Education Reform, And The Lying Liars That Tell Them!

Representative John Boehner declared recently that he “is in” for the new wave of educational reform in this country, which is being spearheaded by the “National School Choice Week” campaign. In a promotional spot for the campaign last month, Mr. Boehner boldly declared, “Hello, I’m John Boehner.”

I sat down with Boehner at his Ohio home to discuss this radical declaration and his sponsorship of “National School Choice Week.”

“We’re not dumb,” Mr. Boehner stated with strict eloquence while we sat for tea and conversation. “It’s the schools that are dumb. We need to put kids in schools that are not dumb.”

Mr. Boehner stood by his notion of increased parental involvement in our brief encounter, pointing out the long, ubiquitous tradition of parental involvement in the kinds of neighborhoods in which parents arrive home from low-wage jobs at 7:30 p.m. after a 16-hour shift and clearly can’t wait to wash up and make it out to the PTA meeting. You know… The bad neighborhoods.

“We simply need to get rid of the schools that are failing and put our kids in schools that aren’t failing. It’s like when you have a bunch of kids smoking pot in your basement. You can’t just take away the pot. You need to privatize the market and push for government to subsidize the small business owners, (ie. your local dealer), while cutting taxes and limiting government as an incentive to stimulate job creation!”

During my visit with Representative Boehner, it became clear that schools in the U.S. are running rampant with good teachers, excellent administrators, and decent budgets. The problem is clearly, and exclusively, the bad schools. The “National School Choice Week” campaign is advocating the idea that the choice of which school a student should attend in the hands of the parents, a prospect which has been thought possible by giving government subsidies. As such, if we take our students out of bad schools, we’ll do away with the only problem in the educational system, right? Still, I couldn’t understand why schools are so tirelessly nefarious, working day after day on ruining our otherwise excellent system.

I sat down with Governor Rick Scott (R- Fl) to discuss the issue of bad schools. Gov. Scott made headlines with his recent proposal of giving students of low socioeconomic standing “school vouchers” to pay for the different options that would allow parents to make a choice as to what school their child can go to.

“The problem, Ronald, is this notion that we should allow our children to be trapped in bad schools. Those schools are evil and they should be banished for all time to an existence best described as an empty shell of their former selves,” the governor told me during our brief interview.

Gov. Scott’s “educational savings account” idea proposes a fiscal product that would allow eligible parents to obtain “up to 85 percent of the state’s per-pupil funding figure.” When asked about whether federal and state representatives who advocate this plan – (largely conservatives and tea baggers, no affiliation) – planned to enact this change before or after they went through with their promise of cutting all the budgets, education included, Gov. Scott excused himself and proceeded to lock himself in the bathroom for several hours — refusing to come out until I left the premises.

So, logically speaking, what is wrong with the idea of reforming our educational system by keeping the actual system in place and just herding our students off to better schools? Is there nothing to lose with shepherding students through the thoroughfares of a fundamentally flawed system until they’re eventually deposited in the slightly more productive tentacles of a larger, low scoring educational beast which consumes academic integrity like a mystical dark mist shrouding a once small, benevolent, defenseless village?

Admittedly, taking children out of bad schools and putting them in good schools is somewhat productive. Giving parents options in choosing their child’s school is honestly a great idea, as proven by the scholarship program instituted in Washington, D.C. Still, by far the best idea I feel anyone has had is simply the thought that education reform strictly involves getting rid of bad schools, as opposed to fixing a fundamentally flawed system at its core: the bad schools we’re trying to get rid of. So while giving options to parents to choose their own child’s education is honestly a great way to further the cause, the biggest step forward in this move to reform the American educational system has been simply identifying the nemesis.

Now we may enact change because we know that evil schools are the only crumbling part of our money hemorrhaging, low scoring, overcrowded, ill-effective, teacher disdaining, savagely under budgeted, horrifically-administrated and often severely corrupted public education; and that change that will allow us to gracefully herd our kids to the better sites of that same system which has clearly worked for so many in the past.

Republican Fatigue

Democrats recently reported from the partisan trenches of the Senate that they will not have the votes needed to pass the DREAM Act, a piece of legislation that would allow young immigrants a path to citizenship via a college education or military service, amongst many other criteria. Critics against the bill (which passed in the House) are quick to blame Republicans.

