Pippi Just Called Us Racists
While S.C. Sen. Robert Ford has made it quite clear that he is “not pussyfooting” around in his support of parental choice, the inevitable attack piece from the crumbling media empire over at La Socialista (a.k.a. The State newspaper) is still into pussyfooting.
In fact, it pussyfoots pretty close to calling everybody involved in the parental choice movement racists in a column that appeared yesterday.
Sort of like the paper’s new editorial page editor Pippi Wrongstockings once called all of us “cancers.”
Anyway, from Pippi’s latest anti-parent rant:
” … his legislation doesn’t help poor kids because the people who are bankrolling the defund-the-public-schools campaign don’t want to help poor kids.”
Really?
Then why on earth does Ford’s bill create a tax credit for individuals and companies that are willing to invest in scholarships for low-income parents?
Seriously, how does that not explicity help poor children – who, incidentally, are being failed by the tens of thousands each year in our current system?
Pippi’s assault also refers to all school choice supporters – well, other than Sen. Ford, obviously – as “suburban Republicans.”
We resent that.
We don’t live in the suburbs. And we’re not Republicans. We’re fiscal conservative social libertarians.
We’re also products of South Carolina’s public schools (ten out of twelve years, anyway).
And unlike Cindi – who assumes a black leader can’t think for himself on this issue – we don’t have a racist bone in our bodies.
We are every bit as invested in the future of a poor, black student from Williamsburg County as we are a poor, white student from Pickens County. Or for that matter a middle class kid in Richland County whose parents are “suburban Republicans,” but who realize that even our best schools are falling further behind the rest of the country.
Why do we not differentiate between these children? Because they all represent our state’s future.
And when one fails, we all fail – and taxpayers have to spend millions cleaning up the mess.
So c’mon Pippi.
Come right out and say it.
Stop playing.
Stop “pussyfooting.”
Stop pretending to be above the “race issue” while you gingerly slap a big ole fat race card down on the table and basically say that we don’t give a damn about poor black kids.
And stop trying to have it both ways – stop saying that parental choice is bad because nobody will benefit from it but then preaching fiscal armageddon for public schools because you say that so many people will benefit from it.
How does that logic work, exactly?
Seriously, put your big government crack pipe down for a minute and stop defending a system that is already conclusively failing our state’s children – something you don’t need elaborate right-wing conspiracy theories to prove.
Here’s the straight dope – the only racists in this debate are the people who have relegated these poor kids to failure for decades now.
Not the people trying to give them a way out of the hole.
Comments
By Fashizzle on March 27th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Preach on it, brother. If the State had bothered to cover last month’s rally at Mount Zion Baptist Church in Cayce they would have seen a church full of African-Americans calling for choice. They also would have heard Dr. Joseph English, the African-American former principal of Busbee Middle School in Lexington County, explain why choice is critical for all students. But the State didn’t show because then they’d be forced to print a photo of educated black leaders supporting choice. That would conflict with their propaganda effort.
By Rodney on March 27th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
AMEN!!!!!
By Maria on March 27th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Will, I am with you brother on this issue. But here is the argument I most often hear that we need to figure out how to rebut: in some of the poor, black counties of the state, there are no private schools located nearby to go to. Like for instance in Hampton County there are apparently no private schools and the closest is in Barnwell County. So what is the answer?
By Shark on March 27th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
wow fashizzle, turn that in a s a letter to editor at la socialista, although it probably will get filed ( in the trash)
By Cooter Brown on March 27th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
When dey starts a’callin’ ye a racist, ye knows ye are close to winnin’! It shews disparashun! I knows Mista Willie is all ’bout da young’uns…
By JC on March 27th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Silly libertarian. Tricks are for kids. The answer to SC’s disgustingly poor attempt to educate ALL children in this state is hardly tax credits. It’s called equal and real funding for all districts.
“Here’s the straight dope – the only racists in this debate are the people who have relegated these poor kids to failure for decades now.” – that’s the only thing you got right in your column. And they sit in the State House year after year, apparenlty voted in by their same kind.
By Mab on March 27th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Home school co-ops Maria! Legions and legions of home schoolers.
[Libs always get puffed-up about the home schoolers, too, for some reason.]
By baker on March 27th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Maria — you’re exactly right. Your side hasn’t figured out how to rebut the problem of limited availability. The Hampton County example is a HUGE — maybe the single biggest — hurdle to making “choice” meaningful for poor kids. And it’s not just Hampton County; even in larger counties, there may be only a few private schools — and NONE that have “open admissions” policies so that struggling students would gain entry.
By James the Foot Solder on March 27th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Good question Maria.
Let’s stick closer to home, shall we?
