QuotePresident Obama reopened Monday what is often a sore subject in Washington, saying that his daughters could not obtain from D.C. public schools the academic experience they receive at the private Sidwell Friends School.

But the city, accustomed to the mantra that its schools need reform, seemed to view the judgment as self-evident.

Obama made his comments on NBC's "Today" show in response to a woman who asked whether Malia and Sasha Obama "would get the same kind of education at a D.C. public school" that they would get at the D.C. private school that has educated generations of the city's elite.

"I'll be blunt with you: The answer is no, right now," Obama said. D.C. public schools "are struggling," he said, but they "have made some important strides over the last several years to move in the direction of reform. There are some terrific individual schools in the D.C. system."

Obama said that if he wanted to get his daughters into one of the public schools, "we could probably maneuver to do it." But he said the "broader problem" is that parents without "a bunch of connections" don't have such options.

The caveats may have helped to take the sting out of the first family's assessment of the 45,000-student system.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/27/AR2010092701766.html

First off, if the President of the United States does not have the authority to get his girls into a public school in Washington, D.C., then his Presidency is meaningless and the educrats have indeed taken over the asylum.

Second off: if you don't have connections, you get public schools by default. Obama clearly talks out both sides of his lying communist mouth. He'll take every penny he can from the NEA and other teachers' unions, then stab them right in the face by refusing to endorse their work, by enrolling his daughters to their educational bunglings.

Will D.C. parents finally revolt? Ask Adrian Fenty, ousted as mayor due solely to teacher-union money poured into campaigns against him. D.C. parents have NO meaningful say today in education --- particularly from a black just like them who won't fix their problem, just sign his kids up for "elite" education, and let the public school kids go to hell for all he cares.

Lies and betrayal. The first lessons you learn from a Democrat. And aren't those black voters EVER so bright, for reinforcing their own problems by siding with the unions. Their system is broken and always has been. The educrats don't care for anyone except themselves.

I notice that he didn't attempt to make any suggestion about how to improve those public schools.  I think they're run by the city and not the Congress, but surely the POTUS could make a suggestion or two regarding improvement.  All kids deserve a decent education.

Quote from: crepe05 on September 28, 2010, 07:04:45 AM
I notice that he didn't attempt to make any suggestion about how to improve those public schools.  I think they're run by the city and not the Congress, but surely the POTUS could make a suggestion or two regarding improvement.  All kids deserve a decent education.

The scum bag knows very well what the problem is, and he is part of it, it's pure DC corruption, from unions to outright criminals running the City.

This is the same group that brought him to power.

Time to burst some bubbles.

Turns out Obama's on the right side of the education issue.

I know. I know. He's a scumbag without redeeming value, etc., etc. Trouble is, on education he'd be on the side of conservatives if conservative had much of a position on education which, in general, we don't.

There used to be a voucher system in Washington D.C. It was called the "D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program" and it was initiated under Dubya. When the Democrats took the Senate one of their targets was the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. Obama went to bat for the program which the Senate Democrats wanted to zero out immediately. He extracted a "grandfather" compromise meaning no new kids to be added but the kids already in the program to stay in it through high school.

Considering there are only 2,000 kids in the program it shouldn't have warranted Obama's attention but he knows something a lot of people don't; blacks are much more interested in change in the public education system then whites and as a Democrat Obama knows that without a virtual lock on the black vote the Democratic party ceases to be a national party. So he fought to hang onto some remnant of a program that a lot more black voters know about then white voters.

Race to The Top is an Obama initiated program and the teacher's unions hate. More even then NCLB because it puts the teacher's unions right under the spotlight. If the unions won't sign onto to RTTT improvements then the state gets no RTTT money. Michigan lost $319 million dollars because the MEA wouldn't play along. Care to guess how that'll play out when the education budget arguments start? Care to guess who's going to have to answer uncomfortable questions when the education budget's being hammered out?

Arne Duncan, Obama's pick for Secretary of Education, is always running around the country talking about vouchers, charters, teacher accountability, testing and a bunch of other ideas that drive the teacher's unions crazy. The unions have pressured Obama to get rid of Duncan. Obama hasn't even bothered to respond.

