Is there too much government in your life?
View Results
CO-EXIST! That is the bumper sticker of the inveterate liberal I see them all the time, usually on a Volvo, or some sort of quote “green” car. Co-exist. What does that mean? I’m not sure, but actually I’ve figured it out. It is an expression of demonic ludicrous that reveals the liberals penultimate desires. Wow, that’s a big sentence with a bunch of poly-syllabic words. On its face, the bumper sticker means “get along,” don’t be pious, other cultures are just as good as our American culture, but different, and how arrogant and condescending of us to demean these other cultures. That’s the intent of the bumper sticker and of course, the folks that sport those bumper stickers are so intellectual, so smart, so much more intellectual than us blue bloods.
Thus, I did what is necessary. I put myself in their shoes, the liberal apparent shoes, just to see if I was or wasn’t co-existing appropriately. Wow, am I naïve. Here’s what I discovered:
First, I have no friends that employ clitorectomies. None. Not one of my friends feel it is appropriate to excise a young girls clitoris in order to cause her to remain celibate and to not enjoy sex. Not a one. I am definitely not in a position to say that I am socializing with folks who endorsing clitorectomies. Shame on me, I am not co-existing.
Second, none of my friends have endorsed stoning a women to death for being raped. God, I am awful, I’m not co-existing. We need to embrace other cultures, we need to understand that they are not wrong, they are just different, and when a women gets raped in Saudi and then stoned for being a victim, we need to understand, we need to embrace, we need not to be so arrogantly righteous. Again, I am so bad, so arrogant, so not co-existing.
Third, It get’s worse! None of my friends discriminate against women. In fact a lot of my friends are women. I treat them no differently than I do my male friends. Yet, other cultures, the one we have to co-exist with, find women to be second class citizens, wear a mask, bow, don’t socialize with another male or we’ll stone you, just be deferential, after all, we have a penis and certainly that makes us better than you. I am so ashamed that I am not co-existing with folks who condemn women to second, even third, the children rank higher, class citizens.
Fourth, Oh shit, none of my friends are killing their new borns if they are female. Uh Oh. I can’t believe how arrogant I am not to be hanging with folks that employ infanticide when the wrong sex is born. Shame on me. I am not co-existing.
Fifth, I do not have a single friend who wants to pass his debt onto his children like they do in India. Again, shame on me. I am such a bad co-existor. How narrow of me? I need some friends who run up debt, live the good life, and pass it on to their children like in India. Well, if it’s any salvation, Obama’s imposing this reality upon us, so I guess I can say that I am involved. Still, I have no close friends who endorse this policy.
I could go on, but I’ve made my point. Co-exist? Get real Libs. The oxymoronic truth of the flagrantly ridiculous “co-exist” mantra reveals your abject stupidity. Don’t believe me, try to reconcile women’s rights with the cultures you inspire us to co-exist with, you’ll get stoned, to death my friends.
Here’s my ultimate point. The Co-Exist bumper sticker is an in your face, challenge me, revelation of the abject ignorance of the left. It’s impossible. It’s insane, It’s all illogical. All the tenants of evil if we have to cut the chase. \ So libs, keep putting those bumper stickers on your cars, keep revealing your inherent stupidity and evil for us to see. Here’s the kicker libs: We’ve seen through it. We know who you are and more importantly, we know what you are.
Come on knuckleheads. You want to co-exist with folks that will stone you for being who your are? The reality is that you don’t. The reality is that the bumper sticker simply reveals another trite illogical effort to destroy and demean what is good. Go for it libs. You are up against God. By the way, did you ever watch the exorcist? God won, he, she, it, always does. And here’s a final thought libs, even if you think you won, you always lose. Losing is consistent with your druthters.
That’s my Reetzality for the Day.
Thanks for the read.
Brett Reetz
On March 18, 2010, the text of this act was included as a rider on the Reconciliation Act of 2010 which was the latest version of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. I have read the Fiscal Responsibility Act. Here’s some text from it:
Sec. 780. Purposes. “To promote in postsecondary education practices and policies by institutions of higher education, states, and nonprofit organizations to improve student success, completion, and post-completion employment, particularly for students from groups that are underrepresented in postsecondary education; and to assist States in developing longitudinal data systems, common metrics, and reporting systems to enhance the quality and availability of information about student success, completion, and post-completion employment.
