Obama's Speech to the NAACP

[footstepsfrom#27]

Posting this since it touches a lot on recent discussions on this board related to issues like personal responsibility, etc...in the AA community. I thought the speech was excellent in that it laid out clearly a philosophical approach to the black community that some have questioned whether it exists in substantial form or not. Setting a standard from the Executive branch surely carries water. The strength of his comments on the black family begin at 25:00 into the speech and they're very strong.


<OBJECT height=344 width=425>


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Zv6EAaoFNno&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></OBJECT></P>
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090717/lf_nm_life/us_obama

Obama has tough-love message for African-Americans

NEW YORK (Reuters) – President Barack Obama had a tough-love message for fellow African-Americans on Thursday, urging black parents to push their children to think beyond dreams of being sports stars or rap music performers.

Obama's election as the first African-American president buoyed the black community. At the 100th anniversary celebration of the NAACP, the country's oldest civil rights group, he urged blacks to take greater responsibility for themselves and move away from reliance on government programs.

"We need a new mindset, a new set of attitudes -- because one of the most durable and destructive legacies of discrimination is the way that we have internalized a sense of limitation; how so many in our community have come to expect so little of ourselves," he said.

Obama told a packed ballroom at a Manhattan hotel that blacks need to recapture the spirit of the civil rights movement of a half century ago to tackle problems that have struck African-Americans disproportionately -- joblessness, spiraling healthcare costs and HIV-AIDS.

"What is required to overcome today's barriers is the same as was needed then -- the same commitment. The same sense of urgency. The same sense of sacrifice," he said.

Obama said parents need to force their children to set aside the video games and get to bed at a reasonable hour, and push them to set their sights beyond such iconic figures as NBA star LeBron James and rap singer Lil Wayne.

Education is the path to a better future, said Obama.

"Our kids can't all aspire to be the next LeBron or Lil Wayne. I want them aspiring to be scientists and engineers, doctors and teachers, not just ballers and rappers. I want them aspiring to be a Supreme Court justice. I want them aspiring to be president of the United States," he said.

Obama noted that his own life could have taken a different path, had it not been for his mother's urgings.

'SHE TOOK NO LIP'

"That mother of mine gave me love; she pushed me, and cared about my education," he said. "She took no lip and taught me right from wrong. Because of her, I had a chance to make the most of my abilities. I had the chance to make the most of my opportunities. I had the chance to make the most of life."

Obama was on one of his first major political outings since he took office January 20.

In Holmdel, New Jersey, he spoke twice for Gov. Jon Corzine, who is seeking re-election but lagging badly in the polls against Republican nominee Chris Christie.

New Jersey and Virginia hold gubernatorial elections in November. Though local issues typically define who wins, the outcome is likely to be viewed as an early referendum on Obama's leadership, ahead of the 2010 congressional elections.

Obama himself enjoys strong public approval ratings well over 50 percent, but they have been dropping in recent weeks from the lofty heights he had enjoyed in the first months of his presidency, suggesting his political honeymoon was coming to an end as Americans begin to examine his policies.

Obama said in recession-hit New Jersey that turning around the jobless rate is usually one of the lagging indicators at the end of an economic downturn.

After earlier in the week announcing it was now his economy to fix, he was tough in his criticism of Republicans, blaming them for getting the country into the current predicament.

Corzine, speaking to thousands at an open-air arena, attempted to tie his Republican opponents to the unpopular presidency of George W. Bush, a strategy similar to that which Obama employed in defeating John McCain last November.

"The same people who miserably failed in the White House now want you to hand the keys to the statehouse to them. No way!" Corzine said.

[That One Guy]

I think we're all agreed there. Notice he didn't say the key to succeeding was throwing the white man off their backs. It wasn't that they needed to find a way to stop funneling all the money to primarily white schools while primarily black schools were being underfunded.

[Rohirrim]

Yeah, I watched that. I'll bet Bill Cosby enjoyed it. ;D

[Garcia Bronco]

I think the whole damn country could use a "Personal Responsibility" speech.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I think we're all agreed there. Notice he didn't say the key to succeeding was throwing the white man off their backs. It wasn't that they needed to find a way to stop funneling all the money to primarily white schools while primarily black schools were being underfunded.
Yes so since his 37 minute speech to the NAACP doesn't state that, obviously black schools don't need any more money even though they're falling apart.

Good call.

BTW he does make the point that black schools need more funding...as well as other things not related to money.

[Dukes]

Yes so since his 37 minute speech to the NAACP doesn't state that, obviously black schools don't need any more money even though they're falling apart.

Good call.

BTW he does make the point that black schools need more funding...as well as other things not related to money


Just as long as they are public schools.

[That One Guy]

Yes so since his 37 minute speech to the NAACP doesn't state that, obviously black schools don't need any more money even though they're falling apart.

Good call.

BTW he does make the point that black schools need more funding...as well as other things not related to money.

But this (his speech) is the side that many want to turn a blind eye to and shift blame from.

[footstepsfrom#27]

But this (his speech) is the side that many want to turn a blind eye to and shift blame from.
What are you talking about? Did you even watch the speech or are you just pulling monkies out of your butt?

[cutthemdown]

That was being hard on his race? I would have liked to seen him talk more about fatherless kids, violent crime, prison reform and the fact that as more blacks and latinos become powerful we have to watch out for reverse discrimination as well.

Also a call to end affirmitive action in the next 10 yrs IMO would be a good move.

Set a date and then work to a goal were we are al judged purely on our merits and being any one race doesn't matter.

[cutthemdown]

I do think the part about encouraging kids to aspire to more then just being a sports star or rapper is a good thing.

But he didn't really say much about the whole hip hop culture other then that. I've heard people talk tougher on every subject he hit on.

For sure though inner city schools need more money and more emphasis on study, less on sports.

[frerottenextelway]

That was being hard on his race? I would have liked to seen him talk more about fatherless kids, violent crime, prison reform and the fact that as more blacks and latinos become powerful we have to watch out for reverse discrimination as well.

Also a call to end affirmitive action in the next 10 yrs IMO would be a good move.

Set a date and then work to a goal were we are al judged purely on our merits and being any one race doesn't matter.

An honest question. Do you believe ''equal opportunity'' is something every child should have in America?

[cutthemdown]

An honest question. Do you believe ''equal opportunity'' is something every child should have in America?

