Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations Alive and Well in Florida (Open Thread)

© Miri WTPOTUS October 14, 2012

Just when you think you’ve heard everything in the new “post-racial,” Obama-transformed United States of America, Florida comes up with something quite unbelievable.  Talk about the “soft bigotry of low expectations!”

Florida is enshrining  racial stereotyping and bigotry into its academic achievement goals:

The Florida State Board of Education passed a plan that sets goals for students in math and reading based upon their race.

On Tuesday, the board passed a revised strategic plan that says that by 2018, it wants 90 percent of Asian students, 88 percent of white students, 81 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of black students to be reading at or above grade level. For math, the goals are 92 percent of Asian kids to be proficient, whites at 86 percent, Hispanics at 80 percent and blacks at 74 percent. It also measures by other groupings, such as poverty and disabilities, reported the Palm Beach Post. …

Florida Department of Education said the goals recognize that not every group is starting from the same point and are meant to be ambitious but realistic.

As an example, the percentage of white students scoring at or above grade level (as measured by whether they scored a 3 or higher on the reading FCAT) was 69 percent in 2011-2012, according to the state. For black students, it was 38 percent, and for Hispanics, it was 53 percent.

In addition, State Board of Education Chairwoman Kathleen Shanahan said that setting goals for different subgroups was needed to comply with terms of a waiver that Florida and 32 other states have from some provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind Act. These waivers were used to make the states independent from some federal regulations.

It’s promising to hear that many “activists” as well as the parents of black and Hispanic children are outraged by these racist plans.

The key to understanding the policy is recognizing the role those “waivers” play. The waivers are a gift to the teachers’ unions, which have never liked President George W. Bush’s “No Child Left Behind Act”.  Why? Because it holds teachers accountable for their failure to teach, and teachers are also supposed to be qualified to teach.  The waivers also help Obama to centralize education policy at the federal level, and teachers’ unions nearly uniformly support Obama.

States that secure waivers are no longer required to ensure universal student proficiency in math and reading under NCLB’s Adequate Yearly Progress provision. NCLB requires that, over time, states raise the bar to achieve 100 percent student proficiency in reading and math.

NCLB also requires that all teachers of core subjects—defined as reading, math, science, foreign language, government, economics, art, geography, and history—be “highly qualified” under the law’s Higher Qualified Teacher mandate. To obtain this status, a teacher must hold a bachelor’s degree, hold state certification, and demonstrate subject matter mastery.

In order to secure waivers from these and other provisions of NCLB, states must agree to the Obama Administration’s policy preferences, which include basing teacher evaluations in part on student performance and adopting national standards and tests for what every child will be taught in school.

These new goals rig the game to ensure that “student performance” will result in positive “teacher evaluations!”  Evaluations will then trump qualifications, such as degrees, certification, and subject mastery.

President Bush wanted to ensure that all children, regardless of race, have a fair chance to learn by being taught by qualified individuals with proven track records.

President Obama wants to ensure that teachers and administrators face no real consequences for their failures, to make it possible for unqualified and ineffective teachers to keep their jobs (so unions can keep those dues-paying members), and to make sure that Obama and his socialist supporters are able to control “what every child will be taught” in school. 

This policy is not designed to help children.  It is designed to make it acceptable for teachers to fail.  Teachers won’t be challenged to teach the children at risk of being “left behind,” by any means necessary (such as becoming qualified to teach)!

The policy is focused on the wrong subjects–the teachers, instead of the children.  The school finances, instead of the children.  The viability of teachers’ unions, instead of the children.

To dumb down academic standards for certain racial and ethnic groups does nothing to ensure that children LEARN.  (Or that taxpayers get the most bang for their educational buck.)

These policies are nothing more than a power grab by the federal government and a gift to the teachers’ unions.  They win; the children and the taxpayers lose.   Society as a whole loses, too, because these racist policies perpetuate stereotypes and prevent all of our children from reaching their God-given potential.

Update 10/15/12:  As if it’s not bad enough to make different academic standards by race, now the Obama administration is forcing schools to have different disciplinary standards by race!

Under pressure from the Education Department, which investigated it over “racial disparities” and “disparate impact,” the Oakland, California, school system has agreed to impose “targeted reductions” in “suspensions for African American students, Latino students, and students receiving special education services; and African American students suspended for defiance.” See Agreement to Resolve Oakland Unified School District, OCR Case No. 09125001, page 14, Section VIII(c)(iii).

