In the last week, political discussion has focused on ads from supporters of Mitt Romney denouncing President Obama's claim that entrepreneurs didn't do it all on their own. Why has this struck a nerve? The Republican candidate will also have to pick a Vice Presidential candidate. Who would you like him to pick? And James Holmes made a court appearance in Aurora, Colorado and speculation is that he will plead not guilty by reason of insanity. But is it too hard to be declared insane?
Defunding of public education has been occurring for DECADES. The budget cutting has been deliberate in order to crash the educational system and to attempt to justify the turning over of public dollars to privately run "charter" schools that cost three times as much as a public school. Here's a thought: just put all the money BACK into public schools and make sure the public school budgets allow for the inflation increases that occur every year.
Now here is where there "deregulation" is hypocritical. If the deregulators wanted to deregulate, then why did they directly tie federal funding of schools to the No Child Left Behind Tests to test scores? This is HUGE regulation! Why? Because the Bush family is friends and also has ownership in the organizations that administer the standardized tests! You want to talk about a business deliberately created to benefit the few in the form of billions of dollars every semester/year paid for by federal tax dollars, therefore, making public education on of the most REGULATED entities in the states!Catherine Buchanan –Jul 31, 2012 22:14:21 PM
Over the past several decades, per student funding (in inflation-adjusted dollars) has more than doubled. Are the results better? Of course not, so money is evidently *not* the problem.Tom Hurst –Aug 1, 2012 10:25:29 AM
What school systems are you talking about, Tom? Just because per student funding has more than doubled does not mean that the amount of dollars that is granted per student is the actual amount that has been needed in order to make sure the student has a decent education. Catherine Buchanan –Aug 1, 2012 12:21:00 PM
I'm simply observing that national statistics show that "X" dollars of per pupil of school funding in, say, 1960 resulted in well-educated students. Today, more than twice as much (inflation-adjusted) money per student generally produces poorly educated students. Indeed, studies routinely show that students of 50 years ago were, broadly speaking, several years ahead of their modern peers, so the reality is that performance has *decreased* dramatically at the same time that funding has *increased* dramatically. Is money really the problem?Tom Hurst –Aug 1, 2012 12:41:55 PM
Let's talk about deregulation and what it did for the airline industry in the 1980s with the deregulation of the maintenance of airplanes. Doesn't anyone remember the fuselages flying off and people getting sucked out of the airplanes into the sky? I guess people seem to have forgotten about the deregulation of the energy market in the State of California, the regulations written by Kenneth Ley, the head of ENRON, whom Dick Cheney authorized writing the regulations. Before the deregulation, California was $12 billion in the black. After the deregulation, California was $15 billion in the red. Do we seriously want to deregulate our public drinking water utilities to be taken over by private corporations, such as Bechtel, whom did not provide a single drop of water for the people in Bolivia and were literally kicked out of the country?Catherine Buchanan –Jul 31, 2012 22:06:46 PM
Let's see... on your show I heard a representative of the left, and one of the right. Trouble is, as evidenced by words and actions, both major parties and both presidential candidates are - excepting what I consider minor details - essentially the same: both love big government, foreign wars and entanglements, the escalating American police state, and printing money; and both hate liberty, the 2nd amendment, true civil rights, Constitutional government, and sound money. Your partisan hacks are, to my mind, just wasting their time discussing irrelevant differences.Tom Hurst –Jul 31, 2012 21:56:31 PM
About public schools vs. private schools/ voucher system: The idea that if someone takes their children out of public schools and puts them in private schools, they shouldn't have to pay taxes that support public schools anymore is a sure-fire way to kill the public school system! And it also makes sure that the wealthy are educated and the less wealthy don't have a chance at getting a decent education. It's about all of us. I don't even have kids, and would never suggest that I shouldn't have to pay school taxes. I like smart kids of all social classes.Barbara Raulston –Jul 31, 2012 20:58:51 PM
Some questions to consider: Why should person A who chose to have no children pay for a service consumed and benefiting person B? What is inherently bad about letting government schools disappear? Surely that won't happen unless the private schools are better and/or cheaper? And, finally, don't you think that enterprising companies will provide education at all price levels? Walmart comes to mind, providing quality goods and services at a fair price, not because they like poor people, but because they can make money off of them. And that is not a bad thing!Tom Hurst –Jul 31, 2012 22:04:43 PM
Government regulations ensure we have clean water and clean air. Unless there are laws and fines to keep them in line, I don't believe corporations that pollute would regulate themselves if the costs of cut into profits.Barbara Raulston –Jul 31, 2012 20:48:26 PM
Ron's comments show how divided we truly are
and how the Right will always find a fault in Obama, and fight him on every issue.
