Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   When even liberals are calling it the Injustice Department, you might be going too far   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 161
    More: Obvious, Injustice Department, Too Far, History of education, racial segregations, Michael Gerson, private schools, University of Arkansas, desegregation  
•       •       •

2732 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Sep 2013 at 12:08 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



161 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-03 01:57:50 PM  

TimonC346: Here is the issue Charters have over public schools: Public schools cannot kick people out. At the very least, they cannot unless the student is violent and considered a danger to either the school or the students at large. In private schools, provided by vouchers, they have the distinct advantage: Academic Minimums. If you don't make it? Good bye. There is no political accountability to whom is being ushered out, there is very little real legal recourse considering there is no guarantee to private school education


Oversight of who is being ushered out can be easily done.  No oversight, no voucher money.  Simple.  The fact that public schools cannot eject a student until they are a danger to the rest of their classmates is ridiculous.  Perhaps the solution is to create a tiered public system so you HAVE somewhere to send the troublemakers that isn't jail.
 
2013-09-03 02:00:01 PM  

Neighborhood Watch: Blathering Idjut: There is no such thing as a "democrat party."


Oh yes there is...  (links to midlly NFSW images, as democrats are pictured in it)


I believe you are now either the 2nd or 3rd person that I've put on ignore. I've seen plenty of derp in my day, but you're just uninspired, lazy, and have contributed nothing of value to a single thread I've seen you in. I will enjoy no longer seeing your drivel.
 
2013-09-03 02:00:28 PM  

AngryDragon: If you can't throw out the troublemakers, you can't fire the teachers, and the schools are increasingly focused on test scores instead of educating children, what fix are you proposing?


Don't refer to poor children as troublemakers, pay teachers more to attract talent, and don't tie test scores to school funding, would be a good start.
 
2013-09-03 02:01:17 PM  
Oh, and probably get rid of several layers of administrators who do next to nothing in the actual process of educating children.
 
2013-09-03 02:02:54 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: AngryDragon: If you can't throw out the troublemakers, you can't fire the teachers, and the schools are increasingly focused on test scores instead of educating children, what fix are you proposing?

Don't refer to poor children as troublemakers, pay teachers more to attract talent, and don't tie test scores to school funding, would be a good start.


So do it.  What are we waiting for?  Vouchers are a private-sector solution to a public sector problem that no one seems to want to talk about much less solve.  If government isn't going to act at least let the citizens do what's in their best interest.
 
2013-09-03 02:03:24 PM  
I thought that the conservatives started opposing this voucher program once the muslim schools started getting voucher money.
 
2013-09-03 02:07:22 PM  

lockers: Great, some financially motivated, and totally unaccountable private business will do better than a public school.


You really don't know how business works, do you?
 
2013-09-03 02:09:00 PM  
AngryDragon: The RIchest Man in Babylon: And still you don't answer the basic question: What do you say to the students whose family can't afford the difference?  Tough luck?

And really, do you genuinely believe that the public schools suffer no ill-effects from having say, half their funding yanked because half the students can afford a private school?

Why isn't the answer to fix the public schools?

Isn't that what you're saying to them now?  You're kid is in a failing public school but you can't afford to send him/her to a better one, so tough luck?


The difference is I'm not proposing we slash their funding.  I suggest we work to improve them.

If you can't throw out the troublemakers, you can't fire the teachers, and the schools are increasingly focused on test scores instead of educating children, what fix are you proposing?

I do not know what the answer is, there are plenty of smart people with all kinds of ideas about how to fix our schools- and I agree, some reining in of the Teacher's Unions is in order.  To blame them for the "teach to the test" mentality is insane- that falls squarely on the shoulders of elected officials pushing standardized testing as the cure-all.  A lot of the problems they face has nothing to do with public/private education- poor parenting, no positive role models, poverty, hunger, etc.  These problems don't just magically vanish because you send someone to a private school...  Many students who are failing in public schools will likely fail in a private school for the same reasons.  The difference is, the public school HAS to keep them, the private school does not.  shiatty grades because your parents neglect you/don't feed you properly?  Tough shiat, you're dragging down our private school's averages- you're gone.

