One more academic has indicted "No Child Left Behind" for the heinous gutting of historical inquiry now forced upon uninterested students. Yet Sam Wineburg's attack on the cult of testing begins not with his own advocacy, but a challenge a related study indicting student ignorance on a major era in this nation's history.
Following a recent study sponsored by the Southern Poverty Law Center, Wineburg castigates the false conclusion that students are not learning enough about the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.
He correctly faults the study for not investigating school staff and student knowledge directly. Relying exclusively on a content analysis of a wide variety of school-based resources, the Southern Poverty Law Center abruptly assumed that young people in this country are not getting a thorough vetting on the tumultuous period of U.S. History that gave us bus boycotts, mass arrests in the face of non-violent protest, the culmination of which incited Congress to pass Civil Rights and Voting Rights legislation, as well as creating an irreparable schism between the Southern Baptist Christian League and the more violent and vocal Black Panthers.
What has engendered students' perceive limitation of history? Standardized testing run amok, all in the wake of the fetish to cure the education crises holding back our students.
History as a long series of "Five W's and an H" does very little to aid students in appreciating the pass, its pressure in the present, and their role in channeling this knowledge into affecting power and purpose in their own and their country's future.
Instead of decrying how little students know of history, teachers and schools need to stress the reasons why we learn about the past. More than anything else, young people are embalmed rather than engaged by the past because of the wax-minted condition in which the past is presented to them. History is not a done deal by any stretch of the imagination, one whose legacy and implications are still harassing or engaging us, from the leaders we elect in local and national governments, to the values we adopt and teach the next generation. Students deserve to be involved in the surging wealth and controversy that history accords and affords to those knowledgeable enough to appreciate and appropriate it. Let us not deny these opportunities to our young because of the vicarious pressure of standardized testing.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
"'Blame the Banks' Overkill" -- Response
In the name of "responsible banking", LA City Councilman Richard Alarcon is proposing that the city break off its financial relationships with major banks and rate future investment agencies based on their assistance and outreach to local communities.
Once again, government is attempting to manipulate market practice, not so much to improve the suffering economy, but to score votes with fickle demonstrators attacking feckless institution as the cause of the economic malaise that has slowed this country down.
Besides the legal requirement that cities invest their funds in banks, a more stable investment yielding higher interest, LA City cannot go about playing favorites with local institutions following hazy attempts to evaluate the long-term efficacy of new and limited financial partnerships.
"Responsible banking" begins with responsible budgeting, a goal that the LA City Council has failed to fulfill time and again. The naked attempt by councilmembers to appeal to the fragile and freakish masses exposes the naive and unserious approach of this local government to tackle its long-term fiscal problems with a mind toward resolving for the unforeseen future.
Instead of blaming the banks, a much-needed public utility, the LA City Council must invest their time in cutting spending; severely limiting future outlays into outlandish and unsustainable promises to public employees and greedy constituents; and above all lowering the tax and fee burden on city residents, already struggling to make ends meet without having to contend with greater and more costly government regulation.
Once again, government is attempting to manipulate market practice, not so much to improve the suffering economy, but to score votes with fickle demonstrators attacking feckless institution as the cause of the economic malaise that has slowed this country down.
Besides the legal requirement that cities invest their funds in banks, a more stable investment yielding higher interest, LA City cannot go about playing favorites with local institutions following hazy attempts to evaluate the long-term efficacy of new and limited financial partnerships.
"Responsible banking" begins with responsible budgeting, a goal that the LA City Council has failed to fulfill time and again. The naked attempt by councilmembers to appeal to the fragile and freakish masses exposes the naive and unserious approach of this local government to tackle its long-term fiscal problems with a mind toward resolving for the unforeseen future.
Instead of blaming the banks, a much-needed public utility, the LA City Council must invest their time in cutting spending; severely limiting future outlays into outlandish and unsustainable promises to public employees and greedy constituents; and above all lowering the tax and fee burden on city residents, already struggling to make ends meet without having to contend with greater and more costly government regulation.
AP Editorializing and Ron Paul
In the last segment of "Meet the Press", reporter David Gregory elicited a stunning response from GOP Presidential Candidate Ron Paul:
He wants to do away with student loans for post-secondary education.
