Replies

No, they're a pressure relief valve for real reform. No wonder Republicans love them.

Look, we home school our children. My wife was home schooled starting in high school, and I attended prep school starting in 6th grade.

Obviously, charter schools are not an ultimate solution.

But there are real people right now whose children are better off than they would be in a standard public school. While in a rational world, the charter schools would take the heat off the public schools if they ever became commonplace, the educrat types are far from rational, and politicians, Republican and Democrat, are vulnerable to cries of "for the children" regarding public school support as a general principle.

Anything that challenges the status quo in as a general proposition is likely a step in the right direction, THOUGH ONLY IF DONE AT THE LOCAL OR AT MOST STATE LEVEL.

Those states that voted in "civil unions" didn't stop the pervert community from pushing harder still.

What would real reform look like (other than funding home schools and private schools with NO STRINGS ATTACHED)? a public school reform needs some agreement as to what the schools should do. Half the people on this board seem to be on board with the idea that the function of education is to prepaer you for a job, the Chamber of Commerce position. A quarter of the world out there are on board with the womyn's studies etc. nonsense.

So, there can be no true reform of the public system and have it remain public. To the degree that some charter schools are less public, they are a marginal improvement. Something is better than nothing for those who do not choose private or home schooling.