by Tina Grazier
The American educational system has been operating well below peak performance for some time now. The latest reports show an overall decline in student performance with scores earning our students an average ranking worldwide:
The three-yearly OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) report, which compares the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds in 70 countries around the world, ranked the United States 14th out of 34 OECD countries for reading skills, 17th for science and a below-average 25th for mathematics.
This is happening in the richest country the world has ever known…a shameful and pathetic outcome. We’ve been throwing money at education for decades with little to show for generously opening our wallets. Clearly, money is not the problem and yet politicians, supported and promoted by the NEA, manage to inflate the budget year after year without giving serious regard to whether or not the money spent achieves a positive result.
This year’s federal education budget includes generous increases; some of it going to dubious purpose:
…The 2011 budget proposal includes a whopping $173 billion in spending on college student aid programs, a $3 billion increase for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (a.k.a. “No Child Left Behind”), and a proposal to create the federal government’s 70th preschool and child-care program (at a cost of $9.3 billion over ten years).
How effective have some of these expensive government sponsored programs been? A Health and Human Services Department study reveals the disturbing reality. As reported by The Corner, National Review (link above):
In January, the Department of Health and Human Services, which administers Head Start, released the result of a long-overdue rigorous evaluation of the Head Start program. It found that Head Start provided zero lasting benefits to children by the end of first grade. That’s right. Since 1965, American taxpayers have “invested” $167 billion in a preschool program that apparently yields no lasting benefits for the children it serves, and now the program could get $1 billion in additional funding.
Am I the only one who thinks too many of our education dollars are being wasted, tossed down a rat hole…and quite possibly, doing more damage than good? If you agree with me you’re going to be blown away by what the school board in Omaha Nebraska chose to do with windfall funds it received through the Obama stimulus plan:
The Omaha Public Schools used more than $130,000 in federal stimulus dollars to buy each teacher, administrator and staff member a manual on how to become more culturally sensitive.
The book by Virginia education consultants could raise some eyebrows with its viewpoints.
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.”
Setting aside the fact that this “stimulus” expenditure did absolutely nothing to boost the economy…people…listen up! Students can’t read or do basic math! That means they can’t be productive and care for themselves adequately in the future. It means that their potential has been wasted, spoiled, ruined by an educational system that has failed them.
We have spent entirely too much money and time on diversity and social training and not nearly enough time and money on the basics in education that will prepare ALL students for their adult lives. After all is said and done what is it that students in America need most? Is it more and better preschool programs? Is it more or better classrooms or teachers; more revenue for sports, music and arts programs; is it classroom aids, computers, audio and video equipment? This “more is better” approach has been tried, again and again, and it just isn’t working. Students Need knowledge and skills and the question is how do we give it to them.
There’s a very good chance that quality, rather than quantity, is the area that begs for attention. Two of the basics scream out for profound change: 1. How we educate our educators, and 2. How we instruct and discipline and in the classroom. Our children are not adequately educated because we do not manage our classrooms well and because we fail to teach. Our classrooms have become social engineering and indoctrination centers….very expensive social engineering and indoctrination centers.
That average ranking achieved by our students represents the best of our children. Many others have fallen through the cracks. We will continue to be average, and worse, if we don’t alter the way we approach education. We could start with the “back to basics” concept that each of us is a human being deserving of respect. This idea covers all diversity bases and it doesn’t require an expensive indoctrination manual.
The system needs a reboot. I think every school that receives tax dollars should be closed for one year and every teacher and administrator be fired. In that year teachers will be rehired under a NEW system of checks and balance’s. Unions will not be allowed in the educational system and teachers will be required to take proficiency tests every year. Teachers who test well and teach well will receive bonuses and extra time off, those who do not will be fired. Also teachers will be required to work 5 days a week 48 weeks a year. They will be required to fund their own retirement accounts and pay for their health insurance just like the rest of us. This will make sure the only people teaching are people who actually want to teach.
That takes care of 1/2 of the problem.
Next we deal with curriculum. In this new system, less is more. Cut out the crap and stick with the basics. The school day will start at 7 am will end at 1 pm . The students will stay seated and the teachers will move from class to class. By ending the day at 1 pm that will allow the tax payers from having to pay for the sub standard and nasty meal programs in today’s system. It could also allow for an afternoon session so you can teach twice as many kids in one day and hire twice as many teachers.
Text books, the text books will be the same in every class across the Country. Every kid will learn the same thing as every other kid.
I figure my system cannot be any worse than what we are saddled with now. As far as the kids being out of school for a year, do you really think they could be any worse off?
Oh and I almost forgot, English only! If you do not speak it, you are S. O. L.!
Anyone paying attention to the state of education since the federal government took it over under Reagan has been saying the same things for the last quarter century. I am glad the Murdoch-owned British Newspapers have finally twigged to this rather common knowledge, and that you are reposting it here for others to see.
Good for you!
Now, let’s do something about it!
Our education system was not federalized under Reagan, it was taken over under Jimmy, The Peanut Farmer”, Carter and the Democrat controlled congress. They created the Dept of education, because they were all socialists back then and they knew if they could federalize local school areas. The next step was to unionize all the teachers that would have control of our future by controlling the minds of the future voters.
The unionization process of teachers was actually already in process before the Dept of education was created, but it became an even bigger push once the federal government gained control of local school systems across America.
It was a process started back in the early 1920’s when communists knew that they could only move America into communism if they controlled the minds of the youth. So first they began taking control of the university’s to change the mindsets of the college instructors of the future. That way they could train the future teachers to accept their leftists ideas and teach them to the students they would one day be teaching in K-12 all across America in fly over country.
Truth is, Jimmy Carters Dept of Education was the crowning moment in the communists struggle to radically change the future of America. It worked, those children put the first communist in the white house, Obama.
As for the Gipper? Well Reagan tried to eliminate the Dept of Education while it was still in its infancy, but the Republicans could not get control of the house of representatives to help him.
Please people, get educated on history so you will know whom did what to us.
Toby nice going. I don’t know if all of your suggestions would work but they are certainly worthy of serious consideration.
I have a feeling that the internet is going to change how school gets done in the next twenty years or so. One thing it will do is create a bit of healthy competition. One way or the other, it’s important that we conservatives have a hand in deciding what and how our students will be taught. We have failed in the past in this regard letting the diversity crowd, people like Bill Ayers take over.
http://townhall.com/columnists/marygrabar/2009/08/12/direct_threat_to_education_bill_ayers
This is what I mean when I say we need to change how our teachers are educated. Those in charge of preparing teachers are largely responsible for the education gap occurring in our schools.
Laughing Im afraid Gate is exactly right:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb108/hb108-28.pdf
According to this site the idea goes way back:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/focus/what.html
President Andrew Jackson (Democrat) signed legislation creating the first Department of Education just for the purpose of collecting statistics and information. It always starts with something harmless and simple with these democrats, right? The department was later demoted because the people didnt want federal interference in their schools.
You are also in error blaming Reagan:
http://www.cato.org/research/education/articles/reagan.html
George Bush came to Washington having been successful working with democrats in Texas. DC Democrats are an entirely different animal. He sincerely believed that parents and educators needed to know whether or not children were learning before passing them along in school and his no child left behind ideas sprang from that concept. But the plan increased the influence and reach of the federal government and added to the cost of the federal bureaucracy. So his first mistake was cooperating with Ted Kennedy to write the NCLB legislation. He would have been wiser to take Reagans advice and work to turn education back to the states and local communities.
Glad you want to “do something about it”. What would you do?