James –Jul 31, 2012 20:37:05 PM
Seriously, did Futrell just say IF America causes wars? IF???? Is there any other country even remotely close to starting wars as this country? Any other countries that are in a constant state of war, as we basically are? Any other countries as hated for our bullying? Wake up, Ron! This is not America circa 1946!art ruehls –Jul 31, 2012 09:58:58 AM
Both parties are bought and paid for by special interest groups. These special interest groups have the country exactly like the need it to be to rake in massive profits. That is why policies hardly ever change.
My guess for VP is Jed Bush. I am not happy about another Bush being in such a high position, but the military industrial complex wants more war and the Bush family is gold in their pocket.Doug –Jul 31, 2012 09:58:49 AM
Futrell.. you obviously have been against Obama from the "get go" and abortion did it. A fetus is a "citizen"?? There is nothing Obama would say that would be positive for you. You want to go back to the Bush agenda with deregulation etc. Do you take any resposibility for the wars etc of that administration? And you have the gall to insinuate that Romney is a pull yourself up by the bootstraps individual because he gave money to BYU to build a building in honor of his father.. Futrell, you are an idiot who obviously has a platform that you do not deserve.Will Schroeder –Jul 31, 2012 09:56:20 AM
I want to comment on charter schools vs public school. Traditional public schools have to educate every student who is eligible to enroll. They can't counsel students out, as many charters do, or select who they want. This is not an excuse for bad schools. But it is part of the reason that the job of the traditional public school system, which still educates about 95 percent of all schoolkids, is far more complicated than many reformers today would have you believe.
When it comes to charter schools Fiscal inefficiency, Schools are funded based on enrollment and charters mean loss of funding for traditional K-12 schools. Unfair playing field. In theory, charter must open their doors to all. In reality, charters can target their audience -- a rigorious curriculum, for instance, will discourage academic slackers; lack of transportation will filter out low-income families; lack of special education services can discourage special-education enrollment. Less transparency. Because charter schools are run by private institutions, they are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act. Less local control and accountability. Less diversityDarby Fredrickson –Jul 31, 2012 09:54:00 AM
I'm a retired scientist. The government was essential in our creative process. The NIH funded our successful research for new cancer treatments that the drug companies felt would not provide adequate return investment. Development is a collaborative effort with government supported infrastructure and laws greasing the innovative process not hindering it.Lynn Lanier –Jul 31, 2012 09:52:34 AM
Can you really be sitting here in a place where deregulation destroyed the economy and talk about whether more or less government is needed right now? Republicans don't believe in luck or in privilege when it comes to themselves. If they "succeed" (exploitation of others or the environment is fine) it's all them.
Childish? Obama's remark was something that far more Americans need to hear. Maybe he could've articulated it better, but the word "childish" does not apply. It is Republicans who are childish in their thinking, compared to Democrats.
And be aware that I will not be voting for Obama a second time due to his failure to really fight for what he obviously understands to be important. He can say it, but he's still a corporate shill like the rest. He understands what going on and has sold us out, which is horrible.
There is not a very strong anti-government sentiment.
Socialism? Bring it on! I'd move to one of the Western European countries or Australia or Canada in a heartbeat, if I could. We're on the road to fascism here.
Please put a timer on Futrell. He's really hogging the conversation.
art ruehls –Jul 31, 2012 09:48:00 AM
The Republicans will not be happy until we have a feudal-type system of serfdom in this country. That's what they're about, and Ron Futrell is part of the problem.
And there he goes again - and do you notice that he's hogging the conversation? - "I want smaller government, but I want government to tell people they can't have abortions. And I'll pretend like I'm only talking about late-term abortions."
Geez, this guy Futrell is making me rethink my choice to vote third party. Maybe I'll vote for Obama after all.
More Ian, more Amy, less Ron, please.
art ruehls –Jul 31, 2012 09:42:58 AM
I can't believe they are going to let that lie about infanticide go!Barbara Allen –Jul 31, 2012 09:41:54 AM
Waiting for Superman is propaganda. Mr. Futrell managed to talk about it without bashing teachers, but that's what it was about: anti-union propaganda.
justateacher –Jul 31, 2012 09:41:50 AM
The whole discussion is so silly. If the President had said churches, parents etc.etc.etc, Ron would have said he left out the dog and the cat. In this whole discussion, we have thrown common sense out the window for political point scoring. Tax breaks and government protection of overseas investment protect American companies who invest overseas. Government tax laws make it beneficial for businesses to open off shore accounts. Tax laws allow perople like Romney to pay less taxes than the average "Joe" on his enormous income. We have become so small-minded that we cannot accept even obvious truths. I wonder of Ron would see things the same way if he lived in Iran or China. alda –Jul 31, 2012 09:34:25 AM
So, now according to your guest, not only does the President get in trouble for words that are obviously taken out of context and edited, he is wrong for things he DOESN'T say. Is there no end to the lack of journalistic integrity. Jim Griese –Jul 31, 2012 09:29:47 AM