4/07: Letters to the editor

Full story: Orlando Sentinel

I read with interest the article in Sunday's Sentinel about the clueless kids who are controlling air traffic at Orlando International Airport .
Comments
1 - 20 of 159 Comments Last updated Apr 23, 2009
First Prev
of 8
Next Last
Support Biscet

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Apr 7, 2009
 
For all the BHO sympathizers who think it's no big deal to ease relations with Cuba, here is a perfect example. Why would the Black Caucus give Raul and Fidel cover for their regime? A free cigar and a free vacation. Pathetic politicians.
Democrats Have No Brains

Winter Springs, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Apr 7, 2009
 
If we will just accept the fact that the American taxpayers and most importantly property owners can no longer be expected to foot the entire cost of public education for K-12 level schools and take the necessary steps to put the burden squarely on the shoulders of the parents of each kid enrolled, parents could then be in a position, as they write the checks, to put their kid where they want their money to go. The money should follow the kid, not the other way around. If I pay, I say. Let tax money be only enough to guarantee truly poor kids a chance at an education and I underline chance because I feel if kids don't take advantage of their chance, the school system should not have to keep them enrolled so that they can disrupt the classes. No automatic progression, no phony diplomas for idiots. Education is a privilege not an entitlement.
Harry Coverston

Sanford, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Apr 7, 2009
 
RE: Parents deciding which school their child attends, not which school a government bureaucrat wants a child to attend, is closer to the ideals that our country was founded on.

Actually, this is inaccurate. The purpose of public education in America has always been to insure an educated public, not to provide consumer choices for parents focused only on their own children. The ideal the country was founded upon was an educated citizenry as a condition precedent for democracy. If you want to actually further the ideals our country was founded upon, work to insure that the public schools are the best they can be. By definition that excludes defunding them to fund doctrinally driven diploma mills.
NWGuy

Federal Way, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Apr 7, 2009
 
In Seattle, public school is decidedly less expensive than any option other than home school. Vouchers would have to be way more than the cost of public school per kid in order to make it possible for most kids to leave the public school system.

On top of that, many public schools here are competitive with the top schools that choose their kids based on academic testing, interviews, etc.

On top of that, there isn't any classroom space outside of public schools, because they're full.

On top of that, America can't afford to increase the number of its undereducated citizens. Giving up on education is NOT an option for any nation interested in being competitive.

So I'd say your "money follows the kid, dump those who can't afford it" idea has a few holes in it.
Republicans Have No Honor

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Apr 7, 2009
 
Democrats Have No Brains wrote:
If we will just accept the fact that the American taxpayers and most importantly property owners can no longer be expected to foot the entire cost of public education for K-12 level schools and take the necessary steps to put the burden squarely on the shoulders of the parents of each kid enrolled, parents could then be in a position, as they write the checks, to put their kid where they want their money to go. The money should follow the kid, not the other way around. If I pay, I say. Let tax money be only enough to guarantee truly poor kids a chance at an education and I underline chance because I feel if kids don't take advantage of their chance, the school system should not have to keep them enrolled so that they can disrupt the classes. No automatic progression, no phony diplomas for idiots. Education is a privilege not an entitlement.
Article IX, section 1, subsection a of the Florida Constitution:

The education of children is a fundamental value of the people of the State of Florida. It is, therefore, a paramount duty of the state to make adequate provision for the education of all children residing within its borders. Adequate provision shall be made by law for a uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools that allows students to obtain a high quality education and for the establishment, maintenance, and operation of institutions of higher learning and other public education programs that the needs of the people may require.
Republicans Have No Honor

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Apr 7, 2009
 
Support Biscet wrote:
For all the BHO sympathizers who think it's no big deal to ease relations with Cuba, here is a perfect example. Why would the Black Caucus give Raul and Fidel cover for their regime? A free cigar and a free vacation. Pathetic politicians.
Pathetic is the cowtowing that is done that keeps the uesless embargo in place for the votes for Cuban-Americans here in Florida.
Grandma Fudd

Winter Springs, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Apr 7, 2009
 
Republicans Have No Honor wrote:
<quoted text>
Article IX, section 1, subsection a of the Florida Constitution:
The education of children is a fundamental value of the people of the State of Florida. It is, therefore, a paramount duty of the state to make adequate provision for the education of all children residing within its borders. Adequate provision shall be made by law for a uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools that allows students to obtain a high quality education and for the establishment, maintenance, and operation of institutions of higher learning and other public education programs that the needs of the people may require.
You Marxists phonograph players keep bringing out that tired, outmoded, obsolete Constitutional amendment every time someone points out the futility of beating a dead horse and trying to wring more blood out of turnips.

