Anyways, as my liberal friend has progressed up the professional public education ladder, she’s taken on opportunities focused on getting kids from lower-economic areas the best education possible. So, if you asked such a person “Hey, you’ve got two candidates to choose from Candidate 1). Who supports a voucher program to give parents and kids the choice – not the government – where they are going to school and pressures public schools to be more competitive and accountable for kids educations or Candidate 2). Who doesn’t support a voucher program but believes there should be bureaucratic federal funding that is the answer. So who are you going to choose?”

Gee, I bet you wonder where I’m going with this. Thaaaaaaaaaaat’s right, this at one point self-proclaimed-libertarian (does she even know what a libertarian is???) voted for……..

Barack “I don’t support voucher programs” Obama.

Her reasoning, no joke, to me was – but if you would have seen the look on my kids’ faces this morning you’d understand my vote. Gee, thanks for voting with your emotions and not with any logic whatsoever. Here’s what I don’t understand – why did you vote for a candidate who’s expressed position during the campaign (and now carried throughout his presidency) does more to damage educational opportunity for the lower economic classes? Why did you vote for a candidate who openly opposes voucher programs which have been PROVEN via facts and statistics to help those kids from lower-economic backgrounds?

You’ve literally just voted for someone who’s position is to continue a failing policy of federally-funded government schools that hurts kids in lower-economic areas. So while you’re kids’ faces may be all smiles, guess what, you just f**ked them over royally by continuing to elect Democratic leaderfailureship that perpetually cares more about teachers unions than the education of kids. WAY. TO. GO.

VoteFAAAAAAAAAAAAIL!

Now that as the reality of Obama’s policies are starting to take affect, hmmmm some former Obamabots are breaking free of being deprogrammed and are pissed about what they are seeing. Am I surprised? A bit. Do I feel sorry for them and their regret? Not one bit. That’s because I took the time to educate myself on the issues and not get swept up in the DNC’s game of guilt/identity politics.

Here’s the latest from ReasonTV reporting on how some people are turning on Obama because of his stance against the voucher program. (via Hot Air). Keep in mind this is an $18 million program that Obama couldn’t find any money for whatsoever to support it in neither his $3.6 billion budget OR his $1 billion porkulus bill.

The one lady is interesting at the beginning when she asks WHY? Yeah, instead of asking Obama I’d say hold a big mirror up to your face and ask yourself WHY you didn’t pay attention during the campaign when Obama said during the presidential debates:

“But the — but here’s the thing, is that, even if Senator McCain were to say that vouchers were the way to go — I disagree with him on this, because the data doesn’t show that it actually solves the problem — the centerpiece of Senator McCain’s education policy is to increase the voucher program in D.C. by 2,000 slots.”

And cue McCain who countered with:

“And I will support those reforms, and I will fund the ones that are reformed. But I’m not going to continue to throw money at a problem. And I’ve got to tell you that vouchers, where they are requested and where they are agreed to, are a good and workable system. And it’s been proven.”

Oh, and it gets better. Not only is the “People’s President” decreasing the funding of the successful education reform program, Obama is cutting the voucher program in DC all together for the future. (via HotAir)

President Obama will seek to extend the controversial D.C. school voucher program until all 1,716 participants have graduated from high school, although no new students will be accepted, according to an administration official who has reviewed budget details scheduled for release tomorrow…

And people wonder why kids in other countries are gaining speed or are light years ahead of our own kids in terms of education levels.

Is Hope n’ Change fever finally dying out thanks to a good dose of reality? One can only hope (pun intended!)

In my high school economics class we watched the always educational Trading Places with Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd. Imagine what could have happened had that time been devoted to a film like this:

Here’s some of the shocking facts about the US public education system from the documentary:

• The percentage of high school principals who say they are not worried about low academic standards: 79%
• The percentage of parents who think their kids get enough math and science courses: 70%
• Only 55% of students take two years of a higher-level math, typically one year of algebra and one year of geometry
• Percentage of college-bound high school seniors that have no more than one hour of homework per night and none on the weekends: 66%
• The average US student spends about 900 hours in the classroom and 1,500 hours in front of the TV each year
• American studernts score highly in one area relative to their international peers: Self-confidence

Super – we ain’t gotz us no edumacation but gosh darn it we gotz some co-fi-dence! 

