Summary: Blah, blah, blah – Republicans suck – blah – extend programs (i.e., spend more money and start propagandizing 4 year-olds) – blah – if "THEY don't act, I will" – blah – government shutdown (whine) – blah – move forward – blah, blah, blah.
Oh, and why aren't there any direct quotes from what HE actually said in this? Why are OTHERS speaking for him?
I wasn't even going to comment on this article when I first started the post but then I ACTUALLY READ IT. OY!
And, you know the sad part, I could do this to EVERY NEWS ITEM THAT IS PUBLISHED by whatever news organization you probably read! What does that mean? For once, really read this pap and LET IT SINK IN. Don't take it at face value. Don't just ASSUME that there's going to be money for EVERY GODDAM GOVERNMENT PROGRAM THESE IDIOTS CAN COME UP WITH AD INFINITUM. Because, WHERE WILL IT ALL CONTINUE TO COME FROM? At what point does it KILL IT ALL? When does it break EVERYONE'S BANK?
Figure it out before I see you on TV when a Chinese government bill collector knocks on your door in a year or so. How about it?
Obama pushes preschool programs in Georgia trip
From AP
President Barack Obama speaks to workers and guests [victims of government persecution, perhaps?] at the Linamar Corporation plant in Arden, N.C., Wednesday, Feb. 13, 2013, as he travels after delivering his State of the Union address Tuesday.
Thu, 14 Feb 2013 10:41:13 -0500
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama's ambitious [of course, he's not a shrinking violet when it comes to breaking YOUR bank] plan to expand preschool programs comes as one of every 13 students already in Head Start classrooms is at risk of being kicked out if lawmakers don't sidestep a budget meltdown.
Obama was set to talk about enlarging [again, of course] early childhood education programs such as Head Start during a stop Thursday in Georgia. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, meanwhile, told senators on Capitol Hill that pending budget cuts could be devastating to current students and could hurt the nation's economy for years to come if students aren't learning now.
"We're trying to do a lot more [of course, it's not YOUR money?] in terms of early childhood education [read indoctrination], not go in the opposite direction," Duncan said. "Doing that to our most vulnerable children [here we go, I think he's headed toward a crescendo] is education malpractice, economically foolish and morally indefensible." [Wow, just say what the hell you really mean, man. Don't muck about!]
Obama's team is warning Congress — and lawmakers' constituents — what is expected to happen if leaders fail to avert $85 billion in automatic budget cuts set to begin March 1. With the cuts looming, the administration has increased its pressure on lawmakers, and Obama's State of the Union address Tuesday made clear he was not looking for compromise as he begins his second term.
"I propose working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every child in America," Obama told Congress and a national television audience.
The White House fleshed out Obama's plan Thursday, proposing a "continuum of high-quality early learning for a child, beginning at birth and continuing to age 5." [WOW, doesn't that SOUND just fantastically irresistible?] The government would fund public preschool for any 4-year-old whose family income is 200 percent or less of the federal poverty level — a more generous threshold than the current Head Start program [once more, OF COURSE], which generally serves kids from families below 130 percent of the poverty line. All 50 states and the federal government would chip in.
Obama also is proposing letting communities and child care providers compete for grants [Again, this sounds great but FROM WHO? Who they hell has any fucking money left?] to serve children 3 and younger, starting from birth. And once a state has established its program for 4-year-olds, it can use funds from the program [Please, which come from where?] to offer full-day kindergarten, the plan says.
Still missing from Obama's plan are any details about the cost, a key concern among Republicans. The White House says federal investment in Head Start, an $8 billion program that serves almost 1 million kids, will grow. [$8 billion on 1 million kids, that's $8000 per kid] But Obama's aides have stressed that the new programs would not add to the nation's nearly $16.5 trillion debt. [Of course, he's going to raise taxes.]
"The last budget had over $1.5 trillion of mandatory and revenue savings, things like reductions in entitlements, closing loopholes," Jason Furman, a deputy director of the National Economic Council, told reporters Wednesday. He said the new initiatives would be smaller than that.