I think the whole term equal opportunity is a sham to tell you the truth. I mean can everything ever truly be equal? Some people will always have a better starting point because of rich parents, luck, whatever.

I do believe that ever child be given the opportunity to go to school. Do I believe all schools can be equal? no I don't.

So define equal opportunity a little better. To me that is like some catch phrase that really has a broad ambigious definition.

[cutthemdown]

Prison reform is the biggest issue IMO and he didn't talk about that. Too many young black men in prison and just saying that not enough.

We need a plan that reduces that number and IMO just more money for inner city schools not enough. We have to reform drug laws, put gamgmembers in there own prisons, do a crackdown on street gangs that is like nothing country ever seen before.

One reason prison gangs got so big is we allowed them to recruit and spread to other prisons.

What you need is prisons where you don't go there unless you are a black gangmember. Ones you go to when you are a latino gangmemeber, ones you go to when you are a white supremist.

Then nicer mixed prisons for all races who are not known street gang members or white supremist. Any gamg activity and guess what you go to the worst place imaginable. A prison with everyone just like you and no one different to hate on.

Then reform drug laws, keep them illegal, but make it community service and fines and drug diversion classes.

Then we may need more money for programs that give a male role model to kids with no dads around. I would think big brother etc a good place to start. That may be more important then just more money for schools.

Also maybe more classes in the grade school area that show kids what it means to be a parent, why its so important, why not having kids until you are married and ready for them is a key to a good life.

I know we talk about rubbers alot, and not spreading disease, and not getting pregnant, but maybe not enough on how to reach the point you can actually enrich your life by doing that.

[footstepsfrom#27]

That was being hard on his race?
Where did I say or imply he was being "hard on his race"? I said his comments were "very strong". He addressed issues related to the black community in a speech to the NAACP. Is there something inappropriate about him calling for black kids to aspire to be scientists and engineers instead of rappers and ball players?
I would have liked to seen him talk more about fatherless kids, violent crime, prison reform and the fact that as more blacks and latinos become powerful we have to watch out for reverse discrimination as well.
Let me get this straight. You're telling me that on a speech given on the 100th anniversary to the NAACP, the organization tasked with standing up for BLACK civil rights, you expected Obama to talk about reverse discrimination against whites? That's really what you believe? Hilarious!
Also a call to end affirmitive action in the next 10 yrs IMO would be a good move.

Set a date and then work to a goal were we are al judged purely on our merits and being any one race doesn't matter.
This was a speech to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People...meditate on that for a while and see if you still think he needed to talk about how tough whites have had it OK?

Don't turn this into another thread jack on race. I started the thread to point out something positive about a speech that relates to a positive message about the black family and things that carry more weight because they come from him as opposed to some random actor or entertainer, sports figure or God forbid...a sports writer.

[cutthemdown]

Don't get me wrong though I have no problem with the speech. I just expected more because it was labeled tough love. I was thinking the other speech he gave on fathers day was more the tough love. If anything he went easier in this one as to not seem to negative.

I like Obama engaging his race to think big. I mean cmon hes a leader and he IMO is trying to be inspirational to all. As far as trying to fire up Americans to do more, volunteer more, go get more school, I am really happy with Obama and will heed his call.

I already do some stuff like that but I can do even more.

[cutthemdown]

Calm down footsteps and pull the corn out of your ass.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Yeah, I watched that. I'll bet Bill Cosby enjoyed it. ;D

That was my first thought. Bill Cosby is finally validated by a prominent African American figure.

Bill Cosby was the first African American to present the media image of black success to the widespread masses. That show was watched, respected, and loved universally by people of many different cultures.

Bill Cosby has set the standard for quality entertainment not only for African Americans, but for people of all American cultures. That show was especially important for young black people who saw the Huxtables as a good family that they could emulate. Its almost a cliche..."What do you want your family to be like? The Cosby Show."

[cutthemdown]

The whole notion we even need organizations that base everything on race is silly to me but whatever.

IMO they just divide.

[cutthemdown]

I still say the fathers day speech way better.

[epicSocialism4tw]

That was being hard on his race? I would have liked to seen him talk more about fatherless kids, violent crime, prison reform and the fact that as more blacks and latinos become powerful we have to watch out for reverse discrimination as well.

Also a call to end affirmitive action in the next 10 yrs IMO would be a good move.

Set a date and then work to a goal were we are al judged purely on our merits and being any one race doesn't matter.

Sorry to burst that bubble, but Obama wont be undercutting the quota mentality any time soon. His appointment of Sotomayor is all the proof you need.

[frerottenextelway]

I think the whole term equal opportunity is a sham to tell you the truth. I mean can everything ever truly be equal? Some people will always have a better starting point because of rich parents, luck, whatever.

I do believe that ever child be given the opportunity to go to school. Do I believe all schools can be equal? no I don't.

So define equal opportunity a little better. To me that is like some catch phrase that really has a broad ambigious definition.

Well.... the follow-up if you said yes was going to be to ask if you believe you had the same opportunity of success as Henry Ford IV.

Obv, and I think you stated as much here, the answer is no.

It's tricky philosophical I think. On one hand, I think the common sense --- Jesus Christ-esque --- answer is yes, everyone should be born equal. On the otherhand, I totally see the emotion and logic with leaving your child(ren) something extra. When I have children I want to leave them in the best circumstance I can.

ANYWAYS - the bottom line is, I've come to disagree with Affirmative Action based on gender/race/etc, but do largely agree with it based on opportunity - to an extent. I think - even if you won't admit it - your post comes to the conclusion.

BTW, one of my conservative friends believes the answer is a pure no. I dunno, he's a good man, but that just seems evil to me.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Well now that the Klan is fully assembled I'll be moving on. Enjoy the circle jerk. I should have known better than to think you had a chance to watch a simple speech without turning it into another diatribe on all your perceived hurts and wrongs you've suffered so much from for so many years.

[frerottenextelway]

Well now that the Klan is fully assembled I'll be moving on. Enjoy the circle jerk. I should have known better than to think you had a chance to watch a simple speech without turning it into another diatribe on all your perceived hurts and wrongs you've suffered so much from for so many years.

Hope I'm not envolved in this. My opinion is the same as Obama's!

