Why the Pledge shouldn't be said in our schoolsoranywherepublic
jal...@cox.net
>:|jal...@cox.net wrote:..
>:|> Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:...
>:|>
>:|MK. Discussion deleted (jalison inserts newsgroup citations)...
>:|>
>:|> Black unmarked helos are frequently seen by this nut,
>:|>
>:|> Perhaps he would like to tell us of his experiences when he was beamed up
>:|> by aliens as well.
>:|>
>:|> No MK, the entire world isn't out to get you, some have of it has already
>:|> gotten you.
>:|>
>:|MK. This is as lucid an argument as jalison makes. The cartel's shills
>:|grow shrill.
Which shrills dippy?
>:} Jalison tried to deny his association with Americans
>:|United for the Separation of Church and State, until I reproduced a
>:|post in which he claimed membership. The NEA supports AU.
Smoke screen argument to cover up his misrepresentation of facts as shown
below in the GOOGLE URLS.
Notice how he tries to fend off his own misrepresentations by creating a
smoke screen.
========================================================
From: jal...@cox.net
Newsgroups:
seattle.politics,wa.politics,alt.politics.usa.constitution,misc.education,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Why the Pledge shouldn't be said in our
schoolsoranywherepublic
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 19:28:49 GMT
malcolmki...@yahoo.com (Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:
>:|jal...@cox.net wrote:...
>:|> Bob LeChevalier wrote:...
>:|>
>:|> MK might be a "libertarian," I don't know. I do know he has a very real
>:|> hard on for the public school system
>:|>
>:|> He would love to see it fail
>:|> Thus, he is very biased.
>:|>
>:|MK. The NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel's schools are failing,
[MK-AKA panther]
Black unmarked helos are frequently seen by this nut,
Perhaps he would like to tell us of his experiences when he was beamed up
by aliens as well.
No MK, the entire world isn't out to get you, some have of it has already
gotten you.
I ask the readers to excuse me if I am employing of this nut's favorite
supporters posting tactics, i.e. susupply
Truth of the matter is, MK has developed a specialized code that he uses in
his posting on this topic. A code that is unproven, yet designed to illicit
nothing but pure raw emotions.
The fact of the matter is, MK, as a former teacher in the public school
system feels that system treated him unfairly, thus he has a really big
hard on against the public school system.
Anyone reading his posts and replies on this topic should take that into
consideration in evaluating his comments including his emotional code
"The NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel"
I am sure the term cartel has many applications but in recent years in out
culture is has a lot of exposure as a negative, i e, drug cartels, etc. I
suspect that is why he likes to use the word.
MK has been known to misrepresent things in his posts, such as a book he
used to talk about that was suppose to prove certain activist organizations
were fronts or supported by the "cartel"
The implication was that these organizations received much or most of their
monies from the teachers unions, etc that they operated as puppets or
fronts for said organizations,
BTW, you will never hear MK mention any of the funding provided by the
various ultra conservative and religious right activist and legal
organizations to the pro voucher groups, organizations, etc.
All the stats he likes to presents are from other countries, and he likes
to try and pass those off as being meaningful to this country.
A country with a totally different history, legal system, culture,
traditions, in most cases government, etc. His claim or implication by
posting such information is --- what and how there --- would be the same
outcome here as well.
There is no proof of that, in fact far more evidence that would not be the
case.
There is no longer term studies of vouchers on a mass scale in this
country, simply because there has not been any mass vouchers applications
in this country. There are a few studies based on a couple programs in a
couple individual med, sized cities.
The results of the voucher programs in those places are mixed.
The best private schools aren't doing much better, if at all than the best
public schools.
The average private schools are comparable to the average private schools.
The poor private schools usually close down. There has been corruption at
times, poor management etc.
In short, those vouchers have not really lived up the various claims the
pro voucher folks like to say vouchers will achieve.
MK is extremely biased, with an agenda and that agenda isn't nobile.
Now with all of that in mind, readers are urged to urged to "enjoy" his
posts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY HE IS BIASED AGAINST THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEMS
From: jal...@pilot.infi.net
Subject: Panther's history as a teacher
Date: 1999/11/28
Newsgroups: misc.education
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3848426c.8807597%40news.pilot.infi.net&output=gplain
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HIS MISREPRESENTATIONS OF THE FACTS
From: jal...@pilot.infi.net
Subject: Re: Panther/Lieberman-finish
Date: 1999/12/01
Newsgroups: misc.education
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=38488738.7202615%40news.pilot.infi.net&output=gplain
Malcolm Kirkpatrick
> Malcolm Kirkpatrick wrote:...
>
MK. Topic: School vouchers and the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel...
>
"If the government would make up its mind to require for every child a
good education, it might save itself the trouble of providing one. It
might leave to parents to obtain the education where and how they
pleased, and content itself with helping to pay the school fees of the
poorer classes of children, and defraying the entire school expense of
those who have no one else to pay for them." -- J.S. Mill, On Liberty
>
MK. Discussion deleted (ad hominem)...
> >:|MK. This is as lucid an argument as jalison makes. The cartel's shills
> >:|grow shrill.
>
> Which shrills dippy?
>
>
> >:} Jalison tried to deny his association with Americans
> >:|United for the Separation of Church and State, until I reproduced a
> >:|post in which he claimed membership. The NEA supports AU.
>
> Smoke screen argument to cover up his misrepresentation of facts as shown
> below in the GOOGLE URLS.
>
(why bother?). Myron Lieberman says in "The Teacher Unions" that the
NEA supports Americans United for Separation of Church and State and
People for the American Way. I remembered this as --financial--
support. jalison observed that Lieberman did not say that, so I wrote
to Dr. Lieberman's organization http://www.educationpolicy.org and
asked. The NEA supports PFAW and AU financially. That is the sum of
my "misrepresentation".
>
> I am sure the term cartel has many applications but in recent years in out
> culture is has a lot of exposure as a negative, i e, drug cartels, etc. I
> suspect that is why he likes to use the word.
>
interest, somewhere between "monopoly" and a competitive market.
>
MK. Discussion deleted (argument repeated by jalison, addressed
previously)
>
MK. Anyway, to our topic: A policy that gives to parents the power to
determine which institution shall receive the State's K-12 education
subsidy would benefit students, parents, real classroom teachers, and
taxpayers. School vouchers would reduce social tensions by converting
issues such as the Pledge of Allegiance from winner-take-all contests
into a matter of choice (and indifference to many). School vouchers
are constitutional, according to the USSC. State amendments which
restrict a State's K-12 education subsidy to secular organizations are
probably unconstitutional, if otherwise children may attend schools
operated by non-government organizations. Even within that
restriction, however, there is a simple method to give parents
control: Mandate that school districts --must-- hire parents on
personal service contracts to provide for their children's education,
if the parents apply fr the contract. Parents could then homeschool,
hire tutors, pool resources and send their kids to a neighbor, or pay
tuition to an independent school.
>
http://www.rru.com/~meo/hs.minski.html (One page. Marvin Minsky
comment on school. Please read this.)
http://www.hslda.org (Very useful links, for prospective
homeschoolers)
http://www.educationnext.org/20014/68.html
http://www.educationnext.org/20014/68.html (voucher study)
jal...@cox.net
>:|jal...@cox.net wrote:...
>:|> Malcolm Kirkpatrick wrote:...
>:|>
>:|MK. Topic: School vouchers and the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel...
>:|>
>:|"If the government would make up its mind to require for every child a
>:|good education, it might save itself the trouble of providing one. It
>:|might leave to parents to obtain the education where and how they
>:|pleased, and content itself with helping to pay the school fees of the
>:|poorer classes of children, and defraying the entire school expense of
>:|those who have no one else to pay for them." -- J.S. Mill, On Liberty
>:|>
>:|MK. Discussion deleted (ad hominem)...
>:|>
>:|> >:|MK. This is as lucid an argument as jalison makes. The cartel's shills
>:|> >:|grow shrill.