. . . including plans for how the state will make special efforts to provide benefits to students in the State who are from groups that are underrepresented in post-secondary education.
Closing gaps in enrollment, persistence, and completion rates for students from groups that are underrepresented in post-secondary education.”
Collect, maintain disaggregate (by institution, income, race, ethnicity, sex, disability, and age of students) and analyze postsecondary education and workforce information.
Priorities in awarding grants. An eligible entity that is a philanthropic organization with the primary purpose of providing scholarships and support services to students from groups that are underrepresented in postsecondary education.
To increase the number of Hispanic and other low income students attaining degrees in the fields of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics.
Martin Luther King, Jr. proclaimed in the 1963 March on Washington that his “dream” was that one day persons “will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” The left hates this quote much like they hate the John F. Kennedy statements in regard to taxation. Here they are and I will admit; I am digressing:
“It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now … Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.” – John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, president’s news conference
“Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government.” – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 17, 1963, annual budget message to the Congress, fiscal year 1964 “In today’s economy, fiscal prudence and responsibility call for tax reduction even if it temporarily enlarges the federal deficit – why reducing taxes is the best way open to us to increase revenues.” – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: “The Economic Report Of The President”
“It is no contradiction – the most important single thing we can do to stimulate investment in today’s economy is to raise consumption by major reduction of individual income tax rates.” – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: “The Economic Report Of The President”
“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.” – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.
“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.” – John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill
“I have asked the secretary of the treasury to report by April 1 on whether present tax laws may be stimulating in undue amounts the flow of American capital to the industrial countries abroad through special preferential treatment.” – John F. Kennedy, Feb. 6, 1961, message to Congress on gold and the balalnce of payments deficit
“In those countries where income taxes are lower than in the United States, the ability to defer the payment of U.S. tax by retaining income in the subsidiary companies provides a tax advantage for companies operating through overseas subsidiaries that is not available to companies operating solely in the United States. Many American investors properly made use of this deferral in the conduct of their foreign investment.” – John F. Kennedy, April 20, 1961, message to Congress on taxation
“Our present tax system … exerts too heavy a drag on growth … It reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking … The present tax load … distorts economic judgments and channels an undue amount of energy into efforts to avoid tax liabilities.” – John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, press conference
“The present tax codes … inhibit the mobility and formation of capital, add complexities and inequities which undermine the morale of the taxpayer, and make tax avoidance rather than market factors a prime consideration in too many economic decisions.” – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 23, 1963, special message to Congress on tax reduction and reform
“In short, it is a paradoxical truth that … the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now. The experience of a number of European countries and Japan have borne this out. This country’s own experience with tax reduction in 1954 has borne this out. And the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget, and tax reduction can pave the way to that employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.” – John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, news conference
“The largest single barrier to full employment of our manpower and resources and to a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of federal income taxes on private purchasing power, initiative and incentive.” – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, special message to Congress on tax reduction and reform
“Expansion and modernization of the nation’s productive plant is essential to accelerate economic growth and to improve the international competitive position of American industry … An early stimulus to business investment will promote recovery and increase employment.” – John F. Kennedy, Feb. 2, 1961, message on economic recovery
“We must start now to provide additional stimulus to the modernization of American industrial plants … I shall propose to the Congress a new tax incentive for businesses to expand their normal investment in plant and equipment.” – John F. Kennedy, Feb. 13, 1961, National Industrial Conference Board
“A bill will be presented to the Congress for action next year. It will include an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in both corporate and personal income taxes. It will include long-needed tax reform that logic and equity demand … The billions of dollars this bill will place in the hands of the consumer and our businessmen will have both immediate and permanent benefits to our economy. Every dollar released from taxation that is spent or invested will help create a new job and a new salary. And these new jobs and new salaries can create other jobs and other salaries and more customers and more growth for an expanding American economy.” – John F. Kennedy, Aug. 13, 1962, radio and television report on the state of the national economy
“This administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes … Next year’s tax bill should reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes, for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay, and for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital … I am confident that the enactment of the right bill next year will in due course increase our gross national product by several times the amount of taxes actually cut.” – John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, news conference.