“Son el diablo esos marditos senadores. Lo que me gustaria es meterle la cabeza por el culo, sabes? Darle verdadero sentido a la metaphora,” said Geraldo Cosme, a local Boston gardener, when asked about the Senate’s role in the DREAM Act getting shelved. Formally, the lack of Republican support for the bill stems from Republican promises to not “prioritize any matters above the critical issues of funding the government and preventing a job-killing tax hike,” or so said the formal letter recently issued and signed by the 42 members of the GOP caucus.

In reality, the matters were of a quite different concern. I sat with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConell (R- KY) Saturday at his house in Louisville to discuss the issue.

The day was frigid as a scorned woman, or a light-hearted conversation with Dick Cheney. Like Obama exiting a bipartisan conference, I could see my hot breath clearly in the icy air approaching Senator McConnel’s front door. There he stood, dressed in a traditional Kentucky “Turtle Shell,” the celebratory garb of many a Kentucky man whom a turtle he eerily doth resemble. Much to my surprise, the Minority Leader was bent on having his outside Saturday lemonade, a tradition in the McConnell household involving lemons, water, sugar, a couple pint glasses, and a 17-year-old Hispanic immigrant on all fours being paid what McConnell called “A handsome hourly wage for any table, none the less one without papers.

“The concerns of the ludicrous right…” he said, pausing quickly for a lemonade induced cough. “I mean, the Republican party, has a lot to do with making sure the tax cuts are passed. But if I can keep it real, we’re just kind of tired,” McConnell concluded.

We went on to discuss how much “crap” the Republicans had to deal with the last two years. Though it was difficult at first to keep away the radical idea that McConnell was suggesting laziness as the catalyst for the recent Republican legislative mannerisms, the conversation quickly became reasonable as McConnell made it simple.

“Have you ever had to filibuster like a million things? It’s totally labor intensive,” he said, describing the arduous task of herding often elderly, scared, and confused conservative Senators like John McCain (R-AZ) towards a podium where they must, often incoherently, give somber and illogical reasons why any legislation proposed by their blue-dog counterparts should be quickly destroyed.

“It’s not easy. We need a break from all this overcoming the Democratic agenda. It’s not a personal thing, I mean, we love immigrants at heart! And who doesn’t love and appreciate 9/11 responders suffering from health complications attributed to their heroic actions on that day! It’s just that the Democrats keep proposing and proposing and proposing and…” said the Kentucky Senator as he went into an incoherent rant about Democrats and their chronic need to pass legislation in response to the dire straits of our country. “It’s like it’s all they think about. Give it a well deserved break!” he concluded.

Senator McConnell finally came clean about the real reason for the dismissal of important legislation like the 9/11 Health Care Bill, the DREAM Act, the repealing of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and the highly contested ASSS Bill, (Annual Senatorial Secret Santa Bill), which would place a cap of $20 on all gifts purchased for the ASSS. And I for one was not the least bit shaken. The fact is, Republicans are people too. They need a little R&R, and it’s well deserved after so much work done halting the plethora of progressive legislation put forth by Democrats that would have translated into months or years of work, regulation, and general attentiveness to the plights of Americans across the country. “I just don’t have it in me, Ronald,” said the over-worked McConnell. Placing his drink down onto the back of his table-person, Senator McConnell kneeled in humility and pleaded, “Please. Don’t make me do stuff!!”

I left the McConnell home with a new outlook on Republican strategy in Congress. My sweater was still wet with Kentucky Senator tears as I headed to the house of an old friend, House Majority Leader John Boehner. My intention to fill the void set by questions of why House Republicans were compelled to pass the DREAM Act, despite their sweat shop working conditions, was adequately met within the first minutes of our conversation in the living room of his Ohio home. “It’s simple,” said the Republican powerhouse. “We had a brunch scheduled with the elect House newbies for earlier that day at this new tapas bar down K Street, you know, near the 7-11 and that weird scrotum-shaped culdesac. So it got pretty wild because a lot of the Tea Party newbs had never had sangria,” said the Majority Leader as we sat watching the Scarface Widescreen Two-Disk Anniversary Edition. “By the time we had sobered up enough to realize what we had just voted on, there was no turning back.”

