Democrats against people of faith!

Next up: changing Matthew 7:6 "Do not give what is holy to Democrats, and do not throw your pearls before Democrats" After that we'll work on "Beware of false Republicans...You will know them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:15,16,20).

At least these evangelicals are not allowing themselves to be manipulated by an entrenched, secular, political power. As we all know, only Democrats allow themselves to be manipulated like that.

Good Lord, save us all. 1 comments

I don't like to advocate for specific products, but the most recent issue of Harpers (May 2005) is essential for anyone striving to understand the growing divide between liberal and conservative Christians. Harpers is the legendary American publication that has grown into an effective voice of intellectual dissent over the last decade. Included in this issue:

"Inside America's Most Powerful Megachurch" by Jeff Sharlet:

"New Lifers", Pastor Ted writes with evident pride, "like the benefits, risks, and maybe above all, the excitement of a free-market society." They like the stimulation of a new brand. "Have you ever switched your toothpaste brand, just for the fun of it?" Pastor Ted asks. Admit it, he insists. Al the way home, you felt a "secret little thrill," as excited questions ran through your mind: "Will it make my teeth whiter? My breath fresher?" This is the sensation Ted wants pastors to bring to the Christian experience. He believes it is time "to harness the forces of free-market capitalism in our ministry."

"Feeling the Hate with the National Religious Broadcasters" by Chris Hedges:

But fascism, (James Luther) Adams warned, would not return wearing swastikas and brown shirts. Its ideological inheritors would cloak themselves in the language of the Bible; they would come carrying crosses and chanting the Pledge of Allegiance.

...too many liberals failed to understand the power and allure of evil, and when the radical Christians came, these people (the liberals) would undoubtedly play by the old, polite rules of democracy long after those in power had begun to dismantle the democratic state. Adams had watched German academics fall silent or conform (during the 1930s). He knew how desperately people want to believe the comfortable lies told by totatlitarian movements, how easily those lies lull moderates into passivity.

Adams told us to watch closely the Christian right's persecution of homosexuals and lesbians. Hitler, he reminded us, promised to restore moral values not long after he too power in 1933 ... Homosexuals and lesbians, Adams said, would be the first "deviants" singled out by the Christian right. We would be the next.

Also of note in this issue:

"Let there be Markets (Evangelical roots of economics) by Gordon Bigelow

"The Wrath of the Lamb" by Lewis Lapham 0 comments

I received a reply from IlliniPundit to a recent post about NCLB. IP (whose blog is essential reading for local politics) asked a series of questions, one of which focused on the federal funding of schools:

If you had a choice between
1. Accepting Federal Education money for your school district, but having it tied to NCLB
2. removing the Federal Government's Education Funding (and lowering Federal Taxes by that exact amount) but having the same revenue come from local and state sources, without the NCLB requirements

Which would you choose?

It’s a fair question, and one that is beginning to be addressed by school districts around the country this week. Michigan, Vermont, and even Texas are now in the process of suing the Department of Education over NCLB’s unfunded mandates. Utah’s State Legislature voted this week to reject parts of NCLB on the State level. Connecticut is also in the process of suing, and was recently compliment by Margaret Spellings, the new Secretary of Education who called the state “unamerican.” These developments are exciting, and seem quite promising.

But what of this idea of withdrawing federal funding altogether? It is not a great leap to see that this may be the Republican's ultimate goal. You know the story: create impossible, intrusive legislation that creates State’s Rights advocates out of typical Federalists, in this case America’s educators. Is my union walking into this snare? Will the end result of these lawsuits be a withdrawal of federal funding for schools? As Utah Representative Steven R. Mascaro put it:

"I don't like to be threatened. I wish they'd take the stinking money and go back to Washington."

I’d be a liar if I said the same notion hadn’t passed through my head more than once over the last couple of years. What is the point of federal intervention in schools anyway? Obviously they cause more harm than good. Right?

It is easy to feel that way these days. Fortunately I am exposed on a daily basis to the positive results of federal action. My two students in wheelchairs, for example, who would not have been allowed in our school without the Disability Act. The two aides that I have during a class filled with learning disabled and behaviorally disabled children, funded by a federal mandate. Black students working at the same table with white students, and Asian students for that matter. Impossible without Brown v. Board. The list goes on.

