I heard the most unbelievable statement on right-wing radio today.

[Liberal Veteran]

I don't know which one I was listening to, but it was a discussion between the host and the caller and the caller (a female) was saying that didn't like Bush doing this or that (mostly about the imigration issue and bloated deficits) but that she was going to vote for him because of defense, but then she made the most unbelievable statement during her diatribe.

She said that it is not the goverment's responsibility to provide education to children.

Where do these people get bizarre ideas like this?

[Bertha Venation]

1. Oh, my.

Such ignorance.

But it makes me wonder: what is the history of public education, worldwide & here in the U.S.? Does anyone know of a handy resource or two?

[WoodrowFan]

3. here's a good site..

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/resource_guides/content.cfm?tpc=36

on edit: oops, site was still being developed. here are some alternatives..

http://www.servintfree.net/~aidmn-ejournal/publications/2001-11/PublicEducationInTheUnitedStates.html

http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~daniel_schugurensky/assignment1/index.html

and a site which is ANTI public education.

http://www.freedomofeducation.org/

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. Guess she slept through her Civics classes?

[Jivenwail]

4. Just like the "voices of America"

They are doing on the CBS Evening News. Saw one last night that almost made me throw up my dinner. Retired couple living in FL, she's a registered indy, he's registered repuke. Even though they lost literally their entire nest egg when the market when bust, they support awol. Both saying going into Iraq was the right thing, she saying that we should've gone ahead an gone into Syria, take care of it all since we are already there. Not a voice of concern for the dead or wounded soldiers. Ugh, it was so disgusting. They went on to say they have friends who can't buy their prescriptions because they can't afford them, other concerns, but support and will vote for, awol all the way.

Makes one wonder - where do these so-called journalists "find" their "voices of America"????? Nobody's asked me, but then again they probably would never air what I have to say.

[maveric]

29. I saw that too. Disgusting!

:puke:
Whats wrong with these people? I think that they severly dislike "brown people", and will suppoert any maniacal repug leader who will try to wipe them out. Why else would they think that way after getting fucked out of their nestegg and are very concerned about being able to afford prescription drugs?

[Ripley]

39. Yes, that's it.

The dislike of "brown people."

When I heard them speaking from the TV in the other room, I heard my husband yell "These people are idiots!! They seem to think all Arabs are the same as the ones who attacked us." Touche. Iraqi's? Saudi's? Hell, who cares, they all look the same. Bomb em.

:grr:

[Mika]

36. Invade Syria? She could vote for Bob Graham

Maybe Kerry can select Bob Graham for VP to snag the "lets invade Syria" types.
:evilgrin:

[ComerPerro]

5. Oh that was on Rush

I just heard that on my way home from the store.

Wow.

Yeah.

Floored me.

Regarding that caller:
let me get this straight:
she don't like Bush's domestic policies, not a one. But she will vote for him?
Why?
9/11.

Oh, right.
How convenient.

LIHOPLIHOPLIHOPLIHOP

[Junkdrawer]

24. *cough* shill *cough*...

I'm guessing that's about all Rush will allow nowadays.

[FatSlob]

6. I partly agree.

It is not the FEDERAL government's job. It is state/local government's job, though.

[Florida_Geek]

7. From Texas, they have a State Leg. there

female too, that has publicly stated that .

[rasputin1952]

25. I wrote that bag once about a year ago...

I can't remember her name, but she was on the TX floor and was blasting public education, it was unreal.

All of these morons are from the very system they decry. The cheap bastards her in NE are the same way, they got an education from the previous generation, but want to put a halt to the current generation getting an education.

Maybe I'm behind the times, but it seems to me, that the one thing that a government is is responsible for, besides defending its citizens, is to educate them. Who, in God's name, would want a bunch of ignorant people running around? There is NO benefit to that!

:grr:

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. Then they wonder why Dems come off as being elitist.

When the people voting against us make such mind-numbing arguments, it's impossible to not look that way.

[Sterling]

10. You are right

When they say that about liberals it is code word for "not retarded like the dumbass fundies the Neo Cons take advantage of".

[walkon]

9. This is where

Dominionist / Christian Reconstructionist Teachings

The exerpt below should be instructive:

In summary: Public education is a socialistic and therefore larcenous scheme. It is Biblically illegitimate for that reason. Christian parents should abandon public education for their children because they are under solemn obligation to train them in a manner befitting a covenant seed; the philosophy governing public education is directly antithetical to the philosophy governing the education the Scriptures require of the covenant seed. All Christians should not abandon public education, nonetheless, for they must take seriously the mandate to subdue the earth for the sake of Christ. Therefore, certain Christians should serve as teachers, administrators, and board members in public education in the effort eventually to purge its secularism and bring education under the crown rights of Jesus Christ.

[mistertrickster]

13. Just like Jesus did when he was alive--I remember that in the Gospel

of Falwall, "Go unto all the Earth and establish governments in my . . ." Hey wait, no, he said "render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's." So as always the fundies and wing nuts get it exactly ass backwards.

[LeahMira]

11. It's not in the Constitution...

She said that it is not the goverment's responsibility to provide education to children.
Where do these people get bizarre ideas like this?