[epicSocialism4tw]

Well now that the Klan is fully assembled I'll be moving on. Enjoy the circle jerk. I should have known better than to think you had a chance to watch a simple speech without turning it into another diatribe on all your perceived hurts and wrongs you've suffered so much from for so many years.

Thanks for the confirmation, Jesse Jackson.

[cutthemdown]

Why I said I liked the speech, but thought the label Obama gives tough love was misleading. I stated I liked the Fathers Day speech more and laid out what issues I feel he missed on.

Footsteps what in any of these posts can you possible construe as KKK like?

[epicSocialism4tw]

Why I said I liked the speech, but thought the label Obama gives tough love was misleading. I stated I liked the Fathers Day speech more and laid out what issues I feel he missed on.

Footsteps what in any of these posts can you possible construe as KKK like?

Not fawning over Obama = must be KKK

[cutthemdown]

Not fawning over Obama = must be KKK

It's just I saw the thread title and was expecting it to be some stern lecture or something but it was nothing like that. I never said I disagreed with more emphasis on school and less on lil wayne and Jay-z. Interesting though did he call any rappers out whose woman sang for them? prob not LIl Wayne must be a repub!!!! LOL yes I am kidding.

People need to lighten up.

[Odysseus]

That was being hard on his race? I would have liked to seen him talk more about fatherless kids, violent crime, prison reform and the fact that as more blacks and latinos become powerful we have to watch out for reverse discrimination as well.

Also a call to end affirmitive action in the next 10 yrs IMO would be a good move.

Set a date and then work to a goal were we are al judged purely on our merits and being any one race doesn't matter.

I wish that I could immerse you in some of these neighborhoods so you can see the real choices that exist for some Americans. You seem bitterly determined to hold on to "them and us" and think yourself not responsible for the reactions you receive.

My biggest frustration with Obama's speech is that he had to actually stop what he is doing to explain this stuff. There is a whole planet of people who see things in terms of "them and us". That has to be frustrating.

Imagine having a job where no matter who you went to for support they would respond "It's your job to bring that message. You are the President." When did we become so idle and weak?

[rastaman]

I do think the part about encouraging kids to aspire to more then just being a sports star or rapper is a good thing.

But he didn't really say much about the whole hip hop culture other then that. I've heard people talk tougher on every subject he hit on.

For sure though inner city schools need more money and more emphasis on study, less on sports.

It won't matter how much money is spent if parents are not involved in their children(s) school curriculm, sending their children to school inspired and ready to learn, and if the parents don't support their child(s) teacher in the form of homework completion and attending Parent Teacher Conferences.

Simple put........schools are not disciplinary enclaves...that part begins at home. Teachers and School Administrators are not miracle workers and must have buy in and support from the parents and the student(s) themselves.

[footstepsfrom#27]

It won't matter how much money is spent if parents are not involved in their children(s) school curriculm, sending their children to school inspired and ready to learn, and if the parents don't support their child(s) teacher in the form of homework completion and attending Parent Teacher Conferences.

Simple put........schools are not disciplinary enclaves...that part begins at home. Teachers and School Administrators are not miracle workers and must have buy in and support from the parents and the student(s) themselves.
I completely agree. A lot of people however, want to use that as an excuse to continiue the current segregated and disproportionate school systems we currently have where urban predominately black schools are allowed to wallow in inadequate conditions, staffed with poorly paid teachers and lacking in supplies and basic technology. Ethics as well as our own economic survival dictate we change this disparate approach to educating children with a clear focus on providing a strong opportunity to learn to all kids, not just those whose parents live in the suburbs.

[That One Guy]

I completely agree. A lot of people however, want to use that as an excuse to continiue the current segregated and disproportionate school systems we currently have where urban predominately black schools are allowed to wallow in inadequate conditions, staffed with poorly paid teachers and lacking in supplies and basic technology. Ethics as well as our own economic survival dictate we change this disparate approach to educating children with a clear focus on providing a strong opportunity to learn to all kids, not just those whose parents live in the suburbs.

This is a chicken or egg argument.

How can you explain that people everyday are undoubtedly coming out of those areas as a success and moving on to bigger and better things? Are they just brilliant and can overcome the poor schooling? Or is it that the resources are there to be taken advantage of but the horse has to be willing to drink.

I don't care if the schools are crappy if noone's gonna take em serious. I obviously think this is an issue that starts in the attitude of the community and family moreso than a pure failure of the school system.

And, at the end of the day, can't people vote for an increase in property taxes and levies to fund the school? We had that problem in high school where funding was short and programs had to be scrapped or taxes increased. I don't know all the details on this and I know there's some state and federal money going to schools but isn't the majority of a school's funding based on the taxes of the area?

[footstepsfrom#27]

This is a chicken or egg argument.

How can you explain that people everyday are undoubtedly coming out of those areas as a success and moving on to bigger and better things? Are they just brilliant and can overcome the poor schooling? Or is it that the resources are there to be taken advantage of but the horse has to be willing to drink.

I don't care if the schools are crappy if noone's gonna take em serious. I obviously think this is an issue that starts in the attitude of the community and family moreso than a pure failure of the school system.

And, at the end of the day, can't people vote for an increase in property taxes and levies to fund the school? We had that problem in high school where funding was short and programs had to be scrapped or taxes increased. I don't know all the details on this and I know there's some state and federal money going to schools but isn't the majority of a school's funding based on the taxes of the area?
First of all, it's not a "chicken or egg" argument. The simple fact is, public education is the ONLY public service funded by taxpayer dollars that offers preferential treatment to those in higher income brackets. It doesn't matter whether you understand how/why the performance of kids in school is based in family structure, discipline, lack of familial support etc...we have NO RIGHT to fund suburban schools differently than we do those in the inner city. The entire local district tax sponsored system of raising supplemental support for schools through local property taxes is racially and economically discriminatory and it's deliberately designed to impact the black community. Urban school districts quite simply cannot raise the level of support for schools that suburban districts can...but that's not the point. They shouldn't have to. What gives us the right to hoard tax money for our own schools just because we think we're somehow entitled to have our kids receive a better education because we can afford to live in a nice area?

I continuously hear whites make this silly argument that because *some* black kids succeed in ****ty schools that means we don't need to fairly fund public education...as if the existence of those who can overcome our discriminatory actions justifies them. Then we turn around and say we want the job and labor market to be totally color blind without some kind of leveling system in place to make up for the unjust system we've installed.

