Why Do/Don't We Need The Department of Education?

[The Rabbi]

If the school district can't fund itself then it should be dissolved and merged with a neighboring district.



Funny how it's always the stupid people who go around telling everyone else how stupid they are.

Why couldn't FEMA provide emergency funding? Why couldn't Interior provide it? Why couldn't a dozen other Federal agencies provide it?
When you can't make points it's time to pull out the stupid. For Scumball that's all he's got.

Christ you are stupid. The doe is older than fema. The doe is almost 150 years old. Only because carter made it a cabinet position do you care.

So what? What does the age of the dept have to do with anything.
Geez you have your brains where you sit.

 

[Badmutha]

In reading your restrictive views of the Constitution, it is obvious that we need a court system to interpret our Constitution so that we do not need to rely on the opinions of Teabagging message board posters

Well a restrictive document was the intention.......probably to your dismay.

I think for statists........its obvious they need 9 (or at least 5) all powerful unelected tyrants in robes in order to subvert the Constitution and defeat The Founders. The past centrury and modern day Post-Constiututional Ameriac as well as our bloated out of control government......is testament to their success.
.
.
.

 

[rightwinger]

In reading your restrictive views of the Constitution, it is obvious that we need a court system to interpret our Constitution so that we do not need to rely on the opinions of Teabagging message board posters

Well a restrictive document was the intention.......probably to your dismay.

I think for statists........its obvious they need 9 (or at least 5) all powerful unelected tyrants in robes in order to subvert the Constitution and defeat The Founders. The past centrury and modern day Post-Constiututional Ameriac as well as our bloated out of control government......is testament to their success.
.
.
.

Obviously, it was not

Our founding fathers recognized that future generations would vote for the government that best met their needs. They never tried to limit what government was...only establish the structure that would decide what was best for the general welfare of the people

They were wise men indeed

 

[Annie]

Nah, I was talking about the democrat who ran for President this year...Perry. Ooooh...thats gotta sting.

So if you really want local control of school districts, why not get read of the SBoE's?

Obama is the only Democrat running for president this year. I guess if you have your head up your ass (and who knows who else's) you might have missed that.

If states want to get rid of their state boards of ed that's OK with me.

Frankly I'd be fine with dissolving all government schools and reducing taxes that much. Doubtless that would horrify a rancid statist like yourself, with hysterical claims of "think of the children". But the truth is kids would end up much better educated.

The bolded portion above is in sharp contrast to Obama's proclamation last night that manditory education for children up to 18 be enforced.

I can't imagine education NOT being the top priority for young Americans. It sure as shit is for Idians, Chinese, Koreans, Europeans, and everyone else in the world. We're the only country in the world that thinks Joe's Heating and Air College of Burbank will equip our children to compete globally.

Well imagine it. Many American children don't care about education. They want to get out of school, the sooner, the better. Why? Perhaps because we aren't teaching things that might interest them, things that seem relevant. It's shocking how many kids that hate history, come alive when the teacher connects how to effect change, via the past. Unfortunately that isn't what's taught in most classrooms today.

Some of the problem certainly has to do with 'national standards': JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

It's not just social studies, the same is happening in science, math, and language arts. Not only are they being 'dumbed down' and made 'politically correct', they are losing the kids.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Neither was NASA. Should we stop going into Space?
It's arguable that the Air Force wasn't in the Constitution either. Care to give it up?
No FDA...so we can go back to the medicine shows and people selling tonic water as a cure-alls. The life expectancy will go down which may solve the problem of medicare but thats
really a craven way to solve the issue.

Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.

And I certainly don't think the DoE is an example of either the perfect nor the good.
It is simply featherbedding at the highest government levels.
Do you find your examples to be featherbedding at the highest government levels?
I thought not.

It might not be a bad idea to start a thread on the enumerated powers....

BTW...you might want to find out what 'craven' means.
It certainly doesn't apply in this context.

Lets not let questions stand in the way of your fillibuster. Apparently if it's not in the Constitution from 1781...it shouldn't be in 2012 America...right?

Point to the passage about Space Exploration, would you please?

Did you actually think what you pose as a question have any significance in this connection?

Not the slightest.

But, continue to strive for relevance.

 

[Badmutha]

Obviously, it was not

Well not in your book.......where "Government Can Do Whatever It Wants".......because the opinion from 5 unelected tyrants in robes supercedes The Constution and Representative Government as well as our constitutional Republic alltogether.

Our founding fathers recognized that future generations would vote for the government that best met their needs.

Like a government that would steal for them?

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the Republic"
--Ben Franklin--Conservative--Hater of Democrats--Great American

They never tried to limit what government was...

