If there's anything this country needs, it's more child labor

[Rage Against the McKee]

I see, so when Newt suggested that there might be some benefit to schools and businesses being able to give after-school jobs to children to help promote the value of working for a wage... that means he wants sweat shops.

Aren't these the same liberals who want to pay children just to attend class (to get their free education)? But they can't be paid to push a mop or shelve library books after class?

Maybe Ann Coulter really is right, liberalism is a mental disorder.

Who wants to pay children to go to class? Where did you see that?

Just Google it. Here is one example. among others:  http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1076550

Well, that's just Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). It's not as Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) as wanting to allow children to get exploited for lower wages, but it's still Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

See, there you go again with this "exploited" bullshit. How is paying a child to clean up the cafateria or shelve library books after class exploitation? You're being stupid.

If you pay a child an allowance for doing chores, is that exploitation?

If your neighbor pays your child $1 per hour to go shovel crap, that's exploitation. If you make your own child help around the house, that's instilling values. The school janitor job idea Newt had was only an example he gave to promote allowing children to work for less than minimum wage.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I see, so when Newt suggested that there might be some benefit to schools and businesses being able to give after-school jobs to children to help promote the value of working for a wage... that means he wants sweat shops.

Aren't these the same liberals who want to pay children just to attend class (to get their free education)? But they can't be paid to push a mop or shelve library books after class?

Maybe Ann Coulter really is right, liberalism is a mental disorder.

Who wants to pay children to go to class? Where did you see that?

Just Google it. Here is one example. among others:  http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1076550

Well, that's just Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). It's not as Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) as wanting to allow children to get exploited for lower wages, but it's still Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

See, there you go again with this "exploited" bullshit. How is paying a child to clean up the cafateria or shelve library books after class exploitation? You're being stupid.

If you pay a child an allowance for doing chores, is that exploitation?

If your neighbor pays your child $1 per hour to go shovel crap, that's exploitation. If you make your own child help around the house, that's instilling values. The school janitor job idea Newt had was only an example he gave to promote allowing children to work for less than minimum wage.

Oh, I get it, you're screwing with me. Nobody could be this dumb. Congratulations, you got me! 

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I see, so when Newt suggested that there might be some benefit to schools and businesses being able to give after-school jobs to children to help promote the value of working for a wage... that means he wants sweat shops.

Aren't these the same liberals who want to pay children just to attend class (to get their free education)? But they can't be paid to push a mop or shelve library books after class?

Maybe Ann Coulter really is right, liberalism is a mental disorder.

Who wants to pay children to go to class? Where did you see that?

Just Google it. Here is one example. among others:  http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1076550

Well, that's just Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). It's not as Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) as wanting to allow children to get exploited for lower wages, but it's still Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

See, there you go again with this "exploited" bullshit. How is paying a child to clean up the cafateria or shelve library books after class exploitation? You're being stupid.

If you pay a child an allowance for doing chores, is that exploitation?

If your neighbor pays your child $1 per hour to go shovel crap, that's exploitation. If you make your own child help around the house, that's instilling values. The school janitor job idea Newt had was only an example he gave to promote allowing children to work for less than minimum wage.

I must have missed that part.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I see, so when Newt suggested that there might be some benefit to schools and businesses being able to give after-school jobs to children to help promote the value of working for a wage... that means he wants sweat shops.

Aren't these the same liberals who want to pay children just to attend class (to get their free education)? But they can't be paid to push a mop or shelve library books after class?

Maybe Ann Coulter really is right, liberalism is a mental disorder.

Who wants to pay children to go to class? Where did you see that?

Just Google it. Here is one example. among others:  http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1076550

Well, that's just Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). It's not as Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) as wanting to allow children to get exploited for lower wages, but it's still Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

See, there you go again with this "exploited" bullshit. How is paying a child to clean up the cafateria or shelve library books after class exploitation? You're being stupid.

If you pay a child an allowance for doing chores, is that exploitation?

If your neighbor pays your child $1 per hour to go shovel crap, that's exploitation. If you make your own child help around the house, that's instilling values. The school janitor job idea Newt had was only an example he gave to promote allowing children to work for less than minimum wage.

I must have missed that part.

Who is going to hire a nine year old at $7.25 per hour? Really.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Anyone else surprised the left is taking this completely out of context and misrepresenting what was actually said?  Didn't think so.


Stop being so rough ridin' ridiculous please.  k thx

stating that child labor laws are "truly stupid" opens you up to such criticism.  what confounds me is that the same party that is saying that we could provide opportunity and life lessons to young impoverished people by allowing them to push a mop is actively seeking to change the school finance structure to ensure that they receive a less than equitable education.

and I'm sure you actually believe all of that

WTF does "less than equitable education" even mean.  Is there like a super democrat marketing team somewhere that invents these ridiculous talking points and then distributes them vis a vis a call tree or something?

Unadulterated lying is like breathing to the left.  Absolutely no sense of reality, whatever fits the agenda at that moment in time.  Psychopaths.

Great post as usual Brad!

it means when i worked in KC kids at Turner didn't have enought textbooks for a class set and kids in Olathe had a laptop for each student

Maybe the Turner School District property tax payers should "pay their fair share" like the Olathe taxpayers do.  I suppose it should be the Olathe taxpayers' "duty as a citizens" to fund the Turner school district as well as their own.  That's fair isn't it?

