Fred Thompson, the Education President?

Hunter's Rangers - Bar of Integrity ^ | September 18, 2007 | Alexander J. Hamilton

[Calpernia]

All the candidates from both political parties have emphasized the need for better education. It is plainly obvious that many, if not most, public schools across America are sub-par. Sub-par not only relative to schools abroad, but when judged against the rigors of American schools of yesteryear. The Democrats and Republicans, in theory, differ greatly when it comes to federal funding of education. Ronald Reagan, as well as the conservative wing of the party, wanted to get rid of the Department of Education altogether, while the donkeys have long howled about the supposed lack of spending on schools.

The so-called crown jewel of US education is still considered to be our colleges, both public and private, as evidenced by the large numbers of foreign students that come to our shores to attend these institutions.

However, a closer examination of the curricula currently being passed off as “education” shows that science and logic and classical economics have taken a back seat to fluff, in many cases. Multicultural flim-flam - from ethnic studies, to lesbian empowerment, to ‘revised’ history – has invaded nearly every campus. The federal government is also responsible for piling on a load of crap. They offer cold hard cash if said institution will establish a program that pays homage to the ‘vision’ and history and agenda of some politician or ‘civic leader’.

One would think that Republicans would be immune from this nonsense. And one would certainly think a man claiming to be a federalist would resist coughing up taxpayers’ hard earned money for such endeavors. Well, let us examine the record of Fred Thompson on the subject of education.

In the 104th Congress, Fred’s first, he cosponsored with Senator Frist and Carol Mosely Braun a bill to spend money refurbishing historically black colleges:

S.1940, Title: A bill to authorize appropriations for the preservation and restoration of historic buildings at historically black colleges and universities.

A noble gesture perhaps, but certainly not a nod to a colorblind society. There were numerous small, historical campuses across the country that were NOT predominantly black that could have used some federal cash. Yet Thompson, Braun and Frist saw fit to propose $65 million over 4 years for these grants. Of course, it helps motivation when Tennessee has its own black colleges covered by this legislation.

The following Congress, the 105th, found Mr. Thompson teaming with Bill Frist, Susan Collins and about 15 other Senators for something called the Education Flexibility Amendments of 1998, S.2213. This legislation sought to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, purportedly to offer the states more flexibility in meeting federal performance mandates. Sounds good, until you read the details. In Tiltle I, it does indeed tweak the edges of previous education law, allowing for more waivers for local school districts. However, the real purpose of this misnamed legislation was to create two federally funded endowments, each with $3 million in seed money for fiscal year 1999: Title II: OREGON INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC SERVICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL STUDIES. - From the funds appropriated under section 206, the Secretary is authorized to award a grant to Portland State University at Portland, Oregon, for the establishment of an endowment fund to support the Oregon Institute of Public Service and Constitutional Studies at the Mark O. Hatfield School of Government at Portland State University. TITLE III--PAUL SIMON PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE - GRANTS- From the funds appropriated under section 306, the Secretary is authorized to award a grant to Southern Illinois University for the establishment of an endowment fund to support the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute. The Secretary may enter into agreements with the University and include in any agreement made pursuant to this title such provisions as are determined necessary by the Secretary to carry out this title.

But apparently, one bill making endowments was not sufficient in the Education budget. Fred and Frist and Kennedy proposed S.2638, “To provide support for certain institutes and schools”. In addition to the two grants mentioned above, they added in two more: TITLE III--HOWARD BAKER SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT - From the funds authorized to be appropriated under section 306, the Secretary is authorized to award a grant to the University for the establishment of an endowment fund to support the Howard Baker School of Government at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville, Tennessee. TITLE IV--JOHN GLENN INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE AND PUBLIC POLICY - GRANTS- From the funds appropriated under section 406, the Secretary is authorized to award a grant to the Ohio State University for the establishment of an endowment fund to support the John Glenn Institute for Public Service and Public Policy. The Secretary may enter into agreements with the University and include in any agreement made pursuant to this title such provisions as are determined necessary by the Secretary to carry out this title.

And the funding appropriated for these two storied gentlemen’s institutes was $10M and $6M, respectively.

