SC

Just Say “No” To Molly Spearman

LIBERAL ESTABLISHMENT ICON CANNOT BE PERMITTED TO WIN “REPUBLICAN” NOMINATION FOR SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION Her political signs – ubiquitous across the South Carolina landscape – are designed to remind you of that sweet-tasting gum you liked chewing as a kid. And Molly Spearman – the candidate being promoted by these…

LIBERAL ESTABLISHMENT ICON CANNOT BE PERMITTED TO WIN “REPUBLICAN” NOMINATION FOR SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION

Her political signs – ubiquitous across the South Carolina landscape – are designed to remind you of that sweet-tasting gum you liked chewing as a kid. And Molly Spearman – the candidate being promoted by these “flavorful” signs – is sweet as she can be.

At least at first …

Once you’ve chewed awhile on what Spearman is selling, though, the distasteful truth starts to take hold – a rank toxicity lingering like a bad taste in your mouth.  An acidic, overpowering, week-old garbage taste.

It is the taste of failure – specifically the soul-crushing, future-shattering, increasingly costly failure of South Carolina’s government-run school system, which for decades has conned taxpayers into pumping billions of additional dollars into its gaping bureaucratic insatiability.

All “for the children,” of course … and yet the children never seem to show any progress.

That’s the racket Spearman – the most powerful apologist for this failed establishment – is selling.  And each year the price tag for her bill of goods grows larger.

We addressed Spearman’s “Republican” candidacy for S.C. Superintendent of Education a few months ago, but now she has positioned herself just one election away from a victory that would have far reaching consequences for the South Carolina GOP and for the future of academic achievement in the Palmetto State.

Obviously this website doesn’t care about what happens to the “Republican” brand. We’ve been done with the GOP for some time now – and will continue to urge voters to explore genuine free market alternatives as opposed to swallowing the rhetoric of big government “bipartisanship.”  Also, as we’ve noted previously, the office of state superintendent is constitutionally limited in its scope and authority – with real power over education policy vested in the S.C. General Assembly and local education bureaucracies.

So why does this race matter?

For starters it represents a real gut check for what’s left of the state’s GOP – as Spearman is easily the most liberal “Republican” ever to seek office at the statewide level.

For years Spearman has run the uber-leftist S.C. Association of School Administrators (SCASA) – a taxpayer-subsidized lobbying group for the state’s bureaucratic class. That’s right … a liberal bureaucratic union leader is seeking South Carolina’s top education post as a Republican.

That’s an important distinction to keep in mind, too. Spearman doesn’t represent students, teachers or parents – her group exists for the sole purpose of protecting overpaid, underachieving administrators. In fact teachers consistently get the short shrift from Spearman’s group, which entertains administrators on lavish summer holidays paid for with taxpayer funds.

Spearman’s liberal roots are well-documented. The Saluda native won election to the S.C. House in 1992 as a Democrat and only switched parties when it became clear she was going to lose her seat. She’s donated to numerous Democratic candidates – including the last four Democrats who held or sought the office she is currently seeking (Inex Tenenbaum, Jim Rex,  Frank Holleman and Mike Anthony). In fact on the key issues in the current race –  parental choice, classroom accountability, tax hikes for schools, teacher evaluation standards, etc. – Spearman has adopted precisely the same positions as the two Democrats vying for their party’s nomination.

Not only that she has gone on the record repeatedly in the past supporting tax hikes, spending increases and has spent the last five years blocking a lawsuit aimed at exposing how much taxpayer largesse her organization receives – and what it does with that money.

Also, when S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford attempted to block the state’s receipt of federal “stimulus” funds in 2009, it was Spearman who filed the lawsuit that ultimately forced him to accept them.

Spearman is the definition of a tax-and-spend liberal. She isn’t a “Republican in Name Only.” She’s openly campaigning as a Democrat … in the “Republican” primary.

Again, though … what do we care? Well, as it relates to the GOP, we don’t care … one bit.

But Spearman’s runoff election on June 24 against establishment Republican Sally Atwater isn’t just about the future direction of the GOP – it’s about the tens of thousands of South Carolina school children trapped in expensive government “failure factories” (like the schools down in Jasper County). It’s also about the hundreds of thousands of South Carolina school children who remain stuck in “good” government-run schools that continue to slip further behind our regional and national peers.

Things have gotten so bad in the Palmetto State that low-income, at-risk students in Florida are actually doing better on nationally administered standardized tests than the average South Carolina student – a testament to Florida’s embrace of parental choice programs in the late 1990s.

Which brings us to the real reason Spearman must be stopped …

If elected, she would turn the S.C. Department of Education (SCDE) into nothing more than a Ministry of Misinformation against the parental choice movement – using her bully pulpit (and millions of dollars of your tax money) to wage nonstop propaganda warfare against the very market-based reforms that have succeeded in Florida.

Why on earth would she do that? Because again … her loyalty is to the demands of those who profit from the system, not the needs of those who are supposed to be served by it.

South Carolina has taken – at long last – its first fledging steps toward school choice. And while current S.C. Superintendent Mick Zais hasn’t been as aggressive a proponent of those steps as we would have liked, he’s supported them. Spearman would throw everything at her disposal against this program –  hoping to kill school choice in its infancy before it gains additional public support.

This website has not been especially supportive of the campaign of Sally Atwater – mostly owing to the infamy of her late husband – but any woman who raised three daughters on her own while maintaining her career deserves at least some consideration. Most importantly, Atwater would support the official GOP position in favor of parental choice – not work to undermine it like the Democrat Spearman.

For these reasons, we encourage anyone who supports market-based academic reforms to cast their votes in the June 24 “Republican” runoff election for Sally Atwater.

Related posts

SC

South Carolina’s Blue Crab Bill On Hold

Dylan Nolan
SC

Residents: Forgotten Gullah Cemetery Desecrated During ‘Clean-up’

Callie Lyons
SC

Southern Charm Saga: Kathryn Dennis Arrested For DUI

FITSNews

210 comments

Liz June 16, 2014 at 11:19 am

Anyone considering voting for Sally Atwater should listed to this clip from the Russ Cassell show: http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2014/06/14/sally-atwater-word-fm/

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia June 16, 2014 at 11:30 am

HOLY FUCKING SHIT, Liz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That was awful!!!!!!! Everyone needs to check out your link. Seriously, can we write-in Mick Zais?

Decisions, decisions….

Reply
Smirks June 16, 2014 at 12:08 pm

Just handcuff him to the desk when he tries to leave on his last day.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia June 16, 2014 at 12:43 pm

Hmmm, might be a good idea, Smirks. This is increasingly what we are faced with, a choice between a turd and a piece of shit, aka no choice at all.

Reply
junior justice June 16, 2014 at 6:55 pm

Okay, okay, okay… I could not resist listening to the audio, and right now I’m going out to the old oak tree, put my head into a empty bucket —- and scream and babble until I can’t breath! Madam, I knew Lee Atwater and you are no Lee Atwater….

Reply
John Boy June 16, 2014 at 11:35 am

Ya beat me to it, Liz!

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 16, 2014 at 11:49 am

Do you run that website? The post you referenced was the only post on that site since January of 2013. So either you’re checking that site daily for over a year and a half for that story, or you knew to go there.