The question is not why a few black kids rise above our actions...it's why we won't change those actions.

[cutthemdown]

First of all, it's not a "chicken or egg" argument. The simple fact is, public education is the ONLY public service funded by taxpayer dollars that offers preferential treatment to those in higher income brackets. It doesn't matter whether you understand how/why the performance of kids in school is based in family structure, discipline, lack of familial support etc...we have NO RIGHT to fund suburban schools differently than we do those in the inner city. The entire local district tax sponsored system of raising supplemental support for schools through local property taxes is racially and economically discriminatory and it's deliberately designed to impact the black community. Urban school districts quite simply cannot raise the level of support for schools that suburban districts can...but that's not the point. They shouldn't have to. What gives us the right to hoard tax money for our own schools just because we think we're somehow entitled to have our kids receive a better education because we can afford to live in a nice area?

I continuously hear whites make this silly argument that because *some* black kids succeed in ****ty schools that means we don't need to fairly fund public education...as if the existence of those who can overcome our discriminatory actions justifies them. Then we turn around and say we want the job and labor market to be totally color blind without some kind of leveling system in place to make up for the unjust system we've installed.

The question is not why a few black kids rise above our actions...it's why we won't change those actions.

Where are the numbers that show how much money goes to inner city schools, and how much to inner city.

I would like to see the per student dollar amount to get a better idea of what we are dealing with.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Where are the numbers that show how much money goes to inner city schools, and how much to inner city.

I would like to see the per student dollar amount to get a better idea of what we are dealing with.
There is no chart you can look at that easily quantifies this. Federal funding goes through SEA's (State Education Agencies) which allocate dollars per child on the basis of a complicated formula that is based on attendance primarily, which is why you see local schools constantly talking about "at risk" kids...the term is used to describe *what* they are "at risk" FOR...dropping out of school. Basing funding on attendance hurts the funding for urban schools, where kids are more likely to miss school. It's also why public school administrators don't like charter schools...because in siphoning off students, they also siphon funding. The more students you have, the more funding you have assuming the students are in class. That isn't dependent on the LEA (Local Education Agency) it's federal/state law. In Texas the system is called PEIMS (Public Education Information Management System) and it's a disaster. Under PEIMS when Bush was governor here the system had so many holes in it the Texas Charter Schools were employing massive fraud...at least $70 million in 1998 alone.

Suburban schools make up for the difference in federal limits on spending by allocating bond issues and property tax increases. In theory it's "their money" and proponents will say they have a right to do with it what they please. In reality...this sounds good but it ignores the fact that urban schools were left in the same deplorable conditions they were before the federal courts started trying to equalize education in Brown v. Board of Education. Some of these inner city schools are 90 years old. IF we had taken the initiative to rebuild the infrastructure of inner city education to begin with and we only had to maintain acceptable levels of quality since then, a case could be made for limiting funding to the urban schools that's equivalent but that's not the case. This is a prime reason that courts have undertaken constitutionality issues to find school funding methods illegal in a lot of cases. On top of this, tax revenues based on property value have been in the toilet for decades in inner cities and business sales taxes in economically deprived neighborhoods are much less than they are in the suburbs. On top of this, teacher salaries for urban areas are usually lower, so they can't attract the best teachers.

Combine all the factors and what you're left with is a stratified education system that is essentially just as segregated as the one we had in 1954 when Brown was decided. Then we wonder why it's so difficult to get parents involved...while part of it is related to social problems in urban families, part is also a despair based apathy that's rooted in the realization that these schools are not teaching their kids anything to prepare them for the real world, let alone educating them for a technology based economy.

[That One Guy]

First of all, it's not a "chicken or egg" argument. The simple fact is, public education is the ONLY public service funded by taxpayer dollars that offers preferential treatment to those in higher income brackets. It doesn't matter whether you understand how/why the performance of kids in school is based in family structure, discipline, lack of familial support etc...we have NO RIGHT to fund suburban schools differently than we do those in the inner city. The entire local district tax sponsored system of raising supplemental support for schools through local property taxes is racially and economically discriminatory and it's deliberately designed to impact the black community. Urban school districts quite simply cannot raise the level of support for schools that suburban districts can...but that's not the point. They shouldn't have to. What gives us the right to hoard tax money for our own schools just because we think we're somehow entitled to have our kids receive a better education because we can afford to live in a nice area?

I continuously hear whites make this silly argument that because *some* black kids succeed in ****ty schools that means we don't need to fairly fund public education...as if the existence of those who can overcome our discriminatory actions justifies them. Then we turn around and say we want the job and labor market to be totally color blind without some kind of leveling system in place to make up for the unjust system we've installed.

The question is not why a few black kids rise above our actions...it's why we won't change those actions.

My god you're just full of excuses. It's insane. I bet the people who designed the program were just sitting around a table one day trying to find the best way to stick it to the black people and that's what they came up with.

And you complain that inner city kids don't get the funding for their school but then say they don't get some of that funding because they don't go to school. Is that not a community problem again?

You seem to refuse to allow any personal responsibility here. You apparently think blacks can never leave the teat of social support programs and could never assume responsibility for themselves. You're as insulting as anyone on this board.

If some can succeed, any can succeed. Unless part of the conspiracy is that "the man" nominates a few each year to succeed just so he can defend the system. Is that what it is? That'd explain it... I guess.

[footstepsfrom#27]

My god you're just full of excuses. It's insane. I bet the people who designed the program were just sitting around a table one day trying to find the best way to stick it to the black people and that's what they came up with.

And you complain that inner city kids don't get the funding for their school but then say they don't get some of that funding because they don't go to school. Is that not a community problem again?

You seem to refuse to allow any personal responsibility here. You apparently think blacks can never leave the teat of social support programs and could never assume responsibility for themselves. You're as insulting as anyone on this board.

If some can succeed, any can succeed. Unless part of the conspiracy is that "the man" nominates a few each year to succeed just so he can defend the system. Is that what it is? That'd explain it... I guess.
First of all, you need a good history lesson. I don't know what "program" you're referring to, but I'm talking about the federally funded US public education system. In 1954 when the Supreme Court forced public schools to STOP deliberately discriminating against black students, and that order had to be backed up by the force of the US military, school districts all across this country were the product of segregation. In spite of what you've been told...American schools in inner cities are almost entirely still segregated. In most big cites black and Hispanic students constitute well over 90% of the student body...in some cases as high as 99%. Brown v. Board of Education ruled separate but equal schools unconstitutional...yet these schools are both separate and UNequal...little has changed.

