The President's Speech, how many watched it?

[Sinatra]

I still think it fair to ask the President, particularly in the context of telling kids to work hard - why he supported kicking poor students out of the private school Obama's own kids have the privilege of attending...

This is why:

President Obama's compromise on the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program -- namely, allowing currently enrolled students the opportunity to graduate -- is a fair solution that I support. But an honest examination of the program's overall effectiveness is still necessary.

When the voucher program was created in 2003, it was designed to be a five-year pilot project to give District students federally paid vouchers to attend private schools. The point of a pilot program is to establish a model that can be evaluated before it is replicated on a larger scale.

Studies by the Education Department and others have, at best, mixed findings -- modest gains by some students in a few subjects, but serious problems with the administration of the program, schools with significant health and safety issues, and teachers lacking college degrees or basic teaching credentials. Most problematic, the Education Department's recent report could not show that voucher students are performing better than their public school counterparts.

Some argue that despite these findings, the program should continue and should be replicated nationwide. But we owe it to students and taxpayers to look at the facts. Congressional hearings this summer will provide an opportunity for voucher advocates to make their case. If a fair analysis can show that voucher students are significantly outperforming their peers in public or charter schools, or that voucher schools are first-rate learning centers, it will go a long way toward winning support beyond the president's proposal.

Topic A: Obama's Compromise on D.C.'s School Vouchers Program - washingtonpost.com

Next question?

They yanked the program - despite its success.

Your post does nothing to dispute that - simply political spin.

And shame on Obama for doing so...

 

[Ravi]

I was too afraid to watch it.

 

[kwc57]

I feel all filthy and indoctrinated.

I'm going to go read the Constitution and the Bible to purge myself.

That alone won't get the job done. You will need to throw a fair amount of self flagellation in to boot.

 

[Sinatra]

I still think it fair to ask the President, particularly in the context of telling kids to work hard - why he supported kicking poor students out of the private school Obama's own kids have the privilege of attending...

You answered your own question, you know.

Quite right - the poor are forced into one option - the public school.

The wealthy have choice.

Why are liberals so willing to subsidize foot stamps, rent assistance, cash for clunkers, college tuition, etc - but not something so essential as the K-12 education of a child? Why advocate educational disadvantage for the disadvantaged?

I can afford to send my children to private school - but most cannot. My children have educational opportunity - but most do not. At the nearest private school in my area, just over 80% of graduates go on to university. At the nearest public school in the area, it is less than 40%.

College graduates, over a lifetime, earn nearly a million dollars more than a high school graduate. So by supporting Obama's elimination of choice, by kicking out lower income children who were succeeding in the private school his own children attend, you are advocating a caste system of education that directly contributes to keeping the generational poor down, and thus dependent upon continued governmental assistance. Such a system is far from "progressive" ...

Do you find that acceptable?

 

[kwc57]

I'm at work, so I couldn't watch it. I did however scan the posted speech. It seemed fine to me.......but I'm sure there were subliminal messages broadcast on TV that affected the poor children who didn't wear the tin foil hats their parents provided.

 

[kwc57]

I still think it fair to ask the President, particularly in the context of telling kids to work hard - why he supported kicking poor students out of the private school Obama's own kids have the privilege of attending...

You answered your own question, you know.

Quite right - the poor are forced into one option - the public school.

The wealthy have choice.

Why are liberals so willing to subsidize foot stamps, rent assistance, cash for clunkers, college tuition, etc - but not something so essential as the K-12 education of a child? Why advocate educational disadvantage for the disadvantaged?

I can afford to send my children to private school - but most cannot. My children have educational opportunity - but most do not. At the nearest private school in my area, just over 80% of graduates go on to university. At the nearest public school in the area, it is less than 40%.

College graduates, over a lifetime, earn nearly a million dollars more than a high school graduate. So by supporting Obama's elimination of choice, by kicking out lower income children who were succeeding in the private school his own children attend, you are advocating a caste system of education that directly contributes to keeping the generational poor down, and thus dependent upon continued governmental assistance. Such a system is far from "progressive" ...

Do you find that acceptable?

You answered your own question again. People who can't afford to buy groceries get government food stamps. People who can't afford a place to live get government rent assistance. People who can't afford private school get government public education. The government doesn't pay for you to eat at a 5 star gourmet restaurant, live in a mansion or attend the best private school.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The losers who disagree with Obama should watch it.

