Republicans WIN! - now what?

[MakeItRain]

The Disunited States of America

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/11/the_disunited_states_of_america_why_demographics_republican_obstructionism.html?wpsrc=sh_all_mob_tw_top

The Slate is a dimlib rag, the republican party has no demographic issue. Did you see the guy who wrote that, he is obviously a big city Obama sympathizer

[ascentofstan]

The Disunited States of America

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/11/the_disunited_states_of_america_why_demographics_republican_obstructionism.html?wpsrc=sh_all_mob_tw_top

The Slate is a dimlib rag, the republican party has no demographic issue. Did you see the guy who wrote that, he is obviously a big city Obama sympathizer

LOL k, MIR.

[michigancat]

there are shitloads of western kansas districts that should be consolidated but I don't think any republicans are proposing that, are they?

Can you name a few? I can think of Ingalls/Cimarron, but most of those small towns are far enough from each other that it is probably more efficient to just have separate schools. I'm not very familiar with most of western Kansas, though.

Within less than 50 miles from where I grew up, I'd say Caldwell/South Haven, Conway Springs/Argonia, Attica/Chaparral, Pratt/Pratt Skyline, and Cunningham/Kingman. All involve 1A schools less than 20 miles from another high school the same size or larger, and I'm sure you'll find similar situations all over the state.

So I just learned that Attica and Argonia had to join forces to play 8-man football last year. Good grief.

http://www.sumnernewscow.com/sunday-feature-argonia-merges-with-attica-on-the-gridiron-to-form-the-titans/

[Rage Against the McKee]

there are shitloads of western kansas districts that should be consolidated but I don't think any republicans are proposing that, are they?

Can you name a few? I can think of Ingalls/Cimarron, but most of those small towns are far enough from each other that it is probably more efficient to just have separate schools. I'm not very familiar with most of western Kansas, though.

Within less than 50 miles from where I grew up, I'd say Caldwell/South Haven, Conway Springs/Argonia, Attica/Chaparral, Pratt/Pratt Skyline, and Cunningham/Kingman. All involve 1A schools less than 20 miles from another high school the same size or larger, and I'm sure you'll find similar situations all over the state.

So I just learned that Attica and Argonia had to join forces to play 8-man football last year. Good grief.

http://www.sumnernewscow.com/sunday-feature-argonia-merges-with-attica-on-the-gridiron-to-form-the-titans/

Sounds like consolidation to me.

[michigancat]

there are shitloads of western kansas districts that should be consolidated but I don't think any republicans are proposing that, are they?

Can you name a few? I can think of Ingalls/Cimarron, but most of those small towns are far enough from each other that it is probably more efficient to just have separate schools. I'm not very familiar with most of western Kansas, though.

Within less than 50 miles from where I grew up, I'd say Caldwell/South Haven, Conway Springs/Argonia, Attica/Chaparral, Pratt/Pratt Skyline, and Cunningham/Kingman. All involve 1A schools less than 20 miles from another high school the same size or larger, and I'm sure you'll find similar situations all over the state.

So I just learned that Attica and Argonia had to join forces to play 8-man football last year. Good grief.

http://www.sumnernewscow.com/sunday-feature-argonia-merges-with-attica-on-the-gridiron-to-form-the-titans/

Sounds like consolidation to me.

Still have separate school districts(!)

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Funny how the issue of rural subsidies - school consolidation, ag subsidies, etc. - really seems to cross party lines. Regardless of political ideology, most politicians and rural Kansans support them, and most other people oppose them (or would, if they stopped to think about it).

Also, I agree that the fairest test for school consolidation should be whether you can support an 11-man football team. That pretty much sums it up.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Funny how the issue of rural subsidies - school consolidation, ag subsidies, etc. - really seems to cross party lines. Regardless of political ideology, most politicians and rural Kansans support them, and most other people oppose them (or would, if they stopped to think about it).

Also, I agree that the fairest test for school consolidation should be whether you can support an 11-man football team. That pretty much sums it up.

The problem is that somebody has to live in these rural areas. At least in Kansas, they do. When your state's biggest industry is agriculture, your state should try to make its rural areas livable.

[Emo EMAW]

In MT I saw a full sized school bus dropping off 3 kids for school.  Why can't we offer this service in KS? 

[michigancat]

Funny how the issue of rural subsidies - school consolidation, ag subsidies, etc. - really seems to cross party lines. Regardless of political ideology, most politicians and rural Kansans support them, and most other people oppose them (or would, if they stopped to think about it).

Also, I agree that the fairest test for school consolidation should be whether you can support an 11-man football team. That pretty much sums it up.

The problem is that somebody has to live in these rural areas. At least in Kansas, they do. When your state's biggest industry is agriculture, your state should try to make its rural areas livable.