The reason private schools look so appealing is exactly why they'd never work as a public school alternative on a large scale- they don't HAVE to take everyone.  They CAN kick students out.  If you force them to accept all the students the public schools are mandated to teach/deal with, they will quickly find themselves in the same situation.

And all of this says nothing about addressing special education.  What happens to those kids?

I don't have the answers to how to fix what is a societal problem in many ways, but I do know that shifting the money around to a private school isn't the answer.  Same issues, different building.
 
2013-09-03 02:09:12 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Tyee: democrat party

DRINK!

/Plonked NW some weeks ago


i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-03 02:12:06 PM  

Neighborhood Watch: Teachers unions vs poor black kids.

Guess which one the democrat party will defend?


School vouchers versus anything else:  Guess which one the republic party will defend?
 
2013-09-03 02:13:23 PM  
If there's one thing I'm sure of, it is that improving the education of poor black children is the number one priority of the state government of Louisiana.  I mean...what else could it be?
 
2013-09-03 02:14:15 PM  

TimonC346: AngryDragon: The RIchest Man in Babylon: They are getting screwed if the public schools are underfunded and poorly managed.  Taking MORE money out of will only exacerbate the problem.

Again I ask, what about the people for whom the voucher is not enough?  Unless the voucher is going to cover 100% of private school tuition and associated fees (including transportation, free/reduced lunches, etc) how is that a solution?  Are you proposing the State of LA should pay 100% of the cost for every student to attend the private school of their choice?  Do you really think that is tenable financially?  Would the private schools even ACCEPT all these students?  Would you REQUIRE these private schools to accept any student that applies?

Underfunding and mismanagement are two entirely different problems.

Provide a voucher for each student equal to the amount of tuition the state provides for a public school student.  If the parents want to go to a private school, they pay the difference.  That's why it's a voucher.  If there is excess, it stays in the public system.  Since they are already spending the money per student, it shouldn't be that much of a hardship.  Yes they should accept anyone who applies up to their class size.  Yes they would be required to do so in order to have the vouchers valid.  The public schools then have to compete for their student dollars, ostensibly by cleaning up their acts from a management perspective.

Again, I'm not seeing the problem.

Here is the issue Charters have over public schools: Public schools cannot kick people out. At the very least, they cannot unless the student is violent and considered a danger to either the school or the students at large. In private schools, provided by vouchers, they have the distinct advantage: Academic Minimums. If you don't make it? Good bye. There is no political accountability to whom is being ushered out, there is very little real legal recourse considering there is no guarantee to private school educa ...


Bingo.   And there is another wrinkle as well to consider:  You often hear how much a school systems spends ON AVERAGE per student.   But that Average is as misleading as Wal Mart's clain they pay ON AVERAGE about $12  because it blends the horde of minimum wage workers with the CEO who is getting $23 million a year.

Same thing with Education.  Thanks tot he Federal IDEA Act (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) schols are REQUIRED to mainstream diabled individuals into regular classrooms whenever possible. So, if you have a kid with, say, severe CP  who requires a personal nurse to attend him, so he can go to class witht he rest of the kids?   Then the school has to hire a nurse for him , and pay that salary (say 50K a year) which then gets figured into their "per student average"

Now since privte schools will be able to pick and choose who they want to admit, they can avoid kids like that, or kids who need a special wheelchair transport bus, or even just kids with behavioral problems or organic brain difficulties that make it hard for them to learn .  Those will all get warehoused inthe now chronically underfunded shell of the public school system, while private schools will get tons of unneeded funding, and appaer to be suceeding because they don;t have to deal with any of the problem chidlren
 
2013-09-03 02:15:33 PM  

Neighborhood Watch: Teachers unions vs poor black kids.