Sorry readers, I couldn’t help myself when I stumbled on to these fantastic JFK quotes, but back to the Fiscal Responsibility Act. Clearly, if you take Martin Luther King, Jr. at his word, we have not aspired to a color blind society. In fact, reading the Fiscal Responsibility Act reveals that Washington has put in play affirmative action in Education. Not in the hiring of teachers but in the student bodies. Don’t believe me, read the Act.
Great? Actually not so great. Let’s analyze how this will play out. The Act makes it necessary for secondary education facilities (and head start programs) to focus on increasing the numbers of those under represented in post secondary education. It does not use the term “quota” but it certainly puts in play massive financial incentives, both rewards and penalties, to increase the numbers of those currently under represented in post secondary education. But really, who is under represented in post secondary education? I have some post secondary education under my belt. How? I worked hard, saved, dropped out when I couldn’t afford it, returned when I could, and finished. I also took entrance exams; the SAT, ACT, and the LSAT. What got me in? My scores, my money, and my ambition. I had no “under represented status.” I’m not even sure what “under represented” means. Why? Because I thought it was all about grades and scores. The best and the brightest, that sort of thing. I thought it was color blind. Not any more and truth be told, it wasn’t when I went to school. My law school went to great pains to include “under represented” folks. But now the stakes have been raised. The government has taken control, total control. And they are mandating that our secondary education institutions, if they want students with student loans, to develop programs to increase the number of “under represented” students. It is important to note, that I do not believe there is any meritorious discrimination in America’s secondary education system. Show me a college or university that denies someone based on race, creed or color and I’ll post a correction. It doesn’t happen and if it does, it’s an absolute anomaly. So how is our secondary education system going to increase the numbers of the under represented? Here’s how: They will lower the standards. They will allow the “under represented” applicants to enter with lesser qualifications. And they will do so by denying admittance to somebody with greater qualifications. Of course they will. Why? Because they have a limited amount of seats to fill. It is a number certain. So, to the extent they admit someone with lesser qualifications, they fill a seat that would be filled by someone with greater qualifications. Simple supply and demand.
A while back I wrote that redistribution is akin to taking a point or two from the A students and giving them to the F students, to equalize the distribution of student accomplishment. My satire has come true.
This practice is not fair. This practice is not American. This practice is demeaning to the under represented. Does it not say that the under-represented are not on par with the represented? Of course it does. I will admit that this is a real problem. The under represented are not on par educationally with the represented. I will also state that the problem is not primarily based upon discrimination (discrimination still exists but it’s much less apparent). We do have an African American President by the way. Rather the problem is a direct and vile consequences of welfare, broken homes, teachers unions, government sponsored lack of accountability, the list goes on. And what is governments solution to the terrible problem they have created, the under represented classes they have addicted to dependency? More dependency. More reliance on government. Less individual responsibility. The next thing you know they’ll want secondary education institutions to make sure the right number of under represented get the right number of post secondary jobs. Too late, that’s in the Act too. The Act is just another effort of government to demean, control, depreciate, and create a nanny state where even more folks are dependent upon the supreme wet nurse, the government.
I truly fear our future. I’ve begun writing my apology to my kids.
This is not a blog based upon statistics, news or current events. This is my blog, a personal observation, question if you will, of where we are as an American Nation. I must admit, I am perplexed by our current status.
I am going to make an assumption and I know the cliché, when you “assume” you make an ass out of you and me, and yet, I’m going to make an assumption, Most folks admire American principles of innovation, personal responsibility, and my favorite, triumph. Triumph is defined by my Webster’s College Dictionary as “the act, fact, or condition of being victorious or highly successful.” Now correct me if I am wrong, but my America lauds all triumphs, from somebody kicking drugs to somebody having a great idea and making a bunch of money, regardless of circumstances. That’s our deal, right? Everything is possible in America. Just check out our American movies. I’ve watched movies where the triumph was financial, personal, even winning a football game is a traditional movie triumph. Hell, in the movie Footloose there was triumph just because the protagonist, Kevin Bacon, threw a senior prom with dancing. (I love the movie Footloose.) We laud it all, triumph, big ones and little ones. We don’t even rate them. We love them all. In our hearts we know them when we see them. We as Americans can think the biggest success, bigger than Bill Gates, is a homeless person getting it together, getting a job, a house, a spouse, maybe even children, and then having that person’s children doing even better. We high five that a glorious success. We honor it more than Bill Gates. Why? This is America, that’s why. We adore the independent accomplishment of folks. We handicap success. A guy has a lot of money, “what did he start with?” A guy works in a factory? “Do you know where he came from? Amazing he’s doing that!” See? We handicap, like in golf (which I rarely play), our judgment of success. We apply a relative analysis of success. It is about accomplishment, not status. It’s not what you have. It’s what you’ve accomplished. This is America.
