Neil DeGrass Tyson @ BYU - are you religious?

One of the things that I love about Neil DeGrass Tyson is that he is one cool cat when it comes to helping people accept controversial science. Instead of taking a more aggressive approach to the question of science versus religion (like Christopher Hitchens), he actually manages to help people understand and accept things like evolution and the Big Bang without alienating them from the start.

Here is a great example of his style from when he spoke at Brigham Young University (BYU) in Provo, Utah. For a little background, BYU is a religious university for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons). The Mormons are part of the group in America that believes in a sola scriptora view of the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and a few other sacred texts that they have (at least on a leadership level -- some of the members are more liberal). This means that the leaders of the church routinely speak of things like Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, the Tower of Babel, etc. like they're actual events in history, not metaphors. Normally, this would raise the ire of most scientists, mainly because the fact that such events did not occur in the Earth's history is provable scientifically, at least up to the point where eveything starts becoming a miracle where the laws of nature have been suspended (think Santa Clause).

Despite this, Dr. Tyson still has enough class to answer the inquisitive young girl in this clip gently when she asks him if he's religious. The answer is no, but he tells her that in a nice way.

I am sure he's one cool cat in real life.

Related articles

• Book Of Mormon Is Taking Over Broadway! (perezhilton.com)
• 'The Book of Mormon' Leads Pack of Tony Award Nominees (foxnews.com)
• Tony awards: 'Book of Mormon' leads with 14 nominations (popwatch.ew.com)
• 2 very daring musicals lead the Tony Awards race ()
• Do Mormons Have Horns? (relijournal.com)
• Student of the Mormon world (scumbaby.wordpress.com)

Amy Chua: Right on Substance, Wrong on Style

Could Black Parents Learn From Amy Chua?

I have been keeping up with the Amy Chua controversy over the past few weeks and honestly I think the criticism is overblown.

Chua, a Professor & author of 'Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother', caused an uproar with her recent Wall Street Journal article entitled 'Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior'. In the article, Chua explains how the Asian approach of aggressive, strict parenting is superior to modern Western parenting, specifically found in traditional American families. Chua argues that her more regimented, structured approach - which is almost boot camp-like - produces better outcomes. It is important for parents to override the natural preferences of children in order to instill values of hard work and discipline.

I am torn on where I come down on this, but I tend to side with Chua. Although her style is probably not the correct approach, the overall basis for her argument is strong. It is a fact that children with more engaged, strict, and attentive parents usually end up in a better position later on. Of course this is not the case in every situation, but there is a definite advantage to growing up in a household where you are pushed more and where expectations are high. Chua's style though provided excuse makers & critics with a reason to pounce. I particularly thought of the section in the article where Chua forced one of her daughters to sit at the piano for hours until she learned a particular song, despite the child struggling and having a nervous breakdown.

But the numbers don't lie. Strong parenting, more often than not, pays off. You can whine about Chua's style til your heart's content... but the kids of Tiger Mothers are kicking the behinds of those raised in more laissez-faire households. Critics have taken things out of context. In the article, and in an NPR interview that followed, Chua makes clear that she was not being literal in all of her comparisons. Yes, it's true that some of her comments could be seen as stereotyping... but she admits that some of her comments were tongue-in-cheek. She stated that the term "Chinese Mother" (or Tiger Mother) could be applied to immigrant parents of a variety of ethnic groups. It symbolically represented a general view about parenting, as opposed to strictly one race of people. But she was mainly referring to Chinese parenting. Her explanation made sense to me, because I have seen a little bit of the Tiger Mother in Vietnamese, Nigerian, European, and Arab immigrants. She was using images and terms to represent mothers more collectively than her critics would have you to believe.

While her methods were a little questionable... her general view of parenting is a good one. This is generally the kind of parenting that we need more of in this Country. This is especially the case in the so-called Black Community. I found it ironic that Black bloggers would come out so strongly against Chua. Strange almost, considering the condition that Black urban communities are in. The Black Community is creating monsters in record numbers who are terrorizing their own neighborhoods as I type this commentary. Black males are 5 times more likely to be arrested and sent to prison than their white counterparts. Additionally, Black males are 3 times more likely than whites and 5 times more likely than Asians to be suspended from School. And I won't even mention the deplorable dropout rate. See two of my previous posts on Education for Black males, here, and here.

Another irony is that many of the traditional black families of the past (1960/1950 and earlier) actually had parents who bore a closer resemblance to the so-called Chinese Tiger Mother, than the current less rigid American parent. That was the case in rural and urban Black families. Education was cherished, because it was seen as a way out of post-reconstruction poverty. Structure, discipline and respect for elders were key in many Black households. One other reason that Black children had to adhere to discipline at that time goes beyond the fact that it was economically important. How well children embraced discipline, structure, and listened to parents was literally a matter of life and death. They had to listen to the warnings about how to properly interact in a white world that was often hostile. Black children had to understand the importance of heeding the constant instructions from parents about societal rules on how to deal with whites in order to keep themselves alive. How many of those stories have we heard? These are the actual roots of Black existence in America, not just a bunch of outlandish, off the wall ideas. Unfortunately much of that tradition has been lost. The lack of fathers in the home obviously contributed to the problem. So I just find it interesting that Blacks (some Blacks) see Amy Chua's approach to parenting as something that is somehow foreign. It's as if Blacks are looking in the mirror after 130, 140 years and can't recognize themselves. But in a way, it explains quite a bit.

If the so-called "Black Community" had more Amy Chua's of their own- perhaps without so much of the bootcamp aspect - and homes with more attentive, present, concerned, engaged, demanding, responsible parents.. who instilled certain values...and if Black men and women (esp. Women) made better choices, I can guarantee that there would not be nearly as many problems as there are today. In fact, the same could be said for American culture in general. Outcomes in education would certainly be much better.

Instead of condemning Chua, more traditional American mothers (black, white, purple) should take notes from her. How a child is pushed, loved, nurtured, educated, etc is subject to style preference. But to suggest that stronger parenting is somehow bad for a child, citing tough methods as an excuse to trash a parent in  Chua's case, is just dishonest. Are Chinese mothers superior? I don't know if I would have framed the title in those terms to begin with. But it is clear that Chinese, Vietnamese, and immigrant parents in general tend to have a better grasp on parenting.

Even the Obama's have banned Sasha and Malia from watching TV during the week. No TV period. Only a little on the weekends. They expect only the best grades and are not pleased with a B or C, especially when they know that the girls could have done better. The President and First Lady also make sure that they keep the girls involved in other meaningful activities... such as music and dance lessons...which they have to attend, in addition to schoolwork... and btw...schoolwork gets done before the girls are allowed to do anything else. They are made to do a whole list of things that they probably don't want to do (I am sure many of their natural preferences are being overridden by Mrs. Obama), yet someone is riding their tails everyday to make sure those things get done and that responsibilities are met. The Obama's have a stricter, more regimented parenting style...not because they are the first family, but because they understand the benefits of discipline and hard work and they know what it took to get to where they are. They want their daughters to understand and enjoy those same benefits. This is not quite as strict as the Tiger Mother approach, but it bares a much closer resemblance to the Chinese Tiger Mother way (if such a style really exists) than the modern American approach. So again, it leaves me scratching my head when people, especially Blacks, see Amy Chua's experience as something completely foreign. Chua's approach is basically about keeping close tabs on children, providing plenty of structure, pushing hard work, maintaining a strong expectation of excellence, instilling the right values, stressing discipline, responsibility & accountability, embracing education, and always being a very engaged parent. Could she have produced children of the same caliber using softer methods? Probably. Her approach is a little on the harsh side, I must admit. But her overall approach worked. I think an approach of a less engaged parent, who doesn't care, who is neglectful, etc... creates a much more abusive situation and creates outcomes that are much worse...both for the child and for society.

