As everyone who has any sense has noted already, Obama would like to run on anything but the economy and his record. Therefore, it’s up to his media surrogates to try to put the focus anywhere else . . . for example, on a “contraception” mandate that just happens to violate the First Amendment. Santorum’s taken some abuse for supposedly playing into this tactic, but has he really, or is that the narrative being foisted on him? And if it’s the latter, then why are some conservatives so eager to aid in doing so?
I ask because of the brouhaha over Santorum’s comments about college, where he said that Obama was being a “snob” for wanting everyone to go:
Santorum’s right on the indoctrination issue, but that’s not the point, really. The point is that Obama’s scheme is intended to accomplish two things: 1) keep the higher education bubble inflated; and 2) to prolong American students’ education, since they aren’t being well enough educated in K-12, as things stand.
Another way of saying this is that Obama sees higher education as fundamentally remedial. If public educators were doing their jobs, and parents were doing theirs, students would be learning enough by the time they graduated high school to have the fundamental skills and knowledge that would make them employable in most sectors of the economy. Unfortunately, that’s far too much to ask of our public schools. Rigorous academics are an afterthought, and the unions and their liberal enablers, who have made the core curriculum about espousing proper attitudes towards polar bears and other nonsense meant to create of a young person a ward of the state, are the prime creators of the problem. Dependency and respect for authority, however ill gotten, are what they strive to inculcate.
Trade schools? Who’s talking about them? Hell, law school students are suing law schools for painting a rosy picture of the job market that hasn’t panned out, and caveat emptor has gone to the wayside.
Is this really just a social issue, when government subsidies in the form of grants and loans have caused the cost of higher education to skyrocket? You tell me.
Charters aren’t a panacea, but they have greater latitude to react to incidents like this than regular public schools do:
I’m not bagging on Oprah for this, though. Don’t care for her, but it’s not her fault.
Joy McCann on February 27, 2012 at 4:39 pm said:
Well, you just braided a lot of things together, there . . .
I know that the lefties and the mainstream media (but I repeat myself) exaggerate the degree to which Rick Santorum gets bogged down in “social issues,” but there is honestly a lot there, beyond the distortions.
At the same time one admires his courage, particularly with respect to life issues and to his theological candor, there is actually a lot to be nervous about when someone’s stance is that 1) the states may pass all the bad, oppressive laws they please (except, of course, when it comes to healthcare in Massachusetts); 2) that mainstream Protestant churches have been taken over by Satan; 3) that the libertarian-leaning elements within the GOP are largely disposable, and 4) that JFK–the nation’s first and only Roman Catholic President–was wrong to suggest a rigorous divide between Church and State.
(Someone is now going to provide me with a 800-word-or-better defense of Santorum on one of those issues–perhaps all of ‘em–but the problem lies with contemplating a candidate whose stances require 800-word-or-better defenses.)
I happen to agree with the average voter that it’s reassuring when our leaders have ethical systems that are rooted in actual religion, rather than bloodless doctrines concocted during the 1960s. It’s no guarantee the man/woman won’t turn out to be a scoundrel, but it’s largely helpful.
On the other hand, one doesn’t have to buy everything the MSM says about him in order to suspect from time to time that Rick Santorum is running for First Deacon, rather than President of the (entire) United States. And that some of the soundbites he so willingly provides the mainstream media underscore swing voters’ worst fears about the GOP.
Dan Collins on February 27, 2012 at 5:00 pm said:
All I’m saying is that this particular charge doesn’t hold up in this particular case. Government educational policy has broad economic effects.