Why Is the Obama Administration Trying to Undermine Educational Opportunities for Black Children?

The question is asked by Thomas Sowell. The commentary is provided by Dan Mitchell. The posting was done by me.

Many thanks to Dan for his ongoing permission to re-publish his posts on this blog. It allows me to go play golf today. Every day you don't read the posts at his fine blog, International Liberty, is a day lost to learning something you probably didn't know.

March 13, 2012 by Dan Mitchell

If you care about helping the less fortunate succeed, I’m commenting today on a Thomas Sowell column that will make you sad and angry. It is a story about how powerless and disadvantaged people are being hurt to advance the political interests of some elitists.

Here is the clever way he starts the column. I particularly like the reference to Social Security as a Ponzi scheme, which reminds me of this cartoon.

There have been many frauds of historic proportions — for example, the financial pyramid scheme for which Charles Ponzi was sent to prison in the 1920s, and for which Franklin D. Roosevelt was praised in the 1930s, when he called it Social Security. In our own times, Bernie Madoff’s hoax has made headlines. But the biggest hoax of the past two generations is still going strong — namely, the hoax that statistical differences in outcomes for different groups are due to the way other people treat those groups.

Then he gets to the meat of his topic.

The latest example of this hoax is the joint crusade of the Department of Education and the Department of Justice against schools that discipline black males more often than other students. According to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, this disparity in punishment violates the “promise” of “equity.” Just who made this promise remains unclear, and why equity should mean equal outcomes despite differences in behavior is even more unclear. This crusade by Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is only the latest in a long line of fraudulent arguments based on statistics. If black males get punished more often than Asian American females, does that mean that it is somebody else’s fault? That it is impossible that black males are behaving differently from Asian American females? Nobody in his right mind believes that. But that is the unspoken premise, without which the punishment statistics prove nothing about “equity.”

Professor Sowell contemplates the motive for this Obama Administration initiative.

What is the purpose or effect of this whole exercise by the Department of Education and the Department of Justice? To help black students or to secure the black vote in an election year by seeming to be coming to the rescue of blacks from white oppression? Among the many serious problems of ghetto schools is the legal difficulty of getting rid of disruptive hoodlums, a mere handful of whom can be enough to destroy the education of a far larger number of other black students — and with it destroy their chances for a better life.

Sowell elaborates further, pulling no punches.

Secretary Duncan and Attorney General Holder want to play the race card in an election year, at the expense of the education of black students. Make no mistake about it, the black students who go to school to get an education are the main victims of the classroom disrupters whom Duncan and Holder are trying to protect. What they are more fundamentally trying to protect are the black votes which are essential for Democrats. For that, blacks must be constantly depicted as under siege from whites, so that Democrats can be seen as their rescuers. Promoting paranoia translates into votes. It is a very cynical political game, despite all the lofty rhetoric used to disguise it. Whether the current generation of black students get a decent education is infinitely more important than whether the current generation of Democratic politicians hang on to their jobs. Very powerful stuff. And it should be disturbing as well.

I’ve already commented on the implicit racism in the minimum wage law and thereprehensible decision by leftists to put the interests of teacher union ahead of the interests of black students.

Now we can add something else to the list.

If you like Professor Sowell’s insights, I’ve highlighted more of his work here,here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. And you can see him in action here. A truly gifted public intellectual and a (thankfully) prolific writer.

A Tough and Smart Kid - Thomas Sowell, Part Five

Today we take a look at the fifth and final video in our series with Thomas Sowell.

I hope you have enjoyed the series. If so please leave a comment or enter an answer in the little poll on the right so I can decide whether to run similar series in the future on other interesting and important people who are not normally covered by the main stream media. There are many who are not widely known outside of "freedom" circles.

In this final part of the interview he answers questions on a range of issues including Obama's failed presidency, who might replace him, and whether it matters. We get a good sense of who Sowell is and what shaped his life. He finishes with his advice for young people today. They would do well to heed that advice, but then again, so would we all.

Baseball Fans are Geniuses Compared to Politicians - From Babe Ruth to Marxism With Thomas Sowell

Part four in our five part video interview with Dr. Sowell explains why he remained a baseball fanatic long after he lost his interest in Marxism. This one has an analysis of the swings of Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth. Political junkies and sports enthusiasts both will enjoy this one.

Love, Marriage and Village Idiots - Thomas Sowell Part Three

Part three of our five part series of interviews with Dr. Thomas Sowell deals in part with love, of all things. I can't remember another economist covering that topic in all the reading I have done over the years by people in that profession.