Has anyone bothered to walk over to Ben Lippen or Hammond and ask them if they would open their doors wider? How many would they accomodate/tolerate? Are they going to take the delinquents, the mentally handicapped, the physically handicapped, the girls that are mothers at 14?
How does taking money from the Richland County schools help the 99% that don’t land a slot at Hammond?
An even better question is how does taking money from the public schools and sending it to the private (that purportedly by freakish statistically improbable coincidences happen to be lily white)schools do anything but line the pockets of the folks trying to keep their kids away from “those” kids?
By Jack on March 27th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Hey Maria and James,
Remember when you could get any color phone you wanted, so long as you wanted black. Now look at the options available. Like phones, educating our kids is not a zero sum static affair. End government monopoly by freeing funding and watch what here-to-fore unavailable options competition produces.
By baker on March 27th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
I went back and read the op-ed in The State. It’s remarkably on the money, I would say. For example, the writer homes right in on the murky “scholarship granting” provision. She writes:
“The legislation does have a convoluted provision that allows people who donate money to provide scholarships to poor kids to claim a tax credit of up to 50 percent. But there’s no guarantee that ’student scholarship organizations’ would even be established and, if they are, no guarantee that they would provide scholarships large enough to do recipients any good, or that the scholarships would go to the kids who need them most.”
By James the Foot Solder on March 27th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Jack – so you basically agree the Ben Lippens and Hammonds are in no position to further your cause.
If not them do share who the “here-to-fores unavailable options” will be?
BTW….the metaphor was you could get any color car you wanted, so long as you wanted black…
By GnuBerry on March 27th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Where did she call you racist?
By BIN News Editorial Staff on March 27th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
sic(k) willie, the simple fact is your voucher scam would only leave those who need help the most even further behind. You know it. Howie knows it.
All you voucher clowns know it. You know the real problems facing education, and so does the SC Legislature. None of you have the courage or will to admit it.
Does that make you “racist”? It sure makes you a voucher clown.
By Cooter Brown on March 27th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Supplie an’ demmand. folks, cut da shit wit da pubic skools an’ competitshun will open da door t’ a hundred different optshuns! Home skoolin’ is da best, but anythin; is betta dan de pubic skools!!!
By Mike on March 27th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
The problem of “limited availability” would solve itself very quickly in the months subsequent to the bill’s passage, but prior to actual enactment. That thing which scares big government cradle-to-grave types the most (the free market) would not let all of those tax credits exist in a vacuum. No one can exactly predict what mix of options would become available, but you can bet that entrepreneurs and frustrated educators would jump. My guess is that we’d see a mix of small, traditional private schools (probably geographically based, especially in poorer areas); the expansion of existing, larger private schools; and some hybrid home schooling co-ops/schools. The education establishment can stick to their claims that it’s the money and/or latent racism, but they know it’s not true. They’re simply defending the enormous educational establishment status quo.
By Cajun Pete on March 27th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Yes’r Massa Brown — dat’s ’bout all dey is dees days.
Sex Ed = pubic skools. Lern ‘em how to re-skin a ‘nanner. De calls ‘em ‘condominums’.
By Silence Dogood on March 28th, 2009 at 2:45 am
The Home School hazard does not seemed to be addressed in anyway. That is, believe it or not, with a several thousand dollar tax credit/voucher incentive to keep their kids out of school, am I the only one see the likelihood that a lot of very poor parents (read morally and parenting wise not necessarily economically) won’t just keep their kids at home, take the money and NOT home school their children?
More to the point on bankrupting the state’s public education system though. No one talks about the fact that before dollar one is offset between what it costs to send a kid to public school vs. private school, the state first has to pick up the tab for all of those thousands and thousands of kids who are already in private school and shell MILLIONS of dollars in tax revenues and credits that already DON’T exist in the budget. That is before even one kid transfers. Everytime I have ever brought up that topic on the “Voice for School Choice” blog my comments always get deleted. Reason, they don’t care about the facts or having an open and honest debate whether or not the government should fund a private school system (obviously the term private woudl somewhat of a misnomer after that), they just have an agenda to push.
Look, they have money to throw around don’t get me wrong. Hell, they just bought Sen. Ford – but I have to admit he was probably pretty cheap compared to what his colleagues might charge to another group for a similar turn around.
By male sapphist on March 28th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Sic
I haven’t seen her in a while… is Pippi still cute? or has she succumbed to liberal feminist woman’s disease? I hate to think that her fuchsia tights are now filled with Bella Abzug like trunks.
By JustWondern on March 28th, 2009 at 11:07 am
It would seem that ‘Cooter’ may be a victim of home skoolin.
