Skip to comments.
Education Secretary Backs Public Boarding Schools: ‘Certain Kids We Should Have 24/7’
Cybercast News Service ^
| May 12, 2015 | 3:03 PM EDT
| Penny Starr
Posted on 05/13/2015 9:08:14 AM PDT by Olog-hai
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
To: Olog-hai
First two thoughts:
Your kids belong to us.
and
It Takes a Village. .
21
posted on
05/13/2015 9:26:51 AM PDT
by
Art in Idaho
(Conservatism is the only Hope for Western Civilization.)
To: Olog-hai; All
22
posted on
05/13/2015 9:27:18 AM PDT
by
KC_Lion
(This Millennial is for Cruz!)
To: Olog-hai
"Thats a little bit of a different ideaa controversial ideabut the question is do we have some children where theres not a mom, theres not a dad, theres not a grandma, theres just nobody at home? Theres just certain kids we should have 24/7 to really create a safe environment and give them a chance to be successful.
Well, he's talking about - what? - 20 million kids who don't have an intact family? That's a lot of boarding schools. It's an indirect admission of the utter failure of the sexual revolution and the drug culture and their devastating influence on families. It is further proof that the end result of progressivism is a highly regimented anthill society managed by an elite.
But - really - this is the end-game of where their logic takes them. First it was day care, then early childhood education, then extended hours at community centers, now it's 24/7 boarding schools. For anal-retentive social engineers like Arne Duncan, there is literally no point at which they can say, "HERE we must stop, here we can go no further." It is always more and more; that is what "progressivism" is.
The ultimate goal is the institutionalization of an entire society, the ruling elite excepted. They began chipping away at parental rights about thirty years ago, and they are now approaching the point where children will be taken away from their parents and become wards of the state, whether parents like it or not. Duncan is revisiting an idea that was once used against - you guessed it - Native Americans. Progressivism has come full-circle.
To: Olog-hai
Obama telegraphed this idea a while back when he said ‘we want all women working’. Sorry, I don't remember exactly when but my thought was ‘yes, so you can control the kids and thus control the parents’.
24
posted on
05/13/2015 9:29:02 AM PDT
by
originalbuckeye
(Not my circus, not my monkeys.......)
To: Olog-hai
"And the state has no right to take kids either way."
Any parent that does not support their child is abusing/neglecting the child.
That's prima facie cause to remove the child to an institution that can meet their basic needs.
And it would be no more expensive, possibly LESS expensive that Welfare...which supports the piece of sh!t parent too.
It would also sever as a disincentive to combining poverty and pregnancy...ultimately reducing the number of children in need.
25
posted on
05/13/2015 9:30:17 AM PDT
by
Mariner
(War Criminal #18)
To: Art in Idaho; GraceG; cripplecreek; Publius; Monterrosa-24; annalex
Your kids belong to us.... It Takes a Village. . CORRECT Art!
That is exactly what the point of this is.
Hillary Spelled it out right there. They need the Youth.
That is way KINDERGARTEN is a GERMAN word, it came from Prussia to raise the child in the state as early as possible
Because in the olden days, when a kid started 1st Grade you were Six sometimes Seven! That is quite old for early indoctrination.
26
posted on
05/13/2015 9:30:47 AM PDT
by
KC_Lion
(This Millennial is for Cruz!)
To: Art in Idaho
Even if this were a great idea (it is not), where would the money come from.
Oh, silly me: The Rich.
27
posted on
05/13/2015 9:35:01 AM PDT
by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
To: Olog-hai
Leftists, having created the problem with the war on poverty with its perverse unintended consequences, now seeks to solve the problem with more of the same proving out Nathan Bedford's Maxim:
The remedy for failed socialism is invariably more socialism.
One might recall the history of The Carlisle Indian School and the leftist reaction to an undertaking that was motivated by a turn-of-the-century Christian impulse. The left absolutely hates the experiment because it sought to Christianize Indians, civilize them, prepare them for competition in the world and discipline them. Leftists regard that as inappropriate but I suspect their new version of The Carlisle Indian School would have much the same impulse but with all the Christian love carefully laundered out.
The impulse on the left is always the same, to treat people like chickens in a Skinner box and reeducate them according to their values. At least Christians who exposed Indian kids like Jim Thorpe to their school had a decent set of values and a true philosophy. They sought to create a generation of independent people rather than a generation of dependents.
28
posted on
05/13/2015 9:35:23 AM PDT
by
nathanbedford
("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
To: Olog-hai
To: Olog-hai
Also coming just after Barry bemoaned the rich (other than he and Shelly, apparently) sending their kids to private school.
What he really meant was no kids should be able to attend private schools unless all kids can.
To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
Like Hillary, they’re raising a village to take your child. It’s not bad enough that the DNC has its own official pedophilia wing in the NEA. How bad would the abuse become in these camps?
31
posted on
05/13/2015 9:54:09 AM PDT
by
DPMD
To: Mariner
You are not that far off of the progressive plan to institutionalize all children and replace all families.
To: Olog-hai
keep the kids away from the union loving public school teachers!
33
posted on
05/13/2015 9:59:22 AM PDT
by
rrrod
(at home in Medellin Colombia)
To: Olog-hai
Been predicting this for years. They want the children fully indoctrinated into the govt.
34
posted on
05/13/2015 10:05:18 AM PDT
by
raybbr
(Obamacare needs a deatha panel.)
To: Olog-hai
I just did some quick figuring and estimate that if they enrolled 5 million kids, it would require $350 billion up-front to build the schools, and about $140 billion a year thereafter for salaries and expenses to operate them. And I was trying to be conservative. In the real world, my figures would probably double.
To: raybbr
The Communist Manifesto has “predicted” this for years as well. Not for nothing did they stipulate “(f)ree education for all children in public schools”.
36
posted on
05/13/2015 10:26:13 AM PDT
by
Olog-hai
To: Olog-hai
It’s been tried...by the Khmer Rouge!
37
posted on
05/13/2015 10:27:46 AM PDT
by
Renkluaf
To: Olog-hai
Commit your offspring to a government mental-adjustment institution and you no longer have any reason to complain about what the government decides to do with its children.
Stop wimpering. You made your bed...
38
posted on
05/13/2015 10:33:33 AM PDT
by
SuperLuminal
(Where is another agitator for republicanism like Sam Adams when we need him?)
To: Olog-hai
That’s what we’ll get if Hillary “it takes a village” Clinton wins.
39
posted on
05/13/2015 11:03:06 AM PDT
by
bgill
(CDC site, "we still do not know exactly how people are infected with Ebola")
To: Olog-hai
[Theres] very little violence happening in schools. This guy has never gone on You Tube and done a search for "High School Fight."
40
posted on
05/13/2015 11:10:28 AM PDT
by
henkster
(Do I really need a sarcasm tag?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson