I am a liberal and indoctrination has nothing to do with it. There is far more of that going on in the charter and religious schools that school choice folks would send their kids to. For the record, I am a pubic high school English teacher and I have to say, I get more trouble from conservative parents who want to impose their values about what should and should not be taught in the classroom than the other way around. My liberal parents by and large appreciate my attempts to produce thinkers and challenge students perceptions, while the highly conservative parents are far more likely to protest a book based on the idea that it violates some higher moral law.

With that said, I oppose schools of choice, vouchers in particular, because it does nothing to improve education in poor communities. Here is the deal. If a kid lives in St. Louis on the other side of the “tracks,” where there is only one school and that school is failing, how is a poor person going to get his or her kid to a better school that could be miles away. If I have no car, I’m stuck. Vouchers do not cover transportation cost most times. Also, vouchers do not always cover the full cost of tution to a new school. And there is the little issue of who wants to bring students into their schools that will lead them to not making AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress)? What keeps a school from picking and choosing.

Okay, some choice programs allow people to choose a public school of his or her choice. How about this one, what if a kid is in a failing system and the only choice he or she has is another failing school in the system. Humm? What happens when the best school in the system reaches capacity?

Schools of choice is one viable option so long as there are choices, and so long as we take into account that just giving the option to go to a better school does not mean that parents have the resources to send them. Free public education is a right and the system needs to be improved to give all kids a level playing field. You will get no arguements from me. Simply saying, “choose a better school” may not be vialble.

Sanders, your remarks are disrespectful and they are that way, maybe because you can see this design, but your vision may be a bit blurred due to refussing to release your Ideologies that everything is fair and everyone has to work hard to achieve it. Your ideas are based on popular belief, not factual basis.

I’m wide awake, but seems that your eyes are wide shut. Again not a color issue, but a design a design that has limits and once those limits begin to be crossed or overwhelmed–technicalities are absorbed to enforce these limits.

Okay. now ROBERT! Any self respecting black man would never call Obama a racist. What makes him/his wife a racist? Racist against who? And why are you calling yourself an Afro-American? Do you have an Afro? Seriously!! It’s African American. Don’t down play yourself as if you are based from a hair texture or stlye.

Think about this ROBERT! Could Jesse Jackson just be jealous? He did run for president years ago and it was a major upset. Jesse Jackson could not run this country, nor his congregation. Jesse Jackson, says he’s going to burry the “N” word then he get’s on live television, after they had a “Mock Funeral” to Murder the “N” word and he stupidly says, “Obama thinks he can tell “N’s” how to think”.

So please Jesse Jackson is no conversation piece. Obama is articulate and educated on this government structure far more than Jesse Jackson and he’s simply jealous. Or how do you say it, “He’s Hating” or “He’s a Player Hater”…lol.

Lastly, ANNIE! The democrats didn’t destroy Hillary, they Democratic party thought Obama is the best choice to get the White House for their party. They figured that Hillary didn’t have a good chance of winning against McCain. Hillary isn’t upset, I think she’s a great lady.

Now the Palin issue is a different story. It’s not sexist that she can’t speak very well and has now clue about foreign policy and energy crisis issues. I could discuss these issues and out debate her, not that she’s a dumb lady, I believe she’s very intelligent, but not ready for a position that has the balance of the American society at stake. She stumbled and fumble of simple topics that someone running for office should be able to discuss or atleast sound like she knows what’s going on. It’s nothing sexist about her inability to discuss the issues.

Last, Joe the Plumber. Who puts a plumber on a campaign trail and allows him to answer questions about Obams beliefs on foreign policy and Isreal.

Finally, no matter if Obama wins. It will still be a division and no unity among the races. Though his winning will give leverage to the phrase, I’m not racist; there’s a black president.

” I said the design makes it impossible for everyone to achieve high levels of income. This is not the basis of being lazy, it’s the basis of opportunity and who this opportunity is provided to.

Everyone wants to succeed. Though you need a opportunity to succeed to high levels. Certain groups or classes aren’t provided these opportunities. It’s not a belief, but a design.”

Your thesis is based in a lie. There are literally thousands of successful CEO’s who are non white. There are thousands of successful politicians who are non white. There are thousands of successful people of all classes and races that started from poverty some not even born and raised in this country in the USA. All you have to do to see them is take your head out of your ass.

There is nothing so sad as those with perfect eyes who refuse to see. Wake up Vasio.

Jim

Of course, there are ways of undermining initiative. Government can punish it by disincentivizing effort, but that is a gross method that has failed badly in the past and led to violence and class warfare. Better to feed the public estrogen or estrogen-mimicking chemicals. Then “redistribution of wealth” will not feel so bad.