If the White House wants to move ahead, officials are going to need help from the states [Really, just how much fucking help do "officials" want? Where does it end? When is it enough? Hint: It ISN'T! EVER.] to provide political cover [Just what the hell is that and why the hell should the 49.4% of us give a shit?] and dollars alike. House Speaker John Boehner said Wednesday involving the federal government in early childhood education was "a good way to screw it up." The Republican chairman of the House committee overseeing education policy was cool toward the proposal and was unlikely to approve new spending on it. And even Obama's allies acknowledged there was little Washington could do without governors' help.
"We can all agree on the importance of ensuring children have the foundation they need to succeed in school and in life," said Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee. "However, before we spend more taxpayer dollars on new programs, we must first review what is and is not working in existing initiatives, such as Head Start."
Obama will outline details about the plan's cost when he sends his 2014 budget proposal to Congress next month, Furman said.
Ahead of that, the White House and Congress are weighing whether to let the deep automatic spending cuts to take hold on March 1. If that happens, some 10,000 teachers [there is one teacher for every 7 students?] could be out of work and 70,000 students [70,000 students is 7% ONLY] could be kicked out of Head Start programs, Duncan warned lawmakers.
The cuts would also force an additional 14,000 Head Start workers to be laid off and would mean 1.2 million students from low-income families would have their schools' funding cut. Washington also would stop paying its share of 7,200 special needs educators' salaries. [More liberal fear-mongering and demagoguery. WHAT THE HELL ABOUT ALL THOSE OTHER PEOPLE (NOT JUST GOVERNMENT HEAD START WORKERS) WHO HAVE ALREADY LOST JOBS DUE TO GOVERNMENT OVER-SPENDING AND ARE NO LONGER PAYING TAXES TO FUND THIS CRAP AND THE EVEN MORE PEOPLE WHO WILL THEN LOSE JOBS AS THAT GOVERNMENT DECIDES IT NEEDS TO SPEND EVEN MORE!?! Excuse me, I just had an aneurysm.]
"I hope the committee members will keep those most vulnerable students [more propaganda] at the forefront of their mind, because they will be the ones who will be hurt worst if Congress allows sequestration to happen," Duncan said.
The federal government doesn't directly pay the salaries of those workers but sends money to states based on the number of students in specific categories [Don't you just love how we're ALL categorized by our government now?], such as those with learning disabilities or from at-risk communities. The states generally dole out those dollars to individual districts based on the schools' share of those students.
Duncan also repeated his warning that Education Department employees would be forced to take unpaid leave to deal with the budget crunch.
The automatic, across-the-board budget cuts were designed to kick in only if lawmakers failed to reach broad agreement to reduce the nation's debt.
Republicans and conservatives have questioned the effectiveness of Head Start programs, citing studies such as a Health and Human Services Department report last year showing that, while at-risk students enrolled in the pre-kindergarten programs saw tremendous gains in vocabulary and social development [What sort of "social development"--Environmental awareness? Anti-gun hysteria? Diversity sensitivity?] , those benefits largely faded by the time students reached third grade.
The HHS report didn't explain why the students saw a drop-off in performance or predict how they would fare as they aged. But it was a favorite reason to question Obama's plan.
"There's reason for huge skepticism," said Mike Petrilli, executive vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative education think tank. "Most states are still in a ditch financially [I wonder why? Is it because we, taxpayers, are required to GIVE those who don't have everything that the government thinks they SHOULD have?], and it's going to be a couple years before they're out of it [Sorry, pal, it ain't ever gonna happen again]. ... I don't know where the states are going to come up with the money for this."
Scores of other studies, however, were more favorable toward the program, which has been shown to make at-risk students more likely to complete high school and avoid criminal arrests. In pure dollars and cents, academics called it a smart investment.
You know, I really DON'T want to include politics in my blog. I would like to just think happy thoughts and that everything is going to be OK (sigh). BUT, IT'S, NOT.
I have had to put up with increasingly harsh and far-reaching liberal/progressive (sorry but I just can't think of any better words for it) propaganda and indoctrination for the last 40+ years and, excuse me if it's too much for your delicate sensibilities, I JUST CANNOT STAND IT ANYMORE. My BS filter is full-up with hearing EVERY mainstream news agency, personality, comedian, etc. you can think of (that is, the ones they, the media, let you see on their precious air time) castigating everything I grew up with and cherish and want for my granddaughter. If I were a liberal that would have just brought tears to your eyes. BUT I'M NOT so I probably now have this big fucking target on my back. Well... so be it.
