Obama's Choose School for Daughters

[Marcia]

A topic of a lot of speculation in this area has been which school the Obamas will choose for their daughters. There have been articles on this every day in the Wash Post.

They finally decided - the very exclusive Sidwell Friends School was chosen (same school Chelsea Clinton went to). The other top runner was the equally exclusive Georgetown Day School.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/reliable-source/2008/11/obamarama_the_obamas_pick_a_sc.html

 

[Enoch]

I think they should attend public school. Or they could let Bill Ayers homeschool them. :laugh:

 

[Crabtownboy]

A topic of a lot of speculation in this area has been which school the Obamas will choose for their daughters. There have been articles on this every day in the Wash Post.

They finally decided - the very exclusive Sidwell Friends School was chosen (same school Chelsea Clinton went to). The other top runner was the equally exclusive Georgetown Day School.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/reliable-source/2008/11/obamarama_the_obamas_pick_a_sc.html

Sidwell is a really great school and a school, because of other children of high level government officials understands security problems.

The school has many ethnic groups represented in its student body and having a Quaker philosophy has high ethical and moral standards.

 

[Enoch]

http://www.sidwell.edu/admissions/tuition.asp

Tuition and Fees

Tuition for 2008-2009 Lower School

$28,442​

Middle and Upper Schools

$29,442​

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Any good parent who has the means to do so would pick the best educational option for their children.

This seems like a good option to me.

 

[donnA]

No one choses the lowest quality school for thewir children, and if you can afford tition fees like that then why not, it being a quaker school hopefully means good morals are taught there.

 

[Marcia]

No one choses the lowest quality school for thewir children, and if you can afford tition fees like that then why not, it being a quaker school hopefully means good morals are taught there.

Well, maybe good morals but don't give too much credit to Quakers. I attended Quaker meetings in Atlanta off and on for many years. It's where I was first introduced to the New Age. In fact, Quaker House hosted "Inner Light Consciousness" which is how I got my spirit guide.

Some of the friends I knew who went there included an astrologer and a clairvoyant, as well as several into Buddhism.

 

[Alcott]

Quakerism was a social movement disguised as a religious movement. So it probably still is; hence, tossing in astrology, meditation and "stuff" <edited LE>, when a leftist approach to anarchy is more its true objective.

 

[KenH]

Interestingly, we have had two presidents who were Quakers - Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon.

 

[Alcott]

Yeah, and they both quook, didn't they?

 

[Bible-boy]

Any good parent who has the means to do so would pick the best educational option for their children.

This seems like a good option to me.

Yep,

but the problem is that Obama and his leftist Democrat friends don't want to allow folks the same opportunity to choose their kid's schools by using a voucher system. Their argument is that the public schools are fine and if we gave vouchers it would mean some public schools would become grossly under funded because people would be sending their kids elsewhere.

Now if all the public schools are so fine why would people choose to send their kids elsewhere under a voucher system? And why didn't the Obama's enroll their kids in the local public school closest to the White House? Answer: Because they are elitist hypocrites who have a vested interest in keeping the public school system status quo because they owe the NEA for their support in the election.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Yep,

but the problem is that Obama and his leftist Democrat friends don't want to allow folks the same opportunity to choose their kid's schools by using a voucher system. Their argument is that the public schools are fine and if we gave vouchers it would mean some public schools would become grossly under funded because people would be sending their kids elsewhere.

With federal vouchers comes federal control. Do you want that in your Christian Schools?

The early Baptist fought for the separation of church and state for very good reasons.

Now if all the public schools are so fine why would people choose to send their kids elsewhere under a voucher system? And why didn't the Obama's enroll their kids in the local public school closest to the White House? Answer: Because they are elitist hypocrites who have a vested interest in keeping the public school system status quo because they owe the NEA for their support in the election.

Some because they believe other schools will be better for their children. Some because of racial prejudice. Some from pressure from their peers. Many reasons.

 

[donnA]

Well, maybe good morals but don't give too much credit to Quakers. I attended Quaker meetings in Atlanta off and on for many years. It's where I was first introduced to the New Age. In fact, Quaker House hosted "Inner Light Consciousness" which is how I got my spirit guide.

Some of the friends I knew who went there included an astrologer and a clairvoyant, as well as several into Buddhism.

Your kidding, wow!

 

[donnA]

I think if a person has the money to pay for a good education for their children they should do it. I assume the obama's are paying the tuition themselves aren't they? That gives them the right to chose a school.

 

[Jon-Marc]

Personally, I couldn't care less what school his kids attend. Why is that news? I remember once when Reagan cur his finger, and it was on the front page of newspapers. Fascinating news. :laugh:

 

[mcdirector]

Well, maybe good morals but don't give too much credit to Quakers. I attended Quaker meetings in Atlanta off and on for many years. It's where I was first introduced to the New Age. In fact, Quaker House hosted "Inner Light Consciousness" which is how I got my spirit guide.

Some of the friends I knew who went there included an astrologer and a clairvoyant, as well as several into Buddhism.

I think this just goes to show that we can't slap "religion" on something and think it's safe.

 

[Marcia]

I think this just goes to show that we can't slap "religion" on something and think it's safe.

Very true. Most evangelicals know little about Quaker history and their beliefs. Although there are some "evangelical Quakers" around now, this is a departure from their history and origins.

Fox believed that there is "that of God in everyone." Also, they taught that the Bible is a good guide to living but not the final authority. The final authority is the "light within" each person. This is traditional Quaker thinking. I read a lot of the books in Quaker house when I first started attending. (I also attended Quaker meetings my freshman year in college in Florida - this was after I had rejected Christianity in high school).

You can see why there were New Agers in that Quaker group in Atlanta! The whole inner-listening and mystical thing with Quakers is very appealing to people drawn to the New Age.

I have no idea what kind of religion is taught at Sidwell Friends. I imagine their focus is on things like social justice, another big thing among Quakers.

 

[LeBuick]

but the problem is that Obama and his leftist Democrat friends don't want to allow folks the same opportunity to choose their kid's schools by using a voucher system.

But Obama didn't ask for a voucher or any help with his children education.

Their argument is that the public schools are fine and if we gave vouchers it would mean some public schools would become grossly under funded because people would be sending their kids elsewhere.

I never heard where public schools were great but many have received an acceptable education via the system. There is no doubt the public system or should I say the neighborhood school would cease to exist if vouchers were implemented. I don't think that point can be argued against.

Now if all the public schools are so fine why would people choose to send their kids elsewhere under a voucher system?

Fine is in no way the best system for a child's education. Most parents want what they feel is best. There are many reason's which have nothing to do with vouchers for who a parent would send their child elsewhere.

And why didn't the Obama's enroll their kids in the local public school closest to the White House?

This and the fact that many private schools exist and thrive is proof to my above statement. Even without vouchers parents send their kids elsewhere. The Obama's are no different then any other parent in their position. I couldn't imagine the presidents kids going to public schools, especially in DC.

I would like to see the public system be improved for those who are not able to send their kids elsewhere. I think no child left behind wasn't the exact answer but there has to be a way to evaluate and guarantee a minimum level of education for all kids to include home schooled. We have let too many slip through the system with little understanding of basics in life. I don't know how we do it but I don't believe taking money from the public schools so that all but the very poor children will leave for private educations is not the solution. I think the answer has to do with improving public education.