Excellent speech.

This post has been removed from the Bravo channel by channel owner Deano. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

Nice and she's absolutely right.

Go to school, go to work, send your kids to school, follow fashion, act normal, walk on the pavement, watch T.V., save for your old age, obey the law, conform.

Repeat after me:

I am free.

Great speech, not a great speaker though
I kept expecting her to say, 'like, yknow, oh my gawd, really?"

>> ^Fade:

Great speech, not a great speaker though
I kept expecting her to say, 'like, yknow, oh my gawd, really?"


Perhaps she could enroll in public speaking school?

*promote

Self promoting this video back to the front page; last published Monday, August 9th, 2010 8:07am PDT - promote requested by original submitter bleedmegood.

Brilliant speech. Now.. how much you want to bet she's on a US government 'watch list'

*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Tymbrwulf.

Well shit, who supports the government school union? Who supports home schooling and competition between for-profit schools (where the failures go out of business)? Hmmm... http://www.schoolandstate.org/home.htm

Damn. I would marry this lady.

No child left behind eh?

"They don't want a population capable of critical thinking", "they want obedient workers"
-George Carlin

Public education is facing permanent shuffling around the world. The public's wealth is becoming private business and profit potential. No longer students, words being used are 'customers'. The ability to think is no longer needed in the labor force. Hence a 60 day occupation by students in Puerto Rico and a growing student movement across the US. Education is a human right!

Yes! Get rid of it!

What the hell? They cut off the part at the end, where she whipped out the AK and shot up the school. Disappointed.

>> ^tsquire1:

The ability to think is no longer needed in the labor force.


I don't agree with that. I think that is less true than at any other point in history. We live in a complex society in which the simplest jobs are increasingly automated. If your job really requires no thought, expect a robot to be doing it in a couple of decades.

At what point in history was thought more required than now?

K-12's only purpose is to prepare students (at least somewhat) for higher education. Curriculum is almost entirely survey-level, which is fine, because broad curriculum gives a better chance for students to find SOMETHING which interests them. I LEARNED from high school that I like to write, that I like science, that I like building things (from web pages to adirondack chairs), and that I like history. I had some good teachers, I had a few bad teachers, and I had some really great teachers. But almost ALL of my teachers were genuinely interested in their fields, and they wanted to interest students as well. One of my history teachers would lecture with such unbridled enthusiasm and energy that it would have been difficult to NOT pay attention. At the end of it all the only standardized test I took was the ACT. I can't go faulting four years of high school on a single exam.

All that being said, I enjoyed high school. It's unreasonable to expect K-12 to cover virtually every prospective field and vocation. They give you art, music, literature, mathematics, history, sports, woodworking, auto repair, physics, chemistry, biology, languages, drama, etc. etc. Provided teachers are doing their jobs, there are PLENTY of opportunities for students to get some direction.

One thing I quickly noticed after arriving at university was that almost none of the students were proficient writers. Now I know I didn't exactly go Ivy League, but students of higher education, if nothing else, need to know how to write. The matter was made far worse by my composition professor, a hippy who decided not to challenge and improve her students but overlook their (many) shortcomings and pass all with flying colors. My term paper for that class was a lengthy treatise decrying her "methods" as doing direct damage to her students' future education and careers. The grade she awarded that paper didn't reflect agreement on her part.

Excellent. Now, I really want to know if she actually wrote this herself, and if she didn't I still think she's awesome for reading it.

>> ^blankfist:
Yes! Get rid of it!


Or fix it.

>> ^PHJF:
K-12's only purpose is to prepare students (at least somewhat) for higher education. Curriculum is almost entirely survey-level, which is fine, because broad curriculum gives a better chance for students to find SOMETHING which interests them. I LEARNED from high school that I like to write, that I like science, that I like building things (from web pages to adirondack chairs), and that I like history. I had some good teachers, I had a few bad teachers, and I had some really great teachers. But almost ALL of my teachers were genuinely interested in their fields, and they wanted to interest students as well. One of my history teachers would lecture with such unbridled enthusiasm and energy that it would have been difficult to NOT pay attention. At the end of it all the only standardized test I took was the ACT. I can't go faulting four years of high school on a single exam.
All that being said, I enjoyed high school. It's unreasonable to expect K-12 to cover virtually every prospective field and vocation. They give you art, music, literature, mathematics, history, sports, woodworking, auto repair, physics, chemistry, biology, languages, drama, etc. etc. Provided teachers are doing their jobs, there are PLENTY of opportunities for students to get some direction.
One thing I quickly noticed after arriving at university was that almost none of the students were proficient writers. Now I know I didn't exactly go Ivy League, but students of higher education, if nothing else, need to know how to write. The matter was made far worse by my composition professor, a hippy who decided not to challenge and improve her students but overlook their (many) shortcomings and pass all with flying colors. My term paper for that class was a lengthy treatise decrying her "methods" as doing direct damage to her students' future education and careers. The grade she awarded that paper didn't reflect agreement on her part.


