The_Carpathia <writingken@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>So much for education being a key issue in the debate, it seems. In
>recent speeches to NAACP, we see that ....
>
>...both McCain and Obama sup****t teacher performance pay (opposed by
>the unions).
Meaningless, since they wouldn't necessarily sup****t the same policies
on teacher performance pay.
>...both McCain and Obama sup****t charter schools (opposed by the
>unions).
Your evidence is lacking that the unions oppose charter schools.
>...both McCain and Obama sup****t NCLB.
But they mean different things when they say that.
>McCain says he will fully fund
>it, while Obama says he will INCREASE funding for it (despite liberal
>opposition to it).
Unless they say where the money is coming from (and that answer
doesn't include the meaningless "eliminate waste", I don't believe any
politician who says that they will increase funding for anything).
Any increases in funding had better mean an increase in taxes, or the
deficit will get worse, which is unacceptable.
>...neither McCain and Obama want NCLB to stay the same but plan on
>fixing any flaws it may have.
But of course they see different flaws, so that is just attempt to
paper over the differences.
>...McCain said he sup****ts voucher programs, while Obama recently was
>condemned by the left for sup****ting government funds being given to
>faith-based programs (which...I would assume...would include schools,
>unless he is lying about it being ok to give government funds to
>religious groups)
That assumption has nothing to do with reality. The discussions of
"Faith-based programs" refer to social service programs for the poor.
.. Indeed, here's an article from May of this year
>where Obama SUP****TED the idea of voucher programs...
>http://www2.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3749401
I see two lines about vouchers in that article, and neither says that
he sup****ts them.
<"For example, he hasn’t ruled out private school vouchers, and some say
he could return to the idea."
That merely says that he hasn't taken an unflinching ideological
stance against them. But then Obama is trying to end ideological
warfare, so one would not expect him to do so.
<OBAMA: “If vouchers are proven to work], whatever my preconception, you
do what’s best for kids.”
The second quote suggests that his preconception is against vouchers,
but that he is willing to be open-minded. Of course, since vouchers
have NOT been proven to work, his statement indicates no changes in
favor of vouchers.
>...McCain said he sup****ts alternative certification programs (as if
>he was the only one to sup****t such). However, Obama's own website
>says....
>"Recruit Teachers: Obama will create new Teacher Service Scholar****ps
>that will cover four years of undergraduate or two years of graduate
>teacher education, including high-quality alternative programs for mid-
>career recruits in exchange for teaching for at least four years in a
>high-need field or location." This would indicate sup****t by Obama
>for alternative certification programs. Thus...both agree, again.
Not all "alternative certification programs" are alike. Obama refers
to HIGH-QUALITY programs, which necessarily excludes any program that
lets someone like you into a classroom. He also requires a 4-year
teaching commitment. That's a pretty high standard. Teach for
America has 75% turnover over 5 years, which is hardly good enough for
Obama.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_2003_Nov_24/ai_110364129
>Indeed, Obama says in the scholastic article, above, that he will not
>be held be bound by the teachers unions,
Good for him. He shouldn't be bound by anyone.
>So, it wouldn't seem to matter which of these candidates were elected
>President, if their words can be believed.
You are clueless.
>They would do the same things in education, once there.
Your evidence is lacking. Your interpretations of statements has
nothing to do with reality. In short, you are an idiot.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
lojbab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lojban language www.lojban.org
|
