"indignant over question"

[dahermit]

What is this indignitie over being asked if kids are being sent to public or private schools? The question is completely legitimate and crosses no boundaries. Tax payers have the right to know if some elitist jerk cuts funding for public education while at the same time sends his kid to a private school where non-public advantages abound. The obvious message is: Public schools where kids are expected to share one text book are good enough for your children, but not for mine. Your indigent dodge of the question fools no one Senator!

Before some jerk starts with Liberals this, Liberals that, Ted Kennedy(his kids were not bussed, they were in private), was just as guilty as some Conservatives. It has nothing to do with party affiliation. Carter sent Amy to public school.

 

[Gipper]

What is this indignitie over being asked if kids are being sent to public or private schools? The question is completely legitimate and crosses no boundaries. Tax payers have the right to know if some elitist jerk cuts funding for public education while at the same time sends his kid to a private school where non-public advantages abound. The obvious message is: Public schools where kids are expected to share one text book are good enough for your children, but not for mine. Your indigent dodge of the question fools no one Senator!

Before some jerk starts with Liberals this, Liberals that, Ted Kennedy(his kids were not bussed, they were in private), was just as guilty as some Conservatives. It has nothing to do with party affiliation. Carter sent Amy to public school.

Come on Luddington Geezer, that post is completely nonsensical.

If any American wants to send their kids to private school, that is their right.

The obvious hypocrisy are those like you on the Left who protect the g-school monopoly and the stinking teachers unions while sending their little kiddies to private school. As you say Jimma did it...so did BJ Bubba and now Big Ears. All did and do all they can to keep the monopoly and unions rolling while the g-schools fail generation after generation of students.

And your the reference to kids sharing one book is most absurd even for you. The g-schools have so much money and waste most of it. Private schools operate on a fraction of what most g-schools have and they actually educate.

 

[ProudLefty]

Come on Luddington Geezer, that post is completely nonsensical.

If any American wants to send their kids to private school, that is their right.

The obvious hypocrisy are those like you on the Left who protect the g-school monopoly and the stinking teachers unions while sending their little kiddies to private school. As you say Jimma did it...so did BJ Bubba and now Big Ears. All did and do all they can to keep the monopoly and unions rolling while the g-schools fail generation after generation of students.

And your the reference to kids sharing one book is most absurd even for you. The g-schools have so much money and waste most of it. Private schools operate on a fraction of what most g-schools have and they actually educate.

Ah, right. Blame the teachers and the teachers unions. Right. Like they have something to say about class size, school budgets, text books, curricula, school calendar, and the students' home life, parenting skills, and study habits.

There comes a point where it is time to face reality and accept the facts as they are, not as your preachers tell you they are.

 

[Openmind]

What is this indignitie over being asked if kids are being sent to public or private schools? The question is completely legitimate and crosses no boundaries. Tax payers have the right to know if some elitist jerk cuts funding for public education while at the same time sends his kid to a private school where non-public advantages abound. The obvious message is: Public schools where kids are expected to share one text book are good enough for your children, but not for mine. Your indigent dodge of the question fools no one Senator!

Before some jerk starts with Liberals this, Liberals that, Ted Kennedy(his kids were not bussed, they were in private), was just as guilty as some Conservatives. It has nothing to do with party affiliation. Carter sent Amy to public school.

I agree! Didn't someone (even a few "someones" on the Republican side) in this forum mentionned that it was unfair and ridiculous for people to make decisions in which they had nothing to lose?

Well, this seems to be the perfect exemple! Cut funding for all the school my kids won't go to. . .instead give me the vouchers so my own kids' private school doesn't cost me as much!

 

[Gipper]

Ah, right. Blame the teachers and the teachers unions. Right. Like they have something to say about class size, school budgets, text books, curricula, school calendar, and the students' home life, parenting skills, and study habits.

There comes a point where it is time to face reality and accept the facts as they are, not as your preachers tell you they are.

Did I blame the teachers in my post? You might consider taking a elementary course in reading and comprehension.

I know many lefties are taught the tactic you just employed. It is tired and worn. It is an effort at keeping the status quo of failing schools, but increasing teacher union dues to help fund the Socialist Party (Dems).

Try another.

 

[dahermit]

Ah, right. Blame the teachers and the teachers unions. Right. Like they have something to say about class size, school budgets, text books, curricula, school calendar, and the students' home life, parenting skills, and study habits.

There comes a point where it is time to face reality and accept the facts as they are, not as your preachers tell you they are.