At least that is the brief assumption of an AP report in the LA Times, which offered this title to their reaction to this move:
"Ron Paul would cut student loans"
The bald assumption at first glance suggests that he would slash their financial support right away.
Only in the text of the piece does the reported spell out the whole policy:
"He would kill the program eventually," after previously pointing out that Paul's economic policy calls for the elimination of cabinet-level departments and a privatization option for young workers. Nothing about cutting student aid.
The the article editorializes further:
"That [cutting student loans] could put him at odds with some of his followers."
Despite the emotional reaction many have to such a move, the rapid infusion of grant and loan money is the very scourge causing college tuition to explode six times the rate of inflation. Ron Paul stressed this economic reality in his interview, yet the Times conveniently neglects to mention this argument.
Dismissing his contention with the mention of current tuition for Paul's undergraduate and medical Alma maters is also a cheap attack. The Texas Congressman paid a fraction of such costs nearly five decades ago because the government was not subsidizing post-secondary nearly has much as now.
Whether purposely or inadvertently, the media's ignorance of economics undermines the salient and salutary polices of Presidential Candidate Ron Paul, the one contender for the Executive Office with clear-headed views and insight to take this nation out of its current torpor and into renewed prosperity.
He wants to do away with student loans for post-secondary education.
At least that is the brief assumption of an AP report in the LA Times, which offered this title to their reaction to this move:
"Ron Paul would cut student loans"
The bald assumption at first glance suggests that he would slash their financial support right away.
Only in the text of the piece does the reported spell out the whole policy:
"He would kill the program eventually," after previously pointing out that Paul's economic policy calls for the elimination of cabinet-level departments and a privatization option for young workers. Nothing about cutting student aid.
The the article editorializes further:
"That [cutting student loans] could put him at odds with some of his followers."
Despite the emotional reaction many have to such a move, the rapid infusion of grant and loan money is the very scourge causing college tuition to explode six times the rate of inflation. Ron Paul stressed this economic reality in his interview, yet the Times conveniently neglects to mention this argument.
Dismissing his contention with the mention of current tuition for Paul's undergraduate and medical Alma maters is also a cheap attack. The Texas Congressman paid a fraction of such costs nearly five decades ago because the government was not subsidizing post-secondary nearly has much as now.
Whether purposely or inadvertently, the media's ignorance of economics undermines the salient and salutary polices of Presidential Candidate Ron Paul, the one contender for the Executive Office with clear-headed views and insight to take this nation out of its current torpor and into renewed prosperity.
Rick "Perry Promises 2.5 Million Jobs in First Iowa TV Ad" -- Reaction
What!!!!
Governor Perry, please avoid such empty parries and thrusts. Mitt Romney is on the ropes, having been unable to raise his polling numbers above the low 20s. But caving in to populist fears of "not having enough" will not be enough to re-persuade an electorate growing wary and weary of your skill to thrill.
The government does not create jobs or wealth. Governments are instituted among men to protect our rights, not to secure our finances or keep us employed.
The government increases bureaucracy, not employment. Beyond the minimal need for an involved diligent citizenry to move the machine of government, but that must be a relatively
We need less government in this country, not more. More government leads to less wealth, less employment, a stagnant economy, and more poverty.
The future chief executive of the United States cannot provide, push, or even promise jobs. He can make sure that government gets out of the way as much as possible, and permits the private sector to do its work following necessary market corrections.
Let no one be dissuaded from the sober truth that the government is not the answer, the quick-fix, or even the provider for everyone is need.
Governor Perry, if you want to maintain a fighting chance of winning the Republican nomination, renounce these hollow promises, and show us the "Fed Up!" governor who demands that Washington play as limited a role as possible in the daily lives of American citizens.
Governor Perry, please avoid such empty parries and thrusts. Mitt Romney is on the ropes, having been unable to raise his polling numbers above the low 20s. But caving in to populist fears of "not having enough" will not be enough to re-persuade an electorate growing wary and weary of your skill to thrill.
The government does not create jobs or wealth. Governments are instituted among men to protect our rights, not to secure our finances or keep us employed.
The government increases bureaucracy, not employment. Beyond the minimal need for an involved diligent citizenry to move the machine of government, but that must be a relatively
We need less government in this country, not more. More government leads to less wealth, less employment, a stagnant economy, and more poverty.