>:|>
>:|> Which shrills dippy?
>:|>
>:|MK. "Shills", jalison, "shills".
Which shrills dippy?
These so called shrills have names?
How DO YOU define shrills?
You got any proof they are shrills?
>:|>
>:|> >:} Jalison tried to deny his association with Americans
>:|> >:|United for the Separation of Church and State, until I reproduced a
>:|> >:|post in which he claimed membership. The NEA supports AU.
>:|>
>:|> Smoke screen argument to cover up his misrepresentation of facts as shown
>:|> below in the GOOGLE URLS.
>:|>
>:|MK. Readers may backtrack to assess the accuracy of that assertion
>:|(why bother?). Myron Lieberman says in "The Teacher Unions" that the
>:|NEA supports Americans United for Separation of Church and State and
>:|People for the American Way. I remembered this as --financial--
>:|support. jalison observed that Lieberman did not say that, so I wrote
>:|to Dr. Lieberman's organization http://www.educationpolicy.org and
>:|asked. The NEA supports PFAW and AU financially. That is the sum of
>:|my "misrepresentation".
>:|>
malcolmki...@yahoo.com (Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:
>:|jal...@cox.net wrote:..
>:|> Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:...
>:|>
>:|MK. Discussion deleted (jalison inserts newsgroup citations)...
>:|>
>:|> Black unmarked helos are frequently seen by this nut,
>:|>
>:|> Perhaps he would like to tell us of his experiences when he was beamed up
>:|> by aliens as well.
>:|>
>:|> No MK, the entire world isn't out to get you, some have of it has already
>:|> gotten you.
>:|>
>:|MK. This is as lucid an argument as jalison makes. The cartel's shills
>:|grow shrill.
Which shrills dippy?
>:} Jalison tried to deny his association with Americans
>:|United for the Separation of Church and State, until I reproduced a
>:|post in which he claimed membership. The NEA supports AU.
Smoke screen argument to cover up his misrepresentation of facts as shown
below in the GOOGLE URLS.
Notice how he tries to fend off his own misrepresentations by creating a
smoke screen.
========================================================
malcolmki...@yahoo.com (Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:
[MK-AKA panther]
I am sure the term cartel has many applications but in recent years in out
culture is has a lot of exposure as a negative, i e, drug cartels, etc. I
suspect that is why he likes to use the word.
MK has been known to misrepresent things in his posts, such as a book he
Founding Father
<jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:8st08vsmduivs23t5...@4ax.com...
>
> MK has been known to misrepresent things in his posts, such as a book he
> used to talk about that was suppose to prove certain activist
organizations
> were fronts or supported by the "cartel"
>
> The implication was that these organizations received much or most of
their
> monies from the teachers unions, etc that they operated as puppets or
> fronts for said organizations,
>
> BTW, you will never hear MK mention any of the funding provided by the
> various ultra conservative and religious right activist and legal
> organizations to the pro voucher groups, organizations, etc.
I just saw this as the first post in this thread, so I don't know what
exactly you're referring to, but funding to conservative organizations is a
pittance compared with liberal ones, like the Ford Foundation.
A pet theme of liberals in recent years has been to attribute
conservative successes to lavish funding from foundations, J. Gordon
Lamb
writes at www.frontpagemag.com.
"People For The American Way ... have taken this idea to an entirely
new
level by way of their published report 'Buying a Movement: Right Wing
Foundations and American Politics,' which documents with specific
figures
in order to educate the reader, 'Each year conservative foundations
channel millions of dollars into a broad range of conservative
political
organizations.' "
PFAW "specifically targets the Lynne And Harry Bradley Foundation, the
Koch Family Foundations, ... the John M. Olin Foundation, the Scaife
Foundations ... and the Adolph Coors Foundation," Mr. Lamb said.
Those foundations had total assets of $1.3 billion in 2001 and awarded
$95 million in grants that year.
Impressive? Perhaps. But left-wing foundations actually are much
larger,
Mr. Lamb said.
"By contrast, the four largest foundations that consistently fund
left-
wing agendas are the Bill And Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford
Foundation, the David And Lucille Packard Foundation and the John D.
And
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation."
Their total assets in 2001 were $53 billion. And their total grants
that
year were $2.6 billion.
"But why, given the availability of myth-busting facts, does the left
consistently cry 'poor'?" Mr. Lamb asks. "Well, it makes for good
press.
The image of scary, big-money, far-right foundations makes a good bogey
man for their platforms."
But, hey, don't let facts get in your way.
> There is no longer term studies of vouchers on a mass scale in this
> country, simply because there has not been any mass vouchers applications
> in this country. There are a few studies based on a couple programs in a
> couple individual med, sized cities.
Thanks to the concerted fascist obstruction by left wing politicians who are
in the pocket of the NEA. And most of these left wing politicians are gross
hypocrites, sending their OWN children to private/religious schools and
denying that right to those who are not wealthy.
> The results of the voucher programs in those places are mixed.
> The best private schools aren't doing much better, if at all than the best
> public schools.
> The average private schools are comparable to the average private schools.
> The poor private schools usually close down. There has been corruption at
> times, poor management etc.
>
> In short, those vouchers have not really lived up the various claims the
> pro voucher folks like to say vouchers will achieve.
Not only do children do better in voucher programs, school choice even
improves the public schools. From the New York Times:
February 16, 2001
Threat of Vouchers Motivates Schools to Improve, Study Says
By DIANA JEAN SCHEMO
WASHINGTON, Feb. 15 - A new study of Florida's efforts to
turn
around failing schools has found that the threat that
children
would receive vouchers to attend private schools spurred the
worst performing schools to make significant academic
strides.
The study, sponsored by the state, was conducted by Jay P.
Greene of the Manhattan Institute, a pro- voucher research
group
based in Manhattan. The study promptly came under fire from
opponents of vouchers, with some saying that it was the
state's
failing grade of the schools rather than the threat of
vouchers
that motivated the schools to improve. Some independent
researchers said it was far too early to tell much from the
Florida initiative.
To change public schoolsThe Washington Times
www.washtimes.com
To change public schools
Ken Johnson
Published 2/12/01
As vice president of a large urban school board, I have a message to
parents of every public school child in America: Private school choice
is
one of the best things that ever happened to my city's public schools.
Many will be surprised to hear an elected member of the Milwaukee
Public
Schools (MPS) Board of Directors say that. They'd be even more
surprised
to learn that several of my board colleagues agree that school choice
is
strengthening our public schools.
Milwaukee's experience with school choice flatly contradicts the
propaganda of its opponents, who mislead citizens to think that school
choice will harm children "left behind" in public schools. The exact
opposite is true in Milwaukee, where we have the nation's oldest and
largest program of tax-supported vouchers for low-income parents.
School choice fundamentally has changed Milwaukee's public education
mindset. Before the Milwaukee parental choice plan, some in MPS seemed
to
have the view that 'we own the children of Milwaukee.' Then, only
wealthier parents had choice. If you were poor and lived in Milwaukee,
you were going to go to MPS. End of story. A system that believes its
students lack options lacks any incentive to perform.
Parental choice changed all that -- not that the competitive spirit
seized the public schools overnight. In the early 1990s, public
schools
looked for ways to kill the program. A big change came in 1998, when
Wisconsin's Supreme Court upheld the program's constitutionality. As a
labor union member and an electrician by trade, I know a little bit
about high voltage situations. When the court upheld vouchers, it sent
a
shock through the public school system. With the realization that low-
income parents now had options, the public education establishment
knew
it would have to improve.
Actually, the best education is home schooling. Parents who do so should
get back what they are saving the public school system.
> MK is extremely biased, with an agenda and that agenda isn't nobile.
Sounds like you're talking about yourself. And you an NEA member by any
chance?
Founding Father
One additional, but important point:
In a free society, proponents of school choice should not have to prove
their system is better. In a free society parents should be able to choose
what school their children go to, and the choice should include private and
religious schools.
