Why do libs send their kids to private schools but want to deny Americans to do the same?

Question

The Democratic party is the major hurdle to school vouchers. This would enable Americans to choose where they want to send their child, instead of being forced to send them to an under performing public school. They (dems) want to keep throwing money at the black hole of public education and are ok with you sending "your" child there but they won't send "their" kid there becuase they can afford private school.
Billl Clinton and Hilary went to private school, they sent Hilary to private school, Al Gore went to private school, he sent his kids to private school. Ted Kennendy went to private school, he sent his kids to private school.

Why not give Americans the same oppertunity via tax paid vouchers?

Ducky- The "No child left behind act" was written by Ted (The scotch ) Kennedy.

civil-av8r- Vouchers allow people to choose what school to send their kids, private doesn't = religious.

Josh- Yes Republicans send their kids to private school, however, it the Dems that are against the voucher system. This limits choice for those who already pay taxes, be can't afford private schools. the Clintons want to limit "your" choices for your kids education, but they have the choice to send Chelsea anywhere? isn't that hypocritical? Besides, how can libs be against choice?

Stiggo 629- Tax payers already pay taxes! I pay school taxes on my house and yet I have NO children. But if I did, shouldn't I have the ability to choose where my kid goes to school? If the closest local school is underpreforming, why should I have to send my child there? Since I pay school taxes, about giving me (I really pay for it via taxes) a voucher to send my child to a public or private school that doesn't suck. Noone is giving me anything but the right to choose.

Answer 1

I'm confused here. Don't conservatives always say that it isn't right to use taxpayer money to make everyone equal? That people who have earned money should be able to spend it as they see fit, including sending their kids to private schools? That if you can't afford something, it isn't right to expect the government to give it to you?

Make up your minds.

And yes, one of the reasons liberals are opposed to this plan is that it would, in effect, be using government money to provide for a religious education, which is unconstitutional. Better to se the money to try to improve public schools.

Answer 2

I agree. I don't have kids, but I would support an increase in taxes for kids to go to private school. The "No Child Left Behind" has made a horrible mess out of public schools, and I think sending kids to private might be the best answer.

Answer 3

Do I easily have to that end stunning ? In Bizzarro Con international ;If a Liberal lighting fixtures fixtures a adventure to an American flag this is a mortal sin punishable with the aid of loss of life yet while that Liberal takes out a pair of scissors ,cuts the yank flag into suitable products and then sews them right into a garment then such strikes are worth of a Cons compliment.

Answer 4

I oppose school vouchers because they would decrease the quality of private schools, even though they would also slightly improve public schools. I don't want to make the school system similar to the college racket.

We need to reject phony changes such as school vouchers and instead repeal compulsory education laws (which lead to harassment of homeschoolers) and shut down the public schools. If we also repeal teacher licensing and every other government interference in education, we'll see alot of new private schools start up and we'll see an increase in the quality of education.

The reason why there aren't more private schools in the country right now is because parents don't want to pay twice to send their kids to school. We need to shut down the public school system or at least limit payment for it to those parents who send their kids there. It is definitely absurd how public schools charge homeschoolers, whose parents pay school taxes even though they homeschool, to participate in extracurricular activities.

We need to separate the school system from the government completely. We don't need any government interference in education.

Answer 5

Well to give all Americans the same opportunities with United Statesian taxes would be highly unpopular in the States. I'm sure United Statesians would oppose paying to send Argentinians to school since we are all Americans we would have to pay for that.... think about it.

Answer 6

It wasn't the private school vouchers people had a problem with. It was the fact that people could send their kids to a *GASP* religious private school.

Answer 7

Please do not confuse liberals with the Democratic Party. I don't confuse conservatives with the Republican Party.

I know lots of kids with liberal parents, and they all attend public schools. The only ones I know that attend private schools are religious institutions, which contain children of both liberal and conservative parents. Your examples have nothing to do with liberals or Democrats, but the rich and wealthy, regardless of political affiliation, do tend to send their children to private schools.

The Clintons have a daughter named Chelsea.

Answer 8

While we are at it lets make Senators drop their own nifty investment program and use Social Security like the rest of us. Again the Democrats want us to use a rotten ponzi scheme while they get to invest in private funds.

Why not give all Americans the same investment opportunities?

Answer 9

how are they a "hurdle" to bush's school vouchers ?

since the Dem's got a slight majority in the house they have done nothing to change the republican school voucher program. (am I wrong ?)

did you know that the current program "no child left behind" is a republican program ?
if it's not working why are you blaming the Dem's ?

Answer 10

You broker info? How does one sell what he does not possess?

If you looked at everybody in the upper reaches of Congress, you'd find that most of their children went to private school.

This isn't a liberal thing, it's an elite thing.

Libs are for education, cons have no idea what that word means.

You should call yourself Misinformation Broker.