When Liberals Control Education....

[Siete]

When you're dead, you don't know you're dead:

will the profundities never cease ?

They cease whenever and wherever you appear.

taking your wit and wisdom to task is similar to playing marbles with a moron who doesn't have any marbles to play with ... just sayin'

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The dope in this case is the one who posts nothing but your typical mishmash of propaganda, which you believe to be profoundly insightful when it is anything but...

Subjective, unfounded, insubstantial, vacuous... all asserted as TRUTH, despite having NO BASIS IN REALITY WHATSOEVER!

Relativism ON PARADE!​

Considering what your faith teaches, and how you actually live, you might to back off the attack on Relativism. Christianity doesn't get any more compromised than that of the Americans, who practice it in name only.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Whats the conservative method of education?

Post #54

Thats a long list of maybes, possiblies etc. Is there anything that conservatives are offering besides a list of "this could be good"?

Thats probably the reason the conservative method isnt being adopted. There isnt one

I can't speak for the Chic... but I would say that simply returning to the effective teaching of reading & writing principles, inducing the extensive practice of same, the training and practice of sound mathematical and science fundamentals, adding the training of sound fiscal principle and application of same and the principles of sound governance, the traits and practices of a sound, productive citizen.

...proof abounds that American students have fallen behind since Dewey and Progressive methodology has been mandated in our schools.

Could it be that conservative/traditional methods are actually the best path to educating students???

You betcha'!!!

12. " Traditionally, classrooms have been organised with children sitting in rows with the teacher at the front of the room, directing learning and ensuring a disciplined classroom environment. This is known as direct instruction.


Beginning in the late 1960s and early ‘70s, teachers began to experiment with more innovative and experimental styles of teaching. These included basing learning on children’s interests, giving them more control over what happened in the classroom and getting rid of memorising times tables and doing mental arithmetic. This approach is known as inquiry or discovery learning.

.... there is increasing evidence that these new-age education techniques, where teachers facilitate instead of teach and praise students on the basis that all must be winners, in open classrooms where what children learn is based on their immediate interests, lead to under-performance." MercatorNet 8216 Chalk and talk 8217 teaching might be the best way after all

Since the Left has come to control education in the US, has the US average student scoring increased or decreased?

It has consistently decreased on every level, across every conceivable category.

That is truly all a reasonable person needs to know to recognize what the solution is... there is only ONE consistent element associated with the decline: Left-think.

Therefore, remove that from the equation and the problematic issue will resolve itself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When you're dead, you don't know you're dead:

will the profundities never cease ?

They cease whenever and wherever you appear.

taking your wit and wisdom to task is similar to playing marbles with a moron who doesn't have any marbles to play with ... just sayin'

"...to task..."

Obviously you are using terms you don't understand.

You haven't even mentioned anything I've posted, much less 'taken same to task.'



In short, you are a dunce trying to keep up with your betters.
This, due to your limitations, is not possible.



Considering your constellation of skills, how is it possible for you to decide whether to defecate or to wind you watch?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The dope in this case is the one who posts nothing but your typical mishmash of propaganda, which you believe to be profoundly insightful when it is anything but...

Subjective, unfounded, insubstantial, vacuous... all asserted as TRUTH, despite having NO BASIS IN REALITY WHATSOEVER!

Relativism ON PARADE!​

Considering what your faith teaches, and how you actually live, you might to back off the attack on Relativism. Christianity doesn't get any more compromised than that of the Americans, who practice it in name only.

My faith is wholly irrelevant to this discussion.

With the exception of Islam, religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Just be be sure that you can see what it means, allow me to help ya discover the truth here:

Objectivity: the quality of being objective

Objective: not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

But religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Hmmm, I'm wondering who might have told you such a thing? It's an utter falsehood BTW, and that's long before we get to your statement about the Jesus cult and what Paul turned it into.

Tell us, just how many other faiths did you try out before deciding that Christianity was the One True Faith? Oh right, none, because it's what you just happen to be raised in. How very convenient for you eh?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

With the exception of Islam, religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Hmmm, I'm wondering who might have told you such a thing? It's an utter falsehood BTW, and that's long before we get to your statement about the Jesus cult and what Paul turned it into.

Hmm... Now reason requires that the Relativist would return to make claims based in nothing but their own subjective needs.

The Contributor at issue returned to advance baseless assertions, which serve only their own subjective need.

Now, with regard to the objectivity inherent in Judea-Christianity:

Such serves to instruct the individual to see life as the Creator of the Universe sees it... and NOT from their own pitiful perspective. And to comport themselves as the Creator of the Universe would have them comport themselves, considering the interests of others, to not behave in such a way that injurious to others, to speak only of the truth, etc, etc... That is not even a debatable point.

Now, I ask the reader to consider, WHAT PERVERTED ASPECT OF HUMAN REASONING WOULD MOST OPPOSE THAT REASONING?

Here's a clue... it rhymes with "Blevil" ORW: "Schmelativism".

 

[PaintMyHouse]

But religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Hmmm, I'm wondering who might have told you such a thing? It's an utter falsehood BTW, and that's long before we get to your statement about the Jesus cult and what Paul turned it into.

But religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Hmmm, I'm wondering who might have told you such a thing? It's an utter falsehood BTW, and that's long before we get to your statement about the Jesus cult and what Paul turned it into.

Hmm... Now reason requires that the Relativist would return to make claims based in nothing but their own subjective needs.

The Contributor at issue returned to advance baseless assertions, which serve only their own subjective need.

Now, with regard to the objectivity inherent in Judea-Christianity:

Such serves to instruct the individual to see life as the Creator of the Universe sees it... and NOT from their own pitiful perspective. And to comport themselves as the Creator of the Universe would have them comport themselves, considering the interests of others, to not behave in such a way that injurious to others, to speak only of the truth, etc, etc... That is not even a debatable point.

Now, I ask the reader to consider, WHAT ASPECT OF HUMAN REASONING WOULD MOST OPPOSE THAT REASONING?

Here's a clue... it rhymes with "Blevil" ORW: "Schmelativism".

The very fact that you believe in a Creator makes you irrational, since none can be found to exist. And so ends your contention that you are objective...

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

But religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Hmmm, I'm wondering who might have told you such a thing? It's an utter falsehood BTW, and that's long before we get to your statement about the Jesus cult and what Paul turned it into.

With the exception of Islam, religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Hmmm, I'm wondering who might have told you such a thing? It's an utter falsehood BTW, and that's long before we get to your statement about the Jesus cult and what Paul turned it into.

Hmm... Now reason requires that the Relativist would return to make claims based in nothing but their own subjective needs.

The Contributor at issue returned to advance baseless assertions, which serve only their own subjective need.

Now, with regard to the objectivity inherent in Judea-Christianity:

Such serves to instruct the individual to see life as the Creator of the Universe sees it... and NOT from their own pitiful perspective. And to comport themselves as the Creator of the Universe would have them comport themselves, considering the interests of others, to not behave in such a way that injurious to others, to speak only of the truth, etc, etc... That is not even a debatable point.

Now, I ask the reader to consider, WHAT ASPECT OF HUMAN REASONING WOULD MOST OPPOSE THAT REASONING?

Here's a clue... it rhymes with "Blevil" ORW: "Schmelativism".

The very fact that you believe in a Creator makes you irrational, since none can be found to exist. And so ends your contention that you are objective.

SO you, who need to deny the existence of the Creator, can find no evidence of the Creation?

LOL! Nothing hideously subjective about THAT!

LMAO! Folks... you can NOT make this crap UP!

Your FIFTH concession on the same issue is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Again, I ask the reader to note the defining traits of Relativism...

"the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality exist only in relation to one's culture, society, historical and personal context, and as such can never be the result of soundly reasoned absolutes."

Then examine the total rejection of objectivity by the offending contributor... .

I leave it to you, the reader, to decide for yourself.

 

[Siete]

When you're dead, you don't know you're dead:

will the profundities never cease ?