Such choice would remove all arguments about prayer in the schools, saying
the pledge, and what values are being taught.
Obviously, then, the NEA and left wing politicians have conspired to make
this not a free society.
The Axis of Weasel
wrote:
>
><jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:8st08vsmduivs23t5...@4ax.com...
>
>One additional, but important point:
>
>In a free society, proponents of school choice should not have to prove
>their system is better. In a free society parents should be able to choose
>what school their children go to, and the choice should include private and
>religious schools.
We have school choice. You just want church schools subsidized, and
the public isn't interested.
>
>Such choice would remove all arguments about prayer in the schools, saying
>the pledge, and what values are being taught.
>
Just don't make me pay for your flat-earth academies.
>Obviously, then, the NEA and left wing politicians have conspired to make
>this not a free society.
>
By not subscibing to your "welfare for Jeezus" program?
****************
They said if I voted for Gore, we would have massive spending deficits, angry allies, and be bogged down in "police actions"
I did, and we are.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal.
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
jal...@cox.net
Founding father? LOL Yea right.
{snipped the rest of the crap]
Here is a news bulletin for you, all sides us the same tactics, have the
same types of organizations that do funding and anyone, and I don't give a
dame who thy are that single out only one side and say bad bad are biased
Bob LeChevalier
><jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:8st08vsmduivs23t5...@4ax.com...
>>
>> MK has been known to misrepresent things in his posts, such as a book he
>> used to talk about that was suppose to prove certain activist organizations
>> were fronts or supported by the "cartel"
>>
>> The implication was that these organizations received much or most of their
>> monies from the teachers unions, etc that they operated as puppets or
>> fronts for said organizations,
>>
>> BTW, you will never hear MK mention any of the funding provided by the
>> various ultra conservative and religious right activist and legal
>> organizations to the pro voucher groups, organizations, etc.
>
>I just saw this as the first post in this thread, so I don't know what
>exactly you're referring to, but funding to conservative organizations is a
>pittance compared with liberal ones, like the Ford Foundation.
You've gotta be kidding!
Have you looked at the money raised by the Republican Party compared
to the Democratic Party? Even with the unions, the Democrats don't
come close to match the Republicans.
>> There is no longer term studies of vouchers on a mass scale in this
>> country, simply because there has not been any mass vouchers applications
>> in this country. There are a few studies based on a couple programs in a
>> couple individual med, sized cities.
>
>Thanks to the concerted fascist obstruction by left wing politicians who are
>in the pocket of the NEA.
Not to mention the voters of many states that have voted down vouchers
almost every time they've been give a choice.
>And most of these left wing politicians are gross
>hypocrites, sending their OWN children to private/religious schools and
>denying that right to those who are not wealthy.
They've been spending their own money when they do so.
They also probably buy better cars than the poor (who may not even own
a car).
>> In short, those vouchers have not really lived up the various claims the
>> pro voucher folks like to say vouchers will achieve.
>
>Not only do children do better in voucher programs, school choice even
>improves the public schools.
Not supported by your own article - you didn't read to the bottom.
>From the New York Times:
>
> February 16, 2001
> Threat of Vouchers Motivates Schools to Improve, Study Says
> By DIANA JEAN SCHEMO
>
> WASHINGTON, Feb. 15 - A new study of Florida's efforts to turn
> around failing schools has found that the threat that children
> would receive vouchers to attend private schools spurred the
> worst performing schools to make significant academic strides.
There is NO evidence that improvements in poor schools came as a
result of a "threat".
> The study, sponsored by the state, was conducted by Jay P.
> Greene of the Manhattan Institute, a pro- voucher research group
> based in Manhattan.
Which means that the conclusion was foregone.
> The study promptly came under fire from
> opponents of vouchers, with some saying that it was the state's
> failing grade of the schools rather than the threat of vouchers
> that motivated the schools to improve. Some independent
> researchers said it was far too early to tell much from the
> Florida initiative.
In other words, how you interpret the results seems to be based on
your political agenda. Thus the article says that there is NO sure
conclusion that school choice has improved the schools.
>Actually, the best education is home schooling. Parents who do so should
>get back what they are saving the public school system.
They aren't saving the public school system a single penny. Pull your
kid out of school, and the school's costs aren't cut in any
significant way. The marginal cost of educating one more kid in the
schools is negligible. It takes large numbers of kids to make a
difference.
>> MK is extremely biased, with an agenda and that agenda isn't nobile.
>
>Sounds like you're talking about yourself. And you an NEA member by any
>chance?
Vouchers are regularly voted down by the majority of the public. The
majority of the public is not a member of any union, much less the NEA
which has less than 1% of the population among its membership.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
><jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:8st08vsmduivs23t5...@4ax.com...
>
>One additional, but important point:
>
>In a free society, proponents of school choice should not have to prove
>their system is better. In a free society parents should be able to choose
>what school their children go to, and the choice should include private and
>religious schools.
They have that choice. But choice costs money. If you spend the
money you have as much choice of schools as you have choice of cars
and houses and doctors.
If you don't have money you have get the equivalent of public busses,
public housing, and public health clinics, all of which are
considerably better than nothing, but none of which are preferred by
people who choose to spend their own money elsewhere.
>Such choice would remove all arguments about prayer in the schools, saying
>the pledge, and what values are being taught.
>
>Obviously, then, the NEA and left wing politicians have conspired to make
>this not a free society.
"Freedom of choice" isn't supposed to be government-paid. That is
socialism.
lojbab
Malcolm Kirkpatrick
>Malcolm Kirkpatrick wrote:...
>
MK. Topic: School vouchers and the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel...
>
> >:|> >:|MK. This is as lucid an argument as jalison makes. The cartel's shills
> >:|> >:|grow shrill.
>
> >:|> Which shrills dippy?
>
> >:|MK. "Shills", jalison, "shills".
>
> Which shrills dippy?
> These so called shrills have names?
> How DO YOU define shrills?
> You got any proof they are shrills?
>
>
MK. Ad hominem deleted...
>
MK. jalison repeats himself. I will refer any patient reader to an
earlier post in answer.
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl2478233601d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=dfbfc9b9.0303211256.5420aa62%40posting.google.com&rnum=101
>
Take care. Homeschool if you can.
Founding Father
"The Axis of Weasel" <zeppn...@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:qb468v05verfrtd69...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 05:07:04 -0700, "Founding Father" <f...@qwest.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> ><jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:8st08vsmduivs23t5...@4ax.com...
> >
> >One additional, but important point:
> >
> >In a free society, proponents of school choice should not have to prove
> >their system is better. In a free society parents should be able to
choose
> >what school their children go to, and the choice should include private
and
> >religious schools.
>
> We have school choice. You just want church schools subsidized, and
> the public isn't interested.
Right. Just like the voters in Iraq have freedom of choice whom they vote
for.
The public IS interested. But overcoming fascist Democrats who are in the
pocket of the NEA has proven to be very difficult.
But I'll tell you what. I'm perfectly willing to compromise. End all
government involvement in education and let parents use their own money no
longer confiscated in taxes to educate their own kids.
But you won't agree to that because of your fascist need to control the
education of America's future (which is damn bleak, given current public
education performance).
> >
> >Such choice would remove all arguments about prayer in the schools,
saying
> >the pledge, and what values are being taught.
> >
> Just don't make me pay for your flat-earth academies.
And don't make me pay for your public schools that indoctrinate children
into loony leftism and teach nothing.
> >Obviously, then, the NEA and left wing politicians have conspired to make
> >this not a free society.
> >
> By not subscibing to your "welfare for Jeezus" program?
By forcing children into worthless public schools that succeed at nothing
but undermining parents' values.
Founding Father
"Bob LeChevalier" <loj...@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:g4j68v0bn1vfu565k...@4ax.com...
> "Founding Father" <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
> ><jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:8st08vsmduivs23t5...@4ax.com...