Reply
Liz June 16, 2014 at 12:12 pm

Sorry, Jackie, I did not check the site’s history. My cousin who homeschools her children in Spartanburg sent me the link. It was shocking to me so I wanted to share it with others who are now looking for a candidate to support in the run-off.

Reply
Matthew June 17, 2014 at 1:38 pm

Liz you need to check out what Spearman has called for homeschooling families. She want homeschoolers to register with the state and to provide SS# for all their children

Reply
so what? June 18, 2014 at 12:53 am

if the government gets a hold of the SSN’s of the citizen!?!?! oh wait, what the hell does that matter….

Elke Wall Clark June 21, 2014 at 12:36 pm

So what? I homeschooled my 3 kids, I don’t have a problem with the state knowing about it and the state already has all children’s SS# if you file SC taxes.

She Said What?? June 16, 2014 at 5:56 pm

The story is all over FB since this morning.

Reply
Sandi Morals June 16, 2014 at 11:57 am

Molly is trying to pull a Tom Ervin.
Don’t fall for it.

Reply
What's N A Name June 16, 2014 at 1:11 pm

Atwater comes off like a complete idiot. Will, please post her manifesto when she figures it out.

Reply
Fat Greg Dulli June 19, 2014 at 8:55 am

I listened to this “interview” yesterday, and came to the conclusion that this woman sounds like she’s either drunk, bats shit crazy, menopausal, confused, or all of the above. I seriously question whether or not she’s qualified to be an educator, let alone the TOP educator for SC.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia June 16, 2014 at 11:20 am

Can we hang on to the one we have? He does a good job of pissing off the education weenies. I’m not thrilled with Atwater (smacks of Republican Party establishment) but she probably is better than Sperm man.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 11:22 am

Here let me fix this for you
We’ve been done with the GOP for some time now, we only endorse them, vote for them, and set ourselves up as an arbiter of who should and should not be considered a Republican.

Reply
Edgar June 16, 2014 at 11:24 am

Molly is a Democrat, I don’t care what she says. For years she proudly said Inez T was her mentor. She has declared her love for Jean Toal as a role model in the past. Jean is holding off on the Richard Breibart opinion as long as she can so the truth about Molly’s father’s finances and how and why hundreds of thousands of dollars ended up in Breibart’s trust account. Time to retire, Molly.

Reply
MyDaddyIsRich June 16, 2014 at 11:33 am

Thanks . I will vote for her if you are against her.

Reply
Smirks June 16, 2014 at 12:14 pm

I wasn’t going to go to the runoff, but now? I think I will.

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 16, 2014 at 11:46 am

I keep thinking her signs are indicating she’s having a rally and you can find it by turning right on the next street.

Reply
Philip Branton June 16, 2014 at 12:31 pm

You go Jackie…….!! LOL….

Her arrows are pointing the way….BUT too where..??

Reply
Vanguard16 June 16, 2014 at 11:46 am

SC already has school choice. You can send your kids to private or public school or move to a better school disctrict. Any one seeking the office of Superintendant of (public) Education that’s supports vouchers and/or tax credits has no business in that position!

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 16, 2014 at 11:46 am

you seem dumb

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 11:49 am

Anyone who thinks giving hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money to parents of kids in private school will help the education of SC’s children not only seems dumb, either is dumb or corrupt. If you want to pay a private business to educate your children fine, but do it on your dime, not mine.

Reply
Smirks June 16, 2014 at 12:36 pm

What they want for private schooling:

Public funding via vouchers/tax credits

What they don’t want for private schooling:

Public regulation
Public educational requirements (sex ed, evolution, etc.)
Public vaccination requirements
Public testing standards
Public evaluation of schools
Public curriculum requirements (state/national standards)
Public requirements to take any and every child
Information made available to the public for scrutiny
Public-elected offices

So, basically, just give them your money and shut the fuck up. Oh, and you’re dumb if you refuse.

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 16, 2014 at 2:02 pm

Isn’t that basically what you’re demanding of taxpayers for public education?

scrcs June 23, 2014 at 10:25 am

No SMIRKS…what I want for the huge amounts of property taxes I do pay:
A non failing school

A school where my child is safe
especially from exposure to gangs

A school that will not indoctrinate my child with the blame America first or the socialist propaganda that is the trend in schools these days

A school that will help my child be creative, independent thinker not a pre programmed worker bee.

What we have now is forcibly take my money. ..and my child, and I have to shut (the coarse word) up!

Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 1:15 pm

Where’s the option of letting parent that have kids not participate in the system and getting their money back?

Let’s step back for a moment and say, “What if I let a parent that undertakes his child’s own education out of paying taxes on that portion of his burden”?

What, exactly, is the “wrong” with that Tom? Are you you going to say that parents don’t deserve to use any money they are ponying up(property taxes going to education) currently to a public school for their own child to in the same manner but how they see fit?(and I”m not talking about “getting” any of your money or anyone elses, I’m talking about a straight up deduction from any property taxes they pay for education)

If that’s what you’re promoting, fine…just come out a say it. We don’t need to hear any feel good bullshit about why you think its so, just say it truthfully…don’t be a fucking pol.

Reply
Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 2:15 pm

You know what’s even funnier about the whole thing – if public schools are so freakin great then why are all the Democrats (Spearman included) so terrified of school CHOICE. If public schools really are that great, then parents would CHOOSE to keep sending their children there. However, all public school teachers, administrators, and unions know that private schools are offer a better quality and more robust education. They know if given the option, parents would leave. The solution: deny them that option. And this all comes from the people that are supposedly so caring. It’s hypocritical and I never support someone like Spearman that stands for such an injustice. Atwater all the way.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 2:19 pm

Thats is such non-sense, the money will go to people who are already in private school. There want be any significant movement out of public school into private school, because the tax credit will not be enough for most people to make the move, and there will not be any quality private schools to take them if they did. Private schools don’t want more children they want more money for the children they have. This is not about competition, this is about giving money to people who already have children in private school, so they can spend their money on something else.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 2:39 pm

That has to be the most unintellectual comment I have ever read. Anyone with a second grade understanding of economics knows that isn’t true. First, public schools cost much more per student than private schools. There is absolutely no way around that fact. So the money is there to send kids to private schools if liberals like Spearman would allow it. But let’s assume for a moment you are right – the money isn’t enough to pay for a private education. The money that families receive, whatever it actually ends up being, will be enough to make it affordable for some fraction of families to leave public schools for private ones. Remember, there is a gradient of ability- and willingness-to-pay. Each incremental change in price shifts the decision matrix one way or the other, in this case towards private schools. Finally, we come to the most egregious mistake of your whole argument. Of course there aren’t enough private schools right now. They are appealing to a very small portion of the marketplace that can afford to pay for school twice (once through taxes and again through private tuition). That burden creates an enormous misallocation of resources towards failing public schools. A marketplace would prevent these failing schools from receiving resources and they would either disappear or straighten up. The profit motive that becomes evident in the marketplace when school choice is present will attract many new private schools. The supply will quickly rise to meet the demand and competition among the schools will keep quality high and costs low. This is Econ 101 stuff – emotional conjecture isn’t going to fix the schools. And for anyone who is paying attention, Tom implicitly agreed that private schools provide a better education. Checkmate.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:28 pm

I do not agree that private schools provide a better education than public schools. There are plenty of crappy white flight academies and small church schools in SC that do not provide as good an education as the local public schools. Despite the efforts of the school choice folks to defund those schools.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:34 pm

