×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Discuss the US Presidential Election & Education

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the running-out-of-time dept.

Education 1515

In 24 hours, many of you will be able to vote. So as we come down to the wire, this is really our last chance to talk about the issues. We've already discussed Health Care, the War, and the Economy. Today I'm opening up the floor to discuss education. Perhaps no other issue will matter more in 50 years. Which candidate will make the next generation smarter?

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

1515 comments

Vote (5, Insightful)

mfh (56) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611229)

Nuff said. (These issues are a stimulus to trigger a voting response, and have NOTHING to do with policies that will exist post-election.)

Re:Vote (5, Insightful)

symbolset (646467) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611391)

If you don't vote:

  • Your opinion doesn't count.
  • you're not entitled to complain
  • you'll have several years to regret it

So get off your lazy butts and vote! You are not too busy.

Re:Vote (5, Insightful)

cl0s (1322587) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611511)

What if you're complaining about the system as a whole? Voting would be quite hypocritical then. Unless your voting for a guy thats running on the basis of changing the system, but running within the system... I guess.

Re:Vote (4, Insightful)

Macgruder (127971) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611661)

By being given the opportunity to vote, we're invited to participate in our electoral process.

If you decline to vote, then you really have no recourse to complain about the results of that process, do you? You had your chance to be heard and decided you had other things to do.

Re:Vote (5, Insightful)

fprintf (82740) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611599)

No, if I don't vote it will make no difference whatsoever. I live in a state that will definitely go Democratic. Unlike 2 years ago, there is no one running for office that is contested. Given our electoral system, my vote cannot do anything other than possibly give an independent candidate enough votes to receive election funding and a place on the ballot next time. Unfortunately this time, there is no Ross Perot to get my vote.

I will vote, as my civic obligation. But if I chose to not vote, please do not assume it is because I am too lazy to do so. It has nothing to do with it, and none of your points make any sense to me.

1. My opinion really doesn't count anyway, my vote can't help anyone get elected unless I change residence to a more independent state.
2. The two party system gives me every right to complain
3. Every time I vote for a candidate I regret it anyway, cause all we get is more of the same - bigger government, more taxes & more intrusion. Ross Perot got my vote twice and I have regretted he didn't win each time. I can't remember the name of the independent candidates the last two times, and regrettably we ended up with W.

If I don't vote I can't complain? (5, Insightful)

Morris Thorpe (762715) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611603)

Silly me. I thought the First Amendment allowed me to bitch until my heart is content.

I'm tired of hearing that I can't complain if I don't vote. Who made up this mantra? The people who want you to vote for them.
And the masses have bought it. They think they really have a say in what happens in government. Ha!

By choosing not to vote I *am* making my statement: I don't like the candidates or the system.

Enough with Groupthink.

Re:If I don't vote I can't complain? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611635)

I, for one, am writing in McSteamy for President.

Re:Vote (5, Insightful)

russotto (537200) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611667)

If you do vote
  • Your opinion barely counts.
  • If your guy wins, you're not entitled to complain because you voted for him
  • If your guy loses, you're not entitled to complain because you accepted the results of the democratic system by voting
  • You'll have several years to regret it

So vote if you'd like, but don't fool yourself into thinking you're morally superior because you did, or that you really had an effect. In Wyoming, your vote is about 1 in 150,000 of a share in electing 3 electors, who are a 3 in 538 share of electing the president. And that's the best you can do. Every other state is worse.

Re:Vote (4, Insightful)

fracai (796392) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611677)

Your opinion doesn't count.

So vote, it doesn't matter who or why, just go to the polls so you get a sticker which gives your uninformed opinion the weight it didn't have before.

you're not entitled to complain

See above.

you'll have several years to regret it

But who cares? You voted, you're free to complain.

Vote if you actually agree with one of the candidates.
Voting for the "lesser of 2 evils" is still voting for evil.
Voting outside of the 2 main parties isn't throwing your vote away.
If you do go to the polls and don't know anything about any of the presidential / local candidates, don't vote for that position.
If you do go to the polls and don't know anything about the state and local measures, don't vote for that question.

Casting an uninformed vote is worse than being informed and making the decision not to vote. At least the non-voter didn't waste any time at the polls casting votes they didn't truly believe in. And the uninformed voter truly wasted their vote.

There's still time to actually read up on the candidates and their positions.
Look at the state and local level as well.
Find a copy of your local ballot and at least read the questions you'll be voting on. Research them further, they're rarely written clear enough to be informed solely on the 1 or 2 sentence description.

CmdrTaco's method of rejecting real discussion: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611681)

CmdrTaco has found a way to reject discussion of political problems: He controls the subject instead of allowing submissions of stories by readers.

Looking from afar... (2, Insightful)

seanellis (302682) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611235)

...from the other side of the pond, Obama is the right choice. Palin's stance on creationism alone should be enough to decide this particular issue.

Re:Looking from afar... (3, Insightful)

mfh (56) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611273)

Palin's stance on creationism alone should be enough to decide this particular issue.

Unless you happen to believe in creationism (like many do in the USA) then this is the trigger to vote for McCain/Palin. If every intelligent person voted, these elections would never be too close to call. Also the nefarious involvement of unscrupulous people doing bad things to win, decreases the predictability of an outcome, when both sides are doing it.

Re:Looking from afar... (5, Funny)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611393)

Speaking of unscrupulous things to win:

It should be known (the media is hiding the fact), that there is a special second polling day for registered republicans. This is to help alleviate lines. This Wednesday is a special extra day o voting only for you.

Don't let the unscrupulous liberal media get away with hiding this fact, stand up for your right to vote without lines on Wednesday November 5th!

Remember this special day is for registered republicans only, democrats and independents must vote tomorrow.

Re:Looking from afar... (1)

Tink2000 (524407) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611605)

Don't you just hate mods that don't understand what they are moderating?
Mod parent up "+1 historical".

Re:Looking from afar... (1)

FredFredrickson (1177871) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611639)

I always thought it was the scummiest thing when people put up posters saying that Democrat's election day was the day after. Don't you stoop that low.