Mother Thrown in Jail for Sending Kids to Better School

Hopes for her own teaching career may have been maliciously ruined in the process. This is one of the strangest cases that I have ever seen. It highlights the growing cast system in America that I often mention here.

New Education Study Shows Bleak Picture for Black Boys

Another study was released this month showing that educational achievement for Black males has reached a crisis level and may be worse than previously thought. The report, entitled "A Call for Change: The Social and Educational Factors Contributing to the Outcomes of Black Males in Urban Schools", was funded by The Council Of The Great City Schools. This is yet another report which indicates that the disparities in educational performance cannot simply be blamed on poverty.

From the New York Times:

Poverty alone does not seem to explain the differences: poor white boys do just as well as African-American boys who do not live in poverty, measured by whether they qualify for subsidized school lunches.

Perhaps the toughest finding from the report is the fact that Black male students with no disabilities, are barely even with White male students who are learning disabled. Read more from The Loop21. See a summary of the CGCS report (pdf).See the Full Report.

Hear an in-depth discussion about the findings of the report from NPR.

The CGCS report seems to confirm the Policy Bridge report from a few years ago, which had a similar focus and generally presented many of the same findings. However, I believe the CGCS report may be more extensive. It also echoed information from The Schott Foundation report. So just within the last 3 or 4 years you have 3 major reports on the same issue... from Policy Bridge, the Schott Foundation, and now CGCS which are all generally reporting the same findings. Not to mention all of the other reports and studies over the last decade.

The Black establishment focuses on "The system" and "poverty" as the culprits for these problems, but those arguments can no longer be used as excuses. I have stated here several times that the core problem has to do with culture, as the Policy Bridge Report points out. The problem also lies with parents. I think the Black establishment (Civil Rights Inc. etc) uses these excuses as a way to somehow protect Black culture or Black parenthood. I made my argument in a previous commentary regarding the Black male achievement gap. You can also find links to the Policy Bridge study there as well. So I won't repeat my argument again. But it is clear that the old arguments are not going to cut it anymore.

In terms of conclusions... I was a little disappointed to see that the CGCS report did not seem to focus on the cultural gap. It seemed to tiptoe around that issue... perhaps for the purpose of political correctness...who knows. This is where I think the Policy Bridge study really shined. It came out and addressed the elephant in the room... "culture".... today's "Black/Urban culture" in particular. Instead of focusing on the real causes... the CGCS report simply calls for "a White House Conference", and more studies (although this issue has probably been studied more than anything known to man). We don't need more huge studies or commissions... we need a cultural shift and parents willing to take responsibility for raising and educating their children.

Hear a discussion with Dr. Ron Ferguson of the Achievement Gap Initiative from Harvard University. (From KMOX RAdio in St. Louis)

Hear full discussion.

I am also annoyed by the effort to demonize teachers and use them as scapegoats. The Black establishment, and even "the system" have joined together to focus the blame on teachers. A teacher in California recently took his own life because the test scores for his students were released by a major newspaper (with no context whatsoever). The newspaper report (which I will not link...nor will I provide clicks for the newspaper in question) gave the impression that the teacher was not doing the best he could. It turns out...the teacher who killed himself was one of the hardest working and most dedicated instructors in his school and his district. The test score issue is a red herring, used by school administrators (misused) to intimidate teachers. The fact is, standardized test scores are not usually a good reflection of the dedication or quality of a teacher. This is especially the case in urban schools.

Teachers have a hard enough time already. They are undervalued and under-appreciated considering the role they play in society, particularly in shaping America's future. They are underpaid and they often have to work in awful work environments where their safety is in question and where they are not given the support they need from school administrators. It's the same nonsense at every urban school district in the Country (and even in some suburban districts). Sure there are bad teachers...but they don't make up the majority. There are ways to evaluate teachers and get rid of the bad apples (by sending in panels of experienced instructors from other schools to watch the teachers in class and provide objective feedback, and by getting feedback from peers and from students. It should not be done through test scores alone). In the case of the California teacher...he was also dealing with a language barrier...with a significant number of his students having trouble with English or not having English as their first language - yet another variable that is not taken into account.

A great example of the kind of insanity that I am referring to can be seen in the A&E program Tony Danza: Teach. The taping of the program takes place in an urban high school in Philadelphia. Unfortunately this show didn't get renewed for another season...but despite that, it provides insight into what is ailing the American public school system. In episode #7, one of Danza's Black students- Algernon- is given numerous chances to turn in a simple homework assignment, but fails to do the work. Can you guess who the school principal jumped on for that? Yep... the principal took a bite out of Danza's ass for the student not listening and refusing to turn in his homework. The student was coddled. The principal is the typical urban school administrator. This is the kind of nonsense that makes my conservative side kick in.... and it is one of the things that annoys me about liberals... sometimes their way of thinking goes too far to the left with no rhyme or reason. Overall... i'm progressive, but I have a few conservative tendencies. I don't embrace many of the positions on the far left. The proper, logical response from this principal (or any principal) should have been to call the parents in...and sit down together with the student, and the teacher to try to find a solution. This would be an opportunity to give the parents a kick in the ass (encourage them to get more involved... provide them with options...and challenge them). But instead of holding the student and his parents responsible for the students performance...she blames the teacher. INCREDIBLE! If this is going on all over the Country (and I know it is)... then America is screwed if it stays on this path. I know this is one reason why the turnover is so high for urban schools. Good teachers don't want to stick around to deal with that kind of nonsense. They pack up and leave for better suburban schools and private schools, where they get more support from administrators and where the working conditions tend to be better.

Watch The Full Episode:

Fewer Than Half of Black Male Students Are Graduating from High School

A recent report from the Schott Foundation for Public Education found that the overall 2007-2008 graduation rate for black males in the U.S. was only 47 percent, and half of the states have graduation rates for black male students below the national average. Hear a conversation with the authors of the report. see the full report here.

The usual suspects (Black Civil Rights Inc., etc) have made their predictable arguments in response to the data. But frankly, I have been tired of hearing it for a long time. Their argument is always something along the lines of "the system" is leading these kids down a path to failure. "The system" is not spending enough money. "The system" is not coddling these kids enough. "the system, the system, the system".... "the system this... the system that". It's always "the system". Notice how this always seems to be the foundation and basis for all of their arguments. Why is it always.. "The Schools or the System is Failing Black Students". Why isn't the narrative - "Black Parents are Failing Public Schools and Their Own Children".... or "Is Black Culture Complicating Life for Black Children"? These narratives would better reflect the problems in my opinion, but they are not politically correct.

