Liberal big govt spenders - it's all about the youth!

[Patriot]

With liberals, it's all about Chicken Little's "sky is falling" scenarios.  The following is from an email I received from Kansas Congressman Mike Pompeo regarding the looming federal sequester, set to take effect on March 1.

   I've heard from many people running programs that will be impacted.  It's true—funds available for some of them will be reduced.  But the hysterical rhetoric doesn't match the facts.

    An example.  Just this past week, my office received a video message from the Chancellor of the great University of Kansas, Ms. Bernadette Little-Gray.  Instead of embracing a message of financial responsibility, Chancellor Gray-Little implores me to "Stop the Sequester"—arguing that the "sequester" would be a disaster for children's education, private enterprise, and American innovation.

    But the facts belie the magnitude of this impact.  As a result of the sequester, federal grants at KU will decline from $245 million to a projected $233 million.  Apparently the reduction would take federal funding of grants back only to the level KU received just one year earlier. That's not to mention the $28 million dollars KU spent over the past couple years from President Obama's stimulus bill.  

Like President Obama, KU's Chancellor argues that we should address the deficit through 'balance.' That is code for more taxes on hard-working Kansans and more money redistributed to Washington, D.C.  While I share the Chancellor's desire to make our Kansas schools great, she ignores the threat to those same young people resulting from the fact that every graduate of her college this May—my son Nick among them—is already responsible for over $54,000 in federal debt.  As for private enterprise, she fails to recognize the simple truth that it is not federal government spending that creates wealth, jobs, and prosperity for our state and for our country.

Sheesh.  Sounds like some local leaders (aka Chicken Little folks) who think government spending is criticle to provide 'positive childhood experiences' (like water slides & whirligig rides) to make sure kids stay/return home after high school/college.  The residents of Kansas already "donate" vast sums to educate our kids through grade 12 via property taxes and the return of state & federal "donations".  Donations = tax/fee revenues confiscated by law in the form of taxes.  Liberal socialist/communist  playbook?  Research the terms, and you decide.

[redcliffsw]

One of these days. it's probable that these government entertainers and the so-called educators will receive nothing
from the government.  Maybe that'll be the end of today's Democrats and the neocon/socialist Republican party or perhaps we will be under the authority of their one world government.

Meanwhile, they'll keep borrowing and printing the money to maintain these programs that getting us to no-where.

[Vitriol]

It is just a priority issue.  Your culvert replacement is more important than my post-secondary education.  Your low property tax is valued over my high sales tax.   The amount of money talked about finances the wic program for a couple of days.  There is land for sale in Canada.

[Patriot]

It is just a priority issue.  Your culvert replacement is more important than my post-secondary education.  Your low property tax is valued over my high sales tax.   The amount of money talked about finances the wic program for a couple of days.  There is land for sale in Canada.

No, education at any level is more important that overt spending on the latest & greatest toy/building/administrator, etc.  Pay for your Vagina Monologues & student union building out of your own pocket.  Let's focus spending on solid curricula & the best teachers instead of bloated administration & marginal 'wants'.

[upoladeb]

having to fund anything over k-12 is ridicules,our taxes subsidize other people so they can have a easy life and act like they are better then the uneducated hard working slobs that made it so they had a college or university to go to.

[redcliffsw]

Why fund education with government money to compete against private education?

Americans ought to know better, instead one generation indoctrinates the next to the limited communist thinking.

Are you limited to the Democrats or the Republican thinking?  Either way, Obama is now your man.

[Ross]

I recieved this in an e-mail
No, I won;t disclose who sent it.
No I won't take credit for it.

"Gifted" and "talented" and 'outstanding" students brainwashd to
"serve communities in need", to become "community organizers"
I suppose.

I'd change it a bit to read "To stop the decline in population, please come back home and start a business.

Think folks, how many business can survive with a population of less than 3,000.
How many pharmacy's, grocery stores, gas stations, auto repair shops, hardware stores, clothing stores and second hand stores can be supported by less than 3000.