The losers' world is disintegrating. That's not bad, either. We are never going back to their ways.

 

[VaYank5150]

I still think it fair to ask the President, particularly in the context of telling kids to work hard - why he supported kicking poor students out of the private school Obama's own kids have the privilege of attending...

This is why:

President Obama's compromise on the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program -- namely, allowing currently enrolled students the opportunity to graduate -- is a fair solution that I support. But an honest examination of the program's overall effectiveness is still necessary.

When the voucher program was created in 2003, it was designed to be a five-year pilot project to give District students federally paid vouchers to attend private schools. The point of a pilot program is to establish a model that can be evaluated before it is replicated on a larger scale.

Studies by the Education Department and others have, at best, mixed findings -- modest gains by some students in a few subjects, but serious problems with the administration of the program, schools with significant health and safety issues, and teachers lacking college degrees or basic teaching credentials. Most problematic, the Education Department's recent report could not show that voucher students are performing better than their public school counterparts.
Some argue that despite these findings, the program should continue and should be replicated nationwide. But we owe it to students and taxpayers to look at the facts. Congressional hearings this summer will provide an opportunity for voucher advocates to make their case. If a fair analysis can show that voucher students are significantly outperforming their peers in public or charter schools, or that voucher schools are first-rate learning centers, it will go a long way toward winning support beyond the president's proposal.

Topic A: Obama's Compromise on D.C.'s School Vouchers Program - washingtonpost.com

Next question?

They yanked the program - despite its success.

Your post does nothing to dispute that - simply political spin.

And shame on Obama for doing so...

You call this SUCCESS???? Let me guess, the surge was a success too, right?

 

[Ame®icano]

Can someone tell me why Obama is against voucher program?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I was too afraid to watch it.

It was a good speech ravi.....we have a thread with the text somewhere if you want to read it.

 

[Sinatra]

You answered your own question, you know.

Quite right - the poor are forced into one option - the public school.

The wealthy have choice.

Why are liberals so willing to subsidize foot stamps, rent assistance, cash for clunkers, college tuition, etc - but not something so essential as the K-12 education of a child? Why advocate educational disadvantage for the disadvantaged?

I can afford to send my children to private school - but most cannot. My children have educational opportunity - but most do not. At the nearest private school in my area, just over 80% of graduates go on to university. At the nearest public school in the area, it is less than 40%.

College graduates, over a lifetime, earn nearly a million dollars more than a high school graduate. So by supporting Obama's elimination of choice, by kicking out lower income children who were succeeding in the private school his own children attend, you are advocating a caste system of education that directly contributes to keeping the generational poor down, and thus dependent upon continued governmental assistance. Such a system is far from "progressive" ...

Do you find that acceptable?

You answered your own question again. People who can't afford to buy groceries get government food stamps. People who can't afford a place to live get government rent assistance. People who can't afford private school get government public education. The government doesn't pay for you to eat at a 5 star gourmet restaurant, live in a mansion or attend the best private school.

Actually - you have made my point. You just outlined a program of dependence upon government - thus advocating an economic caste system.

You have indicated you support a system of haves and have nots.

How...Democratic of you....

 

[kwc57]

Quite right - the poor are forced into one option - the public school.

The wealthy have choice.

Why are liberals so willing to subsidize foot stamps, rent assistance, cash for clunkers, college tuition, etc - but not something so essential as the K-12 education of a child? Why advocate educational disadvantage for the disadvantaged?

I can afford to send my children to private school - but most cannot. My children have educational opportunity - but most do not. At the nearest private school in my area, just over 80% of graduates go on to university. At the nearest public school in the area, it is less than 40%.

College graduates, over a lifetime, earn nearly a million dollars more than a high school graduate. So by supporting Obama's elimination of choice, by kicking out lower income children who were succeeding in the private school his own children attend, you are advocating a caste system of education that directly contributes to keeping the generational poor down, and thus dependent upon continued governmental assistance. Such a system is far from "progressive" ...

Do you find that acceptable?

You answered your own question again. People who can't afford to buy groceries get government food stamps. People who can't afford a place to live get government rent assistance. People who can't afford private school get government public education. The government doesn't pay for you to eat at a 5 star gourmet restaurant, live in a mansion or attend the best private school.