I learned proper writing when I started my own book about useless drivel... never from school. In fact, I never liked writing or reading until I deployed to Iraq and learned the arts because I was bored.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^blankfist:
Yes! Get rid of it!

Or fix it.


Bang up job fixing it so far. I say dump it.

>> ^blankfist:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^blankfist:
Yes! Get rid of it!

Or fix it.

Bang up job fixing it so far. I say dump it.


It is a bang up job only because of entitlement with regards to children and their parents. We need an iron hand regarding failure and unacceptable behavior. Is that accurate to say? Not just for children, but their crappy parents with their busy non-children schedules...

@Lawdeedaw. Wow. I'm speechless. I suppose you'll be the central planner in charge of laying down that iron fist and single-handedly fixing all the ills of the public school system? No one else has been able to do it, but maybe you can?

>> ^blankfist:
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since May 3rd, 2010" href="http://videosift.com/member/Lawdeedaw">Lawdeedaw. Wow. I'm speechless. I suppose you'll be the central planner in charge of laying down that iron fist and single-handedly fixing all the ills of the public school system? No one else has been able to do it, but maybe you can?


Not at all, I would not be the best candidate for correcting our public school system. How could one man possibly do what takes an entire society? I am only capable of helping my three children and any other children that I can. I try---it is all we can do. School, for my kids, is only the start of learning and I continue it whenever I can.

So let me ask, why are you speechless? If I never implied that I was the savior, why tounge tied?

Blank, I am in no way stating that schools should be ruthless or that they should be as fun as stationary paper. I think school should teach a hell of a lot more about life than just education (And life can be fun.)

However, for failure, losers lose. Discipline should be good, fair and harsh. That is a nice motto for me but who knows, we might (Note: will,) screw it up...

One thing I will bring up---I do not think good discipline is sending kids to jail for weed, fighting and all that crap... Jail=criminal college. We need more appropriate forms of discipline at school than overreaction.

@Lawdeedaw, but that's my point. Your take on public schools sounds like a monolithic one-size-fits-all system. That's what it means, it seems, when people say "it takes a society" to raise the kids. But does it? I thought it took the parents. They decided to have the children; I didn't. No other person was responsible for them having their kids. On that point, I don't have children, so don't you think I should have ZERO say in how a school system is structured?

You want "good, fair and harsh" discipline for those who fail, but what about parents (or teenager students for that matter) who don't want that type of discipline? Certainly we should have individual choice how our kids are disciplined, let alone how and what we teach them. Some parents believe in corporal punishment while others do not. Should one group's wishes outweigh the next?

But a public school system is a one-size-fits-all system where the larger group's wishes outweighs the smaller group's wishes. It's always been that way. When I was in school at an early age, teachers were allowed to paddle us, and the parents had no say in the matter. Was it fair that parents and children had to accept public school paddling without any recourse at all? What if a teacher had a grudge against a kid? What if a teacher got off on spanking children? What if the teacher left bruises and welts?

The reason I believe we should get rid of public school is because it's a terrible failure. And it doesn't address the individual needs of parents and children. What if a kid knew what they wanted to be, or at least had a strong interest in some field or industry (medicine, filmmaking, etc.), wouldn't it be cool if there were schools (or tutors) that catered to that without having to teach the horrible 'no kid left behind' one-size-fits-all curriculum passed down by the Dept. of Education? I think so.

Here is my take. And if you get tired of discussing the topic, let me know. I love to debate but I cut my debate down because I was too long winded.

Parents need to be active in children’s lives. True. More important than the influence of parents, studies and observations show, are peers and new stimulations. I.e., “Monkey see monkey do,” or “new pussy wins out.” This works for the conformity and anticonformity mindset. Even the hermit who goes to live alone in the forest was a product, most of all, of his peers (They molded him to be a loner.) Education and parenthood can remove some of this commercialist mindset we inherit from our human genes, but that takes a long time. That statement is broad and is not meant to be 100% inclusive of everyone nor everyone's reactions to different scenarios. Some are better at being individuals than others. But those exceptions are rare.