I have pointed out that this argument is a myth several times. One instance in particular would be my post a few years ago about the impact modern Black culture has on educational outcomes. The 2007 Policy Bridge report, entitled "The Rap On Culture: How Anti-Education Messages in Media, at Home, & On The Street Hold Back African American Youth", was confirmation of earlier research by others, including Dr. John Ogbu of UC Berkley, a leading figure in this particular area of research. But you never hear about these studies, because the Black establishment doesn't want to deal with the elephant in the room - Black culture itself. It's too big of a monster to take on. They are afraid of dealing with it because they would create too many enemies from within the so-called "Black Community" (hate that term). It's so much easier for them to blame "the system" and kick the can down the road.

This problem was highlighted rather clearly in last year's CNN report "Black In America" when Steve Perry, Principle of Capital Preparatory Magnet School pointed out that the parents of his mostly minority students, (paraphrasing) 'aren't around'... 'many don't seem to care'....that they 'just aren't involved' in the education of their children. That, ladies & gentleman, is the key to this whole human disaster that is taking place in this Country. And it's bigger than just the so-called "Black Community". This will have a harmful impact on the nation as a whole.... because many of those who aren't graduating, are (let's be honest) going to be involved in criminal activity, making victims out of you, your neighbors, will disrupt the quality of life in America, and they will be a drag on budgets and the economy, because they won't be contributing to society...to the tax base and it will cost money to warehouse them in jail and prison.

Parenting, the life choices of parents (especially Black women, yes I went there- stop laying down with no good thugs, criminals, & deadbeats), the household environment, and the culture that drives much of life outside of school have much more influence over how well a student does in the classroom. You can have the best teachers in the world... but rappers & other Black Hip Hop culture figures hold more sway with most Black youth. They will listen to the rap stars and take cues from them over their teachers....and in some cases, over their parents or other relatives (those who have responsible parents in their lives to begin with). But again, no one wants to talk about this in the national media... or if they do, they glance over it. This has been the elephant in the room for the so-called "Black Community" for at least the past 15-20 years. Civil Rights Inc. wants to avoid this because it actually deals with getting at the heart of the problem. And since the existence of this problem is their bread and butter, why fix it? Facing it head on would also anger half, if not most, of the "Black Community". This is something that the Sharpton's, the Dyson's, the Smiley's, and the Jackson's can't afford to do. Especially when they have books coming out almost every year. Dr. Cosby and Dr. Alvin Poussaint weren't afraid.... but they haven't been able to inspire the fundamental shift needed in Black Culture (few men throughout history have been able to). But at least a few of us get it. Geoffrey Canada is one of those individuals who seems to get it... which is why he brilliantly incorporated parenting skills training, and a strong parent-teacher bond into his Harlem Children's Zone program early on.

I have understood the importance of parenting, doing well in school, moral compasses, structure and discipline for most of my life. Although I didn't have a perfect home situation early on, and was not always the best student. I didn't get in gear until I entered my Sophomore year of High School. But I still understood the importance of all those values. I knew that I had to take education seriously and that if I didn't do well, life was going to be harsh... that there would probably be a prison cell waiting for me.

I noticed something pretty simple back in my formative years. For one, Black youth with anti-education attitudes tended to do worse when they were clumped together...both in school and outside of school. Even in schools that are diverse tend to have this problem, because socially, Blacks tend to stick with Blacks... that's how it was in many of the grade schools and middle schools I was in, including DODDS. We have all (or you should have) read about this from the reports and studies on how students tend to segregate themselves in school (at lunch for example). Why were the outcomes worse? Well, my belief is... when you have like minded people together, certain beliefs and behaviors are reinforced. ("Group-think" for example). But I noticed that there were always pockets of Black students... either anomalies from within the group, or from outside of the group of other Black youth who seemed to excel. And the difference usually had something to do with the way they were being raised... with life in their households. Their lives were as different as night & day from lives of kids in the larger group. The kids with the more watchful and concerned parents, usually got better grades and had fewer (if any) behavioral issues. They may have faked it in school to a point, by buying cool clothes, playing sports, and having cute girls all over them... but that's where the similarities ended. At home, they had structure. The tougher the parents... the better the grades. The more structure... the better the outcomes. The more rules they had..and the more respect (or fear) they had for mom & dad...or the more desire they had to please their parents... the less trouble they found themselves in. The more activities that their parents had them involved in, the better. The more involved the parents were, the better. And I found this to be true no matter where I went to school... Kansas, Germany, Texas, etc. It always translated, without fail. So this is how I know that Civil Rights Inc. is full of s-tuff.

The Obama's are a perfect example of this. The President recently talked about the weekly routine for the first daughters Sasha and Malia. Part of their schedule involves plenty of positive activities. Homework is stressed...and the first couple keeps up with everything that needs to be done. He also mentioned one other thing.... that no T.V. watching is allowed during the week. NO TELEVISION! Even back in my day (mostly the 80's), that would be seen as a punishment. And I would argue that this is pretty much unheard of in the so-called "Black Community". I was allowed to watch TV, go ride my bike all over town (in Kansas), or go play basketball after my homework and chores were done. I lived like a King in Texas...had a King sized bed, had a huge floor model TV with my own cable box, my own phone and could pretty much do what I wanted. I almost wish I had the kind of structure that the Obama girls have now. But I am thankful that I had what I did. But what the Obama's are doing should be the blueprint for other Black families.

Now it is true that the Obama's enjoy certain advantages. For one, they are able to put their daughters in private school. Public schools are indeed a part of the problem (but not the major part in my opinion). In public school, "the system" and your child, who may actually want to learn, has to deal with disruptive students who have not had the proper parenting. Teachers and administrators must take up the slack and deal with the mess left behind by other people. They often have to deal with violence, and even with out of control parents. All of this, plus the misguided intervention from Federal and State governments...putting pressure on teachers to get better test scores out of students who do not want to learn and in some cases have been taught not to take education seriously. This often leads to a situation that chases good teachers away. Where do they go? To the white schools in the suburbs...where school administrations give them more support...and back them up.... administrations who don't take crap from disruptive students or their parents. The working environments tend to be safer (or at least they are perceived as such) and they are paid better to boot - Hell who wouldn't leave in that situation? That's exactly what the current system does...and has been doing for years.

Unfortunately, it comes down to this... the problem of the low Black male graduation rate...and low rates of graduation for Black students as a whole, is a problem that the school systems alone will never be able to fix. The problem is in the Black Culture itself. Teachers cannot solve that problem. Nor can "the system". They don't set cultural values....values at home, etc. It is time for Blacks to stop blaming both.

Black students are capable... that question has been answered. Urban Prep Charter Academy in Chicago, the Harlem Children's Zone, Steve Perry's Capital Preparatory Magnet School in Connecticut and others (along with the many individual success stories) are proof that Black students are capable. So that's not the problem. It is time to start dealing with the real issues rather than reading from the same script. The same old arguments don't work anymore.

