Jefferson is your hero in this regard, please read on.

But if you want to remain ignorant to the fact that Thomas Jefferson was an education snob that really couldn’t imagine the idea that all children should complete their education and go on to college… maybe you should move on.

Let’s take a look at what I found! We’ll warm up with several quotes that make Sara Palin seem like a moderate:

Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson: Education Snob

“It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.”

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

Holy cow! Jefferson was a Tea Party hate monger!

“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”

Now this is where we get into the subject of Government Run, Taxpayer Funded Schooling. Taxpayers are subsidizing the propagation of ideas they find abhorrent. They have been doing so for generations. And now it’s time to think about going back to the type of public schools Jefferson really wanted.

At BigEye.com, in a post called, Thomas Jefferson’s plan for “Public” Schooling, Albert Jay Nock was quoted extensively. Nock gives us a different–and probably more accurate–perspective of how Jefferson thought public education should work: [emphasis added]

For some reason that I have never been able to discover, Mr. Jefferson seems to be regarded as a great democrat; on public occasions he is regularly invoked as such by gentlemen who have some sort of political axe to grind, so possibly that view of him arose in this way. The fact is that he was not even a doctrinaire republican, as his relation to the French Revolution clearly shows. When Mr. Jefferson was revising the Virginia Statutes in 1797, he drew up a comprehensive plan for public education.

Each ward should have a primary school for the three R’s, open to all. Each year the best pupil in each school should be sent to the grade-school, of which there were to be twenty, conveniently situated in various parts of the state. They should be kept there one year or two years, according to results shown, and then all dismissed but one, who should be continued six years. “By this means,” said the good old man, “twenty of the best geniuses will be raked from the rubbish annually” — a most unfortunate expression for a democrat to use! At the end of six years, the best ten out of the twenty were to be sent to college, and the rest turned adrift.

(Read Nock’s entire essay at the Ludwig von Mises Instutute)

Well! I am certainly all for Jefferson’s plan for educating the youth of America! I’ll fill you in on all the particulars next time you get all excited about how Jefferson wanted our schools to be just like they are now.

 

* Special thanks to the first person to comment on this article for the clarification of the first quote attributed to Jefferson. The actual quote, found here, says pretty much the same thing, only with a lot more words. But since the quote I found above is getting enough traction to warrant an “official” site to make the corrections… I thought I’d let it stand.