The future chief executive of the United States cannot provide, push, or even promise jobs. He can make sure that government gets out of the way as much as possible, and permits the private sector to do its work following necessary market corrections.
Let no one be dissuaded from the sober truth that the government is not the answer, the quick-fix, or even the provider for everyone is need.
Governor Perry, if you want to maintain a fighting chance of winning the Republican nomination, renounce these hollow promises, and show us the "Fed Up!" governor who demands that Washington play as limited a role as possible in the daily lives of American citizens.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Second Thoughts
As I work with young people more from day to day, I begin to consider. . .
Sometimes, it is a matter of attitude, of believing that one can succeed in spite of the system.
Perhaps I have been too cynical about the whole public education thing.
If there is hope of some who do succeed in high school and beyond, what's the point of preventing their success?
If nothing else, choice must reign supreme, not just for parents and students, but also for teachers.
If reform permits everyone the freedom to adapt their educational experience more to their specific needs and skills, then there is still hope, and hope does not disappoint.
Sometimes, it is a matter of attitude, of believing that one can succeed in spite of the system.
Perhaps I have been too cynical about the whole public education thing.
If there is hope of some who do succeed in high school and beyond, what's the point of preventing their success?
If nothing else, choice must reign supreme, not just for parents and students, but also for teachers.
If reform permits everyone the freedom to adapt their educational experience more to their specific needs and skills, then there is still hope, and hope does not disappoint.
Monday, October 24, 2011
The United States Leaves Iraq
After eight years, the American presence in Iraq will be removed by year's end.
Whether this signals that there was a "Mission Accomplished" is still open to some conjecture.
Indeed, the nation breathes a sigh of relief, and for two reason.
One, that at last our armed forces can return home from the sectarian violence and intractable tribalism which has exploded since the invasion and occupation of American forces.
Another, in that our mission to remove Saddam Hussein and stop the development of weapons of mass destruction has enabled a defiant Iran to solicit aid from a weaker nation-state of similar fanatical sympathies.
Yet again, that our attempts at nation-building, springing from the initial legitimate interest to protect our nation and secure freedom for other nations, has back-fired once again, with no end in sight to the myopic hyper-optimism of the Washington political class.
In the years ahead, the American public must direct their sights of relief, disgust, and regret to fervent exhortations to our government, demanding that our institutions will govern this nation according to its binding character of the United States Constitution, securing the blessings of liberty to us and our posterity, and releasing all other nations to seek the same blessings for themselves sans our strained military involvement and financial backing.
Whether this signals that there was a "Mission Accomplished" is still open to some conjecture.
Indeed, the nation breathes a sigh of relief, and for two reason.
One, that at last our armed forces can return home from the sectarian violence and intractable tribalism which has exploded since the invasion and occupation of American forces.
Another, in that our mission to remove Saddam Hussein and stop the development of weapons of mass destruction has enabled a defiant Iran to solicit aid from a weaker nation-state of similar fanatical sympathies.
Yet again, that our attempts at nation-building, springing from the initial legitimate interest to protect our nation and secure freedom for other nations, has back-fired once again, with no end in sight to the myopic hyper-optimism of the Washington political class.
In the years ahead, the American public must direct their sights of relief, disgust, and regret to fervent exhortations to our government, demanding that our institutions will govern this nation according to its binding character of the United States Constitution, securing the blessings of liberty to us and our posterity, and releasing all other nations to seek the same blessings for themselves sans our strained military involvement and financial backing.
Occupy Wall Street Gets Occupied
A protest without a message is a protest that will induce protest within itself, scuttling any message and in the end mandating a swift responsible response to curtail any ongoing menace to the protesters themselves and others.
Such is the case with the Occupy Wall Street "movement", which has become "Occupy Everywhere", and now occupied in turn by freeloaders, freaks, and fanatics looking for a handout or an excuse to be a victim and victimize others. Permitting elements not just hostile to the established order but to order itself, these semi-planned protests have become a justifiable object of protest, by the majority of Americans seeking redress through the political process instead of "anti-political" sit ins, and even the protesters themselves, growing more wary for their own safety.
