says P.J. O'Rourke about America's public schools in the June 21st issue of The Weekly Standard.
And Hoboken BoE member Maureen Sullivan agrees.
You'll see in a moment.
First, I understand the BoE election is over and Sullivan's slate, Real Results, lost. Big. Thank goodness. Their defeat was a thorough rejection of the Trojan Horse effort to gut Hoboken's public school system by a team of partisan right-wing ideologues.
Hooray.
What we have left is a sitting Hoboken Board of Education member- an elected official- who believes in.... ending public school education?
See for yourself. This morning, an email directed me to this post on Sullivan's Facebook page:
Sullivan posts a link to the O'Rourke piece, endorsing it as "spot on".
So, what's P.J. got to say? Well, it's is fairly long, 4 pages, so I'll post the excepts which jumped out at me.
Just remember: this is not a debate about an opinion piece on the merits of public schools. I'm simply pointing out the shared opinions of O'Rourke and a member of our Board of Education, who makes decisions for the public school children of Hoboken. My kid. Maybe yours.
Cute illustration. An aggrieved taxpayer blowing up a one-room schoolhouse. I hope the kids got out first.
P.J says:
Send the kids home to... where, P.J.?
OK, I know O'Rourke is a humorist.
See below how he addresses (presumably) other private school parents (Weekly Standard readers are an elite group), asserting their children are "outstanding", and public schools are for "average" children.
Think that's funny? Are you laughing?
I'm not.
One reason is because I know that this is how many (not all) parents of private school kids think, and may speak aloud-- to other parents of private school kids.This thinking also drives some to pull their kids out of public schools into private ones.
Another reason I'm not laughing is because a member of our Board of Education thinks this guy's "spot on".
Now for the next one, swallow any liquids you may have in your mouth.
Here is P.J. crunching numbers on public school programs for disabled children- you know, the ones that come to school on a separate, specially-equipped bus: some in wheelchairs, some requiring assistance to get in and out of the building, some with congenital medical conditions, others with conditions that affect speaking, hearing, writing, and so on.
P.J. wants to throw "tutoring" or "therapy" or a "pocket full of Ritalin" at these unfortunate children who struggle every day against their disabilities.
How positively reptillian of you, P.J.
Spot on.
Now, for the coup de grace, where he insults every child in America who attends public school, comparing their math skills unfavorably to private school attendees:
Spot on.
Wow.
So there you have it. Views espoused by a famous conservative-Republican 'humorist', shared by an elected official on our School Board.
Do you agree with these views? Maybe you do. Maybe you don't.
I don't.
So I am personally angry because 2 years ago I busted my hump to help her get elected on the Kids First slate, and I can tell you none of these opinions were ever expressed to me, or the rest of the Kids First team. Not a one. Technically, I can't speak for others but I will now: had we known these were her views on public education, her derriere would have been removed promptly from the KF ticket. If any KF campaign folks wish to concur, please do, either here or by email.
What I'd like to know is why does someone who wants to end public education run for a seat on our Board of Education, and do they belong there?
(update 11:10 am)
The following email just came in:
From the School Board Code of Ethics:
a. I will make decisions in terms of the educational welfare of children and will seek to develop and maintain public schools that meet the individual needs of all children regardless of their ability, race, creed, sex, or social standing.
And Hoboken BoE member Maureen Sullivan agrees.
You'll see in a moment.
First, I understand the BoE election is over and Sullivan's slate, Real Results, lost. Big. Thank goodness. Their defeat was a thorough rejection of the Trojan Horse effort to gut Hoboken's public school system by a team of partisan right-wing ideologues.
Hooray.
What we have left is a sitting Hoboken Board of Education member- an elected official- who believes in.... ending public school education?
See for yourself. This morning, an email directed me to this post on Sullivan's Facebook page:
click to enlarge any graphic
Sullivan posts a link to the O'Rourke piece, endorsing it as "spot on".
So, what's P.J. got to say? Well, it's is fairly long, 4 pages, so I'll post the excepts which jumped out at me.
Just remember: this is not a debate about an opinion piece on the merits of public schools. I'm simply pointing out the shared opinions of O'Rourke and a member of our Board of Education, who makes decisions for the public school children of Hoboken. My kid. Maybe yours.
Cute illustration. An aggrieved taxpayer blowing up a one-room schoolhouse. I hope the kids got out first.P.J says:
Send the kids home to... where, P.J.?OK, I know O'Rourke is a humorist.