Tina, your assertion that an emphasis on diversity is harming education just isn’t supported by the facts. Study after study has shown that classes dealing directly with the topic of diversity produce better, more involved students. One example is Tucson’s Raza Studies program, which the state of Arizona is attempting to shut down even though students in the program have better grades and higher graduation rates than their peers.
http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201005120004
Gate, your comment reads like Colbert-esque satire. If I didn’t know better I’d think that was the intent.
Toby, your suggestions are terrible without exception, but I’m especially curious about your desire for text books to “be the same in every class across the Country.” In your opinion, would that arrangement be compatible with the conservative position that education is an issue best handled by local government, rather than federal? If so, how?
Chris, I couldn’t care less how you feel about my ideas. As far as text books being the same, seems to me every kid should get the same education. The system we have is broken, it needs to be replaced, all I did was put out an idea. It is more than I ever hear from anyone with the actual power to make things happen.
I guess I am a conservative who thinks out of the box and is not scared to put it out for review. It is an idea and I have tons of them. Have a Great Day!
Chris: “Study after study has shown that classes dealing directly with the topic of diversity produce better, more involved students.”
How do you account for the lousy international rating, high drop out rates, numbers of graduates that can’t even read, and the seriously inferior preparedness of most students going on to college these days?
“One example is Tucson’s Raza Studies program, which the state of Arizona is attempting to shut down even though students in the program have better grades and higher graduation rates than their peers.”
Good for them on the grades and graduation rates if it’s true.
How has diversity helped the other students grades and graduation rates?
These programs have also caused division and animosity among the kids in Arizona, which is why they are being considered for elimination.
Arizona is also one of the states that is being looked at for cheating on the tests:
http://tucsoncitizen.com/arizona-news/2011/03/07/large-gains-in-school-scores-raise-flags/
But my assertion wasn’t that diversity is harming education…my assertion is that emphasis on diversity teaching, social teaching, has meant less class time for the basics. My assertion is that it is unproductive to treat students differently based on gender disapbility or other considerations when it comes to discipline all students should be regarded as human beings worthy of respect (and deserving of punishment when rules are broken). We’ve been through this before.
And not all reports are positive about Raza studies in Tuscon:
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0203vip-maceachern0203.html?&wired
Tina: “How do you account for the lousy international rating, high drop out rates, numbers of graduates that can’t even read, and the seriously inferior preparedness of most students going on to college these days?”
There are lots of issues with the educational system that account for these failures. An emphasis on diversity is not one of them.
“Good for them on the grades and graduation rates if it’s true.
How has diversity helped the other students grades and graduation rates?”
I don’t understand the question. Are you asking how the Raza studies program has helped kids not in the Raza studies program? Because that doesn’t make sense.
“These programs have also caused division and animosity among the kids in Arizona, which is why they are being considered for elimination.”
Evidence, please?
“My assertion is that it is unproductive to treat students differently based on gender disapbility or other considerations when it comes to discipline all students should be regarded as human beings worthy of respect (and deserving of punishment when rules are broken). We’ve been through this before.”
We have, but you’ve never shown that an emphasis on diversity leads to any of the unequal treatment you bring up here.
As for your link, I trust the results more than I trust John Ward, and the result show that students in the Raza program are more academically successful than their peers. If his accusations were true there should be a measurable negative impact on the students’ performance. There isn’t, therefore, I believe his accusations are false.
Chris: “An emphasis on diversity is not one of them.”
How can you be so certain. When all students in a class were considered human beings worthy of respect ALL of class time was spent learning reading, math, english, social studies, history, civics, science, etc. Since the diversity bug has permeated society a lot of time is wasted dealing with social issues, social fights, ways to handle problems. Our teachers just didn’t put up with that stuff. Between that and the emotional stuff that seems to run so many young peoples lives its no wonder they don’t learn anything. In many ways an emphasis on diversity has just caused emotional excess…kids think too much about themselves when their focus should be on their studies. (My grandchildren are reporting this to me it’s not just the rantings of an out of touch granny)
“I don’t understand the question. Are you asking how the Raza studies program has helped kids not in the Raza studies program? Because that doesn’t make sense.”
You used the Raza program in Tuscon as an example of why we need diversity training in schools. I was just saying that diversity training has done nothing to improve the overall educational record and may be contributing to overall failure in our schools. Your example didn’t make sense within that context.
“Evidence, please?”
I provided a link and a teachers testimony. The fact that the state is concerned enough to legislate change should tell you something.
“We have, but you’ve never shown that an emphasis on diversity leads to any of the unequal treatment you bring up here.”
My point was that education isn’t happening and diversity training is one of the things that gets in the way.
http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/16669/Public_High_School_Grads_Unprepared_for_College_Work.html
I found the results of this study interesting:
http://diversityinc.com/content/1757/article/5935/
Key findings from the students:
* 77 percent of the high-school-dropout respondents said they left because they weren’t challenged enough and because teachers had low expectations of them
* Nearly half of the dropout students said they would have remained in school if they had been challenged more or if they weren’t bored with school
Key findings from the educators:
* 42 percent of teachers surveyed said students who cited boredom as a cause for dropping out were simply “making up excuses”
* Less than one-third of teachers sampled said that “schools should expect all students to meet high academic standards, graduate with the skills to do college-level work and provide extra support to struggling students to help them meet those standards”
The teachers responses are telling. they blame the students (making excuses) but less than a third even know what their main job should be!!!
When I went to school all students were expected to be able to be prepared to do college work (some with more effort than others) even if they did not plan to go to college. Some students chose to do a less demanding program in high school but they were still expected to do well and teachers knew their job was to get as much from each student as they could.
I think teachers are being trained away from academics teaching and toward, as Bill Ayers advocates, social justice “training”.
“As for your link, I trust the results more than I trust John Ward, and the result show that students in the Raza program are more academically successful than their peers.”
Unless they are one of the schools that cheated. If what John Ward is asserting is true then there is a very good chance that this could be the case. We will have to wait to find out but there have been many reports in the paper about students expressing what he suggests. We had similar situations at schools in SoCal.
You should give some thought to where all this division could lead. A melting pot is where people from different lands become fellow citizens in their new homeland…that’s not where diversity training takes us. Gangs are already with us. Riots could follow…or war.
School is a good place for students to share the citizenship experience…an experience in common that creates familiarity and a sense of belonging. More importantly, it would create a calm environment where education would be the focus for all concerned.
“We have spent entirely too much money and time on diversity and social training ….”
Really? Does the phrase “49th in the nation” ring a bell with you?
Probably not. Such astoundingly short memories.
Well, honey … you don’t repair that kind of damage with “stimulous” funding.
You want competence in the classroom, you are going to have to pay for it. So you will either revamp public revenue sourcing in this state (repeal Prop 13) … or … you’ll shut’cher gob.
Libby: “You want competence in the classroom, you are going to have to pay for it.”
If money was the answer Libby we wouldn’t be 49th in the nation.
“So you will either revamp public revenue sourcing in this state (repeal Prop 13) …or … you’ll shut’cher gob”
Sounds like a terrorist threat.
Here’s a reality that bites:
According to the California Department of Education the average per pupil expense for the 07-08 school year was $8,594. This puts California just below the national average of around $9,000 per student
Expenditures per pupil in other countries who are rated higher educationally than the United States:
Korea (ranked 1st in scientific literacy and 2nd in mathematic literacy): spends around $4500 per student for primary education and $6500 per student for secondary education.
Japan (1st in mathematical literacy and 2nd in scientific literacy): spends around $6700 per student for primary education and around $8000 per student for secondary education.