Why? Because of freedom. In our country we have the freedom to succeed and the corresponding freedom to fail. This is what allows us, and more importantly inspires us, as Americans, to work hard and maybe even prosper; likely prosper if we are allowed to be free.
So what is the point here you ask. Here it is. Our country, our America, is spiraling into a degenerate quagmire of irresponsibility and dependence. That sums it up, but I’ll expand. Our government is growing. At a terrifying rate, personal responsibility is being neutered, both by influence and government control. Some things the government tells us aren’t our fault. That’s the influence. Some things, government is telling us isn’t our choice, i.e. health care; that’s the government control.
I miss my America. I miss a country where one could fail and there would be hardship rather than bail outs and finger pointing. I personally went through some of that failure, and I will tell you, it was good for me. It educated me. It hardened me. It made me stronger. I wouldn’t be where I am if not for hardship. I wouldn’t trade it for the world. I am thankful that life imposed upon me consequences that taught me, taught me well, and made me better.
And now, our government is sending bad messages, doing bad things to folks, bad things. Our government is behaving like a parent who spoils their children, and that never works out well. And they are doing so, being the bad parent, by punishing the good children. Our government, through taxation and redistributive wealth policies, is penalizing triumph and subsidizing failure. That never works. And I ask myself why they are doing so? Why can’t they let America be American? I am not for letting folks starve or be denied urgent care in any way. That would be insulting to my personal humanity. But I am also not for enabling. I am not for finger pointing. I am not for someone who blew off school, smoked, gained too much weight, whatever, being enabled. I believe if that person had consequences to their choices, they would improve. I believe in the individual, even the crack addict on the street. If somebody pointed the finger at a successful individual and said, “he used to be a crack addict,” I would think, “only in America.” See my point.
Do you not see what is going on here? Do you not see that the government is taking away all the ingredients, mainly the consequences of bad choices, that inspire a person to improve? To endorse the current trend of America you must, by the logical theory of transference, endorse enabling bad habits in children and rationalizing bad behavior by not imposing responsibility on the bad child but blaming some other circumstance. Everybody knows that doesn’t work. But why then do folks think that policies that would never work in a family setting will work in a nation setting? I don’t know the answer to this, other than one possibility. Our freedom, which is so great, led to such wealth, such prosperity that we got metaphorically drunk on prosperity and much like the rich family who spoils their children, we are now doing so to ourselves. We are saying, “not your fault.” We are saying, “don’t be responsible.” We are saying, “We’ll take care of you, you’re not capable.” (That last one was demeaning to those struggling but indeed we are saying it.)
We as the rich parents, America, who think we can fix things with arcane rule changes that contradict the very principles that made us rich need to step back and re-evaluate our status and our plans. We need to go back to our principles and discipline our nation accordingly. It’s cheaper and it’s right. And it’s American. History will prove this entirely true. I assure you. I’ll bet my eyes on it.
That’s my Reetzality for the day.
Captain Obonga to the Rescue!
I am so relieved. Thank you, thank you, thank you, Captain Obonga. I had no idea that the government, that failed to prevent a terrorist on the watch list whose father reported him as a radical without a passport from getting on a plane headed to Detroit with a bomb hidden in his underwear, no idea whatsoever that that government could fix everything else. The next thing you know they’ll be joking that the government can’t even keep strangers out of White House dinners? But you set me straight Captain Obonga. Thank you.