It all made perfect sense. House Repubs never had an intention to get stuff done! It was all just a simple misunderstanding. I mean, why in turn would they pass the DREAM Act, arguably the most difficult of the bills shelved by congress to put into action. It first requires that you locate immigrants in the U.S. who are under 16 years of age and were brought here by their immigrant parents. Then they’d have to earn a high school diploma/GED, demonstrate “good moral character,” attend two years of college or serve two years of military service, and pass criminal background checks only to receive a six-year conditional status, time in which they must meet other conditions to complete their path to citizenship! Holy cow! Talk about doing stuff! Passing this legislation would put in motion many wheels of government. “Wheels we’re going to need to knock down another two years of progressive and tactful ideas proposed by Democrats,” said Mr. Boehner when asked about the seeming infinite steps immigrants would have to be put through under the DREAM Act. “Who do you think would have to fill out the paperwork while they do all that stuff? The government! And we don’t even get anything out of it! We’re already citizens!”

The sad tale of Republican fatigue is not what rings through the halls of the Hill, nor is it what is being reported by the mass media. These poor Republicans are pleading with the American people, in earnest and dire fashion, for a chance to catch their breath. And though it may seem that Republican legislators are courting the Bush Tax Cuts above any other piece of legislation that would serve the other 98 percent of individuals, their tax cut arguments don’t defend in order to keep their fellow fabulously wealthy folk floating on, it’s important that we keep in mind that it only SEEMS that way.

The matter here has nothing to do with anything other than Republican fatigue drawn from their ‘Get-R-Undone’ mentality. So defend your tired and often cranky Republican leaders, America! For as Mr. Boehner concluded at the end of our interview: “We’re doing the best we can think of. We just hope Americans can actually get a clue and give us a couple of days off soon.”

Hipster Lobby Unleashes Obnoxious Irony Throughout Washington DC

Today, Atticus Kingsley made his first rounds in the halls of DC as the social subculture movement known only as "Hipsters" acquired another asset to their ever influential activist empire. Mr. Kingsley, renown for his work with the pharmaceutical and tobacco lobbies, has become the lead figure of DC's newest "Hipster" lobby. Estimated to be making considerably more money than the highest paid lobbyists on the hill, Mr. Kingsley was contracted by the conservative leaning organization known as the Movement of Elite Hipsters (MEH) in an attempt to further the Republican cause of passing as little legislation as possible.

In an interview with renown conservative pundit Rush Limbough last week, Eric Leech, the chairman of the MEH, announced the newest addition to DC's ever-evolving lobby scene. "The constituents of MEH have been up in arms about the many rampant actions taken by our federal government in only two short years. We join our conservative brethren in the defense against actually getting things done on the hill", said Mr. Leech in the interview last thursday. "We've hired Mr. Kingsley to represent our interests due to his renown political prowess as well as his ability to persuade Republican and conservative Democrats in congress to stop legislation from being passed."

Republicans across the board appear joyful about the presence of the MEH on the hill. Prospective Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R- VA) was quoted by the Washington Post this morning on the subject, saying "We've long wished to reach across the socioeconomic aisle to our hipster constituents. The interests of the American electorate is reflected by their own, as is made evident in their ability to do absolutely nothing while maintaining a sense of intellectual accomplishment, as well as their reading several Kurt Vonnegut books in a single week, and courting an obnoxiously celebrated sense of irony."

Mr. Kingsley joined prospective House Speaker John Boehner (R- OH) on Hannity last friday after the MEH's official announcement. "I'm excited about having a presence in Washington best resembling the conservative platforms that won us the House majority this past election cycle.", said Mr. Boehner. When asked about the MEH agenda in Washington, Mr. Kingsley replied "The American public is sick of being put in a position to do stuff. [MEH] is made up of Americans like you and I, Sean. Americans that are annoyed by squares, shop exclusively at thrift stores, and don't actually have any plans for the near future outside of getting that sweet barista job at the espresso joint down the street. We lead simpler lives."

The close relationship between conservative legislators and the hipster lobby has without doubt been held in question by progressive Democrats and liberal political commentators alike. Famed left wing commentator Rachel Maddow last Saturday, tweeted "Look at this f**king hipster!", presumably in response to Mr. Kingley's recent appointment.

Despite left wing criticism, MEH is preparing it's first series of power plays for the coming congressmen in January. Unable to get a meeting at the MEH office on D street, I was lucky enough to corner Mr. Kingsley in a dim-lit back alley as he made his way home from the 7-11 on H street and Penn Ave. When asked about the first item on his agenda, Mr. Kingsley replied "Whatever you want, please just let me go home. I have kids.."

