In a Politico interview yesterday, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien provided some insight into herself. No, not in the part where she admits to cursing "all the time." It was her response to another question:
If you were the president of the United States for enough time to make only one executive decision, what would it be?Improve public schools.
None of that preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States for Soledad. Or faithfully executing the laws. Or protecting our country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Or serving as Commander in Chief.
O'Brien would improve public schools. As admirable as that goal may be, it isn't a principal responsibility of the president or the Federal government. Neither "schools" nor "education" appears in the U.S. Constitution. Even if one believes there is a legitimate Federal role, education is primarily a State and local responsibility. Who says so? Well, the U.S. Department of Educaton for one. From its Web site:
Education is primarily a State and local responsibility in the United States. It is States and communities, as well as public and private organizations of all kinds, that establish schools and colleges, develop curricula, and determine requirements for enrollment and graduation. The structure of education finance in America reflects this predominant State and local role.
It goes on to say that the Federal contribution to elementary and secondary education is a little under 8 percent of the total spent.
The Federal role in education was accelerated by the establishment of the Department of Education under President Jimmy Carter. The Washington Post noted at the time:
The creation of this department is a response by both the President and the Congress, to one specific organization, the National Education Association.
Former Representative Patricia Schroeder (D-CO) warned:
No matter what anyone says, the Department of Education will not just write checks to local school boards. They will meddle in everything.
That's precisely what happened. Although providing a small portion of education dollars, Washington's created a great deal of red tape and with dubious outcomes.
The president of the United States bears many responsibilities, but improving public schools should be far, far down on that list, if on it at all. O'Brien's statement epitomizes the mainstream media mindset that citizens should look to the Federal government for solutions. Based on results, that doesn't seem prudent.
NewsBusters is turning 5. Enter our free t-shirt contest to help us celebrate!
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
→ And . . . World peace!
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 15:43 ET by Cool ArrowHer priority would not be improving schools.
Her priority would be a furtherance of the classic definition of insanity.
She'd do nothing more than throw more real money at a monopoly.
Why do I think of Parker Bros.
Power...
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:13 ET by unkeeafThe power of the idiot media over the citizenry is amazing, particularly considering the lunacy of their ideas.
--------------------
Conservative or Liberal - Can You Tell By A Photo?
http://bit.ly/920wc3
IT REALLY SIMPLE...
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 15:46 ET by danybhoy1.Get rid of the Dept. of Education, they have done nothing to improve education.
2.School Vouchers, compitition raises standards. Also, how many effing administrators do you need at a school. Teach the kids.
3.Get rid of the NEA, bad teachers need to be sacked, & teachers who know how to teach should be promoted. Too many just go along to get along, they also use social promotion for the same reason.
These 3 ideas would improve education more then anything that will come out of the intellectual elite bubble that actually handles educational planning today in America.
"Please awake & see the truth, he can only be if you believe what he tells you...Remember who you are, what you stand for...There will always be way"- WITHIN TEMPTATION http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fir0Cffv1ng&featured=related
Obviously Ms. O'Brien has
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:01 ET by GTObviously Ms. O'Brien has the position of the U.S. President confused with the position of a school Principal. Evidently the schools she went to either didn't teach her the difference or she spend all of her schools hours daydreaming about one day becoming a newsreader for a cable channel because her answer to the question shows that she can't tell the difference between her elbow and a hole-in-the-ground.
Ms O'Brien
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:04 ET by Mike BatesObviously Ms. O'Brien has the position of the U.S. President confused with the position of a school Principal.
Or maybe community organizer?
And....World Peace!!
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 18:50 ET by motherbeltMs. O'Brien is very attractive. Maybe she should enter pageants....her answer would fit right in.
Disband Teacher Unions.
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:11 ET by CrashObama's way of improving public schools was to end the voucher program and send his daughters to private schools.
→ Yes, he did
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:16 ET by Cool ArrowSpecifically, Obama made sure black children attending under the voucher program were purged from his kids' new school.
But She's So Cute Though!
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:14 ET by JustAlI'm surprised she didn't say, "World Peace," she probably thinks she would get a tiara also. LOL. Who would have thought that reading well out loud, as opposed to reading comprehension would be the key to high paying jobs?
She could have at least
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:38 ET by celatorShe could have at least reached the level of Lauren Catlin Upton when she responded with:
"I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, um, some people out there in our nation don't have maps and, uh, I believe that our, uh, education like such as, uh, South Africa and, uh, the Iraq and everywhere like such as, and I believe that they should, uh, our education over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., uh, should help South Africa and should help Iraq and the Asian countries, so we will be able to build up our future."
Or such as that.
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
Soledad's level, celator
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:33 ET by Mike BatesThat was classic, but I still wonder how Soledad managed to come in third on Celebrity Jeopardy.
