Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Question asked. What would your answer be?

I recently recieved the following from my brother but have not yet had a chance to answer. I know Brad would want to take a hit at the education part.

I will sure to point out that his sources are probably biased. Take in mind the fact that his school is like Western (hippies everywhere)(sounds terrible)

As a person who is relatively unware of the current politics and what they do well I have found my self at a lost. I have a brother who says Bush is great and I got to a school who say he sucks. So I have decided to start researching political areas of interest to me to determine what is really going on. Those areas include education, the environment, and the economy. So far I have explored education and the environment. My conclusion is he sucks. As far as the environment goes he is quickly undoing many things that took so long to create. He is striping the funding and making new regulations that will allow corperations to more easily spread harmful (untested or limited tested) chemicals through out the environment. The "no child left behind" sounded great on paper but is failing, infact it is actually making it imposible for schools who have been struggeling to get back on tract. I have yet to speak to a public school educator who fully supports it. They either hate it or just admit to having a fear for what it will bring in the future.
So my question to you is why is the bush administration good for this country?
Before you get all upset you should know that I think Kerry was worse. I am just asking for some credible information so I can defend the guy against some of these people. So far I am not finding it. I would love to here about something positive he has done for the environment.

Look forward to your comments.


At 8:10 PM, Blogger Matt said...

Shawn, I know that you could answer this by yourself, but here are my insights on these two areas. The first point would of course be that these are two areas that the liberals have claimed as there's for 50 years, and should be looked at in the vast number of issues most importantly national defense, economic freedom, and upholding the basic social ideas this country was founded on.

On Education...fifty years democrats have controlled the education system...Their lobby is one of(I say the most) powerful in Washington, and our education level has been in a free fall. We have had five years, and they claim Bush is ruining our education system, our education system for the people who need it the most(poor inner city/appalachian students)was disgraceful. Bush has put in a comprehensive plan that will not work in a week, the Democratic plan destroyed the infrastructure and the NEA still has too much power but it is working and in five to ten years the results will be glowing. Already inner city youths test scores are going up and crime among youth is going down. The fact that public school teachers are complaining should come as no suprise, think about it, who likes a boss that tells the truth and says "you know what we have to work harder".

I don't have time to write about the environment but I'll try later, Steven can tear this out.

At 5:15 PM, Blogger Purn said...

Shawn or Matt,

Can you guys edit that post so it fits on one page? I have to scroll over and it takes me forever to check it out.

Answer for you later.


At 2:51 PM, Blogger Shawn said...

How would you like me to edit the paste? On my computer it is all easily on the screen. I can email it to you.

At 2:53 PM, Blogger Shawn said...

I need you email.

At 9:54 AM, Blogger Steve said...

It is messed up on my computer as well. It might be difficult to convince him that basic liberal policies are wrongheaded without some more basic background. If he really wants to learn about this stuff, have him read either "Free to Choose" by Milton Friedman or "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. This lays a good foundation as to why there are opporunitity costs to everything we do, which will help him understand why, for example, the Kyoto treaty might look good on paper but in practice has many negative consequences that outweight the potential positives. I'm not real familiar with all of the environmental concerns other than Kyoto, but from what I can tell any small adjustment to pre-existing policy is considered an outright assult by the RFJ jr's of the world...

Education can be difficult because he needs to understand the NEA, what their motivations are, and why these motivations conflict with what is best for students. It is also important to point out that federal spending has increased by 50% under Bush in just four years, and that the federal govt really only contributes about 10% to education overall (it is mostly states and local govts). I have great examples of funding, where excellent schools like Olentangy where I went spend a fraction of what failing inner cities spend... the point is, additional money isn't always the solution.

All of that being said, you may also want to point out that lately Bush has not been adhering to Friedman principals, especially in the spending area.


Post a Comment

<< Home