Yesterday's editorial out of the Washington Post pushed the limit of ethics in my view. The editorial staff fell on their collective sword for the voucher program in Washington, D. C.
Yep, I am a former teacher. Yes, I do champion for "all kids", and no I don't apologize for it.
So what did they clamor for? They pushed, and I do mean pushed, for concept of allowing D.C. to give a whopping 2.5% of the student population a $7,500 voucher per child. This out of a total population of more than 65,000.
So, why am I bitching about this? Well, first why would the Post station itself as nothing less than elitist? Why not demand this government to properly fund pubic schools for all students.
The Post conveniently left some major details out of their rationale for their promotion of vouchers:
1. Will private schools accept children with "special needs"?
2. Will the parochial schools admit students with disciplinary histories?
3. Will the private ( let's say Catholic Schools ) schools willingly admit children from Islamic/Hindu/or Moonies backgrounds?
The Post believes it is acceptable to kick $7,500 toward a tiny 1700 students albeit the fact that so many other kids will suffer(?) under their existing school program.
Let's see: Why wouldn't they come out in favor of appropriate funds for all of the kids in D. C.?
Why the elitism? Why not come out an push Congress to stop the violation of the Church and State Program that they current endorse.?
Showing posts with label Washington Post. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Washington Post. Show all posts
Friday, May 8, 2009
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Huge False Alarm: Was it Done on Purpose?
Yesterday, for no worthy reason, the respected Washington Post editorial staff sent out the ominous alarm that we would see a "light-switch tax" in Prez Obama's budget. So, right now let's get it clear before the heated discussions at the water dispensers and the local pubs heat up. It's not in the bill. It's not even vaguely mentioned in the bill.
I have a great respect for the fourth estate. We sorely need them to serve as a check and balance on the three branches of the federal govt. We should expect them to report the facts and we should also understand that they can surmise all the want in their op-ed sections, but to stoop to a legerdemain-like trick as the Post did yesterday is below the standards of good journalism. Was this done in a manner to get the concept out into the marketplace of ideas to see if it would fly? Doubtful.
Was it done as a way to create an even greater uproar from members of Congress (who probably haven't read the bill and are not likely to do so) to stifle its passage? Maybe.
Was it an oversight? Not in a million years.
Who knows? Just know that it isn't true .
Joseph Goebbels said something to the effect that if we tell a big enough lie long enough the will people tend to believe it. I am pretty sure this false alarm will be repeated as the truth for weeks/months to come by millions.
I have a great respect for the fourth estate. We sorely need them to serve as a check and balance on the three branches of the federal govt. We should expect them to report the facts and we should also understand that they can surmise all the want in their op-ed sections, but to stoop to a legerdemain-like trick as the Post did yesterday is below the standards of good journalism. Was this done in a manner to get the concept out into the marketplace of ideas to see if it would fly? Doubtful.
Was it done as a way to create an even greater uproar from members of Congress (who probably haven't read the bill and are not likely to do so) to stifle its passage? Maybe.
Was it an oversight? Not in a million years.
Who knows? Just know that it isn't true .
Joseph Goebbels said something to the effect that if we tell a big enough lie long enough the will people tend to believe it. I am pretty sure this false alarm will be repeated as the truth for weeks/months to come by millions.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Washington Post Nods to Elitism
Watching the disappearance of the fourth estate before our very eyes is very disconcerting. After all, they have served as the watchdog against governmental abuses, not to mention the idealism of truth in discovery.
Therefore, one could not help but be disturbed and angry over the endorsement by the Washington Post Editorial staff for school vouchers. Using syllogisms that couldn't hold up a pair of baggy pants let alone water, they merrily...urgently ...begged us to disregard the first amendment's wall of separation between church and state. Ironically this is the very amendment that has protected the press since the nascent beginnings of this country.
Yesterday's endorsement by the Post conveniently failed miserably to reveal the real truth about vouchers. The Post failed to tell the reader that private schools accepting vouchers can and do discriminate at will; yep, they have their own subtle form of racial profiling. Private schools need not meet any state or federal laws regarding testing, special needs children (you can pretty much bet that this group is completely disregarded), teacher certification, or even reduced lunch programs for the very needy.
The Post cited higher tests scores, lower class sizes, and a profound environment for learning in the private schools and thus pleaded for us cast out whatever teachers may tell us about the value of public schools (aah, the dreaded teachers' union)and go for the elitism approach. In others words they parroted the concept of dismantling common schools a trademark issue of the neocons and the Republican Party.
They ought to be ashamed.The vanishing 4th estate"Potential" Disruption?
Therefore, one could not help but be disturbed and angry over the endorsement by the Washington Post Editorial staff for school vouchers. Using syllogisms that couldn't hold up a pair of baggy pants let alone water, they merrily...urgently ...begged us to disregard the first amendment's wall of separation between church and state. Ironically this is the very amendment that has protected the press since the nascent beginnings of this country.
Yesterday's endorsement by the Post conveniently failed miserably to reveal the real truth about vouchers. The Post failed to tell the reader that private schools accepting vouchers can and do discriminate at will; yep, they have their own subtle form of racial profiling. Private schools need not meet any state or federal laws regarding testing, special needs children (you can pretty much bet that this group is completely disregarded), teacher certification, or even reduced lunch programs for the very needy.
The Post cited higher tests scores, lower class sizes, and a profound environment for learning in the private schools and thus pleaded for us cast out whatever teachers may tell us about the value of public schools (aah, the dreaded teachers' union)and go for the elitism approach. In others words they parroted the concept of dismantling common schools a trademark issue of the neocons and the Republican Party.
They ought to be ashamed.The vanishing 4th estate"Potential" Disruption?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
