President Barack Obama is urging Congress to overhaul the No Child Left Behind Law and provide more local control and flexibility to schools. "We need to reward the reforms that are driven not by Washington, but by principals and teachers and parents," Obama said. "That's how we'll make progress in education - not from the top down, but from the bottom up." Somebody got the wrong speech in the teleprompter. Nope, it's the right speech. This translates to: let's find a way to get local schools off the hook for the product they're turning out. The teacher unions and school boards are united in how much they HATE NCLB, because it forces them to account for what they've done, and they can't hide behind statistics and averages.
The Obama administration has said No Child Left Behind is inadequately funded and seeks to replace it with a system for reviewing schools that leaves more day-to-day decisions to states and school districts. Oh. more funding! NOW it makes sense! So this is just a red herring to be traded off for ... no, not traded off. Just another good reason to raise Federal taxes to funnel the money thru D.C. for more control over local issues. I get it, now!
Many Democrats, and allies in the teachers unions, think schools need more federal money. Local control = local taxes. Federal money = Federal control.
Posted by: Bobby ||
05/23/2011 12:56 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I kind of agree that control of school should be at least pushed down to the state level. Eliminate the DOE completely and give half of the savings back to education programs that work. Let the states decide what works and act accordingly.
#5
Damn right BP - you get the Parents paying (as in writing a check to the local school district) and you will suddenly see a lot of interest in that the local district is doing and teaching.
I don't care if its $10/month for the dirt-poor who have to pay out of their welfare check. Everyone should pay something.
Same for taxes (Federal and State) - get rid of 'automatic withholding' and make people write a frigging check and suddenly a lot more people will become concerned with how high their taxes are and what is being done with their (and not the government's) money.
As it is - they never see the money so it's viewed as the 'governments money' and pretty much an infinite pile of cash.
I know... good luck with that. The politicians want to keep you numb on your taxes and the Unions definitely don't want people to see what they are doing with your school funds.
#6
Parents paying for their kids education? There are parents who send their kids to school without a breakfast, lunch, pencil, notebook.... My wife sees it everyday. My favorite story was the kid on free lunch who's mother brought in a happy meal. The student ate the happy meal and the mom at the free lunch.
#7
My sister was a teacher before retirement. She spend three years teaching in the American school in Abu Daubi(?). She said it was much better because the students came _prepared_ to learn.
The idea is that if the parents have to actually pay something for it - they might pay more attention. Might even try to get their kids to study or be prepared for school.,
"By definition, it means that the parties themselves - Israelis and Palestinians - will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. That's what mutually agreed upon swaps means," Obama said.
"It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last forty-four years. ... including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides," he said.
Posted by: Bobby ||
05/23/2011 07:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So the actual result for Israel could be worse than the 1967 borders?
Posted by: Matt ||
05/23/2011 8:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The Israeli borders will only be acceptable to the paleos (and the rest of the non-Israeli world) when the eastern border of Israel is defined as the low tide level of the eastern Mediterranean Sea. And even that may not be acceptable forever.
#6
"It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last forty-four years. ... including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides,"
How about including the geostrategic realities on the ground, such as the Arabs losing four wars? The Paleos striking out twice on the intifadas?
Usually the victor of repeated wars gets to dictate the terms of peace. Golly gee, can't imagine why Obama wouldn't allow precedent to handle this one.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/23/2011 11:33 Comments ||
Top||
#7
"It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last forty-four years. ... including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides," he said.
According to that logic we should cede California to Mexico...oh, wait, that's exactly what we're doing.
#8
"Nearly two weeks ago, Fatah, the U.S.-backed Palestinian National Liberation Movement, signed an agreement to form a unity government with Hamas, a U.S.-listed foreign terror organization. ... Hamas's own foreign minister has stated that Hamas 'believe[s] that negotiations with the Israeli enemy are in vain.' The Hamas Charter calls for Islam to 'abolish' Israel and for Muslims to 'fight the Jews and kill them.' It further proclaims, 'There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except jihad.' ... Where would U.S. dollars go in this new unity government? Hamas isn't hiding their intentions for these funds. In touting the new unity government, Hamas foreign minister Mahmoud al-Zahhar announced, 'We believe in armed struggle, in addition to responsible governing, as well as making the government's resources available to the resistance,' i.e. terrorism. ... Israel has already cut off tax funds that it routinely collects for the Palestinian Authority. The United States should follow this example, suspend all funds to the Palestinians until Fatah withdraws from the agreement, and make it clear that if the agreement is honored, there will be no more U.S. dollars for the Palestinian Authority. The fact that we even have to debate this question is absurd." --Jordan Sekulow, Director of policy and international operation for American Center for Law and Justice
#9
After the next Arab-Israeli war, the borders of Israel will be all the land yet livable after Israel nukes the he$$ out of the rest of the Muddled East. Hezbollocks rockets, Syrian tanks, and Egyptian populations will require Israel to use their nukes early and often, or be swept away. The Israelis do NOT have a death wish. The Arabs - it's questionable. The Palestinians - it's certain.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/23/2011 13:44 Comments ||
Top||
#10
So the actual result for Israel could be worse than the 1967 borders?
Yes. A contiguous 'Palestine' realistically implies a bisected Israel. Israel would be worse off strategically.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