Adults are the same way. The way you interact with one 'teaches' that adult what is normal or abnormal. You may not have children Blank, but you most likely interact with children or parents. So you mold them one way or another. Because of this, you should definitely have input on education. In fact, think of society as a job. You should have a say in how everyone does their jobs, fills their niches. That survey at the end of a training session? It applies to everyone in the class of life.

Good parenting is required for good children, yes, but it only shapes an outline. Genetics and new stimulus children encounter account for far more.

Further Blank, you are still a part of society. Casting responsibility away for the woes of our society, meanwhile griping about away for whatever reason, is unacceptable (By that I mean, don't be mad when your house get's burglarized or your car get's stolen by some punk kid. You left them to their own devices, now they are making their own choices. By logic, you should have no say in what they do---just as you should have no say in matters of their education. I am not saying you do cast away responsibility and gripe, I am just making a point.) As long as you admit you were potentially part of their delinquency, I am cool with that. That is the world you crafted through inactivity or distance, and the world I actively crafted.

I volunteer at the Big Brothers mentor program, not because I love children or wish to be better than others... I am not altruism at its finest. I do it to shape one child's life so that hopefully he does not become a danger to myself, my family, my friends, my neighbors, or anyone, even you. Do I owe this to Blank? Do you owe it to me to do likewise? Only if you don’t want punk kids running the streets with their gangs. If responsible people won’t accept them, then someone else will.

You could say you owe nothing to anyone and you would be correct. We all could---parents, children, sons, daughters, why stop at you? Why should mom or dad be any different than you? Their responsibility, technically (Just like your responsibility is technically nothing,) is to drop the kid off at a fire station. "They chose to have children," and? They then chose to abandon or deject their child. Just like you chose to abandon taking care of the place you live in.

Your last paragraph is on point and would be nice.

>> ^blankfist:
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since May 3rd, 2010" href="http://videosift.com/member/Lawdeedaw">Lawdeedaw, but that's my point. Your take on public schools sounds like a monolithic one-size-fits-all system. That's what it means, it seems, when people say "it takes a society" to raise the kids. But does it? I thought it took the parents. They decided to have the children; I didn't. No other person was responsible for them having their kids. On that point, I don't have children, so don't you think I should have ZERO say in how a school system is structured?
You want "good, fair and harsh" discipline for those who fail, but what about parents (or teenager students for that matter) who don't want that type of discipline? Certainly we should have individual choice how our kids are disciplined, let alone how and what we teach them. Some parents believe in corporal punishment while others do not. Should one group's wishes outweigh the next?
But a public school system is a one-size-fits-all system where the larger group's wishes outweighs the smaller group's wishes. It's always been that way. When I was in school at an early age, teachers were allowed to paddle us, and the parents had no say in the matter. Was it fair that parents and children had to accept public school paddling without any recourse at all? What if a teacher had a grudge against a kid? What if a teacher got off on spanking children? What if the teacher left bruises and welts?
The reason I believe we should get rid of public school is because it's a terrible failure. And it doesn't address the individual needs of parents and children. What if a kid knew what they wanted to be, or at least had a strong interest in some field or industry (medicine, filmmaking, etc.), wouldn't it be cool if there were schools (or tutors) that catered to that without having to teach the horrible 'no kid left behind' one-size-fits-all curriculum passed down by the Dept. of Education? I think so.


Let me give a recent example of no-responsibility members of society fucking things up for parents. My brother does not want children nor can he even stand them. I have three children, all girls 3 and under. Well, my mom got remarried and her dictate was for all the children to have fun during the reception. Fine and well.

They were having a blast. They were screaming and running as kids do, and my brother got furious. Mom was cool with it, even if her wedding had been very formal. My brother said, "If I wanted fucking screaming, I would have went to god damn Jumberee." I said, bro, calm down and watch your tounge when you speak about my kids. "No, I fucking hate kids."

Now, knowing my brother was speaking directly about all children, including my own, I almost punched his face off his chin. That would have had me in cuffs and would have certainly affected how I raise my children and how my children would have saw me. His responsibility was to not attend the wedding if he had a problem with children---or he could have shut up. Period. But since he has a responsibility-free mindset, that it is not his problem but he can interject his opinion where it is not wanted or relevant, I have to suffer.

His mindset is, “Why should I not attend my mother’s wedding because of your kids? And why should I have to put up with their screaming?” Well, you don’t raise my kids, don’t love them or care for them, so stfu bro. Mom invited me and my kids, so put up with them. If you demand they change bro, then put in some fucking effort and teach them! You cannot have it both ways.