Yes, I think the distance a student has to travel to get to school should be a factor. Consolidation doesn't necessarily mean closing schools, but it does offer more opportunities and more efficiencies.  There is absolutely no reason for a town that cannot support an 8-man football team should have an entire school district.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

People need food, so people will pay for food. Because people will pay for food, other people will grow the food. Believe it or not, this would still happen without rural subsidies.

As rusty points out, consolidating districts could eliminate unnecessary administration without actually closing schools. Regardless, the worst case scenario is that a few underpopulated schools close, and the kids have to travel further to other schools or parents choose to homeschool. This would not be the first inconvenience of rural living. The truth is, rural living sucks in a great many ways. It also has some advantages. Again, there's money to be made there in ag and energy, so if that's what you want to do then good for you. But stop expecting the rest of us to pay for your lifestyle.

(How's that for a winning message? I should run for governor.)

[Rage Against the McKee]

Do you guys have any facts, data, etc that shows the savings that could be achieved by consolidating schools and ending farm subsidies? I just don't believe the savings from consolidation would be all that big without closing schools, and the loss in property values and economic viability of local businesses would probably offset the savings from closing a school. Ending farm subsidies would slow the adoption of farm technologies and really change the way some people decide what to plant. I can see some positives, but harvest totals would inevitably fall, so you'd just end up paying more for food. I think I'm probably better off just paying the subsidy with tax dollars.

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

Keeping schools local probably means more in rural areas where people actually participate in the community aspects of having a school, than it does in other places where, relatively speaking, nobody gives a eff.  If proximity is the sole determining factor, we should be consolidating districts in the urban core where there are multiple school districts within 10 miles of each other, not in agronoattica kansas.

[michigancat]

Do you guys have any facts, data, etc that shows the savings that could be achieved by consolidating schools and ending farm subsidies? I just don't believe the savings from consolidation would be all that big without closing schools, and the loss in property values and economic viability of local businesses would probably offset the savings from closing a school. Ending farm subsidies would slow the adoption of farm technologies and really change the way some people decide what to plant. I can see some positives, but harvest totals would inevitably fall, so you'd just end up paying more for food. I think I'm probably better off just paying the subsidy with tax dollars.

I don't, although I think the priority should be what's best for the kids, not the communities or state budgets. If consolidating district does nothing to improve actual education, I don't think it's a good idea.

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

"In my fantasy, teachers aren't low skilled labor that teach counting and alphabet, they are true 'murica academics who indoctrinate children as libtards"

-michicat

[MakeItRain]

Seems like the republican party is really getting it, they are really good at learning lessons

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6186080

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Seems like the republican party is really getting it, they are really good at learning lessons

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6186080

If the American people really wanted a policy of promoting people to higher positions of power based on having a vagina as opposed to a penis, they would have voted for Democrats. They didn't. What a stupid article - but it was the product of libtards, after all.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

We're three weeks into the new Republican Congress. How are they doing?
1. Immigration. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/26/house-gop-leaders-cancel-vote-on-controversial-border-security-bill-amid/ Republicans offer a limited "border security bill" that provides no actual border security, and it quickly implodes.
2. Abortion. http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2015/01/house_decision_to_scrap_aborti.html The same bill banning abortion after 20 weeks that passed last year implodes.
3. Keystone. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/26/democrats-filibuster-keystone-force-republicans-to/ They can't even muster 6 Dem votes to avoid a filibuster.

Great job guys! Off to a great start! I guess with all that hard work out of the way, it's time for some serious tax reform, or maybe repealing and replacing Obamacare!

[Rage Against the McKee]

Nobody in Congress is good at their job, and the government will never act to do anything the way you want them to do it. It's really best to just accept that and move on. It's certainly not a cause worth donating money toward.

[CNS]

No one should be a 'pub or a 'crat. 

I dislike them all.

[Dugout DickStone]

Nobody in Congress is good at their job, and the government will never act to do anything the way you want them to do it. It's really best to just accept that and move on. It's certainly not a cause worth donating money toward.

I would say buying influence/votes can be worth quite a bit.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Nobody in Congress is good at their job, and the government will never act to do anything the way you want them to do it. It's really best to just accept that and move on. It's certainly not a cause worth donating money toward.

That's true. I'm getting closer to the mindset of the conservatives I always ridiculed for not voting Republican. I'm torn because I know it's worse to have the Dems in charge, but I'm just tired of rewarding these clowns with my vote only to be repeatedly let down. This is common sense stuff, but common sense doesn't rule in Washington and never will.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Nobody in Congress is good at their job, and the government will never act to do anything the way you want them to do it. It's really best to just accept that and move on. It's certainly not a cause worth donating money toward.

That's true. I'm getting closer to the mindset of the conservatives I always ridiculed for not voting Republican. I'm torn because I know it's worse to have the Dems in charge, but I'm just tired of rewarding these clowns with my vote only to be repeatedly let down. This is common sense stuff, but common sense doesn't rule in Washington and never will.

