The New York Post reported this morning that a public elementary school in New York City will require its students to learn Arabic. The story describes the school is "a so-called 'choice' school and no kids, even those living nearby, are forced to attend it," and even quotes a student and parents that are very supportive of the program. Nonetheless, right-wing media figures are already responding to this reporting with their usual anti-Muslim and anti-Arab bigotry.
Right-wing blogger and anti-Muslim hate group leader (and Fox News regular) Pamela Geller described the Arabic language program as "Islamic supremacism on the march in the public square," and suggested that it would be a "public school madrassah."
Right-wing author Matthew Vadum responded to the news that Arabic would be taught at a public school by making a reference to explosives:
And right-wing blogger Andrea Ryan of Gateway Pundit had this to say:
Now, they want our children be able to read the Quran, listen to the draconian precepts of sharia, and watch Al Jazeera inveigh against Christianity, democracy, equality, and freedom in its native Arabic language. When Communism aimed its missiles and armies at our nation President Reagan didn't fold and force our children to learn Russian.
Leave it to the Liberals to try to completely destroy all that is good about our culture and turn it into something distorted, ugly, and dangerous.
Far from being "dangerous," learning Arabic is actually important for our national security. In remarks to a January 2006 summit of U.S. university presidents, George W. Bush introduced a language initiative to teach students -- starting in Kindergarten -- languages important to national security, such as Arabic:
[O]ne of the reasons why the Secretary of Defense is here. He wants his young soldiers who are the front lines of finding these killers to be able to speak their language and be able to listen to the people in the communities in which they live. That makes sense, doesn't it, to have a language-proficient military -- to have people that go into the far reaches of this world and be able to communicate in the villages and towns and rural areas and urban centers, to protect the American people.
We need intelligence officers who, when somebody says something in Arabic or Farsi or Urdu knows what they're talking about. That's what we need. We need diplomats -- when we send them out to help us convince governments that we've got to join together and fight these terrorists who want to destroy life and promote an ideology that is so backwards it's hard to believe. These diplomats need to speak that language.
So our short-term strategy is to stay on the offense, and we've got to give our troops, our intelligence officers, our diplomats all the tools necessary to succeed. That's what people in this country expect of our government. They expect us to be wise about how we use our resources, and a good use of resources is to promote this language initiative in K through 12, in our universities. And a good use of resources is to encourage foreign language speakers from important regions of the world to come here and teach us how to speak their language.
You're going to hear a lot about the specifics of the program. What I'm trying to suggest to you that this program is a part of a strategic goal, and that is to protect this country in the short-term and protect it in the long-term by spreading freedom.
From the December 15 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
Loading the player ...
From the December 5 edition of TBS's Conan:
In his October 20 Washington Times column titled, "The United States of Mexico? Endgame of multiculturalism looms: Hispanic reacquisition of the Southwest," Jeffrey Kuhner wrote that American high school students learning Spanish "is a form of national self-hatred and self-abnegation." Kuhner also wrote that the students, who were given an assignment to learn the Mexican national anthem, were "being indoctrinated to revere and pledge their loyalty to a foreign government," and called the lesson "treasonous." From the Times:
American students now pledge allegiance to Mexico. They sing its na- tional an- them. And it is sanctioned by the state of Texas. Sound absurd? It is. Last month in a Spanish class at Achieve Early College High School in McAllen, Texas, students recited the Mexican pledge of allegiance and were instructed to memorize the Mexican anthem. Moreover, they had to wear red, white and green - the colors of the Mexican flag - as they fulfilled their class assignment. Public high schools no longer promote American patriotism, but they are doing a superb job of cultivating loyalty to Mexico.
This is treasonous; American students are being indoctrinated to revere and pledge their loyalty to a foreign government. Such is the logical consequence of multiculturalism and modern liberalism.
Decades ago, students learning Spanish would recite the pledge of allegiance to America or sing "The Star-Spangled Banner" in that foreign language. No more. Our education establishment thinks displays of patriotism are signs of "nativism" and "xenophobia." Textbooks regularly teach that America is a nation founded upon racism, sexism, imperialism and genocide. Therefore, students must be taught to appreciate - and respect - foreign peoples and Third World cultures. This is a form of national self-hatred and self-abnegation.
Moreover, this is part of the Hispanicization of America. Since 1990, nearly 20 million illegal aliens have crossed our porous southern border. If one adds legal immigration, the foreign-born population is nearly 40 million. America essentially has imported an entire subculture the size of a major European nation. This is the most dramatic cultural transformation in one generation in history. Our political class is engaged in a dangerous social experiment - one that threatens to destroy our country.
"EXCLUSIVE," blares Glenn Beck's news website, The Blaze, this morning as they blow the lid off a shocking story out of Texas:
BLAZE EXCLUSIVE: TX HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS MADE TO RECITE MEXICAN NATIONAL ANTHEM, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The lede is no less gripping:
Students in a Texas public high school were made to stand up and recite the Mexican national anthem and Mexican pledge of allegiance as part of a Spanish class assignment, but the school district maintains there was nothing wrong with the lesson.
The story centers around a sophomore in said Spanish class who objected to the lesson and complained to the principal. This same student videotaped the students reciting the pledge and the anthem en español, thus providing the critical evidence that high school students in Texas are actually being taught things.
It's a huge story -- most of the country has been laboring under the false impression that Texas public schools are mere fronts for the dissemination of anti-knowledge, in which students are fed garbage like "intelligent design" and right-wing revisionist history in the name of learning. The Blaze has helped tear away this veil of misinformation by conclusively demonstrating that students in Texas schools are actually learning things of value, like second languages and the cultural heritage of their southern neighbor.