These “targeted reductions” are racial quotas in all but name. (“Disparate impact” is when a process affects one racial group more than another, despite having no racist motive, such as when whites have higher average scores than minorities on a standardized test.) The Oakland case is just “the first of some 20 federal investigations into racial disparities in school districts’ disciplinary practices,” which may lead to racial quotas in school discipline in many other school systems (and eventually perhaps in colleges as well).

Contrary to the Education Department’s demands, the federal appeals court in Chicago has said that schools cannot use racial targets or quotas for school discipline, since that violates the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. See People Who Care v. Rockford Board of Education, 111 F.3d 528, 534 (7th Cir. 1997). That court ruling also said that a school cannot use race in student discipline to offset racial disparities not rooted in school officials’ racism (so-called “disparate impact”).

As we know, however, the Obama administration has never let the law, the Constitution, or prior court rulings to stop them from “fundamentally transforming” the USA.  Now the soft bigotry extends to behavior, too. Talk about negative racial stereotypes!


Photo from Wiki  Commons.

150 responses to “Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations Alive and Well in Florida (Open Thread)


    “The Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs has thrown down the guantlet to Vice President Joe Biden — don’t come here and expect to partake in Holy Communion.

    It seems Bishop Michael Sheridan, the person in charge of Catholics in Colorado Springs, doesn’t approve of Biden’s stance on abortion.

    The Bishop, following church doctrine, is opposed to abortion. Biden, meanwhile, has said he doesn’t support the practice, but doesn’t believe it should be illegal.

    In 2007 Sheridan wrote: “Any Catholic politicians who advocate for abortion, for illicit stem cell research or for any form of euthanasia ipso facto place themselves outside full communion with the Church and so jeopardize their salvation. Any Catholics who vote for candidates who stand for abortion, illicit stem cell research or euthanasia suffer the same fateful consequences. It is for this reason that these Catholics, whether candidates for office or those who would vote for them, may not receive Holy Communion until they have recanted their positions and been reconciled with God and the Church in the Sacrament of Penance.””


    “In an interview with The Washington Post published on Tuesday, Susan Rice, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, said, according to The Post’s characterization, that “she relied on daily updates from intelligence agencies in the days before her television appearances and on a set of talking points prepared for senior members of the administration by intelligence officials.

    A figure with long standing ties to the United States defense industry, received this bit of information from a longtime Military Insider, and then passed it along to me. I am now, with their permission, sharing it with all of you…

    Rice just told media she was relying on “intelligence agency talking points” before going public with her version of Benghazi.

    We provide intel. We don’t tell an administration how to sell that intel to the public. We don’t do “talking points”. Any talking points received came directly from administration. They packaged it. They delivered their version of it. Rice just admitted to that. Confirmation of Obama White House lie. Will forward to committee with assessment. -NAME DELETED- pushing for hearing announcement no later than 23rd.”

  3. Obama and Biden have been outright lying on the campaign trail and in the debates: The State Dept. has revealed that the Obama administration is negotiating with Afghanistan to have our troops STAY BEYOND 2014.

    “Marc Grossman, the State Department’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, explained today that’s not the whole story.

    Grossman said Tuesday that the point of the upcoming negotiations is to agree on an extension of the U.S. troop presence well past 2014, for the purposes of conducting counterterrorism operations and training and advising the Afghan security forces.

    To have the Vice President of the United States, speaking directly for the Obama administration, repeat over and over again during a nationally televised debate that American troops will no longer be in Afghanistan in 2014, only to have the Obama State Department refute that claim less than a week later is indication of major miscommunication between the United States military, the State Department, and the Obama White House – OR – Barack Obama and Joe Biden are repeating an election year lie to the American public day after day after day with little regard to the truth, or the sacrifices of U.S. soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

    Well played Hillary…”

  4. Oh, guess who’s at the top of the list to replace Hillary? SUSAN RICE. I’m beginning to see the light. Must protect Little Suzie at all costs.

    “Republican criticism of Rice’s handling of the crisis comes at a time when the administration appeared to be grooming her for a more visible diplomatic position.

    In recent months, she has represented the United States at a state funeral for a close U.S. ally, Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia, and mixed family sightseeing at the Taj Mahal with high-level talks with India’s top foreign policy officials.

    “The president has enormous confidence in Ambassador Rice and is extremely grateful for all the important work she does at the U.N. every day,” said National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor.

    The spokesman said he would not “speculate on future personnel decisions.”

    Micah Zenko of the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations said Rice’s political fate largely rests on whether investigations by a State Department panel and by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee “find compelling evidence she had intelligence that didn’t match” the account she presented to the public.

    “I think it would be very difficult for the administration to put her forward [for secretary of state] if she willfully mischaracterized the intelligence,” Zenko said.

