“Mack The Knife” for Michael Moe
Oh, the shark, babe, has such teeth, dear
And he shows them pearly white.
Just a jack knife has old Mike Moe, babe
And he keeps it, out of sight.
You know when that Mike Moe, starts talking school choice
Lots of businesses start to listen,
Fancy gloves though wears old Mike Moe babe, and he’s innovating all through the night.
Now on the sidewalk, ooh, Sunday morning, uh, huh,
Lies a body, just oozing life, and someone’s sneakin round the corner
Could that someone be Mike the Knife
There’s a tug boat down by the river, don’t you know
Where a cement bag just a droopin on down
Oh that cement is just it’s there for the weight, dear
Five’ll get you ten old Mikey’s back in town.
Now d’ja hear ’bout Mikey Moe? He’s out in Woodside
And investin all his hard-earned cash
And now Mikey spends just like a maverick
Could it be our boy’s done somethin’ rash?
Now Magic Johnson, ho, ho, yeah, Oprah Winfrey
Ooh, Miss Kathy Ireland their friends with GSV
Oh, the line forms on the right, babe
Now that Mikey’s back in town
Now Magic Johnson, ho, ho, yeah, Oprah Winfrey
Ooh, Miss Kathy Ireland, their friends with GSV
Oh, the line forms on the right, babe
Now that Mikey’s back in town
Look out, old Mikey’s back!!
Spotting the Real Reformers
Wherever there are elections, there will most assuredly be candidates paying lip service to their own interpretations of “education reform.” Naturally, many politicians favor the abstract concepts of “building better schools,” “accountability,” and an old favorite, “doing what’s best for our kids.”
However, do these lofty statements on education make these candidates, reformers? What does it actually take for a candidate to be taken seriously by voters as someone who can effect meaningful change when it comes to the educational systems of their future constituents?
Luckily, there are a few surefire ways for spotting the real reformers, as opposed to those whose words have never and probably won’t translate into action.
To name a few, a reformer candidate properly defines educational terms when using them, advocates for independent, multiple charter school authorizers and displays a healthy skepticism about the usefulness of teachers’ unions.
When speaking of school choice, the reformer reinforces the need for Parent Power, and quality educational options rather than ambiguous concerns over the effectiveness of choice and parent empowerment.
If all of this and more come through, then you just might have a real reformer on your hands!
Conversely, if a candidate uses evasive language that doesn’t apply reforms to how they might work for their constituents, then it’s likely nothing would get done under that administration. That veneer of support comes crashing down when the candidate lists a set of reforms such as introducing choice and charter schools, but insists their communities are doing just fine without them.
The other telltale sign of a wolf in sheep’s clothing is using educational terms without actually defining them. Of course no one is “for” an achievement gap, but does the candidate you’re considering define that gap in real terms and prescribe how to close it? This candidate will also make excuses for failing schools, and will miraculously never mention any excuse remotely relevant with “education.”
When a candidate speaks of the closing the achievement gap or tying teacher accountability to student performance, it’s your job to ask: BY HOW MUCH?
So who among the candidates running for office are real reformers? Read the full guide and decide for yourself!