Then why don't you want to cut off funds for the Department of Education?
Its creation in 1979 was controversial and opposed by many in the Republican Party, who saw the department as an unconstitutional, unnecessary federal bureaucratic intrusion into local affairs.
It's been a total failure, why do you want to throw more money at it?
2007-08-03 04:18:23 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
How did we EVER educate our children before 1979?
Thank god for this dept. It has done wonders. 50% drop out rate in many major cities!!!
2007-08-03 04:27:23 · update #1
Ahh, the day has now started- Penelope has made a statement that assumes we blindly agree with our leaders like she does hers.
That sounds good though. Kill the funding for both. It would save tons of federal money and put educational power back where it belongs-the local gov't.
The further youre removed from the governing body, the less influence you have. We need accountability in education!
2007-08-03 04:33:03 · answer #1 · answered by Showtunes 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
it style of feels to me you have some very 'at a loss for words' and 'perplexing' solutions here. initially, if one looks on the final election consequences and the end results of modern-day polls, that's obvious that almost all the yank voters choose for no component to this conflict. yet, Fox information and the Neocon Propaganda device has now stepped in and have by some ability confident the yank public that a 'surge' is the respond. Now the Democratic occasion is caught between a rock and a problematical place. to end the conflict, (using fact the yank public needs -or wanted? Who is familiar with?) they might desire to tension Bush's hand. Bush is the President - The Commander-in-chief- and he has veto ability, and the Dems don't have the final public to tension his hand. As I suggested till now, Fox information and the Neocon Propaganda device have by some ability at a loss for words the project (To 'help the troops, you will possibly desire to 'help the 'surge'!) And the usually used public has swallowed this 'line' hook, line and sinker. The 'surge' is going to 'win' the civil conflict. Holy sh+t, what baloney! The Democratic occasion tried to bypass a 'non-binding no person-is familiar with- what' and have been defeated in the Senate. the triumphing political device has made them powerless, even in the event that they are in the 'majority' in the two properties. the only 'ability' they nonetheless have is to 'decrease investment', and that's considered as 'forsaking the troops to a destiny worse than loss of life' (owing to Fox and the NPM) My prediction is: If Bush does not initiate a 'diplomatic offensive, i.e. refer to the events in touch in the area, the US troops are going to be withdrawn (forced out) in the direction of the tip of this year, many deaths and terrible injuries later. And which will incredibly be proclaimed as a 'victory' by utilising Iran and Bin encumbered If Bush, or who-ever counseled him, think of that a '0.33 occasion' can win a civil conflict, he/they are incredibly misinformed and/or defective!
2016-10-09 03:15:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Um...
We Liberals want to end the War in Iraq because it seems to be a failure, and it's brought about the deaths of 3958 soldiers and an estimated 68,172-74,575 Iraqi civilian deaths.
I'm not sure how many deaths you want to attribute to the Department of Education, but I'll bet it's lower than that, isn't it?
2007-08-03 07:26:42 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. Bad Day 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Education needs to go back to the states. I wonder where most of the D.C. bureaucrats and politicians send their kids to school.
Note: Thanks for the media links that listed the ratings of talk and news shows.
2007-08-03 04:44:36 · answer #4 · answered by Matt 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree the department of Education should be done away with. I have a question for you. Why would a Republican man pretend to be a woman on yahoo answers?
2007-08-03 04:22:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 2⤋
There are hundreds of government offices that would have to close completely if we used their standard of success as a reason to fund or not.
What a bunch of friggin hypocrites,
2007-08-03 04:38:06 · answer #6 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
So, we shouldn't educate our children?
I'm just not sure where you are going with this. On the face of it, your statement is ridiculously stupid.
How can you compare two such vastly different things? I could understand if you wanted to compare education with fire protection, or police funding, or road construction and repair, but Iraq? It just doesn't make any sense.
2007-08-03 04:25:23 · answer #7 · answered by powhound 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Just because their attempt to educate you failed doesn't mean that the whole program should be scrapped.
BTW: When do you ship out to go get yourself some of those free flowers and candy in Uncle Dick's Iraqi Cakewalk?
2007-08-03 04:25:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Yes, and how about the War on Poverty?
We have been taking a bloodbath in that one for decades now. Trillions of dollars spent, no measurable progress being made. Talk about a 'quagmire'? Time to pull out immediately!
2007-08-03 04:26:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
There is a fallacy in your statement.. we don't want to cut off funding.. we just want the troops out.
If we wanted to have the funding cut.. it would have been cut.. Congress does control the purse after all.. not the President.
2007-08-03 04:26:25 · answer #10 · answered by pip 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