Mittens doesn't have to win over black voters, as this reporter points out. He only has to look moderate to suburban swing voters:

Mitt Romney’s campaign team has been quietly laying plans for an outreach effort to President Obama’s most loyal supporters — black voters — not just to chip away at the huge Democratic margins but also as a way to reassure independent swing voters that Romney can be inclusive and tolerant in his thinking and approach.

Compassionate conservativism! Where have I heard that before?

That plan, still in its early ­stages, ran headlong into the harsh political realities on the ground in Philadelphia on Thursday, when Romney was treated to a hostile welcome on his first campaign swing through a poor black neighborhood this year.

A few dozen protesters met him with chants of “Get out, Romney, get out!”

Madaline G. Dunn, 78, who said she has lived there for 50 years, said she is “personally offended” that Romney would visit her neighborhood.

“It’s not appreciated here,” she said. “It is absolutely denigrating for him to come in here and speak his garbage.”

Romney took his campaign to the Universal Bluford Charter School in West Philadelphia aiming to highlight his education agenda but also to connect with voters who were not part of his political calculus during the primary campaign. “I come to learn, obviously, from people who are having experiences that are unique and instructive,” he said.

Despite the obvious difficulties, Romney’s outreach to black voters could reap dividends even if he is unable to significantly chip into Obama’s support. “Suburban voters will be a real battleground, and upscale white voters like to think of themselves as tolerant and they won’t vote for a candidate that is seen as exclusionary, and the Romney folks must be aware of that,” said Bill Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “He has to persuade suburban voters that he isn’t Rick Santorum. He could break the mold a little bit and do some campaigning in African American communities. It would get people talking, and it would be all gain and very little pain.”

But there was evidence on Thursday that it would not be painless. Among the protesters heckling Romney from a distance were some of Philadelphia’s most prominent officials, all of them Democrats.

It's difficult to recall a presidential candidate who had such a poor grasp of the basic facts of history than Rick Santorum. He's mangled the Crusades. Less than two weeks ago, he botched the French Revolution. And Saturday, he revealed an astonishing ignorance of U.S. history as well with his remarks on public education.

At one appearance here, he said the idea of schools run by the federal government or by state governments was “anachronistic.” Mr. Santorum did not say public schools were a bad idea, and he said that there was a role for government help in education.

[...]

“Yes the government can help,” Mr. Santorum added. “But the idea that the federal government should be running schools, frankly much less that the state government should be running schools, is anachronistic. It goes back to the time of industrialization of America when people came off the farms where they did home-school or have the little neighborhood school, and into these big factories, so we built equal factories called public schools."

That's absolutely false.

The idea that the government should be running schools goes back to the Founders and Thomas Jefferson, who originally promoted public education in his home state of Virginia.

To secure the broadest level of popular education Jefferson prepared his "Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge" as part of the revision of Virginia's laws. As chair of the committee, Jefferson proposed a three level system in 1779, (never adopted): three years of primary education for all girls and boys; advanced studies for a select number of boys; a state scholarship to the College of William and Mary for one boy from each district every two years.

Jefferson, who so strongly believed that government-run public education was absolutely necessary for a healthy democracy, also proposed it at the federal level in his 1806 State of the Union address.

Their patriotism would certainly prefer its continuance and application to the great purposes of the public education, roads, rivers, canals, and such other objects of public improvement as it may be thought proper to add to the constitutional enumeration of Federal powers.

Santorum is clearly and deliberately distorting the facts of history to comport with his right-wing ideology. There's something creepily fascist about his revisionism.

"I don't know whether to vote for Fenty or Gray," a D.C. friend confided to me last week.

"Which candidate is backed by the white progressives?" I said.

"Fenty."

"Then vote for Gray."

"Why?"

I told him that contrary to what he'd heard, Michelle Rhee wasn't the savior of D.C. schools and it was nothing more than the corporatization of public education. ("If you don't trust Bill Gates to sell you an operating system, why would you trust him to sell you an education system?" is my motto.)

Now that I've read this piece about "Waiting for Superman," the documentary that has the privileged classes all in an admiring tizzy (Arianna is already pushing it, along with the rest of the usual wealthy, high-powered suspects), I'm even more convinced I was right about Michelle Rhee.

The problems in our class system are systemic, going far beyond access to the "right" schools. You can't rationally hold teachers "accountable" for whether they have more students without heat or food than the teacher in the next classroom. You can't lay off experienced inner-city teachers and replace them with shiny Ivy League "Teach for America" recruits who are only passing through, gathering a hip credential on their way to a better job.

While this film may excite liberals whose kids will never see the inside of an inner-city public school (unless Mommy or Daddy brings them along while they're filming documentaries like this), the parents whose kids are in those schools are rightfully wary of Great White Saviors -- as well they should be.

Think about our past experiences with privatization. What are the odds that Superman really exists in the form of a corporate charter schools operator?

