Sunday, December 27, 2015

Which Comes First, Poverty or Inequality?


1. It is not poverty that creates inequality but inequality that creates inequality. Nomatter what the Progressive Democrats (PeeDees) proclaim everyone of is different. Different in IQ, motivation, height, eye color, body color and thought, Inequality cannot be "fixed", so simply accept humanity as it actually is, not some fantasyworld.  Trying to fix something that is an inescapable component of humanity can only bring unhappiness.

2. The vilification of "inequality" is an unhealthy PeeDee fixation on money over happiness and satisfaction. They consciously attempt -- and succeed at causing us to be unhappy with our lot in life no matter what it is. Except Democrat politicians, billionaires, government-fed leeches, and Harvard elites are supposed to bring We the People happiness since they are above us. (We are "unequal to them" since only they know how we must think, act and behave.) Double standard?

3. Most of us are average, some are above-average and some below-average. Accept it. All together, the average, under-average and over-average make up us. PeeDees want us separated by their standards of: How you vote, body color, social thought, ethnicity, sexual decisions, for or against killing your own fetus, acceptance or rejection of gun ownership, love of internal combustion engines, belief in humans causing or not causing any change in climate over the world, the climate changing, God, and many other attributes. The PeeDees and their mouthpieces, such as the Megaphone of the Left, the New York Times and the Alphabet of Propaganda, NBC CBS ABC CNN PBS NPR AP and the bottom, MSNBC, tell you -- demand -- how you must think. And if you disagree the Left can destroy you socially and economically by getting you fired. THE LEFT MEANS BUSINESS.

4. It is all about power anyway, raw power of PeeDees over " We the People!" Their Black Lies [sic] Matter and Handsup Dont Shoot henchmen are similar to the Nazi Brown Shirts who cowed Germans into submission by using Jews as strawmen targets. In PeeDee Amerika it is the "White Race" [sic, since there is no such reality as "race" it is a political invention] who they can demonize because in truth they -- white male achievers -- that have accomplished almost all that is great in the United States. They -- WHITE MALES must be eliminated as many PeeDee university teachers are teaching today. As long as the achievers are alive they can undermine the PeeDee demand for authority.  Tyranny if you will.

Happy New Year

Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Freddie Gray is dead. So is America

Baltimore, Maryland: Mistrial over the death of Freddie Gray.  No duh!  If I were on the jury I would be afraid of any verdict except "No Verdict" / Mistrial.

Not Guilty! Will bring anarchy, riot, burnings and no doubt a speech by the President of the Democrats saying nothing, but intimating that justice was not served, that police killings of black people (all nice ones, since there are no black criminals, only victimized ones) happen too much and that the Justice Department will investigate it all.

A verdict of Guilty would bring white castigation of overreach by the city of Baltimore and prosecutors. And anarchy, riot, burnings in joyous celebration of justice achieved with a happy speech of the President of the Democrats telling us lecturing us on how police cannot continue mass killings of unarmed, innocent black youth simply minding their own business.  And new national initiatives for the intense training of all police on diversity, acceptance of those unlike ourselves, and how to behave in a community with trust in the people of the communities.  And expectations of further guilty verdicts.

The police truly are in no-win situations. Many Progressive Democrats consider black folks victims of white racism and implicitly never guilty of anything since their actions have always been caused by white advantage. The police are supposed to be community organizers allowing and taking every slight by inaction when all heavy action would trigger bad responses by the community.

Whether the legal process of our country is acceptable to Black Lies Matter and Handsup Don't Shoot "activists" is yet to be seen.  New trial coming up.

Friday, December 4, 2015

The 9/11 Killers, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, the San Bernardino Killers and the Weather Underground Killers -- similar goals -- Destroy America

In 1969 William Charles Ayres co-founded the Weasther Underground, a self -identified communist revolutionary group pledged to overthrow American capitalist imperialism by bombing police stations, the U.S. Capitol Building, the Pentagon and other public buildings during the 1960s.

Sounds like the 9/11 killers.  

Ayres is married to Bernadine Dohrn  , also a leader in the Weather Underground. In 1989, Bernadine Dohrn and Michelle Obama were associates at the Chicago law firm of Sidley & Austin, when Obama joined the firm as a summer intern (where apparently he met Michelle Robinson). In May 1970, the organization issued a “Declaration of a State of War against the United States authored by Bernardine Dohrn. Its goal was also to kill 25 million Americans it thought would resist turning the U. S. A. communist.  

In 1970 a Greenwich Village nail bomb exploded and killed Ted Gold , Ayers's close friendTerry Robbins , and Ayers's girlfriend, Diana Oughton. They were involved in a bomb-making “factory” to slaughter non-commissioned officers at a dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey.