What Happens When Community Colleges Take Away The Helping Hand?

This is one of my favorite statues:



Booker T. Washington lifting the veil of ignorance. For the Black community,
from the moment laws were enacted to prevent us from READING…

EDUCATION has been the key to lifting the Black Community.

It isn't a 'cure all', but it's been one of the most dependable paths to self-improvement that the Black community has known.

I have been in the process of possibly transitioning from one career to another. But, in
order to get into the program that I’m interested in, I have to prerequisites
for those programs. The cheapest way to get those credits where I live is
community college. Going to the local community college has been a positive
experience. You meet all types of people at the community college: races,
ethnicities, age groups, differing goals.

Which is why, when I read this article, I was definitely upset:

Community Colleges Rethink 'Open Door' Admissions as Remedial Costs Rise
By Caralee Adams on August 13, 2010 6:03 AM

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley this week called for an end to the "open
door" admissions policy at Chicago City Colleges, citing concerns about
the cost of remedial courses and a desire to build a quality program.
Every year, the system spends about $30 million for remedial
classes—about 6 percent of its $457.5 million budget. Daley suggested
that a better approach might be to offer programs through alternative
high schools to get students up to speed before they enter college.
Is this a sign of things to come?



Unfortunately, Chicago's approach is not unique, says George Boggs,
president and chief executive officer of the American Association of
Community Colleges. In tight economic times, community colleges are
looking for places to cut back, and some are stopping their most basic
remedial education programs.

"I'm a little concerned about this," Boggs says. "Community college has
always been an open door for college. We have taken everybody."
Students are assessed upon entry and take remedial programs if they
aren't prepared. Boggs doesn't want to see colleges weed out students
who are least able and don't have many other options.

Consider me in the concerned group. The point of Community College to me is that
it is THE place where someone wanting to improve their lot in life – through
education – could go. There is a sizeable group of Community College students
who need these remedial classes in order to be able to GET to the beginning of
where they want to go. These are the students who suffered through inadequate
public schooling that hasn’t been in the business of educating urban Black youth
for about 30 years. So, you send them to crappy public elementary and high
schools, and they are shuffled through, out in the world, unprepared for any
jobs except for the lowest of rungs on the job ladder. Then, these folks decide
to challenge that, and see there is a professional goal that they have, but they
have to be fit to take the classes. These folks are not in remedial classes
because they have nothing else to do- they are in those classes because that is
the FIRST rung to get them on the way of their professional goals.

WHY would you want to cut off that rung for them? City colleges are the cheapest
way for those students to get this educational uplift that they need in order to
be able to compete in this society. It’s not just the classes themselves; for
many students who need these classes, college isn’t something that they grew up
in a household knowing that would just ‘ happen’ for them. It’s something
nebulous that happens to ‘ other’ people. For many, Community College is the
first time that they are in an educational environment where they are surrounded
by people who view education in a positive light. Coming from dangerous urban
high schools, the Community College is quite possibly the first SAFE educational
environment that they’ve experienced. Even though they would be in remedial
classes, it’s still in a college environment, and they would be near other
students. They would see in front of them where they want to go for themselves;
I don’t think positive reinforcement can be underestimated.

This story bothers me, because, if the ‘MISSION’ of the Community College is to
be open for all where the only requirement is the DESIRE for education and the
willingness to work for it, then what is the mission?
This galls me, because Richard Daley and his cronies have done nothing to
improve education for the average Black Public School Student, and the Community
Colleges WERE the place where those students could begin an educational journey.
So now, he’s condemning these students will not get a hand up anywhere. But, as
this article points out, this isn’t just a Chicago problem, this is happening
all over the country, and it is students in Urban areas – BLACK students – who
are getting the shaft.

If you are interested in voicing concern about this possible disastrous change in policy, please drop a letter to the new Chancellor:

Cheryl Hyman
Chancellor
District Office
City Colleges of Chicago
226 W. Jackson
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312.553.2500

You also can fill out the ' Ask the Chancellor' at the website.

It was a kick in the teeth to read the new Chancellor’s 'life story’, and realize that she graduated from
a school that where more than likely, the CURRENT students graduating from her alma mater won’t be able to attend Community Colleges without that remedial help?

Getting Skills To Beat The Recession

The hard part with a recession is we get lost in worrying about short-term concerns, like paying the electric bill. The important thing is to think long-term. It's a well known fact that people with college degrees will earn about $900k more in lifetime earnings than someone with just a high school diploma. If you ask me, it's easily worth taking student loans for that amount. Now, Obama has made it even easier.

Read the rest at The Loop21.com.

Urban Students Failing Because of Racial Oppression?

How much tax money is Arne Duncan going to waste on his Civil Rights adventure? The money that he is about to waste would be better spent creating jobs.

I'm sorry, I just don't buy Duncan's latest PR push to show that he is working to improve education in urban schools. He recently announced that he would launch dozens of Civil Rights investigations, targeting schools across the Country, suggesting that urban students aren't succeeding because their civil rights are being violated. Oh Please!!! I can't drink that Koolaid. Am I the only one who smells bullshit whenever Arne Duncan's name is mentioned? I have been skeptical about this guy ever since Obama appointed him to the post of Education Secretary. He's a Chicago crony. There were certainly better candidates for the job in my opinion. And Chicago's public schools aren't in the best of shape in case anyone hasn't noticed.

It just seems to me that Duncan is playing to the Black urban political elite with this move. He wants to go along with the same old narrative from 20 years ago. But that narrative is out of date. Sure, there are likely some cases of civil rights violations in urban schools that may be uncovered. I don't want to diminish that problem at all. There is probably an even bigger danger of civil rights violations in predominantly white suburban schools against minority students. Hispanics and others may face issues because they speak English as a second language. There may also be cases of students being steered away from certain programs. I can recall guidance counselors refusing to let me into some of the classes I wanted to get into when I first moved to rural/suburban Texas 20 years ago. To this day I don't quite understand what the rationale was. But I still received a decent education because it was a good public school system. However, I believe that these kinds of cases are probably few and far between. Certainly this is not the driving force behind failing students and failing urban schools, particularly those in Black communities. I believe that most students aren't getting into more challenging courses because they don't have the grades...they haven't shown that they can handle the work... not because they are Black. It's interesting how this point is avoided.

Duncan is using the convenient issue of race as a scapegoat, while ignoring the elephant in the room - Urban Culture/Black Culture/Hip Hop Culture and the failure of parents. Urban social norms have a much bigger impact on educational outcomes. Yes, some urban schools have mediocre teachers... that's because good teachers don't want to work in warzones or in environments where their careers are threatened in systems that tie job security to student performance. If I were a teacher in that situation I would probably choose to leave as well...for a better school in the burbs. So let's talk about the elephant in the room. Some students just don't want to learn. Is that the fault of the teacher? Some students don't have parents that are engaged and involved in their educations. Is that the teachers fault? Some students come from broken, dysfunctional families where they don't get the support that they need. Is that the fault of the teacher? Some students follow a Black Hip Hop culture that does not embrace or value education. Is that the fault of the teacher? Of course not.