Occupy Everywhere camps, at first opening their borders (or the fringes of the make-shits tenting meetings) to the poor, now must institute the very law and order which they vocally disdain, having burdened peace officers and frustrated markets and commerce throughout the country. Volunteer security participants have stepped up to protect themselves -- as if they can or will protect others! -- while volunteer medical staff attempt to provide health and wellness services to those who seem content to take the same from law-abiding citizens who refuse to clutter the public square and break the law in the name of "protest".
At the bests of the initial wave of demonstrators, the homeless have also begun occupying Occupy Everywhere. Now, these community organizers of spontaneous disorder are blessed (or cursed) with weeding out the wheat from the chaff, those who are there to protest versus those there to free-load or cause trouble.
"The city ] wasn't giving us what we needed," said one shiftless drifter now nestling in Occupy Everywhere at Portland, Oregon. This entitlement mentality, which has bred the discontent of the fraction claiming to be the 99%, is now infiltrating and frustrating the very movement bent on doing the same to the whole country. Nevertheless, Occupy Everywhere wants to exploit the homeless as sympathy-props for their rage-at-anything agenda. To their growing chagrin, the homeless are now exploiting them.
As a consequence ( a reality of political life which many of these "99%" Protests seem intent on ignoring), Occupy Everywhere must now tend with all the civic problems that come with the cities which they have occupied.
To characterize the stark dysfunction of these makeshift protest-villages, one need only ponder the immoral danger of children playing in rowdy, noisy squalor in which sex-offenders have registered themselves to live in and the mentally ill continue to be a threat to themselves and others.
Law and order, of low import for the Occupy Everywhere crowd, has become a premium concern within their makeshift camps.
In one of the crudest of ironies, there is now an A (for "anarchy") camp within Occupy Portland, complete with borders and divisions of status for the long-term impoverished and the political rebels whose political philosophy is a crass mixture of "I do as I please" "You must do what I want".
"We're here to spoil each other," a volunteer medic commented in one of the camps. "It's a big messy, beautiful thing." To those getting the handouts, indeed it is a beautiful thing, short-lived as it certainly will be. Yet Occupy Everywhere wants to convert charity into a government mandate at Everyone Else's expense, a messy affair that makes government big and bigger to the detriment of individual liberty (read the now-defunct political atrocities of Soviet and Moaist Communism), a consequence by no means beautiful for anyone.
In their earnest (and reprehensible) desire to protest without coherent reason, Occupy Everywhere has made a mockery of the First Amendment and disregarded the rest of the American people's lawful exercise of their own rights. The key word in the First Amendment relating to assembly and petition is "peaceably." Occupy Everything has become anything but. Now the squatting protesters are contending not only with creating undo unrest for the country, attacking symbolic power structures which have nothing to do with the economic and political downturns in this country; they are also creating deviant, dysfunctional, and dangerous communities for themselves and their peers, and their children. Their refusal to articulate an articulate plan of protest and policy has undermined their loose associations, exposing an agenda of no worth and greater opprobrium.
Such is the case with the Occupy Wall Street "movement", which has become "Occupy Everywhere", and now occupied in turn by freeloaders, freaks, and fanatics looking for a handout or an excuse to be a victim and victimize others. Permitting elements not just hostile to the established order but to order itself, these semi-planned protests have become a justifiable object of protest, by the majority of Americans seeking redress through the political process instead of "anti-political" sit ins, and even the protesters themselves, growing more wary for their own safety.
Occupy Everywhere camps, at first opening their borders (or the fringes of the make-shits tenting meetings) to the poor, now must institute the very law and order which they vocally disdain, having burdened peace officers and frustrated markets and commerce throughout the country. Volunteer security participants have stepped up to protect themselves -- as if they can or will protect others! -- while volunteer medical staff attempt to provide health and wellness services to those who seem content to take the same from law-abiding citizens who refuse to clutter the public square and break the law in the name of "protest".
At the bests of the initial wave of demonstrators, the homeless have also begun occupying Occupy Everywhere. Now, these community organizers of spontaneous disorder are blessed (or cursed) with weeding out the wheat from the chaff, those who are there to protest versus those there to free-load or cause trouble.
