Ben Carson on White House: ‘I am starting to think about it’

[Jroc]

Vouchers & charter schools empower the parents & the children. That's why liberals oppose it. They want to empower the unions regardless of the cost to the child or his/her future. Keep them kids trapped in the system, feed them & have their vote for life rather than giving them the chance to break free of the cycle

Nonsense.

Voucher programs and charter schools are a partisan contrivance of the right intended to undermine the quality of education in public schools.

Liberals correctly oppose charter schools because they're a waste of taxpayers' money, where that money could be better spent on improving public schools for all students.

Indeed, charter schools have failed to realize their promise of improving education standards:

The Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University found in a 2009 report that 17% of charter schools outperformed their public school equivalents, while 37% of charter schools performed worse than regular local schools, and the rest were about the same. A 2010 study by Mathematica Policy Research found that, on average, charter middle schools that held lotteries were neither more nor less successful than regular middle schools in improving student achievement, behavior, or school progress. Among the charter schools considered in the study, more had statistically significant negative effects on student achievement than statistically significant positive effects. These findings are echoed in a number of other studies.

Education Justice News - Charter School Achievement: Hype vs. Evidence

The most important thing we can do to improve students' performance is to get politics out of education.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baM8N24K8kE"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baM8N24K8kE[/ame]

 

[rightwinger]

Dems have elected ten times the number of blacks than republicans have and to much higher office

How can a party that is 90% white have the audacity to tell people not to focus on skin color?

Why does a party that claims diversity focus on skin color. Rightwingnut seems to focus only on color. Fucking asshole racist that he is.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

A party that can only claim 10% nonwhite when the country is over 40 % nonwhite has serious issues. To try to play the mock....How dare you bring up race? Is a joke

 

[Papageorgio]

Just because I point out the horrendous record Republicans have with blacks?

And he points out your racism and hatred for blacks, if they don't adhere to your standards.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

I mock your choices in "we have black candidates too" Shills who soak the Republican faithful by spouting the same rhetoric about blacks.

I mock the pathetic attempts of Republicans to court the black vote by elevating shameless panderers to right wing rhetoric and expecting blacks to flock to the right to support these guys

I am the same against the Democrats, they have done nothing but pander the black vote, while delivering nothing, but more food stamps and higher unemployment. Is that the Democrats idea of taking care of their own, or pandering to the blacks?


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[Yurt]

Why does a party that claims diversity focus on skin color. Rightwingnut seems to focus only on color. Fucking asshole racist that he is.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

A party that can only claim 10% nonwhite when the country is over 40 % nonwhite has serious issues. To try to play the mock....How dare you bring up race? Is a joke

you mean like when only 5% of blacks vote republican and the rest vote democrat. using your logic, if 95% of whites voted republican, they would be racist.

here is the thing RW. you are way to focused on skin color. MLK jr. would be ashamed of you. racist like you keep this country divided by pigment instead of ideas and abilities. you want the focus on skin color, when the real issue is: what is best for this country.

if 95% of black people feel dems are the best, good for them. vote away. if the pubs are 90% white, so what? the democratic leadership is 95% white. practice what you preach hypocrite.

people like you use non-whites as political pawns. it sickens me. you have no dream that we won't be judged based on the color of our skin, your dream is that we will ALWAYS be judge based on the color of our skin. your dream is keep those of different skin color separate. you don't care about black people or asian people etc, all you care about is race mongering.

well, you've succeeded. congrats.

 

[Votto]

Republicans won't vote for a black man

The real question is, would democrats vote for someone who is not at least half white?

 

[Votto]

I for one would love to see an intelligent speaker get up and utter sane thought provoking statements unlike the Bush boys saying that embracing illegals is an act of "love". Not that there is anything wrong with that, but they should keep their sexual preferences to themselves.

It would also be refreshing to see someone outside the political system, unlike Obama who was is a pure bred politician made to win elections. Let's face it, lawyers suck.

 

[Esmeralda]

We want them to get an education, think for themselves. Voucher programs work. If they get an education, they won't need government programs to do anything. How long has the war on ? The war has made it worse. Democrats hate successful black conservatives, y'all have blasted everyone of them. You say Carson doesn't have experience, but you support the least qualified president in history. Obama.

School voucher programs are govenment programs. You want the government to pay people to send their kids to private schools when there are already public schools free for everyone.

Really?

Free?

Of course, funded by tax dollars. The school voucher program is a government program on top of a government program. We already use tax dollars to fund public schools. You want an additional program on top of that in which the government pays people to send their kids to private schools. And, the main reason you want it is so conservative Christians can send their kids to Christian schools. The assertion that you want a voucher program so it can help inner city black kids is a smoke screen nobody is buying.

