Rick Santorum opposes public schooling

[eeyore1954]

No, that isn't my argument. Talk to Randfan about that one.

I just think Santorum's being a hypocrite.

Maybe is he against funding for public schools?

 

[johnny karate]

Nope, it beats you, it beats me; we can't judge it one way or the other. Nope, not at all, no sirree. We're all just getting beat off here, Zig.

At least that way you can rationalize not holding Santorum to any kind of standard

It's like when the Tea Party suddenly decided to become upset about "reckless government spending" immediately after Obama was sworn into office. It's not hypocrisy, just an amazingly convenient coincidence.

 

[RandFan]

So that means he wants to get rid of public schools not fix what he perceives as maybe a broken system. Mainly I believe he wants more local control.

How is it broken? In every state? Doesn't that suggest a systemic problem? What control does he think will fix the broken system.

Hey, perhaps you are right. Perhaps is so goddamn stupid that he really doesn't know that the federal govt doesn't "run the schools" and giving control to the states would solve the problem (the only possible explanation, right?). If I were still a Republican I'm not sure I'd be jumping to make that argument.

But hey, if it works for you...

Santorum, either wants to get rid of public education or doesn't know how public education even works. Nice.

 

[Ziggurat]

Nope, it beats you, it beats me; we can't judge it one way or the other. Nope, not at all, no sirree. We're all just getting beat off here, Zig.

At least that way you can rationalize not holding Santorum to any kind of standard

Oh, I can most definitely hold him to standards. But the standards I hold him to are standards I think everyone should adhere to. I'm not going to play silly games where I imagine hypocrisies in order to turn behavior I actually think is appropriate into a criticism, especially when it requires inventing standards he didn't actually advocate. Because let's face it, you don't have a problem with people sending their children to public schools, and as far as we know Santorum never said parents shouldn't send their children to public schools either. You need a better basis for your criticisms if you want to accuse me of rationalizing.

 

[RandFan]

Yeah, that slipped by me. As Santorum is someone who wants to be at the top of the federal government, we might actually want someone who knows what the federal government does and doesn't do

I'm rather amazed that folks want to push this argument.

HEY! Santorum is too damn stupid to want to end public schooling.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Maybe is he against funding for public schools?

Unless those schools teach HIS kids, apparently. I'm guessing he didn't foot the entire $38,000 per year bill for his children to attend a public charter school while he was a Senator. Under those conditions, he seems more than happy to accept public funding

 

[eeyore1954]

Please specify what this means. You do realize there are these things called local school boards (you know, the elected bodies from local communities who run the local districts?) here in the U.S., right?

I am not saying he is correct. But are local school boards autonomous or do they also have to answer to higher authorities.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Oh, I can most definitely hold him to standards. But the standards I hold him to are standards I think everyone should adhere to. I'm not going to play silly games where I imagine hypocrisies in order to turn behavior I actually think is appropriate into a criticism, especially when it requires inventing standards he didn't actually advocate. Because let's face it, you don't have a problem with people sending their children to public schools, and as far as we know Santorum never said parents shouldn't send their children to public schools either. You need a better basis for your criticisms if you want to accuse me of rationalizing.

I never claimed as much. You are confusing me with Randfan.

 

[MattusMaximus]

I am not saying he is correct. But are local school boards autonomous or do they also have to answer to higher authorities.

Yes, they do. Are you arguing that they shouldn't? They do take money from the state, you know.

 

[MattusMaximus]

It's like when the Tea Party suddenly decided to become upset about "reckless government spending" immediately after Obama was sworn into office. It's not hypocrisy, just an amazingly convenient coincidence.

This. The timing is... interesting, isn't it?

 

[RandFan]

Does anyone know what the hell Santorum's point is?

What exactly does he mean by "public education" being an anachronism and an artifact? Seriously, did I miss something?

Public funding? Federal control? What the hell?

 

[Ziggurat]

I never claimed as much. You are confusing me with Randfan.