Guess which one the democrat party will defend?


Living up to the stereotype, chief.  Keep on t-rolling!
 
2013-09-03 02:16:40 PM  

coeyagi: Neighborhood Watch: Teachers unions vs poor black kids.

Guess which one the democrat party will defend?

Living up to the stereotype, chief.  Keep on t-rolling!


You can ignore him now, you know. He's not even fun to argue with.
 
2013-09-03 02:19:30 PM  

jjorsett: lockers: Great, some financially motivated, and totally unaccountable private business will do better than a public school.

You really don't know how business works, do you?


Let me try...   private "education management" businesses lobby the state legislature (i.e. donate money to key state politicians) so that school accountability laws don't apply to them.  For example, in NC the recent flurry of legislation said that charter schools and private schools:

1. Are immune from state law concerning teachers, so that teachers not only don't have to have a college degree or teaching certificate, but don't need a background check.  That's right, there's no requirement for background checks for even obvious things like child abuse.

2. Are immune from state and federal testing rules.  This means there is no way to compare test scores from public and charter schools because the later can just chose a test that's easy instead of taking the nation-wide common-core test.  On top of that, private schools don't have to report scores at all, so there's no way for parents to actually check and see how they compare to public school.
 
2013-09-03 02:19:59 PM  

Magorn: Bingo.   And there is another wrinkle as well to consider:  You often hear how much a school systems spends ON AVERAGE per student.   But that Average is as misleading as Wal Mart's clain they pay ON AVERAGE about $12  because it blends the horde of minimum wage workers with the CEO who is getting $23 million a year.

Same thing with Education.  Thanks tot he Federal IDEA Act (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) schols are REQUIRED to mainstream diabled individuals into regular classrooms whenever possible. So, if you have a kid with, say, severe CP  who requires a personal nurse to attend him, so he can go to class witht he rest of the kids?   Then the school has to hire a nurse for him , and pay that salary (say 50K a year) which then gets figured into their "per student average"

Now since privte schools will be able to pick and choose who they want to admit, they can avoid kids like that, or kids who need a special wheelchair transport bus, or even just kids with behavioral problems or organic brain difficulties that make it hard for them to learn .  Those will all get warehoused inthe now chronically underfunded shell of the public school system, while private schools will get tons of unneeded funding, and appaer to be suceeding because they don;t have to deal with any of the problem chidlren


Also this.
 
2013-09-03 02:20:31 PM  

jjorsett: lockers: Great, some financially motivated, and totally unaccountable private business will do better than a public school.

You really don't know how business works, do you?


www.biography.com
"Do you?" -Ken Lay

images.forbes.com
"Do you?" -Michael Milken

i.i.cbsi.com
"Do you?" -Joseph Cassano

somethingtochew.files.wordpress.com
"Do you?" -Rebekah Brooks
 
2013-09-03 02:20:59 PM  

Super Chronic: Rapmaster2000: Dr Dreidel: Blathering Idjut: Neighborhood Watch: Guess which one the democrat party will defend?

There is no such thing as a "democrat party."

It's a useful term - by using it, the speaker reveals themselves as someone whose opinions on matters political (including matters of policy like climate change, labor law, foreign relations...) are irrelevant.

And yes, I know that something like half to all Republicans in Congress use the term as well.

The only reason I can find for the existence of it, is that its proponents think that this really sticks it to the libs and is therefore worthwhile.

It doesn't.  It just makes you sound like a mouthbreather.

And yet, people keep objecting loudly to it, so apparently it does stick it to some of them.  I swear, it's like driving with a couple of petulant kids in the backseat.  "Democrat party!"  "Quit it! Daaaaad, Timmy said 'democrat party' again! Make him stop!"  Well, Tommy, if you want Timmy to stop doing that, why don't you stop acting like it bothers you so much?


