Obama Supports Public Schools, Sends Own Kids To Pricey Private School

Thunderdog · Feb 27, 2009

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

...Simple question. Why would Obama want to deny poor kids who would otherwise be relegated to failed and dangerous DC public schools the same educational opportunities his own kids receive? I might add his kids receive that opportunity courtesy of the taxpayers. Obama's kids? Pricey private schools. Poor DC ghetto youths who want an education? Horrible DC public schools are good enough for you...
More...

That is such disingenuous bullshit. He wants to improve the school system unlike the president before him. What bearing does your nonsensical post have on anything?

Lucrum · Feb 27, 2009

Quote from Thunderdog:

That is such disingenuous bullshit. He wants to improve the school system unlike the president before him. What bearing does your stupid post have on anything?
More...

What bearing does your CANADIAN opinion have on our education system?

Or are we your biggest trading partner in school supplies too.

Thunderdog · Feb 27, 2009

Quote from Lucrum:

What bearing does your CANADIAN opinion have on our education system?

Or are we your biggest trading partner in school supplies too.
More...

I guess you couldn't see the rationale in AAA's bullshit post either, so you resorted to your old standby. Predictable.

Lucrum · Feb 27, 2009

Quote from Thunderdog:

I guess you couldn't see the rationale in AAA's bullshit post either, so you resorted to your old standby. Predictable.
More...

Oh I saw his rationale and agree with it.

Obviously YOU didn't, and resorted to YOUR old standby.
Predictable.

Ticketwatcher · Feb 27, 2009

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

One of the more horrid parts of Obama's budget denies funding for one of the few education programs that works. There is a tiny, ie $18mill, program that gives kids in the DC public schools a chance at an education, something they can't get in public school. They can get scholarships to attent the same private schools Obama's privileged kids will attend. Obama cut it out totally in his budget. Teacher's unions didn't want the idea to spread. Talk about hypocrisy. For another opinion, see below:

***************************************

THE CAL RIPKEN PRESIDENT
February 25, 2009

As Obama prepared to deliver his address to Congress on Tuesday, the Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner, Fox News' Bret Baier and Charles Krauthammer all gushed that history was being made as the first African-American president appeared before Congress.

Even Gov. Bobby Jindal, whom I suppose I should note was the first Indian-American to give the Republican response to a president's speech, began with an encomium to the first black president. (Wasn't Bobby great in "Slumdog Millionaire"?)

Are we going to have to hear about this for the next four years? Obama is becoming the Cal Ripken Jr. of presidents, making history every time he suits up for a game. Recently, Obama also became the first African-American president to order a ham sandwich late at night from the White House kitchen! That's going to get old pretty quick.

But as long as the nation is obsessed with historic milestones, is no one going to remark on what a great country it is where a mentally retarded woman can become speaker of the house?

Obama spent more than twice as much time in his historic speech genuflecting to the teachers' unions than talking about terrorism, Iraq or Afghanistan. So it was historic only in the sense that Obama is the first African-American president, but was the same old Democratic claptrap in every other respect.

After claiming that the disastrous stimulus bill would create or save 3.5 million jobs -- "more than 90 percent" in the private sector -- Obama then enumerated a long list of exclusively government jobs that would be "saved."

He was suspiciously verbose about saving the jobs of public schoolteachers. Because nothing says "economic stimulus" better than saving the jobs of lethargic incompetents who kick off at 2 p.m. every day and get summers off. Actually, that's not fair: Some teachers spend long hours after school having sex with their students.

As with the Clintons, Obama so earnestly believes in public school education that he sends his girls to ... an expensive private school. He demands that taxpayers support the very public schoolteachers he won't trust with his own children.

It is one thing to tell voters that school choice is wrong, because, you know, the public schools won't get better unless Americans sacrifice their children to the teachers' union's maw. But it is quite another for Democrats to feed their own kids to the union incinerator.

Consequently, no Democrat since Jimmy Carter has been stupid enough to send his own children to a public school.

And yet the stimulus bill expressly prohibits money earmarked for "education" to be spent on financial aid at private or parochial schools. Private schools might use it for some nefarious purpose like actually teaching their students, rather than indoctrinating them in anti-American propaganda.

The stimulus bill includes about $100 billion to education. By "education," Democrats don't mean anything a normal person would think of as education, such as learning how to talk good. "Education" means creating lots of useless bureaucratic jobs, mostly in Washington, having nothing to do with teaching.

