Lesson 1 for Leaders and Lemmings: How to Manage Money

A comment written to our leaders and lemmings in response to this at http://www.patdollard.com/.

Dear Congress, POTUS, and #OWS folks,
I bought a recliner Saturday. I bought it on sale, but that was a happy accident. To buy the recliner, I needed money. I could have used the money from my paycheck (about $30K per year), the money in my savings account, or a store credit card. Of course, I need things like food, clothing, and shelter, so I must keep money for those expenses.

The store expected me to give them money in exchange for the recliner I carried home with me. If I use credit, then the store knows that it will get the price it asked AND bonus money for allowing me to take extra time to pay money for the recliner I wanted. If I want something that I don't have money in any account, and I choose not to buy on credit, I can either wait to purchase the recliner after I've saved money, or get another job to pay for the item. It is illegal for me to simply print money and use it for the recliner, or the other bills, or for donations to church/charity.

The government should work the same way. If the government wants to give money to (insert country here), then it should check the accounts for amount of money available, check for bills coming due, consider unexpected expenses, and then decide to give or not. If the government wants to give money to a person because of children in the house, lost jobs, or medical expenses, or if the government wants to care for the soldiers here and abroad, it should take care of those commitments first before spending more. If the money to be given to (insert country here) is more important than lost-job spending, then you stop spending on lost-jobs and start spending the money for (insert country here).

Money doesn't grow on trees, dear leaders and lemmings, and once borrowed, it cannot simply be made to vanish. I don't need to borrow money from others to buy 28 recliners; one is sufficient. I don't need to give money to every charity that asks because the need is great; if I give away all my money instead of paying my rent, I will soon be in need of taking charity from others. Who will give to charity then? If I borrow money for one recliner, and decide it's the wrong color, shape and size, I either make do or sell it to a friend; I don't blame the cashier who sold me the recliner, and I don't demand that the store refund my purchase price.

I paid cash for the recliner. It's comfy and it's mine. World Vision still gets monthly support for a kid, my student loan still gets repaid, and my fridge has food for a few more weeks. I do my best not to live "paycheck to paycheck" but I for sure don't live beyond my means. The government cannot live beyond its means either. That's irresponsible. Those like the #OWS lemmings who insist the government should care for them are as irresponsible and immature as those in charge.

Sincerely,
An American citizen

What does Jesus think of this WaPo post?

Once upon a time, the question "What would Jesus do?" gained popularity in Christian life and literature. Pop culture soon took over this quote from Charles Spurgeon's In His Steps and infinite variations could soon be found: some hilarious, others sacrilegious. Lisa Miller's "On Faith" post from October 20, 2011 entitled "Jesus at Occupy Wall Street: 'I feel like I've been here before' opens with a variation on that question: What would Jesus think of Occupy Wall Street? She writes as the opening sentence of paragraph four:

The Jesus of history would love them all.

Had Miller ended her post with that statement, I would be satisfied. Unfortunately, the article continues, and it rapidly spirals downhill.

Jesus believed that God was about to right the world’s wrongs with a great upheaval – soon – and at that time, a radical reversal of the social order would occur. As he says in the gospels, “the meek will inherit the earth.”

Jesus believed no such thing. Jesus knew exactly what God was doing. Jesus came to earth for one reason: to redeem us from our sins. Galatians 4:4-5 tells us that, as does Jesus Himself in John 14:6. There was no upheaval of the social order in the works. Jesus came to those who needed Him most: the sick.

Mark 2:17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

For further support to her idea, Ms. Miller offers quotes from Dr. Bart Ehrman, who says “The people who ran things (in Jesus's time) were empowered by the evil forces of the world and his followers had to work against these powers by feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, and caring for the sick.” Dr, Ehrman is a self-proclaimed agnostic who is yet a professor of religious studies at UNC; he is wrong about Jesus's followers. Jesus, His disciples, and the others (like Mary Magdalene) who walked with Jesus didn't feed the hungry or care for the sick to work against those in power. Feeding the hungry and caring for the sick was what needed to be done. Matthew 14 tells us that Jesus had compassion on the sick, and that He "looked to heaven" before beginning to share the meager fish and bread that miraculously fed 5000 or more.