You will have to excuse him. His only experience with a public school was as a student (child), with the usual natural tendency to resent teachers who tried to make him perform. Such people get a rude awakening if they actually become a teacher and discover that it is not about "teacher's unions", "government" schools, being a "teacher", but a custodian of ill-mannered jerks who disrupt with impunity. Nevertheless, such people never become teachers themselves so that they can enjoy the "three month off", the over-pay, and the unreasonable protection of teacher's unions. One would think that they would flock to such a wonderful occupation. My former posistion may still be open.

 

[Openmind]

You will have to excuse him. His only experience with a public school was as a student (child), with the usual natural tendency to resent teachers who tried to make him perform. Such people get a rude awakening if they actually become a teacher and discover that it is not about "teacher's unions", "government" schools, being a "teacher", but a custodian of ill-mannered jerks who disrupt with impunity. Nevertheless, such people never become teachers themselves so that they can enjoy the "three month off", the over-pay, and the unreasonable protection of teacher's unions. One would think that they would flock to such a wonderful occupation. My former posistion may still be open.

I like your logic. . .and your signature! So true!

 

[dahermit]

Come on Luddington Geezer, that post is completely nonsensical.
If any American wants to send their kids to private school, that is their right.

It is the right of any American to send their kids to private school. However, a public servant should not have the "right" not to disclose that fact no more than he has the "right" to have hidden, off-shore bank accounts to which he/she has income from foreign investments deposited. It is called "disclosure". Please note: Ludington has but one "d". You must have been a "g" school attendee.

The obvious hypocrisy are those like you on the Left who protect the g-school monopoly and the stinking teachers unions while sending their little kiddies to private school. As you say Jimma did it...so did BJ Bubba and now Big Ears. All did and do all they can to keep the monopoly and unions rolling while the g-schools fail generation after generation of students.

Please point out in my original post where I said anything about public school monopoly or teachers unions. You obsession is coloring your perception again.

And your the reference to kids sharing one book is most absurd even for you. The g-schools have so much money and waste most of it. Private schools operate on a fraction of what most g-schools have and they actually educate.

You are correct here, it must have been my imagination that students were required to "share", text books, and other resources in my classes. Not to mention the mimeograph (do you remember faded blue, could hardly read, but had a nice smell), machine they wanted us to use in the middle school when I first started there in about 1990. It was 1930's technology. And yes, every time I opened a closet, bags of money would fall out.

"Private schools", like Hillsdale Academy (sponsored by the conservative Hillsdale College), screen their applicants (parents as well as students), take only those who show significant academic achievement. Is it any wonder that such schools have better results than a public school who unlike the Academy, must take any and all students despite handicap, disinterest in education by parents and students, and low I.Q.?

The public school system in which I was a teacher, had a large number of mentally handicapped students, Downs syndrome, Micro-cephalics (they stuck one with a 33 I.Q. in a shop class in the middle school, without even informing the teacher...33 I.Q. = barely potty trainable. How many of those were in Hillsdale Academy?)

Idot.

 

[Openmind]

It is the right of any American to send their kids to private school. However, a public servant should not have the "right" not to disclose that fact no more than he has the "right" to have hidden, off-shore bank accounts to which he/she has income from foreign investments deposited. It is called "disclosure". Please note: Ludington has but one "d". You must have been a "g" school attendee.


Please point out in my original post where I said anything about public school monopoly or teachers unions. You obsession is coloring your perception again.

You are correct here, it must have been my imagination that students were required to "share", text books, and other resources in my classes. Not to mention the mimeograph (do you remember faded blue, could hardly read, but had a nice smell), machine they wanted us to use in the middle school when I first started there in about 1990. It was 1930's technology. And yes, every time I opened a closet, bags of money would fall out.

"Private schools", like Hillsdale Academy (sponsored by the conservative Hillsdale College), screen their applicants (parents as well as students), take only those who show significant academic achievement. Is it any wonder that such schools have better results than a public school who unlike the Academy, must take any and all students despite handicap, disinterest in education by parents and students, and low I.Q.?

The public school system in which I was a teacher, had a large number of mentally handicapped students, Downs syndrome, Micro-cephalics (they stuck one with a 33 I.Q. in a shop class in the middle school, without even informing the teacher...33 I.Q. = barely potty trainable. How many of those were in Hillsdale Academy?)

Idot.

You are so right! I was a social worker for kids like that 33 I.Q kid you're talking about! I had to advocate for their right to go to school like any other kids (thanks for the silly "no kids left behind!" policy, which really is hypocritical, and leads to "lowest common denominator" wins in the classroom!).