> >
> >One additional, but important point:
> >
> >In a free society, proponents of school choice should not have to prove
> >their system is better. In a free society parents should be able to
choose
> >what school their children go to, and the choice should include private
and
> >religious schools.
>
> They have that choice. But choice costs money. If you spend the
> money you have as much choice of schools as you have choice of cars
> and houses and doctors.
That's exactly the point. Parents would have the choice except for the fact
that the government confiscates the money they need to pay for it. If they
have enough left over, they're paying twice.
> >Such choice would remove all arguments about prayer in the schools,
saying
> >the pledge, and what values are being taught.
> >
> >Obviously, then, the NEA and left wing politicians have conspired to make
> >this not a free society.
>
> "Freedom of choice" isn't supposed to be government-paid. That is
> socialism.
>
> lojbab
So what you're saying is if the government pays for it, you get no choice.
That's a pretty revealing admission from a liberal. I'm not sure you
realize the implications. The solution then, is to end public education and
make parents pay for their own kids.
Founding Father
> "Founding Father" <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
> ><jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:8st08vsmduivs23t5...@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> MK has been known to misrepresent things in his posts, such as a book
he
> >> used to talk about that was suppose to prove certain activist
organizations
> >> were fronts or supported by the "cartel"
> >>
> >> The implication was that these organizations received much or most of
their
> >> monies from the teachers unions, etc that they operated as puppets or
> >> fronts for said organizations,
> >>
> >> BTW, you will never hear MK mention any of the funding provided by the
> >> various ultra conservative and religious right activist and legal
> >> organizations to the pro voucher groups, organizations, etc.
> >
> >I just saw this as the first post in this thread, so I don't know what
> >exactly you're referring to, but funding to conservative organizations is
a
> >pittance compared with liberal ones, like the Ford Foundation.
>
> You've gotta be kidding!
>
> Have you looked at the money raised by the Republican Party compared
> to the Democratic Party? Even with the unions, the Democrats don't
> come close to match the Republicans.
You really should learn to read. The post I replied to referred to
"activist organizations." That generally does not include the political
parties.
If you include the unions "in kind" aid and all the free publicity by the
left wing controlled media that basically parrot the Democrat Pary line, the
Republicans are far behind. Talk radio helps, but people have to seek that
out, and those who do are usually already well informed, and therefore
conservative. Those who get all their news from network TV get an endless
stream of Democrat propaganda. The major newspapers are just as bad.
> >> There is no longer term studies of vouchers on a mass scale in this
> >> country, simply because there has not been any mass vouchers
applications
> >> in this country. There are a few studies based on a couple programs in
a
> >> couple individual med, sized cities.
> >
> >Thanks to the concerted fascist obstruction by left wing politicians who
are
> >in the pocket of the NEA.
>
> Not to mention the voters of many states that have voted down vouchers
> almost every time they've been give a choice.
After massive lies and spending and organizing by the teachers unions, which
even use the children to send home propaganda.
The biggest lie, that it violates the Constitution, has been dispensed with.
The second biggest lie, that is siphons of funds from public education is in
the process of being dispelled. But again, it's hard to fight the
entrenched bureaucracy. But freedom will win in the end. Too bad so many,
mostly poor minority kids, will be guaranteed a life of poverty until then.
There is no well financed counterpart to the NEA that can spend millions on
a referendum and buy the advertising needed to counter NEA lies parroted by
the left wing media,
> >And most of these left wing politicians are gross
> >hypocrites, sending their OWN children to private/religious schools and
> >denying that right to those who are not wealthy.
>
> They've been spending their own money when they do so.
Right. The wealthy get choice. The poor get crap. But if the public
schools are "just as good" why do all these rich liberals choose private
schools instead? And why do public school teachers put more of their
children in private schools than the general population - why crying poverty
at the same time? Obviously they know something the general population does
not.
Give the parents their own tax money back if the pull their kids our of the
public schools.
> They also probably buy better cars than the poor (who may not even own
> a car).
But nobody is taxing the poor for a public automobile system, and then
sticking them with 10 year old Yugos.
> >> In short, those vouchers have not really lived up the various claims
the
> >> pro voucher folks like to say vouchers will achieve.
> >
> >Not only do children do better in voucher programs, school choice even
> >improves the public schools.
>
> Not supported by your own article - you didn't read to the bottom.
>
> >From the New York Times:
> >
> > February 16, 2001
> > Threat of Vouchers Motivates Schools to Improve, Study
Says
> > By DIANA JEAN SCHEMO
> >
> > WASHINGTON, Feb. 15 - A new study of Florida's efforts to
turn
> > around failing schools has found that the threat that
children
> > would receive vouchers to attend private schools spurred
the
> > worst performing schools to make significant academic
strides.
>
> There is NO evidence that improvements in poor schools came as a
> result of a "threat".
If not, public schools that did not face this "threat" would have improved
just as much. They didn't.
The gains, Dr. Greene said, were greater for schools
receiving
an F on the state's ranking scale than for those receiving a
D,
a grade that also indicated poor performance, but did not
carry
the threat of vouchers.
>
> > The study, sponsored by the state, was conducted by Jay
P.
> > Greene of the Manhattan Institute, a pro- voucher
research group
> > based in Manhattan.
>
> Which means that the conclusion was foregone.
And every study by liberal groups is likewise? You'd be in big trouble then
because most of these groups are liberal.
And here's a source that is clearly unbiased - Ken Johnson, a member of the
AFL-CIO, and Vice President of the Milwaukee Public School Board.
Will all this change really make public schools better? Our new
accountability report shows that the MPS high school dropout rate declined
for
the fourth year in a row. Suspensions are down, too. The percentage of
students
showing proficiency in math and reading is up. Of course there is much more
to
do, but these indicators are finally moving in the right direction.
As the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently editorialized: "Much of what
the
school system is doing to improve gained impetus because of the expansion of
choice in Milwaukee." Indeed, without school choice and charters, I don't
think
we would be seeing anything like the change taking place in Milwaukee's
public
schools.
The idea that public schools need to improve has been around a long
time.
It took the incentive of private school choice to make public schools
change.
>
> > The study promptly came under fire from
> > opponents of vouchers, with some saying that it was the
state's
> > failing grade of the schools rather than the threat of
vouchers
> > that motivated the schools to improve. Some independent
> > researchers said it was far too early to tell much from
the
> > Florida initiative.
>
> In other words, how you interpret the results seems to be based on
> your political agenda. Thus the article says that there is NO sure
> conclusion that school choice has improved the schools.
>
> >Actually, the best education is home schooling. Parents who do so should
> >get back what they are saving the public school system.
>
> They aren't saving the public school system a single penny. Pull your
> kid out of school, and the school's costs aren't cut in any
> significant way. The marginal cost of educating one more kid in the
> schools is negligible. It takes large numbers of kids to make a
> difference.
So, let's make the number larger. Helps the public schools and the kids
pulled out.
> >> MK is extremely biased, with an agenda and that agenda isn't nobile.
> >
> >Sounds like you're talking about yourself. And you an NEA member by any
> >chance?
>
> Vouchers are regularly voted down by the majority of the public. The
> majority of the public is not a member of any union, much less the NEA
> which has less than 1% of the population among its membership.
You obviously have NO idea how local politics, or even statewide politics
works, especially with respect to referenda.
Campaign spending is a huge factor in such issues.
By Paul Strand
Washington Bureau
May 17, 2001
Christianity.com
The latest battlefield over vouchers was California. There the teacher
groups spent tens of millions of dollars campaigning against vouchers.
After that, one Republican lawmaker introduced a bill that would force
California public school teachers to keep their own children in the
public
schools.
Well, the teachers rose up in loud protest.
It seems the opponents of school choice were outraged someone would
take
that choice away from them. In fact, it turns out many of these
teachers,
who know the public schools better than anyone else, won't let their
own
kids be educated in them.