So, here's the political conundrum for the day: what do you do if the person you've decided you despise supports a position you also support?

Here's an interesting video with a couple of kids and parents regarding the program and Obama.  The video is 5:36, but I found it to be well worth the time.  I'm not much for videos in posts, but never say never.

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/7013-obamas-hypocrisy-on-school-choice

Quote from: arpad on September 28, 2010, 08:35:30 AM
Time to burst some bubbles.

Turns out Obama's on the right side of the education issue.

I know. I know. He's a scumbag without redeeming value, etc., etc. Trouble is, on education he'd be on the side of conservatives if conservative had much of a position on education which, in general, we don't.

There used to be a voucher system in Washington D.C. It was called the "D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program" and it was initiated under Dubya. When the Democrats took the Senate one of their targets was the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. Obama went to bat for the program which the Senate Democrats wanted to zero out immediately. He extracted a "grandfather" compromise meaning no new kids to be added but the kids already in the program to stay in it through high school.

Considering there are only 2,000 kids in the program it shouldn't have warranted Obama's attention but he knows something a lot of people don't; blacks are much more interested in change in the public education system then whites and as a Democrat Obama knows that without a virtual lock on the black vote the Democratic party ceases to be a national party. So he fought to hang onto some remnant of a program that a lot more black voters know about then white voters.

Race to The Top is an Obama initiated program and the teacher's unions hate. More even then NCLB because it puts the teacher's unions right under the spotlight. If the unions won't sign onto to RTTT improvements then the state gets no RTTT money. Michigan lost $319 million dollars because the MEA wouldn't play along. Care to guess how that'll play out when the education budget arguments start? Care to guess who's going to have to answer uncomfortable questions when the education budget's being hammered out?

Arne Duncan, Obama's pick for Secretary of Education, is always running around the country talking about vouchers, charters, teacher accountability, testing and a bunch of other ideas that drive the teacher's unions crazy. The unions have pressured Obama to get rid of Duncan. Obama hasn't even bothered to respond.

So, here's the political conundrum for the day: what do you do if the person you've decided you despise supports a position you also support?

arpad, I am pro-voucher too, but I don't for one second think Obama arrived at this position by his own thinking. I have read countless speeches, transcripts, and clips on Obama, and I have yet to find a single shred of evidence in regards to his ability to make a decision that he 1) understands, and 2) supports.

So, as a pro-voucher person, I know why I support it, and can make the case for it.  Obama can't do the same, except go through his points and touch on it.

Translation: lets pump billions of federal tax dollars into the school systems and graduate kids who can't even read or speak english (other than the ghetto version)and the teachers aren't much better.


Billy

Quote from: taxed on September 28, 2010, 05:11:21 PM
arpad, I am pro-voucher too, but I don't for one second think Obama arrived at this position by his own thinking. I have read countless speeches, transcripts, and clips on Obama, and I have yet to find a single shred of evidence in regards to his ability to make a decision that he 1) understands, and 2) supports.

So, as a pro-voucher person, I know why I support it, and can make the case for it.  Obama can't do the same, except go through his points and touch on it.

If you want to think all things bad about Obama that's certainly your privilege but there's no getting around the fact that on this issue you, he and I are on the same page. If you need to find some rationalization that puts you on the side of vouchers for good reasons and Obama on the side of vouchers for bad reasons then I'd say you're exerting yourself to no good end.

Maybe I've got an odd sense of humor but I think it's pretty funny that politics really does make strange bedfellows.

Just for kicks and grins, let's suppose you were a U.S. representative or Senator and Obama asked you for your help to reinstate the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program. Would you turn him down?

And by the way, for a true, blue conservative even vouchers aren't good enough. They're still a handout from government and to be as conservatively pure as the driven snow vouchers are no more acceptable then the traditional, district-based public education system.

Quote from: arpad on September 28, 2010, 06:22:02 PM

Quote from: taxed on September 28, 2010, 05:11:21 PM
arpad, I am pro-voucher too, but I don't for one second think Obama arrived at this position by his own thinking. I have read countless speeches, transcripts, and clips on Obama, and I have yet to find a single shred of evidence in regards to his ability to make a decision that he 1) understands, and 2) supports.