In fact, the states and the local school districts pay most of the cost of education. The federal government contribution is usually well below 10% of the total cost to the state, and part of the reason for this contribution is because some states that are poorer cannot provide the same educational quality in schools as those with a stronger tax base.

No where in the Constitution does it say that the government has to educate the people. However, if the people decide that they want the government to provide education, Social Security, health care, safe workplaces, a healthy environment, and so on, the will of the people should prevail. The Constitution should not be seen, IMO, as limiting what a government can do, but as providing the bare bones outline of the jobs it must do.

[snippy]

22. It is in the state Constitutions.

[bluestateguy]

12. It isn't

if the year was 1804, not 2004.

[enough]

14. I hear stuff like this more and more.

Not quite that blatant, but I often hear people say that they are sick of paying school taxes because their kids have been out of school for quite a while now, and why should they be paying for other people's kids to get an education.

I can hardly believe it, but I even heard my 85-year old father say this, and he was a PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER all his working life, and a very progressive democrat. But he watches a lot of TV now, and I think the prevailing selfishness-religion starts to take over your brain after a while.

It seems that whatever glue used to hold us together as a society is really starting to crumble away.

[bobbieinok]

17. 'why should we pay school taxes? we don't have any kids in school'

you'd hear/read this every once in a while in the 50s

and it would be immediately attacked - you're part of a community, education is good for the future of the community, EVERYONE pays for the education of the future

the constant right-wing attack on taxes and public schools is beginnig to pay off

[mistertrickster]

18. Since these people don't understand the value of altruism, you

have to appeal to their self interest.

Crappy schools = falling housing values.

I prefer to sell my house for more than I bought for, don't you?

[LeahMira]

35. Someone else paid...

why should we pay school taxes? we don't have any kids in school

... when their kids were in school. And if they don't have kids, someone else paid when they were in school.

Three of our children went through public schools and in no way have we paid school taxes equal to what it cost the state to educate them each for twelve years.

Do the math. A conservative estimate of what it costs to educate one child through high school comes in at around $60,000. Our school taxes have averaged about $600. a year over the close to thirty years we've owned a home, which means that at this point we've only paid in a little over half of what it cost to educate one kid.

[Auntie Bush]

15. How can anyone be so stupid to think like that?

How are the children of poor uneducated parents going to get an education? Would that mean John Edwards wouldn't have gotten a college education? lol

[ieoeja]

16. Same Old Story

When King George III ascended the throne of England, the Privy Council he created took a strong swing to the right. The neo-con platform is practically identical to that of George the Third's. One of the problems they wanted to "solve" was that of modern education. They argued that the public schools were failing and should be shut down in favor of private or religious institutes.

Decades later after everyone involved was safely in their graves, private correspondence between members of this council was made public in which they laid out their plan for eliminating public education because they had determined that an educated public was more rebellious.

Don't ask for a link. I read this in a pre-Internet history book. Forget the exact name, something along the lines of "Origins of the American Revolution 1759-1763".

Today the rightwing talking heads are once again telling us that public education is failing despite ZERO empirical evidence supporting that position. And the last few months they have been claiming that "originally all the schools in America were run by the church instead of the government". This may have been true in the earliest pioneer days such as the founding of religious colonies by the Pilgrims. But it ignores the fact that an extensive public education system was in place well BEFORE the 4th of July in 1776.

[Oilwellian]

19. I'm sure...

the business community would prosper well with an uneducated workforce. :eyes:

[Kat45]

21. The business community wouldn't care: they're outsourcing jobs

The only jobs that will be left in this country are those that are most suitable for an uneducated workforce.

[boobooday]

20. Gee, education was only a foundational principle

of the enlightment. Oh, I forgot, the enlightenment hasn't gotten to these people yet.

They are children of Darkness.

:twisted:

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[bobbieinok]

23. Some fundamentalist churches/colleges attack the Enlightenment

because during the Enlightenment people, like iduring the Renaissance and Humanism, stopped focusing on god and focused on humans.

Hal Lindon's book The Late, Great Planet Earth (70s) was where I first saw this major attack on the ideas, people, concepts, heritage of the Enlightenment.

[Sugarbleus]

28. Hal Lindsy is a creep.....ALL fundies are against Secular Humanism

and anything with New Age tacked on as a title. The fundie movement started back in the 19th century, got a head of steam in the early 20th century, and has evolved into something that is completely "different" today.

The fundie/evangelical movement today is so not christlike and it is pro the "blessings of God" in terms of $$$$. They are, some unaware, in bed with the power mongers of the secular right. The innocents in this movement don't even know what the heck they're subscribing to anymore--mainly because they are TOLD what not to read or listen to. Check your brain at the door of the church before you can become one of them. They have a mandate to conquoer the earth and that's no joke. Trouble is, that's not the "Christ message"...Christ's message was anti wealth and anti established, oppressive, mind altering, corrupt religion. He was against the dumbing down of "Gods People". Alas, christians of this persuasion have been duped into believing this crap all to their detriment. If they think that society was against them before, they will be sorely surprised to learn that they have just begot their own demise by this crude, and unChrist like ideology.