Face it, taxes aren't sufficient anymore for EVERYONE to get a teat at the welfare sow's belly. It is high time we recognize this, overturn the amendement, get on the path to funding our schools by tuition and fees paid by those USING THE SCHOOLS and let grandma and grandpa continue to be assessed a small amount so we don't drop truly poor kids out of the safety net. I agree one hundred percent we don't want a bunch of Arab rag head ignoramuses running around firing AK-47's in the air because they have no jobs to go to but at the same time, we have to stop taxing seniors out of their homes so we can provide a free lunch to kids of parents who can buy Skidoos, Mercedes 60 inch plasma TVs and go to the Riviera every Summer.
Grandma Fudd

Winter Springs, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Apr 7, 2009
 
NWGuy wrote:
In Seattle, public school is decidedly less expensive than any option other than home school. Vouchers would have to be way more than the cost of public school per kid in order to make it possible for most kids to leave the public school system.
On top of that, many public schools here are competitive with the top schools that choose their kids based on academic testing, interviews, etc.
On top of that, there isn't any classroom space outside of public schools, because they're full.
On top of that, America can't afford to increase the number of its undereducated citizens. Giving up on education is NOT an option for any nation interested in being competitive.
So I'd say your "money follows the kid, dump those who can't afford it" idea has a few holes in it.
If you read first before commenting you'd see nobody is proposing to drop anyone who cannot afford a basic education, although to be honest, in today's highly competitive environment, a HS diploma might get you a job picking up yard trash riding on the back of a garbage truck.

We only want to see two things: Our money following our child to the school of our choice and a fair tuition and fee schedule established for parents of each child enrolled who can and should be paying for them to be educated. You breed 'em, you feed 'em, you dress 'em, you educate 'em and you keep 'em safe, secure and well. I know that this is a strange new philosophy for "breeders" who aren't much more advanced genetically than the squirrels and rabbits, dogs and cats who have perfected reproduction but don't seem to have perfected responsibility for your offspring any further than the birds outside my window who fly off and leave their young by the time the young can glide out of the nest to the ground. This is a "Gimme, gimme, gimme" society and getting worse daily. Ayn Rand was so right and soon all those who pay taxes and have been supporting this fragile paper airplane are going to flee the coop and leave you parasites to flounder around like caught fish on a hot concrete sidewalk.
Democrats Have No Brains

Winter Springs, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Apr 7, 2009
 
Article IX, section 1, subsection a of the Florida Constitution:

The education of children is a fundamental value of the people of the State of Florida. It is, therefore, a paramount duty of the state to make adequate provision for the education of all children residing within its borders. Adequate provision shall be made by law for a uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of affordable public schools that allows students to obtain a high quality education and for the establishment, maintenance, and operation of institutions of higher learning and other public education programs that the needs of the people may require.

You only have to change one (1) word to make tuition and fee support practical and legal. Change "Free" to "Affordable". Tax support can be readjusted to fill in the necessary safety net under poor children whose parents cannot afford the basic tuition and fees to send their kid to school. Maybe too, as others have suggested that it might weigh on would be parent's minds before they "spread their pollen" so to speak that the result of tonight's fifteen minutes will result in a lengthy commitment to responsibly caring for all the needs of the offspring we're about to start tonight? Financially, spiritually, morally ? Hey let's think this over, these things can cost money over time?
The Forgotten Man

Hollywood, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Apr 7, 2009
 
Harry Coverston wrote:
RE: Parents deciding which school their child attends, not which school a government bureaucrat wants a child to attend, is closer to the ideals that our country was founded on.
Actually, this is inaccurate. The purpose of public education in America has always been to insure an educated public, not to provide consumer choices for parents focused only on their own children. The ideal the country was founded upon was an educated citizenry as a condition precedent for democracy. If you want to actually further the ideals our country was founded upon, work to insure that the public schools are the best they can be. By definition that excludes defunding them to fund doctrinally driven diploma mills.
You might want to read your history. Public schools are pretty new. All our founding fathers were home schooled (or private schooled).

