Last updated on 2013.02.03
Senator John Thune is still not on Willard Mitt Romney's veep shortlist. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is. Jindal's shortlisting surely brings glee to Professor Schaff, who finds Jindal the "perfect choice":
Let's be honest, his dark skin helps. Mitt Romney is the kind of guy who just stepped out of a Stuff White People Like gag. A little unconventionality helps. Also, no one doubts Jindal's competence. Look at his bio. This is a guy who the best universities in the world were recruiting at a young age. He has executive and legislative experience. He has deep knowledge of health care. The one knock on him is that he flubbed the Republican SOTU response a few years ago [Jon Schaff, "Veep Stakes," South Dakota Politics, 2012.07.06].
The one knock? How about Jindal's support for funding Muslim schools with taxpayer dollars?
My friend LK gets full credit for mirthfully piecing together this conspiracy theory. LK reads Ed Randazzo's fear-mongering about Muslims trying to take over our public schools. LK reads this oh-too-tasty serves-you-right news report about a Christian theocratist in Louisiana who helped pass Governor Jindal's vaunted education reform plan only to react in horror to see that Jindal's plan sends money to proliferating Muslim schools:
Rep. Valarie Hodges, R-Watson, says she had no idea that Gov. Bobby Jindal's overhaul of the state's educational system might mean taxpayer support of Muslim schools.
"I actually support funding for teaching the fundamentals of America's Founding Fathers' religion, which is Christianity, in public schools or private schools," the District 64 Representative said Monday.
"I liked the idea of giving parents the option of sending their children to a public school or a Christian school," Hodges said.
Hodges mistakenly assumed that "religious" meant "Christian."
..."Unfortunately it will not be limited to the Founders' religion," Hodges said. "We need to insure that it does not open the door to fund radical Islam schools. There are a thousand Muslim schools that have sprung up recently. I do not support using public funds for teaching Islam anywhere here in Louisiana" [Alice Dowty, "Hodges Now Leary of Jindal Reform," Livingston Parish News, 2012.06.29].
LK concludes in mythic fashion:
Sleeper agents exist among us, and Muslims want to use schools to take over the United States. Jindal duped a Christian state legislator into voting for a policy that provides taxpayer money to Muslim schools. Can there be any doubt that Jindal is a sleeper agent determined to force Americans to face Mecca and pray five times a day? [LK, "I Create Another Conspiracy: Bobby Jindal Is an Islamist Sleeper Agent," The Displaced Plainsman, 2012.07.07]
Readers will recall that Imam Jindal came to South Dakota just two weeks ago to speak at the state Republican convention. He made this damning comment about our Governor Dennis Daugaard's education reform scheme:
"I can't praise your governor enough for his bold reforms to improve South Dakota schools," Jindal said, referring to the package of changes Daugaard proposed last year in House Bill 1234, which probably is headed for a popular vote this November [David Montgomery, "GOP's Jindal Slams Obama's Leadership," that Sioux Falls paper, 2012.06.23].
Holy madrassas in Mobridge! Jindal might as well have shouted Allahu Akbar! His education reforms support Muslim schools. He praises Governor Daugaard's education reforms. Ergo, Daugaard is part of the jihad too! Q.E.D.! (That's Arabic for Quran EDucation.)
Rep. Hodges's huff and LK's hyperbole should show Randazzo why he should quit censoring the comment I sent in response to his histrionics:
I guarantee, if any Muslims try to make the Quran the basis of our public K-12 curriculum, I will fight just as hard as I do against the explicit threats and legislation South Dakota's Christian theocrats have made to make the Bible the basis of our public K-12 curriculum. If the Muslim threat is real, you had better get on board 100% with separation of church and state [CAH, comment too hot for the Howie Potemkin blogosphere, 2012.07.07].
No religious school should receive public funds. No parent should receive a government subsidy for submitting a child to religious instruction. A solid wall of separation between church and state will protect all religions from the predations Randazzo and Hodges fear (but which Hodges explicitly supports if they promote her preferred faith).
Willard Mitt Romney has already demonstrated his inability to challenge President Obama on two main GOP attack lines, job creation and the Affordable Care Act. If the Mormon nominee picks a running mate who has given public money to support Muslim education, he'll undermine an uglier subline of the GOP narrative, that you can't vote for Barack Hussein Obama because he's secretly promoting Islam.
Hey, Willard: maybe a Jindal nomination is exactly what your party needs.
A few days ago I found this article very interesting. So is this the next "side issue"?
http://www.coloradostatesman.com/content/993597-dutch-lawmaker-brings-his-crusade-against-islam-conservative-confab
PrairieLady: I translate that to, "if you cannot win an argument or change people's minds with what's true and what's not true, then scare your audience into submission." Fear is an awesome manipulator.