Ms. Miller continues her post by explaining how "disappointed" Jesus would be with the #OWS movement.

For Jesus, the first thing – the only thing, really -- was God. His ministry was an effort to help guide people toward a kind of moral perfection before the coming of the Kingdom of God.

Again, Ms. Miller misconstrues the message of the Gospel, and the purpose of Jesus's life, death and resurrection. Jesus says of Himself in John 11:25-26 “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in Me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in Me will never die." Then He asks, "Do you believe this?”Jesus did die, but He rose again, and lives today.

Ms. Miller's final paragraph consists of a quote from someone involved in the protest.

If the Jesus of history could wander the precincts held by the occupiers, “he’d see his people,” says Marisa Egerstrom, a graduate student at Harvard who organized a posse of chaplains to volunteer at Occupy sites. “I think he would be pretty pleased.”

Jesus is well aware of the protests: the needs, the greed, the occupy-ers who mistreat others, and those who honestly hope for a better future. He is also aware of those who are watching from afar, trying and often failing to convince the occupy-ers that there is another way.

Jesus sees His creation: men and women and children that He created, that He loves, that He came to save. He sees the evil that we have in our hearts, and in some, the light that His love has brought.

Is He pleased? I will not speak to the protest itself, but I know that Jesus cannot be pleased with way He was depicted by Ms. Miller. He would be disappointed that the Gospel was distorted in such a way.

Cultural Sensitivity Used to Spread Moral Relativism in Public Schools, or Throwing Good Money After Bad

The Omaha World Herald reported that OPS buys 8,000 diversity manuals. "The authors argue that public school teachers must raise their cultural awareness to better serve minority students and improve academic achievement" and in an 11-0 decision (with one abstention), the Omaha Public Schools school board voted in April 2011 to give a copy of The Cultural Proficiency Journey to each of its employees. Employees will read chapters as assigned and then meet in small groups to discuss it. Teachers will use part of their professional development time for this study.

We encourage cultural awareness within the teaching staff at my "somewhere in Central Asia" international school. Fact: the school is filled with 240 kids from more than 40 different countries. "Cultural sensitivity" means we learn about other governments and other flags, not just America's. It means we don't allow kids to insult each other's heritage and we require everyone to speak English unless they are in an ESL class or studying HS Spanish. However, we don't buy books with a thin veneer of respectability as a springboard to discuss cultural sensitivity; such books aren't needed. Common sense and human decency have already provided 99.9% of the adults in the OPS system with all the knowledge needed to treat students and families fairly and equitably.

According to the article, in the most recent school year "African-American", "Asian-American" and "American-Indian" populations combine for a third of the district's student population. According to page 10 of http://www.ops.org/District/Portals/0/District/StudentAssignmentPlan/full-plan.pdf, for the 1998-1999 school year, students were 56% “Caucasian-American”, 10% “Hispanic-American”, 31% “African-American”, 1.6% American Indian and 1.4% “Asian-American”. Yes, the demographics have changed. Notice though that 100% of the students are “American.” Page 53 of this .pdf from 2005 states that “LEP children vary considerably with regard to the languages they speak, posing special challenges faced by the larger cities such as Omaha where LEP children speak a total of 38 languages (OPS 2003). Despite such diversity, however, the majority of LEP children in Omaha and Nebraska as a whole are Spanish speaking.”

Indeed, the 2000 census found 95% of the Omaha MSA (metropolitan statistical area) population is American-born. (Table A3, page 188 of the .pdf) found that a fourth of the foreign-born population is from Asia, and nearly half are from Latin America, yet the largest non-Caucasian OPS group is Hispanic. Seems to lend credence to the idea that Spanish is the majority foreign language in OPS schools and homes. The same table continues on page 189, indicating that 92% speak “English only” at home. In 2009, this OPS data showed an increased percentage for the Hispanic-American population: 90% of OPS district's residents are native-born Americans, and 62.5% of those foreign-born are from Hispanic-American cultures. About 86% of the residents speak only English at home, while about 10% of the OPS district residents speak Spanish as the primary/sole language at home.