There is ZERO evidence behind that claim. Virtually every single study shows that private schools perform better than public schools. However, if we are going to cherry pick information about a particular school and then state that the norm, then I suppose no amount of evidence, no matter how convincing, is going to change your erroneous opinion. This is why SC needs Atwater. That way we can have school choice so there are less people who are incapable of examining the evidence and walking through a series of logical mental exercises.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:37 pm

Private schools only outperform public schools because they can pick and choose who they take. There is zero evidence the kids in private school would not do just as well as in private school.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:38 pm

Would not do just as well in public school as they do in private school.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:42 pm

I think we just addressed your point a moment ago in a different comment. When you measure public schools performance as an aggregate, when they face competition from private schools, scores improve. The competition is what makes private education better. If government schools had to compete, they would improve as well.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:48 pm

There is no evidence of that. This is just made up.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:53 pm

You know, I didn’t believe you at first. And I thought my many responses with explanation and hard numbers, as well as the cited studies from Bible Thumper would convince you. But now after you’ve said it seven times with no accompanying information or explanation, I think I finally believe you. I mean if someone says something that many times it must be true, right?

Tom June 17, 2014 at 11:31 am

There are no hard numbers. This is a lie. The only article cited was an un-peer reviewed wikipedia article by a voucher proponent. No one uses wikipedia for real research. There are no editors. You can put in anything you want. You can’t get hard numbers unless you are allowed to test private school students who are given vouchers.

Union Boss June 16, 2014 at 1:47 pm

Last time I checked, private schools still have to meet educational requirements. One of the main differences is the ability to fire and hire teachers freely. When a tenured teacher has the continuity of his employment disconnected from his performance, is it any wonder that quality declines?

Reply
Fleet June 17, 2014 at 7:23 am

No tenure in SC

truthmonger June 17, 2014 at 10:44 am

Easier to fire a teacher than you think. You just don’t renew the contract.
Ever stop to think about what tools teachers will have the RIGHT to demand if you make student performance the benchmark? Perhaps parents should simply ADMIT that they actually have a responsibility to help make their children successful?

Tom June 17, 2014 at 10:47 am

These guys don’t want to understand how this works. They just want money. So they can spend their money on something else besides their children’s education. They are willing to make up all kinds of crap to support there demand that the taxpayers fund private education.

South Carolina teachers are not unionized.

Tom June 17, 2014 at 10:49 am

Excuse me, they are willing to make up all kinds of crap to support their demand that taxpayers fund private education.

Union Boss June 16, 2014 at 1:50 pm

Why do you think people pay businesses to educate their children? Just maybe it is because those businesses (some of which are actually non-profits) do a much better job educating. I have never once heard anyone not on the payroll of an inner city school rave about the quality of education a child receives there. Most families make enormous sacrifices to send their children to private schools so their kids aren’t condemned to a lifetime of poverty and dependence.

Reply
Jan June 16, 2014 at 2:06 pm

One of my children went to public school in Rock Hill. He received an excellent education and is in an good University. He will be graduating next year with a degree in Computer Science and plans to get a Masters. There, you know know someone who is not on the payroll of an “inner city” school who thinks her kid got an excellent public education.

Duh June 16, 2014 at 2:10 pm

That’s because Rock Hill is not the inner city. Read much?

Suspect Parenting June 16, 2014 at 9:19 pm

Well, Rock HIll is kind of a shithole in some areas. I’m surprised she risked her son’s education if he went to school in one of those areas in Rock Hill.

Squishy123 June 16, 2014 at 4:08 pm

You do realize what you get with a BS in Computer Science degree don’t you? A $30K Help Desk job, with a Masters they might bump it up to $35K. Unless he wants to relocate to India he’s entering a dying career in this country.

Jan June 16, 2014 at 6:33 pm

My son goes to a good school. He has worked hard and gets good grades. He chose his major and I am proud of him. I believe he will do well in whatever he chooses to do in his life and his parents will be there for him. What you think of his career choices are of no interest to me.

edr June 17, 2014 at 8:18 pm

a BS in computer science will get you 50,000 to start in some places in SC

Elke Wall Clark June 21, 2014 at 12:41 pm

Don’t be a jerk, a BS in Computer Science gets you much more than a help desk job. Most wages start at $45K and go up with experience.

Uh huh June 16, 2014 at 6:23 pm

“One of my children went to public school in Rock Hill.”

You know what’s funny about that comment? I VERY distinctly remember you saying you had no kids a while back in a “school choice” comment section…so which is it?

Jan June 16, 2014 at 6:25 pm

Never. I said I had no kids in public school, and I don’t. I have two kids. One went to public school and is about to graduate from College; the other went to a private school in Virginia, her choice. I paid.

Jackie Chiles June 16, 2014 at 1:58 pm

That’s the point. You should pay to educate your kids on your dime. Don’t come demand I pay taxes to educate your idiot kids and then demand I pay MOAR money to make sure mine have a good education.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 2:03 pm

We all have an obligation to pay for a public education system to educate the children of this state. That is part of our state constitution. I believe it is for the good of all as did Thomas Jefferson. We do not have an obligation to give you money to educate your child privately. Especially when it costs more taxpayer dollars than you are paying into the public school system.

Mike June 16, 2014 at 2:12 pm

Taxpayer funded schools cost much much more than all but the most selective private schools.

Bush has nothing on you June 16, 2014 at 9:04 pm

“We all have an obligation”

Tom, the great deciderer.

Tom June 17, 2014 at 9:58 am

I guess I should have been clearer. All citizens of South Carolina have an obligation to pay for a public education system. That was decided by the citizens of South Carolina, not me Look at the state constitution. It obligates the citizens to provide free public education to all children of the state.
Of course dumb asses like you, don’t give a crap about things like that. Most likely because it requires you to educate black children. So why don’t you move to a state were that is not part of your civic duty. Good luck.
Public education is a core function of state government, in South Carolina..

Elke Wall Clark June 21, 2014 at 12:38 pm

The people sending their children to a private business for their child’s education pay taxes into a system they don’t use.

Reply
SpearmanSucks June 16, 2014 at 1:44 pm

That’s not what school choice is and you know it. How could a family in Dillon County that earns many standard deviations below the national average income move to a district that has a good school. It is completely unrealistic. School entails tying State dollars to the student and the student and parents selecting the school. The market will quickly weed out the bad schools and the good ones will flourish. Anyone thinking about voting for Spearman should seriously ask themselves if they want to condemn tens of thousands of children to a terrible education (and livelihood by extension). Atwater supports school choice and opposes the Common Core, which is why she will have my vote.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 2:24 pm

How would a family in Dillon County that earns many standard deviations below the national income average benefit from a tax credit? Oh, thats right they would not.

Lets face it the School Choice movement is not about helping poor kids get a good education. You guys could not care less about those people. This is about giving taxpayer money to people with kids in private school so they can spend their money on something else.

Reply
SpearmanSucks June 16, 2014 at 2:58 pm

It’s not a tax credit; it is a voucher, check, whatever you want to call it. Poor people would gain the most from it because it would likely have progressive implementation (the poorest receive the most and as income increases, your voucher value decreases). Everyone gets to go to the school of their choice.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 3:57 pm

There is no such plan. No one has proposed anything like I proposed. Where will the hundreds of millions of dollars necessary to pay for the children who are currently in private school come from?