Finland (1st in reading literacy and 3rd in scientific literacy): around $5500 per student for primary education and around $7000 per student for secondary education.
New Zealand (3rd in reading literacy and 3rd in mathematical literacy) around $5000 per student for primary education and around $6000 per student for secondary education.
Your argument just doesn’t hold up. Money is not the problem!!!!!
“How can you be so certain. When all students in a class were considered human beings worthy of respect…”
You’re sneaking your conclusion into your premise, Tina. Diversity training certainly doesn’t mean that students are not all considered human beings worthy of respect…that you’d even imply such a thing shows your ignorance of the subject.
“ALL of class time was spent learning reading, math, english, social studies, history, civics, science, etc. Since the diversity bug has permeated society a lot of time is wasted dealing with social issues,”
Social studies shouldn’t deal with social issues? Neither should civics? That doesn’t make any sense.
“You used the Raza program in Tuscon as an example of why we need diversity training in schools. I was just saying that diversity training has done nothing to improve the overall educational record and may be contributing to overall failure in our schools. Your example didn’t make sense within that context.”
No, it’s you who’s still not making sense. I showed you an individual example of a class with an emphasis on diversity making a positive difference in the lives of students. There are many other examples I could find for you. If I understand you right (and I’m not sure, because you’re not being clear), you’re asking me to prove that diversity training has made a positive impact on the entire U.S. educational system. But once again, you’re sneaking in your conclusions, assuming that the U.S. educational system is overflowing with classes on diversity. It isn’t.
“The fact that the state is concerned enough to legislate change should tell you something.”
Arizona conservatives are concerned about a lot of stupid things, like banning Sharia law. Forgive me if I can’t take their concerns very seriously any more.
“My point was that education isn’t happening and diversity training is one of the things that gets in the way.”
And yet you’ve never even attempted to provide evidence for that point.
“Gangs are already with us.”
Typically, gangs are not made up of high-achieving high school graduates who study diversity, so this is nonsensical fearmongering.
“Riots could follow…or war.”
Tina, given your silence toward your fellow Tea Partiers who have openly called for war against the government, secession, etc., your sudden concern over rhetoric that you believe to be divisive and inflammatory seems rather hypocritical. It also speaks to a possible racial double-standard; if the mostly white Tea Party calls for an uprising, you’re fine with that. But if a class made up mostly by people of color teaches content that you believe might promote resentment toward the government, then of course we need to pass legislation!
“School is a good place for students to share the citizenship experience…an experience in common that creates familiarity and a sense of belonging.”
Those are exactly the feelings reported by those who have taken the Raza studies class and other classes on diversity…you might want to read the testimony of these students to find out what you don’t currently understand.
Chris: “Social studies shouldn’t deal with social issues? Neither should civics? That doesn’t make any sense.”
It wouldn’t make sense to someone steeped in diversity “training”…which is not the same as learning about differences in societies, societal mores, and historical practices and events.
But my larger point was time spent on this that is not spent on core required subjects that would prepare students for life.
“you’re asking me to prove that diversity training has made a positive impact on the entire U.S. educational system..”
I’m not asking you to prove anything. I made a statement. Our educational system spends way to much time instructing and handling problems associated with diversity teaching or training and not enough teaching the basics. I also said that those being trained as teachers are not receiving the training they need to perform well and produce excellent students because the focus has moved away from academics and toward social engineering.
You might serve as an example of the effects of this disturbinbg trend. You seem nearly incapable of looking at any human issue withpiut looking at it through a racial or feminist lens. Now you are a pretty bright guy and obviously work hard at your studies, a self motivated individual…a lot of students aren’t and they are left with social indoctrination instead of an good (at least adequate) education.
“And yet you’ve never even attempted to provide evidence for that point.”
The poor record of American students coupled with the purpose of those who train our teachers offers an indication that this could be part of the problem…which is all I have asserted. Bill Ayers is highly respected in the academic world and his phylosophy of teaching has been widely adopted…he who says education is the motor-force of revolution.
“…you might want to read the testimony of these students to find out what you don’t currently understand.”
You might want to read some of the things students have said and done that don’t support your theory and reconsider that know-it-all position.
http://whitelocust.wordpress.com/wake-up-world/the-dangers-of-diversity/
See also this paper from the English department at MSU-Bozeman: “Racist!” as an Epithet of Repression – Paul Trout, English, MSU-Bozeman
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Fall1995/trout.html
You might want to stop dismissing the testimony of those who don’t fall in line with your belief system.
Tina, I had replies to many of the issues you brought up in your last comment, but they all seem unimportant compared to the one issue I want to talk to you about right now.
I’ve advised you about this before, but you need to start being MUCH more careful about the sites you link to in support of your positions on this blog. I’m not talking about that college professor’s paper, which was a load of rubbish but not entirely shocking.
I’m talking about the blogger “whitelocust,” a psychotic, paranoid white supremacist who advocates open war on ethnic minorities. If you’d read the article you linked to, you’d see that he is not simply against teaching diversity in schools; he’s against diversity, period. I couldn’t stomach reading most of his vile, racist screed, but the title alone–“The Dangers of Diversity”–should be enough to tip anyone off that this is not going to be an enlightening read. Go to the homepage and read his other articles; in one, he argues that U.S. immigration policy is leading us toward “white genocide.” If you had scrolled down to read the comments on the page you linked to, whitelocust has this reply to a commenter who suggests that a lack of education is responsible for the high crime rates among blacks and Latinos:
“More liberal crap, and why do minorities compose over 90% of the gang population, these primitive low lifes know only one thing, just like the Muslims they fear those with power, simple, to respect power is at the heart of the Latino, Black, and Muslim worlds. Black gangs existed long before the introduction of narcotics, you stupid moron. Youth reacting to a government and society, NO I dont think so, an inbreed animalistic social trait, yes. There are so many lies here I dont know where to begin. I know what is coming for you and yours, I can smell it, my brothers smell it, and we are preparing for it, I will see you on the battlefield, and I will cut you down where you stand.”
It’s clear from this passage that whitelocust believes that Blacks, Latinos, and Muslims are genetically inferior, “animalistic,” and “primitive.”
But it gets worse. A few comments after that, whitelocust advocates violence, even nuclear war, against his “racial enemies:”
“you and your kind will get whats coming to you, you think that we will remain silent forever, we cant, you think that will just go peacefully into the night, we wont, these liberal democracies are anything but democratic, these policies which favor our racial enemies will not hold against the natural forces of the universe. All things come down eventually and your liberal western nations are on the chopping block of history. You see you socialist parasites forgot history, even if America falls, Canada goes down the toilet, Europe collapses, and every white nation faces total economic collapse, the white European people will still exist, we will retake our nations, through blood and sacrifice and you will pay for what your kind has done. We hold the keys of power, meaning nuclear war! The day is coming when we will rain nuclear fire on our racial enemies!”
Amazingly, whitelocust doesn’t seem to believe he is racist, writing, “Dont try that racist crap with me, every race on the planet is racist except whites, only our nations get flooded by none whites…”
Despite the condemnation of inter-ethnic violence in the article, whitelocust provides no solution for this problem…except for more violence, this time led by whites against minorities:
“War by its very nature is ethnically based, look it up! whether if its inner ethnic or against another tribe, war is war, if whites have been good at anything its that, and we will wage war like it has never been waged before in the history of human kind! We will crack the very crust if it means you will respect our right to exist, if whole tribes and nations must succumb to our vengeance then so be it. you have been warned.
