The American Spectator : Uneducated to Serve

Text Size

Uneducated to Serve

By RiShawn Biddle on 1.7.11 @ 6:07AM

Out of necessity the Pentagon has become a believer in education reform.

Twenty-seven percent of New Jersey’s 17-to-20 year old high school grads applying to enter the military flunked the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, the test potential recruits must take for successful enlistment. Essentially, one out of every four Garden State residents — including 34 percent of young black and Latino recruits — couldn’t answer such basic questions as “If three plus X equals six, what is the value of X?” and “If 4 people can run 8 machines, how many machines can 2 people run?”

This isn’t just a New Jersey problem. Twenty-three percent of the nation’s recent high school grads couldn’t pass the ASVAB, flunking out of military service. The problem runs across all races and ethnicities, with one out of every five white young adults and two out of every five young black adults failing the test. Among those who did pass, many didn’t score high enough on the exam to get into skilled military positions such as those in surveillance. Just 34 percent scored high enough to join Delta Force or any of the other elite special forces. The ones who managed to score high enough to get in, but fall into the low range, are more-likely to leave the service before completing their tour than those with high scores.

Much of the discussion about America’s abysmal public schools has focused on how decades of declining literacy and academic performance weigh heavily on the nation’s global competiveness (and on the wallets of taxpayers burdened by decades of near-unchecked spending increases and unfunded teachers pensions).

But increasingly, the nation’s educational crisis also weighs heavily on national security and defense. Military leaders have learned all too well from their own analysis of dropouts and General Education Development (GED) recipients that poorly-educated kids make terrible soldiers — especially in an age in which math and science skills are as important in operating military electronics as they are in high-skilled white- and blue-collar jobs.

For young men and women, especially those from the economic poor, the low quality of education also bars them from entering what has long been a gateway into the middle class and a training ground for life in the civil workforce. This, in turn, further strains the nation’s long-term economic prospects as low-skilled grads (along with the 1.3 million kids who drop out of high school every year) land in prison, on welfare, or engaged in some less-than-legal pursuits. This will further fuel the growth of welfare subsidies and bailouts that are draining the nation’s long-term economic prospects.

The best solution for this national defense and economic problem in the long run is the one part of President Barack Obama’s agenda that actually has bipartisan support even in a less-than-friendly Congress: The array of charter school expansion and school reform efforts — including the Race to the Top initiative — that have gained traction in statehouses across the country. The school reform movement may now be able to count the Pentagon as one of its stalwart allies.

SAVE FOR THE PRESENCE OF Junior ROTC members on high school campuses, their counterparts at universities, and service academies such as West Point and Annapolis, few think about the presence of the military in education. But the Pentagon has had a far greater interest in elementary and secondary education than most realize.

Through the Department of Defense Education Activity, the Pentagon operates what would be the nation’s 35th-largest K-12 school district, educating 85,714 students on its bases throughout the world. Looking to make it easier for the children of military families living off-campus to transfer from one school to another with few hiccups, it is helping to standardize school transcripts by working with nonprofits to get states to adopt an interstate compact.

The military has played a distinct role in the expansion of federal education policy. In the midst of the Second World War in 1942, the War Department teamed up with the American Council of Education to start the GED program as a way for high school dropouts leaving military service to attend college (and eventually take advantage of the G.I. Bill). This spurred the post-World War II college boom that has made the U.S. the world leader in higher education.

During the Cold War, the armed forces also helped play a part in the expansion of federal education policy thanks to the National Defense Education Act of 1958, which led to the creation of the Pell Grant program and the first major increase in federal education spending since the launch of the National School Lunch Program a decade earlier. The law, in turn, helped lead to the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the federal law now known as the No Child Left Behind Act.

But within the last two decades — and especially after the post-9/11 invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq — the Pentagon has found itself in the same boat as private-sector employers in working around the deficiencies of American public education. Its response has been to launch a series of efforts which have only had mixed success.

Since 1993, the National Guard has operated the Youth ChalleNGe program, which puts high school juniors and seniors through a 22-week period of military training and school lessons. While the Brookings Institution touted the program as a success in a study released last year, Youth ChalleNGe’s 46 percent graduation rate for participants is still well below the nation’s abysmal four-year graduation rate of 69 percent; the attrition rates of the program’s graduates also lag depending on which armed service participants choose to enter.

Over the past five years, the Pentagon has even been forced to lower its own academic standards (including a requirement than 90 percent of troops had to be high school graduates) in order to meet higher recruiting quotas resulting from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; the percentage of high school grads recruited into the Army, for example, declined from 84 percent in 2004 to 74 percent in 2008. Starting in 2005, the Pentagon launched GED Plus, a program in which dropouts could obtain GED certificates while enlisting. While the Army halted its GED recruiting last year, GED enlistment efforts continue throughout the rest of the military.

But even the military’s own studies show that the GED — once called the “Good Enough Diploma” by comedian Chris Rock — is anything but. Forty percent of GED recipients left the service before completing their two-year enlistment, according to a 1996 U.S. Department of Defense study; that’s double the attrition rate for high school and college grads. This is why the Pentagon stopped classifying GED recipients as high school graduates during the 1970s — and why Congress capped the number of GED recipients that could be enlisted 30 years ago.

TROOP WITHDRAWALS FROM IRAQ, along with the sluggish economy, has helped the military recruit fewer dropouts and GED recipients. But it hasn’t helped the military in avoiding the high costs of poorly-educated high school grads. Aspiring servicemen with low qualifying scores on the ASVAB are more likely to wash out because they lack strong basic skills and work aptitude. It is one of the reasons why the military loses as many as a third of enlisted soldiers before they complete their two-year tour, costing taxpayers as much as $45,000 per recruit.

Page: 1 2 >

About the Author

RiShawn Biddle the editor of Dropout Nation , is co-author of A Byte at the Apple: Rethinking Education Data for the Post-NCLB Era. He can be followed at Twitter.com/dropoutnation.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (117) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Brian Mc| 1.7.11 @ 7:19AM

Solution: could one-room school houses perform any worse? If we are discussing "basics" here, how much more basic can you get than that? All the while, I bet these kids are expert at playing computer games...as they prepare to vote for the next entitlement to their slothful existence. I look about me and see kids who believe it cool to look stupid; even too stupid to know their pants need pulled up or hold a door open for the next person out of common courtesy. I'll take my straight B's from the sixties over any straight A's today.

Harry the Horrible| 1.7.11 @ 10:49AM

It wasn't the one-room school houses.
It was the teachers, the parents and the environment.
The "School Marm" worked in an environment under rules that would get the school district sued out of existence by both the teachers' union and the parents. The Union would object the rules on the lifestyle and certification of the teacher; the parents would object to the level of authority (not to mention the "unfairness" of teaching methods, etc.) the teach possessed over their precious darlings.
The kids grew up in an environment where there wasn't much to distract them from education - lets face it, working the fields, doing chores, or going to school? Not such a hard choice, eh?
Also, school was not compulsory - you weren't incarcerating earnest students along with the young hoodlums who truly didn't want to be there.

A 'Rent| 1.7.11 @ 11:24AM

So true. We moved to Middle America rural living to control the messages are children (4) received. They went to the local school. Every family knew every teacher and vice versa. When my 3rd got a B, there was a whole family discussion about it. He promised that he would get an A by then end of the semester. His teacher was a family friend, and she was told by his older siblings to "make him"! And they watched him. He got an A+. This whole thing, this involvement in your children and your life, is what is missing in today's American culture. I do not know how to inculcate these ideas for living in the general population. You need to forgo that new Camero and pay attention to your kids.

vtwin| 1.7.11 @ 11:34AM

Yes, the problem with the public education system in our country is the government has been spending too much money on it. I read that since the late seventies both federal and state spending on education has “gone through the roof” and the results have been well a dumbing of America. So shouldn’t we conclude that if increasing spending failed the opposite decreasing spending should succeed? And wouldn’t eliminating ALL educational spending make us a nation of Einsteins… maybe not, but if we did cut spending at both the state and federal level on public education enough to cut taxes for on the wealthy wouldn’t that create jobs for all the getting smarter Americas?

Eric Cartman| 1.7.11 @ 12:19PM

I don't expect you to know or understand this, but here it goes: There are these things called "books" and places called "libraries". One can visit said libraries, receive a card at no charge to borrow said books. Now, books are not to sit on so you can see over the steering wheel, or help with the uneven leg on your breakfast table. Books are to read. Inside these books are ideas and stories and history - all sorts of stuff! Now, one can read these books and learn things from them. Abraham Lincoln (our 16th President) was a pretty smart feller (not a fart smeller like you) and he just read books. Einstein read only books - he didn't even have a TI 58 - and look what he accomplished! Now, if we can keep Liberal Aholes from insisting money equals education and keep them away from writing books, the whole populace will improve their IQ. It's really that simple. Read a book.

Welcome to the Army| 1.7.11 @ 12:36PM

I'm with you E. Cartman. I dropped out of high school when I was fifteen, scored a ninety-nine percent (highest possible) on my ASVAB, served six years active Army, and now earn all A's at a technical school in Texas. I was in a pretty poor school district, but the bookshelf was all that was necessary. The boys that I tutor at school never read. They tell me with no shame that they have never read a book. I drive it home as hard as I can that you have to read. You must eat if you want your body to work, you must read if you wish for your mind to work. It's a big problem, bro.