If he never claimed parents shouldn't send their children to public schools, then what's the basis for claiming that he's being hypocritical? You're not making any sense.

 

[MattusMaximus]

If he never claimed parents shouldn't send their children to public schools, then what's the basis for claiming that he's being hypocritical? You're not making any sense.

His claim is that homeschooling is superior to public education, yet when he was a Senator he enrolled his own kids in a public charter school. Connect-the-dots.

Either he is a hypocrite for not exclusively homeschooling his kids or he is an idiot for giving them an "inferior" public education.

Take your pick. I don't think he's an idiot.

 

[lionking]

I love these threads. When people in Australia start whining about our politicians, up pop Santorum or Gingritch. Makes our lot look like brilliant statesmen and women, one and all.

 

[Ziggurat]

His claim is that homeschooling is superior to public education, yet when he was a Senator he enrolled his own kids in a public charter school. Connect-the-dots.

When I connect the dots, I conclude that people aren't always in a position to do what they would ideally like to be able to do. That's not hypocrisy. That's reality.

Either he is a hypocrite for not exclusively homeschooling his kids or he is an idiot for giving them an "inferior" public education.

Take your pick. I don't think he's an idiot.

False binary. And because I don't think you are an idiot, I don't think you even believe it really is a binary. I'm just disappointed that you think so little of me that you believed you could convince me that it's really just those two choices, and nothing else.

 

[MattusMaximus]

When I connect the dots, I conclude that people aren't always in a position to do what they would ideally like to be able to do. That's not hypocrisy. That's reality.

Zig, the man is a millionaire (or at least he earns over $500,000 annually). I think he could afford some homeschooling if he really wanted it.

False binary. And because I don't think you are an idiot, I don't think you even believe it really is a binary. I'm just disappointed that you think so little of me that you believed you could convince me that it's really just those two choices, and nothing else.

Perhaps. Suggest something else, taking into account that he most likely had the means to homeschool but chose not to do so.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

It's like when the Tea Party suddenly decided to become upset about "reckless government spending" immediately after Obama was sworn into office. It's not hypocrisy, just an amazingly convenient coincidence.

This. The timing is... interesting, isn't it?

Memory is convenient. ...isn't it? The Tea Party was born after Rick Santelli's rant on CNBC in Feb, 2009. During the Bush administration, many Republicans and Libertarians complained of excessive spending and bailouts. Remember "Porkbusters"?

 

[RandFan]

I love these threads. When people in Australia start whining about our politicians, up pop Santorum or Gingritch. Makes our lot look like brilliant statesmen and women, one and all.

Yeah, thanks GOP.

 

[Ziggurat]

Zig, the man is a millionaire (or at least he earns over $500,000 annually). I think he could afford some homeschooling if he really wanted it.

That's not home-schooling, that's really small private schooling. Home schooling is schooling by the parents, and I'm not sure if you know this, but you can't actually buy time.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

My favorite part is the last couple of paragraphs in the article...

... Santorum did not enroll his kids in local Pennsylvania schools, and he did not home school them: Instead, he enrolled five of them in the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School. The "cyber" school is considered a public school, as Mother Jones notes, where students have to meet state requirements. It also provides free computers and other perks, and the Penn Hills school district ended up shelling out $38,000 per year for the Santorum children.

Santorum reportedly ended up withdrawing his children from the school. He did not repay the district, though the state ultimately paid the district $55,000 to cover the tuition fees.

Yet he sent his own kids to a public school at taxpayer expense. Funny that.

Define "sent". Virtual "public" schools create an interesting middle ground between homeschooling and government schooling. Depending on State and district level restrictions on homeschooling (some States require that a parent have a teaching license, for example), virtual schools offer parents who might not otherwise qualify to homeschool the chance to realize the advantages of homeschooling without jumping through the State's hoops. Also, the parents might not realize the "costs" of virtual schools (some in this thread suggest that Santorum banked the subsidy) if the district paid real-time teachers to supervise online learning.