The educational systems in India are nearly all for-profit schools from K-12. Our teachers in the US education system are not hired based on merit or performance. In fact, 93% of US teachers who teach science classes have little or no training in the subject. As stated in the film the reason people in the US aren’t acting faster about the deteriorating public education system is because they relate their kids’ education experience to their own instead of to other competing systems. For instance, they’ll say well I want my kids to have the same education I did or better. But what they don’t realize is that the education systems outside of the US have surpassed our systems of the 50s, 60s and 70s a thousand times over. So even compared to our system today, their kids are dramatically behind children’s education around the rest of the world. Then you’ll hear the usual liberal quip “But our schools our so broken – how can we expect kids to learn in that type of environment. We need to put more money (even though they get over $100 billion a year) into the system.”

What’s that???

BIZZZZZAM! Tell that to the kids in India learning in the streets with no desk, no chair and no classroom – and all while probably studying AP Calculus.

Kids in India continue their studies on the weekend as well. One girl in the film is at the tutor 7:00 a.m. on Saturdays for additional math study. Not in preparation for any test or SAT – just because it’s more time to study. The high school experience in India is simpler because it is more organized and focused on the goals with minimal arguments – you will graduate high school, and you will attain a high grade point average to ensure you get into a good graduate program. They don’t even really define the end goal as college, unlike the US – they’re already shooting for Master’s and Ph.D’s when they’re 16!

Our education system is programming citizens not to value learning based on intellectual innovation and stimulation. Part of that then lends itself to the problems we see in the economy. America cannot sustain as a nation of manufacturing – that ship has left the port. Capitalistic economies are cyclical in that as higher-intellectual jobs increase in demand, lower-intellectual jobs are shifted to economies/countries where the production costs are lower. This is because white collar jobs are typically rooted in acquiring the best intellect/skills while blue-collar jobs are rooted in production costs   (vs. what the individual employee can bring to the table). So when your education system stifles intellectual challenging of students and the blue collar jobs dry up once they’re ready to enter the workforce – you’ve then got a receipe for a lot of people out of work unless they’re willing to move to a lower developed country to follow those jobs. But if we develop and maintain our education system based on producing the most intellectual stimulation possible, then your economy will adapt easily to the natural industry/job market fluctuations.

It’s a fact, and common sense, that people with more talent, motivation and ability will increase their odds of being a valued employee in the workplace. Not focusing on the development of academic talent and ability puts the US at a major disadvantage as the world grows more connected and globalized in business. This also plays in part to motivation – if students are not challenged then their motivation suffers on average. Unfortunately, our public education system has moved toward a system of let’s all do it together instead of motivating students by setting challenges and goals which then have to be met as an individual student not as a school. This mindset, as most socialized programs, is promoted on the false promise of having the stronger students brought down to same learning pace as the weaker students and therefore overall academics in the school will be improved. BZZZZ – WRONG. The actual result is that the US public education system has shifted to a lowering of academic standards so that we can make sure every child is included.  

For countries like India and China – engineering, math and science are the leading programs high school students know they will forge a career path from, prior to going to college. In the US, too often many students are unsure and focus more on the fun socializing aspect of college versus planning out the academic path that will shape their future career. It is also a problem that our country puts more emphasis on programs that have a more humanities element (sociology, communications, English, women’s lib) vs. a scientific or math-bias. I’m not saying that liberal arts careers and academics don’t have any signifcance in this world – I’m a communications major myself. Just trying to be honest that the capitalistic competitive nature of our world (now and in the future) lies more in engineering, math and science than it does in liberal arts. 

So as a country – what do we want for our economy’s future? An economy with prosperity, employment and skilled, competitive workers? Or do we want an economy with limited growth, decreased employment and workers who are the most sociable but cannot perform job fundamentals? If we want the former, then it’s time to reform our education systems to produce students who will in turn grow into employees that can firmly stand on their abilities and adapt with ease in changing job market landscapes.