Federal intervention in the schools is often a messy, annoying thing. No question about it. But in the long run it can be for the best. The important distinction to make here is the difference between legislation like NCLB, which is designed to dismantle publicly funded education, and legislation that is designed to advance the cause of public education.

So no, I do not think a removal of federal monies for public education is a good idea. Just imagining what someone like Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour would do without federal constraints scares the hell out of me. 1 comments

A brief respite from NCLB to comment on the growing idolatry movement that is conservative Christendom:

I liked Bill Clinton. I didn't love him, nor did I idolize him. I realized from the beginning ('92 - my first Democratic vote) that he was just a man. But he seemed pretty smart, and he seemed like he wanted to make a difference. Heck, he went to Clarksdale, Mississippi to see poverty. That was enough for me.

I liked John Kerry too. That's where things got weird. I would never have told anyone I loved him, like the Bush supporters did so frequently in 2004. I recognized his weaknesses, measured them against Bush's abysmal record, and pulled the lever for another Democrat. I used my brain, not my heart.

The folks on the right, especially the conservative Christians who have gotten so much play since November, seem to be True Believers. These folks honestly believe that George Bush is a Christian, despite his murderous ways. They believe The System can be made right if only we elect some decent, upstanding Christian Men. They wave their flags, stick the yellow ribbon on their trunk, and vote Republican. All the while they apparently believe they are doing God's Will. Or helping Bush fulfill his prophecy that "God wants me to be President."

Now this line of bullshit stank like a sailor's fart the first time I heard it, and it's smell hasn't improved much since. Either God is a Republican, or George Bush is a lunatic. I prefer to believe the latter. The quote was damned effective in getting conservative Christians to turn for Bush, and for that technique you have to give him points, I guess.

But what of these Christians who were so easily taken in by the skilled politician? What does their gullibility say for their faith, and our own? How dumb to you have to be to be a Christian? The new joke goes: dumb enough to vote for George Bush.

As the Tom DeLay and Ralph Reed masks begin to come off, I fervently pray that my fellow Christians will allow the scales to fall from their eyes. At one time this country believed in equality of rights and economics. That a man should be able to work for a living, not grovel. As we get into these next four years I hope that we can recapture the idea that every person is valuable. That everyone deserves a decent home, fair labor, and a quality education (among other things).

Christians have been blind to the political workings of Satan for so long now. When, oh when will they wake up? George Bush, Tom DeLay and Ralph Reed are not our brothers. They are politicians who sell themselves to the highest bidder. Some take cash for casinos, others fabricate evidence to start unnecessary wars.

You've been blind. Isn't it time to see? 0 comments

Monday’s faculty meeting found me sitting next to an infamous conservative science teacher. An ex-marine and True Patriot, Mr. H has been known to hand out detentions for students who do not recite The Pledge, and was an ardent Bush supporter during the last election. We actually have a couple of these fellas in the building, and I tend to get along with them just fine. Which is to say we don’t talk politics much, as a rule.

The meeting was about the supplemental education service providers that were concurrently gathering in our cafetorium to pedal their wares. A higher up from Central Office came down to explain to us the logistics of the money that will soon be changing hands under NCLB’s regulations. Our school has failed to make AYP (Annual Yearly Progress) for two straight years, and as a penalty NCLB requires us to provide private tutoring services for any student who is on the free or reduced lunch program. The money is coming out of the Title One services we would normally provide for our students who have low socio-economic status (SES). The Title One program in our school has been eliminated beginning next year, with they entirity of the funds going to private tutoring agencies.

About half way through this explanation it became clear that this first step in the dismantling of federal funding for public schools is ironic at best, hilarious at worst. The SES providers are actually in the practice of hiring teachers from the district to do their tutoring for them. We will lose teaching positions in our school because of this change in funding, but the folks who are getting the money we are losing are giving the money back to us by hiring us to do their job for them. Muffled laughter throughout the room.