With such a high Hispanic-American, Spanish-speaking population, the other 92 languages in the OPS district are represented in far smaller numbers:a total of 4.1% of the residents. I would venture that school-to-school, especially for our size, my school with students from 40+ different passport countries is MUCH more culturally diverse than any one of the OPS locations. Yet our students get along well, even as their home countries fire rockets at each other, or have arguments over import/export policies. Our students are encouraged--taught by example--to respect people of all cultures.

This summer I am participating in an 8-week online class to examine, discuss, and practice creating authentic, real-world assessment opportunities for my 7th graders. I am being exposed to websites that assist teachers in creating online assessments and activities that students can use at school or at home. I am rewriting lesson plans to meet the needs of the advanced learners and those who struggle. I am networking with other teachers from around the state. How much does this opportunity cost me out-of-pocket? A whopping $30, just a little less than the OPS paid for TWO copies of this book. The OPS teachers could have participated in a class such as mine, or put that $130,000 to many other uses, providing a much greater benefit to their students. School board members could have provided training for writing across the curriculum, or purchased graphing calculators for middle-school math classrooms, or funded a state-of-the-art science lab. Rather than teaching teachers how to use technology more wisely, the district bought a book that has garnered only 4 reviews on amazon.com in 18 months; 3 of the ratings were 1-star. (Of course, the book is also for sale directly from the publisher; the CampbellJones's website misspelled the publisher's name in the above-the-fold links to Corwin.com's site.) At least OPS received a discount of nearly 50%; www.corwin.com and www.amazon.com both offer the paperback edition at a price of $28.95 per copy. Just because something is available at a discount does not mean it is worth the purchase. Don't overlook the fact that these books were paid for with federal stimulus funds. Federal stimulus funds--our tax dollars--were spent to purchase books that may be propaganda more than anything else.

This manual with a subtitle referencing “profound school change” isn't about cultural sensitivity; it's about indoctrinating teachers and eventually students in leftlibs' inane social justice. In my opinion, the OPS purchase--which included copies for the custodial staff--was about one thing: spreading the lie of moral relativism. A few selections from the World Herald article.

The authors assert that American government and institutions create advantages that “channel wealth and power to white people,” that color-blindness will not end racism and that educators should “take action for social justice.”

                  and

The book says that teachers should acknowledge historical systemic oppression in schools, including racism, sexism, homophobia and “ableism,” defined by the authors as discrimination or prejudice against people with disabilities.

                  and

The authors ask readers to reflect on several hypothetical cases, including that of a gay “teacher of the year” afraid to post family photos of his male partner for his school's Family Day, an African-American parent upset by a sixth-grade Early-American Day because African-Americans were enslaved in those days, and a principal whose attempt to reach out to Muslim students backfires when he announces over the intercom that students should welcome Muslims though they “might believe in violence.”

The authors — Franklin and Brenda CampbellJones and Randall B. Lindsey — all former teachers, write that their intent in the book is “to prepare educators to unshackle themselves from tradition and become facilitators for reconciliation of historical injustices.”

Franklin CampbellJones said in an interview that although some issues in the book are considered “challenging” and “taboo,” discussing them is important to break down barriers to educating every child.

He said the book has been well-received by other school districts using it, including San Diego and Atlanta, and districts in Maryland and Canada.

The fact that this book combines moral relativism with “reconciliation”--simultaneously discouraging American citizens of all ethnic backgrounds from believing in American exceptionalism--was a tingle-inducing bonus for the liberal authors and purchasers. Educators are asked in this book to "acknowledge the existence of white privilege in America, that 'white' is a culture in America and that race 'is a definer for social and economic status' ” in order to reach cultural proficiency. 

School Board president Sandra Jensen was quoted: “Recognition that one might have a certain perspective is critical to treating all people equally.”The article closes with a quote from Nancy Edick, dean of the College of Education at the University of Nebraska at Omaha: “The rich life experiences of a diverse classroom contribute to an excellent education. It's an education that helps prepare our kids for a world they're going to live in, an increasingly diverse world.” Both of those statements are true. Diversity is a reality: our global communications network brings news and ideas from place to place in a manner of milliseconds, not months. This book seems to do little to encourage intellectual diversity, but instead intends to foster divisiveness.