Now I don't want to suggest that there are no good teachers in struggling urban public schools. You will find some of the most dedicated teachers in troubled schools (another reason not to fire them or threaten careers based merely on student test scores). The fact is, in many of these schools, certain groups of students aren't there to learn. They are there to pass time. Culture and other social factors are the biggest variables in the mix, yet they are the variables that schools have the least influence over.

Who wants to work in an environment where there is always a question about personal safety? I wouldn't do it...especially when there is no hazardous duty pay. I wouldn't teach in these schools even if the job paid more money than wealthier white suburban public or private schools. I would rather have peace of mind. You get the occasional Columbine situation in the white burbs, but most violence still takes place in urban schools. Teachers in urban schools have to deal with fights on a weekly basis. Some...on an almost daily basis. Some of these schools function more like penal institutions...with magnetometers at the doors and movements severely restricted in the hallways. And teachers are dealing with a level of disruptive, belligerent, disrespectful, and violent behavior that has never really been seen before....not like it is today. Urban youth today have almost no respect for any kind of authority. So just as a matter of course, many of these schools are out of control. I can post the youtube videos of Black "students" wreaking havoc, fighting in classrooms and teachers either being assaulted or having no way to control them.

And to aggravate the problems, you have school systems, court systems, and States that don't back up teachers who have to deal with belligerent and violent students (many of them are urban terrorists...period). Instead of supporting teachers who are trying to deal with this kind of madness everyday by giving them all of the tools and authority they need, school systems often punish them. School boards are also of no use. And the teachers not only have to deal with out of control prison inmates in training...and the possible violence from them, they also have to deal with the ignorant parents & relatives who often threaten violence. And who does the school board, the courts, and the State side with? Often with the ignorant parents....not because the parent is right...but because they see it as easier to throw teachers under the bus to avoid having to deal with parents and students who are out of control or who might cause problems for board members or administrators. It's a completely crazy system. I am constantly running across crazy stories in St. Louis regarding belligerent & violent students and their out of control parents....and most of the problems are in schools that are predominantly Black. It's the same nonsense in every big city urban school district across the Country... Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, L.A., Atlanta, D.C., Philadelphia, Cleveland...you name it.

You could fill many of these urban schools with the best computers, the best teachers in the World, the best books, the best technology, and the healthiest food and I would argue that there wouldn't be much improvement academically a year later. Not as long as the other variables remain unchanged. In order for students to achieve in these schools, there would need to be a cultural paradigm shift among Blacks in this Country (and to some extent with Hispanics). Remember Steve Perry from CNN's Black In America Series? He was the Principal of Capital Preparatory Magnet School in Hartford Connecticut. Remember what he said about minority parents and their support of the students at his school? He admitted that parental support was almost non-existent.

This isn't about students not having access to education....that's a bunch of bull. And this PR move is really a slap in the face to all those who fought in the 1950's for desegregation of public schools.... those were the real battles regarding civil rights. Students today have all sorts of opportunities.

Please take a look at the Rap on Culture report that I posted a couple of years ago. (be sure to click on the pdf). The report, by PolicyBridge, looked at the impact of culture on educational outcomes. Others, like Dr. John U. Ogbu, a professor at UC Berkley, also looked at the issue of how cultural/social differences impact educational outcomes for Black students.

It's not about whether these students are capable of learning or not. We know that with the proper tools and the proper support, minority students can learn. The Harlem Children's Zone, Capital Preparatory Magnet School in Connecticut, Urban Prep Academy for Young Men in Chicago, and stories from students like Steven Stafford all tell us that urban students have the ability to learn no matter what their circumstances are. It all comes down to the will to learn... the willingness to study and work hard, support from parents and teachers, and ultimately the degree to which Blacks value education.

Why are we wasting money on investigations when we know what the major issues are regarding minorities in urban schools? This issue has been studied backwards, forwards and sideways for the last 30 years. If Duncan wants to help urban students, he could start by telling Black/minority parents to turn off the damn television. But I guess that wouldn't be politically correct. He knows that the Black urban political elite - the constituency that he feels he has to keep happy- wouldn't like that very much at all.

_________

Additional Report from NPR

Interview with Stephen Stafford

Hear an interview with 13 year old Morehouse College student Stephen Stafford...from NPR.

We posted about Stephen Stafford back in January. I'm even more impressed after the interview. Unfortunately he isn't representative of Black students in the wider culture. He has parents who successfully shielded him from the wider culture and the wider education system.

I wish we could get to a point where Stafford isn't such an exception... such a stark contrast from what we typically see, but just a brilliant student within a culture that embraces and cultivates this type of excellence as the norm.

City's Main Problem: Liberals

In the Sunday, February 21st, 2010 edition of the Philadelphia Inquirer an article was published at the very top of page two titled "City's main problem: poverty" written by Karen Heller. In the article, Heller proceeds to lay every single ill that befalls the city of Philadelphia - and that's plenty of ills - at the very feat of this fearsome monster known as poverty.

Budget of the city shows 62% goes to fighting crime and social needs? Poverty is the culprit. Michelle Obama visits Philly to campaign against obesity because too many parents shove McDonald's down their kids throats? Poverty. Teachers are overworked? Poverty. School violence is tolerated? Poverty. Health rate is poor, kids don't take education seriously? Poverty.

The problem, not with the city but with Heller's article, is that she simply cries "poverty" at every opportunity, making the typical liberal mistake of never seeing the forest for the trees. The problem you see is not some general epidemic of poverty, it is an epidemic of liberalism.

That's right, little kids go without food because of the political philosophy and ideology of liberalism. Little kids get fat in some cases because of the exact same ideology. Kids don't stay in school, don't want to stay in school let alone advance further, because of it. Violence is greatly increased because of it, and health problems are magnified because of it.

But where Heller stops, I am going to plow on. She says that poverty is the problem and then makes only a couple of small general comments as to how to deal with the situation. The answer to her view of poverty as the problem is "the city must reduce the poverty rate in order to succeed."

Fine enough principle on it's own that I won't argue with it. Among the many symptoms of entrenched liberalism is more widespread poverty than need exist. So how to reduce that poverty rate? Her answers are to "attract new residents to revitalize neighborhoods" and "moving families..to self-sufficiency and security." She also states correctly that Philly needs to address it's dismal educational system.

What the obviously liberal herself Heller has basically written is what is known as a 'fluff' piece. It is full of statements and commentary that will have her co-workers at the Philadelphia Inquirer, one of the single most liberal newspapers in a country full of them, patting her on the back. It will have her friends and family saying things like "right on, Kar, you got that right. Good job!" It will make her feel better.

But it will have done nothing at all to address the problem, because the real problem has not even been identified in her piece. The city's main problem: liberals.

For decades now, liberal Democrats have been increasingly in charge of the city of Philadelphia. They have been the decision makers, the unchallenged and all-powerful ideologues whose programs, ideas, and policies have taken the city in the direction that it has gone - straight down.