O.K., on a more serious note (although the first note was serious, I just utilized humor to demonstrate the seriousness, now I’ll get rid of the humor) was that a speech or what? Shoot, here comes the humor again. Captain Obonga is going to do everything. Pheewww! Say good bye to worries my little friends, I mean you American People. You “they” people.
O.K., O.K. O.K., I took a serious pill, so here goes, firm, fair and frank. The State of the Union address was a rambling cacophony of lies, misrepresentations, false promises, insincerity, rewriting of recent history, bragging, blaming, arrogance, ignorance, condescension, and otherwise consistent with a complete ripper of a marijuana fest. Thus, the “Obonga” nick name. We’ll call it a “BS”-afest instead.
Folks, he’s going to raise our taxes either directly or indirectly and has already done so with his deficit spending. Wait, small correction-maybe. He may have only raised our childrens’ taxes. Folks, he’s not going to endorse nuclear energy or off shore drilling. Folks, he has no desire to assist small business. He doesn’t even respect business for what it does. He said that all student loans would be forgiven in twenty years but in ten years if a graduate goes into public service. That’s right, we need more social workers and bureaucrats in our future than business people because social workers and bureaucrats are just so damn critical. See folks, this is another window into Captain Obonga’s soul. He values government more than the private sector. And he doesn’t understand basic values either; like paying off your debt. What in the world would justify a person to stop paying a debt if it’s not paid off? Shoot, that’s that pesky “keep your word” stuff. God that’s irritating. So what’s the big deal? I cut a deal, borrow some money for a four year degree which I actually spend six getting, drag the payments out for twenty years and then tell the lender that Captain Obonga told me I didn’t have to pay anymore after twenty years. Wait, wait, wait. I thought of something. Why don’t I just grab a public sector job in let’s say year nine, work it for a year, stop paying which is absolutely justified since I’ll be doing something so critical to America, actually serving the public for America, like for example, collecting tolls on a turnpike, and then, when I’m free of my promise to re-pay my student loan, I quit my cherished public sector job and go into the private sector and stick the tax payer with the rest of my debt. So many possibilities.
O.K. Folks, now I’m really going to be serious, actually I have been. I was just using humor to exemplify how much of a joke the State of the Union Address was. Our president has never made a bottom line, hangs out with communists and terrorists, loves Government, big government, is a progressive democrat, wants to socialize medicine, (He said he’s not quitting in his pursuit of his anti-American Agenda (He didn’t say “anti-American” but it is)), has no understanding of the economy, nothing is his fault, and after listening to his speech, wants to run everything.
Prior to his address, it was suggested that the Obama Administration was going to do a “re-set” on its agenda due to the rapidly growing trend against them. The pundits got it half right. Obama did do a reset but not on his agenda. He did a reset on the focus button so that the picture we see is different than before, blurred; but the content, the actual content, is exactly the same.
Beware folks, this guy does not like us “they” people. But he’s afraid of us and that’s why he reached out last night and spun the focus button. He changed the focus to hide. What he didn’t change was the content of his ambitions which are very un-American. Only our ability to see it was changed. But folks, you need not worry. I know this guy and his ambitions will come back into focus sooner than you think, definitely by November.
NOTE: I use the “Captain” title to remind folks of the Titanic, you know that unsinkable ocean liner that sank on its first voyage. Of course, America could never be like the Titanic.
Public Education Today!
Think I’m over-reacting? Read this article provided to me by a friend and see what you think then:
OUR NATION’S SCIENTIFIC FUTURE LOOKS BLEAK EDUCATIONAL CRISIS By Gerald Rising Special to The News September 06, 2009
High schools and colleges are reopening for the new school year. Such openings are full of optimism—but in some areas, at least, the educational system simply may be unready to unlock students’ full potential.
In math and science, the United States has an educational crisis that is eroding what once was post-war leadership in those fields. Factor in the current push for high-quality health care—increasingly rooted in science and technology—and the problem gets even worse.
A must-see new film “Two Million Minutes,” according to Microsoft entrepreneur Bill Gates, “casts a bright spotlight on a crisis in this country.” Anyone who watches this film should agree.
Where did that title come from? Students spend four years in high school. Multiply that by 365 days, 24 hours and 60 minutes and you come up with 2,102,400 minutes — close enough to the title’s tally. The film contrasts the experience, through those important high school minutes, of six bright students: two each in the United States, China and India.