See below how he addresses (presumably) other private school parents (Weekly Standard readers are an elite group), asserting their children are "outstanding", and public schools are for "average" children.
Think that's funny? Are you laughing?I'm not.
One reason is because I know that this is how many (not all) parents of private school kids think, and may speak aloud-- to other parents of private school kids.This thinking also drives some to pull their kids out of public schools into private ones.
Another reason I'm not laughing is because a member of our Board of Education thinks this guy's "spot on".
Now for the next one, swallow any liquids you may have in your mouth.
Here is P.J. crunching numbers on public school programs for disabled children- you know, the ones that come to school on a separate, specially-equipped bus: some in wheelchairs, some requiring assistance to get in and out of the building, some with congenital medical conditions, others with conditions that affect speaking, hearing, writing, and so on.
P.J. wants to throw "tutoring" or "therapy" or a "pocket full of Ritalin" at these unfortunate children who struggle every day against their disabilities.
How positively reptillian of you, P.J.
Spot on.
Now, for the coup de grace, where he insults every child in America who attends public school, comparing their math skills unfavorably to private school attendees:
Spot on.Wow.
So there you have it. Views espoused by a famous conservative-Republican 'humorist', shared by an elected official on our School Board.
Do you agree with these views? Maybe you do. Maybe you don't.
I don't.
So I am personally angry because 2 years ago I busted my hump to help her get elected on the Kids First slate, and I can tell you none of these opinions were ever expressed to me, or the rest of the Kids First team. Not a one. Technically, I can't speak for others but I will now: had we known these were her views on public education, her derriere would have been removed promptly from the KF ticket. If any KF campaign folks wish to concur, please do, either here or by email.
What I'd like to know is why does someone who wants to end public education run for a seat on our Board of Education, and do they belong there?
(update 11:10 am)
The following email just came in:
From the School Board Code of Ethics:
a. I will make decisions in terms of the educational welfare of children and will seek to develop and maintain public schools that meet the individual needs of all children regardless of their ability, race, creed, sex, or social standing.
He appears to be talking about large metropolitan areas not a town like Hoboken. If you saw Bob Bowden's Cartel inner city schools are a sham. Hoboken gets very little percentage wise (maybe 10-15% of budget). 5 NJ towns- Newark, Jersey City, Trenton, Camden and Paterson receive over 70% of our NJ school tax dollars and fail by any standard to properly educate our children. In that respect he is spot on.
ReplyDeleteHere's a few more interesting statements:
ReplyDelete"Let’s generate some pure outrage. Here’s my proposal: Close all the public schools. Send the kids home. Fire the teachers. Sell the buildings. Raze the U.S. Department of Education, leaving not one brick standing upon another and plow the land where it stood with salt."
"America’s public schools have served their purpose. Free and compulsory education was good for a somewhat unpromising young nation. The country was half turnip-head hillbilly and half slum trash from foreign refuse heaps. Public schools were supposed to take this mob of no-account pea pickers and bumbling greaseballs and turn them into a half-bright national citizenry"
It doesn't appear that he is talking about large metropolitan areas. If we were to believe thie large metro issue, when the public schools close down, which private schools would except those students who have learning and other issues? who will pay for all of the students to attend private schools or should they just not attend, if they cannot afford it? Will there be a church and state issue regarding fed,state and local funds? who will be accredited? How will they determine? who will oversee accredidation? Which metrics and what oversite will be provided to support those studnets who don't have overly active parents involved to find schools to place their children?
Education in economically disadvantaged communities is not as easy as it seems. There are a multitude of issues to contend with. Blaming teachers may be one, easy, feel good way to deal with those issues but obviously isn't the answer. Those who believe that to be so are fooling themelves.
Schools need to provide as many resources as possible to help all children succeed to their full potential, in a fiscally and ethically responsible manner.
Is it appropriuate for a board member, who took an oath to serve in the best interest of the public school students/constituents, to support closing public schools?
Furthermore, I find dealing with an issue by not dealing with it or coming up with any real solutions to be narrow minded and lame. It speaks loudly of the lack of understanding by the general population and allows said polulation to be manipulated.
ReplyDeleteHere's a suggestion: Make laws to protect students and taxpayers. Then, the state can hold elected officials and administrators accountable for their ILLEGAL (not irresponsible) behavior.
A few years back the Newark BOE Supt. was approved for and ordered an entire new fleet of town cars for their board members, so they could get back and forth to meetings. This was irresponsible, but, at the time, not illegal. To this day, the laws are not written to hold elected officials/admins accountable. Should this happen again, I say, any member voting for said illegal expenditure is disbarred permanently from any NJBOE and the Supt fired and cert. revoked permanently. Charges to follow for costs. But hey, why bother with little things like that when you could just close down the schools.