We dont care if global temperatures drop, our kind will do well. See you soon on the battlefield, from the streets of L.A. to the wards of Louisiana, to the coast of Maine, we will fight you.”
Here’s one more from this disturbed individual:
“For the rest of you, be ready, none of the crap above means much to me anymore, I know this, when the time comes, your a male who is not white, I will put you down, I dont want to hear about how evil that is, or why I should not say such things.
You know who your are, you know what you and yours have done to my people and our nations, and you know you will pay with blood, see you soon.
Locust Clan”
I hope this will be a lesson for you, Tina. It should deeply disturb you that you cited the rantings of a racist madman in order to provide evidence for your point. And in the future, when I say that there might be a racial component involved in the efforts to dismantle diversity training in education, you should be more understanding of where this point of view comes from and why these suspicions are justified. Most importantly, I hope you will take a closer look at the sites you choose to link to in the future so that you do not associate yourself with crazy people who advocate murdering non-whites.
Chris: “I’m not talking about that college professor’s paper, which was a load of rubbish but not entirely shocking.”
Rubbish…doesn’t fit the template so it is rubbish. So far right on track.
“–“The Dangers of Diversity”–”
“the title alone–“The Dangers of Diversity”–should be enough to tip anyone off that this is not going to be an enlightening read…”
The title is enough? sounds like you were reading with prejudice.
Chris I don’t doubt this person has very questionable reputation as well as intolerable positions and I was not intending to advocate FOR THE GUY in any way…but some of what he says is valid. There have been problems in schools that suggest kids are dividing along racial lines rather than expereincing themselves as equals and as Americans. This is a problem and, in my opinion, exacerbated and perhaps even invoked by an unhealthy focus on race and diversity.
“I hope this will be a lesson for you, Tina.”
What? We are afraid to consider information simply because they come from someone we consider scum?
The portion from the website that I posted contains none of that but it does contain some truth about the conditions in LA and LA isn’t the only place that is having these problems:
http://www.streetgangs.com/topics/2007/012107raceharbor.html
The headlines are among the most stark documenting gang violence. A Latino gang member, without saying a word, guns down a 14-year-old black girl standing on a sidewalk. A black gang member shoots a Latino toddler point-blank in the chest.
For the most part, though, the role racial animosity has played in gang crime has gone unexamined, largely undocumented in crime statistics and often tamped down by politicians and law enforcement officials anxious about inflaming tensions.
That changed this month when Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Police Chief William J. Bratton and L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca all spoke with unusual candor of their concern that an increasing number of gang crimes appear to be born out of racial hatred.
“The vast majority of gang crimes are not based on hate, as in ‘I’m going to get you because of your race.’ They are based on ‘You are an outsider,’ ” Vernon said. “Now, certainly, race is one thing that can distinguish an outsider, but that doesn’t mean it is based on hatred of the race.”
Racism often downplayed
Fernando Guerra, a Loyola Marymount professor and director of the Center for the Study of L.A., said there has been little upside for politicians in talking about the racial overtones of gang violence. The instinct, he said, is to downplay racism as a cause, in part because “it’s not clear what the policy will be or even if there is a public policy that would work.”
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/04/14/brutal-fights-caught-on-tape-at-hayward-high-school/
Police have stepped up patrols at Hayward High School following a string of brawls that may be tied to local gangs, some of the fights were recently caught on cell phone video.
Massive fights broke out last Thursday, and were followed up the next day after class. Video, which was posted on YouTube, suggests tensions between African-American and Latino students, with the possibility of a gang influence involved.
I’m sorry Chris I have an appointment and have to go…back later
Chris: “It should deeply disturb you that you cited the rantings of a racist madman in order to provide evidence for your point.”
I didn’t cite the “rantings of a racist madman”. Nothing I posted was a racist rant. It did speak to the subject on the table…whether diversity training has taken center stage in our schools and contributed to the downfall from excellence that was once a mark of most, if not all, American schools.
But you certainly posted the ‘rantings of a racist madman” and you did it just to “teach me a lesson”.
I am seriously wondering if you are capable of looking at a social problem without making race the issue and turning the conversation into a warning that “we better be careful”.
“when I say that there might be a racial component involved in the efforts to dismantle diversity training in education, you should be more understanding of where this point of view comes from and why these suspicions are justified…”
Good enough.
I would like to remind you we have had decades, at least 50, addressing issues of race. We have had decades, at least 30, of diversity studies and training and it’s quite possible that hese have had unintended consequences. It at least deserves some investigation discussion. Voices brave enough to suggest a possibile correlation between low scores and diversity training should not be dismissed out of hand.
“I hope you will take a closer look at the sites you choose to link to in the future so that you do not associate yourself with crazy people who advocate murdering non-whites.”
I’d like to gently remind you that you made the association not I. I said nothing to indicate I thought this person was someone with whom I or anyone else should associate. I directed our readers to a particular group of words from a single article which, regardless the source, are relevant to what I was saying.
I don’t think we would be wise to organize our society into categorizes of what is acceptable to talk about and what is not or to dismisses ideas and thoughts that eminate from “certain people”. I have enough confidence to examine what is said by anyone without worrying that it will somehow taint my reputation or poisin my mind. I would hope our students would be well trained in school so they can do the same. Unfortunately there are reports from our college campuses that some speakers are not welcome or are shouted down when they attempt to speak…David Horowitz and Anne Coulter come to mind. Could it be that rather than learning to think critically these students are learning discrimination, prejudice and intolerance? Could it be that clases in diversity are taking precedence over a strong liberal arts curriculum?
I think it is quite possible, and I think we should give it careful and serious consideration.
Tina, I have to say that this is not the response I expected, and I’m quite disappointed that you weren’t able to apologize or even admit error for linking to a white supremacist hate site. Do you really see no problem with this? Giving traffick and legitimacy to someone who advocates murdering non-whites doesn’t bother your conscience in the slightest?
“It did speak to the subject on the table…whether diversity training has taken center stage in our schools and contributed to the downfall from excellence that was once a mark of most, if not all, American schools.”
The article you quoted did no such thing! It did not provide evidence that diversity training was responsible for the problems in this particular district…any reasonable person taking a look at those statistics would have to conclude that the students need to be taught to be more racially tolerant, to overcome the racial biases that are inherent in the gang culture running rampant there. How you can look at this situation and feel that the solution is less diversity training is baffling, and shows a complete disconnect from common sense.
“I am seriously wondering if you are capable of looking at a social problem without making race the issue”
Right, how unreasonable of me to “make” race the issue in a discussion about diversity training in school! And of course I shouldn’t have “made” race the issue when you linked to a racist hate site in support of your position. I mean, really, what was I thinking? This conversation has nothing to do with race at all!
“and turning the conversation into a warning that “we better be careful”.”
If you care about the integrity of this site, you should be more careful. If you care about not alienating potential readers, conservative or liberal, who might have clicked your link and naturally assumed that you were advocating the paranoid delusions of a klan member, than you should definitely be more careful. My warning was a favor, Tina. If you were insulted by that, keep in mind that it was pretty restrained compared to my initial reaction upon seeing what the hell that site was. You’re lucky that I know you well enough by now to know that you aren’t a white supremacist; a new reader who happened to stumble upon this post and saw that link wouldn’t have that prior knowledge and would have every reason to judge you based on your link.
“I would like to remind you we have had decades, at least 50, addressing issues of race. We have had decades, at least 30, of diversity studies and training and it’s quite possible that hese have had unintended consequences.”