So just how many have opted out of the public school system?
"Among teachers, the percentage is much higher than the general
population," said Krista Kafer, an education policy analyst at the
Heritage Foundation. "Looking specifically at California, it's roughly
a
third of the teachers. And just to get a comparison, the general
population is under 10 percent."
"Those numbers are much higher in the inner cities where in many
instances, half or more of public school teachers send their own kids
to
private schools while at the same time their union is dead set against
letting low-income parents exercise the same choice,"
Hypocrites and fascists. Quite a combination.
Educator says vouchers build communities
Cheryl Wetzstein
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published 3/31/2002
Private-school voucher programs are likely to make low-income
neighborhoods
more racially integrated and boost property values, says an economics
professor
who is studying the effects of education policy changes on communities and
school quality.
In the current education system, families are assigned to a public
school
according to their address, Thomas J. Nechyba told a forum at the American
Enterprise Institute (AEI) on Friday.
Taxpayer-funded voucher programs, which allow families to choose a
school,
encourage mobility because they "sever the link" between residency and
schools,
said Mr. Nechyba, who is an associate professor of economics and public
policy
studies at Duke University in Durham, N.C.
There is "unambiguous and robust" evidence that shows private-school
vouchers would dramatically change a low-income community, said Mr. Nechyba,
who
developed computer models to test his hypotheses.
Here's a source you should like - the decidedly liberal Brookings
Institution:
Scores of blacks rise with vouchers
Cheryl Wetzstein
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published 5/9/2002
Inner-city black students in voucher programs consistently scored
higher
than their peers in public schools, say two researchers who have been doing
an
unprecedented study of voucher programs.
These results indicate a need for more research on larger,
better-funded
voucher programs in cities with large black populations, said Harvard
University
professor Paul E. Peterson and William G. Howell, assistant professor of
political science at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.
"Vouchers should be given serious attention," Mr. Peterson said during
a
forum at the Brookings Institution yesterday.
Mr. Peterson and Mr. Howell have reported their findings in a new book,
"The Education Gap: Vouchers and Urban Schools," published by Brookings.
Patrick J. Wolfe, assistant professor at Georgetown University's Public
Policy Institute, and David E. Campbell, a fellow at the Center for the
Study of
Democratic Politics at Princeton University, contributed to the book.
EDITORIAL
February 12, 2001
Democrats for choice
Opponents of school choice will face a new obstacle the
next
time they try to prevent inner city children living in poverty
from
getting a good education -- the Democrats. With Bill Clinton and
Al
Gore out of the White House, Democrats are finally speaking out
to
help those their presidential campaign ignored. From AFL-CIO
member
Kenneth L. Johnson of Milwaukee Public Schools to the Rev. Floyd
Flake of New York, these activists are fighting for the notion
that
public funds should allow parents and children to choose what
public
or private school they attend, and they are encouraging their
party
members to do the same.
"School choice belongs in the discussion of the
[Democratic]
Party," Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist said at the National Press
Club recently. "I was a delegate and it wasn't even an issue at
the
convention."
"We have a choice system that is dividing children by
incomes,"
Mr. Norquist said at the press conference, sponsored by the
Black
Alliance for Education Options (BAEO). "It separates the poor
from
the wealthy, the African American from the white." In cities
like
Milwaukee, where more than 9,000 students below the poverty
level
use publicly funded vouchers to attend public or private
schools,
choice has not meant closing a single public school.
Even John Witte, the University of Wisconsin professor
whose
research has been used by the National Education Association to
show
that school choice doesn't increase poor students' performance,
now
supports the movement. In his book, "The Market Approach to
Education: An Analysis of America's First Voucher Program," he
now
says that school choice is "useful tool to aid low-income
families."
Bob LeChevalier
>The public IS interested. But overcoming fascist Democrats who are in the
>pocket of the NEA has proven to be very difficult.
The votes in public referenda on vouchers does not support your claim.
>But I'll tell you what. I'm perfectly willing to compromise. End all
>government involvement in education and let parents use their own money no
>longer confiscated in taxes to educate their own kids.
Not a compromise. 80% of the kids in the country would not be
educated. That was the situation before public schooling.
>But you won't agree to that because of your fascist need to control the
>education of America's future (which is damn bleak, given current public
>education performance).
Current performance is superior to any time in the past.
>> Just don't make me pay for your flat-earth academies.
>
>And don't make me pay for your public schools that indoctrinate children
>into loony leftism and teach nothing.
You are welcome to leave.
>> >Obviously, then, the NEA and left wing politicians have conspired to make
>> >this not a free society.
>> >
>> By not subscibing to your "welfare for Jeezus" program?
>
>By forcing children into worthless public schools that succeed at nothing
>but undermining parents' values.
The public finds them quite worthwhile, and generally in accord with
the public's values (which are not necessarily the values of the
parents).
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
>> They have that choice. But choice costs money. If you spend the
>> money you have as much choice of schools as you have choice of cars
>> and houses and doctors.
>
>That's exactly the point. Parents would have the choice except for the fact
>that the government confiscates the money they need to pay for it.
Bullshit. If I paid no taxes at all, I could not afford private
school tuition for my two high schoolers (and that tuition would
probably rise if not held down by the need to "compete" with free
public education).
>> "Freedom of choice" isn't supposed to be government-paid. That is
>> socialism.
>
>So what you're saying is if the government pays for it, you get no choice.
Your choice is at the ballot box.
>That's a pretty revealing admission from a liberal.
No it is a revealing admission from a conservative who recognizes that
public education is one of the welfare services of our government. We
don't give welfare recipients a lot of choices as to what kind of
welfare they receive; indeed we make them jump through hoops in order
to receive that welfare. Getting free services from the government
doesn't entitle welfare recipients to "choice".
>I'm not sure you
>realize the implications. The solution then, is to end public education and
>make parents pay for their own kids.
That is what most extremists on the right are really hoping for.
They don't care about kids, only their pocketbooks.
lojbab
jal...@cox.net
>:|jal...@cox.net wrote:...
>:|>Malcolm Kirkpatrick wrote:...
>:|>
>:|MK. Topic: School vouchers and the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel...
>:|>
>:|MK. Discussion deleted...
>:|>
>:|> >:|> >:|MK. This is as lucid an argument as jalison makes. The cartel's shills
>:|> >:|> >:|grow shrill.
>:|>
>:|> >:|> Which shrills dippy?
>:|>
>:|> >:|MK. "Shills", jalison, "shills".
>:|>
>:|> Which shrills dippy?
>:|> These so called shrills have names?
>:|> How DO YOU define shrills?
>:|> You got any proof they are shrills?
>:|>
>:|MK. Read carefully, jalison. There is no "r" in "shills"
>:|>
Ahhhh the distraction method
It is noted
(1) Big deal on the "R" actually there is a word shrill which is why
the spell checker didn't catch it
(2) you didn't answer the question. more unsubstantiated claims by you on
this same matter. Fronts, shills etc you like to toss them out there a
lot don't you dippy?
>:|MK. Ad hominem deleted...
>:|>
>:|MK. jalison repeats himself. I will refer any patient reader to an
>:|earlier post in answer.
>:|>
>:|http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl2478233601d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=dfbfc9b9.0303211256.5420aa62%40posting.google.com&rnum=101
Ther are no acceptable answers to the lies/ misrepresentations you made
before.
Your answer was the same as above, you immediately resorted to distraction.
(1) BTW, have you included the threads where others jumped your unethical
tactics that was exposed when I exposed your misrepresentations of the
book you kept mentioning? HUH? well?
(2) Did you includes URLs to threads that contain posts and replies from a
number of people pointing out how pathetic your attempted distraction
was? Indeed, the joke of trying to claim a one years membership to a group
several years earlier was the same as a ongoing misrepresentation of what
was said in a book. A misrepresentation that was 90% straight from your own
imagination. A number of people jumped your case on you trying that. Are
those URLs included dippy?