That is the essential cowardice of the humorous polemic (which I write from time to time myself). One can back away from any potential damage saying that's not exactly what I meant, or I was being hyperbolic.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise both having and eating the cake can get too fattening.
janis, your questions are excellent, and studiously avoided by the 'burn the house down' crowd-- whose thinking does not cover the wide swath of the population without the 'tools' (financial, parenting support) to do the legwork to find a private alternative then PAY for it. A stinkin' couple thousand voucher will not cover the cost of private school; the gov't will end up paying tuition to UNREGULATED profit-driven private schools. Let's see what happens to tuition fees once the public option is gone.
ReplyDeleteYou said it:
"Which metrics and what oversite will be provided to support those students who don't have overly active parents involved to find schools to place their children?"
Bingo. So the fed/state gov't will HAVE to intervene for these kids.... how much will THAT cost? Or should they these kids be left to their own devices? And the physically- challenged can gorge on Ritalin.
info, right. It's already been pointed out to me offline by a friend that the writer is a "good" satirist and I am "missing the point".
The satirist has every right to have fun with his views. However,in my opinion, the fact that a voting BOE member believes he is "as usual, spot on", is the troubling issue.
ReplyDeleteBoe members are elected to improve the system, in the best interested of their constituents not come up with lame excuses and ideas such as shuttering all public schools. Personally, I find this public declaration disrespectful and disgraceful.
This is what you get when an agenda-driven, partisan political ideologue infiltrates a non-partisan body. And I chose that word, 'infiltrates' carefully.
ReplyDeleteSS1959 says..."He appears to be talking about large metropolitan areas not a town like Hoboken"
ReplyDeleteUh, SS, since when was Hoboken not a Metropolitan area?
We area highly populated geographically small CITY-not a "town".
There is no excuse for a BOE member spewing this sort of hate towards public education. Sullivan should apologize
GA
ReplyDeleteAm I losing my memeory, or did not Mo have an ethical lapse regarding Romano's contract discussions? It seems that she does not take the whole oath of office and ethical standards for board members very seriously. It should be interesting if she can cobble together a crew of misfits to run with her for re-eleciton. I am willing to wager a nice fresh coconut custard pie from JD's that she will not even run again. I doubt that the Repubs will have anything to do with her. She is poison at the ballott box.
No khoboken, your memory serves you well. MS leaked closed session discussions like a sieve.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of ethical lapses, another one-- slamming a fellow Board member publicly is in direct violation to the NJ School Board Association's rules of conduct, covered here back in March:
http://grafixavenger.blogspot.com/2010/03/ethics-schmethics.html
Mmmm... coconut custard pie...
If you had predicted where we would be now a year ago I would have laughed and I certainly wouldn't have campaigned on Sullivan's behalf so she could ride the coat tails of KF to victory; and I suspect I'm not alone in that sentiment. Who would have predicted that Sullivan would run a kamikaze mission against not only Romano but her erstwhile board colleagues and friends when she lost the Romano vote (7-2). Sullivan's attacks on the character and reputation of Romano and that of her fellow board members tainted not only the hiring atmosphere but the integrity of the board itself. Sullivan declared herself the one true reformer; accused the rest of the board of ham-fisted machine politics and called for "someone" to run a slate against the KF majority on the board. Sullivan wrote the handbook on how to taint a hiring process and poison the atmosphere but she forgot about the law of unintended consequences; with the loss of her electoral slate Sullivan is now politically irrelevant and has no one but herself to blame. Karma.
ReplyDeleteGrafix Avenger et al--You're missing the point entirely. O'Rourke is not saying that there should be no compulsory education for students or that the public should no longer finance educations for all students, including special-ed students.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, he’s saying just the opposite – that kids who go to public schools deserve to have the same quality education as those who go to private school if taxpayers are spending as much or more per kid on public schools than the tuition at private school. He's arguing that with the money we as taxpayers now throw at public schools and federal/state/local bureaucracies, we could send everyone's kid to private school at no charge to them, including all the special needs childrens.
Wouldn’t most parents – and most of your friends – in Hoboken send their kid to a good private school if they could afford it and was convenient? Now, take it one step further – what if the tuition was free at that elite school and anyone could enroll? Would anyone still have kids enrolled in Hoboken or innercity schools?. DUH!