Are married people better off than unmarried domestic partners? What about STDs and sex education in schools? Let's look at the evidence with Dr. Sowell.

From Marx to Reagan to OWS - Thomas Sowell's Journey - Part Two

In this second in the series, Dr. Sowell explains why he was a Marxist at 19 and why he became a freedom advocate thereafter. Commentary on perceptions about Reagan and even the OWS mindset are touched on as well.

From Marxist to National Treasure - A Journey With Thomas Sowell

Today's post begins the first of a series of  five videos featuring an interview with Dr. Thomas Sowell. Some of you who have a subscription to this site or are otherwise regular readers know about him to some degree or another. But even (and maybe especially) those who know quite a bit about him will be delighted with this series. For the rest of you, I hope this is an introduction to a person, his history and his ideas that you will treasure, as I have, like a photograph of a beloved member of our family, the American family.

The interviews cover a wide range of topics from politics to poetry and from Babe Ruth to Barack Obama. At eighty one years of age, he has the wit, wisdom and knowledge that men half his age aspire to. And although he has plenty to be angry about, he never seems to be.

The discussion centers around his new book, The Thomas Sowell Reader, which I will be obtaining (shameful hint to Christmas shoppers) to add to my collection of his books.

Most of you do not have the time to sit and watch all five segments at once so I'll be running them one at a time on a regular basis so you can make the enjoyment last. I liken it to a large bowl of intellectual ice cream eaten with a very small spoon. Enjoy.

Why is Granny Throwing Her Kids Under the Bus?

Recently I posted a short piece about a hilarious video that some goofy people made that showed a guy pushing an old lady off a cliff. I say goofy because it was apparently meant as a serious attempt to make people think that any reduction in spending increases or any rational Medicare reform was proof that mean old Republicans and other evil doers were trying to kill Granny. 

It was titled Unintentional Humor is the Best Kind and if you missed it you can revisit it here and have a good laugh. The video backfired of course, at least with anyone of average intelligence.

So what's with the title of this post? Surely I'm not going to accuse old people of intentionally screwing their children and grandchildren, am I? No, I'm not.

But I am going to try to illustrate the point that it's not Granny or any other older Americans who have been paying into Social Security who will be left holding the bag when that system finally collapses if it's not reformed in a meaningful way, and soon. It's her kids and grand kids who will come up empty because that's who is paying her monthly check in the Ponzi scheme farce we call Social Security.

Despite what liberal activists (AKA the mainstream media) have been trying to lead us to believe, absolutely no one from either party has floated any reform proposal that would cut any current recipient's benefit or raise the age of retirement for anyone near the filing age. And it would be political suicide if they did, so no one need worry about that in the short term. (It's the monetization of that debt they should be terrified of.)

The reason for this post is that I got a heads-up on another fine article written by American treasure Dr. Thomas Sowell from a family member who stays current on rationally thought-out articles and knows of my penchant for reading anything Sowell puts to page. Many thanks to son-in-law Bob for pointing me to one I hadn't seen yet.

The article is short and super readable, just as all Sowell articles are. The combination of his intelligence and writing skill make it one you won't want to miss, particularly all you liberals who read this blog. (OK, I can't resist mixing a little humor into every post.)

The Missing Money by Thomas Sowell

One of my earliest memories of revulsion against war came from seeing a photograph from the First World War when I was a teenager. It was nothing gory. Just a picture of a military officer, in an impressive uniform, talking to a puzzled and forlorn-looking old peasant woman with a cloth wrapped around her head.

He said simply: “Don’t you understand, madam? The village is not there any more.”

To many such people of that era, the village was the only world they knew. And to say that it had been destroyed in the carnage of war was to say that there was no way for them to go back home, that their whole world was gone.

Recently that image came back, in a wholly different context, while seeing pictures of American seniors carrying signs that read “Hands off my Social Security” and “Hands off my Medicare.”

Read the rest..

Maybe Gary Johnson for a Change?

"Change" has gotten a bad reputation lately as a large number of citizens have awakened from their fantasy world sleep, come to their senses and have thus realized that nothing has really changed in the way things are being operated by the agents of the now infamous "Hope and Change" mantra.

Change? Government is not more transparent, things are not more fair, attitudes among different racial groups have not suddenly improved because a multi-racial man was elected President, politicians still do what they want to do instead of what the people want them to do, and the recession (depression?) has not ended. It's a partial list for sure. And the few things that have changed, have changed for the worse, not the better. The latter list is at least as long as the former.

Real change, not just a change of which clowns are running the circus, is what those newly awakened people are thinking about. I have been preaching (ad nausem) about having a fundamental change in the debate in this country for so long it makes my friends and relatives weary.