Re:Looking from afar... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611481)

"Intelligent" == at least one standard deviation above the median intelligence.

That's ~25% or less of the population, not enough to make the elections "never too close to call."

Re:Looking from afar... (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611543)

You don't have to agree with somebody on everything to vote for him. It's pretty clear that Obama will "lose" the "evangelical vote", but evangelicals don't have any seats in the Electoral College. States do. Obama is going to win a lot more evangelicals than John Kerry, and that might tip the balance in some battleground states.

The economy is, of course, is a big factor in this. But I think style counts for a lot too. Obama talks about his religion in a personal way, which is something evangelicals can relate to. It doesn't matter if this evokes a violent reaction among those who were never going to vote for him anyway, so long as it moves some into the persuadable category, which is the best a Democrat can hope to do by talking about religion to evangelicals.

Presidential victories are built on persuading a small number of voters in tight races.

Re:Looking from afar... (5, Insightful)

east coast (590680) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611597)

Unless you happen to believe in creationism (like many do in the USA) then this is the trigger to vote for McCain/Palin.

Let's be honest here. Unless Palin is actually teaching the class her outlook on evolution has zero to do with her relation to education. Infact, keeping her in as a governor is probably more likely to get creationism pushed on more students than her being a vice president. On the federal level all she's going to do is go on and on about budgets. That's it.

If every intelligent person voted, these elections would never be too close to call.

Intelligent by who's standards? If your idea of intelligent is the normal Slashdot "everyone who thinks like me" kind of thing than I'm sure you're right. As for me? I know tons of vastly intelligent people who have some ideas that are far from my own. Enough to make me question who's really right. And out of these same tons of people many probably think creationism has some glimmer of truth to it. It doesn't bother me because I'm not asking them to teach biology to me.

Even if I were the difference between the evolutionist camp and the creationist camp means jack shit in the real world. How about we leave that stupid little debate behind and work on the idea that we're graduating kids that can't balance a checkbook. A fucking checkbook has a lot more to do with how this country progresses than whatever theory you have on the origins and progression of life. I bet you that if everyone in this country believed in creationism but could balance a checkbook we'd be a lot better off. We haven't even go an acceptable majority of the kids graduating to cover the basics of everyday life and we're busy bickering over evolution? Huh?

Also the nefarious involvement of unscrupulous people doing bad things to win, decreases the predictability of an outcome, when both sides are doing it.

It's just another reason to reject the two party system if you ask me. When we can finally shed ourselves of the "us or them" maybe we'll also let go of the hate that accompanies it.

Re:Looking from afar... (5, Insightful)

canUbeleiveIT (787307) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611651)

If every intelligent person voted, these elections would never be too close to call.

Intelligent != ability to make good choices. There are plenty of folks of average intelligence who excel at making good decisions and plenty of brilliant ones who continually fuck up their decisions. Intelligent people are subject to irrationality, self-interest and bias, just like everyone else.

I'm sure that this isn't the popular opinion among the alpha dorks who worship on the altar of IQ, but so be it.

Re:Looking from afar... (5, Insightful)

fprintf (82740) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611407)

Looking at it from this side of the pond, it is not quite so clear. Compared with socialist-leaning political types we see in Europe, Obama is seen as a very centrist politician. However compared with the usual types of politicians we are used to in this country, it will be a significant shift toward the left if Obama gets the presidency and the Democrats keep control of congress. While this may be only a 2 year shift in power, looking at what happened to Bill Clinton and the Democrats previously, it is nevertheless makes me very nervous to think what might happen in those 2 years.

There is no candidate or their party that represents my more libertarian views on the world. Small government is not represented by either major party, personal gun ownership is shakily represented by the Republicans, and freedom of self-expression is shakily represented by the Democrats (for some history on the changes to what that party represents - look at what the Democrats did to the students in Chicago in the early 60s).

Obama may look right to you. However, I feel he represents the lesser of two evils between him and Senator Clinton. McCain would have been perfect 10 years ago. Now he just seems like a bitter old-man-puppet, who picked a hot "young" thing as his running mate and now will make all of us pay the price of a Democratic President due to his inability to pick a good VP candidate.

It is with pride that I go to the polls tomorrow, especially as a non-native citizen allowed the priveledge to vote via my naturalization. It is with some amount of shame that I pick a candidate that I agree less than 50% with on my topics of interest (including McCain, Obama, Bob Barr and Bill the Cat).

Re:Looking from afar... (3, Insightful)

Paralizer (792155) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611415)

Her being a creationist really makes me dislike her as a candidate. If she is stubborn enough to not acknowledge even the possibility of evolution, and remains a strict creationist even with the overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, how can she handle foreign relations where society is drastically different from our own, or even domestic issues that she doesn't believe in?

Typically I wouldn't care about your religion, but I think you really need to be open to the possibility you are not correct, especially if you're running for such an important office, and be able to work with the other side to reach a middle ground. I don't think creationists demonstrate this ability. But that's not to say that I disrespect creationists just because of their beliefs.

Re:Looking from afar... (2, Insightful)

FredFredrickson (1177871) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611703)

Especially in a country that prides itself in "Freedom of Religion"

Unless they meant- freedom of christianity...

But seriously, how can we be free while subjected to Palin's version of Genesis?

So is McCain (3, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611449)

Fortunately, it looks like Science and Logic are about to take the stage again. Sadly, here in America, we have upwards of around 20% that believes in creationism of some form. So far, nearly all that I have meet that believe in it, are real whack jobs. When I asked one of my past students about it, he said that James Dobson showed conclusively that Carbon dating does not work. Dobson tested a metal knife blade. When I pointed out that it only works on items that were living before, he said that dobson said otherwise. Sad, sad, sad.

Thank God we are heading back into cooler and logical minds.