"The purpose of compulsory education is to rob the common people of their common sense." G.K. Chesterton

Tim the Enchanter| 1.7.11 @ 5:12PM

Hey- I happen to LIKE my TI-58! Had to modify it to take external power when the battery died, but otherwise, a great little machine.

Adonis Marjoram| 1.8.11 @ 9:44AM

Wasting money is a problem. The challenge is to spend it more effectively.

coal carrier| 1.7.11 @ 7:35AM

And who has been controlling the educational system for 45 years? That’s right. Ever since that returned from Woodstock.

Pelligrino| 1.7.11 @ 8:30AM

It is not just the potential recruits that lack VERY basic education skills and the more imporant willpower to improve &learn;, it is what we have in the force.

Due to our 38+ months down & sour economy, military recruting has NEVER been easier. So we should have seen 4-year college degree kids enlisting in these last two years.

Despite this, if you want to weep, just hand out a 11th grade level written product to your troops. And see who really comprehends it. (Yes, this has battlefield implications when the guys cannot read & understand. For example, how does one repair a piece of equipment if one does not first understand the instructions in the manual?)

Every month EVERY soldier is supposed to have a written counseling statement on his performance. The good, bad, what needs improving, etc.

If one ever goes to actually review these counseling statements, they are pitiful. You see, the NCOs (25 - 36 years old) writing them...well, they cannot write. Not real words anyway.

Even if they are words, they are not logical, descriptive, or helpful.

Put it to the test: Ask a senior NCO with about 16-18 years of service to place in writing the performance of soldier X, Y, or Z in order to prepare this soldier's end of tour award recommendation.

What I typically got was garbage. I had to interview the NONCOM, almost dragging out of him what the soldier had done. So, even though I hardly knew the soldier, the words were usually mine. The NONCOM couldn't articulate it.

Thanks! to the public schools of the USA -- and the parents, too. You are raising morons.

BrokeLT| 1.7.11 @ 9:21AM

I think you're a little too hard on the Non-comms. I've seen very intelligent, capable NCOs who couldn't write their way out of a paper bag. I've also seen how the NCO corps prevents an honest evaluation of many, many soldiers. If a soldier is a screw-up, it's dang near impossible to put it on paper because the SGM will inevitably kick it back for a "re-write" of the negative comment. The result is that evaluations are written by selecting a snippet from one of the unofficial manuals on writing evals.
The kids that the author talks about rarely make it past specialist. The largest problem I've had with them is that they have to be shown how to do things _every_single_time_ you need them to do it.

Pelligrino| 1.7.11 @ 10:25AM

BrokeLT, I think we're pretty much on the same page but... if you mean an NCO (non-commissioned officer, for those who don't know -- our sergeants) is "very intelligent, capable..." yet cannot "write their way out of a paper bag" then I have to ask:

Just how intelligent is that NCO?

The NCO rank begins at corporal; that can possibly be someone as young as 21 years old.

But I am targeting the 26 - 40 year old crowd of NCOs, the majority, the more senior. (The ones who should make the military not just tick but work extremely well; they don't.)

If they are 'intelligent' yet cannot do the basics in our English language (you die on the battlefield without commo / communications / verbal and written)

...just what were they doing with their lives from 2nd grade to 12th grade?

And what are they doing in those night classes toward their Associated Degrees and BA's (while on active duty) -- all paid for by unknowing US taxpayers.

Libraries are EVERYWHERE in the US. They're mostly free. The internet has everything on it. Free books. Free tutorials.

No, the problem is that they are really not that intelligent. And they never self-cultivated a life of learning.

And they find an easy home in the military with easy pay, nice benefits, and an adoring US public.

If you are a lieutenant, you will learn. When a major or lieutenant colonel and really needing/depending on your top NCOs and warrant officers to have skills in fundamental English, well, you'll see how 'broke' and piss-poor their self-education is.

And you'll still be writing for them. And just as baffled when they do not comprehend basic written instructions. (TMs. FMs, TCs, SOPs, ARs, etc.)

And....keep asking. How/Why have most done nothing in their 20's and 30's to self-rectify this?

LiveFreeOrDie| 1.7.11 @ 11:49AM

I've personally trekked 25 miles on a 5 mile hump because the ZERO couldn't read a friggin' map! To be fair, his reports were always well written...

Mike| 1.7.11 @ 3:52PM

Pelligrino

I am curious what branch of the United States Military you served in. You state that the NCO's don't make the military work well. I am calling BS on you. I spent more than twenty years in the Army, seventeen of them as a Noncommissioned Officer. I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the NCO Corps make the military work.

Along with your branch of service I wonder what you did for our military. Was it Combat Arms, Combat Service Support or Support? Perhaps you were just unfortunate to only be exposed to subpar NCO's.

Now to help you understand better the ways of the world let me inform you that education does not equal intelligence. I have personally had to rewrite reports, award recommendations and other paperwork submitted by officers up to the Lieutenant Colonel level because it was unintelligible garbage. I have known NCO’s who could look at a piece of terrain and instantly understand the tactical implications and deploy their units effectively but who were poor at writing reports about a troop. These same NCO’s could inspire and motivate troops to perform at a level far beyond expectations and, on at least one occasion, I knew an NCO who could remember the eight digit grid coordinates to every registered artillery concentration along our line of march over a distance of about twenty kilometers. He was no Rudyard Kipling with the pen either so I guess he was stupid. I have known officers who were confused about which end of the rifle is dangerous.

I have also known snotty officers with poor leadership skills that routinely turned back counseling statements and award recommendations because they were “poorly written” by some arbitrary standard in their head. These were usually rejected because they were written in plain English as apposed to the bloviated BS that comes out of most Universities. Most of these officers did this to prove they were superior and “in charge”

You said:
“But I am targeting the 26 - 40 year old crowd of NCOs, the majority, the more senior. (The ones who should make the military not just tick but work extremely well; they don't.)”

My curiosity has gotten the better of me. If these folks are not making the best military in the world work extremely well who, in your opinion, is? Also, in your opinion, is that a well written sentance?

Mike Johnston
SFC USA (RET)

DG in GA| 1.8.11 @ 12:01PM

Mike, I am not in the military, I am in the business world. Over the past 30 years I have seen a dramatic (and frightening) increase in the number of high-school grads, and COLLEGE grads who do not have a basic command of the English language. Like you, it wasn't just entry-level or lower-level employees, it went right up to the Vice President level in our company. Important reports with misspelled words or poor grammar, Powerpoint presentations with same, entire reports or documents that made absolutely no sense, etc. And sometimes it wasn't that they lacked basic English skills, it was people trying to sound more intelligent than they actually ARE, turning out bloviated nonsense.

I have had discussions with junior high and high school English teachers, asking them why they don't teach grammar and spelling anymore. They have told me it's because it "hurts the creativity" of the children. Apparently there is a belief in the public schools that if you demand correct spelling and grammar, it stifles the child's "creative process" and makes them unable to express themselves. We all know that's BS. It's about laziness. It's also about the schools of education NOT turning out the best and the brightest.

Add to that the huge number of children these days being raised in environments where the parents are not educated, who do not VALUE education, who have cultural influences that denigrate education - and we're surprised these kids can't READ? It's a national disgrace!

Pelligrino| 1.8.11 @ 4:32PM

To Mike and several others: I stand by my comments 100%. I was there; I know.

Please zero in on the focus of my comments: Education fundamentals. The fundamentals of what one should have in our modern era (anyone going through schools since the 1980's/1990’s).

We typically define the education ‘fundies’ as the three R's. Reading, writing, & arithmetic.

Now, Mike, if I were to start talking the mathematical skills present in our -- present day -- US armed forces, well, the honest assessment is ugly. But I’ll leave that topic for some other venue.

I only used reading & writing (above) examples because this is a blog space; one cannot be exhaustive on any topic. And one can only offer a few examples to undergird a point.

By any measuring stick, a senior leader in our military is challenged with MANY things. Many! Resources, time, working/durable equipment, train-ups, desperately needed maintenance equipment, the right vehicles, sufficient personnel, etc.

But, as we all know, the human factor is the ultimate decider.

And our nation is not sending, via MEPS stations and recruiters, really fantastic raw material (new recruits) into the profession of arms.

For example, how many kids did you encounter that -- before you could even license them on the most basic motor vehicle in your unit's inventory -- needed a normal, everyday state driver's license.

Incredible! Many 18, 19, and even 20 year olds that had never driven. (Yes, I know of many 17 year olds who self do this; they work, buy a beater, fix it up, get an adult to instruct, study, and pass the usually very easy driver’s test first time. They are driving themselves everywhere in the final months of high school.)

That’s one tiny indicator. Just one.

Worse for our nation is when the military retains severely subpar individuals (to include MANY officers) at their junctures for reenlistments, extensions of service.

It takes no time at all to earn stripes; it truly takes no capabilities before one reaches the sergeant rank of E-5. This has far more to do with accumulated months in uniform; it has nothing to do with merit.