They cease whenever and wherever you appear.

taking your wit and wisdom to task is similar to playing marbles with a moron who doesn't have any marbles to play with ... just sayin'

"...to task..."

Obviously you are using terms you don't understand.

You haven't even mentioned anything I've posted, much less 'taken same to task.'



In short, you are a dunce trying to keep up with your betters.
This, due to your limitations, is not possible.



Considering your constellation of skills, how is it possible for you to decide whether to defecate or to wind you watch?

of course not Miss 12 0f 16, you cant comprehend simple written sentences so your opinion isn't considered my limitations, the limit belongs to you.


I digress ..

you have 16 ... 9 are refining tar oil.


Click to expand...

12 you say?

Canada
Newfoundland and Labrador

• North Atlantic Refinery, located in Come by Chance (North Atlantic Refining), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)

Nova Scotia

• Imperial Oil Refinery - Dartmouth (Imperial Oil) (closed), 89,000 bbl/d (14,100 m3/d)

New Brunswick


bal bal bal ...

yes, to task.

Cya.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

But religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Hmmm, I'm wondering who might have told you such a thing? It's an utter falsehood BTW, and that's long before we get to your statement about the Jesus cult and what Paul turned it into.

With the exception of Islam, religion is the epitome of objectivism. And there is no greater example of objectivity in religion than Christianity, which is equal to that intrinsic with Judaism.

Hmmm, I'm wondering who might have told you such a thing? It's an utter falsehood BTW, and that's long before we get to your statement about the Jesus cult and what Paul turned it into.

Hmm... Now reason requires that the Relativist would return to make claims based in nothing but their own subjective needs.

The Contributor at issue returned to advance baseless assertions, which serve only their own subjective need.

Now, with regard to the objectivity inherent in Judea-Christianity:

Such serves to instruct the individual to see life as the Creator of the Universe sees it... and NOT from their own pitiful perspective. And to comport themselves as the Creator of the Universe would have them comport themselves, considering the interests of others, to not behave in such a way that injurious to others, to speak only of the truth, etc, etc... That is not even a debatable point.

Now, I ask the reader to consider, WHAT ASPECT OF HUMAN REASONING WOULD MOST OPPOSE THAT REASONING?

Here's a clue... it rhymes with "Blevil" ORW: "Schmelativism".

The very fact that you believe in a Creator makes you irrational, since none can be found to exist. And so ends your contention that you are objective.

SO you, who need to deny the existence of the Creator, can find no evidence of the Creation?

LOL! Nothing hideously subjective about THAT!

LMAO! Folks... you can NOT make this crap UP!

Your FIFTH concession on the same issue is duly noted and summarily accepted.

I don't deny anything. Whether a Creator exists is an unknown, probably unknowable question. That is the only rational position, all others are subjective, like yours.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When you're dead, you don't know you're dead:

will the profundities never cease ?

They cease whenever and wherever you appear.

taking your wit and wisdom to task is similar to playing marbles with a moron who doesn't have any marbles to play with ... just sayin'

"...to task..."

Obviously you are using terms you don't understand.

You haven't even mentioned anything I've posted, much less 'taken same to task.'



In short, you are a dunce trying to keep up with your betters.
This, due to your limitations, is not possible.



Considering your constellation of skills, how is it possible for you to decide whether to defecate or to wind you watch?

of course not Miss 12 0f 16, you cant comprehend simple written sentences so your opinion isn't considered my limitations, the limit belongs to you.


I digress ..

you have 16 ... 9 are refining tar oil.


Click to expand...

12 you say?

Canada
Newfoundland and Labrador

• North Atlantic Refinery, located in Come by Chance (North Atlantic Refining), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)

Nova Scotia

• Imperial Oil Refinery - Dartmouth (Imperial Oil) (closed), 89,000 bbl/d (14,100 m3/d)

New Brunswick


bal bal bal ...

yes, to task.

Cya.

So that is the kind of post one gets by tossing the scrabble tiles out of the velvet bag?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Look around your world today Folks... and see if you can find any evidence of Relativism...