Not all historical or cultural perspectives are factual, or valid, or worthy of acceptance. People have value; their opinions and beliefs (including mine, perhaps) do not always have value. If a student in my classroom states that the shape on the board is a square because it looks like a square from his perspective, yet the measurements of all four sides are not equal, the student's perspective is incorrect. His perspective has little value beyond showing me how I can educate him to understand the correct mathematical perspective. The language the child speaks at home does not change the fact that the student's perspective was incorrect, as was the response he made based on that perspective.

The fact that the OPS district plans to "look for ways to apply some of the concepts in the classroom and workplace" should make us take notice. Moral relativism is not a concept that belongs in a federally-funded program as professional development for public school teachers; nor should American exceptionalism be discounted and discredited in that same venue.

MS 344 (NYC): How can this be?

American Thinker  @amthinker  tweeted a story today from the New York Post. The Post reports that MS344--the Academy for Collaborative Education (ACE/MS344)--a middle school in the Harlem neighborhood of Manhattan, is so chaotic that the state wants to close it. However, the United Federation of Teachers is fighting the closure. They did the same when the school was first announced for closure in 2009. A search of the UFT website finally exposed this article where the suit was explained: schools on the list (a total of 22) have not received promised help from the Dept. of Education. The DOE's "Proposed Closure Scenario" disputes that, listing nine specific means of assistance given; grants, training for teachers, and assistance for the school's principal Ms. Shaw were some of the ways the DOE tried to help the Academy.

ACE opened in the fall of 2006 full of promise. "ACE was launched just four years ago with high hopes. The Department of Education promised to give students 'intensive mathematics and technology programs' -- and to get them into the city's most competitive high schools" according to the October 2010 Post article below. This review seems to indicate the school is home to less than half the expected enrollment and mentions the decision to close as of April 2011.

Just how bad is the school? Here's today's article from the Post. The embedded video (which includes profanity) shows students refusing to go to class, followed by a classroom apparently vandalized when left empty for just a few minutes.  Things don't seem to have changed since October 2010 when this story appeared in the Post. When the student results from ACE are compared with peer schools (40 other schools with similar socioeconomic demographics, ELL and special needs populations) ACE/MS344 "has the lousiest scores." After earning a D in the 08-09 results, the school progressed to an F on the 09-10 Dept. of Education progress report, including an F in two of the three major categories of evaluation.



The Quality Review Report from the NYC Dept. of Education mentioned in February 2009 (during Principal Shaw's first year)  that "Poor student behavior is a major concern at the school that interrupts classroom
instruction." While some characteristics were listed as "underdeveloped with proficient tendencies", the school received an overall evaluation of underdeveloped--the lowest possible level.

The August 2009 "Persistently Dangerous Schools" list includes "JS344": Academy of Collaborative Education. One 7th grader is quoted by the Post as saying that the police "come almost every day."


How good is the school? Here is a school-produced video log from the school, with several videos from April of this year. A teacher apparently teaches "cooking" skills to a small group of kids, and they seem to love her. Someone (perhaps the same teacher) allows a student to interview others about the all-important state tests. One student says she wants to do well so that the school won't have to close.

The "Learning Environment Survey" from 2009-2010 shows a great deal of improvement from 08-09 to 09-10. A majority of students feel safe, inspired to learn, and believe their teachers know their names. Parents are 97% satisfied with the education their children received in that school year. Examining the data as responses to individual questions tells us that 14% of students don't feel safe in their classrooms and that 24% do not feel safe in hallways, locker rooms, and other common areas. A shocking 90% of students say that other students get into fights some of the time, most of the time, or all of the time. Perhaps most telling: only 29% of students agree that students show respect to their teachers.

In the end, though, the students deserve a safe place to learn with trained teachers who care about the students. This graphic compares ACE/MS344 with another school that has some classrooms in the same building. Democracy Prep is the city's #1 charter school. How do they compare?

