Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, January 13, 1993 TAG: 9301130368
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A10 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: CAL THOMAS
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
GOING FOR THE GOLD
THE DECISION by Bill and Hillary (and Chelsea) Clinton to send Chelsea to the upscale, private and elite Sidwell Friends School, rather than a public school in Washington, D.C., may be right for them, but it leaves President-elect Clinton open to charges of hypocrisy because of his oft-repeated commitment to, and supposed preference for, public education.When Clinton spoke to the National Education Association Convention in Washington last July 7, he said: "Every child should be given a fair chance to grab the brass ring in life by developing his or her God-given potential." Clinton gave voice to his conviction that "it is in our public schools that we must begin the process."
At Sidwell Friends, Chelsea Clinton won't have to concern herself with brass rings. The wealthy who send their children there can afford to go for the gold.
In opposing school choice, which would allow the poor to have the same opportunity the Clintons have chosen, Clinton told the NEA delegates: "We shouldn't give our [tax] money away to private schools in a system that will undermine the integrity of our public school system." Is allowing people the option of where their children can best be educated with their tax dollars the only way to undermine public education? Or does spending one's own money to send a child to a private Clinton admits that U.S. public schools aren't competitive with those of other nations. But faced with the chance to send his daughter into the system as an example to the rest of us and in an effort to make them better, he chose an elitist school instead.
Many of the District of Columbia's notoriously bad public schools have metal detectors at the door to keep weapons out and condom detectors in the health clinic to assist kids to carry out their sexual urges without parental knowledge or consent.
Yet Clinton spokespersons say the quality, or lack thereof, of the public school system had nothing to do with the family's decision. Clinton supporters, who laughed when President Bush said Clarence Thomas' race had nothing to do with his decision to nominate him to the Supreme Court, accept the choice-of-school explanation without even a smirk.
So what did Clinton really mean last summer when he told the NEA delegates: "I'd like this country to have a a real education president for a change"?
Why is it that liberals favor federal funding and freedom of choice when it comes to abortion, but oppose tax dollars going to private or religious schools to educate children fortunate enough to have been born? We are told that the poor deserve the same opportunities as the rich to obtain an abortion. That is, if a woman doesn't have enough money to terminate her pregnancy, she should be given tax dollars to provide her the same access to abortion as a rich woman. Otherwise, liberals say, there is an unfair disparity.
Why, then, allow a disparity in education? Why shouldn't poor people, or even those of the middle class, who saw Bill Clinton as their champion, not have the same opportunity as the soon-to-be-president, his wife and daughter?
It is because public education is the training ground, the hothouse, the farm team, for the next generation of liberals. How else to inculcate multiculturalism, political correctness and historical revisionism into children? How else to drum into them the view that they evolved from slime, that sex is an intramural sport and that the liberal agenda is best? Children might not be expected to encounter these "truths" on their own and are even less likely to learn them in private schools, especially private, religious schools where a real education, a moral conscience and wisdom can still be found.
Public education is not about education. In too many instances, it is about propagandizing and controlling the minds and hearts (and bodies) of the next generation. Without public schools, liberalism would qualify as an endangered species. With them, liberals hope to train sufficient numbers of left-thinking drones to replace them when they are gone.
Chelsea Clinton will probably get a good education at Sidwell Friends. Meanwhile, the rest of us have received an education in hypocrisy. Los Angeles Times Syndicate