Sounds like San Bernardino killer bomb makers Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik.

In 1985 the Chicago-based  Woods Fund (the family which owned the Illinois-based Sahara Coal Company, a major supplier of coal to Commonwealth Edison, an electric power company was headed by Bill Ayres’s father. Thomas Ayres was a close associate to Mayor Richard J. Daley) gave a $25,000 grant to the Developing Communities Project, which hired Barack Obama, age 24, as an organizer on Chicago's perennially depressed South Side. Ayres was the Chairman of the Board of the Woods Fund. Why is Obama so fixated on killing the coal industry.  Is there something with the Ayres family?

In 1995 Ayres was a founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge which raised money to help reform (radicalize "I'm a radical, Leftist, small 'c' communist," Ayres is quoted as having said.) the Chicago public schools and wrote the grant with others. Barack Obama became its first director and chairman of its board as the fund spent $110 million until 2001 when  CAC admitted that it had failed in its mission; test scores of Chicago public-school students did not improve. It liquidated its remaining assets to the Chicago Public Education Fund, where Obama and Bill Ayers’ father and brother all were members of the “Leadership Council”  until 2004.

In 1996 Obama was elected to the Illinois state senate with support from Chicago union powerhouses and Acorn and similar organizations to which millions had been funneled by Obama as director of various foundations. The notion of his running came at a meeting at Bill Ayres’ house by Alice Palmer.

In November 1997, Ayers and Obama participated in a panel at the University of Chicago entitled "Should a child ever be called a 'super predator?'" to debate "the merits of the juvenile justice system."

In April 2002, Ayers, Dohrn, and Obama, then an Illinois State Senator, participated together at a conference entitled "Intellectuals: Who Needs Them?" sponsored by The Center for Public Intellectuals and the University of Illinois-Chicago.  Ayers and Obama were two of the six members of the "Intellectuals in Times of Crisis" panel. 
During the 2008 U. S. presidential campaign, Ayres’ and Obama’s relationship was brought up and buried by most of the media, though none of it was a surprise in Chicago. But Daley still owns the town.

There are still questions if Ayres’ father paid for some of Obama’s college and whether Khalid Al-Mansour (nee Donald Warden and co-founder of the Black Panther Party with Bobby Seale; and advisor to the Saudi royal family) might have covered some of Obama’s Harvard Law School expenses and arranged for him to attend it.

The father-in-law of Michelle Obama’s close friend and advisor, Valerie Jarrett who also worked for Daley and Harold Washington, Jr., (and married for five years to Dr. William Jarrett, who died in 1993). Vernon Jarrett, was a Chicago journalist, first for the communist Chicago Defender and a self-identified communist along with Frank Marshall Davis, who had moved to Hawaii and had met Barack Obama when he was 10. Jarrett later was  the Chicago Tribune’s first black syndicated columnist and a founder of the leftist National Association of Black Journalists and in 1983 was hired by  the Chicago Sun-Times.

Commenting on the 1992 Moseley Braun Senate race, in which Obama played a key role, Vernon Jarrett wrote in the Chicago Sun-Times of August 11th 1992: "Good news! Good news! Project Vote, a collectivity of 10 church-based community organizations dedicated to black voter registration, is off and running. Project Vote is increasing its rolls at a 7,000-per-week clip…If Project Vote is to reach its goal of registering 150,000 out of an estimated 400,000 unregistered blacks statewide, 'it must average 10,000 rather than 7,000 every week,' says Barack Obama, the program’s executive director…"


Monday, November 30, 2015


White Advantage/Privilege? Or White Achievement?

Educated, “white,” males who were engaged in commerce of one sort or another, declared independence of the American colonies from England and its monarch, King George III.  White males led the Revolutionary War using force to make those words of independence a reality. The same stereotypical white males drafted what has become one of the most important, impactful documents in human history: the United States Constitution. Those pages were brought to life by white males in executing the concepts of the Constitution bringing forth what today is arguably one of the greatest nations in the history of the world. The United States of America has shown to the world that a democratic, capitalist country can peacefully agree to meaningful changes in leadership, even with bitter philosophical differences of the parties. It is among the most free – in speech, assembly, opportunity and employment, movement, religion, political rights, ownership of property, enterprise and commerce, human rights of life, liberty and the  pursuit of happiness, and equal rights under the law – and most prosperous country in history.

