Michelle Bachmann: "Why do we have a Department of Education?" - Polidicks

Fuck this gay earth. Fuck the Tea Party. [IMG]http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c29/kalamari13/emot-smithicide.gif[/IMG] But really, it's like this, but today in real life: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfXNVhU2EfM[/media]

The US is more and more becoming like the US in "Atlas Shrugged" from Ayn Rand. That scares me.

Alright, let's get a couple things straight. Michelle Bachmann is a fucking idiot, that's no surprise to anyone, but just because one issue is directly related to her doesn't make it inherently bad. The very fact that people are saying things like "lol yeah who needs education" is severely ironic, because they do not seem to be educated enough to know what the "Department of Education" does. I can forgive most of you, you aren't from America, but *some* of us should know better. The department of education isn't a centralized system which funds all the schools in the nation, the states fund schooling. While it's true, they do offer financial aid in certain situations they are not at all responsible for schooling as a whole. The department of education is also relatively new to the American political scene. In fact is may surprise some people that is didn't even exist until 1979, yes, it's that new. Yet we had state funded schools prior. Please stop misrepresenting the argument. Here is it's functions: [quote]The primary functions of the Department of Education are to "establish policy for, administer and coordinate most federal assistance to education, collect data on US schools, and to enforce federal educational laws regarding privacy and civil rights.[4] The Department of Education does not establish schools or colleges.[5] The Office of the Inspector General has a unit of enforcement agents who conduct investigations and raids in connection to student loan defaults and fraud.[6] Unlike the systems of most other countries, education in the United States is highly decentralized, and the federal government and Department of Education are not heavily involved in determining curricula or educational standards (with the recent exception of the No Child Left Behind Act). This has been left to state and local school districts. The quality of educational institutions and their degrees is maintained through an informal private process known as accreditation, over which the Department of Education has no direct public jurisdictional control. The Department's mission is: to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.[7] Aligned with this mission of ensuring equal access to education, the Department of Education is a member of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness,[8] and works with federal partners to ensure proper education for homeless and runaway youth in the United States.[/quote]

Why, Michelle? Because you are a perfect example of someone without a good education, you dumb beaver.

Vote for me! I'll turn your children's education into a complete clusterfuck! Wait. If she gets elected I will lose my faith in American people.

[QUOTE=Turnips5;32138725]for fuck's sake what are people like her doing in the 21st century [editline]6th September 2011[/editline] ...or, y'know, you could move to the UK and just speak english[/QUOTE] Don't lie, it's shit here too.

I rather doubt this is going to win her any votes.

[QUOTE=Killuah;32144164]The US is more and more becoming like the US in "Atlas Shrugged" from Ayn Rand. That scares me.[/QUOTE] Except more mud huts, and less revolutionary industrialization. Also, lol, you read Atlas Shrugged.

[QUOTE=Jon27;32144312]If she gets elected I will lose my faith in American people.[/QUOTE]We don't directly elect the president. This is how I recall it being done: We elect people who say they'll vote for x candidate, then they vote. Take my state, Minnesota, which has 10 electors and let's say six want Bachmann, four do not. Well, those four don't count because Bachmann had a majority in Minnesota, so Bachmann gets ten votes. This continues in every state until she's got 270 votes total, then she's president. She could get ALL the votes (however that is unlikely) but she needs a minimum of 270 to win. This is why candidates tour those really huge states, with lots of votes, and basically say "fuck you" to places like North Dakota. [editline] [/editline] Oh and I forgot to mention that not all states decide who they elect equally. The process varies state to state, but most (to my knowledge) operate in a majority win type thing, where the majority of votes for whoever decides where all the votes go.

[QUOTE=cqbcat;32143626]What did she do that was so bad? She just pointed out that the DoE is unconstitutional and that local communities are what should be in charge of education.[/QUOTE] There's a lot of different things going on at once: 1.) She's never had a clear understanding of the principles our nation was founded upon. She probably couldn't tell you that the train of thought she is expressing is inspired by the Jeffersonian, strict Constitutionalism that some members during the Constitutional-founding period had. At the very most, this is probably a rationalism that her campaign drummed up for her. 2.) She isn't a proper candidate to execute any legitimate plan. She's photogenic and a campaign sweetheart to many people. But she would be an awful leader, because she doesn't have the sort of open-minded, understanding, thoughtful/rational, and decision-making skills that a good leader has. 3.) She doesn't properly understand the world around her. This is someone who thinks that it's OK to joke about Hurricane Irene by suggesting it's "God's way of reaching President Obama." She thinks it's "interesting" that Swine Flu outbreaks appeared when Jimmy Carter was supposedly President, and President Obama's administrations (actually Gerald Ford was President). She thinks Congress is made up of "pro-Americans" and "Anti-Americans." She has, again and again, proven she is at the 100% mercy of her husband - to the point where her political notions change based on her husband's approval. I don't see the practicality in electing anyone like this into office. It's not what she said, it's everything backing up what she's saying.