(3) How do you address you obvious agenda and biases. How do you explain
those? Do you give a disclaimer. warning people that you are always going
to slant, misrepresent and only give one distorted side to this issue in
all of your posts?
LOL
==========================================
malcolmki...@yahoo.com (Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:
>:|jal...@cox.net wrote:...
>:|> Malcolm Kirkpatrick wrote:...
>:|>
>:|MK. Topic: School vouchers and the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel...
>:|>
>:|"If the government would make up its mind to require for every child a
>:|good education, it might save itself the trouble of providing one. It
>:|might leave to parents to obtain the education where and how they
>:|pleased, and content itself with helping to pay the school fees of the
>:|poorer classes of children, and defraying the entire school expense of
>:|those who have no one else to pay for them." -- J.S. Mill, On Liberty
>:|>
>:|MK. Discussion deleted (ad hominem)...
>:|>
>:|> >:|MK. This is as lucid an argument as jalison makes. The cartel's shills
>:|> >:|grow shrill.
>:|>
>:|> Which shrills dippy?
>:|>
>:|MK. "Shills", jalison, "shills".
Which shills dippy?
These so called shills have names?
How DO YOU define shills?
You got any proof they are shills?
>:|>
>:|> >:} Jalison tried to deny his association with Americans
>:|> >:|United for the Separation of Church and State, until I reproduced a
>:|> >:|post in which he claimed membership. The NEA supports AU.
>:|>
>:|> Smoke screen argument to cover up his misrepresentation of facts as shown
>:|> below in the GOOGLE URLS.
>:|>
>:|MK. Readers may backtrack to assess the accuracy of that assertion
>:|(why bother?). Myron Lieberman says in "The Teacher Unions" that the
>:|NEA supports Americans United for Separation of Church and State and
>:|People for the American Way. I remembered this as --financial--
>:|support. jalison observed that Lieberman did not say that, so I wrote
>:|to Dr. Lieberman's organization http://www.educationpolicy.org and
>:|asked. The NEA supports PFAW and AU financially. That is the sum of
>:|my "misrepresentation".
>:|>
malcolmki...@yahoo.com (Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:
>:|jal...@cox.net wrote:..
>:|> Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:...
>:|>
>:|MK. Discussion deleted (jalison inserts newsgroup citations)...
>:|>
>:|> Black unmarked helos are frequently seen by this nut,
>:|>
>:|> Perhaps he would like to tell us of his experiences when he was beamed up
>:|> by aliens as well.
>:|>
>:|> No MK, the entire world isn't out to get you, some have of it has already
>:|> gotten you.
>:|>
>:|MK. This is as lucid an argument as jalison makes. The cartel's shills
>:|grow shrill.
Which shrills dippy?
>:} Jalison tried to deny his association with Americans
jal...@cox.net
>:|
>:|You really should learn to read. The post I replied to referred to
>:|"activist organizations." That generally does not include the political
>:|parties.
Duh, many who support political parties also support activist groups that
represent their philosophies.
Are you going to list the "activist" groups that support vouchers?
Are you going to list the groups that finance some of those groups and many
of the litigation that has taken place over the past 20 some years in
support of vouchers?
Are you going to mention that groups and amounts of money that was expended
in Wis. as they "BOUGHT " a State Supreme Court Justice?
What can you tell us about the following groups:
[The following is only a partial list of various activist groups, fund
raising groups and individual, legal groups that are taking the cases to
court, etc]
Coral Ridge Ministries
James Dodson's Focus on the Family
Christian Coalition
Akkiance Defensr Fund
Rutherford Institute
ACLJ
Curistian Legal Society for law and religious freedom
(CLS Center)
Liberty Counsel
Center For Faith and Freedom
Liberty Legal Insitutte
Pacific Justice Institute
==========================
http://www.tfn.org/issues/vouchers/statementsenate.htm
============================
The Texas Public Policy Foundation
Eagle Forum:
American Family Association:
New York City financier Theodore J. Forstman
John Walton, heir to the Wal-Mart fortune
Family Research Council
CEO America
Local organization called PAVE (Partners Advancing Values in Education) -
Bradley Foundation.
Ted Forstmann
TesseracT Group (formerly Education Alternatives Inc.)
School Futures Research Foundation
American Education Reform Foundation
James Leininger
J. Patrick Rooney
David Brennan
Howard Ahmanson
Richard DeVos (via his Amway Corp.)
Whittle Communications, the creator of the controversial Channel One
television program that has injected commercials into the classroom
Edison Project, a national chain of private schools.
PAC for Parental School Choice
The Walton Family Foundation
Foundation of Ohio voucher proponent David Brennan
California venture capitalist Tim Draper
Michael Milken has moved from junk bonds to education,
Bob Thompson of Washington, D.C.
Windway Capital Corporation,
John MacDonough, a former Miller Brewing Company executive
Barre Seid, a "Chicago contributor to GOP and school
choice efforts."
The William J. Hume Trust
PMA Foundation,
Pete du Pont
Robert Schoolfield, "founder of a school choice group in
Austin, Texas."
Mary and Terry Kohler ($10,000); Robert Thompson
New York business executive Charles Brunie
attorney George Gagnon
Milwaukee religious school voucher supporters
Susan Mitchell, Michael
Joyce and John MacDonough.
======================================
HERE IS A TYPICAL COURT CASE ON VOUCHERS
LISTING WHO IS WHO ON EACH SIDE
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
Case No.: 97-0270 Complete Title of Case:
Warner Jackson, Jennifer Evans, Wendell Harris, The Reverend Andrew
Kennedy, Rabbi Isaac Serotta, Ceil Ann Libber, Father Thomas
J. Mueller, Reverend John N. Gregg, Diane Brewer, Colleen Beaman, Mary
Morris, Penny Morse, Kathleen Jones and Philip Jones,
Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v.
John T. Benson, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Department of Public
Instruction and James E. Doyle,
Defendants-Appellants-Petitioners,
Marquelle Miller, Cynthia Miller, Angela Gray, Zachery Gray, Shon
Richardson, George Richardson, Latrisha Henry, Faye Henry, Reigne
Barrett, Valerie Barrett, Candice Williams, Senton Williams, Clintrai
Giles, Sharon Giles,
Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants, Parents For School
Choice, Pilar Gonzalez, Dinah Cooley, Julie Vogel, Kate Helsper, Blong
Yang, Gail Crockett, Yolanda Lassiter and Jeanine Knox,
Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants-
Petitioners.
__________________________________
Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association, by its President, M. Charles
Howard, Michael Lengyel, Donald Lucier, Tracy Adams,
Milwaukee Public Schools Administrators and Supervisors
Council, Inc., by its Executive Director, Carl A. Gobel,
People for the American Way, by its Executive Vice President and Legal
Director, Elliott M. Minceberg, John Drew, Susan Endress, Richard Riley,
Jeanette Robertson, Vincent Knox, Bertha Zamudio, James Johnson,
Robert Ullman and Sally F. Mills,
Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v.
John T. Benson, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Department of Public
Instruction and James E. Doyle,
Defendants-Appellants-Petitioners,
Marquelle Miller, Cynthia Miller, Angela Gray, Zachery Gray, Shon
Richardson, George Richardson, Latrisha Henry, Faye
Henry, Reigne Barrett, Valerie Barrett, Candice Williams, Senton Williams,
Clintrai Giles, Sharon Giles,
Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants,
Parents For School Choice, Pilar Gonzalez, Dinah Cooley, Julie Vogel, Kate
Helsper, BlongYang, Gail Crockett, Yolanda Lassiter and Jeanine Knox,
Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants-
Petitioners.
__________________________________
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Felmers O.
Chaney, Lois Parker, on behalf of herself and her minor
child, Rashaan Hobbs, Derrick D. Scott, on behalf of himself and his minor
children, Deresia C.A. Scott and Desmond L.J. Scott, Constance J. Cherry,
on behalf of herself and her minor children, Monique J. Branch, Monica
S. Branch, and William A. Branch,
Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v.
John T. Benson, Superintendent of Public Instruction of Wisconsin, in his
official capacity,
Defendant-Appellant.
ON REVIEW OF A DECISION OF THE COURT OF
APPEALS
Reported at: 213 Wis. 2d 1, 570 N.W.2d 407
(Ct. App. 1997-PUBLISHED)
For the intervenors-defendants-appellants-petitioners, parents for school
choice, et al., there were briefs by Steve P. Hurley and Hurley, Burish &
Milliken, S.C., Madison; William H. Mellor, III, Clint Bolick, Nicole S.
Garnett and Institute for Justice, Washington, D,C, and Michael D. Dean,
Waukesha and oral argument by Clint Bolick.
For the intervenors-defendants-appellants, Marquelle Millter,
et al., there were briefs by Kevin Potter and Brennan Steil, Madison and
Richard P. Hutchison and Landmark Legal Foundation, Kansas City, MO and
oral argument by Richard P. Hutchison.
For the plaintiffs-respondents, Warner Jackson, et
al., there was a brief by Jeffrey J. Kassel, Melanie E. Cohen and
LaFollette & Sinykin, Madison; Peter M. Koneazny and American Civil
Liberties Union of Wisconsin Foundation, Inc.,, Milwaukee; Steven R.
Shapiro and American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, NY and
Steven K. Green and Americans United for Separation of Church &
State, Washington, D.C., and oral argument by Jeffrey J. Kassel.
For the plaintiffs-respondents, there was a brief by Robert H.
Chanin, John M. West and Bredhoff & Kaiser, P.L.L.C., Washington, D.C.;
Richard Perry, Richard Saks and Perry, Lerner & Quindel,
Milwaukee; Bruce Meredith, Chris Galinat and Wisconsin Education
Association, Madison; Elliot M.Mincberg, Judith Schaeffer, Washington, D.C.
and Timothy Hawks and Schneidman, Myers, Dowling & Blumenfield, Milwaukee
and oral argument by Robert H. Chanin.
For the plaintiffs-respondents, NAACP, et al., there was a brief
by William H. Lynch and Law Offices of William H. Lynch, Milwaukee and
James H. Hall, Jr., and Hall, Patterson & Charne, Milwaukee and oral
argument by James H. Hall, Jr.
Amicus curiae was filed by K. Scott Wagner and Hale & Lein,
S.C., Milwaukee and James C. Geoly, Kevin R. Gustafson and Burke, Warren,
MacKay & Serritella, P.C., Chicago, IL for the Center for Education Reform,
American Legislative Exchange, CEO America, CEO Central Florida, CEO
Connecticut, Putting Children First, James Madison Institute for
Public Policy Studies, Jewish Policy Center, "I Have a Dream" Foundation
(Washington, D.C. Chapter), Institute for Public Affairs, Liberty
Counsel, Maine School Choice Coalition, Pennsylvania Manufacturers
Association, Reach Alliance, Arkansas Policy Foundation, North
Carolina Education Reform Foundation, Texas Justice Foundation, Minnesota
Business Partnership, Minnesotans for School Choice, Toussaint Institute,
South Carolina Policy Counsel, and United New Yorkers for Choice in
Education.
Amicus curiae was filed by Ralph I. Thomas, Madison; Steven T.
McFarland, Kimberlee W. Colby and Christian Legal Society, Annandale, VA
and of counsel, Thomas C. Berg and Cumberland Law School,
Birmingham, AL for The Christian Legal Society, Ethics and Religious
Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, Lutheran
Church-Missouri Synod and the National Association of Evangelicals.
Amicus curiae was filed by David R. Riemer, Milwaukee for Howard
L. Fuller, John O. Norquist, Steven M. Foti, Alberta Darling, Margaret A.
Farrow, Joseph Leean, John S. Gardner, Warren D. Braun, Bruce R. Thompson,
Jeanette Mitchell and David Lucey.
Amicus curiae was filed by Daniel Kelly and McLario, Helm &
Bertling, S.C., Menomonee Falls for the Family Research Institute,
Christian Defense Fund, Center for Public Justice, Family Research
Council, Toward Tradition, Liberty Counsel and Focus on the Family.
Amicus curiae was filed by Bradden C. Backer and
Godfrey & Kahn, S.C., Milwaukee and Robert L. Gordon and Weiss, Berzowski,
Brady & Donahue, Milwaukee for The Milwaukee Jewish Council for
Community Relations and The Wisconsin Jewish Conference.
Amicus curiae was filed by Marc D. Stern, Lois C.
Waldmani and American Jewish Congress, New York, NY for the American Jewish
Congress.
============================================================
jal...@cox.net
|
>:|That's exactly the point. Parents would have the choice except for the fact
>:|that the government confiscates the money they need to pay for it. If they
>:|have enough left over, they're paying twice.
===============================================================
A New Look At Vouchers.
(Permission of author to use this has been given)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: A new look at vouchers
From: ai...@unity.ncsu.edu (Wayne Aiken)
Date: 1 Aug 1995 19:13:36 GMT
This occurred to me the other day, while listening to a talk-show debate
on school vouchers.
Some people want a "rebate" on the money they give to the state to educate
their children, in order to spend that money in religious schools of their
choice. Fine, although that they get might not be what they expect.
The problem is, the money that a person pays into the system for schools,
via property taxes, sales tax, etc. is *NOT* for the education of their
own children, but for public education as a whole**. Many of the arguments
I've heard that support this is that public education is supposed to be
good for the community as a whole, hence everybody pays. I have no children
in the school system, yet I must pay to educate other people's children.
Other people, with children or not, do the same. The illusion inherent in
the system is that the money taken from them is taken for "their" children-
it is not.
If there is to be any "rebate", then the amount given back is *not* the
total amount contributed, but the percentage portion represented by their
children versus the entire system. If a person pays $5000 into a school
system with 1000 children, then the total amount of *their* money paying
for *their* children is $5 per child. That is all they should expect
back for removing their children from the public school system; the rest
is the "common good" payment. Any more than that, received either
through tax credits or voucher payments, means that they have unfairly
shifted the "common good" burden to other people.
If instead, you look at it from the point of the "total" amount of money
for each child following that child, then you have still have the problem
that the vast majority of that total is from *other people*, who cannot
legally be forced to contribute to sectarian institutions against their
will. Despite claims of "choice", it is *still not a free-market system*
as long as the people paying are not the people directly benefitting, and
I find it perverse that many otherwise capitalistic-free-market-preaching
conservatives have no problem with such a special welfare system, as long
as its to *their* advantage.
Any voucher system, no matter how you cut it, is still almost entirely
*other people's money", and will remain a separation violation, as long
as the socialistic elements remain in the system.
[**] Whether people should be forced to contribute money for collectivist
social institutions or not is a separate issue altogether. As long as
the system exists, for better or worse, everyone has to be treated equally.
--------------------------------------
jal...@cox.net
>:|
>:|<jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
Ahem, another biased zealot of is it troll.
Amazing how as soon as one vanishes another shows up to take their place.
Wonder how many lately have been doing a Nemesis
In case you don't know who he was or is, it is a nut case who uses about
100 different names to post under.
jal...@cox.net
>:|The public IS interested. But overcoming fascist Democrats
Just to set the record straight
Fascists or Fascism is considered to be at the far right end of the
political spectrum (Kabish? )
jal...@cox.net
>:|jal...@cox.net wrote:...
>:|>Malcolm Kirkpatrick wrote:...
>:|>
>:|MK. Topic: School vouchers and the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel...
Here bad ass, explain this
Anyone reading his posts and replies on this topic should take that into
consideration in evaluating his comments including his emotional code
"The NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel"
I am sure the term cartel has many applications but in recent years in out
culture is has a lot of exposure as a negative, i e, drug cartels, etc. I
suspect that is why he likes to use the word.