It is the EXACT SAME for a 1st Lt. who makes captain in the US Army. How can this be? Why is this inevitable? Where are the very rigorous, tough criteria to merit the promotion?

Any honest assessment reveals (and integrity tells you) that is inevitable that that same "buck sergeant" E-5 today will be an E-7 Sergeant First Class in another 6-8 years.

It is practically inevitable. And that IS a HUGE problem.

I am giving no pass toward today's officers either. Am. Spectator does not offer enough space here for me to rip away at 1) what our service academies are sending us, 2) what ROTC is producing, 3) how poorly officers self-develop/educate themselves as a matter of unending professional devotion, 4) the terrible lack of firm adherence to military & life ethics/values, 5) the selfishness one sees every day. (Selfless service is supposed to be the Army value)

No, Mike, the officers get ZERO sympathy for me.
I'd remove 30-40% tomorrow and our armed forces and national security would be the better for it. (I believe in the Gideon principle.)

Mike, I don't know if we are 'better' than any other military in our present world. There is much in China that we just don't know and that we seem to willfully overlook. Yes, I’ll side with America and do everything in my power to make sure our team/nation/ideals/freedom prevails, but there are never empirical means to adjudge who or which is 'superior.'

I would argue that what made us 'superior' throughout the Cold War has far more to do with a tech savvy, workable, large-scale nuclear weapons arsenal and NOT so much what we possessed in the way of conventional ground forces (both weaponry and personnel). The Nukes are what has preserved our 'peace.'

The US edge has existed in our lifetimes due to what free markets/free societies do in the synthesis of units/people+equipment+technology+schooling+innovation+resources+highly competitive industry. And, yes, most definitely morals+ethics.

That is our edge. Yes, I want that edge. But we ultimately need to ALWAYS have the 'edge' of having an incredibly superior, intellectually-charged, self-motivated, intrinsically-always-professional group of adult males.

Let’s reflect: Can we ever make excuses as Americans for personal weaknesses in our cerebral capabilities? No, not in America with resources aplenty at our fingertips.

You are correct; we don’t need Rudyard Kiplings. But we need people in uniform constantly hungry for self improvement, self development to better help the team.

Back to brass tacks:

Why so MANY Hispanics in our Armed Forces who remain incapable in English despite 1) being US citizens, 2) over the age of 30, 3) in the service for over 8-10 years? How is this possible?

Mike, as you were US Army, what is the failure rate at the US Army’s BNCOCs and ANCOCs? What is the failure/wash-out rate at the mid-level Army officer courses? (Answer: Practically no one fails on academic terms or physical fitness. It might be a UCMJ personal conduct incident that forces removal while at these schools like shoplifting, the ubiquitous DUI, or an assault, but it is never for mental/academic/acumen/fitness reasons. Why?)

Mike, you need to be honest with readers here: You never hear an NCO say, “Man that BNCOC or ANCOC course really kicked my butt! Am I glad that’s over! Nothing but study, classes, intensity in the classroom, FTXs! in the labs/real-world vexing motor pool tasks, in the library, and in my personal study AND on the PT field. Man, am I ever glad to be back in the unit again. That was an organized, structured, brutally tough school!”

Which NCO or officer ever says words like this in mid-career (6 – 15 years in) when describing his latest 4-8 month professional development school?

Reminder: We are talking the US military as a profession, a profession that is not supposed to be for most people.

And it is no better at the higher institutions like the US Army’s Fort Bliss Sergeant Major’s academy. I see fat and flabby graduates, both mentally and physically. Why?

Texas Mom 2012| 1.9.11 @ 11:44AM

In response to your statement that a large portion of young enlistees up to age 21 cannot legally operate a motor vehicle, I find that extremely difficult to believe. The only possible reason for this that I can find is a failure of the parent to prepare their child for life as an adult. Driver's Education was taught in school when I was a child but is no longer offered here in Texas. In this case it becomes a parental responsibility to provide this crucial life skill to your child. Believe me, I realize it can be a trial for the parent.

I have an autistic son that learned to drive at sixteen (painfully for me). He drove himself to school by the end of his junior year and all of his senior year. He drives himself to work now and also to a community college in the attempt to prepare him to go off to college after a couple years. I don't believe that he would be eligible to serve but after your rant maybe he would be an asset? Unbelievable.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 12:56PM

"I think you're a little too hard on the Non-comms. "

I would have to agree. They may not speak the Queen's English, and they may have trouble putting words down on paper, but the American NCO is the true key to our military excellence, overcoming manifold deficiencies in the officer corps. As compared to NCOs in other armies (with the exception of the British army), American NCOs have a higher degree of professionalism, initiative and integrity than any others I have examined.

Most armies are, in fact, officer-led. The IDF, for example, is extremely good (and parts of it are excellent), but its NCOs are conscripts, not professionals, and so chores performed by NCOs in our military are performed by officers there. The same is true of the Russian military, except that the officers are appalling, which means no real leadership at the squad/platoon/company level (and why missions performed at one level in the U.S. military are performed by units one or two echelons higher in the Russian military). Russia has been trying to build a professional NCO corps since the last decade of the Soviet Union--and has not yet come close.

So, whatever issues you have with our NCOs today, just remember to count your blessings.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 12:50PM

"You see, the NCOs (25 - 36 years old) writing them...well, they cannot write. Not real words anyway."

True enough--but I work with Ph.D.s and grad students, and believe me, the situation is no better, there, either. I'm also led to wonder what jackwagon thinks a sergeant has nothing better to do with his time than write report cards for his troops? I've studied leadership and troop management in many armies, and only the United States relies on such bureaucratic, time-consuming and meaningless techniques. There are far better ways to train troops--we just don't want to use them.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 7:37PM

"Despite this, if you want to weep, just hand out a 11th grade level written product to your troops. And see who really comprehends it. "

Back in the day, I wrote Training Extension Courses for the Army, including HAWK Continuous Wave Acquisition Radar Maintenance, Troubleshooting and Repair. I was instructed that all materials had to be written at a 7th grade level of reading comprehension. This was in 1983.

"For example, how does one repair a piece of equipment if one does not first understand the instructions in the manual?"

We use pictures, a lot.

Adam Smith| 1.7.11 @ 8:51AM

When we start talking about which alphabet soup Federal Department needs to be zeroed out over the coming year, someone should propose re-allocating the entire, THE ENTIRE Department Of Education budget into direct education vouchers for parents. A few million picky shoppers focused on results should fix things right quick.

DG in GA| 1.8.11 @ 12:03PM

Excellent idea, Adam!

DeesBull| 1.7.11 @ 9:14AM

Is it just me or has anyone noticed that our children are doing exponentially worse since the federal government has stepped deeply into their education? It seems the more they get involved the dumber our kids get. We need to get rid of the giant indoctrination centers they call schools and back to smaller schools so the parents can get more involved into what goes on.

Stan Redmond| 1.7.11 @ 9:33AM

BUT the chidruns are lerning smart things. What gud is a smart traned soljur if the chidrun dont save the earf from globul warming and their carbon footprint, and recycle plastick bottlez thems also has gud self esteme wich is doubleplus gooder becuz evryone will love us and we wont needs soljurs anymores. Them chidrun, up to age 26, also knows how to use rubberz when dey hookup. Obama rulez bush sukz. LOL ROFL ;-)

Pelligrino| 1.7.11 @ 10:49AM

Thank you, Stan. Exactly. however: i noted too much use of capitalization. fix it. tootdles

A 'Rent| 1.7.11 @ 11:30AM

Man, it hurts to read this. I see the humor, I want to laugh, but it just hurts too much.

DG in GA| 1.8.11 @ 12:06PM

Another excellent point, Stan. My nieces and nephews are absolutely indoctrinated with the whole Global Warming scam, but they can't spell to save their lives. Thank God they can separate plastic containers to be recycled though. THERE'S a skill that will help them in later life. :(

Eric Cartman| 1.7.11 @ 9:51AM

Just wait until the Department of Edumacation hears about this! Why, they will jump into action! Holding meetings, writing reports for internal review, assembling blue ribbon panels, issuing guidelines, etc. They are the professionals and I trust them to zero in on the problem.

But I already know the problem is self-esteem and nutrition - the DOE found this to be true over the years. How do you expect children to learn when they are wearing $20.00 Walmart sneakers? Or some imitation Abercrombie and Fitch shirt from K-Mart? These poor children see the wealth of this nation and know they will always be shutout of of it and forced to live in places like Detroit or D.C. They will always have to flash-mob malls to get anything nice.

And can we really expect the single mother to get up after a night of crack-whoring and make breakfast and lunch? Why, that's inhumane! They need to rest up for the upcoming night of crack-whoring! And then there is dinner. By dinner time, she is out crack-whoring again, so we need to provide school dinners, too.

Oh, I know all you right-wingers will say, "Quit crack-whoring and raise your kid!" Well, you're the ones who don't like abortion, so this is what you get. And don't point to past generations actually learning from just books, slide rules and disciplined class rooms - they would never have envisioned calculators or iPods, okay?

I just pray that Obama will increase the Department of Edumacation's funding so we can continue fix these problems by raising teacher's salaries, decreasing class size to 6 kids/teacher, more vacation time and better union representation for larger pensions. Our children deserve no less. It's for the children.