I assume there are only
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 19:46 ET by celatorI assume there are only three contestants on Celebrity Jeopardy? Otherwise.... ;+}
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
Cute counts for a lot at CNN
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:35 ET by Mike BatesHow else could Ricky Sanchez keep his job?
And at FN
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:37 ET by balboaOr anyone on Fox & Friends?
She answered like a
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:13 ET by ForeverOnTheRightShe answered like a stereotypical beauty pageant contestant. What an airhead! Education is important to the future of America, but like others have said here it’s not a presidents top priority etc. etc.
"As President...
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:17 ET by BKeyser...I would improve schools while like, completely twirling my baton." <Big smile!>
Finally fill the jails with these, false teachers...
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:20 ET by upcountrywaterHome schooling
A Montgomery County couple has been arrested on child endangerment
charges for failing to register their children with the school district
as they were home-schooled, the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office said
Monday.
Richard Cressy, 47, and Margie Cressy, 41, both of the town of Glen,
never registered their four children or their home-schooling curriculum
with the local school district, said the Sheriff's Office.
For the first time, researchers can show a timely link between the Sun and the climate of Earth’
Hi UCW, I read this earlier in the day... it sickens me.
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:22 ET by pahuberSo much for liberty.
yea, three-strikes laws, get him behind bars now!
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 19:33 ET by upcountrywaterLooks like JasonC agrees with me...sarc/off or on
For the first time, researchers can show a timely link between the Sun and the climate of Earth’
Hey UCW, I loved the clip : ) very very funny!
Wed, 01/06/2010 - 19:22 ET by pahuberI wish we conservatives would wake up and not try to rationalize why they were arrested.
What's the problem here?
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:43 ET by JasonCWhat's the problem here? If you're going to homeschool you have to meet minimum curriculum requirements to demonstrate you're not depriving the kids of a balanced education. I imagine the parents were aware of this and chose not to do it. So they got a fine.
So what?
Jason, you do not see a problem with having to demonstrate
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:17 ET by pahuberto the state or proving to them something that is not their business?
I do not see a problem with
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 18:07 ET by JasonCI do not see a problem with it, no...nor do I accept your premise that it's not the state's business. The state has a legitimate interest in producing well-rounded/educated citizens. It is not outrageous for homeschooling parents to have to demonstrate that they have in fact designed a comprehensive approach to their child's education. See my response just below for more on this.
The state has a legitimate
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 18:15 ET by pahuberI find this statement to be almost Orwellian, Jason. Since when did the state have a legitimate right to dictate their desire on how our children are educated?
I do not believe they have this right. However, I do know they demand this in many states. Fortunately, we have Mache in MN to defend intrusions by the state.
My contention is that the state just assumed this position via default over time with no real constitutional authority.
You may label it Orwellian
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 19:31 ET by JasonCYou may label it Orwellian if you wish, but it's not nearly so sinister a concept. Parents do not have the right to deprive their child of a basic education based on their own skewed view of public education, their belief that The Bible is all a person needs to know, or any other fringe belief. It is perfectly legitimate for the state to ensure that a curriculum does in fact exist, that the kid isn't just being plopped down in front of his Nintendo for 10 hours a day or being taught irrelevant material. In my experience, there is great flexibility here. for instance, you may certainly teach science from a Christian/Intelligent Design perspective. There are a great number of textbooks out there aimed at Christian homeschoolers for exactly this purpose. It doesn't strike me as Orwellian or Draconian for the state to demand a minimum of pedagogical rigor.
I just do not think they (the state) has a legitimate
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 19:39 ET by pahuberconstitutional right to be in business of dictating, at all, in this realm.
Now, if you are talking about the constitution being a living document... the skys the limit.
Isn't it?
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 20:32 ET by JasonCIsn't it?
Seriously though, we're talking explicitly about states here, right? So since you mention the Constitution:
Amendment 10: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to
the people.
Good point, but I believe that if interpreted correctly
Wed, 01/06/2010 - 01:24 ET by pahuberFederal law would trump much of the intrusiveness that has crept into a lot of the states.
For example, the Bible was used as a text book by schools at one time and now...well, we know that this is not allowed anymore.
So what changed?
Of course, a lot in our society, but technically speaking to the Constitution of the US... not much.
Let me interject
Wed, 01/06/2010 - 16:04 ET by tim413Let the old Con. Law prof jump in here. Govts. have the INHERENT right/duty to legislate for the people's health, safety, welfare, and (in the old days, it seems) morals. This is true unless the govt gives up some of those rights OR if the people take some of those rights away. Our fedl govt does not operate that way bcs it was created by the states (people) and the states chose to limit the fedl govt; hence, the ENUMERATED powers. The 10th Amendment was added to ensure that it was crystal-clear that the states retained their inherent legislative rights, unless specifically relinquished in the fedl Con.