The American public can rest sound knowing that the reshaping of our troubled country will in fact have considerable opposition, now that the hipster agenda is being represented in our nation's capital. Mr. Kingley's critical appointment stands true to the MEH's rally cry, engraved across the entrance arch of their headquarters: "We Shall Overcome All Of This Overcoming".

Yeah It's Art, What The Hell Of It?

Late last week, I sat in my living room writing an article on my MacBook Pro on the evolving face of contemporary art, while downloading James Joyce’s Dubliners on my Ipad and listening to music on my $200 Bose stereo system. My roommate, who desired anonymity in accordance to a recent cocoa plant excursion, entered our living room with the ivory fruits of her journeys and a couple other new possessions amounting to a copy of Milton’s Paradise Lost, and a quill to match the small jar full of ink she had bought just days before. It was a sign from the patron saint of irony, as I thought, “Milton’s paradise is lost indeed.” The fact is that art has changed drastically from the days of Milton, Joyce, and even Vonnegut. So the question stands, are these developments detrimental? Have we established such a lack of confinement of expression through these, our Jetson-esque technological assets, that our expression is in turn made languid in depth and substance? Often, the answers of such inquiry are subject to mutation via generational gaps. The fact is that we, the willing and almost able youth, see these developments as integral to the evolution of contemporary art as a whole – a post-post modernist agenda of sorts. The argument usually takes place between my beloved Jon Stewart subscribing Gen Y, and the surviving cornerstones of the ever impressive twentieth century art scene, lighting red candles on the mantles of giant radios in lieu of Catholic saints, to call back that “fire side chatting” voice. With that in mind, let us navigate the two sides of this argument point to point before casting it to the fire the in the court of public opinion.

Most obviously, the technological development that has had the greatest influence in contemporary art has been the internet. This PC-charged, MacBook Pro world has mutated the once organic chemistry of the creative process. Now that information is available at the click of a “mouse,” whatever the damn thing is, people can perform the tasks of informed judgment, criticism, and learning with the ease and clarity once afforded by a renaissance brush stroke. Sharing artistic history, influence, ideas and developments are of highest priority in the photoshopping sophistication of contemporary artistic culture. But is it effective?

Many argue that the abundance of information flowing through the G.W. entitled “Internets” lead many to assume the false identities of articulate, well read art critics. The fact of the matter is, to the many supporters of said argument, that reading several articles and memorizing famous names of works and artists who contributed in large to artistic movements does not constitute an art expert. But is art a medium dictated by experts and critics exclusively? Was not Duchamp the son of a notary? The fact is that many of the celebrated artists of the last century have buried the ballast of their fame in the grounds, outlying the establishment. So does expertise make good art? Obviously, Duchamp could paint in the classicist style with the best of them, and thus one may argue that one cannot break the rules one does not know. But art is more than rules and the lack thereof. Art is an exercise in cognition, expression, and communication. One of which, the MacBook generation, surely knows a hell of a whole lot more about than any “Great Generation” artist may hope to learn.

Artistic rendering of cognition, expression, and communication in this technological heyday is not ill-afforded, or so it may be argued. People in large, with the grand schemes of information at their near and present disposal, may educate themselves on a level unseen by history. This grand education, in turn, realizes a broad cognition of human and universal conditions. It is in the expression of said cognitions, brought forth by these extensive systematic means of communication, that art may flourish; and it damn sure doesn’t hurt to have a means in which art may be made further aesthetically stunning. This is the stem of the pro-technological artistic movement which uses the many previously mentioned assets as well as developments to the tune of 3D film, digital photography, and digital sound engineering to bring forth tools to employ at the whim of any artist. While one can see the obvious detriments of said technologies, even Jay-Z would agree “Auto-tune” has overstayed its welcome. These are precious assets to the artistic community that can amount to just as much progressive works, in a similar fashion as the advent of canned paint amounted to in the realms of Pollock’s abstract expressionism.

Whether one stands firm against the technological developments, or employs them intelligently and creatively in one’s own work, it is impossible to disagree with the idea that the world’s means and artistic manifestations are changing. But not all change is bad. As a recent cell phone ad campaign on the train pronounced: “Some change is 4G.”