If I was a Conservative/tea partier/Republican I'd find it pretty hard to leave my house. It's a big scary world out there and someone's out to take away everything, including my mind.
When does Reagan's Republican party start cutting the wheat from the chaff? When the money runs out, and not before, I imagine. Have we gone past the McCarthy-era level of fear yet?
Jindal would be great!
So Mike, you're cool with tax dollars supporting Muslim schools?
If they are paying for one religious school I don't think they should discriminate.
All right, then tax dollars to support the Muslim schools that Ed Randazzo says are out to take over America are not a problem. How do you feel, Mike, about the general principle of the government supporting any religion with dollars for their private schools?
@ Taunia I can not believe the craziness that is happening. Everyday, for hours, I read a variety of news sources. If it is not some GOP state taking rights away from women, it is some evangilist spouting a hate sermon, idiots bickering over semantics, or Mitt repeating the same empty rhetoric. At times I crack up, but mostly sit with my mouth hanging open.
Tax dollars to no religious schools. None. Zero. Not Muslim, heathen, bumgarden, Sloven or GodOfToads. Not Christian, not Buddha, not the school of the Order of Offwhite.
No tax dollars to anything that even smells of cult.
***grudznick is a nationally syndicated author. He has been a conservative stalwart for over 70 years and is currently the immediate past president of the Conservatives with Common Sense, an organization spurned by Mr. Howie which is in the process of creating a weekly television program that will probably be seen on cable systems in most of South Dakota***
@Grudznick..............DITTO! And while we are at it...tax all relegious institutions.
All's fair in love, god, and allah. If the taxpayers can support parochial schools by allowing their students to ride public school buses; if the state can support parochial schools by cutting them in a student book deals; if the state can support offset funding for parochial schools in school athletics; if the state can support the myriad of ways the Supreme Court allowed the erosion of the state support of religion - then, you bet, the state better start funding the Muslim schools and the schools of every other sect, group, and belief.
Great blog post by the way Cory!
I don't have a problem with money going to parents in the form of a voucher for the parent to decide if that money goes to a private school, religious school, home school or public school.
The money should follow the kid.
I know some conservatives do not like vouchers (Kristi Noem) or Government money going to religious schools. Many of them are Catholic and feel that if the Catholic school starts getting money from the Government the Government will then start coming in and telling the school how to educate kids etc...
Maybe 100% of the money doesn't need to follow the kid but say 20% or 40% would allow for a private school to be more affordable to a parent?
Maybe it would allow a higher performing public school to attract more kids and get more money also and create better competition.
Throwing an idea out there.
Daugaard and Jindal are trying some different ideas in education. I'm not a huge fan of 1234 but am interested in Jindal's system from what I've read.
There should never be any voucher system for any private school education in any way, shape or form. Never, no way, no how ever.
.
If someone, somewhere wants to send their child to a 'special' private school they should foot the entire cost with no tax break. Home schoolers get no breaks on anything. Their children should not be allowed to participate in any extracurricular without paying a stiff fee and the children should have to pass minimum level grade level tests.
.
I give no sympathy for the extra costs a parent pays to send their children to profit driven / private owned / church owned schools. Children need socialization gained from large groups of children learning together. If your child is so special they cannot learn in this environment then you must have more problems than can be solved by holding your child home back. Home schooling or vouchers will never be the answer to what ails our education system.
A stiffer fee. Stiffer even than stiff. I voucher for that, sir.
The parent knows best. They pay taxes and if the school in their district isn't doing a good job they shouldn't be forced to have all of their tax dollars footing the bill for bad education plus pay more money for a better education elsewhere even another public school. (This isn't a big issue in SD like it is in many urban areas).
Another area I'd like to see looked at is school sports. Why do they get so much funding rather than things like Art, science, theatre etc.
I absolutely believe it is wrong to punish kids for being homeschooled. If kids are in a school district they should be allowed to participate in activities. And kids who are homeschooled do socialize - that is a common myth perpetuated by ignorant people. I know some homeschooled kids and they are very social and active in the community. I would never want to exclude them from participating in school activities.
(Tim Tebow was homeschooled and participated in highschool sports - I'm glad he had the chance to be involved in athletics)
I also know kids who attend a montessori school. Is there something wrong with that also Testor 15?
Kids are always punished for stupid decisions adults make, mike. There are no juvenile delinquents, only adult delinquents.
Mike, if we're going with personal anecdotes, I went over to a homeschooled kid's house once, and he played submarine with his poop in the toilet when he was 10 years old. So, I wouldn't say he was successfully socialized. Also, I never went back to his house.
I'm with others on this. Private schools should never be publicly funded, whether by tax breaks, or by vouchers, or by anything else. I also agree all students, public, private, or homeschool, should have to pass the same tests.