Now, let’s take it to an even higher level. Following is a made-up (by me) list of among the greatest achievements during human existence (when the major accomplisher is known). One of the very great ones, of course, is the forging of the American political system, with the rule of written law, equality under the law, private property, and a government of the people (“self government”).  Human rights and human prosperity have bloomed under it.
Among the greatest achievements during human existence:

Harnessing of Electricity. Electricity is a natural resource which was something interesting but mostly useless until the white male English scientist William Gilbert (or Gilberd) published his seminal work of experiments on electricity and  magnetism and coined the very term electricus which later evolved into “electricity.” His findings established the groundwork for the white male German, Johannes Kepler’s laws of planetary motion which was a foundation for white male Englishman, Isaac Newton’s theory of gravity. Nearly two hundred years later white male Benjamin Franklin showed that lightning and static electricity were the same. Other white males invented batteries  (Italian, Alessandro Volta), the first effective arc lamp (Sir Humphry Davy, English) and other inspirations of  white male Frenchmen, Italians, Germans and Brits whose names are familiar:  André-Marie Ampère, Georg Ohm, Michael Faraday and in 1837 white male American Thomas Davenport invented the direct current electric motor, the basis of most electrical appliances today. Inventor of an effective incandescent light bulb along with an entire integrated system: white man Thomas Alva Edison, who is also responsible for moving pictures and recorded music. 

Transportation. Ships with sails have been used since at least the fifth century B. C. and in all likelihood much earlier, so the color and gender of those innovators are not known. About trains: The first use of rails was in the 1767 by a company in Shropshire, England, owned by English Quakers. The first reciprocating steam engine to power a wheel was invented by a Scottish inventor, James Watt. He patented in 1784 the first design for a carriage propelled by steam which an employee of his built later that year. The automobile was invented in Germany by white male Karl Benz in 1885. The first of which was powered by a single-cylinder internal combustion four-stroke engine designed by white German Nikolaus Otto. The first flying machines with controls were invented by the American Wright (white) brothers.

Communications. Telegraph was suggested first in Scots Magazine (1753) then German von Sommering, Spanish Campillo built models until in 1823  Englishman Francis Ronalds first made a working electrostatic telegraph over eight miles of wire;  then Russians and Englishmen made improvements until Samuel Morse invented and patented (1837) an electric telegraph with his assistant, Alfred Vail, developing Morse Code to go with it. Telephone. The first device to replicate the human voice over wire was invented by American Alexander Graham Bell who patented it in 1876; his mother and wife were deaf and he had long experimented with hearing devices. Bell was Scottish but ended up in Boston via Canada. In 1864 Scot James Maxwell wrote that electromagnetic waves could travel through air. Pouncing on that, white male Italian, American, German and English inventors built working models, first used with Morse code between ships and land, then one-way developed into two-way, then telephony, tele-video (television), navigation (including by satellite), radar, and the digital data transmission of today. Most if not all conceived by white males, many American.

Development of computers. Wilhelm Schickard, a white German polymath, designed a calculating machine in 1623 which combined a mechanized form of Napier's rods with the world's first mechanical adding machine built into the base. In 1642, while still a teenager, Blaise Pascal (white Frenchman) started some pioneering work on calculating machines and after three years of effort and myriad prototypes, invented a mechanical calculator. Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (white German) invented the Stepped Reckoner calculating machine around 1672. However, Leibniz’s invention did not have a method to carry numbers. Leibniz also conceived the binary numeral system, key to all of today’s binary computers. Around 1830, Charles Babbage, another English polymath, originated the concept of a programming a computer. In 1936 a white gay British genius, Alan Turing, presented a paper describing a computer and thus became the father of computer science. Its commercialization initially came from England with the Ferranti  Mark I (parent company was founded in 1882 by white Englishman, Sebastian Pietro Innocenzo Adhemar Ziani de Ferranti) and the U. S. with UNIVAC I for the U. S. Census Bureau. Then IBM took control with its 650 mainframe in 1954. Later came Digital Equipment (Ken Olson, white male founder) making mini-computers. They were followed by microcomputers based on Intel semiconductors (Intel, started by three white males, was the inventor of silicon microprocessors), with IBM’s hardware and Microsoft’s software (two white male founders); Apple Computer (also two white male founders) began around then also. So called personal computers in essence merged with smart cellular phones continuing to miniaturize up to and including the Apple watch. Today, of course, computers and computing devices permeate every aspect of life all over the world. 
The concept for the Internet came from the United States Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) white males: Tim Berners-Lee, Bob Kahn, Vint Cerf. Marc Andreessen, cofounder of Netscape, the first major Web browser company which essentially launched the Internet (”dot com”) industry and has revolutionized the world in countless ways was white.