Our public school system is a failure and needs to be scraped or reformed. We spend way to much for way to little. Our schools cost a lot of money but little of it gets to the teachers.

(I am not blaming our teachers I am blaming the system they are stuck working in.)
The Forgotten Man

Hollywood, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Apr 7, 2009
 
NWGuy wrote:
In Seattle, public school is decidedly less expensive than any option other than home school. Vouchers would have to be way more than the cost of public school per kid in order to make it possible for most kids to leave the public school system.
On top of that, many public schools here are competitive with the top schools that choose their kids based on academic testing, interviews, etc.
On top of that, there isn't any classroom space outside of public schools, because they're full.
On top of that, America can't afford to increase the number of its undereducated citizens. Giving up on education is NOT an option for any nation interested in being competitive.
So I'd say your "money follows the kid, dump those who can't afford it" idea has a few holes in it.
States need to compete with ideas. WA State has different problems and solution then FL. The Fed shouldn't be dumping one size fits all solutions on the 50 States.

The current system is failing and there is no fix for every situation. Let the States and communities figure out what they need and learn from others solution. Release the federal money so the best solutions can be found for the different problems across the States and their communities.
Glen

Saint Cloud, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Apr 7, 2009
 
Grandma Fudd wrote:
<quoted text>
If you read first before commenting you'd see nobody is proposing to drop anyone who cannot afford a basic education, although to be honest, in today's highly competitive environment, a HS diploma might get you a job picking up yard trash riding on the back of a garbage truck.
We only want to see two things: Our money following our child to the school of our choice and a fair tuition and fee schedule established for parents of each child enrolled who can and should be paying for them to be educated. You breed 'em, you feed 'em, you dress 'em, you educate 'em and you keep 'em safe, secure and well. I know that this is a strange new philosophy for "breeders" who aren't much more advanced genetically than the squirrels and rabbits, dogs and cats who have perfected reproduction but don't seem to have perfected responsibility for your offspring any further than the birds outside my window who fly off and leave their young by the time the young can glide out of the nest to the ground. This is a "Gimme, gimme, gimme" society and getting worse daily. Ayn Rand was so right and soon all those who pay taxes and have been supporting this fragile paper airplane are going to flee the coop and leave you parasites to flounder around like caught fish on a hot concrete sidewalk.
Wow. Ignorance of this magnitude is rare, but it does seem to be a common theme in the south.
Glen

Saint Cloud, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Apr 7, 2009
 
Democrats Have No Brains wrote:
Article IX, section 1, subsection a of the Florida Constitution:
The education of children is a fundamental value of the people of the State of Florida. It is, therefore, a paramount duty of the state to make adequate provision for the education of all children residing within its borders. Adequate provision shall be made by law for a uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of affordable public schools that allows students to obtain a high quality education and for the establishment, maintenance, and operation of institutions of higher learning and other public education programs that the needs of the people may require.
You only have to change one (1) word to make tuition and fee support practical and legal. Change "Free" to "Affordable". Tax support can be readjusted to fill in the necessary safety net under poor children whose parents cannot afford the basic tuition and fees to send their kid to school. Maybe too, as others have suggested that it might weigh on would be parent's minds before they "spread their pollen" so to speak that the result of tonight's fifteen minutes will result in a lengthy commitment to responsibly caring for all the needs of the offspring we're about to start tonight? Financially, spiritually, morally ? Hey let's think this over, these things can cost money over time?
Follow this plan and have more of you around...

Ya, that's gonna happen.

Lemme give you a fact. An Educated society is mutually beneficial to all members of society.

You cannot argue with it, deny it, or fight it.