The contrast is telling. The message of the film is that we are not challenging our brightest students in the same way as schools are challenging similar students in competing countries and that, as an outcome, the future for U. S. world scientific competition looks bleak.
First, some history. When North America
was first colonized, the country was far behind Europe in science but, beginning with strivers like Benjamin Franklin, the United States began to catch up. By the end of the dark times in Europe of World War I, our universities had achieved near equality.
By the close of World War II, the United States enjoyed tremendous advantages. Although our armed forces had fought valiantly in many parts of the world, the country itself was not war-torn. That was not the case for the rest of the world. Britain had been ravaged by bombing; much of Europe had been fought over; Russia, China and Japan were devastated; India would be going through the bitterly fought internal battles of its newly won independence.
Meanwhile, if anyone could be said to win a war, we were those winners. Our scientific industry and our university science and engineering departments had been tooled up to contribute to the war effort. The finest world scholars and researchers had fled from war zones and persecution to join our university faculties and staffs, where they enhanced the quality of our science. Then remarkable new federal policies led to the education of returning veterans and a general rise in the nation’s average educational participation. No longer was the completion of high school the ultimate goal of many students; now it had become completion of college.
The world playing field had become strongly tilted in our favor. We were, without question, world leaders. But the rest of the world prepared to address that uphill contest. Russia, Israel, India and Pakistan soon joined the atomic community. Then, in 1957, Russia sent the first rocket, Sputnik 1, into space. That achievement, beating us, sent a message and for a time our national resources were directed toward upgrading math and science. Unfortunately, those energies were soon dissipated and few of us realize what have been the results.
Where do we stand today? International comparisons clearly indicate how low our country has sunk. Consider a few: In life expectancy, we’re 24th and in health, 37th. In school achievement, we’re 24th in high school math, and even worse in high school science.
A sports franchise with this kind of record would soon face bankruptcy. And that is exactly the danger the United States faces in scientific competition.
The failure of our K-12 and undergraduate college educational system to serve our brightest kids becomes most evident at the university graduate level. Visit any university science or engineering graduate program today and you will find very few American students. Asian students predominate, because few of our college graduates can compete at this level.
You might think that at least those foreign students support our programs by their numbers. Unfortunately, there are already signs that this advantage is being lost. Upon completing their doctoral studies, many of those students are now returning to their home countries where they upgrade their own institutions. Today an increasing number of their universities are already staffed and fully prepared to compete with ours. Soon those bright students will be equally or possibly even better served at home. When that happens, as Thomas Friedman predicts in “The World Is Flat,” our standards for graduate work can only decline.
And that is why “Two Million Minutes” is such an important film.
The six students portrayed in the film send a clear and very straightforward message. Topquality Indian and Chinese students are more seriously challenged and work far harder on their academic studies than do equally able American students.
This is not a film about the achievement of average or below average students, those students that No Child Left Behind legislation is designed to support and to whom major school resources are committed. Rather, it is about students at the other end of the ability curve, those bright youngsters who should be the entrepreneurs and researchers of the future. They are not being well served. Our educational system is failing them.
Item: The proportion of students who leave high school with 12th-grade proficiency in math stands at 3 percent for African-Americans, 4 percent for Hispanics, 10 percent for Native Americans, 20 percent for whites and 34 percent for Asian-Americans.
Consider what most American schools provide their best students in math. Identified in sixth grade, these students combine seventh-and eighth-grade math in one year, not a difficult task as this content is essentially a repeat of elementary school arithmetic. Then each subsequent school course is taught a year early, making room for the Advanced Placement equivalent of a semester of calculus in 12th grade.
Not only is there no challenge in simply teaching a course a year early, but the entire program is wasted for most of these students. To lighten their freshman college course load, they repeat the calculus as a “gut” course.
Item: American students spend on average one hour per day on homework.
It is not that our brightest youngsters are lazy. As Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute President Shirley Ann Jackson points out, “It is a matter of distribution of time. Many of them spend 10 to 20 hours weekly practicing sports or working part-time jobs.”