Second, you're apparently unaware of the political efforts to dilute the minority vote, which directly impacts every aspect of the decisions cities make, including those in education.

I'll give you an example; right here in Dallas three years ago we had a citywide referendum that was orchestrated by the white power structure in the city government. Mayor Laura Miller proposed a "strong mayor" form of city government that would concentrate all power in the hands of the mayor's office and eliminate the single member voting districts that spread political power among various sections of the city, with black and Hispanic populated districts getting a seat at the table alongside the rest of the city's representatives to share power with the mayor. Miller, who was no friend of the black community...was supported by two primary interests; the downtown business elite and the small district of Highland Park/University Park...where people like Jerry Jones and the Bush family live. The rest of the city, including the racially diverse but majority white section of Dallas in the north, refused to vote for her power grab. Single member districts were preserved, but only because of a ballot box initiative so vulgar even middle class whites knew it for exactly what it was...an obnoxious slap in the face to the minority community. This kind of idiocy goes on all over the country and it has for decades.

I listed attendance as only one issue in the funding problem, not the sole one, so your focus on that is spurious. Having said that...you're right; lots of kids going to these schools don't want to be there, and for good reason. Inner city schools are dangerous and they're not preparing these kids for anything worthwhile...so why should they want to go?

You suggest I'm insulting? Please...you're the one insulting here. You call equalizing education "the teat of social programs"...as if education is some kind of giveaway we as the generous taxpayers are providing black kids out of the goodness of our hearts. Public education is compulsory...and it's no more a "social program" in the inner city than it is in suburbia. You're viewing this through the lens of some kind of racist agenda that goes so far as to say; "if some can succeed any can succeed", which is obviously utter bull****. Even if what you said were true...it DOES NOT excuse us from not complying with Brown v. Board of education, which specifically states that "separate but equal" is not constitutional. You need to read up on this case and how our education system is not complying with Brown. I suggest you read Jonathan Kozol's book, The Shame of the Nation with an open mind.

Nowhere in my post did I mention social programs. In fact I'd like to see most social programs eventually phased out and replaced with legitimate policies of economic development that produce tangible results instead. This is not about social programs...it's about the obligation of the public trust to provide an equal educational opportunity for all kids, not just white kids.

Here's a solution you should like; Since you say that funding doesn't matter and "if one can succeed then all can", how about we just reverse the funding situation? Let's take all public tax money raised by local suburban school districts through bond issues and property taxes and donate it to urban schools instead so they can simply swap budgets. Then let's assign the PEIMS or similar convoluted systems to work so that urban districts benefit more from SEA funding than suburban districts do based on their funding formulas. Finally, let's follow that up with paying teachers more in the inner city schools. In fact let's do this...let's bus all the kids in suburbia to the same schools these kids inside the inner cities are going to and vice versa...then we can find out if your theory works or not. If you have kids...would you be willing to send your kids to schools loaded with all kinds of facilities problems? Bad plumbing, poor insulation, cancer causing asbestos in the walls, torn up carpet, lousy school furnishings, air conditioning that doesn't work in the summer and heat that doesn't work in the winter, lack of school supplies, old beat up computers or no computers, lack of books, lack of gym equipment, etc, etc, etc...then after a few years we'll find out if you still think it doesn't matter and whether upgrading your kids education is a "social program" or not.

Deal?

Finally...even in suburban schools where black kids attend, they are nearly always left out of curriculum decisions. Black kids are not taught black history in suburban schools...and in fact often not in urban schools either. Not only is this wrong for black kids, it's wrong for white kids. White kids should be taught black history right alongside the history of Europe or any other history courses they take. It's part of OUR history for pete's sake, yet it's left out of the vast majority of schools. We force the same curriculum on black children without any nod to the truth about our culture and society and then we expect them to achieve at the same rate. On top of that we'll complain if it's brought up that even in urban schools they want it taught.

Separate but equal is the same as separate but unequal...we're still doing it 55 years after the high court ordered it stopped.

[cutthemdown]

Good info on it being tied to attendance. I did know that. Also makes sense that hurts urban school where like you said kids drop out a lot.

I'd say the drop out rate is bad because of the fact too many black dads not around.

That goes back to my point that the main goal has to be less dads in prison, more dads raising families.

1-drug reform
2-prison reform (including segregating not by race, but by gang. Then we have prison for the young men who can acutally be rehabilitated. I know oversight would be tough when it was a gray area if the person was a knows gang member but I think we could do it.

Also I could go along with the money not being tied to attendance. It sounds reasonable maybe schools in really tough areas to educate get a break from that.

Also if they ever do start making tax dollars from drug legalization, I feel it should all go to education to offset the fact I think drug legalization a big big mistake. Reform use, down to a misdmeanor yes, but not totally legal.

I actually hung out with some black girls over the weekend. I gotta say that I had a great time and realize now somethings I didn't understand before. Nothing to deep but they did describe a scary atmosphere at the school they went to in LA and said the Poly (the mostly minority) would have been like a utopia compared to there school Roosevelt in LA which has mostly latino student body.

One thing she also said was that latinos treat them really bad, but the with white people it is more subtle. Then she said, and then we stopped talking about it and just went back to jammin music and partying with everyone else, that sometimes is sucks being black. I felt really bad because no one should ever have to feel like that.

So yeah more money for black, latino inner city schools. Really all schools. I'll be honest I would love for all of the stimulus package to have been to the schools. Let's face it it just bailed out bankers and union bosses. Then they scatter it around where you know tons goes to this stupid project we don't need.

I work with kids in music and if people were smart they would realize you make a society better by starting at a the young ages and molding them into the type of citizens you want for your country.

[watermock]

We might as well scattered the 14 trillion around in the wind.

The bankers couldn't reach it from the 65th floor.

[watermock]

If some can succeed, any can succeed. Unless part of the conspiracy is that "the man" nominates a few each year to succeed just so he can defend the system. Is that what it is? That'd explain it... I guess.

I found it depressing how other minorities seem to be able to integrate.

Quck answer?

It's obvious.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I found it depressing how other minorities seem to be able to integrate.

Quck answer?

It's obvious.
Which ones are you referring to?