Look at how your own kids or grand kids are being educated, wherein "Global Warming" is taught as a FACT. Despite THE FACT, that there's NOTHING FACTUAL ABOUT IT!

Look at your own government, where those who have entered the country ILLEGALLY are being given privileges that THOSE WITH LONG HISTORIES OF TRYING TO ENTER THE COUNTRY LEGALLY; HAVING INVESTED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY AND HUNDREDS OF THEIR HOURS DECIDEDLY DO NOT GET! Anything 'reasonable' or objective about that? ANYTHING?

Look at the events in Ferguson, MO. See how YOUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS FANNING THE FLAMES OF IRRATIONAL PEOPLE, who claim that a guilty man is innocent and an innocent man is guilty... REASON WHICH REQUIRES THEY SHOULD BURN DOWN THE PROPERTY OF INNOCENT PEOPLE.

I leave it to you, the reader, to decide for yourself.

I ask only, that where you're so inclined, to please set forth in writing, your own reasoning so that others can learn from you.

 

[Siete]

When you're dead, you don't know you're dead:

will the profundities never cease ?

They cease whenever and wherever you appear.

taking your wit and wisdom to task is similar to playing marbles with a moron who doesn't have any marbles to play with ... just sayin'

"...to task..."

Obviously you are using terms you don't understand.

You haven't even mentioned anything I've posted, much less 'taken same to task.'



In short, you are a dunce trying to keep up with your betters.
This, due to your limitations, is not possible.



Considering your constellation of skills, how is it possible for you to decide whether to defecate or to wind you watch?

of course not Miss 12 0f 16, you cant comprehend simple written sentences so your opinion isn't considered my limitations, the limit belongs to you.


I digress ..

you have 16 ... 9 are refining tar oil.


Click to expand...

12 you say?

Canada
Newfoundland and Labrador

• North Atlantic Refinery, located in Come by Chance (North Atlantic Refining), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)

Nova Scotia

• Imperial Oil Refinery - Dartmouth (Imperial Oil) (closed), 89,000 bbl/d (14,100 m3/d)

New Brunswick


bal bal bal ...

yes, to task.

Cya.

So that is the kind of post one gets by tossing the scrabble tiles out of the velvet bag?

kind of you to call a quote of yours "scrabble tiles out of the velvet bag". Fitting indeed.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So cons entire proposal to change education is "maybe we should do *blank* but I dont know"

Is there any republican that actually proposed any changes or is this another wet dream cons are having?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The very fact that you believe in a Creator makes you irrational, since none can be found to exist.

I don't deny anything. Whether a Creator exists is an unknown, probably unknowable question. That is the only rational position, all others are subjective, like yours.

See how consistent exposure to sound reasoning forces the irrational to modify their reasoning?

In the span of one post, the contributor went from adamantly denying the existence of the Creator, to supposing that such is merely 'unknowable'. Suffice it to say that because something is unknown or 'unknowable', does not mean that it doesn't exist, thus the assertion that 'belief' that it does is irrational, is foolish and a perversion of human reasoning.

This is why it is so dangerous to tolerate their perverse reasoning, it tends to spread like a virus. It's better to check it, trap it and expose it for the fraudulence it is... as we've done here.

Of course, to know that the creation exists tends to help one recognize (to know) that the Creator exists... but let's not try to move 'em too far too fast. The Relativist psychology is a fragile construct and its best to help them down from the rhetorical ceiling instead of just pryin' 'em lose and lettin' 'em fall.

 

[NoNukes]

Antonio Gramsci was an Italian Marxist theoretician and founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party of Italy.
Gramschi’s motto is that of liberals today: “that all life is "political."

Everything is political. Everything....including the instruction given to our children.