Student backgrounds matter in education, yet these two schools (and the 41 schools in the peer group ACE is considered as similar to) show that ACE isn't helping its students as much as other schools are. Kids are not prepared for the elite high schools--perhaps not for any high school.

Teachers impact the quality of education, and while some good teachers may be on staff at ACE, things are not improving. The students are not respectful (by the students' own admission) and they may not have the most updated technology. However, kids can learn without fancy technology. Administrators direct the school, and manage every part of it. Is Ms. Shaw the problem? She certainly hasn't helped; the Post mentions claims Shaw hired friends and family members to work with her, and that she has mistreated her teaching staff overtly and also by failing to support them.

Is the UFT the problem? While the union has "met with the MS344 staff" this year, nothing has changed for the students or the teachers. Perhaps the blame should fall on the parents, who may have sent children to school unprepared for learning, or unwilling to be respectful. The UFT blames the government, and probably some parents share that sentiment.

Everyone can share the blame, or no one, yet the ACE children who didn't know how to read fluently in 2009 still can't read fluently. The children who struggled to learn 6th grade math last year likely struggled this year through 7th grade math. What hope do they have for success in the fall of 2011?

Their best hope at this point is another school. MS344 should never have been allowed to reach the depths it reached; having done so, the effort to bring change will cost too much. The cost of bringing change to ACE/MS344 is irreparable harm to the futures of the 50+ kids who just finished what should be the last year of the Academy for Collaborative Learning's existence.

One Nation Under God, Indivisible

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands: one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Someone at @NBC_Sports decided to create a video montage to "salute our great nation???" and present it to open NBC's broadcast one day during the PGA's U.S. Open Championship, held this year at ??? in Washington D.C. Within the first minute of the broadcast, viewers noticed something about the montage. I admittedly first learned of the montage on Twitter, which sometimes is first to broadcast breaking news for better or worse.


The first YouTube video of the U.S. Open montage--the one I watched even during the U.S. Open broadcast--has since been removed by the user. However, I captured it before that occurred.

This video includes the first half of the montage and the on-air comments offered by announcer Dan Hicks later in the broadcast.

I had a few interesting exchanges on Twitter with folks who claimed that they are offended by the inclusion of the words "under God" within the Pledge of Allegiance. I won't recount those exchanges here. During those exchanges, I collected some research on the Pledge of Allegiance to help me better explain my thoughts. With July 4th coming soon, the announced drawdown of troops in Afghanistan, and the daily efforts of those who seem to hate America and all for which she stands, I've been thinking about the Pledge of Allegiance. So here, in a semi-chronological order, is a (selected) series of articles and videos related to the Pledge of Allegiance. This is not intended to be a comprehensive list; rather, it is what is most familiar and most surprising. 

• The original pledge was written in 1892 by a socialist (or perhaps Baptist, or both) minister, Francis Bellamy. He wrote the pledge in such a way that citizens of any country could  proudly speak it: "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." 
• In 1923 "my Flag" became "the flag of the United States" and in 1924 the two words "of America" were added. These changes took place as part of the first and second National Flag Conferences.  
• In 1940, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) determined in MINERSVILLE SCHOOL DIST. v. GOBITIS that two children (by then teens) expelled "f"or their refusal to yield to the compulsion of a law which commands their participation in a school ceremony contrary to their religious convictions " did not experience a violation of their religious freedoms. In delivering the Court's opinion, Justice Frankfurter wrote: "The preciousness of the family relation, the authority and independence which give dignity to parenthood, indeed the enjoyment of all freedom, presuppose the kind of ordered society which is summarized by our flag. A society which is dedicated to the preservation of these ultimate values of civilization may in self-protection utilize the educational process for inculcating those almost unconscious feelings which bind men together in a comprehending loyalty, whatever may be their lesser differences and difficulties. That is to say, the process may be utilized so long as men's right to believe as they please, to win others to their way of belief, and their right to assemble in their chosen places of worship for the devotional ceremonies of their faith, are all fully respected. "
• In 1942, the US Flag Code adopted specific language about the pledge. Congress made this sentence the official national pledge:  