But ask most people today to explain the relationship of the fedl govt to the various state govts, and you get an answere like: Well the fedl govt is over the state govts.
Stop federal judges from foisting their notions of "fairness" on the States. Amend the 14th Amendment! - tim413
Hi Tim,
Wed, 01/06/2010 - 17:58 ET by pahuberIt seems you understood my point. I was referring to when the Federal Gov't steps in when a state or group of states overstep their bounds.
The position that the state has IMHO overstepped their legitimate authority into families at businesses and if the right court were to interpret the constitution correctly would stop the practice.
Of course, the people of each state could try to legislate change, but the courts just put the nix on that pretty quickly.
So you are correct about the states being over the fed, but that is not what is going on today... although, there are times the SCOTUS has stepped in legitimately, it hasn't been alot lately.
Strange
Wed, 01/06/2010 - 19:04 ET by tim413I thought I was supporting the argument(s) JasonC was making. The states do have the POWER to regulate home schooling; that's why we have different rules in different states.
Stop federal judges from foisting their notions of "fairness" on the States. Amend the 14th Amendment! - tim413
tim, not really... I tend to agree with your premise.
Wed, 01/06/2010 - 19:17 ET by pahuberI got that.
I do not disagree with the notion of states having that power and separate decisions on issues.
In some cases, rightfully or not, Federal does trump state. Not that I like it, but that is how it is.
Where we may disagree is the issue of homeschooling and the rights of states to be intrusive in private matters... or what degree of intrusiveness.
I think we both know that many a decision has come before the supreme court that deals with homeschooling and the decisions varied.
IMO, schools have evolved from the birth of this country home schools & country schools using the Bible to where we are now encumbered with a full blown bureaucracy and expenditures for necessary clubs and anything else that does not help the child to learn.
It is here where I believe many states have overstepped their bounds. Now parents are arrested and I think this should be a warning shot over all of our heads.
Humskuling?
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:44 ET by vrwc13First:
If you're going to homeschool you have to meet minimum curriculum requirements...
...not true in all cases, depends upon what state you live in.
Second:
...depriving the kids of a balanced education.
...public schools are guilty of this. Where's your concern for this?
v
If you're going to
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 18:04 ET by JasonCIf you're going to homeschool you have to meet minimum curriculum requirements...
Well OK, fine, I'll assume you know what you're talking about here, though I was under the impression that most if not all DO make this requirement. But moot point since clearly the jurisdiction in question in this story DOES require it.
...public schools are guilty of this. Where's your concern for this?
How so? Last I checked, public schools still taught math, science, literature, history, foreign languages, and a variety of electives. There may be a smattering of school systems that teach or emphasize things that you find ideologically inappropriate, but that hardly justifies the wide-swath claim you are making.
I am not anti-homeschooling by any means, but there is no reason to get bent out of shape about having to make sure your curriculum meets a certain standard, especially since most parent who homeschool are not trained educators.
Humskuling? ...and ADHD
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 18:27 ET by vrwc13though I was under the impression that most if not all DO make this requirement
...every state is different from extreme to almost nothing at all, a link if you would like to see for yourself.
There may be a smattering of school systems that teach or emphasize things that you find ideologically inappropriate, but that hardly justifies the wide-swath claim you are making.
...again every state is different, but just to name a few issues yet alone laws against prayer and just about everything "Jesus":
heard about:
...just to name a few.
btw: I personally believe in the future that a dramatic increase in ADHD will be linked to modern day public schooling...
v
I didn't mean to belittle
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 19:27 ET by JasonCI didn't mean to belittle your claim that public schools can dramatically fail students. And yes, there have been some pedagogical blunders - New Math is certainly one of them, though I like to think that its hasty reworking is testament to school curriculums' ability to adapt - but mostly I think that the problems i public schools have less to do with issues of what is being taught than with the inevitable problems that will arise when you have a system comprised of students from a wide variety of socioeconomic backgrounds and home environments.
As for PC-revised history - and this is just my opinion now - I think its a completely overdetermined accusation by the right, an angry reaction to the fact that history courses aren't essentially organized under the slogan "USA #1."
I wouldn't be at all surprised if your prediction regarding ADHD came to pass, though we mustn't ignore a variety of extra-curricular contributors.
Anyway, interesting discussion, thanks for your comments.
This newsreader isn't even
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:22 ET by ConservativeRexThis newsreader isn't even close to the correct answer. And here I thought CNN had all the answers.
If she had any snap she would have answered "as President I would make sure the cops in Massachusetts didn't act stupidly and roust a close friend of mine just minding his own business at his own home, that's a top Presidential priority". Silly newsreader.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
None of that preserving,
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:37 ET by JasonCNone of that preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution of
the United States for Soledad. Or faithfully executing the laws. Or
protecting our country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Or
serving as Commander in Chief.