Since the education industry in America has been captured by one political perspective, the Liberal/Progressive, the result has been catastrophic.
Since they have taken charge:


1. ".... a teacher could no longer line up children’s desks in rows facing him; indeed, he found himself banished entirely from the front of the classroom, becoming a “guide on the side” instead of a “sage on the stage.” [In] elementary school, students in the early grades had no desks at all but instead sat in circles on a rug, hoping to re-create the “natural” environment that education progressives believed would facilitate learning. In the 1970s and 1980s, progressive education also absorbed the trendy new doctrines of multiculturalism, postmodernism (with its dogma that objective facts don’t exist), and social-justice teaching."
E. D. Hirsch s Curriculum for Democracy by Sol Stern City Journal Autumn 2009



2. In 1989, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), the chief professional organization for mathematics educators and education faculty, issued Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. The document presented standards for grades K–12, including algebra. The underlying goals of the standards—never made clear to the general public—were social, not academic.

Some of the report’s authors, for example, sought to make mathematics “accessible” to low-achieving students, yet meant by this not, say, recruiting more talented undergraduates into teaching but instead the employment of trendy, though empirically unsupported, pedagogical and organizational methods that essentially dumb down math content.

Math educators proclaimed a brand-new objective—conveniently indefinable and immeasurable—called “deep conceptual understanding…. As Alan Schoenfeld, the lead author of the high school standards in the 1989 NCTM report, put it, “the traditional curriculum was a vehicle for . . . the perpetuation of privilege. The progressive educators, by contrast, support “integrated” approaches to teaching math—that is, teaching topics from all areas of mathematics every year, regardless of logical sequence and student mastery of each step—and they downplay basic arithmetic skills and practice, encouraging kids to use calculators from kindergarten on. ….”
Who Needs Mathematicians for Math Anyway by Sandra Stotsky City Journal 13 November 2009



3. "School Bans Teachers From Using Red Ink Because It’s Too Mean
.... teachers have been instructed not to grade papers in red pen because it is a “very negative color,” vice principal Jennie Hick told theDaily Mail. Green was suggested instead for corrections ...." U.K. School Bans Red Ink for Corrections Because It s Too Mean




As though it weren't enough that the Obama error....er, era, ....proved the fallacy of Liberal governance, now there is proof that John Dewey/Liberal education policies are just as much hokum.

Why do you conservatives not get the education and training and take over the education system? All that you do is complain about it, why not do something?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The very fact that you believe in a Creator makes you irrational, since none can be found to exist.

I don't deny anything. Whether a Creator exists is an unknown, probably unknowable question. That is the only rational position, all others are subjective, like yours.

See how consistent exposure to sound reasoning forces the irrational to modify their reasoning?

In the span of one post, the contributor went from adamantly denying the existence of the Creator, to supposing that such is merely 'unknowable'. Suffice it to say that because something is unknown or 'unknowable', does not mean that it doesn't exist, thus the assertion that 'belief' that it does is irrational, is foolish and a perversion of human reasoning.

This is why it is so dangerous to tolerate their perverse reasoning, it tends to spread like a virus. It's better to check it, trap it and expose it for the fraudulence it is... as we've done here.

Of course, to know that the creation exists tends to help one recognize (to know) that the Creator exists... but let's not try to move 'em too far too fast. The Relativist psychology is a fragile construct and its best to help them down from the rhetorical ceiling instead of just pryin' 'em lose and lettin' 'em fall.

I never denied the existence of the Creator. You jumped to that conclusion when I said believing in a Creator is irrational, which it is. Denying a Creator, which we have no evidence for either way, is also irrational.

 

[PoliticalChic]

They cease whenever and wherever you appear.

taking your wit and wisdom to task is similar to playing marbles with a moron who doesn't have any marbles to play with ... just sayin'

"...to task..."

Obviously you are using terms you don't understand.

You haven't even mentioned anything I've posted, much less 'taken same to task.'



In short, you are a dunce trying to keep up with your betters.
This, due to your limitations, is not possible.



Considering your constellation of skills, how is it possible for you to decide whether to defecate or to wind you watch?

of course not Miss 12 0f 16, you cant comprehend simple written sentences so your opinion isn't considered my limitations, the limit belongs to you.


I digress ..

you have 16 ... 9 are refining tar oil.


Click to expand...

12 you say?