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

• SCOTUS in 1943 reversed the declarations of Gobitis in West Virginia St. Board of Education v. Barnette. Justice Jackson wrote for the court's opinion: " Any spark of love for country which may be generated in a child or his associates by forcing him to make what is to him an empty gesture and recite words wrung from him contrary to his religious beliefs is overshadowed by the desirability of preserving freedom of conscience to the full. It is in that freedom and the example of persuasion, not in force and compulsion, that the real unity of America lies. " 
• In 1954, Eisenhower signed into law (on Flag Day) the bill which added "under God" immediately following the words "one nation".  The site usflag.org states: "Then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower said, 'In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war.' " The Pledge of Allegiance is properly written and spoken as "...one nation under God, indivisible..." (which is the five-word phrase left out the second time in NBC's montage).
• The phrase "under God" was taken from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. (Though some written versions of Lincoln's speech at the dedication of the National Cemetery at Gettysburg, PA do not include the phrase, the phrase is included in the last sentence of the only copy Lincoln is known to have personally signed.)
• I could find very little (see "Limits on Pledge of Allegiance") about a case involving a San Diego CA school district where a teacher sent a student to the office for failing to participate in the daily routine of standing and chorally reciting the Pledge of Allegiance one spring morning in 1998. Brief unsourced sentences similar to the site above, reprinted several places, echo the resolution given in "Limits...". A search of ACLU's website for the phrase "Pledge of Allegiance" indicates that the ACLU has been involved in several incidents related to the pledge, but nothing specific about the 1998 suit.
• Dr. Pepper (and later Pepsi and Coke) faced accusations in late 2001/early 2002 of omitting "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, even though "more than 90% of the words (of the Pledge) were not included."
• In 2002 a federal appeals court ruled that the phrase "one nation under God" violated the separation of church and state. Dr. Michael Newdow filed the original suit on behalf of his elementary-aged daughter. A spokesman for Americans United for the Separation of Church and State was quoted in the article: '''They didn't strike down the Pledge of Allegiance. All they said is Congress made a mistake when they added God to the pledge.''
• In 2004, SCOTUS reversed the appellate decision, based on the fact that Newdow did not have "right to sue as next friend" (Dr. Newdow possessed no legal standing, even though he had at times been given joint physical custody of his daughter.)
• In 2010 the same federal appeals court in San Francisco who had ruled the phrase "one nation under God" to be unconstitutional ruled against a group led by Dr. Newdow. The court found recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance to be patriotic, not religious.
• Florida's state law regarding student participation in the patriotic exercise of the Pledge of Allegiance was partially discounted by a circuit court ruling: students must be allowed to sit if they choose. Many local districts amended their policies to reflect the ruling. Also, see embedded memo here.  
• Illinois 2010: a debate moderator from the League of Women Voters was "forced" to say the pledge at a political debate. One week later: Pledge 2, League of Women Voters 0.
• In June 2011 Dr. Newdow (as "Freedom from Religion Foundation") again faced SCOTUS in appeal of an appellate court ruling. New Hampshire schools require time be set aside daily for students to "voluntarily recite the Pledge (of Allegiance). Dr. Newdow and another family filed suit, and appealed decisions, based on their beliefs that "atheists are the nation's 'most disenfranchised religious minority' and were deserving of the high court's protection." SCOTUS declined without comment as the appellate court had declared unanimously "The New Hampshire School Patriot Act's primary effect is not the advancement of religion, but the advancement of patriotism through a pledge to the flag as a symbol of the nation." 
• State law requires at least some students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in as many as 7 states (though students/parents may opt out in each of these states except DE and KS).This site offers similar information in text format.

 In closing, I offer this from Red Skelton, who explained the Pledge of Allegiance in the words of one of his teachers from elementary school. As the video concludes, he makes these statements: "Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our nation, and two words have been added to the Pledge of Allegiance   "under God.  " Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said,  "That's a prayer  " and that would be eliminated from schools, too?  " 

Yes, Mr. Skelton, it would indeed.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.