But instead of blaming Barak Obama and the leftist oligarchy currently in power for lurching the country towards socialism, I would opine that they deserve our gratitude. (in a perverse sort of way) They have adjusted the contrast control on the national TV set in ways they never intended. The contrast between the traditional values of earlier Americans vs the way we are actually living has become stark enough to change that debate to the only one which really matters in determining the outcome for the American experiment in republican governance.

Although a media stuck in a Utopian fairy tale re-run never mentions it (or gets it), that debate has become  more clear. Namely, as Dr. Walter Williams puts the question in framing that debate, "What is the proper role of government in a free society?"

Oh, many in the political sciences, academia and a few other largely irrelevant groups have debated it one way or the other for generations, but only now has it become the great debate of the people.

Tea Partiers, although not a formal or organized group, set the debate in motion by embracing the only core notions that bind them together. You can be sure that people counted among that group disagree on a whole range of issues. But the notions they have rallied around are; a smaller government that taxes less and is more fiscally responsible, and a less intrusive government that leaves people alone more often to solve their own problems in a free market. They agree that government should not be the agent to pick winners and losers or subsidize supporters while punishing objectors.

It's not actually a group, but a movement. And it belongs to no political party although there is no room for it's ideology in the current Democratic Party. (And recently they have punished Republican old-schoolers at the ballot box quite visibly.)

Naturally, some other groups oppose their ideas, but now they are being forced to address them even as some among them are trying to avoid it by attempting to demonize those they oppose as racists and ignorant rubes. This time it's not working, so now the actual debate has begun.

Which brings us to the question; Who is Gary Johnson and why does it matter who he is?
It matters because he is different in many ways, and in his philosophy, he is definitely different than the type of politicians being held up as future leaders by the establishment types of both of the two (so far) relevant parties.

 Even though he works within the framework of the Republican Party, he isn't a favorite, or even on the radar screen of those who control that party. He probably scares them to death because they are kindred spirits with liberals in as much as they also believe that government exists to solve societal problems. They merely differ in their approach and selection of  the "problems."

Does anyone really think that Mitt, Sarah, Newt, Hillary, Barak or any of those old party types will actually shrink government's role in our lives if they lead the next government? I don't. They may rearrange the Legos, but the toy Tower of Pisa will still eventually topple over and our lives will need to be picked from the rubble.

I am not suggesting Gary Johnson is the answer, time will tell. But I do know the question. Do "we the people" want actual change or just the continued decline into ever larger government controlled chaos?

One of the greatest thinkers and writers of the 20th century, C S Lewis, once wrote; "We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive."

Someone like Gary Johnson, someone from outside the establishment, might be the greatest "progressive" in that context, and must come to the fore, or we shall miss what might very well be our last chance to live our lives as we see fit, not in some Orwellian nightmare of what Thomas Sowell calls the Vision of the Anointed.

Understanding How We Got Here

As promised in an earlier post, Dr. Thomas Sowell, one of the best thinkers in America explains in plain language what caused the Housing Boom and Bust in his book of that name. The links on the right point to articles published in the Investors Business Daily which are actually a chapter from that book.

As always, there is plenty of blame to pass around, but there are always root causes as well. The chapter is titled "The Politics of the Housing Boom" and it takes the mystery out of the question about what some of those causes are. We ignore those causes at our future peril. Of course I suggest you read the book itself, but the chapter referenced should suffice in lieu of that.

Thomas Sowell, a man with no political aspirations, or someone like him, should have been President of the United States. If that had happened, the first black President could have been a triumph instead of the unmitigated disaster it has become. A leader in every sense of the word, his grasp on this issue is only one of many he has a grasp on. A common sense man for uncommon times.

You can read the series on the right. And you won't want to miss listening to a pod-cast of an interview of Dr. Sowell here. It covers several topics and is enlightening as well as entertaining.

The Economics of Medical Care

Dr. Thomas Sowell is well known to readers of this blog, but sadly, if you turn to the person next to you where ever you happen to be and ask them who he is, you will get the same look that you get from American teenagers in a Chinese algebra class. I guess that's not terribly shocking in a country where a huge number of those quizzed on the street about the name of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, answer - "none of the above". In fairness, given the prevailing preferences of what passes for the press in this country, they can't be expected to have heard of Sowell.

For those who are new to this site or to Sowell, the link found below contains a biography, but the content of the series of articles is the real attraction. It is a nine part series carried on the Op-Ed page of the Investors Business Daily and as a courtesy to my readers who do not subscribe to that excellent publication, but who do check on this site often, I will be adding a link on the right hand side each day so that we may together follow along on an economics lesson extraordinaire. As with all of his writing, it is perfectly readable.