Right.....they risked life and limb for unlimited government and a return to Tyranny.

only establish the structure that would decide what was best for the general welfare of the people

They were wise men indeed

“to lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the U.S.” that is to say “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” for the laying of taxes is the power and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. they are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. in like manner they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. to consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct & independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding & subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. it would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the U.S. and as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they pleased.
--Thomas Jefferson--Founder--Hater of Liberals--Great American

.....The Reduction of the Whole Instrument of Government to a single phrase (Your Utopia!).........yes they were very wise men.....which is why they oppose every contention you have made in this thread.
.
.
..

 

[The Rabbi]

Try the doe website dipshit. You really dont want to challenge me on this.

You're obviously a boob. Like anyone had any doubt.
National School Lunch Program

And if you tell me DOE provides food too then you've just proven the point that DOE simply duplicated what can be done by other agencies and needs to be eliminated.

Well no fema would be duplicating the doe. But nice try...

So you've proven that other agencies could do the job DOE is doing, making DOE redundent.
And you've proven you're a moron (once again).

 

[candycorn]

Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.

And I certainly don't think the DoE is an example of either the perfect nor the good.
It is simply featherbedding at the highest government levels.
Do you find your examples to be featherbedding at the highest government levels?
I thought not.

It might not be a bad idea to start a thread on the enumerated powers....

BTW...you might want to find out what 'craven' means.
It certainly doesn't apply in this context.

Lets not let questions stand in the way of your fillibuster. Apparently if it's not in the Constitution from 1781...it shouldn't be in 2012 America...right?

Point to the passage about Space Exploration, would you please?

Did you actually think what you pose as a question have any significance in this connection?

Not the slightest.

But, continue to strive for relevance.

It's too deep for such a shallow mind. That much is clear now.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The doe has done more lasting damage than a Soviet nuclear strike

 

[rightwinger]

Obviously, it was not

Well not in your book.......where "Government Can Do Whatever It Wants".......because the opinion from 5 unelected tyrants in robes supercedes The Constution and Representative Government as well as our constitutional Republic alltogether.

Our founding fathers recognized that future generations would vote for the government that best met their needs.

Like a government that would steal for them?

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the Republic"
--Ben Franklin--Conservative--Hater of Democrats--Great American

They never tried to limit what government was...

Right.....they risked life and limb for unlimited government and a return to Tyranny.

only establish the structure that would decide what was best for the general welfare of the people

They were wise men indeed

“to lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the U.S.” that is to say “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” for the laying of taxes is the power and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. they are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. in like manner they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. to consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct & independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding & subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. it would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the U.S. and as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they pleased.
--Thomas Jefferson--Founder--Hater of Liberals--Great American

.....The Reduction of the Whole Instrument of Government to a single phrase (Your Utopia!).........yes they were very wise men.....which is why they oppose every contention you have made in this thread.
.
.
..

Our great founding father, Thomas Jefferson said it best...


I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well no fema would be duplicating the doe. But nice try...

So you've proven that other agencies could do the job DOE is doing, making DOE redundent.
And you've proven you're a moron (once again).

but why? just so you can say you dumped a department? yet the money would still be the same.

And i was slightly wrong. The DOE doesnt deal with food. The usda does but its grouped into what the total % of the DOE helps with funding.

DOE isnt redundant, you think it is because FEMA does something similar yet it doesn't.

shrug

OK, so yuou admit you are a brainless retard who takes advice from wax fruit. We're making progress.

Each agency has a budget that constitutes overhead. All those bureaucrats needs to be fed and housed. Eliminate the overlap and you eliminate a lot of jobs and extra expense.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

So pay taxes for the schools and pay to send your kids to private schools?

Elect school board candidates who will push for better standards. I honestly don't see why this is so difficult to understand.

Or move away to another district that can change it's standards on whim since there is no minimum standards across the districts any longer.

Because the federal government can't change standards on a whim for the entire country? Did we have school districts all around the U.S. constantly lowering their standards prior to 1980?

I'm curious...do you feel the same way about the FAA as you do the DOE? Should airplanes not have to meet minimum safety standards? If not why not? If so, whats the difference?

Could eliminating the Department of Education result in hundreds of people frying to death in a fiery inferno as their body parts scattered across the runway?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Obviously, it was not

Well not in your book.......where "Government Can Do Whatever It Wants".......because the opinion from 5 unelected tyrants in robes supercedes The Constution and Representative Government as well as our constitutional Republic alltogether.



Like a government that would steal for them?