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:04 pm

You can say there is no such plan all you want but that doesn’t make it so. There is such a plan, and Molly Spearman is dead set on stopping it. There are very few children in private schools today anyway. However, the point is irrelevant – the money would come from the savings to the state because private schools are so much less expensive than public schools. And if the plan were progressively implemented, those already in private schools wouldn’t receive very much money anyway.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:33 pm

Define very few. There are approximately 68,000 children in Private School in SC. If we only allocated a $1500 voucher or tax credit to each one that would be $102,000,000 added to the state budget. Where will the money come from.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:35 pm

If you read the rest of the comment you would know it would come from the savings reaped by not sending kids to these bloated government schools.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:40 pm

This is crap. I am definitely voting in the run off.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:44 pm

Ladies and Gentleman, we have finally reached a conclusion. Tom, having had all of his arguments thoroughly debunked, resorts to saying he’ll vote in the runoff (presumably for Spearman) just to spite the school choice people that support Sally who proved him wrong. I give you… the typical Democrat.

Freddy the Lobster June 16, 2014 at 8:57 pm

Wow, you really are a delusional windbag.

scrcs June 23, 2014 at 10:08 am

If you are zoned for a specific school and unable to move for whatever reason, you are at the mercy of the district. That is a monopoly and modern day serfdom. We should have vouchers or at the very least school choice statewide. Some of the districts with the highest property taxes have no school choice. I’m sorry but that is tyranny.

Reply
Franklin Carson June 16, 2014 at 12:05 pm

Did Spearman think no one would realize she has given thousands to Democrats and almost nothing to Republicans? I didn’t know that until I watched this video.

http://youtu.be/_91DQLPN0bg

Molly really should be honest and run as a Democrat.

Reply
Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 12:21 pm

“Molly really should be honest and run as a Democrat.”

And why is that? If the people that elect her are so stupid to do so on the basis of what letter is next to her name at the polling booth, they deserve every dick they get shoved up their ass.

I think she’s brilliant for doing it. Stupid people deserve to suffer.

Reply
Rodney June 16, 2014 at 2:18 pm

If she isn’t telling the truth about what party she supports how can we trust anything she says?

And below you said you respect someone for being honest….”unlike 95% of those who are serving in office.” Way to talk out both sides of your ass, Thank You!.

Reply
Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 2:53 pm

Obviously sarcasm has no meaning to you.

Reply
Soft Sigh from Hell June 16, 2014 at 6:35 pm

“Stupid people deserve to suffer”
.
Wasn’t a poster here a few years back called “Stupid Should Hurt More” (or similar)? I always thought it was a clever name.

Reply
RogueElephant June 16, 2014 at 12:06 pm

Spearman is part of the problem. Not the solution. Although Sally Atwater is not great , Meka would have been much better, compared to Spearman she is right up there with sliced bread.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia June 16, 2014 at 12:33 pm

I voted for Meka. Too bad she didn’t fare better.

Reply
I liked Meka June 16, 2014 at 2:22 pm

I agree. I really wanted her to be in the runoff. Alas she is not. I’ll be voting for Atwater because I wouldn’t be able to sleep at night knowing I voted for a Democrat.

Reply
Smirks June 16, 2014 at 12:07 pm

Only Willie would dismiss the SCGOP as “Republicans” and then proceed to call on people to make sure a “Republican” isn’t voted in.

Fuck school “choice.”

Reply
Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 12:20 pm

“Fuck school “choice.””

It’s always good when the little Benito’s self identify. It saves everyone a lot of hassle.

Further though, I have more respect for you for being honest, unlike 95% of those serving in office.

Reply
Smirks June 16, 2014 at 12:41 pm

School choice is already what we have. Public education is available, and private schooling or homeschooling is left up to the responsibility of the parent. That is choice.

The school “choice” crowd doesn’t like the responsibility of paying for their own education and demand public subsidization. Sorry, but that’s bullshit.

Reply
Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 12:45 pm

“School choice is already what we have.”

Refund the tax dollars to those that want to send kids other place, then you have “choice” little Benito.

But you don’t want choice, so try your bullshit on someone that can’t think for themselves. You want to control people’s choices by taking their tax money.

Reply
Smirks June 16, 2014 at 12:59 pm

Refund the tax dollars to those that want to send kids other place, then you have “choice” little Benito.

Public schools can still take their kids. Mommy and Daddy can choose to send little Johnny to the local public school if they want. If they’re going to have that option they should pay for that option.

If everyone else pays into public schooling, including people who don’t even have kids, these fuckers don’t deserve special treatment. People who don’t have kids pay into a system of public education because it benefits society as a whole. Parents who send their kids to private school do not lose that responsibility, nor do they lose their choice of sending their kid to public schools.

But you don’t want choice, so try your bullshit on someone that can’t think for themselves. You want to control people’s choices by taking their tax money.

1) Pay your fucking taxes.

2) Do whatever you want after.

It’s real simple. Everyone else does it, even if they think it sucks. It’s called not being a deadbeat.

Have fun looking for your “nobody gets taxed for public education” paradise that doesn’t exist.

Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 1:05 pm

“1) Pay your fucking taxes.”

Why is that fuck face? Because you sit on this website all day and pay none yourself?

What does and doesn’t exist doesn’t matter you dumb fuck. What matters is what is “right” or “wrong”.

And because your an envious little dictator bastard, the idea of someone keeping more of their own money to educate their own children is repulsive to you because you think you know what’s best for society, you arrogant little know it all prick.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 1:41 pm

Exactly how much do you pay a year for taxes that go to public education?

Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 2:30 pm

I’m guessing a LOT more than you. (and it’s none of your business)

But regardless, what does it matter? The underlying principle is that SC has decided it’s going to take everyone’s money for education, then why shouldn’t I get to at least apply my money in a way that I want for my kids?

SC is claiming it as a noble, high minded “good for society” goal..so if I decide to do it on my own what is the problem in at least keeping my own ? There shouldn’t be a problem.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:43 pm

I guessing you do not pay a lot more than me. I am guessing I pay a lot more than you. Public education is in the constitution. Of course we all have to pay. I pay my share you pay your share. Beyond that it is up each person to pay for his own kids education. as best he or she can.

Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 5:50 pm

“Beyond that it is up each person to pay for his own kids education. as best he or she can.”

That’s what you don’t get, if you can pay for it yourself and save the state money then what is the problem?

The cost difference is not close aside from the fact is the moral thing to do(let people have their money to do it).

There’s no way you pay more than me in property taxes, PERIOD. But this isn’t third grade, so that doesn’t make your opinion any worse than mine. It’s logic that should prevail, and yours is lacking.

Jan June 17, 2014 at 10:55 am

Why is it none of his business?. If you are asking for the taxpayers to give you money to pay for your kids to go to private school, when you are obviously well off and capable of paying for it yourself, why should we not know how much you are paying into public education?

Grrr_Native June 16, 2014 at 2:22 pm

I don’t have kids…never have, never will. Should I get a refund too?

Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 2:42 pm

Personally, I think you should. I think it’s BS that SC takes your money to educate other people’s kids.

Now, they’ve sold most of the population on doing it as being the “right thing”, fine. So why not allow those parents that opt out if they are doing it for the same reasons?