[That One Guy]

First of all, you need a good history lesson. I don't know what "program" you're referring to, but I'm talking about the federally funded US public education system. In 1954 when the Supreme Court forced public schools to STOP deliberately discriminating against black students, and that order had to be backed up by the force of the US military, school districts all across this country were the product of segregation. In spite of what you've been told...American schools in inner cities are almost entirely still segregated. In most big cites black and Hispanic students constitute well over 90% of the student body...in some cases as high as 99%. Brown v. Board of Education ruled separate but equal schools unconstitutional...yet these schools are both separate and UNequal...little has changed.

Second, you're apparently unaware of the political efforts to dilute the minority vote, which directly impacts every aspect of the decisions cities make, including those in education.

I'll give you an example; right here in Dallas three years ago we had a citywide referendum that was orchestrated by the white power structure in the city government. Mayor Laura Miller proposed a "strong mayor" form of city government that would concentrate all power in the hands of the mayor's office and eliminate the single member voting districts that spread political power among various sections of the city, with black and Hispanic populated districts getting a seat at the table alongside the rest of the city's representatives to share power with the mayor. Miller, who was no friend of the black community...was supported by two primary interests; the downtown business elite and the small district of Highland Park/University Park...where people like Jerry Jones and the Bush family live. The rest of the city, including the racially diverse but majority white section of Dallas in the north, refused to vote for her power grab. Single member districts were preserved, but only because of a ballot box initiative so vulgar even middle class whites knew it for exactly what it was...an obnoxious slap in the face to the minority community. This kind of idiocy goes on all over the country and it has for decades.

I listed attendance as only one issue in the funding problem, not the sole one, so your focus on that is spurious. Having said that...you're right; lots of kids going to these schools don't want to be there, and for good reason. Inner city schools are dangerous and they're not preparing these kids for anything worthwhile...so why should they want to go?

You suggest I'm insulting? Please...you're the one insulting here. You call equalizing education "the teat of social programs"...as if education is some kind of giveaway we as the generous taxpayers are providing black kids out of the goodness of our hearts. Public education is compulsory...and it's no more a "social program" in the inner city than it is in suburbia. You're viewing this through the lens of some kind of racist agenda that goes so far as to say; "if some can succeed any can succeed", which is obviously utter bull****. Even if what you said were true...it DOES NOT excuse us from not complying with Brown v. Board of education, which specifically states that "separate but equal" is not constitutional. You need to read up on this case and how our education system is not complying with Brown. I suggest you read Jonathan Kozol's book, The Shame of the Nation with an open mind.

Nowhere in my post did I mention social programs. In fact I'd like to see most social programs eventually phased out and replaced with legitimate policies of economic development that produce tangible results instead. This is not about social programs...it's about the obligation of the public trust to provide an equal educational opportunity for all kids, not just white kids.

Here's a solution you should like; Since you say that funding doesn't matter and "if one can succeed then all can", how about we just reverse the funding situation? Let's take all public tax money raised by local suburban school districts through bond issues and property taxes and donate it to urban schools instead so they can simply swap budgets. Then let's assign the PEIMS or similar convoluted systems to work so that urban districts benefit more from SEA funding than suburban districts do based on their funding formulas. Finally, let's follow that up with paying teachers more in the inner city schools. In fact let's do this...let's bus all the kids in suburbia to the same schools these kids inside the inner cities are going to and vice versa...then we can find out if your theory works or not. If you have kids...would you be willing to send your kids to schools loaded with all kinds of facilities problems? Bad plumbing, poor insulation, cancer causing asbestos in the walls, torn up carpet, lousy school furnishings, air conditioning that doesn't work in the summer and heat that doesn't work in the winter, lack of school supplies, old beat up computers or no computers, lack of books, lack of gym equipment, etc, etc, etc...then after a few years we'll find out if you still think it doesn't matter and whether upgrading your kids education is a "social program" or not.

Deal?

Finally...even in suburban schools where black kids attend, they are nearly always left out of curriculum decisions. Black kids are not taught black history in suburban schools...and in fact often not in urban schools either. Not only is this wrong for black kids, it's wrong for white kids. White kids should be taught black history right alongside the history of Europe or any other history courses they take. It's part of OUR history for pete's sake, yet it's left out of the vast majority of schools. We force the same curriculum on black children without any nod to the truth about our culture and society and then we expect them to achieve at the same rate. On top of that we'll complain if it's brought up that even in urban schools they want it taught.

Separate but equal is the same as separate but unequal...we're still doing it 55 years after the high court ordered it stopped.

De facto segregation isn't the problem of the government. Anyone in an inner city school could move to a small town in Iowa and attend a "white school" where cost of living is just as low if not lower than downtown LA and whatnot.

Minimum wage is 7something an hour and you can find a decent apartment in the town where my parents live for about $250 a month. You can exist and learn in the same conditions my little sister has. How am I then responsible if they choose to stay in the inner city atmosphere?

That's just another example of how something that is someone's personal responsibility is somehow turned to make them the victim of racism.

[footstepsfrom#27]

De facto segregation isn't the problem of the government. Anyone in an inner city school could move to a small town in Iowa and attend a "white school" where cost of living is just as low if not lower than downtown LA and whatnot.

Minimum wage is 7something an hour and you can find a decent apartment in the town where my parents live for about $250 a month. You can exist and learn in the same conditions my little sister has. How am I then responsible if they choose to stay in the inner city atmosphere?

That's just another example of how something that is someone's personal responsibility is somehow turned to make them the victim of racism.
You fail to grasp the argument. You're trying to make compliance with federal law tied to whether you think something is likely to "fix the problem". It's not about that...it's about the fact that we have a system where schools are not only funded unequally, but we're perpetuating this deliberately.

You failed to answer my question. Would you like to see if your kids can prove your theory right by swapping places with kids in an inner city school? Or would you object on the basis that because you live in a certain area your kids are entitled to a better education?

Name another government service that's 1) compulsory, and 2) has it's quality rationed to the public based on your income.

The truth is you simply don't want to deal with the fact that we live in a society that willingly ignores the educational opportunities of millions of kids because we really don't value their potential contribution like we do our own kids.

[That One Guy]

You fail to grasp the argument. You're trying to make compliance with federal law tied to whether you think something is likely to "fix the problem". It's not about that...it's about the fact that we have a system where schools are not only funded unequally, but we're perpetuating this deliberately.

