American Public Schools. Should they continue to be funded?

You know you can discuss the issue like an adult and not start throwing you platitudes and bromides around or you can go debate yourself. The fact is you have made totally fallacious statements as in the federal government requires states to have public education and that the federal government is the primary funder of education. And then displayed your total ignorance of what my state would do if there was no federal funding of local schools.

So I don't debate words put in my mouth, go have fun with your mirror.

 

Wait, what? Conservatism in its basic tenant is to 'conserve'(preserve) the State. It's goal is to keep the State, which is prosperous in the right direction and pursuing policies to this end.(and sometimes this means the removal of liberal(progressive) policies.). Whereas Communism is the belief in subjugating the Individual to the Communist regime, which in of itself violates the individual human expression and weakens a State due to the lack of expressed creation of individualism.

The Conservative is merely rigid, the Communist is ideological and a radical. As we're seeing post-Nov 8.

 

Public schools fail children belonging to racial minorities the most. I personally believe the public education system should be abolished. In fact, take the government out of education all together. Choice is better. Let parents decide what kind of school they wish to send their kids to. It has been proven that certain schools which cater to particular ethnic group, for example schools for Chicano children, perform better academically and improve the confidence of the students, giving them an identity and love for education.

Most public schools in the inner city import White female teachers from the suburbs. It is very important that students can identify with their teacher; and teachers should relate to their students.

 

Most states have a requirement to provide public education in their state Constitution. The above is blatantly wrong.

 

They can't. Alabama has a requirement in the state consittuion to provide public education

 

I wonder how the guy thinks we had education in this country prior to the federal Department of Education being established in 1979. Guess we were all just uneducated fools till then.

 

Both of your insane republican partisanship against public schools is not exactly being hidden by you both insisting you're "Right due to state constitutions". Yeah, states constitutions mean nothing. Discrimination occurs in them regardless of what their constitutions say. State constitutions are not at all why public education exists. Most states would immediately do away with all public school funding if the Fed funding didn't require there to be state funding and you both know that (or are too ignorant to know that). Which describes you both I cannot truly tell. I think you both know you're false.

 

Did we have public education before the Department of Education existed? I graduate from public schools in AL 8 years BEFORE there was a federal Department of Education.

You don't know what you are talking about give it up.

 

Learn to spell.

You know Alabama hates public education and you also are smart enough to know as we all are from your posts on the matter that you also hate public education out of petty partisan biases that completely cloud your judgement. The irony of course being you likely owe much of what you have in life to public education which has been saved in your state by the very Fed you so hate.

 

What about Libertarians? They have a desire to preserve their libertarian society when it comes about. Or a communist's desire to preserve the revolution from reactionaries? As for the conservative, the individual is subject to the community, that's how the state preserves itself, by limiting the expression of the individual for the sake of the group.

 

In my political analysis it is Communism(Leftism) that is reactionary. The reaction in response to perceived(or real) class/racial struggles, and the end result being intensifying those conflicts even more. In the presumed belief that the non-racist/non-class society will prevail, but in reality they made it more racist/classist(see: 2017 America.) There simply isn't a record, anywhere of Leftism being successful. Which is why I ditched it as a philosophy.

 

How are you defining reactionary? I simply define it as who reacts to a change. This means there are several different types. There is the regressive and the progressive.

Also do you really want to say the left did this? Honey we've been using a right wing authoritative model since the 1980's called neoliberalism. If anything we're supposed to see a rise of left wing thought because we need to snap back to the center.

 

Well, we see the words out of the mouths of the DNC. If that's "a rise of left wing thought", then that's exactly what I mean and what I see. Brewskier's able to put it in better words than me, but the Left seems to exist, and crave off of the racial/class struggle which fuels their political power at the cost of national unity. Think back to "We can't afford four more years of Bush", that's their MO operation. And when the reactionary gets into power, the reactionary often has no solution.

 

Well yeah but that's not the work of any one institution, it's the result of a cycle. Communal to market and back to communal and so on. Also no, the left does not. That's a horrible way of thinking about it. Libertarians also thrive off of the conflicts of race and class by offering a solution of less government. The rise of the far right in no small part owes itself to the rise of libertarian logic. Also what is reactionary?

 

When I think of reactionary as a dogma, I think 'OMG, there's this really bad thing happening, let's apply the quick-fix bandaid!'. And it often turns out that quick-fix bandaid made things a MILLION times worse than what it was. And we can discover that the Left ALWAYS applies the quick-fix bandaid. Look at the disaster of Medicaid, Medicare and the ACA. All quick fixes, all made it worse.

I look at government like an engine, and like any finely-tuned oil engine, it should operate in a mechanical manner. Government is indeed an organization, and from that standpoint a businessperson does have the inner knowledge of how an organization works. The big difference, is that Trump did not "hire" the legislative branch. No, the people moronically picked them out of political allegiance(though our political nuisance is completely amateurish compared to other countries. Europe's move to the Left in the 21st century, and its embrace of Colonialism for the centuries prior were both based on rational decisions made by the European people and their leaders.

We Americans, tend to vote on a very basic, very linear view of our own politics(let alone the world) that is so grossly false as to be laughable.

 

the right wants religious indoctrination.... only reason they do not support the public schools is they can not force their religion on other peoples children

save religion for Sunday school unless ones church sucks so bad one can't trust them to teach your kids religion, then again with the pedophile preachers, maybe we see why they don't want the church to handle this task

.

 

Conservatives don't like education because it is easier to manipulate the uneducated.

 

This is dumb. The only people forcing their religion upon people are Islamo-Democrats.

The collective is no different then the Catholic Church. They hide and protect their pedophiles the same way the Church did. The average drone would never let their kid go to a church, but would totally let Jon Podesta take their kid to Comet Pizza to see the "Sex Stains". Another example of no credibility on the left.

 

Liberals just are stupid people in general. That's why we spend so much on the school system they dominate/control, and get the results we get.

 

Islam and Christians believe in the same God, and liberals do not support government forcing other peoples children to believe either religion

 

just because we did not support the republicans so called smart "grab her psy" candidate doesn't make us stupid

.

 

They force Americans to tolerate Islam and make special exceptions for them. Like getting DMV pic with a turban on when the rules say, no hats. They won't force a mosk to perform a gay wedding, but Christians they will. I'd like to see you people attack Muslims the same way you attack Christians. The reason they don't is because they are pandering to Muslims and anyone that isn't a white male Christian. I guess the last thing I'll ever see is a collectivist drone be consistent and integritable. They believe and fight for whatever helps them that day, then fight against it the next when it hurts them,

If Trump had an affair, in the oval office, on public time, with a public intern, then lied about it under oath, do you think the drones would all be like "It's just sex, who cares?". The collective doesn't believe in right or wrong. They only know power and will say/do anything for it.

 

You support rapist/sex offender Bill Clinton to this day. No comparison. You people have 0 credibility. You openly worship a known rapist and voted for his doormat wife who enable him and even attacked his victims.

 

your mistaken, the constitution guarantees religious freedom, your free to believe whatever you want, same as they are...

I do not support covering ones face on a DL picture

if your beliefs wont let you get the picture, then no DL for you... your choice

yes, if I think if Trump had another adulterous affair while in office his drones woudl say it's just sex, who cares imo

.....

 

did you vote for Trump, whom has also been accused of rape and sex offenses? and who btw was also friends of the Clinton's?

not only that, there is nude pictures of the first lady on the web?

.