"The city ] wasn't giving us what we needed," said one shiftless drifter now nestling in Occupy Everywhere at Portland, Oregon. This entitlement mentality, which has bred the discontent of the fraction claiming to be the 99%, is now infiltrating and frustrating the very movement bent on doing the same to the whole country. Nevertheless, Occupy Everywhere wants to exploit the homeless as sympathy-props for their rage-at-anything agenda. To their growing chagrin, the homeless are now exploiting them.
As a consequence ( a reality of political life which many of these "99%" Protests seem intent on ignoring), Occupy Everywhere must now tend with all the civic problems that come with the cities which they have occupied.
To characterize the stark dysfunction of these makeshift protest-villages, one need only ponder the immoral danger of children playing in rowdy, noisy squalor in which sex-offenders have registered themselves to live in and the mentally ill continue to be a threat to themselves and others.
Law and order, of low import for the Occupy Everywhere crowd, has become a premium concern within their makeshift camps.
In one of the crudest of ironies, there is now an A (for "anarchy") camp within Occupy Portland, complete with borders and divisions of status for the long-term impoverished and the political rebels whose political philosophy is a crass mixture of "I do as I please" "You must do what I want".
"We're here to spoil each other," a volunteer medic commented in one of the camps. "It's a big messy, beautiful thing." To those getting the handouts, indeed it is a beautiful thing, short-lived as it certainly will be. Yet Occupy Everywhere wants to convert charity into a government mandate at Everyone Else's expense, a messy affair that makes government big and bigger to the detriment of individual liberty (read the now-defunct political atrocities of Soviet and Moaist Communism), a consequence by no means beautiful for anyone.
In their earnest (and reprehensible) desire to protest without coherent reason, Occupy Everywhere has made a mockery of the First Amendment and disregarded the rest of the American people's lawful exercise of their own rights. The key word in the First Amendment relating to assembly and petition is "peaceably." Occupy Everything has become anything but. Now the squatting protesters are contending not only with creating undo unrest for the country, attacking symbolic power structures which have nothing to do with the economic and political downturns in this country; they are also creating deviant, dysfunctional, and dangerous communities for themselves and their peers, and their children. Their refusal to articulate an articulate plan of protest and policy has undermined their loose associations, exposing an agenda of no worth and greater opprobrium.
Libya vs. Syria and the Arab Spring
Moammar Gadhafi, deposed and destroyed former dictator of Libya, had a reputation.
From wearing carpet-like robes to dismissing the protests that culminated into civil war that deposed and ultimately killed him, Gadhafi had little real power once the requisite number of people rose up against him.
The merchant class did not support him. There were no military brass connected to the leadership of the country to stand by him, as Gadhafi had a deep-seated distrust of military beyond his inner circle.
Everyone in Libya had grown to hate Moammar Gadhafi, and his strongest supporters were in weakened, top-down impoverished states in Sub-Saharan Africa.
For forty-two years, Gadhafi ruled with little opposition or unrest. The sudden uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, which instigated rebellion in his own country, most likely shook a dictator long rendered complacent from decades of uninterrupted rule. He had no idea what hit the ground in February, and the rebels hounded him then found him, still dazed and confused from such a so sudden a fall after so long a reign.
None came to his aid as NATO forces pounded the nation and rebel forces advanced on Tripoli, the his hometown and final resting place, Sirt.
Libya, a backward nation of sparsely settled millions, was not under the totalitarian watchful eye many would expect from a limited megalomaniac.
Gadhafi had set the stage for his demise long before the outset of the Arab Spring, and there was little in place to stop it from swamping him and sweeping him from power.
Bashar al-Assad also has a reputation.
Like Gadhafi, Assad and family have been in power for many decades. Unlike Gadhafi, Assad has nurtured stronger ties with other nations, particularly Iran, after scorning overtures from the United States.
Syria occupied Lebanon for fifteen years, flexing military muscle and hastling neighbor states like Israel.
Assad has a more open relationship with a strong military, armed loyalists who have mowed down thousands throughout Syria.
From his father, who wiped out thousands who had risen against him in Homs, to the merchant class who depend on stability to maintain some semblance of commerce, there is a stronger loyal opposition to the Assad regime.