Leaving aside your mathematical gaffes (50 decades?), you’re ignoring the positives that have come from “adressing the issue of race” over the past 50 years. You do this constantly, acting as if the social revolutions of the 60s brought the country nothing but pain, while ignoring such triumphs of freedom as the abolition of Jim Crow laws.
“It at least deserves some investigation discussion.”
“Investigation discussion” sounds like something that would require evidence. If so, than you certainly haven’t lived up to what this discussion deserves.
“Voices brave enough to suggest a possibile correlation between low scores and diversity training should not be dismissed out of hand.”
It’s not “brave” to suggest a correlation with no evidence to back it up, Tina.
“I’d like to gently remind you that you made the association not I.”
No, Tina. When you link to a site in support of your position, you are making a statement that you believe the information therein is credible. It reflects on you. I am sorry you can’t seem to understand this; your site would greatly improve if you did.
“I don’t think we would be wise to organize our society into categorizes of what is acceptable to talk about and what is not or to dismisses ideas and thoughts that eminate from “certain people”.”
Really? You don’t think there should be a line where people say, “No, I will not take the views of a white supremacist seriously; they have no place in a civil discussion?”
I don’t understand this politically correct insistence that all voices are equally valid, and we should accept all views, no matter how contemptible, as having some possible merit to them.
“I would hope our students would be well trained in school so they can do the same. Unfortunately there are reports from our college campuses that some speakers are not welcome or are shouted down when they attempt to speak…David Horowitz and Anne Coulter come to mind.”
Tina, if you ran a university, would you welcome speakers who hurled racial insults at students during their speeches?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mBKQEiA6p4&feature=related
I wouldn’t. To do so would get in the way of fostering a positive learning environment.
“Could it be that rather than learning to think critically these students are learning discrimination, prejudice and intolerance?”
They’re learning to fight discrimination, prejudice and intolerance, and part of that fight is rebuking bigots like Ann Coulter and David Horowitz.
“Could it be that clases in diversity are taking precedence over a strong liberal arts curriculum?”
Have you considered the possibility that these subjects are greatly intertwined, and that they strenghten and support one another?
Chris: “I have to say that this is not the response I expected, and I’m quite disappointed that you weren’t able to apologize or even admit error for linking to a white supremacist hate site…”
To whom do I owe an apology? You? Our readers? I think they are mature enough to decide for themselves. I don’t think you are my parent. I also don’t know why you should be disappointed. I have told you before that I do not adhere to PC rules. I don’t agree that linking to the website means I have in any way given “legitimacy” to the man or his beliefs. People can judge him (or not) by their own standards if they so choose…I was interested in what he said, not who he is. I cannot say I disagree with anything within the paragraphs that I posted.
“…to someone who advocates murdering non-whites doesn’t bother your conscience in the slightest?”
You are the one who called attention to this aspect of the man’s character and beliefs….how does it make you feel? Parental? Superior? Righteous. I appreciate your pointing it out but I see no reason to be afraid.
“The article you quoted…did not provide evidence that diversity training was responsible for the problems in this particular district…any reasonable person taking a look at those statistics would have to conclude that the students need to be taught to be more racially tolerant, to overcome the racial biases that are inherent in the gang culture running rampant there.”
Lets see how the article might be relevant to the subject of diversity training and whether it is using up too much time in classrooms and schools:
The information (and opinion) within this article is relevant. It provides food for discussion. It’s unfortunate that you and I have to spend so much time doing the PC dance.
“would have to conclude that the students need to be taught to be more racially tolerant…”
How many years do we do the same thing over and over again befire we realize what we are doing is not working?
“How you can look at this situation and feel that the solution is less diversity training is baffling…”
Be still and listen, Grasshopper. Answers often reside in what you don’t know and have not experienced.
“…how unreasonable of me to “make” race the issue in a discussion about diversity training…”
The discussion was about whether we have made our differences more important than academics in school. It’s about whether teaching and celebrating differences is causing strife rather than a sense of unity and whether the strife and diversity training are using up too much class time. The discussion is about whether this celebratory exercise in “tolerance” and “inclusiveness” has been a waste of time and done more harm than good. It was also about the money we’ve wasted to no effect.
” you’re ignoring the positives that have come from “adressing the issue of race” over the past 50 years…”
Nonesense! The discussion isn’t about race…it’s about whether it might be wise to bring an end the never ending focus on diversity and try something else in the classroom…like academic study. Less emphasis on individual identity and more on math, science, history, english and literature.
“No, Tina. When you link to a site in support of your position, you are making a statement that you believe the information therein is credible.”
Says who, the thought police? the mind control freaks? The people afraid of differing ideas? I didn’t likn to the site in support of my position. I linked to the site to call attention to a specific set of words, some of them from the LA Times. You called our attention to the dubious nature of the site and it’s host and good for you for doing so. I was not aware of the person and it is important information for our readers. But I don’t agree that it sullies the reputation of PS…I think we are mature enough and honest enough to withstand whatever pressure might come to bear.
There’s a reason that the KKK, communist organizations and such are allowed to exist in this country. It’s the same reason we shouldn’t be afraid to look at and discuss their ideas.
“Really? You don’t think there should be a line where people say, “No, I will not take the views of a white supremacist seriously…”
Once again…I did not take his “views” seriously. The entirety of his views was not the point of posting the few paragraphs I posted. Those few paragraphs contained interesting information and thought. It was not meant as a recomendation for the man’s belief system had I inteded that I would have said so. (You really do seem to enjoy lecturing)
“…all voices are equally valid, and we should accept all views, no matter how contemptible, as having some possible merit to them.”
Who made an issue of the equality of this voice? who said we had to “accept” this view? They are words on a page. Had I not posted the link you likely would not have known from whence they came.
“Tina, if you ran a university, would you welcome speakers who hurled racial insults at students during their speeches? ** I wouldn’t. To do so would get in the way of fostering a positive learning environment.”
Then you would not be running a university; you would be running a kindergarten. Universities are exactly where differences of opinion should be discussed and discussed with unbridled passion, contention and humor.
I couldn’t hear all of what was said in the video but I did notice the geering and hostile environment that Ann was willing to endure after being invited to speak. If this audiences behavior is what passes as civility in an university atmosphere that has been structured as “fostering a positive learning environment” its been a complete failure. These kids are rude and intolerant and it appears they have been so indoctrinated that they can’t handle listening to a different point of view without dissolving into a puddle or becoming a bunch of ravenous wolves.
“They’re learning to fight discrimination, prejudice and intolerance, and part of that fight is rebuking bigots like Ann Coulter and David Horowitz.”
I feel badly for you Chris. You have succumed to the propaganda of the leftist univesity machine.
“Have you considered the possibility that these subjects are greatly intertwined, and that they strenghten and support one another?”
There isn’t a lot of evidence to suggest that. Our academic record is falling, we have graduates with PC degrees that are of little use, we have more, not less, animosity and division.
It’s apparent that you have learned how to categorize, demonize, and hold court on what is and is not, and who is and is not, acceptable or worthy.
Ann Coulter has a razor wit and intellect. She is not a racist but has been labeled by a bigoted, intolerant, bunch of soldiers of the cause. David Horowitz is a brilliant thinker who has also been so labeled. Neither is racist…not even close. Both of these individuals are not afrasid to examine and study, looking evil in the face, even when it may be unpopular to do so. You would be wise to press through the indoctrination and adopt some curiosity.
Tina:
“To whom do I owe an apology? You? Our readers?”
Yes. Why is that unreasonable? Most people would feel sorry after realizing that a link they posted was actually to a white supremacist hate site, yet you don’t seem to have any problem with this whatsoever. I ask you, if you had known about the content of the site beforehand, would you still have posted it?
