Liberals just don't get it.
Bob Schwartz over at Politics and Hypocrisy doesn't understand why rational people consider the school funding lawsuit utter nonsense while Initiated Measure 11 is perfectly legitimate.
One might as well ask why lemons are sour while red apples are sweet. One has no bearing on or legitimate taste comparison to the other.
The school funding lawsuit involves South Dakota schools (which are government entities) suing the state of South Dakota (which is a government entity) for more taxpayer funding...and using taxpayer funding to finance the lawsuit. Put another way, government is using taxpayer funds to sue itself for more taxpayer funding.
You know what that looks like, right?
And these are supposed to be the "smart people" in charge of our children's education?
Besides, as I pointed out this morning, I homeschool on a fraction of the public school budget and get tremendously better results. The educrats are using bad math: More Money <> Better Results.
Initiated Measure 11, on the other hand, is a citizen-initiated petition measure to protect the lives of 98% of the unborn in South Dakota. If the people of South Dakota vote to approve the measure in November, it will become law in South Dakota.
That is, until some pro-abortion group like Planned Parenthood sues to stop it as they did with South Dakota's informed consent law.
If and when that happens, will it be a government entity suing a government entity for more taxpayer funds?
The last time I checked, Planned Parenthood wasn't a government entity. While it's true that they receive about $337 million in taxpayer funding, that still doesn't make them a government entity.
But I suppose if you want to assume for a moment, for the sake of argument, that Planned Parenthood is a government entity, then I suppose it would indeed be just as stupid as the school funding lawsuit.
But it wouldn't be the supporters of Initiated Measure 11 initiating the tail-chasing activity: it would be the Planned Parenthood bunch suing to protect their access to a supply of blood money.
Of course, Planned Parenthood could do the responsible thing and not subject the taxpayers of South Dakota to the expense of a lawsuit...but will they? I won't hold my breath, but it really will be Planned Parenthood's "choice," won't it?
Maybe the liberals behind the school funding lawsuit (as well as the ones who would likely be behind a suit against IM 11) should just forgo the expensive lawsuits so we can have more money on hand to teach critical and logical thinking in our public education system.
With what passes for logic on the Left, society is in bad need of such training...
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
The Liberal Dog Chases Its Tail
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Let me speak slowly for you Bob. I don't disagree with your point of tax dollars being used to sue the state though something needs to be done and our legislature seems unwilling to do anything. While maybe not having a legal leg to stand on, this is a lawsuit of frustration coming from educators that care for their kids.
By the way, how many kids do you home school Bob? 1, 2? Try doing it with 30-35 kids with varying degree's of intelligence and learning abilities all while having to deal with federally mandated standards that aren't funded while making earning $1000's less than your counterparts in neighboring states. That's the main difference between your home schooling budget prowess and the real world so please don't try to compare the two.
With the school issue out of the way, I do disagree with my tax dollars being used to fight an unconstitutional bill that even if won in the court system will still not get past the the one court that matters, the Supreme Court as it is made up currently. Another reason why we can't fund schools...
No tail chasing here
The legislative remedy is the only legitimate one, so either you can elect new representatives who want to tax you more so they can hire more educrat overhead staff (and still not improve academic success), or cut some of the fat out of the ed system and put it in the classroom, or just live with it. But this lawsuit is everything I said of it, and more.
You liberals contend that More Money=Better Results, so my comparison of my homeschooling budget is perfectly legitimate. If you're willing to concede that More Money<>Better results, then there might be room to move on to something else. But other districts, including D.C., spends way more per child than South Dakota, yet South Dakota gets much better results.
What the educrats are doing with this lawsuit is EXACTLY like a dog chasing it's own tail and biting it.
Finally, as I said, there is no legitimate comparison between this asinine education lawsuit and IM 11.
You said: Put another way, government is using taxpayer funds to sue itself for more taxpayer funding.
and...
there is no legitimate comparison between this asinine education lawsuit and IM 11.
Just saying so, doesn't make it so. If IM11 passes, I'm pretty sure your hope is that it will be challenged in court by Healthy Families and PP and go all the way to the Supreme Court.
Who pays the court costs? You and me, as the state's Attorney General will have to defend this law. We support the budgets on both sides of this pointless lawsuit, since IM11 can't make abortions less common in South Dakota--as we already have the most restrictive law in the Nation.
What's "asinine" about this lawsuit is the Legislature's attitude that education is a cost
As for home schooling being cheaper, well, you have less ground to cover in that environment.
I'm not a fan of homeschooling except for special circumstances and needs because not only do the kids lose out of learning about how other people that aren't in their family in church, the community misses out of the contributions that you and your kids bring to society. It leads to segregation and division. We have enough of that already.
Actually, I'd be just fine with IM11 not being challenged in court. That would save the people of South Dakota a lot of time, money, and energy--and a lot of slaughtered children. But if pro-abortionists insist on challenging it, so be it...but it will be pro-abortionists who are costing the South Dakota taxpayers, not those trying to save lives.
Either way, children will be the winners. If pro-abortionists decide to just "write off" a small state like South Dakota and leave the law unchallenged, children win. If pro-abortionists decide to drag the taxpayers through a legal fight, it'll cost a lot of money--and hundreds more children's lives--but eventually when the Supreme Court officially examines the huge amount of scientific information which verifies the humanity of the unborn child, children will win there, too. Either way, children win; once IM11 passes the voters in November, it'll be up to pro-abortionists to decide if they want to just give in to the inevitable, or be responsible for gouging the taxpayers and killing more children.
Your statement that IM11 can't make abortions less common is also either ignorant or intentionally deceptive. In 2006 there were 748 abortions performed in South Dakota (84.6% of which were because "the mother did not want the child"). Comparing the exceptions allowed under IM11 for rape, incest, life and health of the mother to the stated reasons for abortion in 2006, IM11 would prevent 98.2% of those abortions, or 734 of the 748 abortions performed. I'd say 98.2% fewer abortions qualifies as, um, "less common."
You seem incredulous that education is "a cost." Do you think teachers work for free? Administrators and other support personnel? Are books free? Buildings? And who do you think pays for that? The taxpayers do. Of course it is "a cost." And it is a cost that the taxpayers have decided, through the representatives they elect, is already costing them enough.
As for homeschooling, my children interact with other children and adults at church, in the neighborhood, at things like Girl Scouts, Ju-Jitsu class, and many other activities. Protests that homeschooled children are somehow missing out on socialization is, again, either ignorant or intentionally deceptive.
I think what bothers liberals about homeschooling the most is that these children are escaping the socialist and secularist indoctrination that other children are subjected to in public schools--that and the moral rot they are subjected to there.
In other words, homeschooled children are messing up that perfect "Brave New World" liberal elitists would like to create where everyone worships the state, and are all obedient little lemming-like subjects of the state.
That, and the fact that homeschooled children usually illustrate plainly the immense shortcomings of the modern public education system--which constitutes another threat to the vision of socialist perfection.
Sorry, I want my children to know about the great Christian heritage of their nation--and to embrace it. I want them to be proud of their faith, not taught that it has no relevance to the "real world" and must be hidden away when they go to school. I want them to know right from wrong, and that all the education in the world--while great--is worthless if they are a morally bankrupt human being. I want my children to be able to excel academically and not be chained to a system that breeds mediocrity. I want my children to be able to look beyond sound bytes and be able to think logically and critically--something woefully and obviously not being taught or encouraged from the public school system.
Post a Comment