Give me a break. You vilify her for saying her first priority would be something that isn't typically a major presidential concern, but then suggest that a preferable answer would have been for her to say that? Generally when someone asks the rhetorical question "What would be your first priority as president?", they're asking what you consider to be the most pressing policy issue, not for you to recite the presidential oath.
the presidential oath
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:14 ET by Mike BatesMost of what you cited isn't in the presidential oath.
The part about upholding
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 18:09 ET by JasonCThe part about upholding the constitution is; and the rest of it is inherent to that part.
Or, if Dingbat Soledad were a billionaire like Oprah...
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 16:38 ET by krendlershe'd spend it on public sch...
Oh wait. Oprah took her money and spent it lavishly in Africa. When asked why she didn't invest the money in inner city schools in the U.S., she said the students there weren't interested in learning. They just wanted ipods and sneakers and stuff.
In Oprah's opinion, it would be money wasted.
So, yeah, keep working on improving those public schools.
Funny. I went to a public school. It was great. Just like everything else - college included - you get out of it what you put into it.
Gee isn't she pretty ? . . . . . you racist. :)
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:02 ET by meester.
If I was President...
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:08 ET by tim413I would cut off ALL federal funds for public schools. A wise person once told me the educators could have all the money in the world and they would want more. I am convinced that we can raise our students' test scores if we just have the guts to get the trouble-makers out of the classrooms.
Stop federal judges from foisting their notions of "fairness" on the States. Amend the 14th Amendment! - tim413
Oh come on. She's not
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:26 ET by balboaOh come on. She's not actually running for president, you understand. Putting aside that improving public schools is a worthwhile goal, this question is not one that's expecting a logistically accurate answer. It's a question in an interview.
Talk about a slow news day...
Want to improve schools...
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:41 ET by dasherWant to improve schools... The best way is to get the federal government out of them, leave them to the states, and local communities.
"Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P.J.O'Rourke
True, but now you have the teachers unions involved with their
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 17:45 ET by pahuberhand in the pork... and dug in w/ their supporters who chant 'more money is needed' & 'invest in education' along with the usual accusations.
Tell the kiddies in middle
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 18:20 ET by RR GOPTell the kiddies in middle and high school that they get graded only on tests, taken online, made up by the state (so teachers can't fudge the grades) and if they fail they take a different version for a lower grade, and again if necessary until they pass. If they can't...no credit, no diploma.
Not that difficult.
"Under Capitalism, man exploits man. Under Communism it's just the opposite."
"All that Communism needs to make it successful is for someone to feed and clothe it."
Let's say she was asked
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 19:29 ET by balboaLet's say she was asked "What's the one book you'd want with you on a desert island?" Would you be upset if she said something like "Wuthering Heights" instead of some manual on survival?
And with other "riveting" questions such as "What is your favorite body part (on yourself), and why?", I don't think this was a real in-depth perusal of Soledad's thoughts on executive powers.
Please Show Me.....
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 19:31 ET by Bruce_in_KCMs. O'brien, please show me where, anywhere, in the Constitution it is the responsibility of the Federal government to provide or regulate education. This is the responsibility of the individual states, as it is not an enumerated power. Isn't this one the purposes of the 10th Amendment to reserve this responsibility for the states?
President O'Brien
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 22:12 ET by RacoKevPresident O'Brien? Unlikely.
You guys are blowing this
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 22:12 ET by balboaYou guys are blowing this WAY out of proportion. It's comical.
I agree, bal....now don't faint; it's happened before!
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 22:17 ET by motherbeltIf you look at my comment above, you'll see.
Her answer is the beauty pageant contestant's equivalent of "world peace."
I saw your post. I think you
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 22:20 ET by balboaI saw your post. I think you and QM are a refreshing breath of rationality right now. :-)
→ Oh come on?
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 22:32 ET by Cool ArrowShe's singing an adaptation of "If I Were King Of The Forest", with no substantial specificity as to how she's different from anybodsy else.
No, she's singing "The Byrds"
I want to grow up to be a politician
And take over this beautiful land
I want to grow up to be a politician
And be the old U.S. of A.'s number one man
I'll always be tough but I'll never be scary
I want to shoot guns or butter my bread
I'll work in the towns or conservate the prairies
And you can believe the future's ahead
I'll give the young the right to vote as soon as they mature
But spare the rod and spoil the child to help them feel secure
And if I win election day I might give you a job
I'll sign a bill to help the poor to show I'm not a snob
I'll open my door I'm charging no admission
And you can be sure I'll give you my hand
I want to grow up to be a politician
And take over this beautiful land
I'll make you glad you got me in with everything I do
And I'll defend until the end the old red white and blue
Are you having a
Tue, 01/05/2010 - 22:51 ET by balboaAre you having a conversation with yourself?