I just look at what the incumbent has done in office and if I like what I see (almost never happens) I vote for him. Otherwise, I vote for somebody else. There seems to be a direct correlation between time served and shittiness.

[renocat]

Give me an old rumpled clothed, ugly, mean bastard conservative republican slob any day.  I do not think these prissy pretty boy leaders we have in Congress or running for Prez really care about the U.S.  They seem to only care about their vanity.  Ol' Boner, House Leader, cares more about his tan than fighting crazed progressives like Obama.  I bet the inside of his butt crack is tanned.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Chairman Ann nails it once again. http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2015-01-28.html#read_more

HOW MUCH IS THAT PSYCHOLOGY DEGREE WORTH?

The Republican leadership in Congress still hasn't held hearings on why college is so expensive, although I proposed the idea two weeks ago. Of course, it's been a month since the GOP took control of Congress, and they also haven't voided Obama's unconstitutional executive amnesty, passed e-Verify, a fence bill or the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act.

Democrats are on offense all the time, even when they've just had their legs cut off. They announce absurd agenda items and then indignantly demand to know why Republicans are refusing to deal with the free unicorn-rides proposal. Obama is a lame-duck president and, three months ago, his party was slaughtered in midterm elections. And yet, I gather that his State of the Union address consisted of a litany of insanely expensive, utterly pointless ideas.

And Republicans fall for it every time. They consider it a major victory to come back with a free-market approach to surrender.

In response to Obama's "free" community college idea, Republicans should say: We're not giving you anything, and, in fact, we're demanding answers from the entire "higher ed" establishment. You'll be surprised how liberating and fun it is to go on offense, Republicans.

The GOP needs to hold tobacco company-style hearings, hauling in the presidents of various universities and asking them to justify their multimillion-dollar salaries.

We want professors explaining, under penalty of perjury, exactly how much they make per hour for their rigorous schedules of two classes a week, summers off, and full-year "sabbaticals" every few terms.

Also, we'd like to know how driving the getaway car for a cop-killer constitutes a qualification to teach college.

College professors relentlessly hound the rest of society for its crimes -- racism, sexism, "white privilege" -- look what you're doing to the environment! Why are we paying them, again? There's no visible reason most of these people should be teaching at all. How about they explain their value to the taxpayers who subsidize their cushy lives?

Other than engineers, economists and quarterbacks, no one acquires any marketable knowledge at college. The sole purpose of a degree is to function as a substitute IQ test. If employers were allowed to give applicants 15-minute intelligence tests, they'd have the exact same information as knowing what college a person attended.

But they can't do that, so families have to spend a quarter of a million dollars to give their kids the parchment equivalent of an IQ score. High school kids who get into good schools should present employers with their college acceptance letters and skip the going-to-college part.

Republicans need to force colleges to issue reports, just like drug companies, attesting to the average cost, and the average salary, for every degree. It will cost you $160,000 to receive a degree in Spanish literature and will take you 88 years to pay that back.

Trust Ann -- liberals will go wild. That's how you'll know you've struck gold.

They will scream bloody murder, accuse Republicans of "McCarthyism," say it's too burdensome to collect this information and how can you put a dollar value on a college education?
 
They better be able to put a dollar value on a college degree! That's how it's being sold. Obama doesn't say it's important to go to college to learn to think analytically, read critically or be exposed to different ideas -- none of which occurs at most colleges, anyway.
 
No, that's not the pitch. The pitch is: You're going to fail in this economy without a college degree!
 
If colleges really believe their product is worth anything, why don't they guarantee their own student loans? Why should taxpayers be on the hook for everyone's tuition?
 
According to the colleges, their graduates are going to earn all sorts of money! At least that's what they say when they're conning teenagers into taking out colossal student loans.
 
"It's burdensome" is not an excuse accepted by the government in any other context. It doesn't work for businesses being forced to come up with reams of information for the IRS, the EPA or OSHA. And the taxpayer isn't on the hook for the deceptive promises of any other industry -- except hucksters for home mortgages and student loans.
 
I would like to hear college presidents explain that what they do is totally different from any other company.
 
Democrats need to be exposed as hustlers for the most fraudulent, overpriced scam in the country. There's no other industry that has politicians flacking for it, much less conniving to prevent consumers from getting truthful information about the merchandise.
 
Going after Big Education is all upside for the GOP. College professors and administrators already vote 98 percent for the Democrats. In fact, it's a triple-play for Republicans: They would punish a liberal constituency, strike a blow against the principal vehicle of liberal indoctrination in America, and the middle class will love it.

[CNS]

Ann is a sensationalist Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!):

Other than engineers, economists and quarterbacks, no one acquires any marketable knowledge at college.