Re: Poverty

[ABurke5054@aol.com]

Please, one ridiculous example of double-talk is not strengthened by a  
second one.  Art
 
In a message dated 6/25/2006 3:36:21 AM Pacific Standard Time,  
pwmjoy@earthlink.net writes:

The following is a response to comments made by someone on this list to  both 
my posting on "Poverty" as well as one made by Peter Campbell. The  response 
to my posting was: "What a ridiculous exercise in  double-talk.  Poor kids 
need good schools.  NCLB says that If there  are problems with the schools poor 
children attend, states should fix  them.  Do you really think the NAACP would 
be arguing in federal court  that CT should enforce the letter and spirit of 
NCLB, if it thought NCLB had  'no connection with improving schools?'" The 
response to the Peter  Campbell posting was: "How bizarre and ridiculous can you 
get?   You may as well blame NCLB if the roads aren't good in poor  
neighborhoods.  NCLB does what federal education law should  do:  It establishes a 
contract with the states that requires them to  improve their schools, particularly 
the schools that serve large numbers of  poor and minority children.   Do you 
really think that the  NAACP would petition a federal court to enforce the 
letter and spirit of NCLB  if it thought that NCLB were hurting poor and minority 
children?  Education law is not the vehicle to address nutrition, housing,  
and health care.  Arguing that  NCLB is flawed  because it does not fix 
problems in those areas is demagogic, scandalous,  and despicable."