Re:So is McCain (3, Insightful)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611563)

I think technically I fall in that 20%, I've always thought evolution was a rather intelligent design. So they aren't all wackos, mainly the evangelicals

Re:Looking from afar... (2, Insightful)

Ogive17 (691899) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611513)

I agree that Obama is going to instantly increase the reputation of the US around the world.. but seriously, the guy has been playing lip service for the past 6 months.. if he can deliver even 10% of his campaign promises I'll be surprised.

What I'm really concerned about is if the Democrats get the fillibuster proof majority and Obama gets elected... One party in complete control of everything... bye bye remnants of democracy...

Re:Looking from afar... (3, Interesting)

Bartab (233395) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611559)

In the end, I couldn't care less about the creation myths others have, even our President. After 6 Republican Presidential terms, they still haven't managed to overturn Roe.v.Wade.

On the other hand, taxes are never found unconstitutional, and rarely reduced significantly. The only way to avoid them is to never increase them.

I vote my financial self interest, and regardless of what the Obama propaganda is it has nothing to do with $250k [foxnews.com]

"Palin's stance" is better (2, Interesting)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611565)

The last time I saw her state her stance, it was this: "teach both in class and let the students critically analyze both." I saw her give an interview where that came up and that's exactly what she said, if not quite worded the same.

Sounds even better to me because it sounds like she's in favor of teaching critical thinking, which is far more important to scientific research and society in general than just learning whatever the establishment says is the best explanation for the origins of life.

If you think science education means always accepting whatever the scientific establishment accepts, then you belong in a priesthood, not science. It's good for young minds to try to tackle such topics.

Re:Looking from afar... (2, Informative)

Average_Joe_Sixpack (534373) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611577)

The teaching of creationism is the least of America's education issues. We have a significant portion of high school graduates who are well behind their foreign counterparts in literacy and mathematics. The problem is so widespread that many universities have remedial courses to prep students for basic foundation classes in English and algebra.

Unfortunately, in many districts the parents are more interested in spending funding on new athletic facilities then on education.

Re:Looking from afar... (5, Informative)

m4cph1sto (1110711) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611623)

Palin's stance on creationism? You mean that evolution should be taught exclusively in science class, as it is in Alaska? And that there's nothing wrong with discussing alternative views, in an appropriate context, without putting them in the curriculum? What's wrong with that?

I'm a scientist. I think that intelligent design and creationism are hogwash. But because of America's foundation in religion, they are concepts that anyone will come across outside of school. I think they should be discussed, at the teacher's discretion, especially if a student brings up the question, but should not be mandated in the curriculum.

Palin said in one interview "teach both... don't be afraid of information". The next day she went on to clarify her position by saying that they shouldn't be part of the curriculum, but it's ok to discuss them if a student brings it up. Actually here's the exact quote: "I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

Make them Pay (-1, Offtopic)

bit trollent (824666) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611237)

We are within 2 days of making the Republican party pay for it's failure, dishonorable behavior, and fraud.

Can't wait!

Re:Make them Pay (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611315)

You sound like a very thoughtful, emotionally-stable person. Just the kind of person who should be choosing the next leader of the free world. When you said "fraud," were you talking about Democrats destroying the economy and pandering for votes by forcing banks to make loans to unqualified borrowers for homes they couldn't afford, and then resisting all attempts by Republicans to INCREASE regulation of Fannie Mae? Just wondering...

Re:Make them Pay (2, Informative)

Futile Rhetoric (1105323) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611409)

Let us ignore that most (three out of four) of the faulty loans originated with private investment banks, and not with Fannie Mae or Freddy Mac -- that makes for a much more compelling straw man.

Re:Make them Pay (5, Informative)

kingramon0 (411815) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611711)

They may have originated with those banks, but because Fannie and Freddie were buying up those mortgages and they had an implicit government guarantee. If Fannie and Freddie didn't exist, those private investment banks would not have had an irresponsible gov't entity to sell their questionable loans to, so they would have had to scrutinize their borrowers more.

Re:Make them Pay (5, Insightful)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611327)

We are within 2 days of making the Republican party pay for it's failure, dishonorable behavior, and fraud.

How long before we can do the same with Democrats?

Re:Make them Pay (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611405)

4 years and a day.

Re:Make them Pay (3, Insightful)

Ogive17 (691899) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611403)

and replace it with the Democrat party which will bring more failure, dishonorable behavior, and fraud.

Obama may be a breath of fresh air, but as long as the same career politicians keep getting elected to congress, they will keep acting on their own benefit and not the people.

Re:Make them Pay (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611419)

really? you are sure you will have enough voters turn out to override their voting fraud like they did last year?

I doubt it. you guys could not motivate anyone to get off their ass and go vote. all that campaigning and door to door and you could not get lazy young voters to stop doing jello shots or smoking bongs long enough to vote.

We will have 4 more eyars of the GOP because of all you lazy 18-30 people.

It's all YOUR FAULT!

It's the teachers, and the parents. (5, Insightful)

Geoffrey.landis (926948) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611239)

If I had to make on comment on the presidency and eduction, it would be that education has to be reformed from the bottom up, not from the top down. It's the parents, and the teachers, that are important here-- not the president.

The federal government really isn't the appropriate place to deal with any kind of primary educational policy.

Re:It's the teachers, and the parents. (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611275)

Ever heard the phrase "like herding cats"?
There are so many insane parents and incompetent teachers, so many nutjobs with their own little idea of how things should be that trying to move the system in any direction from the bottom is futile.

Re:It's the teachers, and the parents. (1)

roguetrick (1147853) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611633)

And then there are plenty with no idea on how the system does or should work. That is the real problem, the nut jobs marginalize themselves if everyone is educated.

Great plan you have for being competitive w/ China (3, Insightful)

apparently (756613) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611307)

The federal government really isn't the appropriate place to deal with any kind of primary educational policy.

It's called investing in our workforce to remain competitive in a global economy. I realize long-term planning isn't the Republican's forte; sorry we see things differently.

Re:Great plan you have for being competitive w/ Ch (1, Insightful)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611515)

Even better is when I hear right wing christians complain about not being able to be compete on the world stage in math and science then out the other side of their mouths yell about intelligent design.

what.