What a great strategy! Let's apply that to other areas of our lives:

If you want your roommate to clean their dirty dishes, instead of asking them to, you should stop acting like it bothers you so much!

If you want your co-worker to remember your last name instead of mumbling pathetically, you shouldn't tell him your last name, you should stop acting like it bothers you so much!

If you want your child to stop screaming in the supermarket, instead of taking them outside and giving them food\water\naptime, you should stop acting like it bothers you so much!

Yep! The key to solving all of life's problems is to just ignore them and wait for them to go away. I'm so glad you've told us this!

/If the answer can be paraphrased as 'well, it's your fault for finding it offensive', it's probably a dumbass answer.
 
2013-09-03 02:21:12 PM  

Magorn: Meanwhile the voucher schools will have no standards or over sight.  Jindal himself has already said he's be perfectly fine with such schools teaching, say , young earth creationism exclusively in "science" classes


Motherfarking THIS. Also, one of the schools approved for that sweet, sweet government money consisted largely of a DVD Jesus curriculum. Remember when your teacher was hungover and showed a video to shut the class up? It's like that, but nearly full-time. They were approved but the Muslims sparked an outrage.

These schools are not held to the same scrutiny as public ones. Now to be fair, a lot of these schools truly do offer a superior education. I went to Catholic school for a couple of years and yes, they do teach actual science and other forms of critical thinking. They just threw religion classes into the mix but kept them separate. It's still technically wrong to give tax monies to these institutions but at least it's not as harmful as these schools that seem to have been founded by Oral Roberts.

I am very, very proud to live in blue New Orleans, for all her faults. The rest of this state and her voters? Go fark yourselves with a rake. When you need psychiatric care, good luck navigating the list of available beds Jindal didn't scrap or privatize. Medicaid expansion at minimal cost to the state? LOL. Lawsuit demanding that Big Oil chip in for their share of the damage they've done to the wetlands, which serve as a buffer for hurricanes? Your man Jindal will publicly decry it because hey, protecting his interests is far more important than yours, citizen.

If it weren't for New Orleans - easily one of most idiosyncratic and fun cities in America - I'd have run screaming from this place long ago. Though I'd likely sneak back in for the food now and then.
 
2013-09-03 02:24:33 PM  

Kuta: This op ed was written by a libertarian, not a liberal. Sometimes newspapers publish opinions that differ from their typical journalistic slant.



It was written by the WP Editorial Board and that, my friend, is liberal.
 
2013-09-03 02:27:04 PM  

AngryDragon: TimonC346: Here is the issue Charters have over public schools: Public schools cannot kick people out. At the very least, they cannot unless the student is violent and considered a danger to either the school or the students at large. In private schools, provided by vouchers, they have the distinct advantage: Academic Minimums. If you don't make it? Good bye. There is no political accountability to whom is being ushered out, there is very little real legal recourse considering there is no guarantee to private school education

Oversight of who is being ushered out can be easily done.  No oversight, no voucher money.  Simple.  The fact that public schools cannot eject a student until they are a danger to the rest of their classmates is ridiculous.  Perhaps the solution is to create a tiered public system so you HAVE somewhere to send the troublemakers that isn't jail.


And now you have the government telling religious private schools what to do.  I'm sure that is 100% constitutional ;)
 
2013-09-03 02:37:04 PM  

meat0918: AngryDragon: TimonC346: Here is the issue Charters have over public schools: Public schools cannot kick people out. At the very least, they cannot unless the student is violent and considered a danger to either the school or the students at large. In private schools, provided by vouchers, they have the distinct advantage: Academic Minimums. If you don't make it? Good bye. There is no political accountability to whom is being ushered out, there is very little real legal recourse considering there is no guarantee to private school education

Oversight of who is being ushered out can be easily done.  No oversight, no voucher money.  Simple.  The fact that public schools cannot eject a student until they are a danger to the rest of their classmates is ridiculous.  Perhaps the solution is to create a tiered public system so you HAVE somewhere to send the troublemakers that isn't jail.

