.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Bully Pulpit

The term "bully pulpit" stems from President Theodore Roosevelt's reference to the White House as a "bully pulpit," meaning a terrific platform from which to persuasively advocate an agenda. Roosevelt often used the word "bully" as an adjective meaning superb/wonderful. The Bully Pulpit features news, reasoned discourse, opinion and some humor.

Thursday, July 28, 2005

RE: School Bashing

The title of your post is disingenuous. Shouldn't it read, "Government School Bashing?" Keep on trying though. The more you play this game, the more I get to expose it and the more people who become enlightened.

"Question for you Steve: If public schools are so bad, why did you send your children there?"

Stupidity. Yes, not even I am immune. Laziness and ignorance can be added. If I can help it, my grandchildren will never see the inside of a government-run school.

"Your statement about grief counseling and building self-esteem being 'stupidities' is amazing!"

It's only amazing to the hardcore, deep-diving, left-wing government education junkies. To everyone else it is just common sense.

"Do you not believe that building a child's self-esteem is an important part of education?"

Actually, no. However, if you educate a child, their self-esteem will take care of itself. What is amazing is the never-ending tendency of liberals to apply the wrong solution to a non-existent problem.

"Since when?!!"

Since the beginning of human history and up until about twenty-five or thirty years ago. I know, I know. History didn't exist for liberals before 1968, but the rest of us are just funny that way.

"You obviously have a very different idea of what education should involve."

Different than whom? Liberals. Yep. Teachers' Unions? Sure. Social Engineers? Absolutely. Education involves the impression of the sum of human knowledge and the underlying foundations of that knowledge on another mind. How the human that contains that other mind feels this morning or whether they think they're cool enough or not has little or nothing to do with whether they can master the concepts they seek to grasp. Your concept of education is skewed because it is framed completely within the context of liberalism. And yet you and Strother condemn private-sector schooling for being one-dimensional. It may not be hypocrisy, but it's awfully close.

"And you don't seem to understand that private entities could not POSSIBLY fund schools adequately, or for very long."

Horsefeathers. Private entities fund huge efforts every day. Besides, private sector schools wouldn't be nearly as expensive as government-run ones. But of course you work from that steady drone of "more money, more money." The current government school hegemony will not be satisfied until every single resource on the planet is swallowed up by them. Even then they'll press for more. And guess what? Education will continue to decay. The government education blob is a virus.

"I personally don't want to depend on "donations" to get my child through school."

Then don't. Who said, or even implied you would have to? Like anything else that is important to you, you will send your child to the school that suits your needs the best.

"And why in the world do you think church schools or some corporate-sponsored school would not have an agenda?"

Of course they will. But unlike government-run schools, you will have the choice to send your child to the school whose agenda matches your own. That's the wonderful thing about not living in a totalitarian socialist state. We get to pick what's best for ourselves and our own.

"Talk about squashing individuality and creativity!! Wow!!"

No, that's the job of the government-run schools.


Post a Comment

<< Home