Re:Great plan you have for being competitive w/ Ch (5, Insightful)

kingramon0 (411815) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611569)

It is not the government's job to plan things for us. It is hilariously bad at it, anyway. It is the government's job to protect our liberties so we can do things ourselves.

We are perfectly capable of organizing our own local educational systems. Some of them won't be as good as others, but they can learn from the ones that are successful.

Having the government plan it, and run it, will just guarantee that the quality continues to degrade universally.

Re:Great plan you have for being competitive w/ Ch (2, Informative)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611653)

You really think the federal government should be involved in the education of our children? There are over 13,000 school districts in the United States, each and every one of them with their own distinct needs and situations. What possible help could the federal government provide for them? The local government knows what is best for its students and should be the sole decision maker for them too. Interference from the federal (and even state) will just gets in the way because they're making decisions for millions of kids instead of just hundreds.

Apathy (1)

mfh (56) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611319)

parents, and the teachers, that are important here-- not the president.

Many teachers in positions of power are apathetic after losing wages, 401Ks, supplies, budgets for new teachers, students to gunfire... etc. Even if they get more funding, it won't be enough to correct the pain and suffering they have endured. Many will retire in the next ten years and then the whole thing will go to shit.

Re:Apathy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611469)

Speaking as a Canadian teacher who is here in the US for a three year teaching exchange, I would have to agree with the general sense of apathy and hopelessness that pervades the school system. I have been undergoing a bit of a culture shock when I find high school seniors balking at doing work my previous class of sixth graders in Quebec could do easily.

However, I do think if some reforms were made, like increasing academic rigor (in my state they lowered the bar and the students sunk to meet the new lower standards) and a movement away from standardized testing and the horribly misguided No Child Left Behind policy, things could improve.

L.

Re:It's the teachers, and the parents. (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611371)

Get rid of the Teacher's Union. Their only purpose in life is to enrich themselves at the expense of the students, local governments and the teachers that they're supposed to be representing.

Re:It's the teachers, and the parents. (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611613)

Yeah, because when a principal stomps all over the agreed terms of employment a teacher needs to have the deep pockets to defend them self in court.

Some unions may be (are) over greedy, but teaching is a field where contracts make sense, and even contracts across the board reduce costs and increase focus (less time wasted negotiating, and less bitter feelings when people are paid differently).

Interestingly enough, the union sees the natural tendancy of administrators to be politicians, and get busy on the pep-talks rather than the work, and puts time in the contract for classroom prep before the doors open to students.

And principals definitely are known to break the contract, sometimes in insignificant ways that benefit the school, other times in significant ways that only benignity themselves. The union provides a mechanism for teachers to have a chance for remedy.

An example of a common wasteful principal behavior is using the week before school for constant pep-talking with the teachers about all the great things that are going to happen next year, rather than the administrators working to put those plans in place, giving the teachers a chance to set-up their room, and make sure they have the supplies needed to start the school year.

Re:It's the teachers, and the parents. (1)

Leafheart (1120885) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611387)

The government is important in the sense that they limit what parents and teachers can do. Mind you, that watching the American basic education from afar (Brazil in my case) I can see how the government can hind some parents ability to teach their kids, in this case because of too much choice.

It is easy to blame the modern life for your lack of parenting (complaining that you work too hard and you don't have time to watch what your kids are doing), when you have the government doing everything it can to control watch your children know, watch and think. In this case, to have that option is detrimental for society.

The rule of any government regarding education, is to set a minimum high bar on each grade, based on what is good for society, and not the parents. To assert the outer boundaries of our education, so we have parameters to compare and to compete, without setting a hard upper limit (if you want to teach your kid more than it is needed, that is marvelous), and more important to open ways for schools to be able to cope with those rules (funding for public education, very clear guidelines for private institutes, etc

There is a very fine line between helping educate our youth and babysitting a generation of idiots without critical thought. We here are closely to that line, and in some parts have unfortunately crossed it (when you have a dumb president like we have, that happens), but I see that you guys crossed it a long time ago, and seriously need to move back.

Re:It's the teachers, and the parents. (3, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611531)

Uneducated parents are hard to persuade of the value of education. Indoctrinated parents are even harder. Here in the UK, parents are allowed to have their children excluded from religious education classes in case they encounter something that contradicts their home indoctrination. Apparently children who have done comparative study of half a dozen religions are harder to convince that mummy and daddy's religion is the One True Path(tm). Unfortunately, parenthood is an institution with very low barriers to entry.

More Important Than "The War" in 50 Years? (1, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611243)

We've already discussed Health Care, The War, and the Economy. Today I'm opening up the floor to discuss education. Perhaps no other issue will matter more in 50 years.

I would contend that if "The War" is still going on in 50 years (and I mean the Iraq war, not the "War on Terror" or "War on Drugs") it may well be more important than education right now. I'd like to think that it's not even possible but look at our involvement in the Korean War (or "Conflict"). While we're not losing troops like we used to be (did you know over 36,000 Americans have died supporting South Korea?) it's still going on.

Before anyone interjects with McCain's statements of 100 years in Iraq, get the facts (last section) [factcheck.org].

Also a quick reminder that people everywhere seem to just tuck away & forget: We're still at war. Americans are still dying on foreign soil. And the most surefire way to stop that is to remove them from that soil.

Re:More Important Than "The War" in 50 Years? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611503)

Americans are still dying on foreign soil. And the most surefire way to stop that is to remove them from that soil.

That would be great as long as you don't send them to Obama's Chicago.

*Casualties in Iraq in 2008: 282
*Murders in Chicago in 2008: 426

I think that... (0, Flamebait)

cooperaaaron (897474) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611283)

Obama is the right choice. New fresh ideas are needed now, more than ever....