“I also don’t know why you should be disappointed.”
Because I know you can be intelligent and reasonable when you want to be, and I refuse to lower my expectations despite the fact that I probably should.
“I have told you before that I do not adhere to PC rules.”
Ha! “Don’t link to a white supremacist hate site in an argument, lest you make a complete fool of yourself” is now a “PC rule?” Have conservatives redefined the term “politically correct” so that it is now equivalent to “common sense and decency?” It’s becoming more and more clear that this is the case.
“I cannot say I disagree with anything within the paragraphs that I posted.”
Then perhaps you need to do some serious soul-searching about why your policy preferences have significant overlap with that of a white supremacist.
“You are the one who called attention to this aspect of the man’s character and beliefs….how does it make you feel? Parental? Superior? Righteous.”
Tina, you can try to turn this around on me but it was your mistake. Your failure to acknowledge that you screwed up, and your attempts to deflect, reflect worsely on you than the initial screw-up. If you had simply apologized, or at least admitted that you made a mistake, I would have gladly dropped the issue.
“Lets see how the article might be relevant to the subject of diversity training and whether it is using up too much time in classrooms and schools:
….Since at least 1990, calming racial tension usually between blacks and Hispanics has been one of the top goals of the school district….”
So, what’s your point, Tina? That calming racial tension should NOT be one of the top goals of this school district?
Because that’s completely crazy.
“Says who, the thought police? the mind control freaks? The people afraid of differing ideas?”
People with common sense.
“I didn’t likn to the site in support of my position.”
Yes, you did. You were making an argument and you linked to that site in order to provide evidence that you believe is in support of that argument. After all these years debating on the internet, do you still not understand how this works?
“There’s a reason that the KKK, communist organizations and such are allowed to exist in this country. It’s the same reason we shouldn’t be afraid to look at and discuss their ideas.”
Tina, there’s a big difference between believing the existence of such organizations should be LEGAL, and publicly ENDORSING their views.
“Universities are exactly where differences of opinion should be discussed and discussed with unbridled passion, contention and humor.”
Telling a 17 year old Muslim girl to “take a camel” is NOT a “difference of opinion.” It’s hateful bigotry, based on both race and religion. Coulter’s remark was an expression of open contempt for the student body that she was adressing, and universities are under no moral obligation to invite such a person. Universities should invite people who are interested in educating students and engaging in intellectual discussion; not people who hurl racial/religious insults at students.
It’s amazing that after watching that video, the only thing that bothers you is that college students were booing. It doesn’t matter to you that their reaction was justified, as it was in response to a racist/religiously discriminatory remark that Coulter had made on another occasion, as the brave young girl who asked the question pointed out. And it doesn’t bother you that Coulter followed up by unleashing yet another racist/religiously discriminatory slur upon that young girl. This doesn’t surprise me; you ignored those facts the last time I pointed that video out to you as well. That’s because you’re a giant hypocrite. You’ve bought into the fantasy that conservatives are ALWAYS the victim, no matter what the situation. So you feel bad for Ann Coulter, a successful 40+ year old multimillionaire, for “enduring” the jeers of college students, who are only angry with her because she has made vicious and racist statements about members of their student body. Yet you feel nothing for the 17 year old girl who was the target of Coulter’s disparaging racist remark. You call the students “rude” but you won’t call Coulter “rude,” even though her behavior was far worse. As far as I can hear in that video, none of the college students said anything to Coulter as nasty and prejudiced as what she said to that girl. But expecting that to matter to you…is like expecting a fish to learn French. You see what you want to see and ignore what doesn’t fit the narrative. I’ve tried to get you to do otherwise, but I’m afraid you will always be a hypocrite.
Chris: Why is that unreasonable?
It’s unreasonable because it assumes wrongdoing and I do not think I am guilty as charged. As I said, I do not agree with, or feel the need to abide by, the PC rules that seem to run your life under threat of bannishment from the club.
“I ask you, if you had known about the content of the site beforehand, would you still have posted it?”
I probably would have looked for another article from a different site. So? It is still true that I did not, nor would I, promote the man or his site. It was the paragraphs that caught my attention; I evaluated the words on their own merit.
“Have conservatives redefined the term “politically correct” so that it is now equivalent to “common sense and decency?”
There is no need to condemn my fellow conservatives over something I have said or done. This seems to be another one of your rules…a tactic to afford a big black eye in one fell swoop? Frankly this entire exercise seems petty. I explained where my focus and intent was. Accept it or don’t…but leave my cohorts out of it!
“Then perhaps you need to do some serious soul-searching about why your policy preferences have significant overlap with that of a white supremacist”
Now you are stomping on some pretty dangerous ground. You might give some thought to persons that your preferences might align with unexpectedly. Lily white is a color that doesn’t exist in the human heart or mind. If you can’t tell me what in the few paragraphs that are so incredibly abhorent and racist from your perspective then I suggest you have no leg to stand on and are instead engaging in some pompous form of harrassment.
“Tina, you can try to turn this around on me but it was your mistake.”
A mistake so grave that you are willing to continue to give it such significance? To what purpose, Chris?
Haven’t you made your point about the site sufficiently so that our readers have been adequately warned? haven’t you ridiculed me enough now so that those who agree with you can feel satisfied about what a boob I am for “sending our readers” to such a vile site? Haven’t you made quite enough of this to gratify that need to humiliate or humble…or do you require groveling and begging?
“Your failure to acknowledge that you screwed up”
This is what’s really important to you isn’t it Chris? You don’t give a damn about the site…it’s catching me in a “screw up” that really lights your candle. I suspect that this is the energy behind quite lot of your PC attitude, the game of gotcha.
“If you had simply apologized, or at least admitted that you made a mistake, I would have gladly dropped the issue.”
How big of you! Why do you think or feel that others must dance to your tune…who put you in charge? Your first words to me were not just a friendly advisory that the site I linked to was that of a white supremicist. Instead you issued a hauty lecture:
Call me a stubborn old lady…I just don’t feel like I have to cower, grovel, apologize, shuck or jive when someone issues a warning that sounds a lot like a parental lecture.
“So, what’s your point, Tina? That calming racial tension should NOT be one of the top goals of this school district?”
The point is that there is a need to spend time at all on such things. Diversity training, conflict resolution and all of the other PC crap that has dominated the classroom for about 30 years has OBVIOUSLY not caused unity or calm in the classroom….has it! That MIGHT be a significant point and if you weren’t so bent on being right…right about the value of these programs and right about anyone against them being racist you might get it. Open your mind…let in some sunshine…have a different thought for once…it won’t kill you! (and I won’t tell a soul)
“…do you still not understand how this works?”
Oh goody…another lecture!
“…and publicly ENDORSING their views”
I did not endorse supremicists views! I’m not certain that you haven’t given them more legitimacy than I ever could have at this point.
You still haven’t bothered to address the content of the paragraphs which included a portion of an article and paraphrased remarks from the Mayor of LA.
“there’s a big difference between believing the existence of such organizations should be LEGAL, and publicly ENDORSING their views.”
I was talking about study…and learning. You are in activist mode…it’s requirement is brainwashing.
You don’t know the meaning of the word “endorse”. You have become a member in good standing of the thought police.Its a brave new world and you don’t (or can’t) look beyond the little dictionary of PC words and phrases you have stored in that brain-washed mind . You are sadly part of the next generation who will live under the tyranny of that dictionary.
Lighten the hell up! I did not, and I do not, endorse that site and that will remain so no matter what you think or say.