You failed to answer my question. Would you like to see if your kids can prove your theory right by swapping places with kids in an inner city school? Or would you object on the basis that because you live in a certain area your kids are entitled to a better education?

Name another government service that's 1) compulsory, and 2) has it's quality rationed to the public based on your income.

The truth is you simply don't want to deal with the fact that we live in a society that willingly ignores the educational opportunities of millions of kids because we really don't value their potential contribution like we do our own kids.

I will bet you your life savings, right here and now, that if I moved to the inner city I could raise a child that graduated high school and pursued college if he chose to.

Obviously we can't make a binding bet over the internet but I would be 1,000% certain in my ability to raise a child that can succeed. I obviously can't prove that but that's my opinion.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I will bet you your life savings, right here and now, that if I moved to the inner city I could raise a child that graduated high school and pursued college if he chose to.

Obviously we can't make a binding bet over the internet but I would be 1,000% certain in my ability to raise a child that can succeed. I obviously can't prove that but that's my opinion.
Pretending for a moment that I believe you, I didn't ask you if you COULD, I asked if you WOULD...and I have no doubt you would not. Nor do I think you have a clue as to how difficult this would be, especially since your child could easily be dead before they ever made it to college. That' simply an unwarranted assumption on your part.

You're still missing the point though. Regardless of whether some possibility of success exists, it does not excuse us refusing to provide an equivalent education for millions of our kids simply because of what part of town they live in. It's unacceptable on every level.

I asked before...name another public service paid for with taxpayer money that's qualitatively limited based on your economic standing in society.

[That One Guy]

Pretending for a moment that I believe you, I didn't ask you if you COULD, I asked if you WOULD...and I have no doubt you would not. Nor do I think you have a clue as to how difficult this would be, especially since your child could easily be dead before they ever made it to college. That' simply an unwarranted assumption on your part.

You're still missing the point though. Regardless of whether some possibility of success exists, it does not excuse us refusing to provide an equivalent education for millions of our kids simply because of what part of town they live in. It's unacceptable on every level.

I asked before...name another public service paid for with taxpayer money that's qualitatively limited based on your economic standing in society.

Whether I would or not... absolutely wouldn't. I'd move from the urban area, like I said anyone could do.

And what I feel we have no responsibility to do is take the hands of those who refuse to succeed and continue to spend boatloads of money on those who will end up useless anyways. If they can't motivate themselves, I feel no responsibility to them.

[cutthemdown]

Its a fine line between a handout, and spending money to try and make things better for everyone.

Less troubled black youths= less crime=better cities=better schools=more good black kids. Or latino, where ever you go where you see things just so run down its pathetic.

My point is you cant give money that isn't there. The country would have to sacrifice something else because you can't just keep saying add another 1.5% to rich people. Eventually that will cost jobs and stifle the investing.

Last thing inner cities need is more unemployment.

So what is the solution. Nice schools aren't going to say we can get by with less money, and the people whose taxes pay for those schools, in those areas, are not going to tolerate there money being taken from there kids school and shipped off to the inner city school.

It has to come from somewhere footsteps what really is your plan.

Is just not tying money to attendance enough to do anything?

[cutthemdown]

Like I said before all the medical marijuana tax calif is getting should go to giving healthcare to kids who don't have it, or the schools, period.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Whether I would or not... absolutely wouldn't. I'd move from the urban area, like I said anyone could do.

And what I feel we have no responsibility to do is take the hands of those who refuse to succeed and continue to spend boatloads of money on those who will end up useless anyways. If they can't motivate themselves, I feel no responsibility to them.
You continue to make the same stupid points. How would you know if people trapped in these places have the means to leave, let alone are unmotivated to succeed? You wouldn't. When's the last time you actually ventured into one of these inner city neighborhoods, or have you ever?

It's more than how much something costs in town X...people have family, the need to be with and around them for support in helping with kids, etc...you're big idea is to transplant the entire urban population of America to small towns? You're ridiculous.

You continue to ignore the point; it has ZERO to do with whether it will work or not...give me ONE justification for why we have the right to withhold equal education from people based on where they live.

I've asked this repeatedly and you have no answers and continue to avoid the question. What makes you think your kids deserve a better public education opportunity than somebody elses kids?

How arrogant.

[Spider]

You continue to make the same stupid points. How would you know if people trapped in these places have the means to leave, let alone are unmotivated to succeed? You wouldn't. When's the last time you actually ventured into one of these inner city neighborhoods, or have you ever?

It's more than how much something costs in town X...people have family, the need to be with and around them for support in helping with kids, etc...you're big idea is to transplant the entire urban population of America to small towns? You're ridiculous.

You continue to ignore the point; it has ZERO to do with whether it will work or not...give me ONE justification for why we have the right to withhold equal education from people based on where they live.

I've asked this repeatedly and you have no answers and continue to avoid the question. What makes you think your kids deserve a better public education opportunity than somebody elses kids?

How arrogant.
I see you met Cah............

[footstepsfrom#27]

Its a fine line between a handout, and spending money to try and make things better for everyone.
No it's not. Public education is not a social program, and if it WAS a social program, then the place where we could make that argument is in the suburbs since they're getting an undeserved "hand up" by virtue of the higher quality schools, etc...there is no case to be made that merely equalizing education can be called a social or entitlement program.
Less troubled black youths= less crime=better cities=better schools=more good black kids. Or latino, where ever you go where you see things just so run down its pathetic.

My point is you cant give money that isn't there. The country would have to sacrifice something else because you can't just keep saying add another 1.5% to rich people. Eventually that will cost jobs and stifle the investing.
First of all, it's not a question of "giving money that isn't there". It's not a question of "giving" at all. It's a question of how we allocate our available resources fairly instead of unfairly. It's a question of providing what we're supposed to be doing anyway under the law which we're not doing. Second, if we have to sacrifice something else, then we sacrifice something else...simple.