I’ll tell you why IMO, it’s because public “education” is a large boondoggle now. It’s feeds teachers, administrators and high level bureaucrats with taxpayer dollars and they aren’t going to loosen their grip on any of it.

“Educating” the kids is far down the priority scale now, it’s secondary business to the rest of it.

If education was the #1 priority, why would they give two shits about 10% of the population going through the hassle of educating their own kids? The answer is, they wouldn’t, they’d just be happy the kids were being educated.

Beartrkkr June 16, 2014 at 7:48 pm

Does someone know when the Heathwood or Hammond buses run near me? I’m trying to figure out this school choice thing and when the kids might need to be at the bus stop.

I'm with stupid June 16, 2014 at 8:26 pm

Your kids should be looking for the short bus.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:45 pm

No, thank you believes you should help him send his kid to private school. You don’t need as much money as he does. You don’t have kids. Besides his wife may have to get a job to help pay for education if the state does not pitch in.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:48 pm

You already pay for every kid in SC to go to school. If we send them to private schools, you save tax money.

Jan June 17, 2014 at 10:57 am

Nonsense, will never happen. There is no way enough kids will move from public to private school to pay for the kids who are already in private school.

Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 9:08 pm

On the other hand, Tom believes he’s entitled to take your money for whatever pet projects please him, so there’s that.

Tom June 17, 2014 at 11:01 am

Wrong and another lie, of course. The citizens of South Carolina decided the state should provide public education. Not me. Read your state constitution. I happen to agree that public education benefits everyone, as did Thomas Jefferson. The taxpayers do not benefit from paying for the private schools of people who can afford to pay for those themselves.

Freddy the Lobster June 16, 2014 at 9:04 pm

I don’t have kids, so I deserve a big fat refund. Because having an educated populace benefits no one.

Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 9:09 pm

Your assumption that the populace wouldn’t be educated without public skool is as laughable and some of the “educated” populace coming out of certain school districts.

Thank you! June 16, 2014 at 9:10 pm

edit: and=as

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 16, 2014 at 3:43 pm

The school “choice” crowd doesn’t like the responsibility of paying for their own education and demand public subsidization.

*Blinks*

/facepalm

Reply
Bingo! June 16, 2014 at 9:06 pm

Yep. Pure, abject stupidity.

Slartibartfast June 16, 2014 at 12:24 pm

Zais is leaving office for one reason, only: the stupid politicians who control the state don’t know the difference between butt sex and school reform. With Sally, you’ll get SOME school reform. With Molly, you’ll get the other done to YOU. Formula Alert! Democrats + GOP Primary = Graham + Residual Candidate. I’m voting for Sally because she’s from Union. And you do not lie to Union girls because they will cut you.

Reply
Atwater FTW June 16, 2014 at 2:26 pm

Haha. Unfortunately, I had to find that one out through personal experience! I’m voting for Sally too because Spearman will kill any chance of having meaningful reform. After four years of her I doubt there’d be charter school left in the state.

Reply
The Populist June 16, 2014 at 12:38 pm

The “school choice” issue always brings out the nasty Leftist trait of envy. It’s a good topic to use to see it on full display.

It’s amazing that more Neocons don’t latch on to the control aspects too.

The world is filled with sickos.

Reply
Dems want your kid to fail June 16, 2014 at 2:25 pm

You’re right. I’ve found that school choice shows how little the dems care aabout people, especially the poor, and how dependent they are on entrenched educational establishment interests. It is sickening to watch someone publicly proclaim they want to keep poor kids in the worst schools in the country. Spearman cannot be allowed to win.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 2:31 pm

Ok, I will play this game. How am I envious. I have no children in school. And exactly how will your tax credit help poor people who do not pay taxes. It will not.

If you really want to help poor children get a good education, here is a plan I would would support. If you make below average income and your child attends a failing public school, the state should help you pay for a private education until your public school improves. How many of you school choice people will sign up for that.

None, because you do not give a crap about poor children or improving the education of children in public school. You want money so you can spend your money on something else.

Reply
Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 2:54 pm

What you suggested is literally exactly what school choice does! The state pays for you to attend a different school (it could be private, another public school, charter, etc.). When people start leaving a failing public school in droves, the school will either A.) reform itself because it’s continuity is contingent upon that or B.) disappear. In either scenario, the individual child and society are better off.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 3:49 pm

No it doesn’t. It gives money to people who are already in private school, and the richer you are the more you get. To benefit from a tax credit you have to pay taxes.

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 3:54 pm

sonnyboy, Vouchers not Credits. You completely ignore all the places where choice has already been enacted.

Beartrkkr June 16, 2014 at 11:15 pm

So if we start issuing vouchers to every parent desiring to send their bundle of joy to Porter Gaud, Christ Church, Heathwood, Hammond, or one of the other really good private schools in SC (not just one of the many “science is evil” religious schools), are their enrollment numbers going to quadruple, or are they going to have to restrict the amount of students (or vouchers) that they can accept?

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 11:56 pm

You, like every other opponent of vouchers act like these questions haven’t been answered before. You might as well be opposing airline travel not willing to discuss 100 years of success.
Science is not evil unless you are talking about liberals objection to GM crops or the MRI showing the development of the unborn child. Private religious schools usually teach Evolution.
If they can’t handle the demand you can have lottery until the private school demand is met. Usually, the competition causes the public schools to improve , reducing demand. Often, public schools out perform the private schools. But the main point there isn’t a one size fits all system. Like the former a East German car, Trabant. Because there was no competition, it sucked.

Beartrkkr June 17, 2014 at 12:40 am

I’m sure the big wigs in Cola, Greenville & Charleston are going sit idly by and to try their luck in a lottery to get Biff and Buffy into private school. That might work in the inner city when you allocate x number of slots for the “voucher” kids to go to the local parochial school. If this comes to fruition, you can bet there will be “voucher” quotas to allow a token lot of unfortunate kids in, but I guarantee you the money will talk when there are only a set number of slots in the elite private schools. Biff, Buffy, Spencer, you’re in…..Juanita, Latrell, and Shaniqua, better luck next year….wait, Latrell can play ball so maybe he’s in for now…

The Ford Pinto was a crappy car that must have been honed on all that fine American automaker competition in the 70’s. Sometimes things suck just because they suck.

Bible Thumper June 17, 2014 at 12:51 am

Some people were happy with their hatchback, but the marketplace is more efficient at solving those issues than government.

Jan June 17, 2014 at 11:16 am

Please stop mixing vouchers and public charter schools. They are not the same thing. Vouchers are a scam. Public charter schools are not. Public charter schools do not discriminate based on who your parents are, how much money you have, and what your religion is. They must take all qualified persons; generally on a first come first serve basis.

Vouchers are a way for schools that discriminate on any basis to get taxpayer money. The fact a poor black child would not be welcome at a Southern Baptist white flight school does not prevent them from getting taxpayer money under a voucher program. The fact that Hammond would rather have the Governor’s child than the child of a local factory worker does not prevent them from getting tax payer money for the governor’s kid.

Just saying June 17, 2014 at 1:53 pm

Well of course they discriminate by religion – they are religious schools! Why would an atheist want to go to a Christian school? Or vice versa if the atheists git together and decided to make their own school. The government schools discriminate more than any of them too. Why do you think wealthy school districts jack up the taxes? To raise property values in order to artificially price out the “poor black child.” A private school that has students enrolled with state vouchers would not care about someone’s race (they don’t care without vouchers either, as long as you can afford to pay). A black persons voucher is just as good as a white persons. And the reason Hammond has the Governor’s child is because the governor can AFFORD to pay to send her kids there. The factory worker cannot – which is why conservatives like Atwater want school choice and vouchers in the first place! You are literally constructing an argument for school choice without even realizing it.

