Friday, May 16, 2008

8 Years, 0 Vouchers, $4 Gas

Dirt: What’s going on with your blog, you haven’t updated it lately…I kept checking it today thinking that you would update it since you were off, but nothin’.

Me: I was busy having fun with my mom. I guess I could write one now, but nothing is coming to mind. I have a few blogs floating around my head, but they don’t surface when I have time or energy to write them.

Dirt: Tomorrow you can write one about how I caught my first fish. Actually you won’t have to write anything, you can just post the pictures.

…It’s not that I don’t think Dirt is going to catch a fish tonight, okay, if I’m honest, actually, it is. So here is a forced post, inspired (okay, written largely) by my two favorite columnists: Michael Medved & Star Parker, both who I agree with 86% of the time.

Have you ever read the book “If you Give a Mouse a Cookie?” I sort of had a moment like that today. I was thinking about these crazy gas prices, when I thought about the gas prices, it made me think about Bush and why I voted for him 3+ years ago. When I thought about why I voted for Bush I remembered the concept of school vouchers and the disgust I have for the way Dems treat minorities. Then I had a cookie and it made me want a glass of milk. No I didn’t, that was part of the original book.

Anyway, eight freakin’ years! That’s how long Bush had to get me my school vouchers and nothin. Nada. So here I am eight years later making a forced tax contribution to my local school system in addition to paying a whopping private school tuition, and to add insult to injury I’m now paying nearly 4 bucks a gallon while I drive my kids 30 miles a day to and from said private school. Vouchers were low lying fruit, I really don’t know why the President of the US couldn’t hook us up with them with the snap of a finger.

So instead of me stating my feelings in less articulate terms, here are some clippings from some columns that express my feelings and frustrations…

The liberal answer to this oppression, like all liberal answers, is simple and materialistic: You solve poverty by giving poor people money. It's considered cruel and crude to point out that long-term membership in the American underclass most often stems from dysfunctional behavior, criminality, out-of-wedlock birth, fatherless child-rearing, substance abuse, welfare dependency, television addiction, and so forth. http://www.michaelmedved.com/site/product?pid=19078

The black left has dominated black life and thinking for the last 50 years yet black family life is, on average, in much worse shape today than 50 years ago and black poverty persists.
Literally trillions of dollars have been spent since the 1960s to address poverty, both in the United States and in developing countries, in exactly the manner that Revs. Wallis, Sharpton, and Jackson suggest we should continue doing today. That is, to cast poverty not as something that individuals rise above and out of, but as something that bureaucrats spend other people's money on to eliminate.


…the likelihood of a black child in the United States living in poverty is five times higher if that child is living in a home headed by a single parent than in one headed by married parents. It is also true that the incidence of child poverty in homes headed by married parents is virtually no different between blacks and whites.

…[school] vouchers do not siphon off money from the public school system. However, they do cause the public school system to compete for those funds. Vouchers shift power to parents from bureaucrats.

At the heart of the problem is the failure to educate black children. And despite this clear failure, the NAACP fights change because change would challenge government control and would shift responsibility directly into our own communities and families.

Yes, it is incongruent that the nation's oldest civil rights organization opposes the right of black parents to choose where to send their child to school. And it is incongruent that those who celebrate a civil rights movement that was led by a black pastor insist that black children be trapped in schools where it is prohibited to teach Christian values.

Maybe one day the NAACP will wake up and recall that its mission is supposedly to expand not limit opportunities for black Americans. http://www.urbancure.org/

What does all this mean?
1. Nothing
2. Dirt will probably never prompt me to write another blog post
3. I don't know who I am going to vote for because I think that all three frontrunners are losers.

4 comments:

T5M said...

Hello? Anyone out there? Hellllooo?

What? No comments? I purposely went controversial to get some "participation" from the crowd...and nada?!? ...there are more comments on Dirt's fish.

You guys get riled up about the strangest things? It just goes to show that I can never predict the next "hot topic" post.

Tiana said...

I think this is definitely a hot topic post. A great topic as far as I am concerned. I personally agree that parents should be accountable for the educational actions of their children. If the child is in a school where a teacher doesn't care if they progress then its up to the parent to figure out how to get the child in a school where they can progress whether they are black or white, rich or poor. However, I don't agree that the epidemic of poverty should fall soley on the "black" shoulders. Its easy to put us at the fore front of poverty because that's all our media and yes even our "government" chose to focus on. I think the problem is our educational system and parents in general. As well as our general community involvement. Because even though education in poverty filled communities might not reach the rich family in Buckhead Atlanta, or Hollywood, CA the low success rate of education in general in some way shape or form will affect the AMERICAN community as a whole at some point. So its up to all of us Erin, Tiana, Bill Gates, Dirt, Chris, Mickey, even our government to help make those changes. As far as the single parent rate, that is just bogus. My mother, my aunt Sylvia and aunt Candy all raised children who got great educations and went on to make very successful lives and families. I can't say that there were times we weren't raised with less than normal nessecities but we made it and that was because our SINGLE PARENT mother had an interest in our futures. It falls on the importance of education in the lives of a childs parent(s). If there is no importance there is no solid education for the child and that can be said for Donald Trump's kids to my aunt babydoll's kids. Its easy to discuss and give opinions but how many of us are actually doing our best to make sure our concerns are being addressed. I know it may fall on deaf ears, but if I was expecting a school voucher for 8 years you'd be darn sure someone in the government whether it was local or national would be hearing about it.

Sorry that was so long winded. This could be why you didn't get many comments :-(. It is a touchy subject.

Wendy said...

I second what Tiana said!

T5M said...

Hey Tia,
Sounds like we’re in agreement:

Tia said:
“I personally agree that parents should be accountable for the educational actions of their children”

Star Parker said:
At the heart of the problem is the failure to educate black children. And despite this clear failure, the NAACP fights change because change would challenge government control and would shift responsibility directly into our own communities and families

Tia said:
“If the child is in a school where a teacher doesn't care if they progress then its up to the parent to figure out how to get the child in a school where they can progress whether they are black or white, rich or poor.”

This is the reason vouchers are key! Vouchers allow parent to move their kids to another school. Star Parker said:
…[school] vouchers do not siphon off money from the public school system. However, they do cause the public school system to compete for those funds. Vouchers shift power to parents from bureaucrats.

We know that kids in private schools outperform public school kids. Yet on average, private-school tuition is about half of what the average public school spends per student, so money isn’t the answer. The department of Education was established in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter to improve education in our country. The department's budget then was $14.5 billion. Today, its budget has grown sixfold. Yet over the same period of time there has been virtually zero change, on average, in test scores. (www.urbancure.org). Clearly money can’t solve this problem.

At the heart of the problem is what’s going on at home and the overall engagement of the parent in the child’s education. With two parents this is a tough job (Jerms and I will tell you!), with one parent it’s even tougher. Like you (and Jermaine and Jamar..), I too am from a single parent household, so please know that I’m not speaking about the “exceptions”, I’m talking about what’s going on in the high-rise buildings in South Philly (and LA and NY) today. I’m talking about what fuels Jeff’s caseload. Let’s agree to look more broadly at this issue. And based on your and Wendy's response, it looks like we're all in agreement (for once?)

I love us!

…and by the way…BIG congratulations!