Apparently, nothing irritates public schoolteachers more than being asked to teach. While 80 percent of the employees of private schools are teachers, only half the employees of public schools are. The rest are "coordinating," "facilitating" or "empowering" something or other.

The Department of Education alone provides more than 4,000 jobs that haven't the faintest connection with teaching. And now the stimulus bill will double the Education Department's funding. (For those of you who went to a public school, that means it will become twice as big.)

We've come a long way from Ronald Reagan promising to eliminate the Education Department, which itself was a Jimmy Carter sop to the teachers' unions.

Federal meddling in education has been an abject failure, so the Democrats' plan is to keep doing more of the same. If only there were some aphorism about people who fail to learn from history -- oh, well!

It can't be easy to reduce the educational achievement in America year after year, but the education establishment has done it! Yes they can!

Thanks to the hard work of thousands of government workers at the Department of Education and well-paid teachers' union employees, American schoolchildren perform worse on education tests for every year they spend in a public school.

It turns out that being in U.S. public schools has the same effect on people as hanging around Paris Hilton does.

In fourth grade, the earliest grade for which international comparisons are available, American students outperform most other countries in reading, math and science. Fourth-graders score in the 92nd percentile in science, the 58th percentile in math and the 70th percentile in reading, where they beat 26 of 35 countries, including Germany, France and Italy.

But by the eighth grade, American students are only midrange in international comparisons. (On the plus side, by the eighth grade they're noticeably fatter.)

By the 12th grade -- after receiving the full benefits of an American education -- Americans are near the bottom. Let X represent the number of years spent in U.S. public schools, and Y represent average test scores in math and reading -- oh, never mind.

With an additional eight years of a public school education under their belts, Americans fall from the 92nd percentile in science to the 29th percentile. While American fourth-graders are bested only by South Korea and Japan in science, by 12th grade, the only countries the American students can beat are Lithuania, Cyprus and South Africa.

Which suggests that if public education were extended all the way through college, by the time a student gets to graduate school he might very well be qualified to be ... speaker of the house!

COPYRIGHT 2009 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
More...

Ann Coulter is to cable news what Howard Stern is to radio.

I am certain there are many things on which me and Howard agree.

I do not give him any of my attention to know what we might agree on.

Barry is a Washington elitist of the highest order. He has NO idea what it would be like to have his children attend the public schools of Washington, D C. One thing is for sure they would NOT have any Gubmint official's kids as classmates.

That is why he is an elitist, they choose not to partake of what they provide and promote to others.

I do not need a pyscho-bitch like Ann Coulter to bring me what everyone knows is true.

Barry may not be Bush, but he is not the change that I can believe in either.

Cutten · Mar 1, 2009

All of page one is ad hominem (pun intended) attacks. You win a debate by attacking the flaws in an argument, not the qualities of the person who puts it forward. Doesn't it embarrass you to be behind some 3rd world countries in important subjects? If that happened where I lived, I would be seriously concerned that things were so bad, and trying to come up with reasons for it and possible solutions.

But go ahead and shoot the messenger, I am sure that will help! I think Anne Coulter is obnoxious and usually wrong, but on this point she is definitely correct.

Cutten · Mar 1, 2009

Quote from Lucrum:

What bearing does your CANADIAN opinion have on our education system?

Or are we your biggest trading partner in school supplies too.
More...

He's a human being and so are the kids getting fucked over by the US state school system. Maybe he has empathy for them, regardless of their nationality? Are you one of those Americans for whom the world stops at the border, if so I trust you have never commented on world affairs, the record of the French military, China's trade policies, outsourcing, the situation in Iraq etc. That kind of mentality is what left you vulnerable to 9/11, Pearl Harbour etc. It's a global world and only the ignorant remain parochial nowadays.

Lucrum · Mar 2, 2009

Quote from Cutten:

He's a human being and so are the kids getting fucked over by the US state school system. Maybe he has empathy for them, regardless of their nationality? Are you one of those Americans for whom the world stops at the border, if so I trust you have never commented on world affairs, the record of the French military, China's trade policies, outsourcing, the situation in Iraq etc. That kind of mentality is what left you vulnerable to 9/11, Pearl Harbour etc. It's a global world and only the ignorant remain parochial nowadays.
More...

He's also a bleeding heart. He has empathy for anyone and everyone, so long as they're not conservative.

Yes I realize the global situation and implications of the issues.

I just don't obsess over ONE other country (in his case the US) AND make multiple comments about another countries politics almost every day.

Which had you been spending more time paying attention and less time being a know it all arrogant ass you probably would have known.