Rand Paul Offers Common Sense Solution of Ruining Schools to Save Education


Hey Rand Paul, what are you ranting and raving about today? Oh nothing, just wanking off about the best way to destroy public education (or what's left of it) no big deal.

Will his latest proposal go anywhere? We hope not, but probably the point isn't to actually DO something about education and poverty; the point is for everyone to know how much Rand Paul hates education and also, Poors,  in which case: mission accomplished.

America’s educational system is leaving behind anyone who starts with disadvantages, and that is wrong. Those born in poverty already face significant challenges. For those striving to climb the ladder of success, we must fix our schools.

If only teachers were armed with bootstraps and guns, maybe then we would be able to provide good education! But since we don't have enough bootstraps to go around and probably won't be able to arm teachers any time soon, the best solution is to make sure that rich people and poor people never ever have to go to the same school, and that will fix everything.

Let’s start by agreeing that a great education needs to be available for everyone, whether you live on a country club lane or in government housing.


I am convinced this will only happen when we allow school choice for everyone, rich or poor, from any background.

Let the taxes you pay for education follow each and every student to the school of your choice.

We are not sure what this means. Your Wonkette does not have children, but can we choose to send our education taxes to each and every student at International Student Center, which is worst school in the U.S. according to some website? (If so, the joke is on International Student Center because we are too poor to pay income tax and do not own property, HA, in your FACE, International Student Center!)

Anyway, is this permitted or do we have to have a school-aged child in order to let our taxes follow each and every student to the school of our choice?

Who knows, we are not sure what he thinks he is saying, but whatever he means, we are pretty sure it is a stupid idea. Why is it entirely up to the SCHOOLS to fix income inequality? What about rich people who send their kids to fancy private schools -- will their tax dollars stop supporting public education, and if so, what happens to the less-rich people who can't afford to pay for private school for their kids? What if you choose a Muslim school and want to send your tax dollars there -- is that OK? (Answer: doubtful).

Maybe poor kids aren't doing well at school because of problems with the school, but maybe also it has something to do with not getting enough to eat, or not having a home environment conducive to studying; will this plan fix any of those things? (Duh, not the POINT.)

Clearly, current policies are failing families and students. No one should be forced to endure this crisis. We must act now to fix our schools. If we don’t, many students from disadvantaged neighborhoods will continue to be left behind. The status quo traps many in a crumbling system of hopelessness. That’s a sobering fact that we need to meet head-on.

We should have put a [sic] after "head-on," which doesn't need a hyphen, but there are so many bigger problems with this essay that we didn't bother.

[Washington Times]

Donate with CC

Deleted Comments: We Gave God The Banhammer

The Commentczar's In Town


Yr Wonkette has been getting quite a few visits from trolls lately, although most of the infestations have been incredibly tiresome and not at all worth discussing here. We're talking, like, not even as good as ol' Turgid Love Muscle Guy. Come to think of it, we haven't seen him in a while; hope he's OK. At least health-wise.

Keep reading... Show less
Donate with CC

In 2006, Bob Casey Jr., then the Pennsylvania state treasurer, defeated Rick Santorum and took his seat in the US Senate; presumably only after having it steam cleaned. Not that Casey wanted anything much to do with Dan Savage, the columnist who had helpfully made the alternative definition of "Santorum" one of the best demonstrations of the power of trolling for the prior three years. But in '06, Casey's campaign actually declined a donation from Savage; Casey's finance director thanked him, but suggested maybe Savage could give the money to a group working against Santorum so Casey wouldn't get flak for taking the donation. That was back when Dems were happy to talk about civil unions but frightened of gay marriage, and Casey just plain wussed out on the chance to bring a "weeks-long debate about feces, lube, and assfucking" to the Senate race, as then-Wonket Dave Weigel put it. But Bob Casey has come rather a long way since then, and he now supports marriage equality. He might still be a bit shy about a full-on embrace of buttsechs talk, however.

Keep reading... Show less
Donate with CC




©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc