Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Replaced_Texan]

Marketplace has a series going on about the "real election," and they got to education yesterday. They've been pitting David Frum and Robert Reich against each other. I thought that this was an interesting proposition and I was wondering what ya'll thought of it?

REICH: Well, I believe in accountability. But I think we've gone way, way overboard. In an attempt to make our schools accountable to parents, and to put some pressure on schools, all we're doing is teaching how to take tests. You know, on the issue of competition, market competition, let me make a confession here. Because, years ago, I proposed something in the Wall Street Journal and I got dumped on from all sides. Which makes me think that maybe my idea was pretty good. I proposed then a progressive voucher, and it would go something like this (and David I'd be interested to see what you think):

I mean, poor families, say, get $15,000 per kid. Let's say rich families get $3,000 per child. And the families do have an option as to how to utilize these vouchers. If you don't like the word vouchers, call them liverwurst. Whatever fits. And they can use them at charter schools. They can use them at any school that meets minimum requirements. But you see, if poor families got $15,000 per child, immediately kids from poor families would become very attractive to any school. I mean, competition is fine as long as the poorest kids with the biggest learning and social problems are not excluded from the good schools, in fact, are attractive to the good schools. And I think my progressive voucher system — modesty aside — is the answer.

RYSSDAL: David, I'll put it right to you. What do you think about vouchers and Bob's idea?

FRUM: I think the idea of vouchers is so precious that I would certainly be willing to pay. If that's what the Democratic price were for vouchers, I would certainly be willing as a policy maker to pay it. I mean, Bob is quite convinced that what will happen as a result of his progressive vouchers is that you will have all of the worst students in the same schools as all of the best students because the schools will be eager for the $15,000 check. It may be that, in fact, specialized schools spring up which are full of $15,000 kids who need extra help. And so long as we have an educational market that is open enough to initiative to allow for that possiblity, as well as the one that Bob anticipates, that I think is real freedom. And that is the thing that will lead us to the best results.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
See, Greedy? Tenacity can pay off. It's almost fucking time for me and nono (even better than Miller time!)

Congratulations!

But watch out for the :whip:

[Spanky]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
You are so tied up in the process ("but look at what Ty said in this particular post before all the information that we have today was out there!") that you are missing the importance (or lack thereof) of the issue in the first place. Put down the mouse and step away for a minute. Seriously.

The issue? That Kerry screwed up and gave a gift to the Republicans? That he screwed it up even more by refusing to apologise making the debate last for seven or eight news cycles more than it had to.

Micahel J. Fox was the center of attention (which was bad for Republicans) and now John Kerry is (which is good for Republicans).

The screw up was also like a perfect storm. If someone else had made it, it wouldn't be so bad, but it came from the mouth of a guy that has a history of criticising US troops. Now the news channles get to replay all the times Kerry has made similar comments (but intentionally). It also came just before an election where the Dems had national security on their side, but this gaff put the spotlight back on the main reservation people have about the Dems: that they can't be trusted when it come to national security. Even some strong liberal on this board are saying they hope Pelosi and Rangel tone it down and don't do what they are saying they are going to do (like cut funding). Kerry's Gaff reminded people of why they have not trusted the Dems with national security in the past. Without Kerry's screw up this issue would not have been as prominent as it is now.

I am sure many Democrat strategists are wishing that the Foley thing came up now and this thing came up weeks ago. Both are irrelevent but both are political gifts. But the gifts closer to the election are the more important ones.

Is any of this not obvious? What is there to debate?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Marketplace has a series going on about the "real election," and they got to education yesterday. They've been pitting David Frum and Robert Reich against each other. I thought that this was an interesting proposition and I was wondering what ya'll thought of it?

I hate to agree with Reich, but that's a really good idea.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
You can't be the arch conservative on this board. That's Slave's role.

:waggle:

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
I am annoyed at Ty because he mocked me when I wouldn't accept as gospel what they were alleging Dick Army said was true, and because I posted the actual video footage of the speech and he critisized me for posting what he alleged was insufficient video when he couldn't be sure the video (or transcript) was incomplete (and it turned out I was right). And when he did say with certainty that my video wasn't complete (and I was a fool to not understand that is was incomplete) he didn't post the actual transcript or video footage that showed my video footage was incomplete .

I mocked for you thinking that you had "refuted" what I'd posted. I continue to mock you for this, though the marginal utils of shooting this particular fish in this particular barrel are diminishing.

And now he admits that video I did show (that he mocked) did paint the entire picture but he still thinks some how it was stupid of me to post it.

I don't believe I admitted any such thing.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Spanky
The issue? That Kerry screwed up and gave a gift to the Republicans? That he screwed it up even more by refusing to apologise making the debate last for seven or eight news cycles more than it had to.

Micahel J. Fox was the center of attention (which was bad for Republicans) and now John Kerry is (which is good for Republicans).

The screw up was also like a perfect storm. If someone else had made it, it wouldn't be so bad, but it came from the mouth of a guy that has a history of criticising US troops. Now the news channles get to replay all the times Kerry has made similar comments (but intentionally). It also came just before an election where the Dems had national security on their side, but this gaff put the spotlight back on the main reservation people have about the Dems: that they can't be trusted when it come to national security. Even some strong liberal on this board are saying they hope Pelosi and Rangel tone it down and don't do what they are saying they are going to do (like cut funding). Kerry's Gaff reminded people of why they have not trusted the Dems with national security in the past. Without Kerry's screw up this issue would not have been as prominent as it is now.

I am sure many Democrat strategists are wishing that the Foley thing came up now and this thing came up weeks ago. Both are irrelevent but both are political gifts. But the gifts closer to the election are the more important ones.

Is any of this not obvious? What is there to debate?

So it was a Good Idea then. Rove was brilliant to latch onto this 10 second clip, even understanding that Kerry didn't mean what he said, because the important thing is to confuse voters into voting for your side?

This is exactly what makes partisan politics the disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person with good ideas would ever want to wade into. Thanks for clarifying that for me.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
This is exactly what makes [the PB] the disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person with good ideas would ever want to wade into. Thanks for clarifying that for me.

No, wait -- come back.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
Considering the power relationship isn't it automatically sexual harassment? I heard that argument made about John Tower.

The argument was wrong as to both. That someone has a lot of power over you does not mean that he is demanding sex as a quid pro quo, or that your willingness to blow him creates a hostile work environment for you.

I'm not aware of any case that supports your view, but I don't practice in this area so maybe I'm uninformed. Still -- it would seem that the notion of "consent" would apply to an adult woman.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
This is exactly what makes partisan politics the disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person with good ideas would ever want to wade into. Thanks for clarifying that for me.

It's still better than the FB.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I hate to agree with Reich, but that's a really good idea.

I am much more favorably disposed to school voucher programs if they give everyone enough money to move. Many programs are proposed with vouchers of insufficient value. The effect is to subsidize people who already send their kids to private school but only to enable a relatively small number of middle-class families who otherwise could not afford private tuitions to instead send their kids to another school.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I mocked for you thinking that you had "refuted" what I'd posted. I continue to mock you for this, though the marginal utils of shooting this particular fish in this particular barrel are diminishing.

So. I will try and come up with something else to keep you entertained.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I don't believe I admitted any such thing.

Spanky:

Are you saying the transcripts and the video clip don't represent what he really said?


Tys response:

No.

Spanky claim that Ty disputes.

And now he admits that video I did show (that he mocked) did paint the entire picture but he still thinks some how it was stupid of me to post it.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
So it was a Good Idea then. Rove was brilliant to latch onto this 10 second clip, even understanding that Kerry didn't mean what he said, because the important thing is to confuse voters into voting for your side?

This is exactly what makes partisan politics the disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person with good ideas would ever want to wade into. Thanks for clarifying that for me.

Anytime. Like Churchill said, it is the worst system save the rest.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
So it was a Good Idea then. Rove was brilliant to latch onto this 10 second clip, even understanding that Kerry didn't mean what he said, because the important thing is to confuse voters into voting for your side?

Ding ding ding!!! We have (another) winner!!!

(is it fucking time yet?)

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
there was a report posted yesterday that shows he is full of shit. most have some college. most are from middle class homes. that you have prejudices and ignorance is fine, but he speaks for a party that wants to run the country.

My uncle was in Vietnam. When the first Gulf War broke out he told me if I were to be drafted, he'd break my legs and mail me to Canada. He killed people.

The only people who'd willingly volunteer for a war of choice are not thinking straight. I'm not ignorant and I harobor no prejudice. Objectively viewed, the decision to enlist at this place and time is unwise. You can wave the flag all you like, but that's a fact you can't change.