Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Drew J. Wade, a spokesman for the service, told the magazine that he is not aware of these agents guarding an education secretary in the past. The education secretary is traditionally guarded by a small security unit from the education department, the report said.
It makes me very angry that the Left has devolved into a group of lawless thugs and, because they are no longer in control, have resorted to threatening the physical safety of our public officials.
Why? There is a civilian detail that guards all Secretaries of whatever office they're secretaries of.
She is spending Dept of Ed money to get US Marshalls instead of using the civilian security detail that has guarded all of the over Dept of Ed secretaries before her.
What? Those men and women aren't good enough for Princess Billionaire Who Never Attended Public School?
Please. She's wasting money.
If she really wanted to "serve her country" why not just get some free guys from Blackwater? I mean, her family is hip deep in that group and it's not like she cannot afford it.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
The lady is not wanted. And this is how it will continue. She herself does not even believe in the school system, teachers want her gone!
From her comments, seems she is there to privatize the schools. Period
Unions want her gone, not teachers whose salaries are conscripted to suport politicians with which they disagree. The teachers, who are treated like widgets by the unions, deserve recogniotion that a merit performance evaluation would deliver.
The unioins create a hostile environment where a shocking number new teachers leave the profession after the first year.
The rubber rooms of NYC for wayward teachers are a perfect example of 19th century edu alive and well in the 21st century. Devos and Trump are the best hope we have to leave 19th century edu behind in the display cases of a museum.
We do not want the union thugs and unioin dues consuming democrats, who support violence against people having opposing views, to direct the education of our children.
Devos does not oppose public edu! that is propaganda.
Its crazy that working stiffs who support Trump relentlessly push the agenda of full privatization of the school system. Rural folks in the boonies would be crushed by these policies. Its a policy tailor made to make Trump supporters fall even further behind and become even more desperate. It makes no sense whatsoever. No country has had a strong working class without public education.
Its crazy that working stiffs who support Trump relentlessly push the agenda of full privatization of the school system. Rural folks in the boonies would be crushed by these policies. Its a policy tailor made to make Trump supporters fall even further behind and become even more desperate. It makes no sense whatsoever. No country has had a strong working class without public education.
Exactly. In the wealthy, liberal, population dense city I live in, kids would be fine.
Can't say the same for rural working poor families in say, Oklahoma.
Exactly. In the wealthy, liberal, population dense city I live in, kids would be fine.
But not the poor kids in dense liberal cities, but rich liberals don't care about them.
Can you imagine if the poor students being failed by the D.C. school system were given the chance to attend the schools of the wealthy liberals' children? There would be a riot.
Rich liberals know that the only way to keep out the poor is to keep them from having the choice of going to better schools.
"I dont want my Johnny jeopardizing his future by getting mixed up with some maid's daughter."
I have a question about school choice. Parents can get vouchers to choose the school their child goes to, great so far. But do those charter, or private, schools have to accept all comers? I went to private school for a few years, there were strict guidelines regarding grades, and behavior, to stay in those schools. They basically screen the students for the cream of the crop. So would this then just leave the under performing students with no choice to go to a better school?
Then there is the issue of the amount of the vouchers. Say each parent gets a $10,000 voucher, my private school cost $15k a year my parents could afford it with or without a voucher. Someone without the means to pay the difference would not benefit from having a voucher while those that can already afford tuition get a bonus.
Unions want her gone, not teachers whose salaries are conscripted to suport politicians with which they disagree. The teachers, who are treated like widgets by the unions, deserve recogniotion that a merit performance evaluation would deliver.
The unioins create a hostile environment where a shocking number new teachers leave the profession after the first year.
The rubber rooms of NYC for wayward teachers are a perfect example of 19th century edu alive and well in the 21st century. Devos and Trump are the best hope we have to leave 19th century edu behind in the display cases of a museum.
We do not want the union thugs and unioin dues consuming democrats, who support violence against people having opposing views, to direct the education of our children.
Devos does not oppose public edu! that is propaganda.
A union turn you down as unsuitable for membership in the past?
A unionized family member or friend received better pay and benefits than you working in your sweat shop?
