Should Republicans be drafted first?

[be10dwn]

Swordfish, you have not added a single word of intelligence to this conversation.  Once again, it is you who assumes that one is a "righty" because they don't agree with your ignorant rantings.  If you have some shred of intellect to add to this conversation, please do.  Until then, go back to thinking of all the ways that you can sound stupid next.

[Perversely]

how much funding did Bush allocate for the implementation of NCLB?

That sort of question is shows you to be less than knowledgable on NCLB and how it functions.  NCLB, much to Mr. Kerry's chagrin, was and never is an "unfunded mandate."  Why not. Well first, its not a mandate.  States may decide whether they want to comply- UTAH is considering not tagging on this year.  When states don't comply they lose the portion of federal funds they would otherwise receive.  The figure below in the link I've provided shows how education funding has risen (something that I as a critic of the public education system) am not happy about.  Funding has very little to do with educational outcomes and success. Washington DC for instance has the highest funding per pupil of any district in the nation, some 14,000 a year per pupil, yet they boast some of the worst scores in the nation.  NCLB is designed to be an accountability system that gives kids a chance to get some free tutoring or a switch to another public school if schools fail to improve.  Funding is not the issue.  By reasonable standards AMerican public schools are funded incredibly generously and the per pupil funding is higher than some of the most socialist european nations known for their generousity in funding social programs (e.g. France, Sweden, you name it).


http://www.educationnext.org/20042/images/peyserfig2.gif

rhetoric is getting old.

i'm waiting for your rebuttal.  you gave me 5 minutes.  i'm giving you 3 more before i sign off.

the no child left behind theory, IN THEORY, is wonderful. but, the reality is that although there is funding to help, there's no real progress in changing how children learn across the board.  bottom line.  there needs to be some fundamental changes in how children learn.  there shouldn't be a HUGE disparity between the level of education a child receives when they attend a private school oppose to attending a public one.

our public schools can do more.  they should do more.  & it begins with not only giving money to those schools, it begins by sending a message to the families that they need to care or else....  it begins by allowing a student in any neighbor access to the same quality of an education that one would receive at the best private school.  & it's more than just class size...

the no child left behind should do more than weed students who don't test well out...did you know more minorities aren't graduating from high school because of testing.  geewiz...i wonder why is that!

[ibisgolfer]

perversely, maybe we in fact agree, you mention wanting a public school education to offer more of what a private school education does.  i take it you would support vouchers then.  great, i do.  you know funding really isnt an issue. catholic schools in NYC spend 1/3 of what the average public school does and get 30000 times the testing results.  and these arent lily white catholic schools they are some of the most heavily minority populated schools in NY.

[Hegel]

In general (and I'm not singling out people here, I should say) I think the liberal attitude toward servicemen and women is interesting...on the one hand, the look down their noses at them (hence the comment about poor people...and while foose probably didn't mean it the way I read it, it is common liberal thinking that most troops are from lower middle class backgrounds) and yet pretend to honor and revere them. You don't exalt someone you believe is beneath you. Liberals can't have it both ways.

lower middle class == upper poor class

[Hegel]

Also, the military is overwhelming conservative.  I remember reading the Stars and Stripes last November which reported that about 80%.... THAT'S 80%.... of our armed forces who voted voted for Bush over Kerry.

Bush is not conservative.  He's as radical as they come.

[swordfish]

Also, the military is overwhelming conservative.  I remember reading the Stars and Stripes last November which reported that about 80%.... THAT'S 80%.... of our armed forces who voted voted for Bush over Kerry.

Bush is not conservative.  He's as radical as they come.

amen to that

[ibisgolfer]

Thats just rhetoric.  Bush is radical blah blah blah.  The original point was credible.  The military voted for Bush and they are the main consituency taking the fallout from this war and bearing its burden. If it passes their muster, then who are you to say that Bush's war is radical and Bush is radical.  Apparently a larger percentage of the American people found Monseniur Kerry to be the more radical candidate because a few million more voters said no to his agenda.

[Perversely]

perversely, maybe we in fact agree, you mention wanting a public school education to offer more of what a private school education does.  i take it you would support vouchers then.  great, i do.  you know funding really isnt an issue. catholic schools in NYC spend 1/3 of what the average public school does and get 30000 times the testing results.  and these arent lily white catholic schools they are some of the most heavily minority populated schools in NY.

no, no freakin' vouchers!  fix the freakin problem!  don't put a bandaide on it and say, "hey, we tried"!!!! because you know what's going to happen? not everyone will take advantage of it.  not everyone will know how.  not everyone will be able to entirely.

yeah, i'm a communist.  my name is mrs. castro.

call me anything, just don't call me a republican!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

no, seriously, i think the 'no child left behind' law or laws that have been brewing because of this initiative have been wonderful...however, if a law says it's going to do something, it should do it.

to imply 'no child left behind'...i would think they mean ALL CHILDREN will have a chance.

currently, ALL CHILDREN don't have a chance.

we're just looking at another form of what's going on in asia and in europe.  do we want or need a classist society that begs to treat people differently, depending on the side of the tracks where a person has been raised.  aren't we better than that?

i would hope so.  with the needless war, our fleeting manufacturing base, and a number of countless issues this country faces today, do you really think we can afford to be this selective.

let's face it:  rich people aren't having the babies in this country.

[swordfish]

Swordfish, you have not added a single word of intelligence to this conversation.  Once again, it is you who assumes that one is a "righty" because they don't agree with your ignorant rantings.  If you have some shred of intellect to add to this conversation, please do.  Until then, go back to thinking of all the ways that you can sound stupid next.

I defame people.  I have yet to try to anything positive or intelligent to anything.  That's not the reason God put me on here.

[swordfish]

perversely, maybe we in fact agree, you mention wanting a public school education to offer more of what a private school education does.  i take it you would support vouchers then.  great, i do.  you know funding really isnt an issue. catholic schools in NYC spend 1/3 of what the average public school does and get 30000 times the testing results.  and these arent lily white catholic schools they are some of the most heavily minority populated schools in NY.

no, no freakin' vouchers!  fix the freakin problem!  don't put a bandaide on it and say, "hey, we tried"!!!! because you know what's going to happen? not everyone will take advantage of it.  not everyone will know how.  not everyone will be able to entirely.

yeah, i'm a communist.  my name is mrs. castro.

call me anything, just don't call me a republican!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

no, seriously, i think the 'no child left behind' law or laws that have been brewing because of this initiative have been wonderful...however, if a law says it's going to do something, it should do it.

to imply 'no child left behind'...i would think they mean ALL CHILDREN will have a chance.

currently, ALL CHILDREN don't have a chance.

we're just looking at another form of what's going on in asia and in europe.  do we want or need a classist society that begs to treat people differently, depending on the side of the tracks where a person has been raised.  aren't we better than that?

i would hope so.  with the needless war, our fleeting manufacturing base, and a number of countless issues this country faces today, do you really think we can afford to be this selective.

let's face it:  rich people aren't having the babies in this country.

Yep, you can curse my momma and call me what you want just don't call me a republican