    He said he would “find it hard to believe” that Republicans could muster sufficient opposition to block her nomination if the evidence indicates that her account matched the intelligence assessments.”

    Of course, how could intelligence assessments show there was a protest or a riot (copycat or otherwise) when video that they watched in REAL TIME showed NO PROTEST, NO RIOT. They watched the assault with heavy weapons for 6 hours. They KNEW immediately it had nothing to do with a video or any protest. The only way Rice can come out smelling like a rose is to admit that Obama’s talking points were bogus and then how does she get to be Secretary of State? SHE DOESN’T.


    “The Justice Department on Monday night sought dismissal of a lawsuit by a Republican-led House committee demanding that Attorney General Eric Holder produce records about the botched law enforcement probe of gun-trafficking called Operation Fast and Furious.

    President Barack Obama has invoked executive privilege and the attorney general has been found to be in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over documents that might explain what led the Justice Department to reverse course after initially denying that federal agents had used a controversial tactic called gun-walking in the failed law enforcement operation. … In a Feb. 4, 2011 letter to Congress, the Justice Department said that agents made every effort to interdict weapons that have been purchased illegally and prevent their transportation to Mexico, which turned out to be incorrect. Ten months later, the department withdrew the letter.

    In its court papers, the Justice Department says the Constitution does not permit the courts to resolve the political dispute between the executive branch and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that is seeking the records. …

    If the lawsuit is allowed to go forward, “countless other suits by Congress are sure to follow, given the volume of document requests issued by the dozens of congressional committees that perform oversight functions,” the Justice Department’s court filing stated. “This case thus illustrates vividly why the judiciary must defer to the time-tested political process for resolution of such disputes.”

    The Justice Department cited a Supreme Court ruling which said the court lacked jurisdiction to decide a challenge brought by several members of Congress to the constitutionality of the line item veto law.”


      Does that article not basically say that Obama has been arming Islamist terrorist militias in order to first, overthrow Gaddafi, and second, to overthrow Assad? These are the “special forces strike teams” that they CLAIM are to be anti-terrorist. And yet it seems more likely that they’re arming terrorist thugs, with connections to Al Qaeda, in order to overthrow governments and help create on Muslim caliphate. Where are all the people who screamed about us arming the Contras? Even more so than communists, Al Qaeda and jihadists and Islamists are our AVOWED enemies. WHY are we arming them and helping them to attain MORE POWER? I hope somebody asks Barry that tonight. I hope that Romney doesn’t say we need to “help” these forces even more. If the people of Syria want to be free, let them fight for their freedom like our Patriots did. Our troops don’t have to die for THEIR freedom if they won’t fight for it themselves.

      • “The September 11 attack that claimed the life of the US ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, and three other Americans disrupted a major CIA operation in the North African country.

        According to the New York Times, at least half of the nearly two dozen US personnel evacuated from the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi following the fatal attack on the US consulate and a secret “annex” were “CIA operatives and contractors.”

        “It’s a catastrophic intelligence loss,” a US official who had been stationed in Libya told the Times. “We got our eyes poked out.”

        The Times report describes the mission of the CIA station in Benghazi as one of “conducting surveillance and collecting information on an array of armed militant groups in and around the city,” including Ansar al-Sharia, an Islamist militia that has been linked by some to the September 11 attack, and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, or AQIM.

        It further states that the CIA “began building a meaningful but covert presence in Benghazi” within months of the February 2011 revolt in Benghazi that seized the city from forces loyal to the government of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. Stevens himself was sent into the city in April of that year as the American envoy to the so-called “rebels” organized in the Benghazi-based National Transitional Council (NTC).

        What the Times omits from its account of CIA activities in Benghazi, however, is that the agency was not merely conducting covert surveillance on the Islamists based in eastern Libya, but providing them with direct aid and coordinating their operations with those of the NATO air war launched to bring down the Gaddafi regime. In this sense, the September 11 attack that killed Stevens and the three other Americans was very much a case of the chickens coming home to roost.”

        And now that’s what they were doing in Benghazi. Strike force to prepare to ARM and coordinate Islamist militias against Assad.