So, as a pro-voucher person, I know why I support it, and can make the case for it.  Obama can't do the same, except go through his points and touch on it.

If you want to think all things bad about Obama that's certainly your privilege but there's no getting around the fact that on this issue you, he and I are on the same page. If you need to find some rationalization that puts you on the side of vouchers for good reasons and Obama on the side of vouchers for bad reasons then I'd say you're exerting yourself to no good end.

Maybe I've got an odd sense of humor but I think it's pretty funny that politics really does make strange bedfellows.

Just for kicks and grins, let's suppose you were a U.S. representative or Senator and Obama asked you for your help to reinstate the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program. Would you turn him down?

And by the way, for a true, blue conservative even vouchers aren't good enough. They're still a handout from government and to be as conservatively pure as the driven snow vouchers are no more acceptable then the traditional, district-based public education system.

I think his point is that 2000 vouchers, is not setting precedence.
This from Fact check.

Vouchers don't solve the problems of our schools
McCAIN: I'm sure you're aware, Sen. Obama, of the program in the Washington, D.C., school system where vouchers are provided. It's a thousand and some 9,000 parents asked to be eligible for that.

OBAMA: The D.C. school system is in terrible shape, and it has been for a very long time. And we've got a wonderful new superintendent there who's working very hard with the young mayor.

McCAIN: Who supports vouchers.

OBAMA: Actually, she supports charters.

McCAIN: She supports vouchers, also.

OBAMA: Even if Sen. McCain were to say that vouchers were the way to go--I disagree with him on this, because the data doesn't show that it actually solves the problem--the centerpiece of Sen. McCain's education policy is to increase the voucher program in D.C. by 2,000 slots. That leaves all of you who live in the other 50 states without an education reform policy from Sen. McCain.

McCAIN: Because there's not enough vouchers; therefore, we shouldn't do it, even though it's working. I got it.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Barack_Obama_Education.htm#62

Quote from: arpad on September 28, 2010, 06:22:02 PM

Quote from: taxed on September 28, 2010, 05:11:21 PM
arpad, I am pro-voucher too, but I don't for one second think Obama arrived at this position by his own thinking. I have read countless speeches, transcripts, and clips on Obama, and I have yet to find a single shred of evidence in regards to his ability to make a decision that he 1) understands, and 2) supports.

So, as a pro-voucher person, I know why I support it, and can make the case for it.  Obama can't do the same, except go through his points and touch on it.

If you want to think all things bad about Obama that's certainly your privilege but there's no getting around the fact that on this issue you, he and I are on the same page. If you need to find some rationalization that puts you on the side of vouchers for good reasons and Obama on the side of vouchers for bad reasons then I'd say you're exerting yourself to no good end.

Maybe I've got an odd sense of humor but I think it's pretty funny that politics really does make strange bedfellows.

Just for kicks and grins, let's suppose you were a U.S. representative or Senator and Obama asked you for your help to reinstate the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program. Would you turn him down?

And by the way, for a true, blue conservative even vouchers aren't good enough. They're still a handout from government and to be as conservatively pure as the driven snow vouchers are no more acceptable then the traditional, district-based public education system.

I support vouchers for some alternative, but if I were a Senator or Rep, I would not support them, because I don't believe in stealing from my constituents, and other citizens of the country, to pay for a local school problem.  The school system needs to be fixed locally and on out.  I would vote no, even though I think it is a positive choice as a band-aid.  The goal would be, of course, to fix the system.

  I have to say im stunned that even the dems are cracking on the teachers unions.
and theres talk about tenure and how it just keeps the bad teachers teaching.
    I wish I had tenure when I was on the job...I wouldnt have to do a job :)

Quote from: Solar on September 28, 2010, 06:36:55 PM
I think his point is that 2000 vouchers, is not setting precedence.

You have to understand the politics of education reform to understand the importance of any voucher program.

Back in the mid-90's when education reform was finally getting some traction beyond the idea of just pumping more money into school districts there were two main reform ideas - vouchers and charters. As far as the teacher's unions were concerned neither was a good idea but opposing both presented them with both a tactical as well as a strategic problem.