Most importantly, this failure to serve our best and brightest is not recognized. As the film points out, 70 percent of parents are satisfied with their schools and, still worse, 79 percent of high school principals believe that their schools are doing a good job.
Item: Some years ago a New York governor proposed the establishment of four state schools for gifted high school students, like the North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics. Almost unanimously, school administrators fought his proposal. A local suburban principal argued that such schools would “just train scientists and engineers to give us more Challenger accidents.”
As the film points out, the one area in which we Americans outscore those from other countries is in self-confidence.
While a few states have followed the lead of North Carolina, most bright students are left to their own devices. The old refrain, “They’re so smart, let them take care of themselves,” remains a sad reflection on how we overestimate the motivation of adolescents.
But Buffalo maintains two programs that do serve such talented kids. For once this region is a recognized leader.
City Honors School, founded in 1975, offers challenging accelerated and collegiate level courses in science and math including the highly regarded International Baccalaureate Program for the city’s best students in grades five through 12. Under the leadership of its current principal, William Kresse, each year the academic challenges are being elevated and increasing numbers of students are meeting those challenges.
The diverse socioeconomic population City Honors serves clearly indicates that talented students of all backgrounds will rise to the challenge when the bar is raised beyond that of a typical American private or public school. A number of representatives of other school districts have visited City Honors and are considering introducing the International Baccalaureate Program.
Meanwhile, under the leadership of Thomas Schroeder and Betty Krist, the University at Buffalo Gifted Math Program currently enrolls about 250 seventh-through 12th-graders in a challenging six-academic-year course of studies that includes not only a strong school mathematics program but also 20 semester hours of university-level course work. It was selected as one of the 10 top math and science programs nationally by a commission organized by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, the National Science Teachers Association and the American Association of School Administrators. Gifted Math Program student David Patrick of Batavia attained the only perfect score on the National High School Mathematics Contest, besting more than 40,000 of this country’s finest students.
Together these two programs graduate a few dozen students each year, all of whom are well prepared to continue with advanced standing in our nation’s finest colleges. Unfortunately, these better-served students remain a drop in the national bucket at a time when, each year, many thousands of bright students are compromised by this failure of our educational system.
Every high school student, every math and science teacher, every school administrator and every parent should not only see “Two Million Minutes” but follow it up with action.
Note: If you are a Reetzality reader in the Gibraltar School District, there is a board meeting on Monday night, October 12th. “Inclusion” and the termination of AP classes will be discussed. Please attend and let your voice be heard.
On September 8th, 2008, President Obama will deliver a nationwide speech to public school students from PreK-6. The Department of Education has delivered a document titled “MENU OF CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES” to all public schools. I’ve read it. The first paragraph states, “Teachers can build background knowledge about the President of the United States and his speech by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama.” Now of course, two books about Barack Obama were written by Barack Obama. I’m sure the President wants these books read to the students. But will the teachers read Dick Morris’s book Catasrophe? Highly doubtful. No, the teachers, predominantly democrats, will use the opportunity to propagandize Obama’s un-American agenda. You can bet on it.
The document states that “During the Speech” students should ponder questions. Here are a few of them:
What is the president trying to tell me to do? What is the president asking me to do? What specific job is he asking me to do?
The document states that “After the Speech” students should ponder the question, “Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us?”
Now there are some good points in the document with wonderful words such as “progress” and “goals” and “create” and others. So what!
Mr. President, keep your words off my children. I don’t want you telling them what to do. They are free and so long as they take care of themselves and don’t hurt others, what they do is none of your business. The same goes for asking them to do anything. You can ask them to obey the constitution. I’ll let you do that but no more. As far as a specific job he is asking my children to do, sorry Mr. President, I’ll be in charge of my children’s specific job, not you. And then to be so bold and arrogant to ask them if they are able to do what he asks, (the question has the improper presumption that they should do what he asks), your way out of line Mr. President.
What is this guy thinking? Here’s the best analogy I can find in history. The Khmer Rouge Pol Pot of Cambodia. He destroyed all intellectual challenges to his policies, kidnapped and brainwashed the children, and built a miserable evil short lived empire. Here’s an excerpt from an article chronicling Pol Pot’s agenda:
Children were often bribed with food to spy on their adult family members and relatives and to report what they said to the Khmer Rouge. Those showing “subversive” ideas could be summarily executed. Children over the age of six were often separated from their parents and forced to work in camps, with little food. Children were to be raised by the state, not by their parents. The Pol Pot regime fractured all of the normal social networks among its people: familial, religious, and commercial.
