Wild speculation or...
...wish Fitz gets it so the Senate can bog him down with sensless investigations and away from real investigations,
Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democratic, speculated that Patrick Fitzgerald, a U.S. attorney and the prosecutor in the CIA leak investigation, had a chance — albeit a small one — of replacing Alberto Gonzales: “If the choice is made to bring in somebody truly independent who will be quickly confirmed, Patrick Fitzgerald’s one.”And a Giuliani quote from the same link that fits Illinois,
Rudy Giuliani: “How is it that we have the best higher education in the world and a weaker K-through-12 system? … What’s the difference? Why does one operate so well and the other not nearly as well? American higher education is based on a quintessential American principle — choice.”
More: “I’d give parents control over their children’s education. … We’ve got to have competition operating.”
8 comments:
If Patrick Fitzgerald were to become the Attorney General one would have to wonder if Patrick's posse of lawyers could bring Governor Blagojevich to justice.
If that were to happen let's all hope that Patrick Fitzgerald would clean up Illinois and Chicago.
"How is it that we have the best higher education in the world and a weaker K-through-12 system? … What’s the difference?"
The K-12 public school system is required to educate every kid that shows up. Colleges and universities are not so required.
That Giuliani is a real dim bulb.
-- SCAM
The education lobby hates choice but its time has come. Milwaukee's parents are clamoring for an expansion of their choice program. Let's experiment with choice in Illinois. What more harm could be done?
scam,
On the surface, your argument seems valid, but you forget the fact that transferring K-12 content to youngsters is not a difficult task.
While there are valid arguments about differences between poor and rich kids' starting points, the fact remains that the political class sacrifices the poor children on the alter of the ineffective and wasteful bureaucracies that fund their campaigns.
The Canard about being forced to "take all comers" is smashed against the truth that if you funded children directly and allowed for a myriad of options, the poor would rapidly increase their achievement.
It is only the political clout and the insatiable greed of "Big Education" that prevents the poor from accessing these opportunities.
They will fight tooth and nail to make sure that every dime of education dollars is directed through their corrupt fingers.
If you want to distinguish between an honest progressive interested in the poor and a hack shilling for a corrupt bureaucracy, school choice is the litmus test.
If educating Illinois and America's disadvantaged is your goal, there is no intellectually sound argument against school choice.
But your are right about one thing.
Benito is a dim bulb - just not for the reason you cited.
Wisdom, you said,
"The Canard about being forced to "take all comers" is smashed against the truth that if you funded children directly and allowed for a myriad of options, the poor would rapidly increase their achievement."
So which school(s) would be required to take all comers under your plan? That shouldn't be a problem, should it? And you wouldn't eliminate compulsory education laws, would you?
And, BTW, what is your information source for your statement that "if you funded directly", the poor would rapidly increase their achievement"? your opinion?
Bill,
If there ever were senseless investigations, pFitz is the instigator. Ed Vrdolyak for considering a real estate commission on a transaction that did not take place; George Ryan for being Secretary of State when there was a big accident; Scooter Libby for not revealing the name of a non-covert CIA agent....
Come to think of it, the guy might be a perfect match for the incompetency of the Federal Government.
JBP
Hello Again Steve,
Though certainly controversial, the fact is that I WOULD eliminate compulsory education laws. They are not necessary in a free society.
To demonstrate, I'm already on record as supporting a scholarship for every child in the state (throw the nation in too, though states should be responsible for their own reforms).
If you are offering such a scholarship, to be used at a school your choice, what in God's name does one need cumpulsion for?
Once again, your question exposes your implied belief that people are too stupid to find a way to educate their kids.
To be sure, a tiny minority might be. So what? The modern liberal's notion that you can force people to be smart is one of the most stupid notions of all, and Chicago's amazingly wasteful schools, with their obscene drop out rate and substandard education prove my point.
As to my "proof." I actually have some. Since our last few debates, I've actually discovered that my "radical plan" is basically already proven successful.
Sure, there are some differences with my plan. I offer Illinois a $2 billion tax cut and a chance at getting rid of an overpriced Education Bureaucracy
Post a Comment