Pelligrino| 1.7.11 @ 10:42AM

Mr. Eric Cartman, you see it mostly acurately. Thank you.

I just want to be the bearer of bad news: Some of those crack-whores are staff sergeants in our US military living on an installation near you! Yes indeed.

(some deployed and enjoying that even more)

They are mid-thirties, well overweight, with usually something like three children (being partially raised by someone else, matters not who) from three different men's sperm.

And you are funding their much-better-than-ever-expected lifestyle through your charitable contributions known as taxes funneled through the US Congress and the Dept. of Defense.

Better yet, many of these 'women' (many men too) are just 2 or 3 years from retirement at 20 years of (self) 'service.'

So you'll be funding their lifestyles for years to come.

But do not disparage them in any way! They are, after all veterans deserving of your admiration.

Thoroughly uneducated themselves (see my posts above), they used our modern day military welfare system to the max.

The joke is on you.

On all of us.

Eric Cartman| 1.7.11 @ 11:48AM

I've seen a few like that in the military (USAF-SAC) and my experience is that they don't last too long. But they are there. A vast majority were there to serve and better themselves. One single mother (who the military shouldn't accept) would always complain whenever there was an ORI - "My daughter is all alone! I can't find a babysitter!" etc. But most are there to serve.

Ned| 1.7.11 @ 10:50AM

BUT FIRST, before we struggle with anything icky like "education" - DOE will give everyone in the department a big raise.

Eric Cartman| 1.7.11 @ 1:50PM

And bonuses - you forgot bonuses. And a cruise. You can't expect the professionals in the DOE to work 40 hrs a week without a two week cruise every year. Self esteem and all that.

Stan Redmond| 1.7.11 @ 12:33PM

I am glad you saw the obvious solution. There is no problem too big or too small that can't be solved with, taxes, spending, government agencies, beaurucrats, studies, blue ribbon panels, and blaming Bush.

Muddy | 1.7.11 @ 12:53PM

I teach 9th grade English in a high school on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. Many of my students come from broken homes, or no homes, and haven't a clue as to what it takes to be a disciplined student. However, there are many students who realize the education they received is flawed at best, and criminally negligent in the worst case. these students do learn when they realize hard work can lead to success, and not every answer is correct. Try not to be so hard on the teachers who attempt to instill discipline in the classrooms and in the minds of these youngsters. The bureaucrats are to blame, along with the gutless, brainless, and totally incompetent political class who have spent years trying to engineer a better class of people. Eliminate all the administrative positions above the school principal, let us elect our principals, and you may have some hope of turning things around. Meanwhile, I stay at my post, on duty, until relieved. I thank all who have served our country.

Muddy| 1.7.11 @ 12:57PM

Sorry for my capitalization error, I rushed through this between classes.

Eric Cartman| 1.7.11 @ 1:36PM

No dissing teachers here. Just to garbage that passes out of the bowels of DC to "fix" our education. Teachers should be the ones pissed off, but they seem to vote Democrat every . . single . . .time!

roadmaster| 1.9.11 @ 8:35AM

Thank you for your service, Muddy. It's people like you, working inside the system who are our only hope for fixing it. Here in Tucson, we cannot break the strangle hold of the teachers union, La Raza and a complicit school board, so far.
Mass murderer, Jared Loughner, was a product of TUSD, and probably rejected for military service for the very reasons stated in the above article. Red flags all around this guy and he is still able to buy a gun?

roadmaster| 1.9.11 @ 8:44AM

Ronald Reagan was exactly right! Had an enemy subverted our education system like liberals have, it would be tantamount to an "act of war."
Gubberment "education" and proponents of it are indeed the enemy of a free and healthy society. They inculcate students with canards like "social justice" and redistribution of wealth. The La Raza supported ethnic studies program here in Tucson preaches hatred for the "man," and turns innocent children into unhappy, ignorant malcontents - just what we DON'T in our culture.
Once again proof that Big Gubbermint FAILS, with what ever it touches - just like socialism/communism fails where ever it's been
tried, because they're basically one and the same.

Jean Jacque| 1.7.11 @ 10:07AM

Had we but known and blown-up the Columbia School of Education and the Columbia School of Social Work 100 years ago before the infection spread. What's necessary is to forget about "equality" and restore competiion and ranking.(Kids are naturally competative)
use the "Singapore Solution " to Drugs and use the pillory for bad parenting. "Or use the English Public School Model" It has the risk of homosexuality sadomasacism and philistiinism but by golly they did learn how to read and calculate!

Franco| 1.7.11 @ 10:20AM

I wasn't home schooled, nor did I attend a private school. I was public-schooled all the way, from elementary through middle school to state college (the only private universityI attended was for my graduate studies, which I paid for myself). I grew up in a house full of books, raised by two parents who loved reading. I recall sitting at the breakfast table on Sundays with half the paper taking up half the table and my parents reading the other half. We actually talked about what was going on in the world

The fact is that we live in a world of anti-intellectual morons who sneer at learning education, and books and approve of them only insofar as they can further their attempt to hop on the dole without making them look too "white" or uppity. I was into video games too. Just call in the mercs.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 10:35AM

As a former High School math teacher, who had way too many 9th and 10th grade students come to my class who couldn't do arithmetic, the solution is to close the public schools, fire the teachers, and give the money to the parents in the form of an escrow or voucher to be used ONLY for their kids schooling and let them find the BEST private or parochial school for their kids. Also, eliminate the silly rules which allow a wild child to be left to infect the rest. There's more but this would be a serious good start.

Whitey O'Carr Kennedy Dukakis| 1.8.11 @ 3:22AM

Mr. Baker could you write an article detailing your experiences in the public schools? The more people that come forward to tell what is going on will give impetus to reform education. My aunt was a teacher in the MA K-12 system and she told me all kind of horror stories. Please explain to us how a wild child could screw up a class room and waste the taxpayers money. This is the aspect of the education debate that is missing.

Pelligrino| 1.8.11 @ 5:27PM

How does the 'wild child' disrupt the education focus for the whole?

Easy. Where exactly have you grown up?

It is the same as how 10% druggies, soon-t0-be crackheads destroy an entire neighborhood. Their mere presence.

In the normal, suburban-life scenarios, any volunteer youth sports coach can tell you the same. All it takes are 2 or 3 miscreants in the team who 1) divert from the drill, 2) purposely scheme to undermine, 3) misrepresent in front of other parents, league officials, etc.

It does not take much. A kid can come from a thoroughly broken home with no love and a parent on-again, off-again welfare...and this kid has NOTHING going for him BUT he can outwit you like Gary Kasparov whipping your butt at chess.

They've seen all the endless pop TV, movie, MTV, web nonsense "tutorials" on how to undermine authority, lampoon the adult.

They have cultivated by 13 or 14 mastermind status as undisciplined terrors anywhere & everywhere they choose.

Far more important, the school classroom (a closed, indoor environment).

Aren't you aware of how many dedicated teachers at (yes even the elementary) middle schools and high schools want large, male teachers in the building/classrooms? A 12 year old can already be physically imposing to many women (and that kid knows he is).

You lose, as much as 20-25 minutes (collectively) in just a 50 minutes class period due to significant student misbehavior.

And the teacher has no real means (the trial lawyers await) of discipline enforcement. Practically none.

If just 3 or 4 students in a classroom of 30 want to disrupt and have no compunction about doing so, education will not occur.

This is a tiny ratio. It can be 50-50.

And this goes on week after week unabated.

Please go visit a public middle school or high school near you in a middle or lower middle class district.

There is ZERO discipline at home; why should there be any in a public space?

Howard| 1.7.11 @ 10:58AM

I look at two events that occurred around the same time that have had disastrous effects for this country:
1. The rise of Teacher Unionization in the late 1960's. This has resulted in placing the Unions needs above the community and taxpayers. The trend line has been educational standard down with unionization going up. No coincidence.

2. The rise of general purpose credit cards such as Visa coming into existence in the early 1970's and the declining rate of savings hence forth. In my opinion; no coincidence. Also bad for the country.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 12:06PM

Has it occurred to anyone that a certain percentage of any given population appears to be, well, to put it bluntly, "stupid" when you measure their "intelligence" with some type of standard test? That a certain percentage will always fail a standardized test and that this is NATURAL as intelligence isn't something that can be quantified successfully for each and every one of us?

Sure, a certain percentage of new recruits can not tell you what the answer is to simple questions like: "if you have six apples and eat three, how many are left," but if they can pick up a m-16 and successfully attack a bunker complex, something that requires the planning and execution of complex maneuvers (a sure sign of intelligence, wouldn't you agree?), what difference does it make if they pass a math quiz or not?

I'd rather have an entire division of "stupid" troops who know how to attack an enemy position with just a weapon and their own aggressive instincts than a single "intelligent" officer who can solve, in their head, Pythagorean theorem but can't tell you how far away an enemy position is without the assistance of a laser range finder or optical stadia marks.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 1:11PM

"Has it occurred to anyone that a certain percentage of any given population appears to be, well, to put it bluntly, "stupid" when you measure their "intelligence" with some type of standard test?"