And as additional note, injecting race into issues that really have nothing to do with it is not constructive to anyone or any cause. This is not 1950s Montgomery, AL. This is 2014 and those issues are largely behind us. Let’s talk facts rather than race baiting people on a comment board.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 3:55 pm

Can you read? It’s not a tax-credit. Spell it out: v-o-u-c-h-e-r-s. You get a fixed sum of money, either irrespective or in inverse proportion to your income.

* June 16, 2014 at 4:01 pm

“It gives money to people who are already in private school, and the richer you are the more you get”

* envy right there

If the concept was simply that you don’t pay in, you wouldn’t be “given” anything.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:05 pm

Not envy, common sense. I’m not poor. I run my own business, I make good money and I pay a lot of taxes. I don’t see why I should have to help pay for the education of some guy who can afford it himself, just so he can spend his money on something else. I already pay for public schools. Where will the money come from to pay for all these kids currently in private school? Through increasing my taxes.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:06 pm

Private schools cost less than half of public schools. You will save tax money! This is first grade arithmetic.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:08 pm

That is BS and you know it.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:17 pm

Average cost of public school education per pupil: $13,041
Average cost of private school education per pupil: $6,018

In Chicago, the average cost per pupil is $21,024. It has been reported to be over $27,000 per pupil in Phoenix, AZ.

Get some facts.

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 4:29 pm

http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/12f33pub.pdf
See Table 8, page 8 $9,147 in 2012.

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 4:13 pm

“I don’t see why I should have to help pay for the education of some guy who can afford it himself.”
That is exactly what you do if you he sends his kids to public school, which is what most rich people do. Why should a middle class family that sends their kids to private school have to pay for a rich person to send their kids to public school.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:18 pm

And, it costs twice as much to send them to the public schools!

Beartrkkr June 16, 2014 at 8:23 pm

And private schools are providing free transportation, free breakfasts and lunches, in addition to individualized instruction to the disabled? If Mungo et al decides to build five new subdivisions in rural Richland County is a new private school gonna spring up to educate all those new students?

I'm with stupid June 16, 2014 at 8:33 pm

Pssssttttt…..none of it is “free”…the money all comes from someone else…we don’t have a printing press in SC.

Jan June 16, 2014 at 8:38 pm

Yes, it comes from the taxpayers. Who are obligated under the State Constitution to provide free public education. They are not obligated to provide free private education, or free religious education (since 79% of SC private schools are religious schools) and should not.

Magic pieces of paper! June 16, 2014 at 9:12 pm

It’s just a matter of passing another law Jan. They come and go, when they aren’t ignored.

* June 16, 2014 at 5:43 pm

” I don’t see why I should have to help pay for the education of some guy who can afford it himself,”

You don’t see it because you’re not smart enough to. I seriously doubt you run a business.

The issue is whether someone gets to use their own money to pay for their kids education or not, not whether they can afford to or not.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 6:54 pm

Believe me or not, thats of no concern to me. And its not all your money. It part my money. As I said if you can’t understand the concept read Fits article on why the state should not give the Columbia baseball stadium developers a tax credit. Because it decreases state revenue that has to be made up by increased taxes on everyone else.

TBG rule #3 June 16, 2014 at 8:32 pm

“It part my money.”

Brilliant retort. You have won the war of stupidity with your firm grasp on the subject matter, I concede.

Slartibartfast June 17, 2014 at 11:57 am

Clear aside all the ego and greed from all of the arguments here, and you are left with two points of view:

1. Follow your suggestion and it will eliminate competition, keeping public schools little more than warehouses and feeding stations.
2. Allow school choice and empower lower income parents to choose, at least, the public school of their choice. Or the cheaper, often better Catholic school.

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 3:49 pm

I support school choice, because wherever it has been enacted, PUBLIC SCHOOLS have improved. Many times outpermorming private schools. FREE MARKET CONPETITION W_O_R_K_S.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 3:51 pm

There is no evidence of that. Period. Look at the Wisconsin experiment.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 3:53 pm

Literally every example is evidence. Not just in the US, but around the world. Most student in South Korea go to private schools on public money (i.e. they have school choice). All schools improved, including the public ones. But the private schools were so much better that the public ones all but died out.

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 4:07 pm

From Wikipedia —– http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_voucher#Proponents ——–The argument that school vouchers increases quality and efficiencies in schools forced to compete is supported by studies such as “When Schools Compete: The Effects of Vouchers on Florida Public School Achievement” (Manhattan Institute for Policy Research’s, 2003), which concluded that public schools located near private schools that were eligible to accept voucher students made significantly more improvements than did similar schools not located near eligible private schools. Stanford’s C.M. Hoxby, who has researched the systemic effects of school choice, determined that areas with greater residential school choice have consistently higher test scores at a lower per-pupil cost than areas with very few school districts (see Hoxby, 1998). Hoxby found that the effects of vouchers in Milwaukee and of charter schools in Arizona and Michigan on nearby public schools forced to compete made greater test score gains than schools not faced with such competition (see Hoxby, 2001), and that the so-called effect of cream skimming did not exist in any of the voucher districts examined. Hoxby’s research has found that both private and public schools improved through the use of vouchers.[16][17][18][19] Also, similar competition has helped in manufacturing, energy, transportation, and parcel postal (UPS, FedEx vs. USPS) sectors of government that have been socialized and later opened up to free market competition.[20]

Inciteful June 16, 2014 at 12:57 pm

I’m glad South Carolina has open primaries since we have such open candidates.

Reply
jimlewisowb June 16, 2014 at 1:03 pm

Bat Shit Crazy Fuckin Cockroach

Reply
Greg - teacher-parent-taxpayer June 16, 2014 at 1:18 pm

School Choice is not a Republican/Democrat issue anymore. If you care about what’s best for your child, you should have a choice on where you send your child to school. A certain portion of the tax dollars you spend on education should go towards the tuition of the school that you want your child to attend — whether private or public.

It shouldn’t be mandated that the tuition goes to a public school. Molly Spearman (and her group) is pushing as hard as she can to make sure the tuition dollars go to public schools ONLY and the administrators they employee. She is protecting the employees who want a job — not the children. She is protecting the vendors who make millions off of school districts — not the taxpayers. Vote for Atwater

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 1:40 pm

This is crazy. The average SC Taxpayer pays less than $1500 a year in taxes that go to public education. Yet, school choice people want the taxpayers to give them a lot more than they pay for public education to pay for private education. That means they are taking money from other taxpayers who do not have their kids in private school to help pay for their kids education. That is BS. I should not have to pay for public education and also pay additional amounts to help parents send their kids to private school . Some of whom don’t even work. They can afford private school but they want money from the taxpayer so they can spend their money on other things.

And if you don’t understand how that works let Fits explain it the way he did in the article where he opposed giving a tax credit to the people wanting to build a baseball stadium in Columbia. Its money out of the tax coffers that has to be replaced or cuts have to be made. Why should I have to pay more taxes to make up the difference or suffer cuts to benefits so that little Preston can attend Porter Gaud without cutting into the family vacation budget.