Own a small business and had trouble keeping good people on the payroll with the Union shop down the street attracting the best from a small pool?
Your unionized wife made more money than you and hired a better lawyer for the divorce?
"Thugs", "conscripted wages", "widgets" all over-emotive words used to describe a system that has raised all workers standards of living, regardless if members or not. All you folks with your "libertarian individualism" couldn't survive one day without your public provided benefits of all types that are taken for granted as having fallen from the sky.
I have a question about school choice. Parents can get vouchers to choose the school their child goes to, great so far. But do those charter, or private, schools have to accept all comers? I went to private school for a few years, there were strict guidelines regarding grades, and behavior, to stay in those schools. They basically screen the students for the cream of the crop. So would this then just leave the under performing students with no choice to go to a better school?
Then there is the issue of the amount of the vouchers. Say each parent gets a $10,000 voucher, my private school cost $15k a year my parents could afford it with or without a voucher. Someone without the means to pay the difference would not benefit from having a voucher while those that can already afford tuition get a bonus.
Here in the Houston area, you're only allowed to attend the school you're zoned.
If you live in a district with crappy schools, you can't send your kids to another district with better schools. It makes sense because I pay taxes in my district that goes to fund the schools in my district; therefore, if I sent my kid to another district, none of my taxes go toward the education the other district that is picking up the tab.
By having vouchers, the tax money follows my kid to that other district. My kid gets to go to a better school for a better education while the district still gets the money used to educate him.
As far as private schools, here is how that helps some people. Let's say I want to send my kid to the private school that costs $15k, and I can't afford that. Well, if my voucher is for $10k, I might be able to swing $5k out of my own pocket.
Here in the Houston area, you're only allowed to attend the school you're zoned.
If you live in a district with crappy schools, you can't send your kids to another district with better schools. It makes sense because I pay taxes in my district that goes to fund the schools in my district; therefore, if I sent my kid to another district, none of my taxes go toward the education the other district that is picking up the tab.
By having vouchers, the tax money follows my kid to that other district. My kid gets to go to a better school for a better education while the district still gets the money used to educate him.
As far as private schools, here is how that helps some people. Let's say I want to send my kid to the private school that costs $15k, and I can't afford that. Well, if my voucher is for $10k, I might be able to swing $5k out of my own pocket.
Texas law says a student can go from one district to another if the district has room. Pays to be friends with the principal. The state money goes with the kid. The parent pays what would be allocated to the kid from local taxes. I have known a couple of people who pulled it off. That 3-4 grand in local money was way cheaper than private.
But, why should people have to jump through hoops to get their kid in a decent school?
The only thing that concerns me about vouchers if all the kids go to private or charter, who pays off the bonds?
Here in the Houston area, you're only allowed to attend the school you're zoned.
If you live in a district with crappy schools, you can't send your kids to another district with better schools. It makes sense because I pay taxes in my district that goes to fund the schools in my district; therefore, if I sent my kid to another district, none of my taxes go toward the education the other district that is picking up the tab.
By having vouchers, the tax money follows my kid to that other district. My kid gets to go to a better school for a better education while the district still gets the money used to educate him.
As far as private schools, here is how that helps some people. Let's say I want to send my kid to the private school that costs $15k, and I can't afford that. Well, if my voucher is for $10k, I might be able to swing $5k out of my own pocket.
What happens when there is a rush to send out of district kids to a good district? We had that problem in FL where one small district was being over crowded they finally had to institute new laws so that the kids in that district didn't get crowded out of their own schools. This new rule decreased the number of out of district students allowed so vouchers would do no good for the majority of those who wanted to send their kids there.
Still doesn't answer the issue of under performing students not being able to get into schools that screen for GPA or behavioral issues. No one is going to want to pay top dollar for schools that have to accept the "problem students". Honestly that is why I was sent to private school in the first place, my local schools had violence issues and poor GPA averages. If those same students were going to the $15K private school the same problems would have followed and my parents would not have paid for me to go there.
The reason many private schools rate better is because they can be very selective. Public schools must take all students.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
