tell me it ain't so
Scott Reader via Spontaneous Solutions,
"An East St. Louis assistant principal was allowed to stay on the job despite evidence that he had impregnated a 7th grader, who attended his school. A paternity blood test showed a greater than 99 percent chance that he was the father, but a hearing officer ruled that was insufficient evidence. The administrator was ordered to pay child support nine years later. But he was acquitted of criminal charges in the case. He has denied any wrongdoing.
A Chicago teacher took a 15-year-old student to Wisconsin to attend an anti-Ku Klux Klan rally where the student was arrested after allegedly kicking a police officer in the groin. The teacher is alleged to have never informed the student’s guardian or school officials of the arrest during the unauthorized trip. A hearing officer ruled the teacher could keep her job."
8 comments:
Bill,
It is so.
A more protected, incompetent, and fundamentally corrupt institution does not exist on this planet.
Public Education (BIG ED) makes Enron look pristine. Unlike Enron, however, BIG ED has 892 politically protected franchises in this state - each gaming the system, protecting their 17 year-old diddling progeny, and indoctrinating a nation the "they did nothing wrong."
The sole plank in their platform is that the only "wrong" thing on the planet is to fail give them even more money.
Everything else is permissible
The tone of extreme wisdom's remarks probably are a good indication of why we'll never have school vouchers in the state.
Yeah I saw the links so many tough issues and question. It's absurd that there are so many hurdles to hiring bad teachers. Unfortunately it helps if you have an active union.
not really sure how you can compare the two cases ... it's not like the second teacher took the kid to Wisconsin to get an abortion
hey we keep re-electing John Stroger
With the advent of increased homosexuality and other sexual abberations, more problems will develop. Mark this prediction.
Anon 7:30 AM wrote:
The tone of extreme wisdom's remarks probably are a good indication of why we'll never have school vouchers in the state.
EW asks:
Please try to explain that. What does "tone" have to do with whether or not we get vouchers?
Do you think a softer tone would get vouchers faster? Slower?
Vouchers (I prefer the words "fully-funded scholarships of equal value") certainly aren't going to come about until people are made aware of just how corrupt (and overpriced) public education truly is.
Is is your position that one must be nice and quiet in "tone" to criticize public education? Is it your position that vouchers can come about by other means?
Some how, I don't think you hold either of those positions, but would rather attack my "tone" instead of attempting to defend the indefensible (and I mean all of public education, and not just these 2 examples of how out-of-control it truly is).
If this is a just society, vouchers will come about eventually.
I completely support school vouchers, but being so confrontational so as to say "A more protected, incompetent, and fundamentally corrupt institution does not exist on this planet." shows the general public that you're a bitter idiot and discredits your arguments, making those on the other side look saner.
The same thing is happening on the immigration debate. There are good reasons to restrict illegal immigration, but unfortunately the loudest voices advocating for this are racist idiots, rather than people arguing rationally based on economics and national security. Thus, it makes all those who support tougher borders look like racist idiots.
The same is also true with the abortion debate. I'm pro-Life and there are good biological and philosophical reasons to back up my position. Unfortunately, the ones who speak loudest in the pro-Life debate are fundamentalist wackos who make it seem like the pro-Life movement is about turning the clock back to the 1950s when it's really about saving the lives of the unborn.
The fact that you attacked me so strongly when I suggested that your tone is hurting your argument tells me that if you really cared about school choice, you should either make your arguments rational and appeal to the traditional American values of liberty and competition or you should shut up for the good of the cause.
Post a Comment