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 16, 2014 at 2:04 pm

LOL at the guy taking the average. Included in the average are the tens of thousands of people that pay NOTHING towards taxes? Maybe you should recalculate how much people who actually pay taxes pay towards public education there hoss.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 2:10 pm

Wrong hoss, I said the average taxpayer, not the average citizen. That would be much lower.

The vast majority of people paying for public education have children in public school, or no children in school at all. You see you guys forget about people like me who no longer have children in school. You want our money.

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 16, 2014 at 2:11 pm

Show me the study.

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 3:41 pm

Tom is comparing apples to oranges. In 2012 the average public school student cost $9,147 but there are many more tax payers than students. Tom is trying to compare cost to taxpayer to cost of students. A private school student would cost half as much as a public school student.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 3:49 pm

Finally someone who knows what they are talking about!

Da Kings English June 16, 2014 at 6:46 pm

Finally someONE who knows what they are (sic) talking about!
=====
Let me guess. You home school English.

I'm with stupid June 16, 2014 at 8:30 pm

Which king are you referring to English major?

Jan June 17, 2014 at 11:04 am

No he is not. If you pay $1,500 in taxes that go to public education, and you get a $3000 voucher, the extra money has to come from some other program or taxes have to go up. That is simple math.

Bible Thumper June 17, 2014 at 11:39 am

You probably learned your math at public school.
Tom’s statement is false. ————— “Yet, school choice people want the taxpayers to give them a lot more than they pay for public education to pay for private education.”———-
The costs for a private school would be half of a public school education and that would be a savings to taxpayers for every child that transferred to private school.

Jan June 17, 2014 at 12:17 pm

Why do you people have to be rude. I could be equally rude, but I refuse to sink to your level. I think my math is fine. I’m not buying the mythical so many children will flee the public schools the state will save money argument. If that were even possible it would take a decade to build the necessary private schools.

If the parent of a child currently in private school pays $1500 in taxes for public education, and the state gives that parent a $3000 voucher, two things are objectively true.

1. The cost of public education has not been reduced by one penny; and

2. The parent is not moving “his or her” money from public education to private education, It could be argued he or she is moving $1500 of his or her money; but the other $1500 has to come from another program or taxes have to go up.

This is very simple math.

Spearman hates the poor June 16, 2014 at 2:21 pm

And what about those hundreds of millions that come from the lottery? I suppose we should keep funneling it into the black hole that is SC public education. No individual has a claim on that money so it should be divided among the families with school-age children to spent at the school of their choice. I wouldn’t even be opposed to having it distributed progressively, since the whole point of this program is for poor children to go to good schools. It is absolutely amazing how people will deny the facts that are right in front of them.

Reply
Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 3:35 pm

—–“That means they are taking money from other taxpayers who do not have their kids in private school” —- Most tax payers don’t have kids in either public or private schools, but they are paying for your kids to go to public school.
Tom is Crazy. What a way to twist numbers. The tax payers paid $9,147 per public school student in 2012. Sending a kid to private schools cost half of that amount. That is a $4500 savings for every child that moved to the private school system.

—-“Fits” opposed giving a tax credit to the people wanting to build a baseball stadium in Columbia.——–

He also opposes giving $9,147 for a failed education system.

Reply
Tom June 16, 2014 at 4:16 pm

We are required by the constitution to provide public education. The reason private school cost less is because they can refuse to take people who cost a lot to educate. Make private schools take all students on a first come first serve basis and see what happens to costs.

Reply
Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:21 pm

Have you read the constitution. It makes no mention of education. Which is why it’s a state issue. And you think private schools don’t have disabled children??? The primary reason they cost less is because they don’t build a new school every 20 years and they can hire and fire teachers at will. Oh, and you work until you’re 65 like everyone else. Not retire with a six figure in pension in your early fifties. Especially when you get 4 months of the year off!

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 4:25 pm

He is right. it is in the state constitution that SC must provide free public education

Article XI

SECTION 3. System of free public schools and other public institutions of learning.

The General Assembly shall provide for the maintenance and support of a system of free public schools open to all children in the State and shall establish, organize and support such other public institutions of learning, as may be desirable. (1972 (57) 3193; 1973 (58) 44.)

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:28 pm

I was referring to the US Constitution, just to clarify.

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 4:35 pm

http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/edu/ed370/federal.html

“Since education is not mentioned in the Constitution, it is one of those powers reserved to the states.”

Tom June 16, 2014 at 6:45 pm

I was not, just to clarify.

Who cares? June 16, 2014 at 5:52 pm

Who cares, no one gives a damn about the law anyway, especially if you’re in higher levels of office.

Just because a piece of paper says something doesn’t make it magic or commandments handed down from God. For Christ’s sake, there’s laws against oral sex in this state, you wanna enforce those too?

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 6:13 pm

” laws against oral sex”?
Now they teach them how in public schools.

Oscar Wilde June 16, 2014 at 8:02 pm

” laws against oral sex”?
Now they teach them how in public schools.
…………….
“Suck, don’t blow. It’s just a name.”

jimlewisowb June 16, 2014 at 9:41 pm

BT before I get too excited please clarify

Are you saying they are teaching laws against oral sex or are you saying they are teaching oral sex – because if it is the later I need to start volunteering at the nearest school

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 4:23 pm

Tom, you completely ignore examples of school choice programs already in existence. In New York they have a lottery system, which is better than first come first serve, and prevents cherry picking students for Charter schools run by outside organizations.

Tom June 16, 2014 at 6:42 pm

I am not talking about public charter schools. That is not part of this debate.

Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 7:04 pm

A lottery could be used as a method of granting vouchers to particular private schools.
If a private school is eligible for vouchers it must use a lottery.

The NY City charter school a are almost like private schools that work within the public school buildings. They have private groups that sponsor them.

Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:26 pm

You act like every business on the planet doesn’t take any type of customer that walks through their door. Do you think a grocery store will turn away a skinny man because he won’t buy as much food as a fat guy? Don’t be ridiculous. It is becoming painfully obvious the type of voter that got Spearman into the runoff.

Fits Aint No Republican June 16, 2014 at 2:31 pm

Fits is so “finished” with HIS Republican Party that he spends most of his time advising people who to vote for in the primary of the party he is “finished” with!

That isnt whats so funny though.The real hilarity is there are those here who really believe he isnt a Republican!

Reply
sonnysboy June 16, 2014 at 3:31 pm

So we should vote for Sally Atwater, who has exactly what in terms of experience relevant to education?

Reply
Experience Is Overated June 16, 2014 at 4:01 pm

Her husband was National Chairman of the Republican Party overr twenty years ago!

How much more damn experience do you want?

Reply
The Populist June 16, 2014 at 4:02 pm

The decision has once again come down to which lunatic is “less evil” to vote for….yay for democracy!

Reply
Niles June 16, 2014 at 6:06 pm

Ms. Atwater has been a teacher for years, and has had significant administrative responsibilities.

Reply
Beachtiger0412 June 16, 2014 at 3:39 pm

Anybody that votes for Sally Atwater will assure that there will be a Demo as Supt of Education.

Reply
moderate republican June 16, 2014 at 4:59 pm

agreed

Reply
Elbert June 16, 2014 at 6:04 pm

Wrong.