Oh, and why aren't there any direct quotes from what HE actually said in this? Why are OTHERS speaking for him?
I wasn't even going to comment on this article when I first started the post but then I ACTUALLY READ IT. OY!
And, you know the sad part, I could do this to EVERY NEWS ITEM THAT IS PUBLISHED by whatever news organization you probably read! What does that mean? For once, really read this pap and LET IT SINK IN. Don't take it at face value. Don't just ASSUME that there's going to be money for EVERY GODDAM GOVERNMENT PROGRAM THESE IDIOTS CAN COME UP WITH AD INFINITUM. Because, WHERE WILL IT ALL CONTINUE TO COME FROM? At what point does it KILL IT ALL? When does it break EVERYONE'S BANK?
Figure it out before I see you on TV when a Chinese government bill collector knocks on your door in a year or so. How about it?
Obama pushes preschool programs in Georgia trip
From AP
President Barack Obama speaks to workers and guests [victims of government persecution, perhaps?] at the Linamar Corporation plant in Arden, N.C., Wednesday, Feb. 13, 2013, as he travels after delivering his State of the Union address Tuesday.
Thu, 14 Feb 2013 10:41:13 -0500
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama's ambitious [of course, he's not a shrinking violet when it comes to breaking YOUR bank] plan to expand preschool programs comes as one of every 13 students already in Head Start classrooms is at risk of being kicked out if lawmakers don't sidestep a budget meltdown.
Obama was set to talk about enlarging [again, of course] early childhood education programs such as Head Start during a stop Thursday in Georgia. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, meanwhile, told senators on Capitol Hill that pending budget cuts could be devastating to current students and could hurt the nation's economy for years to come if students aren't learning now.
"We're trying to do a lot more [of course, it's not YOUR money?] in terms of early childhood education [read indoctrination], not go in the opposite direction," Duncan said. "Doing that to our most vulnerable children [here we go, I think he's headed toward a crescendo] is education malpractice, economically foolish and morally indefensible." [Wow, just say what the hell you really mean, man. Don't muck about!]
Obama's team is warning Congress — and lawmakers' constituents — what is expected to happen if leaders fail to avert $85 billion in automatic budget cuts set to begin March 1. With the cuts looming, the administration has increased its pressure on lawmakers, and Obama's State of the Union address Tuesday made clear he was not looking for compromise as he begins his second term.
"I propose working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every child in America," Obama told Congress and a national television audience.
The White House fleshed out Obama's plan Thursday, proposing a "continuum of high-quality early learning for a child, beginning at birth and continuing to age 5." [WOW, doesn't that SOUND just fantastically irresistible?] The government would fund public preschool for any 4-year-old whose family income is 200 percent or less of the federal poverty level — a more generous threshold than the current Head Start program [once more, OF COURSE], which generally serves kids from families below 130 percent of the poverty line. All 50 states and the federal government would chip in.
Obama also is proposing letting communities and child care providers compete for grants [Again, this sounds great but FROM WHO? Who they hell has any fucking money left?] to serve children 3 and younger, starting from birth. And once a state has established its program for 4-year-olds, it can use funds from the program [Please, which come from where?] to offer full-day kindergarten, the plan says.
Still missing from Obama's plan are any details about the cost, a key concern among Republicans. The White House says federal investment in Head Start, an $8 billion program that serves almost 1 million kids, will grow. [$8 billion on 1 million kids, that's $8000 per kid] But Obama's aides have stressed that the new programs would not add to the nation's nearly $16.5 trillion debt. [Of course, he's going to raise taxes.]
"The last budget had over $1.5 trillion of mandatory and revenue savings, things like reductions in entitlements, closing loopholes," Jason Furman, a deputy director of the National Economic Council, told reporters Wednesday. He said the new initiatives would be smaller than that.
If the White House wants to move ahead, officials are going to need help from the states [Really, just how much fucking help do "officials" want? Where does it end? When is it enough? Hint: It ISN'T! EVER.] to provide political cover [Just what the hell is that and why the hell should the 49.4% of us give a shit?] and dollars alike. House Speaker John Boehner said Wednesday involving the federal government in early childhood education was "a good way to screw it up." The Republican chairman of the House committee overseeing education policy was cool toward the proposal and was unlikely to approve new spending on it. And even Obama's allies acknowledged there was little Washington could do without governors' help.