In Seattle, like in all of America, the city is divided into school districts and your kids go to the school nearest your home. But, they have a program where if you don't like that school, you can send your kid to any other school in the district. I don't know if that is typical in all school districts across the country, but it should be. This way parents feel they have more control where theirs kids go to school. But, you have to arrange your own transportation to get your kid to and from school.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Of course, funded by tax dollars. The school voucher program is a government program on top of a government program.

It's not on top of, it's in place of. The state is paying for a child to be educated. If a child is not attending a public school, then the state is not paying the public school to educate that child. When the state gives the voucher, then the state, once again, is paying for that child to be educated. That's not an additional expense.

And, the main reason you want it is so conservative Christians can send their kids to Christian schools.

And exactly what is wrong with that? Why do liberals believe that the propaganda slopped out in public schools has the optimum philosophic content to meet every family's needs? I write this as an Atheist. It's not for you nor I to decide what is in the best interests of some family.

In Seattle, like in all of America, the city is divided into school districts and your kids go to the school nearest your home. But, they have a program where if you don't like that school, you can send your kid to any other school in the district. I don't know if that is typical in all school districts across the country, but it should be.

Public school is public school is public school. They are ideologically uniform, especially so within a district. All that changes when students move between schools are the demographics of the students and the follow-on effects from that.

 

[Papageorgio]

School voucher programs are govenment programs. You want the government to pay people to send their kids to private schools when there are already public schools free for everyone.

Really?

Free?

Of course, funded by tax dollars. The school voucher program is a government program on top of a government program. We already use tax dollars to fund public schools. You want an additional program on top of that in which the government pays people to send their kids to private schools. And, the main reason you want it is so conservative Christians can send their kids to Christian schools. The assertion that you want a voucher program so it can help inner city black kids is a smoke screen nobody is buying.

In Seattle, like in all of America, the city is divided into school districts and your kids go to the school nearest your home. But, they have a program where if you don't like that school, you can send your kid to any other school in the district. I don't know if that is typical in all school districts across the country, but it should be. This way parents feel they have more control where theirs kids go to school. But, you have to arrange your own transportation to get your kid to and from school.

It isn't added government expense, it's an added program meant to give every child an education, one that suits the child, not the school. I know some atheist families that have sent their kids to a "Christian" school because it offered more a disciplined approach to school and didn't put up with trouble makers.

The Seattle issue is the schools in the same school districts must have openings in the school, otherwise...

Democrats years ago were for the voucher system, what happened that changed their minds?


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[Samson]

School voucher programs are govenment programs. You want the government to pay people to send their kids to private schools when there are already public schools free for everyone.

Really?

Free?

Of course, funded by tax dollars. The school voucher program is a government program on top of a government program. We already use tax dollars to fund public schools. You want an additional program on top of that in which the government pays people to send their kids to private schools. And, the main reason you want it is so conservative Christians can send their kids to Christian schools. The assertion that you want a voucher program so it can help inner city black kids is a smoke screen nobody is buying.

In Seattle, like in all of America, the city is divided into school districts and your kids go to the school nearest your home. But, they have a program where if you don't like that school, you can send your kid to any other school in the district. I don't know if that is typical in all school districts across the country, but it should be. This way parents feel they have more control where theirs kids go to school. But, you have to arrange your own transportation to get your kid to and from school.

Anyone who compares "free" public school to the some sort of cost associated with a voucher program has a few screws loose to begin with, but to make the astonishingly weak assumption that the only group that would ever use vouchers are Christians requires a level of stupidity for which only Esmerelda could aspire.

But apart from her idiotic anti Christian diatribe, there is the kernel of truth; vouchers would allow choice for parents who could also afford the transportation costs, not necessarily all parents. This would cause less economically challenged students to concentrate in schools where only they could afford transportation.

 

[Politico]

He can think about it all he wants. He will never be president.

 

[Slyhunter]

Republicans won't vote for a black man

I'll vote for West.

 

[JoeB131]

What is an uncle tom you racist piece of shit

The kind of black guy who takes shitloads of money from white people telling them how shiftless and lazy other black folks are.

See ALso.

Ben Carson
Alan Keyes
Herman "Nein, Nein, Nein" Cain
Clarence Thomas

The irony here is that the people you named are actual victims of racism, but don't bitch about it for reasons of personal gain.

While numbnuts like you look up to pure race hustlers such as:

Revvum Jesse Jackson
Revvum Al Sharpton
Louis Farrakhan
Elijah Cummings
Sheila Jackson Lee
Maxine Waters

And lets not forget the biggest victim of racism ever:

Barack Obama ....