Hello? Bell Curve! A certain portion of the population IS stupid--ain't no way around that.

"Sure, a certain percentage of new recruits can not tell you what the answer is to simple questions like: "if you have six apples and eat three, how many are left," but if they can pick up a m-16 and successfully attack a bunker complex, something that requires the planning and execution of complex maneuvers (a sure sign of intelligence, wouldn't you agree?), what difference does it make if they pass a math quiz or not?"

However, experience does not bear out your supposition, which is at best a caricature of the Audie Murphy/Sergeant York cliche. In fact, it's the combat arms that require men with the highest levels of intelligence. You can pretty much teach anyone with just average intelligence to maintain modern military systems (at least Level 1 maintenance, with the proliferation of Built-in Test Equipment (BITE) and Line Replaceable Units (LRUs)), but it requires real smarts to be an infantryman or a tanker (no more false and fatal joke than the saying, "You have to have half a mind to join the infantry").

During World War II, the United States diverted men scoring highest on the Armed Services Aptitude Test (Level 1) to the Army Air Force; the next two quintiles (Levels 2-3) were directed to technical services (Signals, Intelligence, Automotive Maintenance, Artillery) and the bottom two quintiles (Levels 4-5) to the combat arms (infantry, armor, cavalry); there was even a pool of men who could not be scored (because they were illiterate), and these either ended up as infantry replacements or as supply troops. This goes far to explain the mediocre performance of U.S. infantry in World War II (with the exception of elite forces like the Airborne troops, the Rangers, and the 10th Mountain Division--all of which were manned by volunteers and had a disproportionate number of college students or graduates in their ranks).

The German army, in contrast, always directed its best and brightest to the combat arms, which explains why the German infantryman, right up to the end of the war (when the manpower barrel was being scraped dry) showed greater initiative, aggressiveness and tactical aptitude than his American counterpart (whose basic tactic was move to contact and call in artillery).

And not coincidentally, the more intelligent the soldier, the better he seemed able to withstand the stress of combat. I wonder if anybody has bothered to correlate PTSD rates from Iraq and Afghanistan against soldier IQ. That should be interesting.

Modern war ain't meant for the stupid, especially not at the sharp end.

Hank Rearden-WI| 1.7.11 @ 12:25PM

I have a son currently going through his basic training. He loves it.

He blew away the ASVAB - a perfect score. Soldiers, fellow recruits, and office personnel at the MEPS Center went out of their way to congratulate him. He knew he'd done well, but it didn't sink in until the processor asked "what job do you want?"

His MOS is in Military Intelligence.

His brothers plan to follow him.

They are all Homeschooled.

Help your children, yourselves, and your country- get out of the public schools.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 12:53PM

I can relate with your son's experience. I did rather well overall on the ASVAB (a GT score of 118) even though I am a high school dropout and barely passed the GED test. I did especially poor on math in both the GED test (45, UGH!) and the ASVAB (I don't remember that score but it wasn't very high) but, surprising, I was recruited to be a Cobra Mechanic and I was in the top 3 percent of my AIT class.

So, according to the standardized "test,'" I am barely above idiot level in math but, thanks to my mechanical aptitude, I became a mechanic, a position that requires mathematical precision in repairing, adjusting and installing mechanical and electrical components, something I did very well.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 1:12PM

Consider me old fashioned, but I think everybody should have to do at least one tour as an 11B before he gets to choose an MOS. In the Marines, every one is a rifleman first, and given the nature of modern war, that is a very good thing indeed.

DG in GA| 1.8.11 @ 12:14PM

My nephew just joined the military out of high school. He originally wanted to work in Explosive Ordnance Disposal. Then he took the aptitude test. He scored so high they told him they wouldn't ALLOW him to work EOD. He is in Basic Training now and I believe they have him slated for MI.

Stuart Koehl| 1.8.11 @ 4:26PM

Nobody should go directly into military intelligence. Until you've been a grunt, you really have no idea what is important and what is not. Making someone an intelligence specialist is a lot like making a cop a detective before he's had a chance to walk a beat.

Darlene Snipes| 1.10.11 @ 9:05PM

Absolutely!! The public schools of today are teaching for the test. They do not allow for students to excel in any area.. Homeschoolers are self starters, hardworking and focused. The school system has so many distractions from teen pregnancy, drugs and just mean kids, that the kids can't put their education first. They are just trying to survive or fit in...Kids need the opportunity to learn and excel without these detractions. Colleges love homeschoolers.. it's easy to see why..

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 12:28PM

Ray:
In todays military, "stupid" won't do. Your post would generate cannon fodder instead of a capable unit. The ASVAB is nothing more than a way to determine the MINIMUM capabilities of the prospective recruits. Yes, we need warriors but uneducated hoplites or praetorian guards are not the answer. We decided long ago that huge standing armies weren't in our future (WWII as an exception) and that we were going to use technology as a force multiplier. Had an NCO colleague at Ft. Benning in '76 tell me that, in his opinion, the Infantry School was spending too much time on physical fitness and not enough on educating the troops in the art of Infantry combat which is, contrary to popular belief, a thinking man's game. He referred to the output as "physically fit buffoons." Is that what you mean?

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 1:17PM

I only partially concur. The ideal modern soldier is an MOS 18 (Special Forces)--a tough-minded, determined warrior with the equivalent of two masters degrees and the physical prowess of an Olympic athlete. That standard is not attainable by all (which is why the SOF washout rate is about 75-80%), but modern war demands both intelligence and physical fitness. The types of war we are most likely to fight--low intensity conflicts and counter-insurgency operations--are fought up close and personal. They require quick wits as well as the killer instinct (and the smarts to know when not to shoot), and the ability to dispatch the foe in hand-to-hand combat.

That said, the Army spends too much time running, and not nearly enough time developing the endurance needed for modern war. While the U.S. Army encourages guys to run marathons, the British army encourages cross-country "tabbing" while carrying 80 lbs of kit. Guess which is more useful on the battlefield.

DG in GA| 1.8.11 @ 12:17PM

My husband was a Green Beret, and if he is any example, they are EXACTLY as you describe. He ended up spending most of his military career training troops, as he was an excellent teacher, who did not suffer fools lightly.

Stuart Koehl| 1.8.11 @ 4:29PM

All honor to your husband.

Green Berets are supposed to be teachers, first and foremost. The original idea behind the Special Forces was a bunch of guys who would stay behind when the Soviets overran Europe, in order to raise and train the resistance. A-Teams work best when they provide training and advice to indigenous forces, whether regulars or irregulars, so that the locals can take the fight to the enemy. To do so, they have to be the equivalent of a whole general staff, and be able to do hands-on training, and be able to do the "kinetic" stuff, when push comes to shove. I've known a lot of Green Berets, and no, not one has ever suffered fools lightly.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 12:38PM

Richard, it is my military experience that it's the "stupid" troops who successfully carry out their duties and prevail on the battlefield. This is because the "stupid" troops can be easily trained and are flexible in applying out that training to real-world situations while the "smart" people are harder to train and have a hard time adapting to dynamic battlefield conditions as they think they already know everything and, because of this, are arrogant and inflexible.

Contrary to "logic," it is the "smart" military "experts" who are the ones who misinterpret battlefield conditions and requirements and issue ineffective orders while the "stupid" troops are the ones that win battles. That's just as true in the "modern" battlefield as it was back in the days of the Roman Empire.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 1:18PM

"Richard, it is my military experience that it's the "stupid" troops who successfully carry out their duties and prevail on the battlefield. This is because the "stupid" troops can be easily trained and are flexible in applying out that training to real-world situations while the "smart" people are harder to train and have a hard time adapting to dynamic battlefield conditions as they think they already know everything and, because of this, are arrogant and inflexible."

We must be using different definitions of smart and stupid.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 12:57PM

Ray:
Your ideas would hold sway if we used massed frontal attacks/assaults with almost unlimited manpower. However, in America we think a bit smarter than that. That's why with a relatively small military no one really wants to go up against us. The baloney knows the meat-grinder. Stupid gets you killed on the battlefield. As I said before, Infantry combat IS a thinking man's game. Ray, our Army history, as an example, is full of instances where the Senior PFC would fight the battle fairly well after the officers and NCOs were gone. Stupid would be like Soviet troops who'd be helpless after the leadership was gone. For example, maps were classified documents in that system which is still being used all over the world. Without something as simple as Land Navigation, definitely a thinking man's game, your troops are helpless. Try and read OUR military history.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 1:19PM

"Without something as simple as Land Navigation, definitely a thinking man's game, your troops are helpless."

It used to be said that the most dangerous thing on the planet was a second lieutenant with a map and a compass. That is no longer true: the most dangerous thing on earth is a second lieutenant with a GPS receiver.

BNehls| 1.7.11 @ 1:16PM

I remember taking the ASVAB when I was a senior in high school back in 1990 and I thought I scored good enough to be accepted. Unfortunately that was not the case. Not only did I score bad, it was dismal. My worst subject is math and that is what most of the ASVAB test is. The vocabulary and paragraph comprehension part of the test I scored in the 80-90% but that was not good enough. To this day I can remember the Air Force recruiter looking at the test I took and his answer sheet and without looking at me said, " did you pay attention to the questions?" Well, at least I learned more on my own in a public library than ever sitting in a classroom.

