Conservatives beat us on Education

I have a brother and sister-in-law who focus heavily on education in their home. Their oldest daughter is barely 7 years old and has tested out of the 2nd grade already. They worked so hard to get the school to allow them to advance her to the 3rd grade (essentially skipping two grades ahead) and the school wouldn't allow it. Several of the teachers showed up to vouch for my niece, both in terms of her academic abilities and her social skills; no dice. The principal refused to allow her to move forward even one year, much less two because she didn't want to set a precedent.

The irony is that when it comes to holding a child back a year the parents have the last say, at least in New York state. However, if your child is doing well then they aren't interested in helping them move forward. After fighting for her child and losing, she pulled all of her kids (all bright) from the school and began homeschooling.

Now, I'm about to cross the line here in several ways

#1 I'm a liberal who's DISGUSTED by the ownership teachers unions have over the democratic party.
#2 I have a bias against the homeschoolers because I suspect many of them are religious fundamentalists who are trying to limit their kids opportunities, not expand them
#3 I generally support public education... or do I?

Here is the problem as I see it: Schools that stink have no incentive to move exceptional kids forward because they bring up the test scores for the kids whose parents are not involved or who seemingly lack capacity and genuinely need special attention (funding for which is limited).
Teachers unions work to protect even crappy teachers and lousy parents demand more money so they don't have to get involved.

Here is the solution as I see it: Publicly fund and regulate education but privately run it. I do support public education, but we can have public education without having the hegemonic limitations imposed on us. Give each parent a voucher for their child's education of whatever we are currently spending on education, plus what we need to do it the right way, and then give parents the ability to hold their school DIRECTLY accountable for its success or failure.

Sometimes it's not even about "success" or "failure" so much as it is that some schools may be better suited for some students than others. Under our current system, however, the students without a lot of money are stuck. Wealthy parents will privately school their kids anyway and so it is the middle-class and poor who are screwed by the current educational practices; the very people Democrats claim to help most.

Hey Democrats, if you really care about the poor and middle-class then how about fixing the schools... not too difficult to do if you care to try. On this issue I must side with conservatives. It may be the only time I do, but it is so frustrating to have a party that sells out it's constituents for the proverbial special interest groups!

It's not dead yet

“At the end of the day, we have to figure out who is the stronger candidate because that is what matters most.” -Hillary

Oh, I thought what matters most is that at the end of the day we stand for something besides our own narcissistic career ambitions. This is why Hillary should never be elected President, because she thinks politics are the ends for her and not a means for us.

Damn the torpedos!

One of the problems that I have with President Bush is that if he gets it into his head that he wants to do something, not even his closest advisors, political allies, or friends can convince him otherwise. Sound familiar?

Last night Hillary lost by almost 15 points in NC and barely, barely squeeked by in Indiana; a state by the way, which will allow anyone to request a Democratic ballot. A state which has voted Republican in every election for many, many years. A state in which, presumably, "operation chaos" is in full swing. But Hillary will take her 2 point lead and declare "on to the White House!"

Obama has the popular vote, the delegate vote, and Hillary has the possibility (not probability though) of getting the super-delegates to go for her. The very idea of having super-delegates is offensive to me and I find to be exceptionally undemocratic as it is part of a machinery that works against voters.

In short, the only shot Hillary has is to overturn the will of the voters.

Obamanomics

PBS tried to host a debate on the "gas tax holiday" supported by Hillary and McCain... they couldn't find ONE SINGLE Economist to defend the idea. Obama, on the other hand, has said the idea is silly... something EVERY SINGLE Economist has defended.

The reason for this comment? Just another way in which two polished politicians are trying to find ways to play for votes, while Obama fights for what is right.

Jeremiah Wright and Mormons

I've been somewhat amused and simultaneously astonished at the ironies that are plaguing this election. Here are just a few: Hillary and McCain have been in politics for decades and are millionaires many times over, but Obama is an elitist. Hillary has the blue collar white vote??? And last and most importantly... Jeremiah Wright.

I wonder how many LDS liberals there are? I've attended a Mormon church since before I can remember and I can count on my hands how many liberals I've known. Prominent Mormon church leaders have said things like "blacks will never have the (Mormon) priesthood" and that "the biggest enemies to the church are feminists, intellectuals, and homosexuals." (I like to consider myself both of the former by the way) The late President Gordon B. Hinkley once poked fun of Senator Harry Reid on an LDS broadcast for being a Democrat. And it goes on...

I've endured far, far worse than any of these comments both in church meetings and in less formal settings from LDS Bishops, Stake Presidents, and many others. I've regularly attended our classes and listened to "teachers" talk about how the church's doctrines clearly align with the Republican party and assail "liberals." I wonder, is the fact (and it is a fact) that my Bishop is an unapologetic right-winger cause for doubting my liberal credentials? I wonder how many people have disowned friends and acquaintances they have simply because of disagreement with them?

Would you? Do you really only maintain relationships with people that agree with you? How sad if you do. How much better is the person who keeps up a variety of acquaintances than the narrow-minded fool who keeps the company only of himself and those like him.