I think anyone involved in politics is a "hustler". What boat did you just come in off of.

But guys like Carson get huge speaking fees to go in front of audiences full of white people and tell them how shiftless other blacks are.

What I'd like to see. Ben Carson going in front of an audience of black folks talking that shit.

 

[JoeB131]

[
The kind of black guy who takes shitloads of money from white people telling them how shiftless and lazy other black folks are.

See ALso.

Ben Carson
Alan Keyes
Herman "Nein, Nein, Nein" Cain
Clarence Thomas

Like Obama that actually has done nothing for black communities except increase their the number on food stamps and limit the number of jobs available for blacks.

You are a complete asshole.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it's all Obama's fault that the economy was destroyed a year before he came into office.

Not George W. Something who was actually president when that shit went down.

 

[Statistikhengst]

no. just pointing out that you are a liar and a racist.

the dems record does not fair much better. your argument is silly, for example....republicans only have 10 blacks on their side, well dems have 30, yet, both parties have 10,000 whites on their side and you are arguing some sort of moral superiority.

it is downright stupid. let all americans be in the party they want to and run for the party they want to. stop focusing on skin color RW. you spit on MLK jr's grave everytime you bring up skin color. you do not have the dream.

Dems have elected ten times the number of blacks than republicans have and to much higher office

How can a party that is 90% white have the audacity to tell people not to focus on skin color?

It can and must if it is a party with a platform as shitty as the GOPs. It can and must if it's economic performance over 100 years sucks donkey dicks. The only thing left to a party is to divide people with all sorts of racist, bigoted, homophobic, xenophobic shit and then, like little 5 year olds, scream that the others are doing it.

Hillaryous!

 

[Statistikhengst]

Dems have elected ten times the number of blacks than republicans have and to much higher office

How can a party that is 90% white have the audacity to tell people not to focus on skin color?

Why does a party that claims diversity focus on skin color. Rightwingnut seems to focus only on color. Fucking asshole racist that he is.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

I hear that anger management courses even work for backwards Righties. Give it a try, it could maybe help you out of your dilemna.

Now, as to the title of the OP itself, which I created:


Ben Carson on White House: ‘I am starting to think about it’

The OP simply states that Dr. Ben Carson is now considering a presidential run.

 

[Statistikhengst]

What is an uncle tom you racist piece of shit

The kind of black guy who takes shitloads of money from white people telling them how shiftless and lazy other black folks are.

See ALso.

Ben Carson
Alan Keyes
Herman "Nein, Nein, Nein" Cain
Clarence Thomas

Like Obama that actually has done nothing for black communities except increase their the number on food stamps and limit the number of jobs available for blacks.

You are a complete asshole.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

Yes, indeed, anger management courses may be just the right thing for you!

 

[Statistikhengst]

A party that can only claim 10% nonwhite when the country is over 40 % nonwhite has serious issues. To try to play the mock....How dare you bring up race? Is a joke

you mean like when only 5% of blacks vote republican and the rest vote democrat. using your logic, if 95% of whites voted republican, they would be racist.

here is the thing RW. you are way to focused on skin color. MLK jr. would be ashamed of you. racist like you keep this country divided by pigment instead of ideas and abilities. you want the focus on skin color, when the real issue is: what is best for this country.

if 95% of black people feel dems are the best, good for them. vote away. if the pubs are 90% white, so what? the democratic leadership is 95% white. practice what you preach hypocrite.

people like you use non-whites as political pawns. it sickens me. you have no dream that we won't be judged based on the color of our skin, your dream is that we will ALWAYS be judge based on the color of our skin. your dream is keep those of different skin color separate. you don't care about black people or asian people etc, all you care about is race mongering.

well, you've succeeded. congrats.

So, you are a psychoanalyst? Or maybe just a psycho.

I am thinking more the latter in your case.

So much anger, so much bile from you, always. Poor Yurt.

Now, back to the title of the OP, which is:

Ben Carson on White House: ‘I am starting to think about it’

All the OP does is to report that Dr. Ben Carson is considering a presidential run.

Why not stick to the OP, like an adult, instead of trolling and attacking other members? Try it for a refreshing change, you might just like it!

 

[Stephanie]

I'm not a fan of the GOP playing the "we like negroes too" game. This identity politics shit has to go. I like Ben Carson, but if he weren't black he would have never been in the news.

It isn't the gop doing it
as you see who started the thread
I would vote for DR. Carson over the community agitator in there now
Carson isn't just an agitating dummy thug. he actually has some smarts

 

[Jackson]

I've listened to Ben Carson and liked what I heard. I could think about voting for him. Need to know so much more. We cannot be duped again.