[BlackVelvetElvis]

26. That caller should give back the $$$ it took to educate HER.

Honestly, if anyone is a product of the public school system and whines about their taxes for education, they should pay the state every penny back that it took to educate their selfish asses for 12+years. Greedy, souless jerks. If we don't educate our kids, who will be able to contribute to society in the future?

[Rex]

27. Okay, if not then who will do it? Oh wait...lemme guess...

corporations? Big Buznus. Yeah, that would be just SWELL. :eyes:

"Okay now class, everyone stand to say the Pledge of Allegiance to Disneyland.

[Michael Costello]

30. Republican Texas legislator Debbie Riddle says...

"Where did this idea come from that everybody deserves free education, free medical care, free whatever? It comes from Moscow, from Russia. It comes straight out of the pit of hell."

http://www.tft.org/publications/archiveapril03.cfm

[GOPBasher]

31. Wow.

Yeah, some of these people are just nuts. But I wish Bush would come out for something like that, so he'd lose 50 states.

[VOX]

32. The RW likes education looking bad, so they can cut the hell out of it...

And then move the monies around to finance weapons, etc.

RW staples in their bag of propaganda tricks: 1) Public schools are liberal institutions that force evolution on kids, and won't allow prayer; 2) Universities and colleges are liberal bastions run by an intellectual elite, who force their liberal ideas on impressionable minds; 3) All schooling, therefore, is another tentacle of the big liberal-government monster.

(Try substituting the work "Jewish" for liberal here, and you catch the sickening drift.)

This way, the poor saps who need public education the most won't shed a tear when its funding gets slashed to ribbons.

On edit: typos

[DoNotRefill]

33. I guess it depends on how you look at it.

From my perspective, no one party except the parents has the complete responsibility for educating their children. Public and private schools can play a role, if the parents are unable to do it themselves. But saying that the Government should shoulder 100% of the responsibility is, well, irresponsible.

Schools have students for between 5 and 7 hours a day, for 180 days a year (at least around here). They simply don't have enough time to teach everything that needs to be taught. My wife is a public school special ed teacher. She has a 5 year old kid who wasn't toilet trained at the start of the year. The parents were simply unable to do it. She's been working on it, but only has so much time to do it, and the parents refuse to reinforce the positive behavior. Progress has been made, but if the parents had their act together, it never would have been an issue past year 3. A lot of her caseload involves kids whose parents have been unable to undertake even BASIC education (in the form of social skills), resulting in the child being unprepared to even enter programs like Head Start. These kids end up in special ed not because they're truly disabled, but because their parents are either apathetic or incompetent.

If parents are able to (and want to) sucessfully educate their children, that's fine, and the government shouldn't be involved except in an oversight role. If the parents want to send the kid to private school, that's also fine, and the government shouldn't be involved except for certification issues at the private school. If neither of these are viable, then the government is the "stop-gap" to make sure that the kids get SOME education.

So, once again, depending on your perspective and the facts of each individual case, the Government may NOT have a responsibility to educate each and every child. It's role is to educate those children that the parents are unable or unwilling to educate. But the ULTIMATE responsibility lies with the parents.

BTW, I know a LOT of teachers socially. Most are fine, a few are excellent, but some I wouldn't trust my child with in a day-care role, much less trust my child's education to them.

[rasputin1952]

34. My sig, "Fear is born of ignorance", states the position...

that the RW'ers want. Fear is all they have to motivate people, and the less educated, and therefore more ignorant people are, the easier it is to manipulate said citizens. When a government or religious entity controls what is learned to the extent that the dumbing down of a nation is viable, there is great opportunity to take advantage of the population.

The 'Flat Earthers' ensured that exploration would be reined in; don't want to stray too far and fall off the earth do we?

The 'Earth Centrists' felt that the earth was the center of the universe; turns out we are close to the edge of a somewhat mediocre galaxy.

The physicians of the Dark Ages believed in 'bad air' and bleedings.

The list goes on; ignorance has played a major part of human history. A few brave individuals countered the reign of ignorance, one of these was Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was one of the great believers of public education, as were many of the Founders. This country became the most powerful, and arguably, the most benevolent the world has ever seen; this is based on education, especially education through HS. With out an educational base for all people, the country would quickly become a swirling mass of conflicting ideologies that would devolve into internal warfare.

O8)

[DocSavage]

37. Where?

The argument that the right puts forth is that there is no where in the constitution that says the Federal Govt. is responsible for education. Now, having said that, the right feels that local and state govt. can do a better job in the education business. Locally, parents can get directly involved in the way the school is run by going to school board meeting and such. State wide, local politicians will listen to you a lot better that your congressional representative in D.C..

Does the Federal Govt have a role, yes, but the right wants that role reduced. Stop the transfer of money from the local level, to the feds, back to the local level. There is waste and burecratic log jams. I personally believe, that I as a parent, can do more and make more of an positive impact on my kids schools than some govt. worker in Montgomery Co. I would rather see a shift in tax payments from Federal to local property tax. Is there a perfect system, heck no, but IMO, local owernship is better.

[Shopaholic]

38. Another line I keep hearing

is that it's not the president's job to find people jobs.