The fact is, we can say "the parent knows best" all we want, but I think we all know, deep down, that that is utter BS. Does the high-school dropout parent homeschooling their child "know best"? Does the religious nut parent teaching their child that the world is 6,000 years old and that dinosaurs are a test from God "know best"? The objective answer is no. No, that parent does not know best.
So, regardless of whether or not you agree with facts, your child should need to have a basic understanding of things like biology, math, and other sciences (and the more liberal of arts) to continue moving through the system, otherwise they're just being left behind.
Homeschool students should be able to take part in extracurricular activities, though, as long as their parents pay taxes.
That all said, I'm not entirely sure I like the concept of private schools existing in the first place.
You are wise, Mr. Carter, in much of your comment. And I too would not have gone back to the poop submarine kid's house.
I remember well Bill Flemming's admonition to not chase things down rabbit holes. OK, it wasn't things it was falling through the looking glass of some of Sibby's rants.
This is the same thing. We've been chasing our tails around teacher evaluations, vouchers for Muslim schools (like that will happen in SD anytime soon) and other nonsense.
As Jindal's plan demonstrates, the bigger picture is in privatizing schools, dismantling teacher organizations and reducing state investments in children. If the preceding goals are met and students see a benefit, that is a side benefit and not the goal.
Here's what one paper in Louisiana had to say and I think it speaks volumes as to what Republicans are trying to accomplish in South Dakota.
http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20120703/NEWS01/120703001/Some-La-lawmakers-see-deception-by-Jindal-s-top-school-official
No on 16. It's a Bad Law.
It's bad for our communities, bad for our kids and bad for the people we entrust to educate them.
Oh boy, now I done it...misspelled Bill's last name...My deepest apologies!
For those who were thinking I was talking about the Bill Flemming who was the sportcaster for ABC's Wide World of Sports...I'm sorry too.
Although, sometime following politics in South Dakota can look like the promo for ABC's Wide World of Sports with the Thrill of Victory and the Agony of Defeat. Right now I feel like the ski jumper...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2AZH4FeGsc
Did I mention my shortcomings in working with an iPad keyboard? There seems to be a 've, and the letter s is missing a few times. Hope everyone had as good of weekend as we had.
For the record, most of my formal education took place outside of South Dakota, so the teachers in our state are off the hook.
Jindel wants to privatize schools and really could care less what relegion the schools want to be. They have a number of charter schools already.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/01/us-education-vouchers-idUSL1E8H10AG20120601
Louisiana also has a number of charter schools. http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2012/06/charter_school_group_rarely_at.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/01/us-education-vouchers-idUSL1E8H10AG20120601
http://www.doe.state.la.us/divisions/charters/
"In Louisiana, charters are established by a variety of groups, including businesses, non-profits, parent groups, education groups and others. However, sponsoring groups must include no fewer than three certified teachers.
Charter schools are governed independently by a board of directors and are free from many laws and regulations governing traditional schools. This allows charter schools significant flexibility and autonomy to allocate resources. However, in exchange for this flexibility, charter schools are regularly monitored and must demonstrate defined academic achievement goals and maintain satisfactory financial and contractual performance indicators in order to have their charters renewed. Thus, charter schools in Louisiana are subject to stringent standards as well as specific objectives outlined in their charter contracts with local school boards or BESE. "
This would rid a state of alot of pesky problems with teachers, tenure, etc.
Carter,
Very funny... A submarine huh?
I'm not sure I disagree with you on much. Kids need to be educated and should learn and understand the topics you laid out. I'm just saying I don't have a problem with parents having more say in where their child is educated or if money follows their child.
(It's not an issue that is likely to take over SD anytime soon. Unless you think this is what DD has instore for us next session?)
"money should follow the kid"—one problem there. South Dakota's funding formula uses enrollment as the proxy for calculating school operating costs. But that doesn't mean that money somehow belongs to that kid or that kid's parents. We spend that money to maintain a free public education system. The property tax dollars my wife and I pay have the same purpose as the tax dollars single folks and retirees contribute: to educate everyone, not one specific child. Vouchers are an abdication of our constitutional obligation to maintain a free and uniform education system.
Besides, in South Dakota, vouchers are irrelevant. Our market can't support enough affordable options to make vouchers practical.
Jindal is a real piece of work...speaking of submarines. His performance on ABC yesterday morning in trying to support Romney was laughable...except that parts of the right wing apparently believe any nonsense factoid tossed out by guys like Jindal who have no respect for truth or reality.
This is totally off topic, but Doug, way to use "factoid" correctly! It's a rare thing.
Indian Americans tend to the Right while American Indians tend to the Left.
Willard to announce nerdling sidekick after Rome trip: WBUR Boston's Here and Now.
Wow ! These are the same elected officials blaming Obama for having ties to Muslims.I don't ever think Obama gave them Public funds...WoW!