Unlike Gadhafi, the Syrian government and armed forces were prepared for massive insurrection, due in part to the extensive uprising of 1982, which Papa Assad put an end to with finality.
Press repression is high; Big Brother Assad watches over everything. The rebel forces are uncoordinated and powerless, compared to the armed opposition that swept Libya for the past six months.
The revolt against Assad will take much longer, yet the Syrian people are emboldened. They want to take down their strongman. His fall will have wide-spread implications for the region, hobbling the heinous infiltration of Iran.
Instead of scattering bombs here and there in Libya, the United States needed to concentrated on weakening the Syrian tyranny.
From wearing carpet-like robes to dismissing the protests that culminated into civil war that deposed and ultimately killed him, Gadhafi had little real power once the requisite number of people rose up against him.
The merchant class did not support him. There were no military brass connected to the leadership of the country to stand by him, as Gadhafi had a deep-seated distrust of military beyond his inner circle.
Everyone in Libya had grown to hate Moammar Gadhafi, and his strongest supporters were in weakened, top-down impoverished states in Sub-Saharan Africa.
For forty-two years, Gadhafi ruled with little opposition or unrest. The sudden uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, which instigated rebellion in his own country, most likely shook a dictator long rendered complacent from decades of uninterrupted rule. He had no idea what hit the ground in February, and the rebels hounded him then found him, still dazed and confused from such a so sudden a fall after so long a reign.
None came to his aid as NATO forces pounded the nation and rebel forces advanced on Tripoli, the his hometown and final resting place, Sirt.
Libya, a backward nation of sparsely settled millions, was not under the totalitarian watchful eye many would expect from a limited megalomaniac.
Gadhafi had set the stage for his demise long before the outset of the Arab Spring, and there was little in place to stop it from swamping him and sweeping him from power.
Bashar al-Assad also has a reputation.
Like Gadhafi, Assad and family have been in power for many decades. Unlike Gadhafi, Assad has nurtured stronger ties with other nations, particularly Iran, after scorning overtures from the United States.
Syria occupied Lebanon for fifteen years, flexing military muscle and hastling neighbor states like Israel.
Assad has a more open relationship with a strong military, armed loyalists who have mowed down thousands throughout Syria.
From his father, who wiped out thousands who had risen against him in Homs, to the merchant class who depend on stability to maintain some semblance of commerce, there is a stronger loyal opposition to the Assad regime.
Unlike Gadhafi, the Syrian government and armed forces were prepared for massive insurrection, due in part to the extensive uprising of 1982, which Papa Assad put an end to with finality.
Press repression is high; Big Brother Assad watches over everything. The rebel forces are uncoordinated and powerless, compared to the armed opposition that swept Libya for the past six months.
The revolt against Assad will take much longer, yet the Syrian people are emboldened. They want to take down their strongman. His fall will have wide-spread implications for the region, hobbling the heinous infiltration of Iran.
Instead of scattering bombs here and there in Libya, the United States needed to concentrated on weakening the Syrian tyranny.
Saturday, October 22, 2011
Tunisian Elections after the Jasmine Revolution
"I will be voting for freedom and for jobs," one Tunisian said.
It is not the government's job to give anyone a job. This is the very corruption that has incited Arab peoples across the Middle East to rise up against their leaders.
The socialist impulse bred the dysfunction and dictatorship which young people throughout the region rose up to protest and replace. Democracy with handouts leads to more tyranny. If this is the widespread attitude of many in Tunisia and the greater Arab world, then it is a harbinger of worse to come.
The Tunisian election is a parody of political power. 11,000 candidates, 80 parties, and many clueless voters so unskilled in politics, unlearned and illiterate, there are still many more questions than answers. This motely rabble is electing an assembly to rewrite the nation's constitution. No learning, no common interest in the welfare of man apart from ethnic or tribal considerations -- this in not Jeffersonian Democracy in the making.
Worse, the largest party guaranteed to secure the greatest number of seats in the Tunisian Assembly is an Islamist Ennahda party, already setting the stage for a rise in Islamic nationalism, Sharia Law, and hostility toward the Jewish State and Israel.
It is not the government's job to give anyone a job. This is the very corruption that has incited Arab peoples across the Middle East to rise up against their leaders.