DG in GA| 1.8.11 @ 12:19PM

B: Did you ever take the SAT or ACT? I'd be interested in knowing how your scores on those tests compared to the ASVAB.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 1:20PM

Ruchard, have you even been following the news during the last 10 years? Our reliance on "smart" technology is actually dangerous because we forget to rely upon experience and instinct and, instead, rely upon "smart" technology to "prevail" on the battlefield..

YOU should actually read our military history, especially recent history, and then, maybe, YOu' LL understand just how foolish it is to rely upon that technology and not on human instinct and experience. For example, just a few years ago in Afghanistan a squad of our own troops was struck by friendly fire because some "smart" forward observer had to replace the batteries in his GPS device but "forgot" that the device will reset to zero position and he didn't account for the difference between HIS position and the distance to the ACTUAL position that fire was suppose to be direct at. Had he simply glanced at the hard-copy MAP he was also carrying, he would have know exactly what coordinates were needed to strike the enemy's position (something I learned to do in basic training back in the 80's before GPS units were used) and not his own. But did he do that, something even "stupid" troop is capable of understanding and used to be taught in basic training (you couldn't pass basic without being able to read map and give the coordinates of a given spot on the testing "battlefield")? No, he relied upon the technology to produce the coordinates, just as he's been taught, and mistakenly directed fire upon his own position. Americans died in that "mistake," a mistake that occurred because of our over-reliance on advanced technology

Is THAT the type of "smart" military you feel is necessary in the "modern" battlefield these days, ones that are so stupid that they don't even bother to check a simple terrain map before issuing coordinates for a strike?

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 1:24PM

"Is THAT the type of "smart" military you feel is necessary in the "modern" battlefield these days, ones that are so stupid that they don't even bother to check a simple terrain map before issuing coordinates for a strike?"

See my statement above about the most dangerous thing on earth.

But, to be fair, FOs were making this basic error long before they had GPS. There are two bad places to be when someone is calling in artillery: on the target, and at the OP calling in the fire, because it's a pretty good bet that, in the heat of the moment, the FO is likely to call in fire on his own position.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 1:21PM

"My worst subject is math and that is what most of the ASVAB test is."

Like it or not, the ability to comprehend basic mathematical principles is a real predictor of military aptitude (at least of the intellectual part).

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 1:29PM

Ray:
You must not be reading OUR history. Accidents and mistakes do happen in warfare and that is inevitable. Friendly fire casualties occurred long before GPS. You seem to be saying that because they do then what we need are "stupid" troops to do the deed. Obviously, you don't have much grasp of the Military Arts as practiced by the US. I suggest you send your musings to the Infantry School at Ft. Benning in Infantry Hall and see how they are received. Again, no one wants to get in a fight with us because we are NOT stupid in the use of the Military Arts. The baloney DOES know the meat-grinder.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 1:37PM

Stuart:
Ray seems to think that cannon fodder is acceptable as that is where his ideas lead. While he had Basic in the '80s, he must not have been in a Combat Arms MOS. Then and now mental agility is required. I'd like to see him try Resection on a map and tell me if that's a stupid level exercise. Oh Ray, don't forget to include the declination in your calculations when you're doing this in a driving rainstorm.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 1:45PM

Here's what everyone is forgetting: The ASVAB is only used to indicate a recruit's potential, not their performance. You see, recruits still need to pass Basic Training and AIT: Advanced Individual Training. They are also tested yearly for proficiency in their particular MOS, their "specialty".

If at any time a troop fails to pass "muster," whether it is the requirements to pass basic, AIT, or their year proficiency tests, they are ether retrained or, if that doesn't work, discharged from the military.

This mean that, contrary to the claims that t"stupid" troops are "harming " the military and it's mission, they are, in fact, proficient in their areas of training, their areas of expertize, so to speak. So, yes, a given troop may have scored badly on their ASVAB, but that doesn't meant at they didn't do well in their training and that they can't carry out the mission with precision and effective.

Oh, and yes, I do understand that "accidents" do occur, but to claim that technology alone is what wins battles or that the ASVAB is the true indicator of someone's military abilities, ignore the fact that training and experience is a much better indicator as to the possibility of winning a battle than all the technological advances combined.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 2:00PM

Ray,

It costs about $100,000 to get a recruit from induction through AIT. When one flunks out along the way, a large part of the investment is wasted. We have a very expensive volunteer force, and recruits don't grow on trees. So the military does its best to ensure those it takes in will make it through to the end. You may not like the AVSB, but it does provide an accurate predictor of whether a recruit will complete his training--in the same way that the SATs provide a good indication of whether a college freshman will be around to collect his degree at the end of four years.

Now, I myself subscribe to Wellington's "scum of the earth" school that says soldiers can be made out of the most unpromising material. But that only works at the retail level, and requires a good bit of time. If the basic contract was ten years, we could reduce intake standards considerably, because we would have much more time to bring the riff-raff up to snuff. But, with just four years, every moment counts--unless you want to get the guy proficient and then lose him to the civvy world.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 2:08PM

Stuart, very few recruits "flunk" AIT. Those that don't pass their specif MOS (and that does happen) are usually offered another MOS, one that is more suited to their particular skills. If you don't become a mechanic because you don't have the aptitude even though the ASVAB indicates you did , it doesn't mean that you're unsuitable for another MOS.

Also, the point where most of the "stupid" (unsuitable) recruits are "weeded out " is in Basic Training, not AIT.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 2:14PM

I know this, Ray. What the ASVAB does is get rid of those guys who would never have lasted a week in basic. Hopefully, by the end of basic, the weak sisters are gone (it used to be more effective when basic was tougher). AIT assumes the recruit has what it takes to be a soldier, but still filters out the mistakes. It's hoped that the ASVAB did a good job in determining aptitude for a particular MOS, because it costs time and money to reshuffle a recruit through a new specialty.

So don't underestimate the role of the aptitude test (and the psych batteries, either): they are the gross filter that makes sure the worst of the worse never even get to basic. It costs about a thousand bucks to administer and process the test, but basic costs more than $45,000.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 1:51PM

You're right, I wasn't an 11B, but, like all military members, I was trained and tested every year for the proficiency to read maps, identify targets, shoot accurately, ect. I was also trained to use more than my issued M-16. I was trained and received (every year that I was tested) an Expert badge, in the M-60, LAW(do they even use them anymore?), Stinger Missile, and the M-203 grenade launcher.

You see, I may have been "just" a Cobra Mechanic, but I WAS trained in the use and application of more than just a wrench.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 2:07PM

Not that I am denigrating the flightline guys who keep the birds in the air (I'm just finishing up a study on rotary wing operations in Afghanistan, and my hat is off to all of them, because I don't know how they do it). But proficiency with a weapon does not make one an infantryman, anymore than learning to take off and land in a helicopter makes one a Cobra pilot (you would be amazed at the Marines' new AH-1Z Vipers--not your daddy's Cobra by a long shot). To be an infantryman, one must train in an infantry unit, master fieldcraft, minor tactics, orienteering, and the myriad other skills needed to survive and fight the modern (and very lethal) close battle.

In a sense, it's the same error that the Repeal folks make: they think if a man can perform the individual tasks specific to the MOS, then he's qualified. Actually, he's not qualified until he's been integrated into a unit and accepted by his buddies as a member of the team.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 2:19PM

Stuart, my proficiency in those weapons meant that additional infantrymen wouldn't be needed to "guard" or "protect" any are where I would be stationed. That is why people like myself were trained in things like multiple weapons proficiency and target identification, along with map reading and communications. It was to reduce the need of infantry to defend an established position like a field repair position.

You see, thanks to the training I received, I could defend against any attacking troops and even call-in an artillery strike on an attacking enemy formation just like any other 11B could have done even though My MOS was 67Y.

Would I be used to a offensive attack against an enemy position? No, of course not, but I could very well DEFEND my own position so that the infantrymen could used to assault that enemy position instead of defending a friendly position.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 2:58PM

I wrote a monograph on the Alarmenheiten the Germans formed from rear-area troops and convalescents to counter breakthroughs on the Eastern Front. It's not easy to turn a cook into a grenadier, but it's a lot easier to teach him how to defend a position than to take back one from the enemy.

On the LAW--it's gone, replaced by the AT-4, an 84mm, single-shot, disposable recoilless rifle derived from the Swedish Carl Gustav. Much better--you can do a lot more than just annoy the enemy with it.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 2:20PM

Stuart:
Ray seems to think that "stupid" is acceptable for, as it's called today, the warfighters. I've been an Airframe and Powerplant mechanic on helicopters in civilian life (Bell 212/412 and Sikorsky S-76) and agree that fixing helicopters is a technical skill which requires sharp thinking. His idea, with which I disagree, is that "stupid" is acceptable for the warfighters. In a high tech military, stupid gets folks killed way beyond accidents and mistakes. As I said before, our enemies (the baloney) know the meatgrinder (our combined arms force). They know the reality.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 2:29PM

Richard, you seem to be misunderstand me and my arguments. I don't think that "stupid" is acceptable, I disagree as to the definition of "stupid" itself. Just because the ASVAB says that you can't add numbers together, it doesn't mean that you don' have the ability to accurately and effectively identify and attack enemy targets and positions.

