Project Wonderful Banner

Thursday, August 21, 2008

That damned logic

What's Mallard raving about today?

Barack Obama, Vouchers.

Obama pays to send his kids to Private School and yet doesn't complain about funding Public Schools with his tax dollars.

Mallard wants to stop funding Public Schools, won't stop whining about it, and makes absolutely baseless statements that vouchers "work."

An Obama is the one you are mocking? I'll take Obama's compromise position any day.

6 comments:

Toots McGee said...

I do understand the concept of caricature, but this is starting to get ridiculous. Tinz is going to have to draw that chin in an athletic supporter or something (this runs in family newspapers!)

It's all about pandering to the teachers union. Right.
Public education sucks. Right
Vouchers "work". Right.

Thanks for explaining it to me, duck. (But seriously, that chin is disturbing.)

David B said...

So Obama uses a private institution and pays for it, but is opposed to having the general public pay for anyone to use said private institutions.

Tinsley, presumably, is in favor of having the general public pay for others to use those private institutions.

From this we learn that Obama is pro-capitalism, while Tinsley is pro-socialism. Who knew?

exanonymous said...

Even with comments pro-vouchers, it's always acknowledged that it's the major cities with inner city schools that have a problem, and not so much anywhere else, and that the suburbs have an advantage with public schools.

So in other words, public schools can't be dumped because the voucher system would not work for the more rural areas (transportation fees would be through the roof). So one must continue to pay taxes. And the idea is that competition will make the inner city schools better, so one can't stop paying taxes on them either, since they'll need to exist to compete. But the voucher system has to be expanded, so one needs to pay more taxes on that. Even the public schools in "good" areas are always putting almost-illegal levies out there to support themselves, and cutting back on extra-ciriculars, so there isn't enough money to go around.

Sorry, when simplified it seems obvious, but when you really look at it, it means a tax increase for everyone without a guarentee of results once it's allowed to go private. The government is not supposed to regulate business, which means my tax dollars could go to a school without standards.

It almost would be worth it though to see all the "hippies" move and monopolize private schools just as they do the colleges. Private colleges compete, but they are apparently liberal hotbeds of stupidity according to Mallard. Why does he think elementary school education would be different?

Progressive Conservative said...

I have my kids in private (religious) school, and my wife teaches there, and I must say I am absolutely opposed to having the government pay for them. David B is right, by the way, true Conservative principles dictate that I just don't want the government involved in my private school.

One of the reasons private schools can succeed is that everyone feels, quite literally, invested in the school. All the parents show up for cleanup days, or to put in a new ceiling for the library, or to help with science fair, spelling bee, orchestra concert, whatever. We have a stake in the school. Give people vouchers, that incentive would be gone.

There are also unfair advantages private schools have, such as not having to accept kids with certain special needs because they lack the specialized certification. Also, the ability to kick out troublemakers with little warning. Public schools must accommodate everyone, and every troublemaker has to go to school somewhere. Give out vouchers, and you force the schools to comply with government regulations.

I, unlike Tinz, unlike Bush, unlike McCain, am a Conservative - I want the government out of my church, the church out of my government. I completely support public schools, and I completely oppose any government intervention in private schools. Obama has my vote in '08.

rewinn said...

Uh, where has Obama ever said "School Vouchers Work" ?

Why doesn't Tinsley just have Obama say "Vote for John McCain"? It would be just as honest of Tinny.

rewinn said...

progressive conservative: let me just add to your honest-conservative analysis one point: when the government starts funding anything associated with religion, it gives the government some control over that religion. I think you alluded to it toward the end, but basically, the desire for government dollars can twist a church in subtle and maybe not-so-subtle ways.