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the Republic"
--Ben Franklin--Conservative--Hater of Democrats--Great American




Right.....they risked life and limb for unlimited government and a return to Tyranny.

only establish the structure that would decide what was best for the general welfare of the people

They were wise men indeed

“to lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the U.S.” that is to say “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” for the laying of taxes is the power and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. they are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. in like manner they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. to consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct & independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding & subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. it would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the U.S. and as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they pleased.
--Thomas Jefferson--Founder--Hater of Liberals--Great American

.....The Reduction of the Whole Instrument of Government to a single phrase (Your Utopia!).........yes they were very wise men.....which is why they oppose every contention you have made in this thread.
.
.
..

Our great founding father, Thomas Jefferson said it best...


I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

Which is why we were given a process to amend it.

 

[GHook93]

Most of our educational funding is generated at the local and state level. That is where most educational decisions are made. The Dept of Education provides about ten percent of our educational funding

There is a wide disparity in funding and educational quality between states. Some states do not emphasize education and their children suffer for it. Theses states, which we like to call Red States are the ones who most want to get rid of the Dept of Education. This is primarily because the Dept of Education sets standards that they will actually have to expend money to meet.

Douche bag, the worst schools in the country are in the big cities. Like NY, Chicago, LA, PHX, Dallas, Miami, Baltimore etc. All these cities are run by leftist douche bags like yourself!

 

[rightwinger]

Most of our educational funding is generated at the local and state level. That is where most educational decisions are made. The Dept of Education provides about ten percent of our educational funding

There is a wide disparity in funding and educational quality between states. Some states do not emphasize education and their children suffer for it. Theses states, which we like to call Red States are the ones who most want to get rid of the Dept of Education. This is primarily because the Dept of Education sets standards that they will actually have to expend money to meet.

Douche bag, the schools in the country are in the big cities. Like NY, Chicago, LA, PHX, Dallas, Miami, Baltimore etc. All these cities are run by leftist douche bags like yourself!

The numbers don't lie

Red States score significantly lower than Blue States in educational performance. It is indicative of poor funding, aversion to science and an attitude that education is somehow elitist

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Most of our educational funding is generated at the local and state level. That is where most educational decisions are made. The Dept of Education provides about ten percent of our educational funding

There is a wide disparity in funding and educational quality between states. Some states do not emphasize education and their children suffer for it. Theses states, which we like to call Red States are the ones who most want to get rid of the Dept of Education. This is primarily because the Dept of Education sets standards that they will actually have to expend money to meet.

Douche bag, the schools in the country are in the big cities. Like NY, Chicago, LA, PHX, Dallas, Miami, Baltimore etc. All these cities are run by leftist douche bags like yourself!

The numbers don't lie

Red States score significantly lower than Blue States in educational performance. It is indicative of poor funding, aversion to science and an attitude that education is somehow elitist

The northeast tends to have the better school systems in terms of quality. The south tends to be lower, but there are states that break the rules. California, Hawaii, and Rhode Island are below average and certainly not bastions of Republicanism. On the flip side, Virginia, Indiana, and New Hampshire are among the top and have a lot of Republican influence in those states.

State Education Rankings: The Best And Worst For Math And Science

Regarding funding, there is no correlation between funding and education quality. Washington D.C. spends an average of $24k per student, more than any other district in the country, and they have one of the worst school systems. Ditto with New York City. They spend up to around $19k with poor results.

Funding for public education nationwide has tripled since the 1970s with no measurable result to show for it. The bottom line is that the schools will perform according to the demographics of the district. Your best school districts are typically those with middle to upper income families who have post high school educations and good careers and thus raise their children to the be the same way. In the end, it always comes back to the parents.

 

[rightwinger]

Can anyone explain how eliminating the Dept of Education will result in an improvement of our education system?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Can anyone explain how eliminating the Dept of Education will result in an improvement of our education system?

I think the point being made is that it doesn't appear to have added anything of value to the system, so why continue to spend millions, if not billions of dollars per year on it for at minimum, the same results we'd have without it?

 

[The Rabbi]

Can anyone explain how eliminating the Dept of Education will result in an improvement of our education system?

I think the point being made is that it doesn't appear to have added anything of value to the system, so why continue to spend millions, if not billions of dollars per year on it for at minimum, the same results we'd have without it?

Pages of discussion and no one can give a good argument why we should keep this albatross.

 

[rightwinger]

Can anyone explain how eliminating the Dept of Education will result in an improvement of our education system?

I think the point being made is that it doesn't appear to have added anything of value to the system, so why continue to spend millions, if not billions of dollars per year on it for at minimum, the same results we'd have without it?

Pages of discussion and no one can give a good argument why we should keep this albatross.

Someone has to enforce the GOP No Child Left Behind Act