Cell phones as we know them started in the United States by engineers from Bell Laboratories (where in 1956 John Bardeen, Walter H. Brattain, and William Shockley, all white males, received the Nobel Prize in Physics for inventing the first transistors, and home to myriad ground-breaking technologies of radio astronomy, lasers, charge-coupled device (CCD) semiconductor sensors, DNA prototyping machines, UNIX operating system, the C and C++ programming languages, TDMA and CDMA digital cellular telephone technologies ) then a division of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company stemming all the way back to Alexander Graham Bell. They were then  attempting an automobile-to-automobile communication system, with the first service commencing in St. Louis, Missouri, June 1946, as AT&T’s Mobile Telephone Service. The system used Motorola radiotelephones. Motorola was started in 1928 when two white Catholic brothers bought a bankrupt battery company in Chicago.
Capitalism (and free enterprise) has been – very arguably – proven to be the most fair allocator of capital, employer of workers, arbiter of taste in consumer products of any economic system yet devised in the world; the United States was implicitly a “capitalist country.” The American financial system early on enabled vast amounts of excess capital to be deployed into starting new companies, resulting in entirely new industries. This includes the early “trusts” dreamed up by Samuel C. T. Dodd, of Standard Oil, a distributed banking system, venture capital and private equity partnership models as well as hedge funds. Like it or not,  most U. S. companies have been founded by white males, many of whom had invented products that formed the basis for their companies. A few are: Thomas Alva Edison (General Electric); Charles Goodyear (vulcanization); Alexander Graham Bell (AT & T); Eli Whitney (the cotton engine – “gin”); Henry Ford’s assembly line; RCA (David Sarnoff); Willis Carrier (air conditioning); More recently, to toss off a few more white male names that have rewarded the world: Walt Disney, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, mentioned above, Larry Ellison (Oracle), Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Ph.D., then students at Stanford University (Google), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), and Jimmy Wales who, together with Larry Sanger, founded Wikipedia, from where some of the general information in this essay emanated. A few white males who didn’t necessarily invent products but who were simply entrepreneurial: The Big Four of railroads, Stanford, Huntington, Hopkins, Crocker (Central Pacific R.R.); John D. Rockefeller (Standard Oil); J. P. Morgan (JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley), Sam Walton of Wal-Mart, and Howard Schultz (Starbucks). Inventions by mistake of white male Americans were pacemakers and the lithium-iodide battery to power them by Wilson Greatbatch; an American pharmacist, John Stith Pemberton, who invented Coca-Cola; Thomas Adams, trying unsuccessfully to replace rubber for tires with a natural gum, chicle, chewed it, later adding flavor and thence creating Chiclets and the chewing gum industry.

The spread of capitalism and economic, political and social freedoms, as exemplified by the United States, has enriched the world. From the 1981 to 2010, abject poverty – those living on just over dollar a day dropped from half the citizens in the developing world to 21 percent in 2010 – in part by dollars flowing from U. S. purchases from free trade, and free enterprise in every remote area where allowed by their political systems. While “poverty” is an arbitrary political term The World Bank recently reported on October 9, 2015, that the share of the world population living in extreme poverty had fallen to 14.5% in 2011 from 36% in 1990. The number of people in the world living on less than $1.25 a day has fallen to 1,011 million in 2013 from 1,926 million in 1991.

While certainly not every innovation since Adam has been by white males, by far the vast majority have been conceived and implemented by white males and since the establishment of the United States of America, American companies have been conceived, established, financed, managed and innovated mostly by white males. In many cases, the white males started with little, faced great odds, and kept going in spite of obstacles, and succeeded. While tens of thousands of others took the same path, they failed, many losing everything they owned, and were never heard of again.  

Of course the original demographic of the United States was predominantly white (and Christian). In 2013 it was: White (non Hispanic) 62.6%; Hispanic or Latino 17.1%; African-American  13.2%; Asian 5.3%; American Indian & Alaska Native 1.2%; Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander 0.2%. With the Civilian Labor Force being 79.4% white, according to government statistics. Given the superiority in numbers, it should be no surprise that white people have accomplished so much. Foreigners have always  flooded our country: From the British Isles (including the Scots and Irish), Germany, Africa, Netherlands, Mexico, Spain, Italy, France, Poland. Generally each group faced bitter denunciation and rejection, with many brought over in captivity from Africa as slaves and others as near slave indentured servants.  More recently Asian country immigrants including China, India, South Korea, Viet Nam, Philippines have been legally allowed in.  The United States was – is truly – a melting pot, with opportunity offered to all.

Now I’ve argued that white male Americans have been responsible for much of the innovation and prosperity since the formation of the United States, raising all boats (most all of the poorest in the United States and many of the poorest in most countries have reaped advantages of white achievement and have cell phones, electricity and bicycles – the first verified claim to making one was by white, German civil servant Baron Karl von Drais); has causing assimilation of most immigrants into the U. S. who began as loathed minorities greeted with discrimination. They assimilated and choose to fit in as they choose. (“Pursuit of happiness.”)            