And now you have the government telling religious private schools what to do.  I'm sure that is 100% constitutional ;)


Then the private school doesn't have to accept the voucher money. Problem solved.
 
2013-09-03 02:37:36 PM  

AngryDragon: TimonC346: Here is the issue Charters have over public schools: Public schools cannot kick people out. At the very least, they cannot unless the student is violent and considered a danger to either the school or the students at large. In private schools, provided by vouchers, they have the distinct advantage: Academic Minimums. If you don't make it? Good bye. There is no political accountability to whom is being ushered out, there is very little real legal recourse considering there is no guarantee to private school education

Oversight of who is being ushered out can be easily done.  No oversight, no voucher money.  Simple.  The fact that public schools cannot eject a student until they are a danger to the rest of their classmates is ridiculous.  Perhaps the solution is to create a tiered public system so you HAVE somewhere to send the troublemakers that isn't jail.


They do--but every student is entitled to equal access to education. A tiered education system is being attempted again now, but it constantly runs a risk of becoming a tracking like system, which in the end just kept dumber kids somewhat below their grade level peers, and socially apart from them.

The system you are proposing with oversight is basically what the current public education is, man.
 
2013-09-03 02:45:35 PM  

Mrbogey: So is that your shtick? You lie and troll? WP is a well know liberal newspaper.


Not to people who actually, you know, read it.

It hasn't been "Liberal" for decades.

/Been reading the Post since the `70s.
//Being "Mostly Objective" isn't "Liberal", although most "liberals" are "mostly objective"...
 
2013-09-03 02:46:23 PM  

AngryDragon: Oversight of who is being ushered out can be easily done. No oversight, no voucher money. Simple. The fact that public schools cannot eject a student until they are a danger to the rest of their classmates is ridiculous. Perhaps the solution is to create a tiered public system so you HAVE somewhere to send the troublemakers that isn't jail.


That is...kinda sorta my suggestion.
If parents and the kids don't care, put them in a baby-sitter's room with spongebob on the tv all day. Get them out of the rooms with kids who may actually care. Don't count them for NCLB or other accountability tests. Also, no sports for them.
I would also tier government assistance tied to your education level. Only got a Spongebob certificate? You only get x% amount of assistance. Want more? Get your GED, get job training, oh look, you're qualified for a job.
Also....
AngryDragon: You're kid is in a failing public school but you can't afford to send him/her to a better one, so tough luck?
:)
 
2013-09-03 02:47:14 PM  

Neighborhood Watch: News Flash: It's a liberal publication


Not for decades.
 
2013-09-03 02:49:14 PM  

GoldSpider: meat0918: AngryDragon: TimonC346: Here is the issue Charters have over public schools: Public schools cannot kick people out. At the very least, they cannot unless the student is violent and considered a danger to either the school or the students at large. In private schools, provided by vouchers, they have the distinct advantage: Academic Minimums. If you don't make it? Good bye. There is no political accountability to whom is being ushered out, there is very little real legal recourse considering there is no guarantee to private school education

Oversight of who is being ushered out can be easily done.  No oversight, no voucher money.  Simple.  The fact that public schools cannot eject a student until they are a danger to the rest of their classmates is ridiculous.  Perhaps the solution is to create a tiered public system so you HAVE somewhere to send the troublemakers that isn't jail.

And now you have the government telling religious private schools what to do.  I'm sure that is 100% constitutional ;)

Then the private school doesn't have to accept the voucher money. Problem solved.


The problem is not solved.  If they do accept those vouchers, you still have government entanglement in a religious institution.  Whether or not it is excessive would probably have to be demonstrated in court.

Where is that line drawn?  Can you kick out a student that is no longer of the faith?  What if their parents change religion?  What about admissions requirements?  Does the government get to start dictating those if you accept voucher money?
 