And then just for grins, Frist and Thompson proposed these expenditures, in the exact same format, as amendment S.AMDT.3743 to bill S. 442. The irony is the S.442 is called the Internet Tax Freedom Act and its purpose was to “establish a national policy against State and local government interference with interstate commerce” for internet usage.

In the 1999 session of the 106th Congress, apparently unsatisfied with the seed money that was passed for these fine institutes, Fred Thompson decided to provide another few million ($10M for Baker, $3M for the lesser politicos), but added $5M for a fifth endowment: TITLE V--ROBERT T. STAFFORD PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE, though it is apparently not associated with a particular school. Certainly a man of Stafford’s acumen deserves an institute, considering he is best known as a rabid environmentalist and for his work on shepherding Vermont’s gay civil union law to fruition.

In 2000, Fred introduced an amendment S.AMDT.2317 to the DC College Access Act that mandates that District of Columbia grads get “in-state” tuition at institutions outside of DC. More Frederalism, I reckon.

Of course, Mr. Thompson also voted for the much maligned No Child Left Behind Act, despite his supporters claiming that Fred is a small government conservative. Granted, there was a lot of pressure to pass NCLB: Bush campaigned on it, the schools were a mess, and its goal was supposed to be to hold schools accountable. Nevertheless, the final bill had Ted Kennedy’s fingerprints all over it, and it became just another government boondoggle; a very expensive boondoggle.

And finally, for an encore topping off his fine career in education, Fred introduced and got passage of an amendment to dedicate funds for one last endowment. This time he hid it in the supplemental appropriations bill for Terrorism related expenses. The amendment reads: SA 3611. Mr. THOMPSON (for himself and Mr. Frist) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4775, making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 86, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: ``(5) the provision specifying $835,000 for the Benjamin L. Hooks Institute for Social Change shall be deemed to read as follows: `The Benjamin L. Hooks Institute for Social Change in Memphis, Tennessee for an endowment to pursue a broad programmatic agenda that emphasizes the continued importance of the Civil Rights Movement and encourages academic research and community outreach, $835,000'.''. It passed into law, assuring that the former NAACP leader, lunatic, and vociferous foe of Clarence Thomas would have his legacy and agenda kept alive for years to come. I’m just amazed Fred Thompson had the time and energy to work on such important education funding goals between all of his Campaign Finance Reform activity. Who ever said he was lazy?

[Paperdoll]

Liars never prosperk, prs. Didn’t your mother ever teach you that?

[perfect_rovian_storm]

She sure did. You and your merry band of Duncanistas are living proof that liars never prosper. Maybe if they did, your guy would be outside the margin of negative polling.

[Paperdoll]

I think you woke up too early this morning, fredthugster. Why don’t you just curl up in your wee straight jacket for a few more winks? Have a nice day.

[Tired of Taxes]

Thanks for the ping, Cal.

So far, I am not a Thompson supporter because I don’t know what he’s all about yet. I’m waiting to hear him give more specifics. And I’d like to see how well he performs in a debate. Also, I’m not convinced that he really wants the job. It seems more like he was pushed into it.

However, this article doesn’t turn me against him, either. I don’t think education should be government-funded at all, so if a few colleges receive a sum of money, it’s just more of the same old thing. I’d have to measure it against what other colleges are receiving and the reasons why.

About him receiving money for something in TN, well, that’s his home state. About his support for the NCLB: I’ve come across many homeschoolers who object to NCLB, too, but then again, those are NJ (anti-GOP) homeschoolers. The way I see it, if the schools want money, they’d better show they’re doing the job. I’ve always agreed with the NCLB. Any excuse not to give them money is fine with me.

So, those things won’t make me not support Fred, but then again, I’m not supporting him at this point, anyway. Duncan Hunter has caught my interest, but I haven’t made a decision yet. Waiting to see what happens in 2008...

[Calpernia]

FYI from a group with the Home School Legal Defense Association:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1872986/posts
Next Generation of Social Conservatives Already in Trenches (Youngens for Hunter)

[Pistolshot]

From your link.

Michael Farris, chairman of the board and general counsel for HSLDA, has said that these teams will be out in the field for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, whom the organization has endorsed for president.

