I found the usual nonsense on the www dot this morning until I came upon a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Michelle Obama. Hers was a by rote, one might say sordid, piece of liberal insincerity entitled “Let’s Ensure That Every Girl Can Learn” and subtitled “An international initiative can help the 62 million girls world-wide who are not in school.”
Don’t liberals write lofty headlines that praise their lofty intentions and trumpet their lofty place above mere planet-dwellers?
So Michelle, who I like on days I believe she plays the piano and dislike like on days I don’t believe she plays the piano, will travel to Tokyo today and announce a partnership labeled “Let Girls Learn” to assist girls in developing countries go to and stay in school.
Lofty, lofty, lofty. Expensive too, I bet. I also bet she calls that expense an investment. Why there it is, leading off paragraph two. Soon we should see the litany of scare words liberals and well intentioned sit-coms use when trying to convey the urgency of an issue. Michelle is not messing around today, still in paragraph two we find tragic waste of human potential, a drag on national economies and global prosperity, and a threat to security.
Liberals are all closet scientists, Bill Nye is their kind of screechy guy, so we need facts, figures and studies to justify the lofty investment of someone else’s money. They should be around here somewhere… aha! Paragraph four! Of course, the research is unequivocal! Educated women marry and have children later! They have lower rates of infant-mortality! Lower rates of HIV/AIDS! They make more money which can boost an economy! Get this one: National-security experts have even noted that educating women can be a powerful tool to fight extremism, violence and instability. Can be? You sure this is settled damn science?
Having settled the science, Michelle says the “… question today is no longer whether to invest in global girls’ education, but how, particularly when it comes to adolescent girls.” I will translate this from Liberalese to English for you: “I have already decided to take your money, now I’m just trying to decide how I am going to spend your money.”
I would like to insert here that this morning I was not asking any questions beyond “Where are my glasses?”, so I am totally surprised by Michelle having an answer to a question I didn’t ask. It is settled science, you know, my glasses are missing. Where are they, Michelle?
From here it slides downhill to Junior High Speech Contest level. The focus is international. Blah. Let Girls Learn is about inspiring young Americans to commit to education. Blah, blah. Even though a young American’s school might be “…far from perfect—and my husband is working hard to change that—they still have a responsibility to show up every day and learn as much as they can.” Blah, blah, what?
Your husband has been President for six years. Have our schools improved one little bit in the past six years? Lots of words describe our President but “working hard”? Any way you order these two words they are not apt descriptives unless you force “on his golf game” into the sentence. And that hasn’t helped our schools.
Some kids arrive at school troubled but part of the job is not adding to their troubles. You won’t accomplish this by becoming their drug dealer, commiserating as if you are so understanding, or allowing them to avoid responsibility because they are troubled. Every word you say should model and teach. You model and teach your subject because you want the student to understand the great value your subject can add to their life. The student should be constantly learning self-reliance within the subject at hand, and therefore in a slice of their life. Teachers who do not stick to the subject model only a distrust of that subject’s central value.
I once wrote of Rachel Jeantel, the girl who testified in the Trayvon Martin trial, with sympathy because she was embarrassingly overmatched by the attorneys and the judge in that trial. A mercy killing may have been easier to watch; we had so let Rachel Jeantel down. Yes, we. We allowed the public school system to waste 14 years of her valuable life. We tacitly approved the system’s role in mis-educating that child and so many, many, others like her. I read she is doing all right these days. I pray so, because we sure didn’t help her along the way. She had to leave school in order to learn anything of value.
I suppose the American contribution to global education will be to assign endless papers on “To Kill a Mockingbird” and white privilege. We can also help Afghan teens form and coordinate their LGBT clubs. We might globally drug all boys with Adderall at globally low prices. We could offer Womyn’s Studies and a historical survey of Climate Cooling, (settled science from the 70’s) Global Warming, (settled science from the nineties) and the grandbaby of them all Global Climate Change, settled science as of this morning.
Michelle says, “These girls walk miles each day to school, study for hours each night, and stand strong against those who say they are unworthy of an education. If they are prepared to make those sacrifices, the global community should be able to summon the resources to help them fulfill their promise and the promise of their families, communities and countries.”
God, I find that insufferable. What sacrifices was the great Democratic Party Controlled American Public School System willing to make on behalf of Rachel Jeantel and millions of other kids thrust into ghettos and ghetto schools by the Democratic Party? Having solved the education crisis at home, Barrack and Michelle Obama will now solve the global education problem. For the girls; all boys will sit in the back of the global education bus.
The real insult is that such dung is thrown on your plate by someone willing to ignore the stark reality of local educational failure. Sleep well, daughters of America! Michelle and the global education cavalry are coming to your rescue. They’re meeting in Japan today.