One can only hope you did not infect your children with this nonsense.
Fred

Orlando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Apr 7, 2009
 
I think Terry Maley needs to remember that ultimately, it was up to Pres. Bush to either sign or veto the spending bills that came his way. Pres. Bush signed those bills & the spending that went with it into law; therefore in the fianal analysis, it was Pres. Bush's fault for getting us into this mess. It's part of the deal that goes with being President- You can take the credit when things go well, and you have to take the blame when things go badly.
James

Orlando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Apr 7, 2009
 
Glen wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. Ignorance of this magnitude is rare, but it does seem to be a common theme in the south.
Yeah, and Grandma Fudd's usually a strict constructionist when it come to the American & Florida Constitutions.

Since: Apr 08

Butler, New Jersey

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Apr 7, 2009
 
Harry Coverston wrote:
RE: Parents deciding which school their child attends, not which school a government bureaucrat wants a child to attend, is closer to the ideals that our country was founded on.
Actually, this is inaccurate. The purpose of public education in America has always been to insure an educated public, not to provide consumer choices for parents focused only on their own children. The ideal the country was founded upon was an educated citizenry as a condition precedent for democracy. If you want to actually further the ideals our country was founded upon, work to insure that the public schools are the best they can be. By definition that excludes defunding them to fund doctrinally driven diploma mills.
Thanks so much for your on target analysis of the public education system. To decentralize to the extent that many people would like using vouchers, would not only drive the literacy rates lower overall, which would be a step backward for so many young people. There is already enough separation between the Haves and the Have nots! Support and involvement in making the public school system better by the same people who have the time to home school their kids would surely improve public education for all.
Margo

Sanford, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Apr 7, 2009
 
Harry Coverston wrote:
RE: Parents deciding which school their child attends, not which school a government bureaucrat wants a child to attend, is closer to the ideals that our country was founded on.
Actually, this is inaccurate. The purpose of public education in America has always been to insure an educated public, not to provide consumer choices for parents focused only on their own children. The ideal the country was founded upon was an educated citizenry as a condition precedent for democracy. If you want to actually further the ideals our country was founded upon, work to insure that the public schools are the best they can be. By definition that excludes defunding them to fund doctrinally driven diploma mills.
As has already been pointed out government funding 'free' schooling is quite new, dating from the 19th c. as I recall.

Note the reference to 'doctrinally driven diploma mills'(nice alliteration btw). That's what this is really all about, keeping education (ie: indoctrination) in the hands of the Liberal government.

Since: Apr 08

Butler, New Jersey

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Apr 7, 2009
 
NWGuy wrote:
In Seattle, public school is decidedly less expensive than any option other than home school. Vouchers would have to be way more than the cost of public school per kid in order to make it possible for most kids to leave the public school system.
On top of that, many public schools here are competitive with the top schools that choose their kids based on academic testing, interviews, etc.
On top of that, there isn't any classroom space outside of public schools, because they're full.
On top of that, America can't afford to increase the number of its undereducated citizens. Giving up on education is NOT an option for any nation interested in being competitive.
So I'd say your "money follows the kid, dump those who can't afford it" idea has a few holes in it.
You are trying to use "Logic" and "Educated Sense" with these people who can't think past their own selfish, individualistic concept of living. Good post NWGuy!
otownnole

Orlando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Apr 7, 2009
 
Fred wrote:
I think Terry Maley needs to remember that ultimately, it was up to Pres. Bush to either sign or veto the spending bills that came his way. Pres. Bush signed those bills & the spending that went with it into law; therefore in the fianal analysis, it was Pres. Bush's fault for getting us into this mess. It's part of the deal that goes with being President- You can take the credit when things go well, and you have to take the blame when things go badly.
I am sure you also take the same stance on the spending bill Obama signed with 9000 earmarks.

He insisted the bill must signal an "end to the old way of doing business."

But Obama signed it.
Margo

Sanford, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Apr 7, 2009
 
2008bill wrote:
<quoted text>
You are trying to use "Logic" and "Educated Sense" with these people who can't think past their own selfish, individualistic concept of living. Good post NWGuy!
Ooooh Individualism! The ultimate Evillll! Collectivism is SO much more moral and successful!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••