I'm surprised someone as "smart" as you, someone who appears to be such an "expert " on military matters, didn't figure that out for yourself.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 2:34PM

By the way, Infantry is still used to perform perimeter security at aircraft installations. There aren't enough Military Police to adequately defend these large and busy installations. Yes, everyone has a rifle but effectively using it is the key. As to performing a call for fire as well as an 11B, well, try it one time. It's not just a matter of saying "Put it over there." Try functioning in a world of 10-digit grid coordinates, which is what these folks prefer, in a real-time environment.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 2:46PM

Richard, we also had MP's, and even German "gate" guards, at our permanent bases, but NONE of them ever accompanied us on field training exercises like field repair and recovery exercises or when we were deployed to establish forward rapidity positions (not all equipment can make it back to the permanent bases for repair, you know. Some had to be repaired in situ or, failing that, recovered and transported to the "forward" repair bases (which were always mobile and, therefor, always temporary) or, in the wost cases, to permanent bases for extensive repair. Guess who defended our forward positions during those exercises? Yep, me and my fellow mechanics did, just as we were trained to do.

Oh, and by the way we also guarded our own permanent bases along with the MP's and German "gate" guards.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 3:00PM

In Iraq and Afghanistan, every aircraft recovery mission is accompanied by a ground security element composed of infantry or special operations troops. In the first place, the aircraft ground crew are too busy and too valuable to waste on perimeter security; and in the second place, the bad guys, when they contest a recovery, come en masse and armed for bear.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 2:50PM

Ray:
Maybe you need to read your initial post, again. Don't profess to be a military expert but just someone who keeps in touch with the Military Arts as they really are (the information is readily available). Learned a great deal as an 11B30 SSG and understand the need for as intelligent a Soldier as can be procured. That's what ASVAB attempts to do in the manner of a "gross filter", as Stuart mentioned. Cannon fodder results from the stupid use of troops. When I was on active duty, I often heard the REMFs, as they were called in Vietnam and the '70s, denigrate the Infantry mission ( groundpounders and gravel agitators among them). Regardless, disagree with your ideas.

Ray| 1.7.11 @ 2:53PM

Ok, I apologize. You're not an expert, you're just fully versed and knowledgeable and are far more suitable to comprehend and elaborate on military matters than I am. Sorry for the confusion.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 2:58PM

Ray:
I was never referring to peacetime. Look into who provides most of the security in Afghanistan or Iraq at air installations. In Vietnam, Infantry units were routinely tasked to provide perimeter security all over the country. That was one of the many reasons there weren't that many "grunts" in the field at any one time and was the bane of the commanders of these units.

Stuart Koehl| 1.7.11 @ 3:03PM

We cross-posted. See mine above.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 3:30PM

Ray:
Sorry that my having an interest in my former life offends. Queen of Battle!

Edward G. O. Radler Rice| 1.7.11 @ 4:06PM

Certainly, our contemporary public school system is imperfect. However, I do not recognize it has the root of the current educational crisis. In fact, I think that it is more a symptom than anything else. The root is really the breakdown of the family. When enough families collapse (or fail to even lift-off as when a man cohabitats with his girlfriend), then the wider society will begin to undergo stress. Literaracy (and numeracy) development starts at home, not in fifth grade or in pre-k. This development will be retarded as long as families are unstable, as long as men women are not responsible enough to avoid fornication and getting pregnant before marriage. By the way, easy access to contraception and abortion have not in any way helped young men and women. In fact, if anything can be said to be a threat to national security it is abortion (and the contraceptive mentality), which basically reduces life-giving sexual activity to masturbation...

the family
As an educator in the Catholic parochial school system, I recognize a different root to the problem

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 4:09PM

Stuart:
Regarding the danger of 2LTs and a compass, that's why you have NCOs. Hopefully the LT will listen and if he's smart he will. A friend who was an Infantry Captain told me of one of his new Platoon Leaders laying the lensatic compass on a jeep hood and wondering, out loud, why he couldn't find North. Experienced heads enlightened the LT. They educated the boy.

Shoey| 1.7.11 @ 4:19PM

our children are being dumbed down on purpose, smart people are hard to control, stupid people are easy to control.

Richard Baker| 1.7.11 @ 4:39PM

Rice:
Agree with your diagnosis as to the root of our problems. Short of a theocracy, how do we attain a return to the path of righteousness? I've heard some of the older among us, and by that I mean those who lived the Great Depression, say that what this country needs is another similar event to return us to our senses. They may be correct in their remedy but is it necessary to, as was said in Vietnam, destroy the village to save it? I earnestly solicit your thoughts on this subject.

PCP Smoker| 1.7.11 @ 6:39PM

Much ado about nothing. The Navy uses those low ASVAB recruits as either cooks or deck hands. Not much brains required and, by the most part, they do their twenties. They also become old salts really fast too.

K. Barker| 1.7.11 @ 10:13PM

Geez, maybe the military is the reason the public schools are doing so badly! From the reader's comments, it sounds as if it costs at least 10x as much for a recruit than for a year of school. The military is certainly draining money that could go to schools. Military public schools, JROTC, Starbase, etc., etc......get the military out of public schools, please.

Eric Cartman| 1.8.11 @ 2:19AM

What a great idea! And let's put hippies in charge of the schools and Liberal Ahole union thugs. And we can teach self esteem and have Gay & Lesbian Tolerance Workshops, and teach Ebonics and prepare everyone for Womyn Studies programs in college! What a great idea!

Stuart Koehl| 1.8.11 @ 8:38AM

"Geez, maybe the military is the reason the public schools are doing so badly! From the reader's comments, it sounds as if it costs at least 10x as much for a recruit than for a year of school. "

Well, I suppose we could stop housing and feeding the recruits, not use real guns, grenades and tanks while training them, and use social promotion to get them through the system. Yeah, that's the ticket!

Who Knows?| 1.8.11 @ 12:11PM

As a substitute teacher, I probably spent thousands of hours in the classroom with maybe 100,000 different "students", over the years.

You wouldn't believe how bad it all has become, and I was always very careful to only work in those districts everybody wants their kids to so to school in.

One of the last gems, for your viewing pleasure--
from January 8th, 2003

"I got a good laugh, when grading some school work, yesterday. A student was asked, "What is the major source of power for China?"

She answered "COMMUNISM"! when the correct answer was COAL!"

Coal Miner's Son| 1.8.11 @ 1:09PM

While you're right about the failures of math, science, and reading, you left out PE. When I was in high school, PE was either shooting hoops in the gym for the jocks or walking laps or sitting on bleachers for the non-jocks. Not only can many students not pass the ASVAB, most can't pass the military's physical fitness tests without having to go back to remedial training. We have generations of couch potatoes. More and more American's are obese and Type II diabetes is becoming commonplace among young people. The military will have to either become a lot smaller due to lack of suitable recruits or just lower their standards to let enough people in.

Tina B| 1.8.11 @ 2:09PM

As an affirmation and bravo to Edward G.O.R.R.
I am in a 6th grade math classroom, having taught 8th graders math and Algebra for the past 20 years. My three teammates and I have been given a team/group of all the lowest level skilled students in a school of 98% free or reduced lunches. I mention the economy of our school here as it is usually considered a factor in student achievement, though in my opinion this is not always so.

Prior to being asked to go to 6th grade to help repair a drop in test scores and enjoyment of school in general at this age, I had taught the highest leveled students for most of my years. We had a pre-pre IB program and students from out of our zone often applied for entry. I am going to say, regardless of economy or previous educators, students from a certain type of family could succeed or at least grow under my tutelage. And students from another type of family situation could not, they struggled no matter what I did to help. This is mentioned no where in discussions of education reform. I realize we must play the hand we are dealt, but at least give me all five cards!

If we do not reform families in our culture, we are not going to successfully reform the education of their children. When childrens' hearts are breaking or torn by divorce or abandonment, emotional as well as physical, or by family violence, overt sexuality, or disrespect for each others morals or virtues, how am I supposed to bring the joy of math into their world? If they can't grasp the joy of math and its basis in everything from the universe to video gaming, how do I convince them to do the hard work it takes to become skilled at it?

I am 100% behind the fact that all of the "problems" identified in education are valid. And the fact that there is more data collection than ever, and more research based solutions than ever, and some of them are probably wonderful given the right set of circumstances. But then you get to my world. And most of it is just not realistic.

My world of Level 1 and 2 students, the bottom rung of the test takers, are a variety of wonders to me. I love them all the same, I teach them all the same, which is to say I use a diverse array of methods from smart board, to cooperative learning, with and without a co-teacher, hands on lessons, graphic organizers and I have great classroom control and a wonderful rapport with ALL my students. And still a large number of students are barely crawling up the skill ladder and some gaining hardly any ground. Forward one step and back two, on some days.

And I believe that their family life is an integral part of their success or lack of it. Please, sir. A little more love, respect and stability please. Then watch us fly!