2013-09-03 02:49:16 PM  

Mrbogey: So is that your shtick? You lie and troll? WP is a well know liberal newspaper.


By the editorial board, who's education editor gave us the gem
The Big Easy's school revolution
 
2013-09-03 02:57:03 PM  

meat0918: Vouchers aren't the answer.

Fixing the goddamn public schools is.


via competition and incentive.
 
2013-09-03 02:59:20 PM  

STRYPERSWINE: meat0918: Vouchers aren't the answer.

Fixing the goddamn public schools is.

via competition and incentive.


Sweden: please explain your thoughts in detail.
 
2013-09-03 02:59:48 PM  

neversubmit: Injustice indeed.

14 Wacky "Facts" Kids Will Learn in Louisiana's Voucher Schools

1. Dinosaurs and humans probably hung out:

2. Dragons were totally real

3. "God used the Trail of Tears to bring many Indians to Christ."

4. Africa needs religion:

5. Slave masters were nice guys:

6. The KKK was A-OK:

7. The Great Depression wasn't as bad as the liberals made it sound:

8. SCOTUS enslaved fetuses:

9. The Red Scare isn't over yet:

10. Mark Twain and Emily Dickinson were a couple of hacks:

11. Abstract algebra is too dang complicated:

12. Gay people "have no more claims to special rights than child molesters or rapists."

13. "Global environmentalists have said and written enough to leave no doubt that their goal is to destroy the prosperous economies of the world's richest nations."

14. Globalization is a precursor to rapture:


Shouldn't the fundies be in favor of the UN and global warming and stuff? I thought the rapture was the goal because that means they get taken up. In other words its someone else's problem. If the anti christ runs for president, wouldn't a good fundie vote for him because its part of god's plan?
 
2013-09-03 03:02:39 PM  

czei: Voucher programs aren't about race, but about funneling taxpayer money to either religious schools who want to retain the rights to discriminate based on race and religion, OR fake out of state "for-profit management" scams.


Wonder how Neil Bush is doing nowadays....
 
2013-09-03 03:04:47 PM  

Witty_Retort: By the editorial board, who's education editor gave us the gem


"Whose".

/Public School Graduate
 
2013-09-03 03:10:54 PM  

PsiChick: Super Chronic: Rapmaster2000: Dr Dreidel: Blathering Idjut: Neighborhood Watch: Guess which one the democrat party will defend?

There is no such thing as a "democrat party."

It's a useful term - by using it, the speaker reveals themselves as someone whose opinions on matters political (including matters of policy like climate change, labor law, foreign relations...) are irrelevant.

And yes, I know that something like half to all Republicans in Congress use the term as well.

The only reason I can find for the existence of it, is that its proponents think that this really sticks it to the libs and is therefore worthwhile.

It doesn't.  It just makes you sound like a mouthbreather.

And yet, people keep objecting loudly to it, so apparently it does stick it to some of them.  I swear, it's like driving with a couple of petulant kids in the backseat.  "Democrat party!"  "Quit it! Daaaaad, Timmy said 'democrat party' again! Make him stop!"  Well, Tommy, if you want Timmy to stop doing that, why don't you stop acting like it bothers you so much?

What a great strategy! Let's apply that to other areas of our lives:

If you want your roommate to clean their dirty dishes, instead of asking them to, you should stop acting like it bothers you so much!

If you want your co-worker to remember your last name instead of mumbling pathetically, you shouldn't tell him your last name, you should stop acting like it bothers you so much!

If you want your child to stop screaming in the supermarket, instead of taking them outside and giving them food\water\naptime, you should stop acting like it bothers you so much!

Yep! The key to solving all of life's problems is to just ignore them and wait for them to go away. I'm so glad you've told us this!

/If the answer can be paraphrased as 'well, it's your fault for finding it offensive', it's probably a dumbass answer.