Re:I think that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611379)

how very insightful. thanks for the input. i think your post is about progressive and comprehensive as the next administrations regardless of who wins. whomever takes the helm next is going to have a very bad presidency no matter what.

as for education? without a president sitting down in the classroom and being a teacher there isn't much else that can be done from his position. we keep throwing money at education and it's getting us nowhere. we need an active interest in every student. a president nor the legislature can make that happen. that needs to come from the teachers and the parents together and from every single one of them. there is no other meaningful way to do it.

Re:I think that... (2, Interesting)

farrellj (563) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611611)

And anything to throw out the "No Child Left Behind" system!

It creates a situation where special needs kids are being pushed out of the publish school systems because the act has no accommodation for them, and thus they drag down the scores for schools and schoolboards. So they don't loose their funding, schools only provide the minimal of what the law requires of them, and the kids suffer unless their parents can afford to put them into private schools. It's cruel!

ttyl
          Farrell

McCain... (5, Insightful)

Notquitecajun (1073646) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611287)

MAYBE Obama will get rid of NCLB, but I don't see him getting away from the typical left position of supporting the teachers' unions goals and just throwing money at education without real standards. We spend more money - under left and right administrations - per student and don't see the results, which means the overall system is broken.

I don't see him actively supporting homeschooling as well, and we know he's going to be against vouchers.

The biggest problem, however, will NEVER be government involvement. I don't care who is in power, but the ONLY real influence on children's education is PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT. It doesn't matter what teachers, principals, politicians, and everyone else does if a parent doesn't care about how well their kid is doing in school - it's nearly too great a hurdle to overcome.

I think that the only thing that I have ever seen that may do something is a performance-based state-sponsored tuition program (like Louisiana TOPS or Georgia HOPE) which is directly tied to secondary school performance with college tuition on the line - there are a LOT of parents in those states that I know of who pushed their kids to get good grades simply because there was a near-free college tuition at stake (it's what paid for my own tuition at Louisiana Tech).

Re:McCain... (4, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611389)

MAYBE Obama will get rid of NCLB, but I don't see him getting away from the typical left position of supporting the teachers' unions goals and just throwing money at education without real standards.

He plans on reforming it, not eliminating it. From his site [barackobama.com]:

Reform No Child Left Behind: Obama and Biden will reform NCLB, which starts by funding the law. Obama and Biden believe teachers should not be forced to spend the academic year preparing students to fill in bubbles on standardized tests. He will improve the assessments used to track student progress to measure readiness for college and the workplace and improve student learning in a timely, individualized manner. Obama and Biden will also improve NCLB's accountability system so that we are supporting schools that need improvement, rather than punishing them.

What I emphasized does seem to align with your assessment of throwing money at the problem. Those are the best details I can come up with so don't ask me how he plans to improve accountability ... I wish he had thrown out some metrics or requirements that he was aiming for. But if he did that, we might be able to hold him to it!

How do you grade performance? (4, Interesting)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611431)

Tell me, how do you "grade" teachers? Why can't you simply go to your PTA meetings and your teacher in service meetings and be a responsible parent and know what your children are doing?

The reason i don't want teacher "appraisals" outside of what a school district does in and of itself is because some people would rate teachers poorly because they're not christian enough, not moral enough or not forcing "family values" enough or other non public educational focused education based issues.

Start by giving teachers livable wages, start by funding real programs that put books, science and math into students hands. Start challenging and teaching kids AT school. Get away from homework, let kids live a life after school and make school about learning.

BTW, if the middle class is doing better, so will the schools. Fix it from the bottom up, not top down.

Obama'08

Re:How do you grade performance? (1, Insightful)

Notquitecajun (1073646) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611573)

You hit exactly on what I am talking about - a parent knowing who and what their child is being taught. I'm not the type that minds alternative values - to an extent - being taught in the classroom, but I AM opposed to them being taught in a manner that makes the ones I want my kids to pick up being the wrong ones.

Get away from homework, let kids live a life after school and make school about learning.

Welcome to homeschooling. No wasted time spent on stuff children already learn, and no "busy-time" spent bored in classroom with a ton of pent-up energy.

Teachers already have livable wages (2, Interesting)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611631)

In most districts they don't even have to work a full day, and they get about 3-4 months off. I knew a math teacher in high school who taught 3 classes and 1 study hall. What she did was she graded all of her work during down time in class and study hall, and worked a second job when she felt like it. She was single and had plenty of time to use a second job to flesh out her work schedule for the entire year, and consequently, she made a pretty penny. Most of her peers were simply too lazy to follow her example.

Re:McCain... (1)

krinderlin (1212738) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611443)

While I disagree with your support for McCain, I agree that this is a non-federal issue. This is best handled at the state level.

Also, you address a very obvious issue with parents. Our society places less and less value on education. This is a social problem that will not be solved easily with a piece of legislation.

We need to either get the parents involved, or reconstruct the system in such a way that they are no longer required.

Re:McCain... (1)

Panaphonix (853996) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611495)

Agreed. McCain would actually work to implement vouchers and not kowtow to teachers' unions. Obama plans on throwing money at the problem.

Which candidate will make the next generation smarter?
I hope Taco was joking. It's the parents' job here. On this question I suppose Obama wins because he has two daughters who will likely grow up to be pretty smart. Does anyone really expect the Federal Government to "make" anyone smarter? What a concept.

Unfortunately this is one election where I am not voting on education, the economy, or even the candidates' records. I'm voting for Obama.

Intelligent Design (5, Informative)

Sasayaki (1096761) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611293)

... belongs in the philosophy class, not science. Science is a set of facts seeking a conclusion to support them- Intelligent Design is a conclusion seeing a set of facts to support it.

In a philosophy or comparative religions class? Absolutely- go nuts! Be sure to include a whole bunch of other religious theory, including Hindu creation myths etc. Would be a fun class.

But as science? ... Do not want.