First, even the teacher's unions have only so much money. They can't fund campaigns against everything they don't like so they prioritize. In the scheme of things vouchers looked scarier to the teachers unions then charters so they threw everything including the kitchen sink at vouchers. On charters they were much more willing to deal which is why there are charter schools in, I believe, forty-four states.

Second, if the teacher's unions tried to prevent any substantive reform from passing they'd be seen for what they are which is a special interest group with a self-serving agenda. That would not be good because to a significant extent the teacher's unions enjoy the public perception of them as sort of a big bunch of Miss Crabtrees - noble, compassionate, giving and caring professionals into whose care parents can feel comfortable entrusting their precious children.

Pretty tough to carry off that image if you're stonewalling any changes in the system that don't benefit yourself.

So that means the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship was a precedent. But it was a dangerous precedent that had to be ended as soon as possible and luckily for the teacher's unions it was a tiny precedent. But when you've got a stone wall any crack is dangerous because cracks have a way of growing.

Naturally, when I went looking for some of the articles about the fight over the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program that detailed Obama's and Arne Duncan's efforts to keep the program going I can't find them but as a consolation prize I'll offer this item from the Washington Post about Obama addressing the NEA in 2007 - Link:

Quote"If you excel at helping your students achieve success, your success will be valued and rewarded as well," he says -- but he hastens to add that this must be done "with teachers, not imposed on them, and not based on some arbitrary test score."

This is whispering truth to power. But for the teachers, Obama's words are fingernails on a chalkboard. They fall silent, except for scattered boos, as he mentions a modest new program in Minnesota.

For a Democrat, especially a Democrat with presidential ambitions this is a pretty daring position to take. After all, the most important supporter of the Democratic party is the teacher's unions so pissing them off would be considered a bad idea.

Zip, the reason the Dems aren't quite as cozy with the teacher's unions as they have been comes down to one factor: the black vote.

Blacks are much more supportive of vouchers and charters then whites and the fate of the Democratic party rests on keeping a tight grip on the black vote. It's as simple as that. Obama gets it and is trying to do something to hang onto the black vote, many of his fellow Democrats don't get it and don't see the danger.

Sooner or later the disagreement's going to go public and that'll be way fun to watch because they're going to take hunks out of each other.

Quote from: zip on September 28, 2010, 07:04:15 PM
  I have to say im stunned that even the dems are cracking on the teachers unions.
and theres talk about tenure and how it just keeps the bad teachers teaching.
    I wish I had tenure when I was on the job...I wouldnt have to do a job :)

This is either bravery or rats abandoning a sinking ship. It's getting pretty hard to defend the massive costs and poor results.

Also remember that Obama threw his own grandmother under the bus

I predict this will be one of the way Obama tries to work with Republicans in 2011.

Quote from: quiller on September 28, 2010, 06:27:21 AM


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/27/AR2010092701766.html

First off, if the President of the United States does not have the authority to get his girls into a public school in Washington, D.C., then his Presidency is meaningless and the educrats have indeed taken over the asylum.

Second off: if you don't have connections, you get public schools by default. Obama clearly talks out both sides of his lying communist mouth. He'll take every penny he can from the NEA and other teachers' unions, then stab them right in the face by refusing to endorse their work, by enrolling his daughters to their educational bunglings.

Will D.C. parents finally revolt? Ask Adrian Fenty, ousted as mayor due solely to teacher-union money poured into campaigns against him. D.C. parents have NO meaningful say today in education --- particularly from a black just like them who won't fix their problem, just sign his kids up for "elite" education, and let the public school kids go to hell for all he cares.

Lies and betrayal. The first lessons you learn from a Democrat. And aren't those black voters EVER so bright, for reinforcing their own problems by siding with the unions. Their system is broken and always has been. The educrats don't care for anyone except themselves.

So what does he do, he closes down the republican sponsored voucher program.

I still say this is the issue where Obama will try to pivot to the center. If he can throw his own white grandmother under he bus, then he is capable of throwing the teachers' unions under the bus too.