Here are just a few of the things that Philadelphia does not need to be doing. It does not need to spend a dime on a homeless shelter. It does not need to spend a dime on feeding a hungry person. It does not need to indoctrinate students in the classroom in it's liberal ideology. It does not need to allow students who refuse to behave to continue in school. It does not need to provide free health care to anyone.

Wow, what an uncaring, unfeeling, insensitive, inhuman I must be in order to believe all of those things, right? Wrong, Mr. and Ms. Liberalism. My belief is not that man must stand by and watch the suffering of the inevitable folks who will fall between the cracks of opportunity do to reasons beyond their control, such as a physical or mental handicap or some sudden disaster. My belief is that it is not the city of Philadelphia's responsibility to address those issues.

When given the opportunity, mankind will respond charitably to his fellow man. The story has been told of a locality in Texas back in 1887 where a couple of consecutive seasons of drought had left the farmers in bad shape and facing poverty. The local government put out the call to Washington for some emergency subsidies for the farmers.

The plight of the poor farmers was passed by a misty-eyed congress before being vetoed by President Grover Cleveland (pictured). In one of the single greatest acts by any American President of all-time, Cleveland defended his veto in the exact same manner that must be embraced by Philadelphians today. Let me quote exactly a couple of key paragraphs of his veto speech:

"I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people."

"The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood."

So President Grove Cleveland literally said what the liberal Democrats of Philadelphia and all over the country have no ability to say. He said what every parent learns is one of the single most valuable words that they must early on begin to say to their children. He said the very thing that many of us need to begin to say to ourselves. He simply said "No".

But he didn't just say that "no" to win some political battle, he said that "no" because frankly it was the right thing to say. What was the result of his decision? Dead farmers? Far from it. As he rightly predicted, the call went out around the nation for private donations to help the farmers. This call resulted in the appropriation of ten times the money that had been requested from congress. And not a dime of forced expense on the general American public, not a single tax levied.

Karen Heller is wrong. She has pointed at a symptom rather than the real problem. The problem is not poverty, it is liberalism. Philadelphia needs to have the strength to begin finally to say "no" to the Democratic Party as it is now constituted. It needs to begin to say "no" to the nanny state that has led to our inevitable and continued decline. If we don't have the strength to say "no", if leaders do not emerge who will stand up and then be supported in saying that "no", then Philadelphia will never, ever recover it's former greatness.

So specific answers start with stopping funding social welfare programs cold. If we are to spend any money on a social program, I would make it on an on-going publicity campaign with billboards, TV and radio ads, all positively encouraging people to make good choices in their lives, to stay in school, to turn away from drugs and drink, to go to church, to become or remain sexually responsible, and to keep their families intact.

I would do whatever is necessary to turn our schools around. That would first happen with security. Difficult decisions need to be made to eliminate the unrepentant criminals who commit assaults, robberies, and drug dealing on our school grounds, no matter their age. Expulsion for the absolute worst cases, transfer to disciplinary schools for those who may simply need a period of behavior modification before possibly returning to the general student population.

The second thing that needs to happen is that curriculum needs to be addressed. Philadelphia school children need to be taught the fundamentals of education as the primary goal of our school. Math, science, reading, writing, and wait for it - civics. They need to learn and understand our history as a nation, the good and the bad with an emphasis on the incredible good that America has been and done since it's founding.

Next I would empower teachers to take charge of their classrooms again, having their backs when they need it in controlling the room and maintaining that control. I would also ensure that those teachers are allowed and encouraged to emphasize their role as educators, not social workers and not substitute parents. But at the same time, I would not tolerate the small number of teachers who simply will not or do not enthusiastically do their jobs. Out on their cans, union or no.

Where violence and other crime occurs on the streets, deal with it. Support our law enforcement officers and officials in any way possible. Zero tolerance. Let's face it, some sections of the city are simply out of control, and you cannot begin to rebuild them and, as Heller says "attract new residents" without gaining that control and maintaining it.

Arrest criminals, put them in jail, if they get out, put them back in. If we are unwilling to fight this fight on a daily basis, to win this war over time, and spend what it takes to at least keep up with it year after year, then we will lose. Any alleged 'war on crime' or 'war on drugs' will never end. But we need to fight it every hour of every day. Just as with the teachers, if some cops don't know professional limits and abuse their power, out on their cans. The good ones will be happy to see them go.

Finally, emphasize parental and familial responsibility in public. From the stump speeches of politicians to the teaching in our classrooms to our public service announcements and community outreach, strengthening and maintaining our families and the responsibility level of parents has got to become paramount.

You can never force someone to become a good parent. But you can tap them on the shoulder and let them know that it is just as easy to hand their kid a celery stick as it is a cupcake. It is just as far a walk to the supermarket for some soup, vegetables, fruit as it is to McDonald's for some fries and a Big Mac. Obesity is not the result of poverty, it is in most cases the result of bad decisions.

Those same bad decisions are the reasons for the vast majority of other childhood problems, many of which in a large portion of Philadelphia's communities lies directly at the feet of non-existent or irresponsible fathers. Men need to begin to take their familial responsibilities seriously. Women need to respect themselves more and develop more of a sense of self-worth. Most of this comes from your own strong family situation.

The city needs to find a way to encourage it's residents to return to church, return to the basic values and teachings that God gave all of mankind in the Bible. The long-held liberal notion of a "separation of church and state" is a crock. In fact, America has shown that it has been our embracing of Judeo-Christian values that has separated us from other nations and governments in history. We need to return to that root strength, not run from it, and we need to embrace and advertise that resource, not hold it at arms length.

Liberals will see my ideas resulting in armies of homeless people, drug addicts, and student truants roaming the streets, exploding the crime rates, and only adding to the problems of Philadelphia. They have cried this cry for decades, and their own answers have proven both soft and ineffective, as anyone with a spine could have predicted. It is time we began to walk a hard, straight line here in Philadelphia.

While we slice social programs and increase law and quality of life enforcement measures we need to also decrease the Philadelphia tax burden. We need to drastically overhaul our overall tax policies with the stated goal of making the city of Philadelphia the single most attractive place in the entire nation for a business to locate itself. We then need to aggressively market that new-found status and begin to bring business, and thus jobs, back into Philadelphia.

Lower taxes and increasing the quality of life here in the city. These are the things that will accomplish what Heller calls for. They will never, ever be accomplished by appropriating more money from Philadelphia's already overburdened tax payers, or from the already overburdened Commonwealth, or from the already over-socialized federal government.

These general ideas that I have put forward today go far beyond what the simplistic approach and siren's call made by Heller and the Inquirer. There is zero chance that my ideas would ever be supported by Philadelphia's talking head politicians or it's liberal media, so the only way that such a change would be possible would be for some distinctly charismatic and articulate individual to step forward and lead Philadelphia in this direction.

I guess in short what Philadelphia really needs is an effective alternative to the liberal Democratic Party that has ruled the crumbling roost for this last half century. It needs an effective, strong, threatening, alternative, conservative Republican Party to emerge and become a realistic challenger. That has to start from the grass roots, but it also needs an effective leadership with an uncompromising alternative vision that is a true alternative to the city's main problem: liberals.