Re:Intelligent Design (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611673)

Creationism is fine in a well-taught science class. It was taught in my biology classes in the early '90s. First, it was proposed, then it was contrasted with scientific theories and the differences (predictions, useful results, and so on) were pointed out. There are various forms of creationism. We looked at one of the pre-Darwin forms that actually did make a prediction - that species were stable and unchanging - and then we looked at the counter-evidence and saw that it was a bad hypothesis. Creationism has a role in biology classes in the same way that alchemy has a role in chemistry classes. It shows the shortcomings of work that occurred before the development of the scientific method. It helps motivate the subject and helps provide a background for real scientific theories.

I know this will be downmodded.... (-1, Flamebait)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611311)

...and I'm probably going to hell for it, but here goes:

Q: What's the difference between Sarah Palin's mouth and her vagina?

A: Retarded things come out of her vagina only sometimes.

Offended? Listen to that prank phone all and consider how retarded her end of the conversation was. The mere possibility that this imbecile even has the potential of getting into the White House is far more offensive than the joke.

Re:I know this will be downmodded.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611367)

Way to butcher the punchline. The proper form is: "Not everything that comes out of her vagina is retarded."

Not the Federal Government's Job (5, Insightful)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611329)

If you are concerned about the education in the United States, voice your concerns to your state and local government. The only thing the federal government has authority over concerning education is the ability to tax you and decide how it will spend that tax money. Looking to solve education issues at the federal level is a farce.

What is there to Debate? (0, Flamebait)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611349)

Honestly. McCain is all about mud slinging and Obama is all about Change. Whether either of them can pull it off is up in the air, but the person that i'm voting for is the person working on real issues.

Obama 08.

GOP doesn't deserve another term. Not not, now for a long time. Not till they tell the religious fanatics to f off.

Smarter? (3, Insightful)

Selanit (192811) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611359)

Neither candidate will make the next generation smarter. Either one might put policies in place to help the next generation get education, but ultimately learning happens inside the heads of the students.

That said, Obama looks a lot more tuned-in when it comes to educational issues. His keynote address to the American Library Association's conference [senate.gov] in Chicago (2005) pretty clearly demonstrates his commitment to education, particularly literacy programs and such.

Whereas McCain is, well, not. Remember that McCain proposed a governmental spending freeze as a remedy for the fiscal crisis? With a few exceptions, such as Defense. Well, education was not on the list of exceptions.

McCain doesn't think planatariums are good (0, Flamebait)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611477)

If it doesn't kill people, Mccain doesn't support it.

Re:McCain doesn't think planatariums are good (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611675)

There's a big difference between thinking something is good and thinking something is over priced. And I think you missed the entire point of the projector issue (not a big surprise around here).

Re:Smarter? (1)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611595)

His keynote address to the American Library Association's conference in Chicago (2005) pretty clearly demonstrates his commitment to education, particularly literacy programs and such.

What do you think he'd be particularly focused on if he spoke to the American Association for the Advancement of Science?

He's telling people what they want to hear. That doesn't necessarily make him slimy or a liar; but I'd be surprised if he goes out of his way to do something special for reading over other subjects.

[I take that prediction back if there's a consistent pattern of him talking about reading over other subjects.]

Err.. (5, Insightful)

brian0918 (638904) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611385)

Why should the president, or the government, have a role in "making everyone smarter"? I also don't see how people can be "made smarter" when they are spoon-fed a pre-packaged education and are not driven to learn on their own - something they would be more motivated to do if we moved away from our current nanny-state that lets us get by without being informed about the choices we make.

Smarter... collectively (1, Flamebait)

pieterh (196118) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611395)

This election is probably the most important one I'll ever see in my lifetime. The fight is between special interests and society as a whole.

I've been telling people since the start of the race for candidacy that Obama would win because he has the superior machine. But his "machine" is people, organized in smart and flexible ways, largely thanks to the web and what it offers.

To some extent this fight matches the fight between Anonymous and Scientology.

People do not get smarter because they get the right education. This helps but it's not enough. They get smarter because they live and work in more diverse groups, because they have access to knowledge and information, because they can argue, because they don't follow dogma and ideology, but only the merit of social accuracy. We don't need an ideology to know that the Bush regime were a gang of thieves. But when the thieves run everything from the security infrastructure up to the courts, and back down to the vote counting itself, nothing less than a revolution can put things right.

And this is revolution. Quiet, polite, like Americans are. But it's real, it's powerful, and it's going to succeed unless there is a coup.

The outcome of this election proves to the world that the Americans were mainly victims, not supporters, of the Bush junta. It is as important a victory as the ending of WWII and the chasing away (by Americans, for a large part) of another ugly elite of vicious thugs and thieves.

It's been especially heartening - for a European - to see America confront its racism, intolerance, and fractionalism, and turn that into a mass movement for something better.

As for the education system itself... time to move away from the industrial world and into something more suitable for 2008. Mix kids of different ages, give them more freedom to learn in projects online, bring education into the digital age and merge it with digital business and lifestyle.

Re:Smarter... collectively (1)

MosesJones (55544) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611497)

Quiet, polite, like Americans are.

Of whom are these Americans that you speak?

Sorry couldn't resist, given that this is a post talking about the most expensive election in world history in which the level of abusive rhetoric is at levels that are only ever seen in the US or 3rd world countries.

Quiet and polite? Which election have you been watching?

Re:Smarter... collectively (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611549)

It's been especially heartening - for a European - to see America confront its racism, intolerance, and fractionalism, and turn that into a mass movement for something better.

So when will you gentlemen confront yours? Europe is rife with racism. Most of it is against your own indigenous people, lol. Have fun with that.

Is this serious? (0)

lowlymarine (1172723) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611397)

At the risk of being moderated a troll, is this a serious question? When have the Republicans ever been right on education? No Child Left Behind is an unmitigated disaster, and the bungling of the Republican administration of the last 8 years has left the US education system nearly dead last in the western world. And it's no surprise that the worst education systems in the country - Louisiana, Texas, South Carolina, Alabama - are in die-hard red states. As a resident of Florida, the state which pioneered the poorly-written standardized tests and laughable "lower-performing schools get less money" idea that NCLB hinges on, if education were my hot-button issue I'd never vote for a Republican. (Now, to be fair, Florida has other problems as well; specifically having to teach English to half the state before they can start teaching math, science, and history.)