There should now be little doubt about the vast amount achievement by white males, but would it all  have taken place anyway without white males who were in power?  Is white advantage/privilege (WAP)  implicitly “unfair” and would the world would be a better, more moral place without it? If not, if WAP has been beneficial to the world, why are there blatant attempts to debase it? No doubt “diversity” feels good, but which is better for humanity? And are the two, white achievement and WAP mutually exclusive?  So given all this, what actually is the new notion of  WAP?”

There is argument that whites have more freedom to move around, speak freely, buy stuff, work wherever they want. These seems to beg the question that non-whites cannot do all this, which is untrue, or that minorities can’t do them as much, which is impossible to measure, “enough” being subjective. WAP includes a high, “unwarranted” opinion of one's own worth, greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely at home, work and school.  According to Samantha Vice ("How Do I Live in This Strange Place?" Journal of Social Philosophy, September 7, 2010), The concept of white privilege also implies the privileged right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal. American, in other words, being in the white majority. Turns out that in being the majority means the assumption of normality, usual, and average.  Others are not normal, usual or average. Lawrence Blum in 2008 argued in "'White Privilege': A Mild Critique," Theory and Research in Education, that many social privileges are interconnected with being white, requiring a complex and careful analysis to identify whiteness' contributions to privilege. This means that the notion of whiteness is not inclusive of all white people. Critics of white privilege also note that there is a problem with the interpretation of people of color. That is, it fails to acknowledge the diversity of people of color and ethnicity within these groups, but apparently white is white.  Or something. All this seems to presume that having privilege is bad, that diversity is good and other such unprovable pablum. Or simply that none of this makes sense.

I think the concept of WAP encourages certain non-whites not to assimilate, deciding that the white majority has to change to satisfy and incorporate the religion, nationality, mores and dress of minority groups. The federal government has passed labor laws to label as discrimination the desire to hire persons reflecting the majority. In applying for jobs, a person might not get an offer if he or she speaks “African American Vernacular English” or perhaps “Indian English” that are sometimes difficult to easily understand, or wears baggy, saggy trousers or a burqa. If the candidate is black, Indian or Muslim he or she can sue. If the job seeker is white, that is that.  White privilege?

As Winston S. Churchill said, “History is written by the victors.” And Jawaharlal Nehru said, You don't change the course of history by turning the faces of portraits to the wall. And the old saw, “He who has the gold makes the rules.”

I argue that WAP is little more than an invention by left-leaning and Democrat Party ideologues seeking more power for themselves by using their minority factions in attempting to eliminate the achievement of the white (male) majority and substituting guilt for achievement or negating achievement entirely.  It is about power.

Monday, November 16, 2015



Well, Republicans and Democrats disagree, Left and Right disagree, Progressives and conservatives disagree.  And factually no one knows actually who those killers carefully planned to kill in Paris.

But. It seems clear that actions speak louder than words (read that, President of the Democrats, Barack Obama) and that the actions played themselves out in Paris last week. 134, give or take, died. But truthfully that many are killed perhaps daily in Syria, and other geographic places in the world. 300 this year in Baltimore, but that's less than one a day, nothing for politicians to care about.

I feel that those crazy (according to Western civilization), misinformed killers can be stopped but, if not, Hitler-, Stalin-. and Mao-like they will keep killing. Is starvation or gassing any better or worse than having your head dismembered by sword? I have never tried either and hope I never will be in that competition. But also they are dumb to kill themselves along with others. Odds are they all will be dead and no one will visit the virgins sitting on the ***** of Allah. Those clearly are Muslims that are misinformed and dumb, but many people die daily from them. I personally would like that to stop. But stopping takes leadership.  I believe that America is the only country that (hopefully) can lead in such an endeavor.

But if they -- the Islamic Killers -- are dumb so are our politicians. Obama wanted to degrade them. Huh? Degrade the degraders? But then he sends a few safe drones and jetplanes and far, far more words, carefully vetted for Legacy. But I know there is a way for civilization to win. Depends of course of the meaning of win. But it will need to be a physical event or events, words will never harm me. (As my parents more or less said innumerable times) or them, the Islamic killers. (And stop thinking ISIS, ISIL or whatever and think Islamic Killers, IcK.)

So, Americans stop thinking Legacy, stop with the enemy being your political opponent, stop saying our greatest threat is the weather heating up (huh?) or that compromise or friendship with those fellow human beings that do not think in the same book, same page as we do, is possible. Could anyone convince Hitler to back off? Or Mao that collective socialist farming is a good idea? Or Josef Ivanovich Stalin (or whatever his name was) that his buddies didn't want to overthrow him? Or that a black American president pretending to be a Christian can convince the zealots of Iran to do any damn thing?

GET REAL, get together (and Obama stop with the low handicap search for a while) and truly spell out all the possibilities of what could happen over the next year and how to counter each variable. Difficult? Sure. Does it contribute to one vote or any Legacy? No. Will some Americans disagree? Most certainly. But about war, the experts actually can make some good choices if allowed to.