Reply
moderate republican June 16, 2014 at 3:52 pm

How about voting for the BEST candidate for the job and not a political party? Spearman is the most qualified hands down. You have to have someone who can work with both political parties to effect change. The most important issue is who can help our children’s education the most. I say that is Molly Spearman and that is who I will vote for, regardless of party preference past or present.

Reply
Concerned Parent June 16, 2014 at 3:59 pm

Ah yes, the compromiser. Compromise is not inherently good or bad. But I wouldn’t compromise with someone trying to burn down my house, so why would I compromise and vote for someone who wants to dumb down my kids?

Reply
Experience is Overated June 16, 2014 at 4:03 pm

What!You dont believe Fits and Howie Rich can help your child’s education?

Reply
Squishy123 June 16, 2014 at 4:04 pm

Is this another Will Folks endorsement? I think we all know how well the last endorsement went.

Face it, you have to be mildly retarded to think you can change SC public education, so why not elect the best mildly retarded candidate available.

Reply
Squishy123 June 16, 2014 at 4:06 pm

Why does it matter what party the Supt. of Education falls under? It’s as idiotic as those who push a Republican County Coroner or a Democratic County Coroner. If you’re fucking dead it really doesn’t matter which political party the guy signing the death certificate falls under.

Reply
Republican June 16, 2014 at 4:08 pm

The difference is we are talking about hundreds of thousands of children here with Democrats who want to hold them down in failing schools at the request of the unions they are beholden to. Party matters a lot here. If you can see a difference you either aren’t paying attention or are too stupid to process what you see.

Reply
Squishy123 June 16, 2014 at 5:32 pm

South Carolina has had failing schools for generations, so now all of a sudden we should be party aware of the candidates? I believe you could swap out administrations and teachers of the #1 education state and SC would still be at the bottom. Republican or Democrats, when you’re dealing with mouth breathing idiots, you’re dealing with mouth breathing idiots.

Reply
Jan June 16, 2014 at 6:07 pm

What union?

Reply
Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:46 pm

I will gladly be voting for Sally Atwater. I could never support a Democrat in disguise who wants to prevent school choice and bring back the Common Core. Sally is more than qualified to head the Department of Education!

Reply
M326 June 16, 2014 at 4:51 pm

I have read all 120 comments on this article. Based on that, I am voting for Molly Spearman in the run-off.

Reply
Voice of Reason June 16, 2014 at 4:55 pm

*slow clap* Given that Tom has posted the stupidest comments on this article and can’t defend even a single one of his points with a shred of evidence, I will be voting for Sally Atwater.

Reply
Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 4:58 pm

M326, Remember to show up August 1.

Reply
Jan June 16, 2014 at 6:05 pm

You show up August 1, I will show up June 24.

Everyone can vote even if they did not vote in the original election. And listen to that Sally Atwater interview.

Reply
Jason June 16, 2014 at 6:03 pm

Based on your profile, M326, you are a Democrat. Of course you are voting for Spearman!

Reply
Tired of this crap June 16, 2014 at 9:01 pm

If you are voting for Atwater after hearing that radio spot, you are as stupid as she is.

Reply
Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 4:58 pm Reply
Next It Will Be For Homeschool June 16, 2014 at 7:01 pm

Mandatory universal free public education is what made America great in the past century (to their credit, the Catholic parochial schools helped too in areas of their codomination, mostly northern cities).. Full-participation public education beat the Kaiser, Hitler, and Tojo both in the factories and on the battlefields. It darn well helped outcomplete the USSR as a superpower. Who cares that the Teabaggers don’t want to continue paying for it. Let them move to Sudan (seeing that they cannot actually move back to the middle ages).

Reply
Bible Thumper June 16, 2014 at 7:11 pm

Kaiser, Hitler, and Tojo had national run public schools. At that time there was no national role or Fed. money in education and no Fed. Dept.of Education.

Reply
Next It Will Be For Homeschool June 16, 2014 at 7:37 pm

Kaiser, Hitler, and Tojo had national run public schools. At that time US had no national role or Fed. money in education and no Fed. Dept.of Education.
How many wars have we won since Sputnik and the Federal became involve in education?
//////////////////
So what? It has nothing to do with my point that universal free public education in the US gave us the able technological and more easily teachable workforce and military necessary for modern war and international competition.

Reply
moovova June 20, 2014 at 8:16 pm

…and, apparently taught you to use sexually derogatory terms in an effort to support your arguments.

Reply
I'm with stupid June 16, 2014 at 8:29 pm

“FORCED participation public education beat the Kaiser, Hitler, and Tojo both in the factories and on the battlefields.”

There, now it’s fixed.

That being said, it was forced on both sides….so equating government run and monopolized education with winning wars is a non starter even if it wasn’t a moronic causation fallacy.

Reply
Phil June 16, 2014 at 7:10 pm

Sally Atwater claims in her latest ad that she has an “A+ education plan”. Is there a web link, text file, pdf file or ANYTHING that the voters can actually SEE? If so, please let us know. A 30 second ad with bullet points on a green board doesn’t quite qualify, to me, as a “detailed” plan, I have to wonder out loud IF this plan even exists.

Reply
Godslayer June 17, 2014 at 10:57 am

Congratulations for endorsing a moron. Guess you want everyone else in SC to be as stupid as you are.

Reply
brian June 17, 2014 at 1:39 pm

All atwater has is her husband’s last name and questionable legecy

Reply
BIN News June 17, 2014 at 4:12 pm

Molly Spearman is the very best choice.

Ms. Atwater is a nice little’ole lady, but she is clueless. Listen to this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/06/16/want-to-hear-a-really-awkward-interview-with-a-politician/

No wonder Atwater refused to debate. She has no idea what she is doing.

Only uninformed right-wing-Republicrat-zombies (RWRZ) would vote for her.

She clearly knows nothing about the real issues facing S.C.

…just like Trikki Nikki Haley – clueless!

BIN News Editorial Staff
Flair and Balanced

Reply
RG June 17, 2014 at 4:36 pm

I couldn’t vote for a woman like this… ever. Has anyone seen some of things she’s supported? Take a look: http://www.howmollyrolls.com/

Reply
edr June 17, 2014 at 7:01 pm

Sally does alright for a school teacher, owns house in Washington worth 1,400,000
one in columbia worth 420,000 and a condo in Charleston worth 250,000

Reply
edr June 17, 2014 at 8:13 pm

Sally does alright for a school teacher. She owns a house in Washington worth 1,400,000
a house in Columbia worth 420,000 and a condo in Charleston worth 250,000.
She should be running for Treasurer or Comptroller General

Reply
edr June 17, 2014 at 8:20 pm

Molly gave all her money to attorney Bretbart to invest and lost it all.
She shows real good judgement.

Reply
EDR June 18, 2014 at 5:50 pm

HOW MUCH MONEY DID SHE GET FROM ATTORNEYS KEN CHILDS AND DAVE DUFF?????

Reply
ISLANDDCS June 20, 2014 at 3:53 pm

sad , these are our two choices

Reply
showbob June 25, 2014 at 3:32 am

Well Atwater is history! Thank God. I just listened to another interview recently where she kept on saying, ” the teachers are FLUSTRATED”? I think she means frustrated. I hope she did not talk like that up in DC. Maybe that’s why she’s back.? Everytime I hear her. Paula Dean comes to mind. Thanks Ya’ll ! Ya’ll come back ya hear.

Reply

Leave a Comment