So why is O’Rourke essay such heresy to you?
As everyone knows, something isn’t working. O’Rourke simply points out that the billions spent on public schools hasn’t done much to improve scores and graduation rates in inner cities and elsewhere. He is saying that just because you throw a lot - or more --money at something,or create a big bureaucracy to administer it, it doesn’t necessarily translate into more effectiveness. It certainly can help, often a lot, if the money is spent wisely and prudently.
So why not consider some alternatives? Why not try some different approaches, make changes and improvements to the entrenched bureaucracy, often dedicated to its own preservation rather than change? Why deride someone who has the courage to say a guy like O’Rourke may have some good points? You have branded a well-intentioned, unpaid, elected school board member as the villain for simply endorsing the obvious -- that something isn't working here when we as a nation are spending so many billions and not getting the return that private schools produce for less money. Isn’t that what true leaders are supposed to do—call it as it really is? (cont'd)
(cont'd)Clearly, O'Rourke knows that his “Modest Proposal” is folly, since it would be impossible to obliterate the public school system in one fell swoop. He’s obviously trying to be provocative – to get some attention by positing a radical notion. But he’s trying to call attention to how cheated those in public schools often are, when there may be a cheaper, better alternative.
ReplyDeleteYou suggest that Sullivan’s agenda is to do away with public schools, and suggest charging her with ethics violations for simply writing “spot on” on her Facebook page to an article that simply endorses many of the same things she campaigned on – that changes are needed. She’s exercising her Constitutional right to free speech, first of all. But most important, you know that she’s not advocating the overthrow of public education, and for you to suggest this indicates how little regard you have for the real problems facing Hoboken.
Does the school board– a district plagued by bad schools and deeply entrenched problems – really have time for this pettiness? You , Grafix Avenger, are diverting precious and limited time that should be directed toward as you say, “mend’’-ing your district’s problems. Why lash out at someone for simply having the courage to state the obvious – we’re not getting value for our money. Why attack Sullivan and other reformers for trying to make the schools better and more effective, striving to eliminate waste, tackling the long-entrenched bureaucracy dedicated first and foremost to its own preservation rather than what's best for the kids?As I recall, her campaign promise was to put “kids be first.” I haven’t seen anything to indicate she’s done anything but put kids first.
You’re diverting attention from the kids who deserve better and suffer most if they don’t get a good education. The rest of us pay too -- in prison costs, high-unemployment rates, crime etc.
Isn’t it time for some real change? Don’t your kids and all the kids of Hoboken deserve better than this sheer pettiness? For Shame, Grafix Avenger et al.
Lemony,
ReplyDeleteO'Rourke is not saying that there should be no compulsory education for students or that the public should no longer finance educations for all students, including special-ed students.
Really?
"Let’s generate some pure outrage. Here’s my proposal: Close all the public schools. Send the kids home. Fire the teachers. Sell the buildings. Raze the U.S. Department of Education, leaving not one brick standing upon another and plow the land where it stood with salt."
"America’s public schools have served their purpose. Free and compulsory education was good for a somewhat unpromising young nation. The country was half turnip-head hillbilly and half slum trash from foreign refuse heaps. Public schools were supposed to take this mob of no-account pea pickers and bumbling greaseballs and turn them into a half-bright national citizenry"
GA
ReplyDeleteYou were too kind to this putz.
um Janis, P.J. Rourke is a POLITICAL SATIRIST... look up the definition of satire since you obviously don't recognize it. If O'Rourke suggests "eating the rich" as one article of his was headlined, do you really think he's advocating murder? ...Come on. .(.guess you might have missed books such as Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" in high school.)
ReplyDelete(and just so you know, Grafix, some people do travel outside of Hoboken to expand their horizons..as per your implication that any criticism is coming from "over the border" by a foreigner.. the IP address is like a postmark, indicating only the area where something is sent from, not necessarily the sender's permanent address.
Lemony
ReplyDeleteSatire that is used by ignorant people (Mo) to advance an agenda that touts the very outrageous "satirical" statement is no longer satire, but has become cannon fodder used to achieve the outrageous statement. Have no clue what your agenda is, could care less if you are froom Hoboken or not, but the people that read and post here are most assuredly capable of reading and understanding satirical pieces. I just find his satire not very funny or well written or persuaive, for any numer of reasons. But in short, any time someone needs to explain a joke or a satirical statement in as much detail or as obtusely and condescendingly as you do is explaining something that has failed as a joke or as a stirical piece.