Canada
Newfoundland and Labrador

• North Atlantic Refinery, located in Come by Chance (North Atlantic Refining), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)

Nova Scotia

• Imperial Oil Refinery - Dartmouth (Imperial Oil) (closed), 89,000 bbl/d (14,100 m3/d)

New Brunswick


bal bal bal ...

yes, to task.

Cya.

So that is the kind of post one gets by tossing the scrabble tiles out of the velvet bag?

kind of you to call a quote of yours "scrabble tiles out of the velvet bag". Fitting indeed.

Not my quotes, you moron.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Antonio Gramsci was an Italian Marxist theoretician and founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party of Italy.
Gramschi’s motto is that of liberals today: “that all life is "political."

Everything is political. Everything....including the instruction given to our children.


Since the education industry in America has been captured by one political perspective, the Liberal/Progressive, the result has been catastrophic.
Since they have taken charge:


1. ".... a teacher could no longer line up children’s desks in rows facing him; indeed, he found himself banished entirely from the front of the classroom, becoming a “guide on the side” instead of a “sage on the stage.” [In] elementary school, students in the early grades had no desks at all but instead sat in circles on a rug, hoping to re-create the “natural” environment that education progressives believed would facilitate learning. In the 1970s and 1980s, progressive education also absorbed the trendy new doctrines of multiculturalism, postmodernism (with its dogma that objective facts don’t exist), and social-justice teaching."
E. D. Hirsch s Curriculum for Democracy by Sol Stern City Journal Autumn 2009



2. In 1989, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), the chief professional organization for mathematics educators and education faculty, issued Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. The document presented standards for grades K–12, including algebra. The underlying goals of the standards—never made clear to the general public—were social, not academic.

Some of the report’s authors, for example, sought to make mathematics “accessible” to low-achieving students, yet meant by this not, say, recruiting more talented undergraduates into teaching but instead the employment of trendy, though empirically unsupported, pedagogical and organizational methods that essentially dumb down math content.

Math educators proclaimed a brand-new objective—conveniently indefinable and immeasurable—called “deep conceptual understanding…. As Alan Schoenfeld, the lead author of the high school standards in the 1989 NCTM report, put it, “the traditional curriculum was a vehicle for . . . the perpetuation of privilege. The progressive educators, by contrast, support “integrated” approaches to teaching math—that is, teaching topics from all areas of mathematics every year, regardless of logical sequence and student mastery of each step—and they downplay basic arithmetic skills and practice, encouraging kids to use calculators from kindergarten on. ….”
Who Needs Mathematicians for Math Anyway by Sandra Stotsky City Journal 13 November 2009



3. "School Bans Teachers From Using Red Ink Because It’s Too Mean
.... teachers have been instructed not to grade papers in red pen because it is a “very negative color,” vice principal Jennie Hick told theDaily Mail. Green was suggested instead for corrections ...." U.K. School Bans Red Ink for Corrections Because It s Too Mean




As though it weren't enough that the Obama error....er, era, ....proved the fallacy of Liberal governance, now there is proof that John Dewey/Liberal education policies are just as much hokum.

Why do you conservatives not get the education and training and take over the education system? All that you do is complain about it, why not do something?

Because it is politically based, having nothing to do with credentials.....are you really that stupid?

1. 1. Department of Education is, of course, unconstitutional. The Constitution clearly states that powers not granted to the federal government belong to the states. So where is the impetus for its creation? Unions. The National Education Association (NEA)
   2. “In 1972, the massive union formed a political action committee…released ‘Needed: A Cabinet Department of Education’ in 1975, but its most significant step was to endorse a presidential candidate- Jimmy Carter- for the first time in the history of the organization.” D.T. Stallngs, “A Brief History of the Department of Education: 1979-2002,” p. 3.
   3. When formed, its budget was $13.1 billion (in 2007 dollars) and it employed 450 people. IN 2010, the estimated budget is $107 billion, and there are 4,800 employees. http://crunchycon.nationalreview.co...-department-education-not-radical/mona-charen 4. “In November 1995, when the federal government shut down over a budget crisis, 89.4 percent of the department’s employees were deemed ‘nonessential’ and sent home.” Beck and Balfe, “Broke,” p.304