ALLOW THEM. And Mr. Democrat, it will take much concentrated study, thought, back and forth conflict that debate is and and end point:some strategy. Allow them, your advisers, to advise and get rid of political advisers who run your government, like Val-J! And listen, think and decide.

Friday, November 13, 2015


Why Students Need to Sit Up and Pay Attention

Our charters are guided by what I learned from a great public-school teacher: Distracted, misbehaving children aren’t learning.

Success Academy Charter Schools, New York City’s largest network of free charter schools, has recently been the center of controversy over its policies on student behavior. Our critics accuse us of pushing out children who might pull down our test scores, and in doing so creating what some call “a kindergarten-to-prison pipeline.” In reality, our attrition rates are lower than those of the district schools. How then do our students, chosen by lottery and mainly children of color, routinely outperform even students from wealthy suburbs?
I wish I could claim that I’ve developed some revolutionary pedagogical approach at Success, but the humbling truth is this: Most of what I know about teaching I learned from one person, an educator named Paul Fucaloro who taught in New York City district schools for four decades.
When I founded Success Academy in 2006, I hired Paul to coach our teachers. I soon learned that while he was quite instructionally sophisticated, Paul was decidedly old school on the topic of student behavior. Every child had to sit up straight and show he was paying attention.

Opinion Journal Video

Success Academy Founder and CEO Eva Moskowitz on the national media's portrayal of charter schools. Photo credit: Getty Images.
I wasn’t completely sold on Paul’s approach at first, but when one of our schools was having trouble, I’d dispatch him to help. He’d tell the teachers to give him a class full of all the kids who had the worst behavioral and academic problems. The teachers thought this was nuts but they’d do so, and then a few days later they’d drop by Paul’s classroom and find these students acting so differently that they were nearly unrecognizable. Within weeks, the students would make months’ worth of academic progress.
Teachers couldn’t believe it. I couldn’t believe it. But Paul did it over and over again. And incredibly, the kids seemed to love Paul more than the teachers who were far less strict.
So what did he do? Well, imagine that a man to whom you’re speaking at a party is looking over your shoulder. You’ll suspect he isn’t really listening. The same is true of kids. Their physical behavior reflects their mental state. Therefore, Paul set behavioral expectations to reflect the mental state he insisted his students have.
Paul’s students had to sit with hands clasped and look at whomever was speaking (called “tracking”). They couldn’t stare off into space, play with objects, rest their head on their hands in boredom, or act like what Paul called “sourpusses” who brought an attitude of negativity or indifference to the classroom. Paul made students demonstrate to him that at every single moment they were focused on learning.
He also had more sophisticated techniques. He’d call on students randomly rather than ask for hands, so students had to prepare an answer for every question he asked. He made students repeat or comment on what their classmates said to make them listen carefully to one another. And he’d never repeat what a child said, as most teachers do, because—besides wasting precious time—it suggested to students that they didn’t have to listen to one another, only to the teacher.
These practices ensured that while only one student could talk at a time, every child was continually engaging in what Paul called “active listening,” meaning thinking critically and preparing to participate if called upon.
Success Academy in large measure uses Paul’s approach, and that is much of the reason why we have schools where more than 95% of the students pass the state math tests in neighborhoods where on average fewer than 20% of students do.
Some critics find our approach rigid and overbearing. I’ve got two of these critics in my own home: my kids, who attend Success. They complain when they get into trouble for not tracking the speaker. They were listening, they protest. Maybe so. But sometimes when kids look like they’re daydreaming, it’s because they are, and we can’t allow that possibility.
As Paul repeatedly preached to me, it’s morally wrong to let a child choose whether to pay attention, because many will make the wrong choice and we can’t let them slip through the cracks. So if a student had trouble paying attention, he’d move him to the front of the class, call his parents, keep him after school to practice. Whatever it took. Paul was relentless.
Some critics say that it’s hard for young children to focus. True. But it’s our job to teach them this. Recently, I was at a news conference at which I was asked why Success has strict rules regarding behavior. As I answered, the reporters didn’t stare off into space, look bored or fiddle with things. Because they were focusing. A school that fails to teach students this necessary skill isn’t doing right by them.
People have understandably expressed concern that some students may have particular trouble meeting our behavioral expectations and ask why we can’t simply relax them. The answer is that Success Academy’s 34 principals and I deeply believe that if we lessened our standards for student comportment, the education of the 11,000 children in our schools would profoundly suffer.
In my case, that belief has nothing to do with any ideological predisposition or pet pedagogical theory. I came to it only because Paul Fucaloro—the most gifted educator I’ve ever met, who spent four decades honing his craft before retiring last year—showed me that it works.
Ms. Moskowitz is the founder and chief executive officer of Success Academy Charter Schools.