The socialist impulse bred the dysfunction and dictatorship which young people throughout the region rose up to protest and replace. Democracy with handouts leads to more tyranny. If this is the widespread attitude of many in Tunisia and the greater Arab world, then it is a harbinger of worse to come.
The Tunisian election is a parody of political power. 11,000 candidates, 80 parties, and many clueless voters so unskilled in politics, unlearned and illiterate, there are still many more questions than answers. This motely rabble is electing an assembly to rewrite the nation's constitution. No learning, no common interest in the welfare of man apart from ethnic or tribal considerations -- this in not Jeffersonian Democracy in the making.
Worse, the largest party guaranteed to secure the greatest number of seats in the Tunisian Assembly is an Islamist Ennahda party, already setting the stage for a rise in Islamic nationalism, Sharia Law, and hostility toward the Jewish State and Israel.
Ivy League School: Anything But: The Teachers
I have often made the point about how unhappy teachers are.
I could think of no group who better typified this unrest and disconcerted state than the other teachers I suffered with, and suffered through, at Ivy League School.
One was an effete, prissy multicultural elitist, a North Carolina boy with more swish than accent.
He loved to lecture to me about Indians, which correcting me by calling them "Native Americans." When I told him that I was part Indian, er . .. "Native American." I called myself a member of the "Huron" tribe", which he would then correct me again, "Tribe is a European construct. You mean "nation". . ."
He was as pretentious in his political correctness as the day is long; he was a real downer, a real creep, arrogant in his weakened simplicity, and very popular with the kids since he let them get away with a lot without really accomplishing anything (or at least that's what is seemed to me)
When he wasn't boasting about his Native American heritage, he whined at length about his sad circumstances, of which there were many. He lived in a death trap of an apartment, which had doubled as his office. When mold creeped into the room, causing him terrible health problems, his landlord refused to do anything about it. In response to the blunt spurning for assistance, he filed a lawsuit, which he was still pursuing for the duration of my ill-extended stay at Ivy.
In addition to the hellish hole he lived in, he had suffered in a terrible automobile accident, one which apparently was not his fault. He still death with headaches and weak moments. It was just plain depressing hearing from this guy. When he came by to talk, I kept everything to a minimum; I had no interest in adding to my own misery.
He was a nice guy, one that wanted you to appreciate his same niceness.
There was another teacher, more crusty, more beaten down, more worn out. She had been a full-time teacher, but after ten years she quit. She got so burned out over the whole thing.
"My garage is still filled with crap from teaching elementary school," from which she offered to offload some of it on me. I politely turned her down.
She would back-bite the Asian employers who ran Ivy, as well, commenting on the absurd programs they were running, like trying to make first and second graders write cohesive essay, when they were just starting to read and write.
She talked a lot about money, talked a lot about getting out of the teaching profession. She wanted to work with people, and she was training to become a radiologist, a profession that required minimal contact with other people. She figured this out about a year into her training, and thus resolved to pursue another calling.
She was full of herself, a mixed legacy of disappoint and fear, all born of pursuing a profession as the one answer to the ache of living a life with some purpose.
Plus the economic downturn which roiled opportunities for us all. We did not have much to look forward to, it seems. When I ran into her at the local library, she was wearing a baby-tee with one of those gaudy lucky cats that look eerily over costumers in donut shops. I noticed the freaky feline on her shirt, which she corrected me was a "Japanese" not a "Chinese" symbol (in reality, meaningless monstrosity).
"I wear this to attract money. Money!" Then she grabbed at the air, grasping for the wind, exasperated my already thinning patience.
While at Ivy, I was also offended by the things that I discovered through other students what she would say about me to them -- like that I was a bad teacher (then again, this was one word from some frustrated fifth grade forced to spend three more hours a day in run-down dump of a school. Still, I did not care for her, and I did not care to be talked about, either.
There was another teacher, one whom I esteemed for his humility and simplicity, although he was a credentialed and degreed individual, one who worked at a local community college during the day as an English teacher.
He liked working with younger kids, although he despised the methods he was forced to adopt in teaching. "Drill and kill doesn't work, but the counselor insists on it," he lamented. Why was he teaching there, then? Wasn't he getting compensated enough working at the community college?