Of course, the true believers in Superguy (as charter operator) will argue vehemently that the finding that charters, on average, are average does not shake their belief… because the “upper half of charter schools is really good!, better than average, in fact!” Skeptically, I respond – isn’t the upper half of all schools better than average? If so, might Superguy actually be found in any school that’s better than average? But who am I to nitpick?

The most compelling evidence that Superguy exists was provided in Caroline Hoxby’s finding regarding NYC charter schools that:

On average, a student who attended a charter school for all of grades kindergarten through eight would close about 86 percent of the “Scarsdale-Harlem achievement gap” in math and 66 percent of the achievement gap in English.

Who other than Superguy could close the Harlem-Scarsdale gap? However, Stanford University researcher Sean Reardon explains:

Because the report relies on an inappropriate set of statistical models to analyze the data, however, the results presented appear to overstate the cumulative effect of attending a charter school.

Superguy in Gotham is also assumed to have competitive effects, lifting entire neighborhoods wherever he may be present. This evidence is often cited to Marcus Winters’ (Manhattan Institute) finding that:

The analysis reveals that students benefit academically when their public school is exposed to competition from a charter.

But thwarting this Superguy sighting is Wellesley economist Patrick McEwan’s observation that:

The statistical analysis suggests that increasing competition has no statistically significant impact on math test scores, but that it has small positive effects on language scores. The report does not conclusively demonstrate that the results are explained by increasing competitive pressure on public school administrators; they may also be explained by shifting peer quality or declining short-run class sizes in public schools.

Yes, public schools have big problems. Selling them off to unregulated private bidders will only make things worse.

This is a cautionary tale from the Philadelphia Daily News. Yes, we're rapidly privatizing schools, building them around wealthy CEOs' uninformed wish lists designed to produce workers. They're using the kids as guinea pigs in this great capitalist experiment, carrying the torch of Ronald Reagan's conviction that public education exists primarily to fund free job training for business.

Hell, what's not to like? Especially when you get to bash teachers along the way:

When the High School of the Future opened amid the rolling green grass of Fairmount Park four years ago, many parents eagerly sought a place there for their children.

On its first day, Sept. 7, 2006, former school district superintendent Paul Vallas and former Mayor John Street rang bells outside the school in Parkside to start the new year.

It was an expansive, space-age-looking facility - dubbed the "Microsoft School" because the company helped design it - where every student was issued laptops and textbooks weren't required.

Now, Ivy Dixon, whose daughter Soleil is among the first group of seniors to graduate after spending four years there, said she and her daughter feel cheated.

"There are too many learners at the school whose college options are limited due to the lack of solid foundations in core subject matters delivered by the majority of inexperienced educators," Dixon told the School Reform Commission yesterday.

Superintendent Arlene C. Ackerman told Dixon that other parents had come to her this spring with similar concerns about students' lacking "foundational skills" as teens began getting the results of their SAT scores and applying to colleges.

"This is not the first time I've heard this," Ackerman said. "We are looking at the curriculum at High School of the Future. We'll definitely be making some changes."

Later, senior class president Quetta Fairy said students were told earlier this year that only 48 of the 120 members of the senior class would be eligible to graduate.

"Now, we can't seem to get any answers on how many will actually graduate," Fairy said.

But she said a number of students feel that low SAT scores have meant they will have to go to a community college.

According to Dixon, and several students who accompanied her yesterday, the school's focus on computer-based learning may have left some students struggling with the basics.

"We don't have any textbooks there, and we need them," Dixon told the commission.

Now, you might think this was some kind of horrible oversight. But was it? Danny Weil over at Daily Censored, a most enlightening piece on Obama's push to privatize education:

You will never see a town hall meeting on ‘standards in education’ on any corporate news channel and not much on other progressive venues either. The policies of Race to the Top are literally destroying lives in cities throughout the nation. According to the Atlantic Journal Constitution:

“Starting with the Class of 2012, every Georgia student must pass four years of math to receive a college prep diploma even if he or she plans to attend a technical school or enter the work force after graduation. Special needs students can appeal to opt out after completing Math III if they stay concurrently enrolled in math support classes and a review of their education plan makes it clear that the course would be the highest level they could achieve” (By D. Aileen Dodd and John Perry The Atlanta Journal-Constitution May 20, 2010 http://www.ajc.com/news/new-curriculum-math-anxiety-532073.htm).

The Atlantic Journal Constitution then went on to note what many of us have been saying, or screaming for years:

“When the state initiated this new era of souped-up instruction in math, pushing students to grasp complex concepts in algebra, geometry and statistics sooner than ever before, the goal was to produce a new generation of college-ready teens to compete globally” (ibid).