          Miri, if ya’ll can tear yourselves away for just a bit from the Benghazi/debate chronicles , I have hear a Kenneth Ndesandjo mugshot. Remember I posted Bert/Bertrand N. Falls of Lawrenceville georgia not too long ago. He was at the same address as Sheila/Marina/Mary N. Ndesandjo Falls. Now Sheila/Marina or whatever her first name is is the lady I saw at Joseph’s wedding in San Antonio Texas in the wedding photos standing with Mark Ndesandjo. Remember I showed you two mugshots of Bert N. Falls of Lawrenceville. who had license revoked ect. You can lookup Bert’s mugshot, there’s two of them , one in 2007 and one 2011. This guy kenneth has the same address as these other people. Seems Mark and Obama have lots of alcoholic relatives. I feel this is very significant. Marina uses N. as her middle initial with several last names. Bertrand has N. also as middle initial, then here I find Kenneth Ndesandjo. Something is suspicious here. Do these people that have they’re license revoked and seem to be intoxicated have jobs in Georgia? Like Omar, I wonder if they are real citizens of the US.

  6. Colonel Hunt blames Hillary, too. He calls them the “State Dept. rules of engagement.” I find it hard to believe that Obama doesn’t hand down the rules of engagement that the Sec. of State has to follow.

    Hunt told Breitbart News that the new State Department Rules of Engagement for Libya, approved and signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton since the 2011 fall of Khadafi’s regime, severely compromised the safety and security of murdered Ambassador Stevens and all American diplomatic staff in Libya.

    He also stated that the decision not to staff Benghazi with Marines was made by Secretary of State Clinton when she attached her signature to the State Department Rules of Engagement for Libya document. Breitbart News has subsequently learned that under those rules of engagement, Secretary Clinton prohibited Marines from providing security at any American diplomatic installation in Libya.

    Hunt told Breitbart News that “the rules of engagement have been changing drastically over the last 10 years. . . The reason the surge in Iraq worked was we had another 40,000 soldiers and the rules of engagement were changed to allow our guys to shoot. What’s happened in Libya is the final straw of political correctness. We allowed a contractor to hire local nationals as security guards, but said they can’t have bullets. This was all part of the point of not having a high profile in Libya.”

    According to Hunt, the debacle at the American mission in Benghazi is directly the result of Obama’s new policies. “The policy of the Obama administration led to this,” he said.

    It was the policy of the Obama administration to have a low profile in Libya. That’s why the rules of engagement were approved by the Secretary of State to have no Marines at Benghazi, and to have an American contractor hire Libyan nationals to provide security there. The rules were they couldn’t have ammunition.”

    Obama may not have known the details of the State Department Rules of Engagement for Libya, but his Chief of Staff and National Security Advisor would have. The Secretary of State absolutely would have.”

    “The Department of State Security are the people in charge of diplomatic security. They enforce the rules of engagement, which are set at Clinton’s level at State. The Department of Defense was told we’re not going to have Marines at Benghazi. Whether it goes higher than the Secretary of State to the President, I don’t know.””

    Now that is well and truly confusing. Whatever it is, it’s a TECHNICALITY. The buck stops with Barry. Since Hillary reports to Barry, there’s no way HE can weasel out. The fish rots from the head and he’s the stinking rotten head. I cannot see Hillary deciding where and where not Marines will be deployed. Not without the influence of Obama, who sets the general policies. It’s been said many times that she’s a figurehead and has no real power. I do believe that she’s AT LEAST complicit by BEING his Sec. of State toady in the first place. Of course, there’s also the influence of Huma Weiner.

    We the People KNEW all of this almost immediately, thanks to the foreign press and bloggers. ONLY NOW is it getting wider play and it STILL isn’t in the lamestream–the FACT that they decided deliberately to NOT have Marines, to hire LIBYANS to protect the U.S. citizens, and to give them NO BULLETS! It’s freaking unbelievable. If this were GWB, they’d be all over this like flies on Obama’s face.

  7. Today for some reason I had a real peculiar feeling. Didn’t we all expect to see Maya and the rest of the Obama clan out rah-rahing for their relative like they did in 2008? No interviews of Maya, Auntie Zeituni, Joseph, Mark, Uncle Omar, Granny Sarah, George, or Malik by the fawning Obama propaganda press corp? Maya was out on the stump and very prominent in videos and the campaign in 2008. Africa was lit up with reports on anything Obama. What happened? No interest by reporters? Were they given a memo that these people weren’t to be contacted? With about 20 days to go before the election, their absence and silence is notable.

    • I wrote the above before I checked to see if any of them were in the news. It appears that MO’s brother, Craig, and Maya were speakers at the DNC…we missed this somehow.