Obama's State of Anti-Americanism

President Barack Obama strutted in front of Congress and the nation last night to give his State of the Union address. This time his undeniable oratorical skills simply could not save him from the facts that have become clear in his first full year in office, facts that now have his speeches sounding more and more like skips on a broken record.

Let's start by taking a look at what his programs have actually done over the past year, and see what he said last night. Directly because of the programs and initiatives launched by the Obama administration, our unemployment rate has soared past the 10% mark for the first time in decades and our national debt has been set on course to triple over the next decade.

But what is Obama suggesting that we do as we move into his vision of the future? Spend more, go further into debt, reward cronyism and failed industries. Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress wish to throw massive amounts of good money after excessive and irresponsible amounts of bad.

The President proposed in his speech last night to "take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat." So we taxpayers, who did not want to do it in the first place, loaned money to banks. It was repaid, but now we lend that same money back out to banks? So what exactly is going to have been "repaid"?

Why again did I lend money to banks in the first place? Do you know why? To save the financial system from collapse? Really? And why do we taxpayers need to prop up any business that cannot succeed on the strength of it's own hard work, value, worth, and entrepreneurial skills? Businesses large and small have gone under for centuries. Why do we have to save some now with taxpayer dollars?

Next the President said "We can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow...There's no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products." Really? Why not? What does having the fastest trains in the world have to do with anything at all? If China has a train that goes 200 miles per hour, why do we need one that goes 250?

Has the President even bothered to look at every single study of mass transit in this country? All the studies show that the vast majority of these mass transit systems: buses, trains, trolleys, etc go without ridership for the majority of the day. It is only during certain peak hours that ridership is full. But the trains and buses run all day and night long, running up massive fuel, maintenance, and labor costs. And the vast majority of the public doesn't use these systems on any regular basis at all. Those are the facts.

Why do we need to build new manufacturing plants for business? If a business wants a new plant, and will benefit economically from it's construction, then why doesn't it just build one itself?

Obama then finally spoke a truth, but he spoke it in typically veiled fashion: "The only way to move to full employment is to lay a new foundation for long-term economic growth, and finally address the problems that America's families have confronted for years." Well, first of all, that is not exactly truth. There will never be "full employment", whatever that means. But we get the idea and the goal of creating as many decent jobs for as many people who actually want to and are able to work.

The only proven way to create long-term sustainable jobs that will make a real difference in the lives of the greatest amount of people is to get government out of the way and allow private industry to flourish with minimal restraints. Keep taxes as low as possible across the board, and keep regulation to reasonable levels that are not a result of partisan political studies or a knee-jerk overreaction to occasional errors.

But what Obama and the Democrats want to do is what is known as 'picking the winners', making the decisions as to which businesses and industries are worthwhile and valuable and worth investing in and then forcing Americans to live with their decisions. Rather than leaving the business community alone to develop products and services and allow the American dollar-paying public to decide based on their own desires.

Obama played the scare tactic by mentioning that Germany and China and India were not waiting to pour money into 'clean energy' because "they want those jobs." Which jobs is he talking about? You mean the jobs that they are creating by the pouring in of all that money? Why would Obama possibly compare what the U.S. should do to what these nations are doing? Because they are socialist (Germany), communist (China), or corrupt quasi-socialist economic (India) nations, that's why.

Obama also continues to be shameless in his attempts to embarrass Republicans into 'going over to the Dark Side' and joining with the Democrats in making these changes. He once again mentioned that "saying no" and disagreeing continuously is not a policy idea. The fact is that individual Republican lawmakers and the Republican Party leadership have put forth numerous ideas, only to be ignored or slapped down every time by the Democratic Party-controlled congress.

Republican Party politicans in Congress and the Senate have, in fact, no obligation to blindly follow the President and fall in lock-step with the Democrats to pass laws and bills and enact policies that they know will only hurt America in the long run. They are absolutely supposed to attempt to "say no" to the President and disagree with him when he is wrong, which is on almost every issue.

Republican politicians need to not only continue to stand up to the Obama policies strongly and vocally when warranted, but in fact need to more fully and substantively embrace traditional American ideals and programs which support these ideas themselves, or many will find themselves tossed out of their own offices in the coming primary elections.

Barack Obama's vision for America is nothing short of full-blown socialism. The complete destruction of the capitalist system that elevated the United States to the greatest economic levels in the history of the world and kept us there for more than a century. The reason is simple: the power and control that comes with running a state-controlled economy and a central government.

He will play all of the usual race-baiting and class-warfare games to make this happen, implying or directly saying that those who don't go along are racist or want babies to starve or the elderly to go without medical care. He will use a mass media that has become slowly and surely and almost completely infected by individuals with the same political and social beliefs as his over the last few decades.

He further called for an "investment in the skills and education of our people." What exactly does that mean? There was a time when the American educational system was the envy of the world. What changed all that? What changed it was these very liberal ideals invading the classroom and shifting our students attention away from important learning skills to forced cultural sensitivity.

For generations, American students have been historically and socially indoctrinated in the classroom far more than they have been educated. Because some couldn't or wouldn't keep up, everyone was forced to drag back to their level. And the teaching and enforcing of morality and discipline? Forget about it. If Obama wants to improve the American educational system, he needs to get the government out of the classrooms.

Finally, Obama continued to pour it on for his outrageously enormous takeover of what is already the greatest health-care system that the world has ever known, despite the fact that the large majority of the American public doesn't want any part of a government-run system. Health-care needs responsible reform, not a comprehensive government takeover and the accompanying massive cost to the tax-paying public, as Obama and the Dems are trying to force down our throats.

Right now what Obama and the Democrats have been doing for a year and continue to plan towards the future is the insinuation of the government into effective or direct control of every major facet of our lives. The only way to stop this suicidal power-grab is to reverse the political fortunes of the country as soon as possible, before things get too bad to ever reverse.

As the brilliant economist Thomas Sowell has so perfectly put it "human beings have their own individual preferences, values, plans, and wills all of which can conflict with and even thwart the goals of social experiments." What Obama and the Democrats are advocating is what Sowell calls an "open-ended demand", one that calls for "ever-expanding government bureaucracies with ever-expanding budgets and powers."

We Americans have certainly been getting exactly what Barack Obama promised in his campaign: Change. While I personally did not vote for him, I have a hard time believing that most of those who did so were thinking about fundamentally changing the United States of America from a nation built upon the God-given rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness into a socialist nation that stifles liberty and replaces the pursuit of happiness with your acceptance of whatever the government deems oughta be what you think happiness should entail.

One of today's great scholars, Dinesh D'Souza, a legal immigrant who became a White House policy advocate, stated "America represents a new way of being human and thus presents a radical challenge to the world." In describing "American exceptionalism", D'Souza called it the idea that "Americans have throughout their history held that they are special: that their country has been blessed by God, that the American system is unique, that Americans are not like people everywhere else."