Lots of Hunter support there

/rollseyes

[Calpernia]

Hopefully, the Hunter’s Rangers from Generation Joshua of HSLDA has changed most of their minds by now.

http://www.myspace.com/dhgrassrevolt
Duncan Hunter Grass REvolt

[Sun]

You still haven’t told me, what ISSUES does Fred represent that you like?

Are there enough ISSUES to fill a tiny tag line, where you and Fred agree?

There were a couple of articles in the newspaper that my husband was telling me about, written by conservatives, saying that Fred has a lot of feel-good hype without substance.

I gotta believe that’s true, when I can’t get Fred supporters to give me a few words why they support him regarding ISSUES.

[Petronski]

It’s best not to feed the trolls.

[Sun]

Can you tell me what SPECIFICALLY Hunter voted re: spending that you don’t like, or is it just a feeling you have.

[Sun]

“It’s best not to feed the trolls.”

The people who weren’t invited here are more likely to be “trolls.”

[Petronski]

Invited where?

LOL

[Pistolshot]

10/15/1998 Held at the desk.

You do know what this means, don't you? Here. Let me help.

A “hold” is placed when the Leader’s office is notified that a Senator intends to object to a request for unanimous consent from the Senate to consider or pass a measure. A hold may be placed for any reason and can be lifted by a Senator at any time. A Senator may place a hold simply to review a bill, to negotiate changes to the bill, or to kill the bill. A bill can be held for as long as the Senator who objects to the bill wishes to block its consideration.

In effect the bill was not considered for any action other than being held. No action. No vote. No consideration.

But thanks for trying. Again.

[Pistolshot]

As I said in an earlier post, whatever I say here, you will disregard, dismiss, and otherwise find some way to demean it further.

Now, I can think of a bunch of reasons why Duncan will make a great VP, but I can't think of one that would make him a good POTUS.

[Calpernia]

Are you saying Fred didn’t cosponsor this?

[Pistolshot]

I'm saying it didn’t get anywhere. But thanks for trying to make it look more ominous than it was.

[Calpernia]

Fred CoSponsored.

[Paul Ross]

Not in the "polls" that count. As the Texas Straw Ballot proved...with the MSM...and their dupes... screaming 1% the whole way...

H'mmmm. You don't suppose the MSM (Gallup, Harris, etc) or Bush's for that matter (RNC & Rasmussen) Polling could have an AGENDA do you?

[Paul Ross]

He has a shameful attendance record in the House.

B.S. His record is pretty good from what I have seen. Take a look at McCain's over in the Senate. Blech. And Thompson's was no better.... H'mmmmm. Pot calling Kettle black, are ye?!

[Sun]

“As I said in an earlier post, whatever I say here, you will disregard, dismiss, and otherwise find some way to demean it further.

Now, I can think of a bunch of reasons why Duncan will make a great VP, but I can’t think of one that would make him a good POTUS.”
.
.

I’m only one voter, but numerous folks read FR. Why not convince THEM? Don’t you want as many voters as possible to know why you support Fred. None of the Fred supporters can tell me why they support him, in their own words.

Here’s SOME of why Duncan Hunter will make a GREAT president:

DUNCAN HUNTER QUOTE: “Not only do we have a bad trade deal with China but they’re cheating on the one we do have. China is cheating on trade and they’re using our trade dollars to buy ships, planes and missiles. They’re becoming a super power and stepping into the shoes of the Soviet Union.”
*******

Click below for Duncan Hunter’s voting record:

http://www.issues2002.org/CA/Duncan_Hunter.htm

excerpts are:

Duncan Hunter on Abortion

Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
Voted YES on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
Voted YES on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
Voted YES on funding for health providers who don’t provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)

Duncan Hunter on Gun Control

Voted YES on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
Voted YES on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)
Rated A+ by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)

Duncan Hunter on Foreign Policy

Voted YES on deterring foreign arms transfers to China. (Jul 2005)
Voted YES on reforming the UN by restricting US funding. (Jun 2005)
Voted NO on keeping Cuba travel ban until political prisoners released. (Jul 2001)
Voted NO on $156M to IMF for 3rd-world debt reduction. (Jul 2000)
Voted NO on Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China. (May 2000)
Voted NO on $15.2 billion for foreign operations. (Nov 1999)