Whenever this is phrased as "giveaways" or "social programs" the presumption is that white kids in the suburbs somehow "deserve" what we're spending on their education already but the black inner city schools don't, otherwise this would not be phrased this way. There is no need for me to make an argument that this will work or won't work based on social need, because it's not about that. It's about doing what is equal under the law.
So what is the solution. Nice schools aren't going to say we can get by with less money, and the people whose taxes pay for those schools, in those areas, are not going to tolerate there money being taken from there kids school and shipped off to the inner city school.
Since when is public tax money "their money"? Suburban schools have no more "right" to proper funding than urban schools do, yet they receive it anyway. If you think the reason urban schools are multiple levels of quality behind in every way that can be traced to funding because of bond issues and property taxes in the burbs, you're not understanding this problem. Courts have devised ways of fairly distributing tax money...here in Dallas they termed this the "Robin Hood" plan...implying that it was stealing from the rich...which is bunk. The simple fact is, we have segregated schools in violation of Brown v. Board of Education. That's illegal under the law, and it doesn't matter what suburbanites will or will not tolerate. Lawsuits have been filed around the country on this basis.
It has to come from somewhere footsteps what really is your plan.

Is just not tying money to attendance enough to do anything?
I'm not charged with figuring it out, but the money needs to be spent so it can come from somewhere else...I really don't care where. But here's a few things I see;

1) We could start with this; a tax system that does not tie education to property taxes and district control at all. There is no reason why education funding has to come from the local district at all, let alone from property taxes. Why not sales taxes instead? That taxes consumption instead of wealth as the basis for funding. This does not mean local communities can't raise their own bond issues if they want to. I'm not trying to take that away, but you should ask yourself this question; if suburban schools didn't see the need for additional funds these districts wouldn't pass bond issues to begin with. The fact that they do is indication they recognize the benefits of increasing their own education budgets. If they think they need more money, how much more so do urban schools?

2) Voucher systems were a good idea but they lacked the key component to make them work; transportation. Vouchers and charter schools depended on the kids being able to get to another school on their own, which most often they can't. School buses currently run only in the local school zone their assigned to. There's no reason we can't design this differently so that kids can take advantage of getting to another area. We could stagger school schedules to allow buses to run during the morning hours after making their initial run, which would allow kids from other areas to get to schools they can't get to now.

3) We need to re-evaluate the expenditures on extra curricular sports in some cases. Here in Texas we have almost every local high school of any size with it's own football stadium...I said STADIUM, not field. Some of these rival college stadiums. I'm sorry but a high school does not need it's own stadium. When I played in Lakewood CO at Green Mountain HS we had two stadiums in Jefferson County that 12 schools shared. It worked just fine. Millions are wasted on this nonsense.

4) Dump the "no child left behind" thing that Bush enacted...it's a failure. Most people don't even try to question that now.

5) Create a federal standard for education equalization funding that mandates minimum standards for facilities infrastructure, supplies and computer equipment and tie compliance to money spent statewide. This way if one school in any district is not up to par in terms of it's facilities or equipment, supplies, etc...no additional money is spent on extra programs in any other school within that district until the minimum standards are met and paid for. This will prevent school boards from being influenced by political issues inside their districts that enable them to vote how they want to without consideration for equalizing schools.

6) Tie taxpayer dollars spent on private projects that are not directly meant to benefit low income urban areas (for example sports stadiums for pro football teams) directly to annual revenue directed to education in under funded districts. So if Jerry Jones has a $1 billion stadium that the city of Arlington taxpayers paid $400 million for with public money that nobody in low income brackets can ever afford to use yet they have to help pay for, then a percentage of profits taken in as a result of that corporate welfare program needs to go directly to under funded schools. We have no right to fund private enterprise with public money unless there is a compelling public interest that justifies it, and clearly this is not a compelling public interest, which means if we're going to do this, a percentage of revenue needs to be introduced back into the schools, which IS a compelling public interest. On top of that, any new businesses opening within 2 years of the use of the stadium within 1 mile of the facility should have their sales tax revenue collected by the city go directly to this fund.

7) Merit pay for teachers (where it exists) is based in many cases on how the whole school performs on state testing. This drains off the best teachers from even considering inner city schools. I have no problem with merit pay...but we need to correspondingly introduce hazard pay for teachers working in urban schools. These schools are very difficult to work in, so teachers willing to do so should be paid not just equivalent to suburban teachers, they should be paid at a higher rate for the associated risk and difficulty. On top of this, teachers working in urban schools should be specifically trained for this environment.

8) A radical over-hall of the managerial costs of state and local education budgets needs to be done to weed out graft, corruption and needless waste in the administration. This is a HUGE problem. In Dallas millions of dollars are stolen every year by pure corruption. Some of this is insanely stupid...teachers using school district credit cards for personal use, phony contracts, school board nepotism...even the FBI has been engaged in some cases. Here we actually had a Dallas school superintendent about 6 years ago who was buying furniture for her home with the districts money. In another case a phony office existed for the sole purpose of collecting money fraudulently. We should create a branch office of financial integrity in every local school district in America that reports directly to the US Department of Education and NOT the local district superintendent or the school board. Stealing federal education money is a felony but it's being gotten away with on a constant basis.

9) Reconstitute how low income schools are educating kids in terms of curriculum. Financial literacy should be a mandatory class. Business entrepreneurship in the black community is a major force for economic empowerment. Every urban high school should have business education programs tied into practical working experience doing internships in locally owned businesses and it should be a requirement to graduate. This will also help boost local business since they'll have the benefits of trying people out for free before hiring them later. Obama's already established an Office of Social Entrepreneurship at the federal level. This department should oversee introducing innovation and ideas for economic change into these programs and tie them directly to stated goals for economic growth in each individual community.

10) Create online courses for both middle school and HS curriculums that allow kids to get credit for taking these courses anywhere in America and make these courses not only free, but also tie incentives to them directly to computer hardware and software purchases just like we already do for schools and universities as well as other non profit organizations. Non profits can purchase software for half price or less, and something similar should be enacted here. If kids achieve better grades with these courses they should see some kind of tangible benefit.

11) Black history should be a mandatory course in every high school in America, for all kids. An intro course would fulfill basics requirements, and if black kids (or white kids) want to take more than one they should have that opportunity. It's absurd that we teach the history of Europe or Asia and not the history made in our own country. This should be federally mandated curriculum just like the courses in other subject areas. In most school districts, not only is there no such course, but efforts locally to attempt it are voted down. Why should this be a local issue? It should be a national issue not a local one. Local schools don't get to choose if they teach English, Math or Science...nor should they get to choose which parts of American history they'll eliminate.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Footsteps, you have flown the coop dude.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Footsteps, you have flown the coop dude.
Perhaps I don't like the smell of chicken ****.