I know of only one gunsmith in Elk County, a good man runs it in Grenola.


                                       

[Vitriol]

Let's focus spending on solid curricula & the best teachers instead of bloated administration & marginal 'wants'.

So you want only your approved curricula?  You decide what is a "best" teacher?  So in education, unlike local government , you propose that eliminating the administration component is the best option because it give you an instant cost savings, salary, benefits, per each admin personnel eliminated.  Of course in this dream you would have the most qualified "best" instructors working for free. Because there would be no one to acquire wealth, hire or fire, negotiate contracts, or pay the bills.   You want no chiefs just all Indians.  Yet in local government you want to add levels of management.  When there is no one at the helm the ship will sink.
Just as if you do nothing but change the direction you still crash, just in to a different reef.

Elimination of public funded post - secondary institutions would definitely do one thing.  Dumb down the 90% of the population that could not afford to go college.  Private colleges have the independent right of refusal.  They don't like you or your check bounces you stay poor and dumb.  Eliminate the public fund stream and the price will shift to the private sector.  You will be taught what the corporation wants you to learn and at their schedule.  He who pays the check rules the classroom.

That being said $12 million will not make or break any state budget. 

[Patriot]

So you want only your approved curricula?  You decide what is a "best" teacher?  So in education, unlike local government , you propose that eliminating the administration component is the best option because it give you an instant cost savings, salary, benefits, per each admin personnel eliminated.  Of course in this dream you would have the most qualified "best" instructors working for free. Because there would be no one to acquire wealth, hire or fire, negotiate contracts, or pay the bills.   You want no chiefs just all Indians.  Yet in local government you want to add levels of management.  When there is no one at the helm the ship will sink.
Just as if you do nothing but change the direction you still crash, just in to a different reef.

Elimination of public funded post - secondary institutions would definitely do one thing.  Dumb down the 90% of the population that could not afford to go college.  Private colleges have the independent right of refusal.  They don't like you or your check bounces you stay poor and dumb.  Eliminate the public fund stream and the price will shift to the private sector.  You will be taught what the corporation wants you to learn and at their schedule.  He who pays the check rules the classroom.

That being said $12 million will not make or break any state budget. 

Vitriol is such an appropriate name.  In retrospect however, BitterLoser might have been a better option.

First, I never advocated 'only my approved curricula'.  I suggested, given a choice between buildings & better books, that the best curricula & instructors were a better use of taxpayer funds.

I also did not suggest the elimination of administration.  Just bloat where it exists.

Nor did I suggest that the 'best' instructors work for free.  Actually, I believe quality teachers should be among the highest paid in the system...  above administrators, if necessary to ensure retention.  No chiefs?  No, just chiefs who realize that the primary objective is to educate children, not just buy a better chair for themselves.

When there is no one at the helm the ship will sink.  Just as if you do nothing but change the direction you still crash, just in to a different reef.

As it will if the one(s) at the helm are unskilled, incompetent, asleep or drunk (on booze, power or any other intoxicant).

You, and your twisted arguments, sound remarkably like the warm, greasy crap that the goose in the White House squirts out the tin horn on a daily basis.  Ever consider facing the fact that focused, liberty loving conservatives have had enough of that BS and might be standing up for a change?  Get over it.  Or not.

[Diane Amberg]

But nobody can agree any more on what kids should be learning, how and when. Did you take trig in 7th grade? How about calculus in 8th? It happens here.
Children who are eager,ready to learn and have involved parents are  leaps ahead of the rest of the kids...who also deserve a good education, but aren't strong enough in their basics and don't grasp new material fast enough to survive the AP courses. Who shall we sacrifice?
It also hurts the hard workers who see the negative stuff written about such poor education in this country. They are working so hard and still get exposed to negative press.The parents can't hide it all from them. They don't know who to believe.