Now, I’m in no way stating that President is going to begin a genocide, but is he encouraging children to spy on their adult family members? Please recall that the White House encouraged folks to feed them blogs and emails that espouse views contrary to White House’ policies. Obama has made it habit to attack and destroy “subversive ideas” rather than engage in an intellectual debate. (“Subversive” to Obama means contrary. Recall that the vocal town hall speakers were called Nazi’s, thugs, goons, implants, subversives, etc.) Obama’s speech to children certainly gets in-between children and their parents. He’s asking them to work according to his principles and asking them to ask themselves why they wouldn’t want to do so. Fracturing social networks? Yep there’s some fracturing going on here. Gay marriage, marriage penalty tax, ignoring Christianity while embracing African American Theology, Muslimism, hosting a Muslim breakfast while canceling a fly over on a predominantly Christian prayer day, the list goes on. These views certainly are contrary to American principles. Still, he’s in no way a Pol Pot to the extent of a murderous genocide. He is more clever than that. He’s a Pol- Pot lite. He believes he knows better than we do as to what’s good for us. And when we don’t buy into his beliefs, he takes his shallow transparent propaganda to our children.
Good work Mr. President. I thought Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and Reverend Wright were your mentors. Now I find out Pol Pot is too. Bottom line, keep your words off my children. I’ll tell them what you say and what you believe and how you view America. And I’ll tell them how wrong you are too.
Below is the letter sent to schools from the Department of Education.
Menu of Classroom Activities President Obama’s Address to Students Across America (PreK‐6) Produced by Teaching Ambassador Fellows, U.S. Department of Education September 8, 2009 Before the Speech Teachers can build background knowledge about the President of the United States and his speech by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama. Teachers could motivate students by asking the following questions: Who is the President of the United States? What do you think it takes to be president? To whom do you think the president is going to be speaking? Why do you think he wants to speak to you? What do you think he will say to you?
Teachers can ask students to imagine that they are delivering a speech to all of the students in the United States. If you were the president, what would you tell students? What can students do to help in our schools?
Teachers can chart ideas about what students would say. Why is it important that we listen to the president and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?
During the Speech
As the president speaks, teachers can ask students to write down key ideas or phrases that are important or personally meaningful. Students could use a note‐taking graphic organizer such as a “cluster web;” or, students could record their thoughts on sticky notes. Younger children could draw pictures and write as appropriate. As students listen to the speech, they could think about the following: What is the president trying to tell me? What is the president asking me to do? What new ideas and actions is the president challenging me to think about?
Students could record important parts of the speech where the president is asking them to do something. Students might think about the following: What specific job is he asking me to do? Is he asking anything of anyone else? Teachers? Principals? Parents? The American people?
Students could record questions they have while he is speaking and then discuss them after the speech. Younger children may need to dictate their questions.
After the Speech Teachers could ask students to share the ideas they recorded, exchange sticky notes, or place notes on a butcher‐paper poster in the classroom to discuss main ideas from the speech, such as citizenship, personal responsibility, and civic duty. Students could discuss their responses to the following questions: What do you think the president wants us to do? Does the speech make you want to do anything? Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us? What would you like to tell the president?
Extension of the Speech Teachers could extend learning by having students: Create posters of their goals. Posters could be formatted in quadrants, puzzle pieces, or trails marked with the following labels: personal, academic, community, and country. Each area could be labeled with three steps for achieving goals in that area. It might make sense to focus first on personal and academic goals so that community and country goals can be more readily created. Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short‐term and long‐term education goals. Teachers would collect and redistribute these letters at an appropriate later date to enable students to monitor their progress. Write goals on colored index cards or precut designs to post around the classroom. Interview one another and share goals with the class to create a supportive community. Participate in school‐wide incentive programs or contests for those students who achieve their goals. Write about their goals in a variety of genres, such as poems, songs, and personal essays. Create artistic projects based on the themes of their goals. Graph individual progress toward goals.