Wednesday, November 11, 2015



From about 1882 through 1968, 27 Hispanics per 100,000 Hispanics were lynched while 37/100,000 blacks were, with the number of 2,500 being black during that time. While no one will never know for certain what the actual numbers were, they all -- each one -- was a horror. The year with the most, 1892 was 123 years ago when 161 blacks and 69 whites were hanged to death.

"From 1848 to 1928 mobs murdered thousands of Mexicans"...though only 547 cases were clearly documented according to the New York Times.

Upwards of 11 million Jews were systematically murdered by Germany. Cattlecar loads were herded into scientifically-designed gas chambers and killed from 1941 through 1945.

2,977 innocent people, black, white, American, foreign and other were killed on September 11, 2001.


Tuesday, November 3, 2015


“The government kicked off its ‘Hustle’ case against Bank of America Corp., arguing the bank’s Countrywide unit misled executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac about the quality of loans they bought in 2007 and 2008,” said an article (“‘Hustle’ Trial Steps Off With Opening Salvos”) in the Journal September 25, 2013, page C3, “Global Finance”.  The government’s argument is that “the Hustle program was ‘largely a joke,’ arguing that the program ignored red flags…”  Later in the article the government’s lawyer gave an example of a Florida doorman saying he made $13,000 a month when in fact he was making $5,000.  It is hard to imagine a human being attempting to game a system with no checks and bounds!  Isn’t it?  Then please read page A15 in the same day’s Journal’s Opinion section, “The ObamaCare Wars Are Just Starting”:  “On the flip side, the administration’s last-minute decision not to require income documentation in the first year…”  On one hand the Bank of America is being sued by the Obama Administration for not requiring proof of income and on the other it arbitrarily changed the law to not require proof of income.  Hmmmmm.  While fudging $3,000 a year (an illustration on ObamaCare incentives) to save $501 is less money than fudging $8,000 a month to obtain an unspecified mortgage, the principle seems the same.  Whoever said the Obama administration is arbitrary?

Thursday, September 24, 2015

Back JEB!

On the Right is the second Narcissist-in-Chief (to Obama), a well-respected but inexperienced physician and a less-than-successful CEO.Well then, on the Left you have a socialist and a liar-crook as the other side. But there's a year+ left. Foot-in-mouth Biden might enter. Can another Republican enter? Probably Mitt-toast is standing ready. But, the only truly capable person in all this is...sorry!...Jeb Bush. He has managed with success the sprawling bureaucracy of Florida and this all alone would put him ahead of all but perhaps Chris Christie. But like his bro and pa, he has at his disposal a huge number of experienced foreign affairs personnel. No one else has. And looking at the mess an inexperienced president has made of the world, expertise here is desperately needed. Yeah, Megaphone of the Left, The New York TImes and the Alphabet of Propaganda, NBC CBS ABC AP CNN NPR PBS and MSNBC will scream and attack with everything they've got to hold on to their power. He is well financed and can win...then he can govern this country successfully. Back him!


Float this sinking ship around and turn it from an absolute Progressive failure back to innovation, success, freedom and prosperity for the world.

Thursday, September 17, 2015

vote REPUBLICAN and innovation not paper- and money-shuffling


This is the perfect reason for never casting a vote for ANY Democrat EVER. While India and China and many, many other countries are doing everything they can to beat the United States in every and any industry our Democrats and Trial Lawyers are forcing our greatest companies to spent millions of dollars and millions of PERSON-hours defending the class action lawsuits made possible by Democrat legislators.  Their business is advertising widely by trial lawyers to gather hundreds or thousands of "plaintiffs" together to enable one or a few law firms to sue, then gather even more names, present them all to a company that has better things to do, like innovate more than companies from India and China. MSFT must settle. Maybe $10 to $50 million in consumer coupons and lawyers get cash = $4 million to $25 million and tithe $400,000 to $2.5 million to the Democratic Party.
Corruption is us.

Vote Republican.


                     CHAOS REIGNS SUPREME

What a mashup of 15 possibilities.

I'd first eliminate the inexperienced -- 8 years of blundering managerial inexperience and blind ideology is taking the country $10,000,000,000,000 closer to the cliff of insolvency.

That eliminates all senators. Carson's too nice (and inexperienced). Carly's been out of it a while, and Trump showed himself to be a light-weight (and his blame of the Subprime Meltdown/Great Recession on President Bush shows ignorance and Left-leaning propaganda).

The myriad experienced governors seem a little slim in overall knowledge, foreign and domestic.

If foreign affairs are important (duh) that leaves only one.