By Pat Hendrix on March 28th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Devil is in the details – open up Bishop England to poor kids in Mt. P, okay, great idea. If not, then what’s the point other than to give tax breaks to people who already have kids in private schools? I’m doubting that most of these private schools will like the idea of tossing their doors open to poor kids that are already far behind thie Middle Class and Upper Class piers.
And will the private schools now start educating kids with disabilities? I doubt it.
Face it, there is an enormous amount of data with regards to who does well in private versus public schools. It’s about soci-economics, not Inez or Rex. SC is a terribly poor and backwards place. Expect the climb out of the hole to be the equivalent of climbing Everest.
By James the Foot Soldier on March 28th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
And here’s the dirty little secret: private schools underperform in standardized testing relative to their cherry picked classrooms.
By Annie Snelling on March 28th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Are you guys serious. It doesn’t matter where you live all are granted a free education. How about putting the blame where it belongs. Parents. I have 3 kids. When I lived in Illinois my kids went to private school.You may say okay I am a rich little Yankee that could afford it. No not true I worked 3 jobs. Why did i decide to send them to private school. PUBLIC SCHOOLS HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO PUNISH KIDS might hurt thier self-esteem Shit give the paper to sign and spank thier asses which I did and which they got. Never hurt them at all. Moved to SC son went to Lexington high, Daughter was home-schooled as she was a gymnast, and other son is in Public School in Illinois. PARENTS PARENTS are the reason many of these kids fail not our Senators, Not our Teachers WE AS PARENTS are to blame with a lot of help not being able to discipline our own children. Spare the Rod Spoil the child that is what we have done. Granted some schools under-achieve and people grip it’s a poor section of town it’s all brown people, teachers are racisits. Give me a break Nobody told you to live there. Crap I have 3 brown Grandchildren and 1 brown neice and 1 brown nephew and guess what thier daddy’s are nowhere around. Parents need to Parent that is the PROBLEM
By male sapphist on March 29th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Should the money not follow the child? If SC gummint education were a car the state lemon law could protect you….but we have to pay top dollar for extremely poor results.
By BIN News Editorial Staff on March 29th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
willie, willie, we know you! We’ve known you for years. You’re blatantly racist when you can get away with it. You know it! But you can’t admit it.
By Jennifer on March 29th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Baker, Maria, et al: Mike is right. The reason there are fewer schools in lower-income areas is because there are no consumers. Turn parents into consumers, you open up the door for options. Do bad private schools exist? Of course. But when they are bad, they lose students and they shut down. That never, ever happens to a public school. There is plenty of fraud, waste, scandal — you name it, it happens in SC public schools. But those schools continue to exist and students are forced to attend them. No one is forced to attend a private school.
Also, “rich” kids are not the ones who flock out of the public schools when choice is introduced. That hasn’t happened anywhere else. The “creaming” argument is a red herring. In fact, wealthier kids are ALREADY in private schools. It is low-income and special needs kids who jump at the options.
Baker, here’s something YOUR side has never been able to argue: school choice has not shut down one single school district in the world. They have not “lost” all their students, or their money, or anything else. Nothing changes for them, except that some of them have gotten better.
As for the funding argument, pay attention folks: the poor districts SPEND MORE per child than the wealthier district — they are the highest Per Pupil Expenditures in the state, period. In fact, about $13,000 per child. You can buy a great private school education for that — Hammond, Heathwood…you could have your choice with that kind of money.
The average private school tuition in our state is about $4,000. The high-end schools are the ones opponents of choice offer as the only options. Not true. There are lots of small schools educating children for much less money. Much, much less. And doing it better than our best schools.
Parents may not always be perfect, but contrary to popular educrat opinion, it is not their job to teach their kids anymore than it is the job of teachers to raise them, teach them values and give them “self-esteem.” Schools are supposed to teach kids. That is what they are there for.
Let’s stop making excuses for failing schools. Let parents choose. Let’s be a world-class delivery system for all children, and allow them any and every opportunity possible. We have nothing at all to lose. Not one thing. Except, perhaps, that lowest-in-the nation slot….
By calhoun faws on March 30th, 2009 at 4:47 am
school choice is just another liberal big government program. Why should my tax money pay to help send your kid to a private school? What’s next, shall we give you a tax credit if you choose to enroll in a private security plan for your home because you think the police are not good enough?
All the Sanford/Ford plan will do in increase government and bring its regulations into private schools via court decisions, like similar measures did in higher ed. No wonder Ford supports the idea, he is always been a liberal big government type.
I wish Howard Rich and his buddies would spend money on actually reforming public education instead of spending money to promote bigger government intrusion into our lives.
Make no mistake about it, if the Sanford/Ford plan comes to pass, government spending will increase and government regulation will come eventually to private schools, giving parents really no real choices at all.