Cost of Inclusion

July 26, 2008 in Reading Response
Tags: argument, asian, confidence, cost, courage, cuomo, cynical, democrats, difference, explain, government, governor, inclusion, islander, jerkwads, lesbian, mario, metaphor, pacific, priority, republicans, school, short, sighted, skill, steak, vision

Before I betray my feelings about a particular portion of Mario Cuomo’s keynote to the 1984 Democratic convention, please read it. This passage in particular sticks with me.

It’s an old story. It’s as old as our history. The difference between Democrats and Republicans has always been measured in courage and confidence. The Republicans — The Republicans believe that the wagon train will not make it to the frontier unless some of the old, some of the young, some of the weak are left behind by the side of the trail. “The strong” — “The strong,” they tell us, “will inherit the land.”

We Democrats believe in something else. We Democrats believe that we can make it all the way with the whole family intact, and we have more than once. Ever since Franklin Roosevelt lifted himself from his wheelchair to lift this nation from its knees — wagon train after wagon train — to new frontiers of education, housing, peace; the whole family aboard, constantly reaching out to extend and enlarge that family; lifting them up into the wagon on the way; blacks and Hispanics, and people of every ethnic group, and native Americans — all those struggling to build their families and claim some small share of America.

Cuomo characterizes Democrats with courage and confidence and, by comparison, he characterizes the Republicans as non-inclusionary jerkwads.

The Democrats will lift their fellow neighbor into the wagon of progress, be he black or white, hard-working or lazy. The Republicans expect you to climb in on your own recognizance. The Democrats want to improve the nation by helping individuals to lead better lives, while the Republicans want the improve the nation by letting individuals try. Each side accuses the other of being cynical, and each side praises itself for having faith in America. But the editorial we digresses.

Cuomo praises his party for being inclusionary, but, after a certain point, how much value really exists in being inclusionary? Universities, community colleges and technical schools are already inclusionary, and, once we work out the kinks in the system, every American will be on a level playing field in all the ways that matter.

If, after that level playing field, I find that my steak is rare and I wanted it to be cooked medium, I don’t care whether it was cooked by a white guy or a lesbian Asian-Pacific Islander. It wasn’t cooked correctly, and he-and-or-she had his chance.

In practical matters, and after school is done with, diversity cannot be the end-all and be-all. Yet, even today, Democrats echo that same, tired calling card of pluralism, and they echo it to exclusion.

It’s rather short-sighted for party that claims to have such vision.

Students Sound Off, and Vociferously: Part 2

February 12, 2008 in The Way It Were
Tags: advice, barack obama, clinton, cuomo, essays, exam, excerpts, hillary clinton, hitler, john mccain, learning, mario cuomo, mccain, mitt romney, moral, obama, part, part 2, paul, poetry, prompts, prose, romney, ron paul, student, student teacher, teacher, teaching, test

One of the more popular prompts for last week’s essay concerned poetry and prose and how they relate to Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. It had been a popular topic in class, and my kids ran with it. Excerpts from the essays begin here.

“Poetry is easier to understand,” says one of my classmates. “Poetry makes you feel what the candidate is saying and how he feels,” says another. Poetry has more emotion and more feeling, but is it good enough to get our country where we need to go? …

I believe our government should be run by prose rather than by poetry. We need a leader, not a fellow citizen. We need someone who can show us right from wrong. Prose is always more important to have because you will always get done what needs to be done. Prose!

Oh, youth.

Another student describes how well these poetic or prosaic strategies work for their candidates.

Both Obama and Clinton have been doing a good job because both are close in delegates, so you know that they have been using their strategies well. Both strategies got the job done. …

If they continue on their speeches, there is no telling on who will win. Barack is making a strong appearance when he comes to speeches and might overtake Clinton, but Clinton is coming right back with what they want to hear.

I have a student who always talks or sleeps in the corner. Thing is, she surprised me with her own relatively well-done response. She even takes on the former Democratic governor of New York quoted in my prompt.

I disagree with Mario Cuomo. Candidates can have both during elections. They can also be both when one of them is the president. One must take courage and be tough. …

Both candidates [Clinton and Obama] are very equal. The thing that matters is that we trust in the candidates. They can speak however they want, but when it comes to solving problems, they must be serious.

Considering that she hadn’t seemed to much care for the subject or its teacher, and considering that she was sure she failed at the time, she was remarkably insightful.

Moral of the story? Keep expectations high, or your students won’t have something to rise to.

If you haven’t already, check out Part 1.

Students Sound Off, and Vociferously: Part 1

February 9, 2008 in The Way It Were
Tags: barack obama, clinton, cuomo, essays, exam, excerpts, hillary clinton, john mccain, learning, mario cuomo, mccain, mitt romney, obama, part, part 1, paul, poetry, prompts, prose, romney, ron paul, student, student teacher, teacher, teaching, test

These are some of my best essays, all graded according to my rubric. As promised in the same post, they are excerpted as follows.

One student in particular outright hates America’s first serious female candidate, and defends our first serious African-American candidate while he’s at it.

Hillary Clinton would not be where she is today if she wasn’t a woman. The worst part about it being that she uses it against her equally qualified competitors who are male. Change and wanding something new is how she starts and finishes, not to mention the ever-so-sickening line, “What can be more new than a woman president?” [sic] The fact that she’s using the gender card is giving herself and females in general a horrible look. …

Obama has to fight to prove himself as a younger candidate and gets flack for being black and not being black enough at the same time. This sickens me. This is America. Why can’t people just be people and not worry about gender or race? What is it that some should feel guilty for not voting for the Black guy or that one chick running? …

If America was in fact truly the land of the free, gender and race would not matter. It’s time for people to start listening and stop watching. The fact that people like Edwards can’t get a fair shot at the presidency because he’s up against two “firsts” is horrible.

Maybe we’re not ready for change after all.

He had started his essay by contrasting the Democrats to the Republicans, lamenting that the Republicans “had great candidates like Ron Paul, John McCain and Mitt Romney.”

Perhaps to show that his answer isn’t reflective of my own carefully guarded bias, another student, to put it nicely, disagrees. It was good enough that I couldn’t help but transcribe it in full:

When it comes down to who I want to lead my country, I don’t care so much how they say it but rather what they say. Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo said, “You campaign in poetry, but you govern in prose.” I don’t shame his thoughts.

I believe that what you represent and how you campaign is how you will govern. We have two Democratic candidates what fit this perfectly. We have Obama who is the poet and who sways the crowd with his speeches and we have Hillary who sticks to what matters.

Yes, Obama the poet. It sounds nice, doesn’t it? Well, I don’t want a president who can quote Shakespeare and get me all teary-eyed and emotional and have no idea what he’s doing. Yes, he can rally a crowd and get everyone pumped up and to follow him no matter what but that makes me think of another leader in history and his name was Hitler.

Yes, he went there. Give him a break for not thinking of perhaps fairer conjectures. It continues.

Obama never sticks to the issues or what matters. He just plays the crowd, and who knows what he would all of a sudden stand for if he were in office?

Hillary Clinton may not move the crowd. She may not be able to dominate you with her every word. No, Hillary is straightforward and lets you know where she stands. I feel that I could trust someone who is telling me the truth rather than dancing around it.

Mario Cuomo got it wrong. It does not take poetry during a campaign because we have candidates in the lead right now without all the fancy “speachers.” What’s important with any leader is that they are straightforward and let us know where we are being led.

This and the essay that includes the earlier excerpt received full credit. Both would have competed for top score between the classes, had the first author not bombed the second essay with a five-point score.