MK has been known to misrepresent things in his posts, such as a book he
used to talk about that was suppose to prove certain activist organizations
were fronts or supported by the "cartel"
The implication was that these organizations received much or most of their
monies from the teachers unions, etc that they operated as puppets or
fronts for said organizations,
BTW, you will never hear MK mention any of the funding provided by the
various ultra conservative and religious right activist and legal
organizations to the pro voucher groups, organizations, etc.
==============================================
Are you going to label the following a "CARTEL" as well?
Are you going to list the "activist" groups that support vouchers?
Are you going to list the groups that finance some of those groups and many
of the litigation that has taken place over the past 20 some years in
support of vouchers?
Are you going to mention that groups and amounts of money that was expended
in Wis. as they "BOUGHT " a State Supreme Court Justice?
What can you tell us about the following groups:
[The following is only a partial list of various activist groups, fund
raising groups and individual, legal groups that are taking the cases to
court, etc]
Coral Ridge Ministries
James Dobson's Focus on the Family
Herman Rubin
This is a false conclusion. The spectrum is not one dimensional,
and there is essentially no difference between the totalitarian
"right" and the totalitarian "left".
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
jal...@cox.net
>:|In article <jj098vstobam6v4cv...@4ax.com>,
>:| <jal...@cox.net> wrote:
>:|>"Founding Father" <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
>:|
>:|
>:|>>:|The public IS interested. But overcoming fascist Democrats
>:|
>:|
>:|>Just to set the record straight
>:|>Fascists or Fascism is considered to be at the far right end of the
>:|>political spectrum (Kabish? )
>:|This is a false conclusion.
No it's not.
>:|The spectrum is not one dimensional,
>:|and there is essentially no difference between the totalitarian
>:|"right" and the totalitarian "left".
Actually there is. If your are talking a circle, there is some truth to
what you say, however, even then there can still be a stable of the right,
private ownership of the banks, businesses, industry, etc. whereas going
left that isn't a stable of the left
That is why you find the odds of a ultra right having a far greater support
among the upper classes, i.e. the barons of enterprise, business and
industry if you will and why the same so often hate and fear the ultra
left
For average joe blow in the street there isn't much difference but for some
segments there are considerable differences
Italy and Germany were both considered Fascist while Russia was considered
Communist. While there were many things alike there were also major
differences in structure, etc.
I stand by what I said.
Malcolm Kirkpatrick
>Malcolm Kirkpatrick) wrote:...
>
MK. Topic: School vouchers and the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel...
>
US school system?)...
>
> MK has been known to misrepresent things in his posts, such as a book he
> used to talk about that was suppose to prove certain activist organizations
> were fronts or supported by the "cartel"
>
> The implication was that these organizations received much or most of their
> monies from the teachers unions, etc that they operated as puppets or
> fronts for said organizations,
>
answered, I won't again.
>
> BTW, you will never hear MK mention any of the funding provided by the
> various ultra conservative and religious right activist and legal
> organizations to the pro voucher groups, organizations, etc.
>
little to the discussion. a) The current policy which, in most US
States, restricts a parent's options for the use of the taxpayers'
K-12 education subsidy to schools operated by government employees,
originated in anti-Catholic bigotry. Empire-building bureaucrats
replaced school choice systems in many polities in the early 19th
century with government school systems, when a surge of Catholic
immigrants provoked an allergic reaction in the resident Protestant
majority. How long must a system remain in place for its defenders to
merit the label "conservative"? The proper label for laissez faire
advocates is "liberal". It is in this sense, for example, that Benito
Mussoloni excoriates "liberals" in his essay "What is Fascism?".
Compulsory attendance at government schools characterizes totalitarian
States, and the US. Many of the world's industrial democracies give
parents more options than do US States. b) Parent control (taxpayer
subsidization of a parent's choice of school) would reduce inter-faith
animosity, as choice would reduce the need for agreement about things
like curriculum, values instruction, disciplinary policy, and the
lunch menu. One doesn't have to be a religious to see this.
>
> Are you going to label the following a "CARTEL" as well?
> Are you going to list the "activist" groups that support vouchers?
> Are you going to list the groups that finance some of those groups and many
> of the litigation that has taken place over the past 20 some years in
> support of vouchers?
>
not selling services to the the same purchaser over time. I recommend
Mancur Olsen's "The End of the Middle Way" (__American Economic
Review__) and his book __The Logic of Collective Action__, Jack
Hirscliiefer's "Anarchy and its Breakdown (__Journal of Political
Economy__) and Roger Axelrod's __The Evolution of Cooperation__ for a
discussion of the growth of special interest groups and their effects
on the overall economy.
>
> Are you going to mention that groups and amounts of money that was expended
> in Wis. as they "BOUGHT " a State Supreme Court Justice?
>
laws, jalison.
>
> What can you tell us about the following groups:
> [The following is only a partial list of various activist groups, fund
> raising groups and individual, legal groups that are taking the cases to
> court, etc]
>
Rooney) who donate millions to private school voucher programs, giving
poor kids a chance the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel's schools deny to them,
are heros.
>
MK. Gerard Lassibile and Lucia Navarro Gomez, ["Organization and
Efficiency of Educational Systems: some empirical findings", pg. 16,
"Comparative Education", Vol. 36 #1, Feb 2000]. "Furthermore, the
regression results indicate that countries where private education is
more widespread perform significantly better than countries where it
is more limited. The result showing the private sector to be more
efficient is similar to those found in other contexts with individual
data (see, for example, Psucharopoulos, 1987; Jiminez, et. al, 1991).
This finding should convince countries to reconsider policies that
reduce the role of the private sector in the field of education".
>
From: Hyman and Penroe, Journal of School Psychology.
"Several studies of maltreatment by teachers suggest that school
children report traumatic symptoms that are similar whether the
traumatic event was physical or verbal abuse (Hyman, et.al.,1988;
Krugman & Krugman, 1984; Lambert, 1990). Extrapolation from these
studies suggests that psychological maltreatment of school children,
especially those who are poor, is fairly widespread in the United
States...."
...A good percentage of these students develop angry and aggressive
responses as a result. Yet, emotional abuse and its relation to
misbehavior in schools receives little pedagogical, psychological, or
legal attention and is rarely mentioned in textbooks on school
discipline (Pokalo & Hyman, 1993, Sarno, 1992)."
"As with corporal punishment, the frequency of emotional
maltreatment in schools is too often a function of the socioeconomic
status (SES) of the student population (Hyman, 1990)."
>
"I'm sorry I have so much rage, but you put it in me." --Dylan Klebold
>
http://www.rru.com/~meo/hs.minski.html (One page. Marvin Minsky
comment on school. Please read this.)
http://www.schoolchoices.org (Massive site. Useful links).
Bob LeChevalier
>"Bob LeChevalier" <loj...@lojban.org> wrote in message
>news:pfi68vcjk8e8ln8o2...@4ax.com...
>> "Founding Father" <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
>> ><jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> >news:8st08vsmduivs23t5...@4ax.com...
>> >>
>> >> MK has been known to misrepresent things in his posts, such as a book he
>> >> used to talk about that was suppose to prove certain activist organizations
>> >> were fronts or supported by the "cartel"
>> >>
>> >> The implication was that these organizations received much or most of their
>> >> monies from the teachers unions, etc that they operated as puppets or
>> >> fronts for said organizations,
>> >>
>> >> BTW, you will never hear MK mention any of the funding provided by the
>> >> various ultra conservative and religious right activist and legal
>> >> organizations to the pro voucher groups, organizations, etc.
>> >
>> >I just saw this as the first post in this thread, so I don't know what
>> >exactly you're referring to, but funding to conservative organizations is a
>> >pittance compared with liberal ones, like the Ford Foundation.
>>
>> You've gotta be kidding!
>>
>> Have you looked at the money raised by the Republican Party compared
>> to the Democratic Party? Even with the unions, the Democrats don't