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;32141407]oh neat i hope you have never had public schooling because you're unappreciative[/QUOTE] Public schooling goes through my state, not the federal government.

[QUOTE=B-hazard;32144800]Don't lie, it's shit here too.[/QUOTE] It's shit but it's not Hell.

If she actually wins, which is a snowballs chance in hell, I'm declaring open revolt. I just don't care anymore.

I've been scared of republicans coming to office since Sarah Palin pretty much promised war with Russia ("if they "invade" another small country"-face it, Georgia had it coming) when she ran for vice in 2008

[QUOTE=Charybdis;32148197]I've been scared of republicans coming to office since Sarah Palin pretty much promised war with Russia ("if they "invade" another small country"-face it, Georgia had it coming) when she ran for vice in 2008[/QUOTE] What I don't understand is that people generally saw her for the unqualified, uneducated cunt she was, yet with Bachmann it's a total 360.

[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;32148226]What I don't understand is that people generally saw her for the unqualified, uneducated cunt she was, yet with Bachmann it's a total 360.[/QUOTE] I've gotten the exact opposite impression tbqh. Most people think Palin is a better choice than Bachmann these days.

[QUOTE=Reimu;32148545]I've gotten the exact opposite impression tbqh. Most people think Palin is a better choice than Bachmann these days.[/QUOTE] Most people I converse with think all of the republican candidates are retarded.

America, What the fuck are you doing How in gods name did she get into politics

Seriously, Michelle Bachmann is an embarassment for American politics. She's almost as bad as Bush.

[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;32148226]What I don't understand is that people generally saw her for the unqualified, uneducated cunt she was, yet with Bachmann it's a total 360.[/QUOTE] you mean 180?

[QUOTE=Miskav;32148652]Most people I converse with think all of the republican candidates are retarded.[/QUOTE] It depends where you live and what environment you're in.

[QUOTE=Gordon Frohm;32149090]you mean 180?[/QUOTE] Don't care. Bitch be flipping any which way over everything.

when I grow up I'm getting the fuck out of this crazy ass country as soon as fucking possible before everything piles up and everything fucking breaks and everything is shit and stupid it'll be like now but more-so

To the people badmouthing Bachmann as usual, while I don't know the feasibility of dissolving our DoE, you have to admit it's a pretty shady concept to have a government-sponsored viewpoint. I don't like it either way. And frankly, neither should any of you.

[QUOTE=Jenkem;32150404]To the people badmouthing Bachmann as usual, while I don't know the feasibility of dissolving our DoE, you have to admit it's a pretty shady concept to have a government-sponsored viewpoint. I don't like it either way. And frankly, neither should any of you.[/QUOTE] you don't like it because why?

[QUOTE=Jenkem;32150404]To the people badmouthing Bachmann as usual, while I don't know the feasibility of dissolving our DoE, you have to admit it's a pretty shady concept to have a government-sponsored viewpoint. I don't like it either way. And frankly, neither should any of you.[/QUOTE] Uhh, how else will I get my Pell Grants that are issued by the DoE? Besides tossing the DoE back into the Department of Health and Human Services is really dumb. [editline]6th September 2011[/editline] Also when you got school boards and school systems out of control, there needs to be a department to take care of this instead of the fucking governor of the state stepping in and signing some bullshit paper to toss them out of office. When a accreditation agency steps in and wants to take their accreditation away because these huge fags on the school board cant work together and want to run it into the ground, then there is a problem in the first place. Getting rid of the DoE is not going to change this at all. Go ahead and look up the cheating scandal in Atlanta Public School's and [url=http://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/clayton/stories/2008/08/28/clayton_sacs_schools_timeline.html?cxntlid=inform_sr]Clayton County Public School's[/url] problems.

Yeah, government should stop controlling our education so we can teach our kids good christian values