Call Tree Operator:  Lickey, have you heard about the "less than equitable education system" we currently have in place?

Lickey:  No, what's that?

Call Tree Operator": Well Lickey, the "less than equitable education system" is where kids in one school district have less amenities than kids in another school district, it's called the "less than equitable education system" and its all the Republicans fault and they are trying to make it worse, trust me

Lickey:  My god! What can I do to stop this equitable system of education

Call Tree Operator:  No!  It's the "less than equitable education system", get it straight, "less than equitable education system", say it with me "less" [...leeesssss] "than"  [ ....theennnn] "equitable" [.....equipicle] "education"  [. .. ..eduvacation]. . . meh, close enough

Call Tree Opeartor:  Now tell everyone, [abruptly hangs up]

Lickey:  "less than equitable education system"  

I wonder if the Republicans have a call tree promoting the "more than equitable education system"?

[Rage Against the McKee]

[LickNeckey]

Call Tree Operator:  Lickey, have you heard about the "less than equitable education system" we currently have in place?

Lickey:  No, what's that?

Call Tree Operator": Well Lickey, the "less than equitable education system" is where kids in one school district have less amenities than kids in another school district, it's called the "less than equitable education system" and its all the Republicans fault and they are trying to make it worse, trust me

Lickey:  My god! What can I do to stop this equitable system of education

Call Tree Operator:  No!  It's the "less than equitable education system", get it straight, "less than equitable education system", say it with me "less" [...leeesssss] "than"  [ ....theennnn] "equitable" [.....equipicle] "education"  [. .. ..eduvacation]. . . meh, close enough

Call Tree Opeartor:  Now tell everyone, [abruptly hangs up]

Lickey:  "less than equitable education system"   

I wonder if the Republicans have a call tree promoting the "more than equitable education system"?

This sunovabitch tapped my phone.   I'm on to you Pioli.

[LickNeckey]

Really though my only point with creating a more leveled educational playing field isn't to deny kids in Olathe opportunities to succeed. 

But rather to ensure that all individuals that have the potential to positively impact our state/country/planet have the chance to choose that path.

It is impossible to tell where the next great thinkers will come from.  So why limit the pool of canidates?

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

It is impossible to tell where the next great thinkers will come from.  So why limit the pool of canidates?

Exactly. That's why I'm pro life.

[LickNeckey]

i appreciate the pro-life sentiment. 

however i find that the people who are the strongest supporters of making sure kids are born often are the strongest opponents of ensuring the child has a chance when they arrive.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

i appreciate the pro-life sentiment.  

however i find that the people who are the strongest supporters of making sure kids are born often are the strongest opponents of ensuring the child has a chance when they arrive.

Conservatives and liberals define "has a chance" differently. No conservative I know disputes the necessity of some welfare to provide a safety net. The key is to avoid turning this net into a hammock. A hammock can actually harm children. Look at what decades of welfare expansion and victimhood did to the black community (ooh, that's gonna make liberal heads explode!) Thus, there is no hypocrisy in being pro-life and pro-welfare reform. By contrast, there is definitely hypocrisy in favoring unrestricted abortion and then decrying any efforts to reform welfare as "not caring about the children."

[LickNeckey]

i was just mocked for stating that we should provide an equitable education to all students.

i do not remember masking for hammocks rather preparing students to not need a hammock

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

i was just mocked for stating that we should provide an equitable education to all students.

i do not remember masking for hammocks rather preparing students to not need a hammock

I disagree that spending more money on education means a better education. Past performance would not seem to support this. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, published an interesting paper on this issue a few years back. The following chart compares total state and federal expenditures, per pupil, adjusted for inflation, against NAEP reading scores:



And call me crazy, but I want my property taxes to go to the schools in my community, where I will send my kids to school.

[LickNeckey]

is that information adjusted for inflation???

also i am not saying we should just throw money at the problem and i understand your desire to keep your money close to home.

however that does not necessarily generate an equitable education system.  I do not believe that education is a welfare program but one that is eesential to a functional first world nation.  you have said that you agree that children born in poverty can be the leaders of tomorrow however you do not seem to want to shoulder the soceital burden of preparing them to do so.

It is impossible to tell where the next great thinkers will come from.  So why limit the pool of canidates?

Exactly. That's why I'm pro life.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I don't mind funding projects that might actually improve education, but it's annoying that every school budget that passes has to be tied to something like a new gym or field turf. GMAFB.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I don't mind funding projects that might actually improve education, but it's annoying that every school budget that passes has to be tied to something like a new gym or field turf. GMAFB.

Or new computer labs. And yes, the numbers above are supposedly adjusted for inflation. Curbing education spending (its for the children!) is a political third rail.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I don't mind funding projects that might actually improve education, but it's annoying that every school budget that passes has to be tied to something like a new gym or field turf. GMAFB.

Or new computer labs. And yes, the numbers above are supposedly adjusted for inflation. Curbing education spending (its for the children!) is a political third rail.

New computer labs are fine. I don't support "laptop for every student" initiatives, though.