Here it is as the end of the Debate II:

Only Bush can hit the ground running. He has a great team of people who have "been there, done that" and he seems engaged enough to select the best, experienced proven foreign-affairs advisers early on. Domestically he needs to convince and IMMEDIATELY select Carson as V.P. and chief operating officer of human relations and healthcare. Mild-mannered Carson knows healthcare people and he might be able to extricate the U. S. from a imminent bankruptcy courtesy of the unimaginable morass of government-caused healthcare rules, regulations, restrictions, distrust. Then add Carly as Chief Operating Officer -- Information Systems to get the government out of the 19th Century and into TODAY. They both could have shots at presidency after some governmental experience which would make or break them. Carson can help streamline government to make its delivery of services to us efficient not political and she could automate it all. Some people would lose their jobs and somehow the power of the Democrat unions would have to be broken. Perhaps Walker could be brought in as COO -- union buster. (That might be a joke!) But management at this point in our government's life is the fulcrum with death on the left and life on the right. So to speak.

The federal government is a mess and all by itself could take us down.  Obama tosses a billion here, a hundred million there, over a trillion in bad student loans alone, with NO accountability, management or follow up. It is 100% political and each person he hires is a political agent, "featherbedding," patronage, whatever. But no one is managing any of them.  Anarchy with our trillions.

This election might be our last except for 4 more years of an imbecile with Hillary.

Monday, August 31, 2015

Evidence #2 Obama seeking United Nations office of Secretary General


The president is touting an "historic new approach" bringing exchange rates into trade negotiations. He argues that without his HNA (historic new approach" his Trans-Pacific-Partnership trade agreement which is under negotiation while being argued in Congress whose approval is necessary. His HNA would place currency changes aka "manipulations" under jurisdiction of the World Trade Agreement and out of the hands of the United States. Although still under discussion this is further indication that the president is attempting to take some of  the United States power out of its hands and put it into the hands of international bodies, such as the WTO and the United Nations.  Maybe this is a bit of a far-fetch, but it is evidence.

Wednesday, August 26, 2015

EVIDENCE #1 Obama seeking United Nations Secretary Generalship

The treaty Secretary Kerry signed without authorization from the Senate would create an un-Constitutional registry of all US gun buyers and would lead to the UN controlling American’s gun rights.
Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday signed a controversial U.N. treaty on arms regulation, riling U.S. lawmakers who vow the Senate will not ratify the agreement.
As he signed the document, Kerry called the treaty a “significant step” in addressing illegal gun sales, while claiming it would also protect gun rights.
“This is about keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists and rogue actors. This is about reducing the risk of international transfers of conventional arms that will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes. This is about keeping Americans safe and keeping America strong,” he said. “This treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom. In fact, the treaty recognizes the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess, and use arms for legitimate purposes.”
U.S. lawmakers, though, have long claimed the treaty could lead to new gun control measures. They note the U.S. Senate has final say on whether to approve the agreement.
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., in a letter to President Obama, urged his administration not to take any action to implement the treaty without the consent of the Senate.
He claimed the treaty raises “fundamental issues” concerning “individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
The National Rifle Association blasted the plan, claiming it would impose an “invasive registration scheme” by requiring importing countries to give exporting countries information on “end users.”
“The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement. “These are blatant attacks on the constitutional rights and liberties of every law-abiding American. The NRA will continue to fight this assault on our fundamental freedom.”

Once again Obama’s regime tries to end the Second Amendment by stealth.

For Secretary General of the United Nations: Barack Hussein Obama.

While swimming and thinking as I am wont to do, something came to me. Why is Barack Obama rejecting classic United States "friends" such as Saudi Arabia, Israel and others? He then joins hands with the worst dictators in the world (or tries to) such as Vlad Putin, the Ayatollah, Chavez (RIH) the Castros and perhaps, but less likely, the leadership of the Peoples Republic of China. I believe Obama sees himself as the anointed (by God, but he does reject Christianity, so this is a bit confusing, but perhaps he self-identifies as anointed) savior of the world. Peace and love by talk. His anti-war, anti-gun, anti-unfair-capitalism, free healthcare, rights to identify, be and act anyway you want, and a same-old, same-old Democrat-liberal spend, borrow and tax ideology fits well into my theory. And Mr. Obama in his earnestness submits and defaults to the United Nations in most all issues from control of financial institutions, the religion of climate change, Iran, and unilateral U. S. reduction in nuclear weaponry, among many, many others. Congress many times begs to differ.

I do not have time to perform some research on this issue right now, but I will in the next few weeks.

Where do Michelle Obama and her "friend" and strong socialist Valerie Jarrett fit in? Both are massively ambitious to change mankind into their desired profile (which is quite similar to Barack Obama's or vice versa).