“Telling a 17 year old Muslim girl to “take a camel” is NOT a “difference of opinion.”
Take it up with Ann Coulter. I have no desire to debate with you about an event that happened without my being present or on the merits of a video segment chosen to make Ann Coulter look bad! While you’re at it try finding out what the 17 year old girl was saying and what shes up to. I’ve seen that provacative “girl” before. She comes across as an agitator.
“Coulter’s remark was an expression of open contempt for the student body that she was adressing, and universities are under no moral obligation to invite such a person.”
The place was packed with students who came for the express purpose of booing hissing and causing trouble. This is the level of student participatiion that passes for civility and scholarship regarding differing viewpoints. It is likely born of the Marxist and PC environment fostered since the sixties on university campuses. This was a very poor example to offer if you were bent on showing me how superior to Ann you all are.
“Universities should invite people who are interested in educating students and engaging in intellectual discussion; not people who hurl racial/religious insults at students.”
Oh give me a break. The students start the hurling of insults and they did not come to listen or learn…their own INTOLERANCE is the driver and their desire to learn vacant! She comes prepared to speak and the little beasts don’t have the decency, or the intellectual capacity, to hear her out or ask her questions respectfully.
“It doesn’t matter to you that their reaction was justified”
THIS IS THE CRUX OF THIS ENTIRE POST!
Are you aware that there was a time in this nation when behaving with such disrespect to an invited speaker was considered ill mannered and inapporpriate? I don’t care if it was Hitler or Pol Pot…students would have listened and taken notes and posed questions at the conclusion with respect and dignity.
Had these students affordes Ann such dignity I’m sure she would responded in kind. The point should be to learn from the experience…to analyze and scrutinize. Boooooing is not high on the list of appropriate responses.
Activism…diversity…social engineering…it’s all you kids know or have been taught…and its a damn shame because you are missing a great deal.
America’s standing in the world reflects it too.
” That’s because you’re a giant hypocrite.”
NO! It’s because I don’t believe Ann Coulter is a bigot or a racist. I have listened to her speak. I have read her books. She doesn’t mince words and she has a razor sharp wit but she doesn’t follow that dictionary in your head…But you do…so you can’t hear her!!!
Everything she says is played through that filter of yours. I imagine she gets sick of trying to get through…I know I do.
“You’ve bought into the fantasy that conservatives are ALWAYS the victim…”
Horsefeathers!
“So you feel bad for Ann Coulter, a successful 40+ year old multimillionaire, for “enduring” the jeers of college students, who are only angry with her because she has made vicious and racist statements about members of their student body.”
YOU LITTLE TWIRP!
I don’t “feel bad” for Ann Coulter…she can take care of herself. I feel bad for you! You and those students who refuse to learn.
“But expecting that to matter to you…is like expecting a fish to learn French…blah blah blah…. but I’m afraid you will always be a hypocrite.
Back to labeling and lecturing? Okay…getting bored now.
Tina, there’s no point in debating the whole link thing any more; I’ll let that one drop.
“Take it up with Ann Coulter. I have no desire to debate with you about an event that happened without my being present…”
That’s clearly not true. If it were true, you wouldn’t have made a judgment about the students in the video at all. But you did. You even tried to smear the girl who asked a legitimate question. What you have “no desire” to do is to hold Ann Coulter to the same standard you hold these students to. You’re perfectly willing to condemn your percieved ideological opponents (and who knows, some of the booers might have been conservatives; I know plenty of Republicans who find Ann Coulter repugnant), but when you’re asked to apply the same standard to someone on your side of the aisle, all you can say is “Take it up with her?” That’s utter hypocrisy.
You keep saying Ann Coulter is not a racist…but I showed you a video in which she clearly makes a racist statement, so point: me. You haven’t tried to explain how this statement was not racist…you haven’t even mentioned it. You’re too busy focusing on booing, as if booing is worse than racially insulting someone. It isn’t. Coulter’s behavior at this event was far worse and far more bigoted.
Ann Coulter is a professional bully, Tina, as even a blind man could see. She puts people down for a living, and she’s made her millions by hurling insults exactly like she did to that 17 year-old girl, although usually she does it behind the safety of a TV appearance or website column. When she ventures outside of these arenas and onto a college campus, wherein reside many of the people she has made money demeaning, she has to expect that she will not exactly recieve a warm reception, and frankly she doesn’t deserve one. Her history of mean, racist and often violent remarks (remember when she wished that the New York Times building had been hit on 9/11? Or that Clinton should be assasinated?) make her someone who deserves all the booing she gets. That you admire someone so hateful and so bigoted reflects extremely poorly on your character.
Chris: “If it were true, you wouldn’t have made a judgment about the students in the video at all.”
I disagree. I don’t care to debate about the event…I am also not willing to let you get away with a smear campaign without a rebuttal.
“What you have “no desire” to do is to hold Ann Coulter to the same standard you hold these students to.”
Ann Coulter was an invited guest speaker. As I said, her audience was made up of ill-mannered activist and trouble makers who had no interest in hearing what she was invited to impart to them. A person in her shoes has two options…walk off the stage and allow these hooligans to get away with this crap or fight back…I applaud her grit in fighting back. I have no idea what caused her to make the camel statement…wish we did have some idea…then we could decide on the appropriatness of the comment. But since the clip is designed to make her look terrible and the young woman an innocent victim we really cannot. So don’t preach to me your holier than thou message…your video was nothing but a trap.
“…but I showed you a video in which she clearly makes a racist statement”
Racist comment? Oh please, there you are with your little PC dictionary and your perfect little PC agenda, making a mountain out of a molehill.
“Her history of mean, racist and often violent remarks…”
Excuse me, but you are once agaion venturing into twirpdumb! (yes I spelled that incorrectly!!!!!)
I saw Ann Coulter when she first began appearing on national television…she was courteous, well spoken, and tolerant of other guests…she did’t interrupt. Her hosts, and the other guest, often interrupted and attacked not only her position, but her looks and her associations as well. She was met with agression and obnoxious dismissiveness. If she has taken on an edge it is understandable…the left in general doesn’t accept that other points of view should be allowed much less tolerated or that they might be, God forbid, accurate or correct. Has she met attack with counter attack? Yes! And I don’t blame her.
Still bored…out of my goard…and still not dancing to that PC tune. You don’t get to decide who is worthy of my admiration…sorry. Your opinion of me is just that…your opinion…and you are welcome to it.
Tina: “I disagree. I don’t care to debate about the event…I am also not willing to let you get away with a smear campaign without a rebuttal.”
LOL. When you make a rebuttal, you are by definition engaging in debate, Tina. But you didn’t make a rebuttal anyway, you made a deflection. You ignored Coulter’s racist slur and decided to instead focus on the behavior of every other person in the video.
“Ann Coulter was an invited guest speaker. As I said, her audience was made up of ill-mannered activist and trouble makers who had no interest in hearing what she was invited to impart to them. A person in her shoes has two options…walk off the stage and allow these hooligans to get away with this crap or fight back…I applaud her grit in fighting back.”
No, Tina. It was the 17 year old Muslim college student who “fought back.” Coulter was the aggressor when she decided to demean all Muslims by telling them to take a “flying carpet” instead of traveling by airplane. That girl had done nothing to Coulter before the pundit insulted her entire people. This was a disgusting, racist and religiously discriminatory statement that showed that Coulter has no respect for a large number of her fellow Americans. The girl responded articulately and respectfully. Her question was not in any way uncivil or “ill-mannered;” she did not mock Coulter’s religion or race, did she? All she did was confront Coulter about the bigoted statements the woman had made about her, her family and her culture in the past. Why don’t you applaud the “grit” it must have taken for this young girl to stand up to such a powerful figure?