Actually - you have made my point. You just outlined a program of dependence upon government - thus advocating an economic caste system.

You have indicated you support a system of haves and have nots.

How...Democratic of you....

I stated how things are. I never stated support. Do you ASSume and ASSign political motives to people you don't know very often?

But as a libertarian conservative, I do understand the reality of haves and have nots. Some people will work hard to earn what they want and others are willing to take what they can get from whoever is willing to provide. Those willing to settle for less create their own caste system.

And to give credit where credit is due, I think it is great when any POTUS speaks to the children of this nation to encourage them to work hard, apply themselves and excel in their personal goals.

 

[JakeStarkey]

BHO is much more an ethical, manly human being than 90% of the posters on this forum.

 

[bodecea]

Quite right - the poor are forced into one option - the public school.

The wealthy have choice.

Why are liberals so willing to subsidize foot stamps, rent assistance, cash for clunkers, college tuition, etc - but not something so essential as the K-12 education of a child? Why advocate educational disadvantage for the disadvantaged?

I can afford to send my children to private school - but most cannot. My children have educational opportunity - but most do not. At the nearest private school in my area, just over 80% of graduates go on to university. At the nearest public school in the area, it is less than 40%.

College graduates, over a lifetime, earn nearly a million dollars more than a high school graduate. So by supporting Obama's elimination of choice, by kicking out lower income children who were succeeding in the private school his own children attend, you are advocating a caste system of education that directly contributes to keeping the generational poor down, and thus dependent upon continued governmental assistance. Such a system is far from "progressive" ...

Do you find that acceptable?

You answered your own question again. People who can't afford to buy groceries get government food stamps. People who can't afford a place to live get government rent assistance. People who can't afford private school get government public education. The government doesn't pay for you to eat at a 5 star gourmet restaurant, live in a mansion or attend the best private school.

Actually - you have made my point. You just outlined a program of dependence upon government - thus advocating an economic caste system.

You have indicated you support a system of haves and have nots.

How...Democratic of you....

So, you think the government should provide for us all to be "haves"?

 

[FSTEDE]

I recorded it and watched a documentary on Stalin instead...thought I'd save the best for last...

 

[SableRay]

I found the speech inspiring and short. Don't understand where all the talk of an hour long speech came from.

 

[SableRay]

I'm asking you now to take this sacred blood oath with the person next to you. Find a knife or a razor and cut open your palm.

Did Michelle Bachmann write his speech?

Do you know if Ms. Bachman, the drooler, can write?

 

[Vast LWC]

So, let me get this straight:

People on the right screamed and moaned about how the president's speech was going to be an "indoctrination to socialism" for America's schoolchildren.

Then, when it turned out that they had been dead wrong, AGAIN, they try to change it into a criticism of Obama's dislike of voucher programs????

I believe that there are several posters on these boards, and a large number of people in the right-wing media that owe Mr Obama an APOLOGY.

I await said apology.

 

[bodecea]

So, let me get this straight:

People on the right screamed and moaned about how the president's speech was going to be an "indoctrination to socialism" for America's schoolchildren.

Then, when it turned out that they had been dead wrong, AGAIN, they try to change it into a criticism of Obama's dislike of voucher programs????

I believe that there are several posters on these boards, and a large number of people in the right-wing media that owe Mr Obama an APOLOGY.

I await said apology.

Don't hold your breath. They don't do apologies.

 

[MaggieMae]

I still think it fair to ask the President, particularly in the context of telling kids to work hard - why he supported kicking poor students out of the private school Obama's own kids have the privilege of attending...

Nice spin, genius.

Obama was the one that extended the program so that kids in the DC voucher program could finish out the year. It's now up to congress to renew the experimental program. But it has NOT received good marks. The Department of Education recently issued a three-year analysis of student achievement under the program that showed limited gains in reading and no significant progress in math. Obama Offers D.C. Voucher Program Extension for Existing Students | 44 | washingtonpost.com

But that's just the DC program. Overall, the voucher system has been productive, and Obama is NOT dead set against it, nor is he against private schools or charter schools. But since more of our children already attend public schools, he has focused on the problems in those classrooms first.