Yes, because those things are all exactly the same as conduct that someone engages in for the sole reason of bothering you and for no other reason.  If you can't see the difference, then the dumbass answer is yours.
 
2013-09-03 03:20:03 PM  

AngryDragon: Oversight of who is being ushered out can be easily done. No oversight, no voucher money.


Republicans are fighting government oversight tooth-and-nail when they do try to put in privatization.
 
2013-09-03 03:30:55 PM  

Super Chronic: /If the answer can be paraphrased as 'well, it's your fault for finding it offensive', it's probably a dumbass answer.

Yes, because those things are all exactly the same as conduct that someone engages in for the sole reason of bothering you and for no other reason.  If you can't see the difference, then the dumbass answer is yours.


If someone's willing to annoy you for the sole reason of annoying you, what makes you think they're going to stop if you don't show interest?
 
2013-09-03 03:33:53 PM  

Super Chronic: for the sole reason of bothering you


Well, that's not the sole reason. The other one is to make morons - their "base" - wet themselves with glee.
 
2013-09-03 03:41:00 PM  

Neighborhood Watch: Kuta: This op ed was written by a libertarian, not a liberal. Sometimes newspapers publish opinions that differ from their typical journalistic slant.


It was written by the WP Editorial Board and that, my friend, is liberal.


NO ONE RESPOND FURTHER TO THIS DRIVEL, THIS TROLLBOT IS STUCK ON LOOP
 
2013-09-03 03:43:36 PM  

Wooly Bully: Super Chronic: for the sole reason of bothering you

Well, that's not the sole reason. The other one is to make morons - their "base" - wet themselves with glee.


Yes.  And why do you think it does that?  Because they know that the phrase will cause Democrats to object.  There is nothing inherently offensive about the phrase "Democrat party," unless you're an English teacher; the glee is all due to the response it causes.  Absent such a response, I don't think even the Republican base would find any joy in saying "hey, let's get the other party's name slightly wrong, that'd be fun!"
 
2013-09-03 03:45:08 PM  

STRYPERSWINE: meat0918: Vouchers aren't the answer.

Fixing the goddamn public schools is.

via competition and incentive.


Yeah that is working really well for Sears now, and that is part of an industry that isn't necessarily retarded to be profit driven. Profit-driven education is, by its nature, farking retarded. The moment you make it about how much money people can make and not about how well students are doing, you just create busywork for useless education middle management justifying their redundant jobs.
 
2013-09-03 03:53:11 PM  

Super Chronic: Wooly Bully: Super Chronic: for the sole reason of bothering you

Well, that's not the sole reason. The other one is to make morons - their "base" - wet themselves with glee.

Yes.  And why do you think it does that?  Because they know that the phrase will cause Democrats to object.  There is nothing inherently offensive about the phrase "Democrat party," unless you're an English teacher; the glee is all due to the response it causes.  Absent such a response, I don't think even the Republican base would find any joy in saying "hey, let's get the other party's name slightly wrong, that'd be fun!"


Sure, they enjoy it if someone gets annoyed about it. But they'll say stupid things like that among themselves when they know won't get a response, too, and then smile as if they were being clever. You can't underestimate the immaturity of people like this, or somehow ascribe it to other people's oversensitivity. They just want to be dicks, period, and that deserves everyone's scorn.
 
2013-09-03 04:06:03 PM  
Just send everyone to the over achieving private schools, and give them all the money the public schools would have received. We'll call them Publicly Accessible Private Schools, or Public Schools for short.
 
2013-09-03 04:15:31 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: KyngNothing: http://theadvocate.com/home/4274144-125/report-la-teacher-unions-weak

Yes, those incredibly powerful Louisiana Teacher's Unions, contributing .18% of all donations to state elections!

Lying pieces of shiat need someone to blame. In spite of the fact that only 7% of the US workforce is organized and other countries with much higher penetration are doing better, right-wing trash like to blame every problem in the country on organized labor, because apparently freedom and self-determination are evil.