Stuart Koehl| 1.8.11 @ 4:07PM

"Not only can many students not pass the ASVAB, most can't pass the military's physical fitness tests without having to go back to remedial training. "

That was true back in "good old days" of World War II--about a third of all draftees were rejected for physical or mental defects, but of those inducted, most needed quite a bit of physical conditioning even to meet the wartime military's rather lax standards. And, when you look at the World War II Army's elite forces--Rangers, Airborne Infantry, Mountain Infantry, etc.--you find the same high washout rate as you do for Special Operations troops today.

In other words, civilian life does not prepare one for the physical demands of military life--even high school and college jocks have trouble. In fact, once in the field, the jocks seemed to do worse than more mature, stable men of just average physical abilities.

Syd Chaden| 1.8.11 @ 4:52PM

When I returned to the University of Illinois at the end of the Korean War, there was an ongoing national program to take a test to avoid the military service draft, which was still in effect. Students who passed the test were exempted from the draft, those who failed, were not. Every class that I attended included a University-sponsored lecture on the importance of passing the test, stressing that military service was inappropriate for superior people, such as the students, and should be performed by inferior lesser beings, such as farmers and laborers. It was important, they said, to preserve the national resource of superior intellects, so that they could continue to advance the world, and assistance was offered to students to help them prepare for the tests. The non-student lesser beings would be subject to the draft to defend the country, and, of course, to protect the superior beings. Those superior beings became responsible for education in America, which may explain the antipathy toward the ROTC program and the inability of 25% to pass the military exams. Today, the problem is not to pass a test to avoid the military, it is to pass a test to be able to enter the military. Interestingly, today our military is the most capable in the world, and our education system is pathetic.

Marc Jeric| 1.8.11 @ 6:45PM

History has shown that, given sufficient time, every union will fall into the hands of either the Mafia or the communists. Then the union will kill the industry in which they "work" - steel, automobile, textile, apparel, electronics... and of course Amtrak, Postal Service, education...
Our education system is hard on the way to reach the level of Zimbabwe - the proces that started in the 1960's with the unionization of teachers.

R Sweeney| 1.8.11 @ 6:55PM

unintended consequence

In the days before women's lib, there was little choice other than teaching for the intellectually talented woman.

As such, generations of Americans were taught by some of the brightest and most talented of the previous generation.

When opportunities opened, talented women went elsewhere and in their places came educrat-mill graduates from state education schools whose SAT scores would embarrass a military school for troubled boys.

And here we are.

Tina B| 1.9.11 @ 7:48AM

I see , its the teachers again.

How about women's lib changed the sexuality in America. Women were encouraged to behave like men, and get it on with whoever attracted them, what was good for the goose. . .

Then we began divorcing at incredible new rates, and children began to come to school aching with broken hearts from their family circumstances. Brothers and sisters separating to go with Mom or Dad and missing both equally, and every day missing someone.

This is what feminism brought about. I see wonderful young teachers, women and men, leaving college bright eyed and bushytailed, ready to make the world a better place. And then they enter the classroom full of broken children. And while loving them all, we need to completely parent many of them. They have no manners, no one is teaching those any more; no respect for authority, many parents don't inspire their childrens' respect; no morals, they watch anything on TV and cable; and no inclination to learn, if they have been taught to read at all, and we are supposed to fill in all those gaps.

I was taught by Cindy Hutchinson at UCF that my classroom may be the only safe place they come to all day long. I remember that each day I teach. Quit blaming the teachers and look in the mirror. As a parent, are you as good as the previous generations in your family? How about those around you, in your circle of friends? Divorces? Single parent families? shared custody? And I am supposed to educate for 45 minutes a day and make up for all that?

Once my students learn to really trust me, sometimes after 5 to 7 months of seeing me each day, I can teach my socks off. But that's a lot of learning to miss out of the 180 days I teach every year. But what can I do about this? Just keep on loving and teaching, and taking the blame for the often poor results.

Pelligrino| 1.11.11 @ 1:35AM

Thank you, Tina B. As no one ever seems to come look at an Am. Spectator blog/story even 36 hours after it was posted, I am not sure anyone will see this.

But Tina B. is fully correct.

And any teacher can tell you that after working with a kid for 6-12 weeks, you already know which kids come from the broken homes, which ones have nothing but strife or no discipline or chaos at home. (The kid does not tell you. But all the telltale signs are there.)

And, it is no wonder. The kid misbehaves. Acts up for attention. Mouths back. Doesn't have learning as a priority.

Our society is failing. Our homes have failed. And the pop culture consumed unquestioningly is killing minds and souls.

Tina B. is right to ask: So just how good are you parenting?

Hey folks, for year 2011 a simple resolution in your home: No TV. Yes, it is that simple. And confiscate your kids' iPods.

Get back to Tough Love in the Home the Daddy Drill Sergeant way. (pretty close to it)

That's real love.

Oldefarte| 1.9.11 @ 10:59AM

This was happening when I was 30 years old, and the public school system and labor unions are to blame. The latter guarantees incompetitent teachers receiving humongous pensions [at taxpayer expense] that institute politically correct social promotion to the nation's students [who are and have been ill/educationally trained to operate the computerized factory systems in all manufacturing/retail establishments. Instead of these labor union teacher ranks, public schools need to seriously increase the pay/salaries of competitent teachers, and to begin holding them and their students to the non-social promotion standards of education in order to produce a truly educated workforce and military. Its way past time to do away with political correctness in this country, if we are to compete with China/India etc and to survive as a nation!!!!!

JimE| 1.9.11 @ 6:02PM

The qaulity of recruits are very poor, they also lack the desire to invest any effort into self-improvement, they want instant gratification.
These problem can be corrected by the NCO has to invest his time in his people instead of worrying about his own career and many are unwilling to do this.
As an NCO I taught my people use a dictionary,
read a compass, read a machinist's rule and break a fraction down to it's lowest common denominator and then convert it to a decimal. Those who couldn't convert a fraction to a decimal learned fraction X equals decimal Y by rote. I never had a single sailor ever come back and tell me I wasted my time. I did this because I got tired of hearing " I know how to use a scale and a micrometer, I just can't read it".

PattyMor| 1.9.11 @ 6:12PM

The gov'ment and the unions have purposely wrecked the schools. A dumbed down electorate will keep voting for the Demon Party that promises to give you stuff.

My grandkids go to Catholic grade school. The 8th grader is doing algebra that I did in H.S. She worked on the U.S. and State constitutions.

Only vouchers and competition will improve the schools. If say if a school is failing, give out vouchers so they can pick another school. The money should follow the child; not the school. But the unions have a death grip on our schools and will not give up easily.

So onto 2012 and a conservative Prez, and a 60 vote, veto proof Senate of Repubs.

Richard Baker| 1.10.11 @ 9:42AM

Tina B:
The reason the NEA and the teachers get such criticism is that once upon a time the teaching establishment demanded rigor and behavior in the schools. Now, people all around the country sense that the teaching establishment is hostile to the very foundations of the country and indoctrination instead of instruction rules the day in too many school districts. The homeschool and voucher movements exist because too many parents recognize said hostility. If the adults running the school system would draw a line and stand FOR academic excellence AND decorum then the parents, regardless of their whining and crying, would realize that those ideals matter. However, and I saw this when I taught High School math/science here in Florida, too many "educators" only care about their careers and getting to retirement. Demand nothing of the parents and students and you get what you demand.

Jim Whittle| 1.11.11 @ 1:57PM

The primary problem in education is not federal spending, teacher unions, lack of reform, lack of choice, etc. The primary problem in education is illegitimacy. It would be enlightening to track ASVAB scores to single parenthood. I think you'll find a direct correlation.

Adidas | 8.11.11 @ 5:54AM

is good

Aby Stander| 11.26.11 @ 2:57AM

The elephant in the room that everyone seems to be avoiding is the standardization of curricula (NCLB) that is responsible for teaching children WHAT to think rather than HOW to think. Everything else is an opinion.

And please take the military circle jerk to another forum...KMAGYOYO.

العاب بنات | 4.10.12 @ 12:21PM

thank you

Latest Headlines

Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets

Ross Kaminsky|73 comments

Enough With the Bipartisanship

Matt Purple|40 comments

The United States of El Norte

Larry Thornberry|55 comments

Vodka = Vodka = Vodka

Daniel J. Flynn|76 comments

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer

Tornado Chasers

Claire Healey|32 comments

We Will Remember

Roger Kaplan|23 comments

The Chinese Waltz

George H. Wittman|1 comment

The Spectacle Blog

Updated: NBC News: Holder Personally Approved Fox Reporter Warrant

Ross Kaminsky | 3:45PM

Felonious Attorney General?

Kaylin Bugos | 3:21PM

Did the Boy Scouts Cave to Pressure?

Claire Healey | 3:14PM

BBC World Survey Ranks Israel Near Bottom in Global Popularity

Aaron Goldstein | 12:36PM

Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats

Ross Kaminsky | 11:03AM

Stein on IRS Scandal

Patrick Ryan | 10:29AM

The Restricted Engine

Yogi Love | 6:00AM

Muslim, Er, Youth Riots in Sweden

Aaron Goldstein | 12:41AM

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?

Clip of the Day

H/T to National Review Online