      Craig Robinson and Maya Soetoro-ng DNC speech (text, video)

      • I breifly read of Maya’s speech at the DNC, when I was checking out who the Hawaii delegates were….I was looking for one delegate in particular (who is not mentioned on their list. However one delegate spoke that she didn’t know why they weren’t to report their list of delegates at the convention…..not all were there, not all are listed. I forget the nunber Hawaii has 30 something, but in the list provided there were two people’s names listed twice and other people associated with Democrat representatives to total there numer for delegates. THis struck me as odd since I had already found a guy whose office was right beside the immigration office…a vetinarian associated with the Federal and State ports. He inspects animals coming in and out of Hawaii . Wonder if Obama’s dog needed to be checked before intering Hawaii. He’s Timothy B. Falls and is listed as a delegate(maybe he’s a delegate to something else ?) But this man is also listed with Sheila Ndesandjo Falls/Bert Falls who has similar mugshot as Omar Obama) in Georgia. Just really strange. Anyway I checked out Maya’s same old spill at the DNC.

  8. The set up for the wagging of the dog to drive Benghazi out of the headlines and replace it with a foreign policy “success” by superman Obama just in time for Monday’s debate?

    “Libyan security officials say Ahmed Abu Khattalah, founder of Islamist militia Ansar al-Sharia, was at the US consulate in Libya during the attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens—the most direct link between the militia and the attack so far, though officials have been focusing on Ansar al-Sharia for a while. Yet, more than a week after Libyan leaders and US investigators learned Khattalah was allegedly at the consulate during the attack, he remains free, the Wall Street Journal reports. The two officials who say Khattalah was there—and submitted evidence to that effect—also say they have not been given orders to arrest him.

    That fact will likely not go over well in the US, where the White House is already embroiled in controversy over its response to the attack, the Journal notes. “There’s no doubt the sheik was there,” says one of these officials, using the title Khattalah’s followers use. “If the sheik was there, then the sheik was giving commands. That’s how the group operates.” But Ansar al-Sharia has repeatedly denied any involvement in the attack. The news of Khattalah’s alleged whereabouts comes amid other complications in Libya: The FBI is attempting to investigate the consulate attack from 400 miles away, because of instability in Benghazi, and some Libyan witnesses have criticized the FBI for not protecting them after they came forward.”

    Maybe he was there to meet with somebody in the consulate. Ya think? Well, he’s taking the fall, apparently. So the question becomes: Did we give any weapons or support to Ansar al-Sharia in the past months? Hmmmm?


    Sounds like an explosive and embarrassing story coming out tonight on ABC news. DRUNKEN and DOPED-UP private security contractors in Afghanistan.

    “Cellphone video recorded earlier this year at an operations center of a U.S. security contractor in Kabul, Afghanistan appears to show key personnel staggeringly drunk or high on narcotics, in what former employees say was a pattern of outrageous behavior that put American lives at risk and went undetected by U.S. military officials who are supposed to oversee such contractors.

    The video, provided to ABC News by two former employees, is scheduled to be broadcast in a report this evening on “ABC World News with Diane Sawyer” and “Nightline.””

    Who can they blame for this one?

  10. A story at American Thinker about this soft bigotry story: writer has an interesting take on the DemoncRAT opposition to voter ID:
    “The real black traitors to their race reside in the Democratic Party. They’re the ones who agree with liberals that requiring a photo ID to vote will “disenfranchise” blacks. Give me a break! And why aren’t a majority of black Americans seriously POed over this insulting assumption?

    Following the Democrats’ logic, blacks are disenfranchised or unfairly blocked from flying, driving a car, entering the Democratic National Convention, etc. Clearly, Democrat opposition to showing a photo ID to vote is all about insuring their ability to use voter-fraud to steal elections. And once again, “black intellect” is put on the chopping-block by Democrats to win an issue.

    Frustratingly, many blacks still will not “get-it”. They will interpret the Democrats’ claim that blacks are too stupid to find their way to acquire a photo ID to vote as the Dems looking out for them. While in reality, Republicans who fight the Dems’ absurd claim are the ones respectfully treating blacks as equal Americans. For crying out loud, black America, wake up!”

    • I have to share this part:
      “Thank God Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was educated before liberal Democrats began lowering educational standards for blacks…or his famous “I Have A Dream” speech could be known as his “I Be Havin’ A Dream” speech.

      All you blacks in Hollywood who continue to roll with the Democrats’ blacks-need-lowered-standards program are clearly being played. When you produce ads and serve as spokespersons for Obama and company, you are the ones dumbing down and truly betraying your people. Far too many of you are politically clueless, racist, brain-dead Obama zombies. I am talking about Jay-Z, Beyoncé, Samuel L. Jackson, and Morgan Freeman, to name a few.

      So please, stay out of the face of us common sense- and character-driven black conservatives. We are on the front lines, fighting to empower not only blacks, but all Americans.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s