Hah!!! Guess which party is overtly hostile to freedom and self-determination???

You are the epitome of a useful idiot.
 
2013-09-03 04:31:44 PM  

DeArmondVI: Neighborhood Watch: Blathering Idjut: There is no such thing as a "democrat party."


Oh yes there is...  (links to midlly NFSW images, as democrats are pictured in it)

I believe you are now either the 2nd or 3rd person that I've put on ignore. I've seen plenty of derp in my day, but you're just uninspired, lazy, and have contributed nothing of value to a single thread I've seen you in. I will enjoy no longer seeing your drivel.


i added him to the green text club myself, always worth a laugh (AT not with)
 
2013-09-03 04:37:31 PM  

oryx: Public schools can't compete with private schools. What about "justice" for the teacher's unions?


Oh bull. That's a myth. Public schools have to take EVERYONE who comes through the doors. Private schools can pick and choose - and they tend to choose the cream of the crop and send anyone who causes trouble back to the public schools.

Stop perpetuating a falsehood.
 
2013-09-03 05:17:39 PM  

Kimothy: Public schools have to take EVERYONE who comes through the doors.



The reverse of that is also true.  You are forced, by law, to be indoctrinated in a government school unless you can afford to opt out of it.  Liberals, and their unions,  love that.  Unfortunately, the poor black kids referred to in the link must remain slaves to government force - they haven't the available cash that democrat politicians have to free their kids from the chains of failed & unsafe government schools.

This voucher system, though not perfect (what is?), was/is a way for poor black kids to have a better chance at life.  Directed by our precious little king, Eric Withholder and the Injustice Department intend to DESTROY that chance.

Those nationwide political races gotta' have that union money, doncha' know... and that's all that matters.
 
2013-09-03 05:17:43 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Mr. Titanium: The problem with vouchers is that it tacitly agrees that it is OK for some schools stink.  Wnen the public officials in each state insure that ALL public schools in their state are good, then they can gripe.  Until then, they need to get off their butts and do the jobs they take public money for doing.  The teacher unions sometimes just fight for the teachers, but nobody is looking out for the students.  Not the Governor, Legislature, Mayors, local school boards, etc.

The teachers fight for the students. The teachers' unions are made up of teachers. Far from the scumbag right-wing lies about them, unionized teachers are the best advocates and the best defense students have available by a wide margin. Anyone trying to bust or denigrate teachers' unions wants schools to fail their students.


The schools are already failing their students and have been for decades.  Teachers' unions didn't make a difference then, why would they now?  Clearly the status quo is a model for failure.
 
2013-09-03 05:41:26 PM  
When have they NOT called it the Injustice Department?
 
2013-09-03 06:49:17 PM  

Lsherm: A Dark Evil Omen: Mr. Titanium: The problem with vouchers is that it tacitly agrees that it is OK for some schools stink.  Wnen the public officials in each state insure that ALL public schools in their state are good, then they can gripe.  Until then, they need to get off their butts and do the jobs they take public money for doing.  The teacher unions sometimes just fight for the teachers, but nobody is looking out for the students.  Not the Governor, Legislature, Mayors, local school boards, etc.

The teachers fight for the students. The teachers' unions are made up of teachers. Far from the scumbag right-wing lies about them, unionized teachers are the best advocates and the best defense students have available by a wide margin. Anyone trying to bust or denigrate teachers' unions wants schools to fail their students.

The schools are already failing their students and have been for decades.  Teachers' unions didn't make a difference then, why would they now?  Clearly the status quo is a model for failure.


Doesn't explain VA's failing schools. In fact, some of the states with the poorest performance of students are those without public-sector unions.
 
2013-09-03 06:54:50 PM  
It's amusing to me how liberals only care about poor black children. Not poor children.

Racists.
 
Displayed 50 of 161 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report