Continuing with the laugh parade it turns out the students are not required to attend. In fact, the burden of signing these students up and having them report to the tutoring appointment is completely on the parents. Whether the students show or not, once they sign up the District will pay for five appointments. It is my understanding that any money that is left unused at the end of the year will be refunded to the Feds.

It was at about this point when Mr. H leaned over and joked, “you and I should start a tutoring company and get rich.”

“Not much money in tutoring, my friend” I responded.

“Yeah, but this is ridiculous. Stupidest thing I’ve ever seen.”

After the faculty meeting Mr. H, myself, and the rest of our staff waltzed through the cake walk of SES providers set up in the cafetorium. Hardly perky, downright testy, these folks didn’t seem much enthused about tutoring poor, mostly black students. One sales rep admitted to me, “well, it’s gonna be different.”

“How much do you make in a year?” Mr H asked in his typically gruff tone.

“Honey, this is part-time. You can’t live on my salary.”

I gave him a wink and we walked on.

This morning at team meeting one of our special ed teachers was asking for the run-down on what is happening with the SES. Mrs. C is a died-in-the-wool Republican and has always voted Bush. After we filled her in on the details, and she completed asking questions like “what’s gonna happen to our Title kids?” (to shrugs all around), she declared the obvious: “Well, this is just about the stupidest think I’ve ever heard.”

“Didn’t you vote Bush?” I asked politely.

“Yeah, but I never expected this.”

I thought it would be rude to ask the obvious. 4 comments

I’ve decided to start writing about the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation which was enacted at the beginning of 2002, and has transformed public education as we know it. I am a public school teacher, and have been teaching in Urbana District 116 for seven years. I have seen first hand the changes NCLB has brought to public education: some good, some bad.

First the good. We are streamlining what we teach. This means that we are learning how to teach “essential” (ie: tested) objectives, instead of whatever we happen to like to teach. We are also becoming more homogenized, which means all the history teachers in my department (3) are now attempting to teach the same stuff at approximately the same time. While this is slightly Orwelian, and definitely Maoist, it is also pleasing in an abstract, orderly way.

I think we have seen some good results from the streamlining that has taken place. Our Social Studies test scores are extremely poor in the middle school, but our kids are tested in the 7th grade and since I teach 8th grade my student’s scores are really reflected in the high school test scores, which continue to improve. (Click here to view District 116’s most recent test results.) I also think the streamlining has helped us to know what we are expected to teach - it has forced us to examine what and how we teach. Which is a good thing.

The problem with NCLB is that it is driving everything we do in Urbana. Every professional growth afternoon is geared toward NCLB improvement. Every goal in our school improvement plan is about raising the AYP (Average Yearly Progress). This emphasis on “performance” has made stressed-out wrecks of good teachers and administrators. Folks are rethinking teaching in droves, and many are choosing to leave education for something less regulated (like the Stock Market!). The environment and morale are literally at an all time low. This is not a good thing.

For the record, District 116 receives about 15% of its budget from the US Government. Click here to analyze the budget further.

One of the other problems with NCLB is it’s absolutely ridiculous expectations. A careful reading of the plan shows that every district that receives federal money is required have 100% (that’s right every single student) meeting or exceeding standards by 2011 (more on the tests themselves at a later date). 100% includes all caseload students (LD, BD, Extreme Mental Handicap, ESL, etc.) and all regular education students. This goal is simply not possible. But, that’s the point.

At the end of the day NCLB is a clever way for the Republicans in DC to funnel federal monies out of schools and into private education companies, or “supplemental education services” (SES). In Urbana, we have already lost over $1.7 million in federal money to NCLB in the form of Title 1 funding which is now to be transferred to the SES. More on these tutoring agencies in a later post.

I have been most surprised by the astounding lack of leadership we have seen in Urbana regarding NCLB. Like trained puppies our School Board and Superintendent and rolled over for this highly dubious legislation, and failed to demonstrate effective resistance. It appears that they believe our district will somehow manage to achieve 100% meets or exceeds by 2011. I’d like a hit of whatever they are smoking. 3 comments

Oh, come on - it's a little funny.


0 comments

Am I the only one? I can't do this anymore. Time for a break - real life calls.

Go Cubs! 0 comments