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.
everytime i repond to a thread i must research the posters previous threads and posts to establish their position? really?
judging by other responses to your op, it seems i was not the only person who was taken by the suggestion that bachmann was nuts for wanting to abolish the dept. nevertheless from what you are 'suggesting' here ( i don't have the time to search your previous posts) we're on the same side of this argument ie we want to see the back of the dept of ed? if that's the case i've got less time to argue with someone on the same side of the debate. we have dragons to slay, not each other
Maybe I wasn't clear enough with my first reply to your post.
If you were interested in finding out my position on the issue, you would have at least asked for further clarification instead of making rash assumptions. My original post really didn't go into details about my opinion on axing the Dept. of Education.
Really, I think you were looking to create an argument that didn't even exist in the first place.
An ideological point that I wholeheartedly agree with. But you could say the same thing about lots of issues that we've amended the constitution for (women's right to vote, etc.)
I don't think it's a good thing for Gov't to usurp power from the states, but again... hindsight. I stated before that I'm not defending the DoE.
The DoE exists. They ARE doing something (maybe not the right thing, no argument there). They employ thousands. They enact policy. They've had the backing of generations of legislators. We don't have a time machine to go back and rethink the original implementation, so what's the point of beating each other up over it? Taking ideological stands in a vacuum of hindsight are a waste of energy imo.
I have a problem with sound bite governing. I have a problem with standing at a podium and yelling "We need to axe these programs immediately!" without a backing that statement up with concrete reasons WHY that wouldn't pass muster for a 5th grade book report.
I'm sure this makes me a liberal/commie/pinko/marxist or whatever.
ammending the constitution is very different story to the feds just usurping power.
it doesn't matter what congress or the federal govt does, but if a conservative was elected ie paul or johnson, it would open the door for the states to challenge the feds over education. for that matter it would open the door for states to challenge all sorts of federal programs and laws like medical marijuana, medicine, agriculture, energy etc.
your last statemnt makes it clear that you don't understand the point of the constitution. the founders were concerned with power. as such they designed a system where power would be distributed amongst as many people as possible. this was in stark contrast to the monarchy which they fought against. federal administrations have largely ignored this and have used every single crisis in our history to concentrate more power into the federal govt and ultimately the executive branch
up until now i have conducted myself in a civil manner and i don't see why you take it upon yourself to put words in my mouth and make serious accusations. how you came to that conclusion is quite worrying after all it is you who unwittingly does the bidding for those who'd love to do some ethnic cleansing!
you are a very confused individual. i don't like the indoctrination of public schools. i think they teach very little relevant information. i think we'd all be far better off if instead of one size fits all we had 50 states doing different things to educate our kids. i stated that the evil of FORCED segregation was replaced by the evil of FORCED integration. i have explained that i believe that multicuturalism works best when it isn't FORCED. the operative word in case you hadn't guessed was FORCE. i believe that power should be spread out far and wide instead of concentrated in one place. from all of this you have come to the conclusion that i am adolf hitler incarnate! very confused indeed.
neverthelss if you can't have a serious discussion with someone without alleging that i'm a neonazi ready to put your race to the slaughter, then there really isn't much point in debating with you any further
You were the one arguing against the social contract theory evident in the federal constitution. What's a system of government devoid of a social contract?
EVERY program should be up for review and reorg if not every 4 years, certainly on a reasonable schedule. The lack of accountability in our Gov't is an extremely serious issue across the board.
Jerry Brown eliminated the office of education in the state of California when he took office earlier this year.
that's kinda worrying in many ways. for one it is the recognition that the state is powerless so why bother, the conclusion i come to is that california wants the feds to control education.
You were the one arguing against the social contract theory evident in the federal constitution. What's a system of government devoid of a social contract?
alphamale, i normally agree with you, and on the dept of education i'm behind bachmann 1000%. bachmann however is no constitutionalist. she has no problem with the federal war on drugs, federal marriage, patriot act which effectively guts the 4th, tsa, dhs, etc.
bachmann like obama, bush, clinton and perry is a political animal. she will say and do anything if she thought it would get her votes. she bleats on and on about abortion, and the dept of education, two areas where she knows she would never be able to change unless the states re asserted their power. like most politicians and religious leaders, she picks and chooses verses from the constitution and bible which she agrees with and the rest is left behind
that's kinda worrying in many ways. for one it is the recognition that the state is powerless so why bother, the conclusion i come to is that california wants the feds to control education.
The state office of education was eliminated due to redundancy. We already have the superintendent of public instruction that oversees education in California. The result was slashing over a million dollars and that savings was used towards public education funding.
An ideological point that I wholeheartedly agree with. But you could say the same thing about lots of issues that we've amended the constitution for (women's right to vote, etc.)
That is the difference. The US Constitution was amended in regard to equal protection under the law, women's sufferage, Presidential term limits, etc., etc. Which makes them part of the US Constitution.
There are no amendments concerning education. You will not find the word referenced anywhere in the document concerning education. That alone should have given you a clue that it is not a power that belongs to the federal government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sporin
I don't think it's a good thing for Gov't to usurp power from the states, but again... hindsight. I stated before that I'm not defending the DoE.
The DoE exists. They ARE doing something (maybe not the right thing, no argument there). They employ thousands. They enact policy. They've had the backing of generations of legislators. We don't have a time machine to go back and rethink the original implementation, so what's the point of beating each other up over it? Taking ideological stands in a vacuum of hindsight are a waste of energy imo.
I have a problem with sound bite governing. I have a problem with standing at a podium and yelling "We need to axe these programs immediately!" without a backing that statement up with concrete reasons WHY that wouldn't pass muster for a 5th grade book report.
I'm sure this makes me a liberal/commie/pinko/marxist or whatever.
If we, as voters, do not hold our federal government accountable for taking powers that are reserved exclusively to the States, then we are giving the federal government our tacit approval to usurp even more powers away from the States. Such as health care, for example.
The state office of education was eliminated due to redundancy. We already have the superintendent of public instruction that oversees education in California. The result was slashing over a million dollars and that savings was used towards public education funding.
Apparently the California Department of Education never got the memo that they were "eliminated."
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.