It's easy, just think logically. (5, Insightful)

m4cph1sto (1110711) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611401)

Why can't McCain properly defend his education policy? It is the most important issue facing our nation, and it is where McCain is leaps and bounds ahead of Obama!

We have the best private education system in the world. We have the best college education system in the world, both public and private. We have one of the worst public school systems in the developed world. Why? What's the difference between our tremendously successful college system and private system, and our horrendous public school system? Guess what, it's NOT MONEY. Per-student spending in public schools is almost DOUBLE what it is in private schools! Surprised? You certainly didn't hear that in tonight's debate. Only the absolute top most elite private schools cost more per student than we spend on our public schools, and the difference is not much, just 10-20% more. And students at those elite schools get WAY more in return for that extra 10-20%. Oh, and public school teachers earn more than private school teachers, so that's not it either.

So what's the difference between how our public, government-run schools operate, and how our colleges and private schools operate? Here are the differences:

1. No teachers unions in private schools and colleges.

2. School choice: private schools and colleges must compete for your dollars. Public schools don't; the government decides which school you must attend, based on what neighborhood you live in.

Let's go into #1.

The teachers union is the most dangerous organization on the planet. They are more of a threat to our nation than Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea combined. They are ruining the education of our children and destroying our only hope of maintaining our prosperity and peace.

The teachers union has made it impossible to fire teachers for poor performance. To be fired, a teacher basically has to break the law or molest a student. They can't be fired for simply being a terrible teacher. It's gotten so bad that at public schools across the country, bad teachers are paid full-time salaries to simply sit in the teachers' lounge all day and not teach! Schools are forced to do this because they don't want these bad teachers anywhere near their students, but they haven't done anything that the union says they can be fired for.

In private schools and colleges, teacher pay is based on performance. In public schools, because of teachers union demands, pay is based on seniority (i.e. how long they've been working there). You can't pay good teachers more and bad teachers less, and therefore you can't attract and reward the best teaching talent. Public teachers as a whole lose the motivation that drives the private sector to work harder and better: more money.

Finally, the teachers union is 100% opposed to school choice. Why? Because it would force all public teachers to work harder and compete for their job, just like everyone does in every job in the private sector.

And this leads directly into Point #2.

It is school choice, in the form of vouchers, that will save our public education system. The way our system works now, schools tell the government how many students they have each year, and the government funds them with X amount of dollars per student. The way school choice will work is this: instead of the government giving those dollars to the school, that money will be given directly to the parents in the form of a voucher. The parents can then take that voucher and use it to send their kids to any school they want, public or private.

What affect will this have? Competition. The same thing that makes our private schools and colleges perform so well. They'll have to wise up, stop wasting money, become more efficient, and start teaching better, or else they'll start losing students. Parents will choose to send their kids to better-performing schools.

Cue the teachers union yelling "But you'll be taking money away from already struggling schools!". Of course, that's the point, and that's a good thing - because the struggling schools will simultaneously and proportionately have fewer students to teach! They will keep the same amount of money per student, but just have fewer students. They'll have to lay off teachers - but at the same time the schools that are gaining students will have to hire more teachers, and at the same rate, so no jobs will be lost. And once those struggling schools have fewer students to deal with and are no longer overcrowded, it will be easier for the administrators to tackle the problem, improve their school, and slowly start bringing those students back.

Providing competition through school choice and vouchers will raise the standards of all our public schools, and dramatically so. It is the same effect that busting monopolies has in the private sector: more choices, better products, lower prices.

Fighting back against the teachers union, preferably abolishing them, and implementing performance-based teacher pay, will attract the best and brightest teachers to our public schools. And as schools learn to run more efficiently due to competitive forces, they'll be able to afford much higher teachers salaries, bringing even more talent into the profession.

Everything I've just discussed is the Republican education platform, and John McCain's platform. Barack Obama and the Democrat party is against these ideas. You decide what is best for our country. Throw even more money than the outrageous amount we already do at our failing system? Or reform the entire system from the ground up, and give every parent and student, not just the rich, the right to self-determination in education?

Re:It's easy, just think logically. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611647)

Your "logical" argument assumes the same students attend each of these classes of schools. Without matching initial conditions, your analysis is fundamentally flawed.

There is a large population of unmotivated students, students that may feel like there is no hope for them in American society. A win by Obama may provide a modern hero for some of these same kids.

I dare to hope that the result of this election triggers a new surge in academic interest relating to public policy (loosely matching the surge in math and science interest from the space race).

Give them something to aspire to (3, Insightful)

MosesJones (55544) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611435)

In terms of education here we have

1) Obama - raised by a single mother to a kenyan father who buggered off, progressed through school and demonstrating ability and prowess at all stages before coming top in Harvard Law.

2) McCain - Rich family with a history in the services, graduated near the bottom of his class, married a richer woman on the second try. Paired up with Palin who things that education is elitist.

Seriously when it comes to education shouldn't we be teaching kids than anyone can become the leader of the country if they work hard and are smart enough not just that you have the right set of bigotry and name-calling to get yourself elected?

Given that in the US education is a State (or lower) level then this isn't a big area for impact at the Federal level, but the best thing the US President could do for the children of the country is demonstrate the value of a good education.

Only Obama does that.

What was Obama's GPA at Columbia? (-1, Troll)

skarth (184192) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611645)

graduated near the bottom of his class

If we know that McCain finished near the bottom of his class in college, we must surely know where in his class Obama finished, right?

And we've learned about Bush's education, and Gore's, and Biden's and Palin's... there's something missing...

Why don't we know about Obama's? What is he hiding?

Thinking of things... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611655)

Paired up with Palin who things that education is elitist.

It sure looks like you aren't too fond of grammar and spelling yourself.

Re:Give them something to aspire to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611665)

In terms of education here we have

1) Obama - raised by a single mother to a kenyan father who buggered off, progressed through school and demonstrating ability and prowess at all stages before coming top in Harvard Law.