[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;32139926]Uhh... Ron Paul has said the same exact thing numerous times. And yet there are still people on this very forum who practically worship the guy. So.... would it be news if Ron Paul had said that instead of BaChmann?[/QUOTE] Yes, Ron Paul has been saying it for years. In fact, talk of ending the Department of Education has been going on since the 80s. It's just really hard to shut down the DOE, because then it would look like the federal government doesn't give a shit about education, when in fact that's the truth. Bachmann is just copying Ron Paul's ideas just to make herself look smarter, yet she doesn't completely understand the idea behind eliminating the DOE. [QUOTE=Megafanx13;32138833]Bigger disparity between rich and poor in schools, some schools have far more funding then others, privatization of all schools in a given area, re-segregation (this is unlikely, quite literally a worst-case scenario), and a non-standardized curriculum (teaching intelligent design but not evolution, teaching only abstinence, etc.) just to name a few.[/QUOTE] No, you got this completely wrong. Do you even know what the Department of Education does? They don't determine the curriculum at all and they are not really organized at all. Schools can teach whatever they want. Teachers and staff determine the curricula. Even parents have more of a say in the schools than the federal government. (Haven't you heard of the PTA - Parent-Teacher's Association?) States determine the academic guidelines. Hence the requirements for what needs to be taught in say for example, a Geometry class, differ from state to state. The DOE don't control the quality of schools and don't even do the accreditation. That's all done at the state level. All the DOE did was just give loans and grants to college students, make sure they paid it back and collect data. It was understandable back then, that you didn't need a separate department to do this simple crap. But ironically, it wasn't until George W. Bush a Republican, that when he passed the No Child Left Behind Act, Bush made the DOE larger and gave them the power to punish schools by giving less federal funding to schools who didn't do well on tests. Now, most people are saying the No Child Left Behind Act isn't really improving education, evidence being that there has been a huge number of cheating for the No Child Left Behind exams: [URL="http://www.google.com/search?q=cheating no child left behind"]http://www.google.com/search?q=cheating no child left behind[/URL] Read what the DOE does: [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Education#Functions"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Education#Functions[/URL] Ron Paul doesn't want to completely eliminate federal aid for education, he just doesn't see the point of a separate department for education and why we're paying over billions for a department that doesn't really do anything complex that requires a separate federal department. According to Ron Paul, we should just give the money directly to the states and let them continue doing what they're doing. No more of the federal testing bs. It's not helping at all. But most teacher unions are against Ron Paul, because he also wants people to have [I][B]the choice and freedom[/B][/I] of using federal aid to pay for private schooling and the chance for [I][B]a better education[/B][/I], the same way it's currently done for college students. This pisses off the teachers union because they fear that most parents and students will choose this, meaning teachers in public schools will get paid less. [QUOTE=jordguitar;32150755]Uhh, how else will I get my Pell Grants that are issued by the DoE? Besides tossing the DoE back into the Department of Health and Human Services is really dumb. [/QUOTE] Grants and financial aid for education have been issued for decades before the DoE existed. Why do we need a separate department and pay them billions to do simple shit like this? [QUOTE=jordguitar;32150755] Go ahead and look up the cheating scandal in Atlanta Public School's and [url=http://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/clayton/stories/2008/08/28/clayton_sacs_schools_timeline.html?cxntlid=inform_sr]Clayton County Public School's[/url] problems.[/QUOTE] Ah, it's the same way schools want to cheat on federal exams set by the DoE. It's all about getting more money. Except, there's been a sharp increase in schools cheating across the country since the No Child Left Behind Act was passed and made the DoE more powerful and expensive. [QUOTE=OrionChronicles;32151171]Yeah, government should stop controlling our education so we can teach our kids good christian values[/QUOTE] How can you stop the federal government, when the federal government doesn't even control education in the first place? Curriculum is determined by state and local governments. If the DoE is shut down, nothing in the curriculum or what schools are teaching currently will change.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32143686]A long list of things, you can't honestly be unaware of her other actions if you've spent any amount of time in SH.[/QUOTE] I'm not concerning her sum total of shit things she's said. I already know that she's a bitch who shouldn't be in office. I'm just concerning this specific comment she made about education. It makes sense, local communities should be in charge of education instead of big government. Yet most of the first posts were of the "i lost faith in humanity" variety.

[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;32138504]I have actually ceased to be surprised by the antics of American politics. My expectations for the future of the country, and by generous extension, the world are dropping with every press conference. Even if Obama gets re-elected, it is still just delaying the inevitable, republican clusterfuck of a government.[/QUOTE] The second that oil prices here hit a high price, just wait for and even bigger clusterfuck of Republicans promising to get more oil for the American dream. I'm telling you, we've seen it coming for years but after 9/11 and recently Donald Trump trying to run, its just sealed the deal. In a few more years our government is going to be run by some of the most psychotic ambitious Conservative Republicans we will ever see. All with the goal of magically finding some solution to expensive gas without actually solving the problems of our sprawl. The only really short solution will obviously be finding ways to start more wars to get what we want quickly. Actually I just feel like spitting this out right now. If there was going to be a time for party relocation it would probably be sometime during of after the above. If you think about it, on a really low level Republicans sort of have a good idea, at least the parts about how business's should be pretty free to do as they wish, and maybe the main government should be a little weaker than the state's government. However, when gas prices get way high and people wont be able to afford to drive, the most important thing will be lots and lots of small business in small areas within walking distance. Major corporations will be completely crippled and will lose employees to small local business's where they don't need to commute, and the major business's wont be able to pay for hauling goods all over the country. The whole structure of big business will crumble. The idea of lots of business competing is very republican, e.g. doctors who live a few houses down from you, corner grocery stores etc but not on a small scale. Funnily enough, these are currently things which Democrats are usually big supporters of. So I can see how when problems arise the mega rich republicans will continue to fight to keep their massive business alive wheras Democrats will probably want to have more state control over things in small scales. Anyone else following this? :P