Democrats against education...

maineman said:
As I implied, unless there is total unanimity within the democratic party, then, by definition, some will be fore and some are against. Congratulations.... you found a few to make your point.
Click to expand...

Are you deliberately trying to be an ass? Not only did I find a 'few', but the 'few' were the Mayor of the third or fourth largest city in the US, the Governor of the third or fourth largest state and the President of the United States. I would say those 'few' I found are quite prominent.

If you would like more... take a look at the parents in Harlem, Brooklyn and the Bronx that are rallying in support of charter schools. I would be willing to bet many of them are Dems.

Again, the point you so adamantly refuse to address is that it wasn't me that made an inappropriate generalization. But you stuck your foot in your mouth and now seem determined to see if the other one will fit as well.
 
I don't know if you've heard this quote before, but...

"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat." - Will Rogers

most democrats that I know are against charter schools but admittedly, there are some who see things differently. That's the nature of democrats.
 
maineman said:
I don't know if you've heard this quote before, but...

"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat." - Will Rogers

most democrats that I know are against charter schools but admittedly, there are some who see things differently. That's the nature of democrats.
Click to expand...

Then you should point that out to Tai... he is the one that made the generalization... the one I corrected him on. Again... there are many dems, especially in poor areas that support charter schools. There is a reason that poor areas that have charter schools also have long waiting lists and lotterys to get into those charter schools.
 
cawacko said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Wrong, my last sentence stated that Democrats (at least in NYC, anyway) were against creating a two tier educational system using public property and taxes.....they are not against education. Again, in New York City (and it's suburbs) our local television has been bombarded with a series of commercials hailing charter schools and condemning Mayor De Blasio.

The cost of these commercials? $3.6 million dollars in less than 1 month!

Hell, you could BUILD a school and fully equip it for that amount of money! The funding comes from an unnamed group of pro-charter school "financiers".

Funny how in all the years of complaints of NYC schools being in disrepair, understaffed and under-equipped, you didn't get a penny out of these "financiers".

The retort is that "teacher unions do the same" has YET to be proven. I'm not saying that teacher unions don't run commercials or put money into politicians or advocates for their cause, but if anyone can show me where they did to the tune of $3.6 million in less than 1 month, then I'll be surprised.

So, do you agree or disagree with this?

Mind you, Obama, a right-of-center Democrat believes charters are a solution to a willful deadlock by the very people I'm pointing to above (who were aided and abetted by local corrupt politicians, white flight in the 1960's, etc.). But I think you would be hard pressed to hear Obama condone the way in which charter schools are set up.
Click to expand...


I'd argue you could ask the same question of any teachers union money spent on politics and advertising. Why not put it into the schools instead? To me if you believe in school choice it's not surprising that's where they put their money. If you think public education isn't doing its job and it's more than a money issue you aren't going to throw more good money after bad.
Click to expand...

You seem to forget that teachers ARE THE SCHOOLS! The unions money comes out of their salaries....NOT their "investments". In effect YOU are asking the teachers to not only take care of themselves, but the buildings, the supplies, etc.

Do a little research as to how many teachers across the country are spending their OWN money to provide supplies and such because STATE and FEDERAL are not pulling the weight!

Sorry, but as I said before if anyone can show me where they spent to the tune of $3.6 million in less than 1 month on political advertising, then I'll be surprised.
 
Superfreak said:
The point that public education doesn't get enough money? Given that we spend more per capita on education than most countries, I think that is not the problem. It is in the allocation of the resources that we do spend that is part of the problem. We spend far too much on administration and not enough on the teachers and kids (my opinion).

Simply putting more money into an inefficient system is ridiculous. Fix the system and show that it can work, THEN you might get private donations. Otherwise you are going to start seeing competition via charter schools.

Can you refute the fact that many poor parents are rallying around their charter schools trying to stop de Blasio from eliminating the choice they have made for their kids?
Click to expand...

Your opinin means nothing, given that you avoid the simple facts: charter schools that use PUBLIC school facilities, and then CHOOSE what students they educate, and require the teachers are on 24/7 standby is a BOGUS system of independent superiority.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Your opinin means nothing, given that you avoid the simple facts: charter schools that use PUBLIC school facilities, and then CHOOSE what students they educate, and require the teachers are on 24/7 standby is a BOGUS system of independent superiority.
Click to expand...

1) Charter schools ARE PUBLIC SCHOOLS... they are simply run by private entities.
2) Where do they require teachers to be on 24/7 standby?
3) Yes, they HAVE to choose in some manner because their is more demand for spots than supply. Most do the 'choosing' by lottery.
 
Superfreak said:
... take a look at the parents in Harlem, Brooklyn and the Bronx that are rallying in support of charter schools. I would be willing to bet many of them are Dems.

Again, the point you so adamantly refuse to address is that it wasn't me that made an inappropriate generalization. But you stuck your foot in your mouth and now seem determined to see if the other one will fit as well.
Click to expand...

So the title of this thread should be "rich white democrats against education choice for poor black democrats..."
 
Superfreak said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Not quite, my Super Freak(ing) liar. Observe:

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sho...54#post1467154
Click to expand...


You do realize that you are still wrong? You stated Democrats were against charter schools. That is not accurate. Some are, some are not. Just because no one mentioned your fixation on the 'spending done in a month' doesn't change the fact that you are wrong. You calling someone a DINO is just your opinion.
Click to expand...

How many times do I have to tell you to READ CAREFULLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY. I NEVER WROTE THAT DEMOCRATS WERE AGAINST CHARTER SCHOOLS. If you can copy & paste such and note the post where I did, then please do. If not, then you are either lying or remembering what you want and not what is.

Go back and see what either you or one of your compadre's highlighted. If you still don't understand, then get an adult to explain it to you.

Funny how a FACT that is detrimental to your opinion is deemed a "fixation" by you. But let me try to explain it on a level you can understand.

The charter schools in NYC are akin to the old Catholic (or "parochial") schools. Difference is, the parents who kids attend the public schools are footing the bill for the FACILITIES that the charter schools are using. The old parochial school system that I attended was solely funded by the parents and the diocese (aka parishioner donations). That is unfair.

Also, the charter schools get to pick and choose their students...so the disciplinary and academically challenged kids are weeded out to result in a high performance review which is unfairly compared to the standard public school.

Again, the history of the NY public school system shows that the "financiers" who are hefting cash to promote charter schools didn't do the same for public schools after years of requests.

De Blasio was elected to do EXACTLY what he's doing, despite the propaganda against him.

So the title of this thread is dead wrong, if not terribly misleading.
 
Superfreak said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Your opinin means nothing, given that you avoid the simple facts: charter schools that use PUBLIC school facilities, and then CHOOSE what students they educate, and require the teachers are on 24/7 standby is a BOGUS system of independent superiority.
Click to expand...


1) Charter schools ARE PUBLIC SCHOOLS... they are simply run by private entities.
2) Where do they require teachers to be on 24/7 standby?
3) Yes, they HAVE to choose in some manner because their is more demand for spots than supply. Most do the 'choosing' by lottery.
Click to expand...

1) Wrong. There is a difference, as I pointed out...which is why one is PRIVATE and the other one is PUBLIC. What are trying to do, sell some sort of L. Ron Hubbard neologisms here? A rose by any other name.....

2) Read the damned articles that I referenced, will ya please? I tire of your willful ignorance.

3) Ahhh, but if it's a straight up lottery, then the winner gets in regardless of their disciplinary (to a degree) or inability to learn quickly. That is NOT the case with charter schools. Again, public schools take ALL kids by law....charter schools do not. Got that bunky?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top