.. and now he wants to tax you so hard, no one else gets the chance to do what he did. woohoo!

Can you define "education" please? (3, Insightful)

TheRon6 (929989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611439)

If I learned anything in high school, it's that in this country "education" no longer means the process of learning. Instead, school has become a daycare for parents to send their kids to until their old enough to move out. I may not be in the majority but I learned very little from actual classes and tests. I received my own computer at the age of 15 and taught myself about hardware and how to program, neither of which my school offered any classes about beyond keyboarding. Now I'm 24 and a senior systems administrator for a large dedicated server management company... thanks to our country's educational system? I think not.

Parents aren't going to give up their free daycare so if I support any educational plan, it's going to be one that involves getting kids who want to learn out of the classroom and into environments where they can use their time more productively.

Neither (1)

Nodamnnicknamesavial (1095665) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611451)

Neither candidate will do much for the intelligence of the population at large. I can answer who IS the smarter candidate though, but I don't want a flamebait mod :P

Which candidate... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611459)

"Which candidate will make the next generation smarter?"

I think you meant to write: Which candidate will take more money from one group of people, and give it to another group of people.

Because we all know, more education spending = smarter kids. Right? Uh, right? Just ask all those uber-braniac kids in DC, where they spend a ton per student.

The federal "education" empire in the U.S. is much more scary than the military industrial complex ever was.

Use home-schoolers' experience (2, Interesting)

Vepxistqaosani (205827) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611461)

After years of unsatisfactory experiences in the government schools, we took our kids out to teach them ourselves. We learned there's a thriving and successful community of home-schoolers, who could teach the various school systems a thing or two about pedagogy.

When others her age were getting a (worthless) high-school diploma, our eldest daughter was getting her first associates degree. She earned her second the next year, and will have a bachelors at the age of 20 -- a half-decade or more ahead of her peers. And, while bright, she is not one of those prodigies one occasionally reads about: just a normal student with the advantage of a sensible education.

Of course, home-schoolers are hated by those who perpetuate the regime of government schooling, and, since Obama is firmly in the pocket of the most ardent defenders of the unearned privileges of those who profit from the status quo, we can expect to see home-schooling outlawed in the next few months. After all, children educated by their parents are less likely to be indoctrinated to be ardent followers of The One.

Decentralized Education (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611467)

Education would be best left up to the states. Obviously some states will do better in different areas, but having education run from the federal government keeps individual states from trying to improve beyond the average.

My Prediction: Failure. (4, Insightful)

zach_the_lizard (1317619) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611529)

Tomorrow we go to the polls to elect the next failed administration, and the next failed Congress.

Regardless of who is elected, I feel that both candidates have the wrong attitude towards government. I feel that the role of government is simply to protect our lives and our property from one another. Both candidates espouse statist ideals that want to take away from our self governance or continue policies that take away our power.

Both throw out petty scraps of meat to the people to get them to vote for their demise. This year, they throw the meager pickings of tax cuts. Perhaps four years from now it will be the threat of terrorists again, or perhaps health care.

Both voted for a plan to give hundreds of billions of dollars to failed banks that gave loans to people who deserved none. Let them fail. The consequences of propping up zombie banks are greater than of letting them fail and having the market adjust.

Tomorrow I go to the polls to vote Libertarian, to fight the establishment.

Federal government has little to do with education (3, Informative)

rufusdufus (450462) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611555)

Promises about improvement in education by federal politicians are pure pandering.
See this chart [ed.gov].

See how small a percent of education is actually funded by the federal government. It should be obvious that even significant changes to federal spending will have an insignificant effect. They spend in a whole year what they spend in Iraq in less than 3 months.

 

Does it really matter? (3, Insightful)

glenfahan (827839) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611571)

I joined the military to pay my way through college. My family always stressed the importance of education. After spending all that time getting a bachelor's in IT, I'm worse off than my uneducated parents. I frequently think I would have been much better off being a plumber or an electrician. At least those jobs require a license, some skill and can't be sent overseas. (i.e. manufacturing and IT) What good is an education if no one will pay you to use it?

Not Voting Can be Rational (1)

ThreeE (786934) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611581)

While I intend to vote, not voting is a perfectly reasonable response. In fact, given how little the candidates actually differ, it might even be a more rationale response.

If you vote for one of them, you:

- give them a mandate,
- imply that there are real differences between the candidates, and
- are accountable for your choice.

For example, both candidates believe in a big bearded guy in the sky and look to him for guidance in difficult times. This alone might lead some to not vote for either one based on insanity...

Choose wisely.

I approve this message.

Darwin (0, Flamebait)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611621)

McCain will be the one that will make all smarter. At least, if you manage to survive his government, you definately will be smart (or very lucky, in the Teela Brown way).

Mod parent down (0, Flamebait)

Mycroft_514 (701676) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611627)

For he can't interpret he real ads out there. Obama is slinging the mud as fast or faster then McCain, it's just hte MSM covering for him. And McCain is apoligizing for the ads that are bad and by people he can't contrl. Obama just waves his hand and "they don't matter", but never calls for them to stop.

No, the parent of this post is not evaluating reality, so mod him down.

Thank You Slashdot! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611707)

Thank you for once again giving so many people the opportunity to put their ignorance and sheer stupidity on display for the rest of us to mock!

School Vouchers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611713)

Seriously, in a debate about Education,

Let's face it, NCLB was a GREAT idea with a HORRIBLE implementation. The idea to evaluate schools in comparison to other schools and set up some sort of system of national standards is a good one.

Vouchers do very much the same thing, give parents the choice to PICK the school that performs the best. We know government SCREWS it up whenever it gets involved, and the private sector can do things for a fraction of the cost when they want to. At some level, fostering competition between schools is going to produce a better product. So give the parents a CHOICE and watch things improve

Look what Firefox did to the browser market....introducing competition improves EVERYONE. Let's do the same with education!

The only CHOICE the democrats want to give you is abortion, They want to control our education/healthcare/stop smokers/you name it...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...