There you have it. It is really gets no clearer; the neo-cons are in control of the educational process for their delusional competitive free market that is failing as we read and write. So, in an effort to compete with low paid workers in China in areas of science, math and technology students, “higher standards were passed, standards so high even tutors for kids can’t do the problems. Aker says the program is so accelerated that upperclassmen that used to help her tutor can’t do the math the freshmen do (ibid).

The math overhaul was pushed by state Superintendent Kathy Cox. Now that Cox has announced she will not seek a third term, some parents and teachers wonder whether the program will continue at the same accelerated pace, be diluted or scrapped altogether by her successor. Slash and burn, Kathy and then retire on an administrator’s salary after leaving a wake of bodies and minds under nourished by your vicious policies. Don’t be surprised if old Kathy goes to work for one of the testing companies that is needed to support the curriculum she tube fed teachers and students paid for by tax dollars.

I just wonder when people will start to notice.

On May 19th, the Texas Board of Education will meet to approve the final Social Studies curriculum and textbook changes that caused such a stir back in March.

Since that meeting, even more changes have been proposed which, if adopted, promise to rewrite history for Texas schoolchildren to the conservative narrative. Uber-winger Don McLeroy's proposals:

• Undermine the doctrine of separation of church and state. McLeroy wants to substitute an unintelligible standard asking students to "contrast the Founders' intent relative to the wording of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause, with the popular term 'Separation of church and state.'"
• Attacking social programs. McLeroy proposes children "discuss alternatives to long-term entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare" as a solution to the current ratio of workers to retirees. This is a particularly odious theme, given that the ratio will be entirely different by the time these children are at the peak of their careers.
• Skew focus toward conservatives. McLeroy's logic:
  

  "This is relevant to assessing the policies of the various ideologies that have shaped where we are as Americans," said McLeroy, who has joined with other members of his board bloc to put a more conservative slant on the social studies standards.

  For example, high school students will have to learn specifically about leading conservative groups from the 1980s and 1990s in U.S. history, but not about identified liberal or minority rights groups.

• Removal of all references to the terms "justice" and "equality".

Continue reading »

HOLY CRAP: Otisolatry Down Under...Chuck Norris does not understand irony...Relics For Sale...slacktivist reads 'Left Behind'...Killing Gays is Good

The Satirical Political Report: Rush Limbaugh claims FDR faked polio to pass the New Deal

The Heretik: Slam dunk on torture

THE NEWS BLOG: You down with GOP?

Shakespeare's Sister: BU$HCO and single-sex public education

No Capital: Commander Codpiece reverses course again!

Congratulations to all you bigots out there

Bill to remove racist language will likely die

Roy Moore and the Putatively Christian Coalition, you might recall, campaigned against an Amendment to the Alabama constitution that would have removed racist language from the constitution. They claimed that the amendment would allow "activist judges" to raise taxes because it removed the horrific claim that there's no right to a public education.

And now, John Rogers is blocking a new bill because to let a modified version through "would be admitting that Roy Moore was right". Now, I don't want to do anything to make Roy feel even better about himself than he already does. But this is stupid. And just Rogers being Rogers.
",0]);D(["ce"]);D(["ms","3985"]);//-->
And now, John Rogers is blocking a new bill because to let a modified version through "would be admitting that Roy Moore was right". Now, I don't want to do anything to make Roy feel even better about himself than he already does. But this is stupid. And just Rogers being Rogers.

The Tea Party (who is really the Republican party but pretends they're not) held a rally in Tampa yesterday with a plethora of wingnut speakers including Jason Chaffetz and Michele Bachmann. However, these detestable remarks by Neal Boortz, right-wing Limbaugh wannabe hate talker, revealed the motives behind much of the right-wing movement to end public education.

Here's what he said, via Right Wing Watch:

Let me change your language on two things. […]

They are not public schools, they are government schools. They are owned by, staffed by, operated by and forced upon by the government.

And, ladies and gentlemen, it is 100 years of government education that led us to the point that a man like Barack Obama could be sworn in as president of the United States.

So, wherever you are, preach school choice.

So, it doesn't get much more straightforward than that, does it?

Tim Wise published a brilliant essay yesterday about how deep the right wing has lunged into overt and covert racism:

How many times, one is left to wonder, must a person be called un-American before it’s accurate to claim that he’s being accused of being foreign, and a danger to the nation? A cancer to be excised from the body politic?

How many times can a man be the butt of racist humor, or likened to black dictators, or accused of seeking racial revenge upon white people, before it is no longer outrageous or the playing of some mystical, magical race card to assert that, indeed, the people doing these things are really just race-baiting white nationalists in conservative garb?

How long, in short, before we call that which walks and talks like a duck, a f*cking duck?

You should read the whole post, frame it, print it, and hand it out at Tea Party rallies, frankly. It's not going to get better. It's going to get worse. The Republican party has alienated Latinos, African-Americans, women, and moderates. The only thing they have left are scared white people, and they'd have to win a huge majority of them to win this election. The People's View:

Continue reading »