If all of the polls taken in recent months are telling the truth, then the American public is starting to wake up to the fact that Obama and the Democrats are steering us away, far away, from our founding and established ideals and that very "American exceptionalism" that we have always cherished. With the continuing of God's blessings on our special experiment in democracy we can begin to remove them from office as has been happening already all across the country, reverse the damaging course upon which they have set us, and begin to reclaim our national greatness and prosperity.

Iran Jails Irani-American Woman Protesting Elections

From Denny: An Iranian-American female grad student went to Iran to study and document women's issues in Iran. That didn't sit well with the local government soon after she arrived and they threw her into jail. These guys have issues with being American-phobic and female-phobic. Heaven forbid if women are as capable of being their equals. Their egos can't handle it.

But I figure there is really more here than keeping the females controlled in Iran. It sure looked like they were keeping her on the back burner as a bargaining chip or pawn for an international incident they could turn to their favor. Whatever the motivation this young woman was lucky to get out alive and in one piece. Take a look at her story.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

7 Funny Quotes About Reading Habits

Reading Upside Down Photo by garryknight @ flickr

From Denny: Today, and every Wednesday, is Cheeky Quote Day over at The Social Poets, one of my many blogs where I dance on the airwaves. Here's a sampling of what's going on today:

Quotes

* A classic is something that everybody wants to have read
and nobody wants to read. ~ Mark Twain ~

* Never lend books, for no one ever returns them;
the only books I have in my library are books
that other folks have left me. ~ Anatole France ~

* I read the newspaper avidly. It is my one form of continuous fiction. ~ Aneurin Bevan ~

* Where is human nature so weak as in the bookstore? ~ Henry Ward Beecher ~

* Outside a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside a dog, it's too dark to read.
~ Groucho Marx ~

* Books are the blessed chloroform of the mind. ~ Robert Chambers ~

* Never judge a book by its movie.
~ J. W. Eagan ~


*** To read a bonanza of funny quotes like this, hike on over to The Social Poets for Cheeky Quote Day to get some more grins, go here.

*** Thanks for visiting and come back often! :)

Two Million Minutes

That is how long the typical student the world over will spend in their high school careers - two million minutes. Four years in the students life - do the math (assuming you know how.)

It is also the name of a documentary film that asks a simple thought-provoking question that you might think you can answer easily: Can your high school Junior or Senior measure up to the 10th grade proficiency standards of the Third World?

"Two Million Minutes" (website linked by the title of this blog posting) is a breakthrough film from Executive Producer Robert A. Compton, directed by Chad Heeter, written and produced by Adam Raney from Compton's original idea. In the story line, the priorities and pressures of six students from different parts of the world are examined. There are two from Carmel, Indiana representing typical American students. Neil Ahrendt is an 18-year old senior class president and National Merit Award semi-finalist. Brittany Brechbuhl is a 17-year old who is in the top 3% of her graduating class who wants to become a doctor.

Also in the film are a pair of students from Bangalore, India. Rohit Sridharan is a 17-year old young man who is seeking acceptance into an elite Indian engineering school. Apoora Uppala is a 17-year old girl who aims to become an engineer, which she believes is the safest profession in her home country. And finally we have two young people from Shanghai, China as well. Hu Xiaoyuan is a 17-year old girl who plays violin, hopes to study biology, and has applied for early admission to Yale University here in the States. Jin Ruizhang is a 17-year old boy who competes in international math tournaments and wants to continue studying advanced math in college.

The film also features commentary from folks such as Cal-Berkely professor and former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, physicist and RPI president Shirley Ann Jackson, 12-term congressman and Chairman of the US House Committee on Science and Technology Bart Gordon, Harvard economist Richard Freeman, and a number of others.

How much time do you and/or have you spent actually supervising your kids homework, study habits, school attendance and performance? How much emphasis do you give in your home to the importance of your child's formal education? How much have you evaluated the quality and content of the education that they are actually receiving at your neighborhood school, and evaluated any options of choice in schools that you may have available if you find it lacking? The fact is that students in the United States, world leaders for generations, have fallen behind their counter-parts in many nations, and continue to fall further behind each year.

A wide variety of factors are behind this decline in competitiveness, including poor parental guidance, misplaced priorities of students, and liberal educational objectives. If you don't think that it's important for our children to be able to compete on a global scale in an increasingly shrinking world, then you are selling their future prospects short. These are things that I never fully appreciated as my girls were growing up: you just sent them to the best school that you could, tried to make sure they behaved themselves and generally did their work, and hoped for the best at that point from the school itself.

That is simply not enough in today's world. It never was, and I realize only now that it is the lazy man's way out. American parents need to begin to re-emphasize formal education, and need to ensure that their children specifically are receiving the highest possible level of education, particularly in the areas of math and science.

If you find that your school doesn't measure up to your increased standards, and you simply cannot afford any other option, then you need to find a way to personally supplement their formal education in these areas. A good beginning for you would be to visit the website by clicking into the title of this blog entry, and by eventually seeing the film "Two Million Minutes". If you have young kids for whom its not too late to make a difference, you won't regret it. More importantly, neither will they.

Academic Progress

Just got some nice news in the mail yesterday. I was named to the Dean's List at my college, Saint Joseph's University, for the Spring 2008 term. You get named to the list for being a Senior and maintaining at least a 3.50 GPA. Right now in the Summer term, I am attending a Sociology class that is my next-to-last class work. In the Fall term, will have one more Sociology that will be my final class that will finally earn me my Bachelor's degree in Criminal Justice. My GPA is over 3.90, with just three A- grades keeping me from that perfect 4.0 over the years. About five years ago at this time, someone finally got through to me about the importance of going after my formal education, even in my 40's. I had been putting it off for over two decades. Originally had been set to attend LaSalle out of high school back in 1979, but my high school girlfriend and I got pregnant, and I went out to work instead. I had two beautiful daughters and a mini-career in banking (over a decade), but neither the career or the marriage lasted. After joining the Philly PD in 1990, learning and enjoying the police career was my life, and then I met my wonderful wife and got married in 1995. But school was something that always remained a regret in my mind. I actually got to the point where I put it down, publicly taking the position that it wasn't really important for someone to succeed in life. Again, someone finally got through to me. That someone was anonymous on a message board, which is something that I absolutely hate (anonymity in posting). But whatever that person said back then got to me, and so for the past five years I have gone to night school, first Community College of Philadelphia, and now for the past two years at St. Joe's. Making the Dean's List and being set to graduate next spring is making all the time, money, and work feel very worthwhile. So thanks to that anonymous poster, thanks to CCP and St. Joe's for the opportunities, and thanks to the PPD for their relationship with those educational institutions. If any of you are friends or family members, or even other cops or adults, and you have been putting this or some other opportunity off because you feel it simply has passed you by, don't do that. Don't sell yourself short. Go for it, you can do whatever you really decide to set your mind to. The important thing is to get started, and don't give up or take a break until you reach your goal. For me, now I have an alma mater (almost), and a Philly Big Five college that I can point to at tournament time with pride and say "The Hawk Will Never Die!"