Equally shocking was The Blaze's revelation that the teacher is not only of Mexican descent, but is actually proud of her heritage and uses that pride to inform her teaching of Mexican culture:
When Brenda made clear she would not stand up and recite the pledge, she was given an alternative assignment: an essay on the history of the Mexican revolution.
Meanwhile, other students continued with their presentations, which took place over the course of several days.
When Brinsdon talked to Santos -- a first-year teacher at Achieve -- about her new assignment, the teacher told her she grew up in Mexico.
"She told me that she loved Mexico," Brinsdon said.
Let's all take a moment to thank Glenn Beck and The Blaze for not falling victim to conventional wisdom and actually reporting on the successes of the Texas education system and the pride and dedication of public school teachers working to improve young Americans' understanding of one of our most important allies.
Or, better yet: díganles "gracias."
Last year, Washington Post education reporter Bill Turque made clear what he thought of how his paper's editorial board covered then-Washington, D.C., schools chancellor Michelle Rhee.
In a blog post, Turque wrote that the Post's editorial support for Rhee had been "steadfast, protective and, at times, adoring."
The item was quickly removed from the Post's website, but Turque is hardly alone in his views.
Two of the Post's journalists covering education recently shared with Media Matters their own concerns about the way the paper's editorial page has covered Rhee.
Jay Mathews, a 40-year Post scribe who writes the Class Struggle blog and a weekly column, pointed to editorial writer Jo-Ann Armao's coverage of recent allegations of potential cheating on standardized tests. Mathews noted that Armao is his former boss and praised her work on education in general, but he said that on the testing issue, he could not "understand why her reporting instincts have failed her." Mathews criticized what he called Armao's "failure to address seriously what seems to me are problems that cannot be overlooked," later adding, "Her failure to see that, I find troubling and puzzling given my great respect for her as a person and a journalist."
Valerie Strauss, who pens the Post's Answer Sheet blog, told Media Matters:
"I didn't agree with very much of the editorial stance when it came to the Rhee era. But certainly, as an editorial board, it had a right to take a stand and stick to it. That's what editorial boards do." She added, "There were times when they could have been more critical, they could have looked harder and been more even-handed about how they presented information."
Rhee's tenure at the helm of D.C.'s schools -- from 2007 to 2010 -- was contentious. She implemented a controversial reform program designed to improve achievement. She angered some parents and education officials and fired hundreds of teachers. (Rhee reportedly once invited a PBS camera crew to film her firing a principal.)
Rhee had something to show for her work -- gains in student achievement. The Post editorial page -- along with other Rhee supporters -- has pointed to rising test scores as evidence of her success.
The announcement that Sesame Street plans to introduce a Muppet named Lily, an impoverished girl whose family faces ongoing hunger issues, is prompting much snark and derision in the right-wing media.
For instance, The Blaze's blog had this to offer:
Uh-oh. It's time to redistribute Cookie Monster's cookies.
Question: When did Sesame Street become so focused on teaching societal issues? From Bert & Ernie's gay marriage fiasco, to Big Bird's birtherism and growing unemployment. What "injustice" might Mr. Snuffleupagus stand for?
One of my colleagues (who wishes to remain anonymous for obvious reasons) points out that "Snuffy" actually comes from a broken home and represents a lesson in divorce for kids. I had no idea.
Here's something else Barack Obama and democrats can be proud of.
With a record number of Americans on food stamps, record unemployment, increased debt and record poverty, Sesame Street will introduce a poor, starving muppet to educate on the growing number of starving children in Obama's America.
On Fox & Friends, guest co-host Eric Bolling hosted Larry Schweikart to attack a bill recently passed in California that would require schools to teach about the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans; during the segment, Schweikart compared the gay community to the "association for polygamists." This follows Fox's repeated attacks on the bill and smears about gay Americans.
From the June 6 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
Loading the player ...
A judge has ordered a graduation ceremony for a public high school in Texas to be changed to exclude planned opening and closing prayers. While this adheres to the Constitution of the United States, that's not good enough for Fox & Friends who, today, hosted one of the would-be-praying graduates and his parents to push back against the separation of church and state. The show did not mention that there was no prohibition against students making religious references during their individual speeches. This follows Fox's long history of fabricating a "war on Christians."
From the May 19 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
Loading the player ...
From the May 11 edition of Fox Business' America's Nightly Scoreboard:
Loading the player ...
CNN's Dana Loesch is trying to pretend away the deceptive editing practices at the center of the Andrew Breitbart campaign to "go after the teachers."
Yesterday, officials at the University of Missouri-St. Louis concluded that the videos Breitbart's site Big Government used to smear two of the university's labor studies lecturers were "highly distorted through splicing and editing."
Loesch rejected their findings on her radio show today:
This story, it began with a whistleblower who got some video of some of the things that were being said in his class, sent it out to a bunch of people, and progressives freaked out. And because they went up on the Breitbart sites, of course they immediately said Andrew Breitbart has some sort of magical editing, video editing, equipment, which, I -- if it's out there, please show me where I can purchase stock, because it's just magical. Now you can get people into scenes and you can manipulate them so that say things that they can try to deny later. There is absolutely nothing that has been put out there that is out of context.
This is demonstrably false.
University of Missouri officials Monday issued a statement concluding that Andrew Breitbart-promoted videos smearing university lecturers were "highly distorted through splicing and editing." This is just the latest investigation to discredit deceptively edited videos promoted by Breitbart.
From the May 6 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
Loading the player ...