I almost forgot the retired computer engineer, an unmarried man who was appalled as I was with the students' miscreance and misconduct toward each other. He was a kind man, one who brought the students gifts on their birthdays. After working for twenty-odd years with computers, he wanted to take on another career, this time working with young people. He was keen on pre-school, but he was glad for the opportunity to teach anybody. He liked working there, despite the crude conditions that would have appalled any full-time teacher. He was upbeat, and I liked that. It was good that there was somebody there who was to be happy to be there. At least it seemed that way
I could think of no group who better typified this unrest and disconcerted state than the other teachers I suffered with, and suffered through, at Ivy League School.
One was an effete, prissy multicultural elitist, a North Carolina boy with more swish than accent.
He loved to lecture to me about Indians, which correcting me by calling them "Native Americans." When I told him that I was part Indian, er . .. "Native American." I called myself a member of the "Huron" tribe", which he would then correct me again, "Tribe is a European construct. You mean "nation". . ."
He was as pretentious in his political correctness as the day is long; he was a real downer, a real creep, arrogant in his weakened simplicity, and very popular with the kids since he let them get away with a lot without really accomplishing anything (or at least that's what is seemed to me)
When he wasn't boasting about his Native American heritage, he whined at length about his sad circumstances, of which there were many. He lived in a death trap of an apartment, which had doubled as his office. When mold creeped into the room, causing him terrible health problems, his landlord refused to do anything about it. In response to the blunt spurning for assistance, he filed a lawsuit, which he was still pursuing for the duration of my ill-extended stay at Ivy.
In addition to the hellish hole he lived in, he had suffered in a terrible automobile accident, one which apparently was not his fault. He still death with headaches and weak moments. It was just plain depressing hearing from this guy. When he came by to talk, I kept everything to a minimum; I had no interest in adding to my own misery.
He was a nice guy, one that wanted you to appreciate his same niceness.
There was another teacher, more crusty, more beaten down, more worn out. She had been a full-time teacher, but after ten years she quit. She got so burned out over the whole thing.
"My garage is still filled with crap from teaching elementary school," from which she offered to offload some of it on me. I politely turned her down.
She would back-bite the Asian employers who ran Ivy, as well, commenting on the absurd programs they were running, like trying to make first and second graders write cohesive essay, when they were just starting to read and write.
She talked a lot about money, talked a lot about getting out of the teaching profession. She wanted to work with people, and she was training to become a radiologist, a profession that required minimal contact with other people. She figured this out about a year into her training, and thus resolved to pursue another calling.
She was full of herself, a mixed legacy of disappoint and fear, all born of pursuing a profession as the one answer to the ache of living a life with some purpose.
Plus the economic downturn which roiled opportunities for us all. We did not have much to look forward to, it seems. When I ran into her at the local library, she was wearing a baby-tee with one of those gaudy lucky cats that look eerily over costumers in donut shops. I noticed the freaky feline on her shirt, which she corrected me was a "Japanese" not a "Chinese" symbol (in reality, meaningless monstrosity).
"I wear this to attract money. Money!" Then she grabbed at the air, grasping for the wind, exasperated my already thinning patience.
While at Ivy, I was also offended by the things that I discovered through other students what she would say about me to them -- like that I was a bad teacher (then again, this was one word from some frustrated fifth grade forced to spend three more hours a day in run-down dump of a school. Still, I did not care for her, and I did not care to be talked about, either.
There was another teacher, one whom I esteemed for his humility and simplicity, although he was a credentialed and degreed individual, one who worked at a local community college during the day as an English teacher.
He liked working with younger kids, although he despised the methods he was forced to adopt in teaching. "Drill and kill doesn't work, but the counselor insists on it," he lamented. Why was he teaching there, then? Wasn't he getting compensated enough working at the community college?
I almost forgot the retired computer engineer, an unmarried man who was appalled as I was with the students' miscreance and misconduct toward each other. He was a kind man, one who brought the students gifts on their birthdays. After working for twenty-odd years with computers, he wanted to take on another career, this time working with young people. He was keen on pre-school, but he was glad for the opportunity to teach anybody. He liked working there, despite the crude conditions that would have appalled any full-time teacher. He was upbeat, and I liked that. It was good that there was somebody there who was to be happy to be there. At least it seemed that way
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)