"We can all agree on the importance of ensuring children have the foundation they need to succeed in school and in life," said Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee. "However, before we spend more taxpayer dollars on new programs, we must first review what is and is not working in existing initiatives, such as Head Start."
Obama will outline details about the plan's cost when he sends his 2014 budget proposal to Congress next month, Furman said.
Ahead of that, the White House and Congress are weighing whether to let the deep automatic spending cuts to take hold on March 1. If that happens, some 10,000 teachers [there is one teacher for every 7 students?] could be out of work and 70,000 students [70,000 students is 7% ONLY] could be kicked out of Head Start programs, Duncan warned lawmakers.
The cuts would also force an additional 14,000 Head Start workers to be laid off and would mean 1.2 million students from low-income families would have their schools' funding cut. Washington also would stop paying its share of 7,200 special needs educators' salaries. [More liberal fear-mongering and demagoguery. WHAT THE HELL ABOUT ALL THOSE OTHER PEOPLE (NOT JUST GOVERNMENT HEAD START WORKERS) WHO HAVE ALREADY LOST JOBS DUE TO GOVERNMENT OVER-SPENDING AND ARE NO LONGER PAYING TAXES TO FUND THIS CRAP AND THE EVEN MORE PEOPLE WHO WILL THEN LOSE JOBS AS THAT GOVERNMENT DECIDES IT NEEDS TO SPEND EVEN MORE!?! Excuse me, I just had an aneurysm.]
"I hope the committee members will keep those most vulnerable students [more propaganda] at the forefront of their mind, because they will be the ones who will be hurt worst if Congress allows sequestration to happen," Duncan said.
The federal government doesn't directly pay the salaries of those workers but sends money to states based on the number of students in specific categories [Don't you just love how we're ALL categorized by our government now?], such as those with learning disabilities or from at-risk communities. The states generally dole out those dollars to individual districts based on the schools' share of those students.
Duncan also repeated his warning that Education Department employees would be forced to take unpaid leave to deal with the budget crunch.
The automatic, across-the-board budget cuts were designed to kick in only if lawmakers failed to reach broad agreement to reduce the nation's debt.
Republicans and conservatives have questioned the effectiveness of Head Start programs, citing studies such as a Health and Human Services Department report last year showing that, while at-risk students enrolled in the pre-kindergarten programs saw tremendous gains in vocabulary and social development [What sort of "social development"--Environmental awareness? Anti-gun hysteria? Diversity sensitivity?] , those benefits largely faded by the time students reached third grade.
The HHS report didn't explain why the students saw a drop-off in performance or predict how they would fare as they aged. But it was a favorite reason to question Obama's plan.
"There's reason for huge skepticism," said Mike Petrilli, executive vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative education think tank. "Most states are still in a ditch financially [I wonder why? Is it because we, taxpayers, are required to GIVE those who don't have everything that the government thinks they SHOULD have?], and it's going to be a couple years before they're out of it [Sorry, pal, it ain't ever gonna happen again]. ... I don't know where the states are going to come up with the money for this."
Scores of other studies, however, were more favorable toward the program, which has been shown to make at-risk students more likely to complete high school and avoid criminal arrests. In pure dollars and cents, academics called it a smart investment.
You know, I really DON'T want to include politics in my blog. I would like to just think happy thoughts and that everything is going to be OK (sigh). BUT, IT'S, NOT.
I have had to put up with increasingly harsh and far-reaching liberal/progressive (sorry but I just can't think of any better words for it) propaganda and indoctrination for the last 40+ years and, excuse me if it's too much for your delicate sensibilities, I JUST CANNOT STAND IT ANYMORE. My BS filter is full-up with hearing EVERY mainstream news agency, personality, comedian, etc. you can think of (that is, the ones they, the media, let you see on their precious air time) castigating everything I grew up with and cherish and want for my granddaughter. If I were a liberal that would have just brought tears to your eyes. BUT I'M NOT so I probably now have this big fucking target on my back. Well... so be it.
No comments:
Post a Comment