I worked only with kids/adults who had an IQ below 70. . . some of them very violent, most needed a 1:1 teacher's aid in the class room. . . in addition to speech therapy, special tutoring, etc. . .
And YOU know that this costs a LOT Of money to the system!

There are so many ignorant people who believe that everything is "black or white," either you're "smart" and go to private school, or your "dumb and lazy" and you go to public schools!

 

[BigRob]

I agree! Didn't someone (even a few "someones" on the Republican side) in this forum mentionned that it was unfair and ridiculous for people to make decisions in which they had nothing to lose?

Yes!

Well, this seems to be the perfect exemple! Cut funding for all the school my kids won't go to. . .instead give me the vouchers so my own kids' private school doesn't cost me as much!

I think the solution is as follows:

1) Tie the funding for a child's education to the specific child.
2) That child can then pick/choose where they want to attend school
3) This forces schools to offer good education and compete for the best teachers.
4) In theory, education in this nation then gets better.

 

[BigRob]

There are so many ignorant people who believe that everything is "black or white," either you're "smart" and go to private school, or your "dumb and lazy" and you go to public schools!

My experience here is limited, I never attended a public school all the way from kindergarten through graduate school.

But I think there are plenty of good public schools out there that provide a good education.

 

[Openmind]

My experience here is limited, I never attended a public school all the way from kindergarten through graduate school.

But I think there are plenty of good public schools out there that provide a good education.

At least, it's nice that you recognize that. I totally respect your always trying to be fair. . .even if sometime you don't absolutey succeed. I always know it's not intentionally hypocritical.

All together, you're a good guy. . .I wish there were more Republicans like you!

 

[dahermit]

Yes!
I think the solution is as follows:

1) Tie the funding for a child's education to the specific child.

Oh...like using Fourth Friday counts (The Michigan system), to determine which school gets the money for the kid's education. Then during the year many kids decide to go with their friends to a different school and the new school gets those kids, but without the funding? Or, did you have something else in mind?

2) That child can then pick/choose where they want to attend school

Do you mean the parents choose the school? You know of course a kid will pick a school for reasons other than a good education, like offering the sport he would like to play (Soccer), or the school that has pony rides on Tuesday.

3) This forces schools to offer good education and compete for the best teachers.

No, this forces schools to "bait" the students there with other things, free soda pop, free pizza, lower requirements for graduation, less English, less Math, etc. Only the kids that parents have nurtured correctly in regard to education are going to make anything but immediate gratification choices. Nevertheless, most of the parents I dealt with viewed high school as the high-light of their kids social life, and gave very little consideration to high school as a necessary and very important stepping stone to the kid's future. In short, if the parents could choose, they would want their kid to be popular instead of being concerned with going on to college.

4) In theory, education in this nation then gets better.

In theory, is a joke. What should be done is to pilot all changes to see if they will work before jumping in with both feet in the assumption that, in theory it would work.

 

[BigRob]

Oh...like using Fourth Friday counts (The Michigan system), to determine which school gets the money for the kid's education. Then during the year many kids decide to go with their friends to a different school and the new school gets those kids, but without the funding? Or, did you have something else in mind?

Do you mean the parents choose the school? You know of course a kid will pick a school for reasons other than a good education, like offering the sport he would like to play (Soccer), or the school that has pony rides on Tuesday.

No, this forces schools to "bait" the students there with other things, free soda pop, free pizza, lower requirements for graduation, less English, less Math, etc. Only the kids that parents have nurtured correctly in regard to education are going to make anything but immediate gratification choices. Nevertheless, most of the parents I dealt with viewed high school as the high-light of their kids social life, and gave very little consideration to high school as a necessary and very important stepping stone to the kid's future. In short, if the parents could choose, they would want their kid to be popular instead of being concerned with going on to college.

In theory, is a joke. What should be done is to pilot all changes to see if they will work before jumping in with both feet in the assumption that, in theory it would work.

As I understand it, this system is in place and works pretty well in parts of Europe. I will try to find more details on the subject to post.

 

[BigRob]

At least, it's nice that you recognize that. I totally respect your always trying to be fair. . .even if sometime you don't absolutey succeed. I always know it's not intentionally hypocritical.

What do you mean I don't always succeed?!

All together, you're a good guy. . .I wish there were more Republicans like you!

Well thank you, I must say despite errant positions at times I enjoy debating with you as well.

That is all this country really needs, a mutual respect among our leaders so that things can actually get done.

It is like Reagan (I think) said. There are a few core beliefs that you cannot waiver from, everything else is negotiable.