The series is actually an entire chapter of his new book, "Applied Economics" and will be reprinted in its entirety on the pages of that paper. He has also recently written a book entitled "The Housing Boom and Bust" which will inform its readers of what actually happened during the recent meltdown of government "fixes" and the attendant economic crash.

I hope you enjoy it so you can roll your eyes (in an informed way) whenever someone at your favorite watering hole tells you how great it's going to be when "free" government healthcare finally arrives to save us from those enemies of the people, the insurance companies and drug manufacturers.

Now That I’m a Racist

After over four decades of experience in the financial markets, having a good understanding of profit motivation has made it fairly easy to ignore being called a racist by the usual race and poverty extortionists like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. But now that the media and an ex-President have jumped into the dumpster with them and the third rate actress who was already in there for reasons of insanity, it may be time to close the lid and call Waste Management.

The good thing about this situation is that it gathers the tactics, the practitioners and the ideas they champion all in one place for easier disposal. The bad thing is, we never seem to be able to pile enough clay on top of them to keep them from crawling out of the landfill every so often when people forget how bad the stench actually is.

There is an old saying that “the first one to invoke Hitler’s name in any argument, automatically loses the debate”. I’ve never believed that to be true in all cases, but the idea that associating your opponent with a vile ideology can change the subject when losing an argument is certainly not new. Lawyers and spin meisters are well acquainted with the concept and employ it all the time. You’d think more people would catch on, but once you become addicted to hopiates, you can start hallucinating that people who disagree with your dreams aren’t merely stupid after all, they are actually evil racists as well.
And since those who rode Obama’s “return to Camelot” train in the greatest number were the youngest passengers and didn’t understand it was a disastrous return trip to a dangerous illusion, they don’t have the advantage of hindsight.

At least I’m in good company now that you can be put on the racist list without actually being white. As a kid, it was my understanding that only white people could be racists. Of course that wasn’t true, but the new racism definition includes anyone who disagrees with liberal dogma on “healthcare reform” and the “failure” of capitalism and freedom. Our recalcitrance stems from a racist hatred of President Obama according to Billy Carter’s slower brother.

To stand as a fellow racist with the likes of Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Ward Connerly and Larry Elder is an honor. Anyone who is familiar with these luminary Americans and still utters racial epithets about others doesn’t have a problem with political correctness, they have a problem with rational thought.

I’ve been fortunate enough to have been in the same room and actually spoken with three of them (I’m still waiting for the chance to shake hands with Dr. Sowell) but until this connection was established by our rabbit fearing ex-President, the personal association ended there. They have graced the page on this blog, not because they happen to be black, (and now are fellow racists) but because they share my love for freedom and happen to be smarter and better at communicating that virtue than I am.

A few years ago I had the privilege of a short chat with Larry Elder after hearing him speak at a dinner gathering. I asked him a question which had puzzled me since I became a “born again” freedom advocate many years ago. It seemed to me, I told him, that the most natural constituency for the ideas of liberty in this country ought to have been the people to whom it had been systematically denied. That is to ask, why aren’t black people as a group the most vocal proponents of freedom in our society? After all, some of the best spokesmen for liberty today, are immigrants from Eastern European countries and various other kleptocracies around the globe. Those who have been abused the most, often defend it the best. Witness Svetlana Kunin, etal.

Larry's answer then was as honest as he is, he didn’t know. And I still don’t know. So I guess it’s only logical that as individuals, the above named people are some of the best defenders we could hope for even if the group's political leanings still have me befuddled.

Now that we have a President of color for the first time, it should have been a slam dunk for freedom based solutions to our various problems. Instead, we elected a man who dines at the statism table and seeks to re-enslave people, this time without regard to skin color. I guess the idea is that, you don’t solve servitude as if it were a problem, but instead ensure that all people are equally enslaved in the name of fairness. The slave masters this time around will be big government czars instead of whip wielding cotton farmers.

It’s the same approach these folks have on poverty and the results will be the same. I’m afraid the people who will suffer most will be the people who support this replay of the horror story with the highest enthusiasm, that is to say, the younger people. That may seem like justice, but it’s like giving petty thieves life without parole. And in this case, the innocent will get the same sentence.

So, Jimmy Carter notwithstanding, the new “racists” mentioned above, the rude "shout out" specialists, and the sign carrying protestors at Washington marches of debatable size, are our best hope to avoid jumping into the historical dumpster with the USSR and all the other failed utopian nightmares that started out as the hopeful dreams of our fathers.