There was a third option Coulter could have taken that you haven’t considered…she could have apologized. She SHOULD have apologized. But if she ever started, it would take years for her to make up to all the people she’s insulted…single mothers, 9/11 victim’s families, the journalists whom she publicly wished were dead, Muslims, gays, African-Americans…she’s got a lot of things to make up for, yet tragically, I don’t believe she ever will.
“I have no idea what caused her to make the camel statement…wish we did have some idea…then we could decide on the appropriatness of the comment. But since the clip is designed to make her look terrible and the young woman an innocent victim we really cannot.”
Hilarious! You honestly think “Gee, I wonder why she said that, guess we’ll never know, dur dur dur” is a convincing argument? Are you seriously under the delusion that it is EVER appropriate to tell an Arabic Muslim girl to “take a camel?”
The context of the video is very clear. The girl asked Coulter, “When asked what alternative modes of transportation were, you suggested flying carpet…” She goes on to ask, “Since I don’t have a magic carpet, what other modes would you suggest?”
This girl had every right to point out Coulter’s past prejudicial comments. Her question was sarcastic, but rightfully so; she used humor to convey how hurtful and stupid Coulter’s statement was to her.
When confronted by an articulate teenager who had been personally offended by her insensitive remarks, Ann Coulter could have taken the opportunity to reflect, realize she had hurt somebody personally, and apologize. But that would require her to show some actual humanity. Instead she responded in typical Coulter fashion, doubling down on her bigotry and unleashing another racial and religiously discriminatory insult. And why wouldn’t she? She knows she has enough fans like you who will never, ever see anything she does as wrong, and will make her the victim in every situation.
“Racist comment? Oh please, there you are with your little PC dictionary and your perfect little PC agenda, making a mountain out of a molehill.”
And once again you show your apparent belief that common sense and accurate definitions of words have a liberal bias. It is not “politically correct” to realize that “take a camel” is a racist comment. It is an obvious fact. You have abused the term “PC” to the point where it has lost all meaning.
If you would like to attempt an explanation as to why you think the comment was NOT racist or religiously discriminatory, then please, have at it. You’ll still be wrong, but at least it would look like you actually put some thought into the matter, rather than simply having the Pavlovian response of shouting “PC!” whenever a charge of racism is made, no matter how true that charge may be.
“I saw Ann Coulter when she first began appearing on national television…she was courteous, well spoken, and tolerant of other guests…she did’t interrupt. Her hosts, and the other guest, often interrupted and attacked not only her position, but her looks and her associations as well. She was met with agression and obnoxious dismissiveness. If she has taken on an edge it is understandable…the left in general doesn’t accept that other points of view should be allowed much less tolerated or that they might be, God forbid, accurate or correct. Has she met attack with counter attack? Yes! And I don’t blame her.”
Yes, yes, conservatives are ALWAYS on the defensive, they’ve never been the aggressors, we started it, and Ann Coulter is just an abused kitten who once was cute and cuddly but now bites liberals as a defense mechanism.
Let’s assume that this is all true for a moment; that still would NOT justify her making a racist and religiously discriminatory comment toward a seventeen year old girl.
But leave it to a member of the party of personal responsibility to constantly fall back on “Liberals made me do it.”
Chris: “You ignored Coulter’s racist slur”
This is why it isn’t a “deflection”. I don’t agree that this is a racial slur. Hence no basis for a debate about the event but plenty of room to not let your prejudice and false accusation stand.
“…conservatives are ALWAYS on the defensive, they’ve never been the aggressors, we started it, and Ann Coulter is just an abused kitten who once was cute and cuddly but now bites liberals as a defense mechanism.’
You’ve been around for what…two minutes? You don’t know anything about what your precious liberal progressive friends have done or what they are now up to and apparently you are blind to the tactics they use.
Progressives always think they have the high moral position and therefore anything they say or do is justified…they, after all, have a cause! They have also been attacking America and conservatives (throught violence, derision, the courts, in education and media) without respect for decades…they assault freedoma, common decency, the Chritian religion, marriage, white men, our common heritage, and our republican form of government…OF COURSE WE ARE ON THE DEFENSIVE…I’d call it an agressive defense! Please quit pretending that liberal progressive have been honest, decent, respectful, interested, inclusive, or respectful in their political and social endeavors. I have pictures and history on my side.
“But leave it to a member of the party of personal responsibility to constantly fall back on “Liberals made me do it.”
And leave it to a punk college indoctrinated upstart to reduce my comments to something so kindergarten trite and incredibly BORING!
Hm, I thought I posted a reply yesterday but I guess I didn’t submit it all the way.
Tina, I realize I’ve been quite snippy in this thread and perhaps that’s why you’ve been unwilling to explain why you don’t believe that what Coulter said was racist. I’d like to come to some kind of better understanding of your position, because to me it seems so clear that this incident meets the dictionary definition of racism that I don’t even feel my charge should need an explanation. But since our views are so far apart on this issue, I will try to explain my position better, and I hope you’ll respond in kind.
The “flying carpet” remark referenced by the student in the video I posted was originally published in a profile of Ann Coulter for the Guardian. An excerpt:
“Sharing a table at a New York bar with Coulter, watching the heads turn, you’re seized by the urge to test her. Is she for real? Is she making this stuff up, like a comedian doing a shtick? How far will she go? “What if the free market offered Muslim-free air travel?” I venture, by way of bait. Would that be a smart move? “This is my idea,” she says brightly, competitive as a child. “I’m way ahead of you. I think airlines ought to start advertising: ‘We have the most civil rights lawsuits brought against us by Arabs.’ ”
And how would Muslims travel? “They could use flying carpets,” she says, a grinning picture of charm. But worry not: lots of other swarthy ethnic groups would be subject to the Coulter plan for selective security. “You’d be searching a lot of Italians, Greeks and Jews.” Intensively frisking just 20% of travellers would make flying quicker for everyone, she says. “Have you seen these lines for getting through? Everyone suffers equally. Which presumably is the dream of the Guardian: modelled after their beloved Soviet Union.”
This is what talking to Ann Coulter is like: she flits from one rightwing prejudice to another, taking not so much as a gasp for oxygen. In a couple of sentences, she can play with overt racism, soften it with a line so provocative she could only be kidding, then round off the performance with a sweeping smear of the liberal enemy. Coulter has turned riffs like that into an art form.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/may/17/pressandpublishing.usnews
This comment was racist and religiously discriminatory in a number of ways. Coulter insisted that airlines should not only discriminate against Arabs and Muslims, but that they should take pride in doing so. Then she suggested that Muslims who do not like this treatment should simply refrain from traveling by airplane, an activity that non-Muslims enjoy every day in this country. Then she used what is inarguably a racial stereotype with the “flying carpet” remark. How is that not racist, Tina? How is that not religiously discriminatory?
And how is telling a 17-year-old Muslim girl to “take a camel” not also racist and religiously discriminatory? Do you think Coulter would have told a white Christian that? Of course not, because there’s no stereotype of white Christians riding camels.
So how can you possibly argue that Coulter’s remark was not prejudiced? And how can you then accuse me of prejudice, when I am making my judgment about Coulter based on what she has said and done, while Coulter only judged this young girl based on the actions of people who happen to claim the same race and religion as her? That seems completely backwards to me, Tina, but I look forward to hearing why you think your judgments are justified.