"But the Chicago Teachers Union, whose contract expires next year, is poised for battle.
No. But so what? The point isn’t how many politicians (Catholic or not) send their children to parochial schools. The point is Rahm’s hypocrisy and elitism. He opposes programs that would allow families to make the same choice he has made for his children. He’s doing what’s best for his children, and all of us here support that. But he needs to stop talking about public schools are good enough for the proletariat (or soon will be when he is done) but not good enough for his children.
I retract my earlier comments. I don’t know if he is for vouchers or not, but clearly he is doing the right thing regarding pay/performance and expansion of charter schools. He deserves credit for that.
And that is a point you have not proved. You just make some nasty allegations.
That’s just the issue. Rahm does not think that the public schools are good enough.
What point? That Rahm sends his kids to private schools while opposing vouchers? Well, I think the OP has already proven his kids attend private school. As for vouchers:
Yet he doesn’t support plans for parents to send their children to the same kind of schools that are good enough for his kids. Apparently they are good enough for the masses, otherwise he wouldn’t oppose efforts for parents to get their children into the same kinds of schools.
And you are wrong.
There’s no way to extrapolate that from any decision the mayor made. Parents can send their children to the schools they want to. You have no idea about the number of Chicago magnet schools. And, once again, you have no idea how many children attend that university school on scholarship. I do.
Well done counselor.
Your counterpoint is underwhelming. Really, do you have more than that? You asked me to backup my point and I did. And all I get is “[Y]ou are wrong”? 
So what? We aren’t talking about scholarships. And magnet school != private school. Further, Rahm opposes efforts to allow less affluent parents to choose as he has.
OK
That’s just not so. Vouchers does not automatically mean that someone’s child will be able to get into or attend a private school. Vouchers are not simple enablers for less affluent children to attend private schools.
Not at all. That’s like saying that if a person owns a car he or she must support government efforts to subsidize car purchases for the poor. Calling someone a hypocrite is highly uncharitable.
Sure they are. Vouchers allow less affluent families to afford something they otherwise cannot afford. How is it that you think they don’t?
That is one school and doesn’t address my question. Certainly, a family who wishes to send their child to a good, private school but can’t because of money would be enabled to with a voucher program.
Debatable. It would certainly require them to reform. A good public school, like many of the charter schools, would attract families, and they would apply them to those schools. It may destroy failing schools. That would be a good thing.
What does that have to do with my post? Did I call him a hypocrite? I was asking about vouchers.
It’s sorta like making claims about Christie and, when proven wrong, ignoring the proof.What does that have to do with my post? Did I call him a hypocrite? I was asking about vouchers.
Or, are you referring to my earlier posts, which I retracted after you posted evidence of Emanuel’s efforts to improve the schools? Was it okay for me to do that, or should I have ignored your post and continued posting negatively?
That happens to be quite a leap. That’s also inapplicable to the school involved, which is what we were talking about.
Well, I can spell.It’s sorta like making claims about Christie and, when proven wrong, ignoring the proof.
Beau knows hypocracy.
Ah, the you can’t spell defense.
It’s a leap? In what way? Are you claiming that the kids in less affluent households wouldn’t be accepted to better schools, regardless? Or, do you seriously think there are no families out there who would send their kids to better schools if they could offset the costs with vouchers? I know people who scrimp and save to send their kids to Catholic schools (and still pay indirectly for the public school system). I also know plenty of other people who just plain can’t make it pencil out. I guess, in your opinion, their kids don’t deserve it?
It isn’t just about this school. That just happens to be the school Emanuel sends his kids to. The criticism is general.
Costs for a ‘good, private school’ could very easily exceed the funds available with any voucher.
In other locales quality schools have sprung up that will educate the children for the amount of vouchers given. Why is Rahm so opposed to giving parents an opportuinyt to free their children from a school sytem so horrid even the mayor wont send his children to it?
Of course, but the difference a voucher makes can enable someone to afford it. For example, if tuition is $8,000 and a voucher is $4,000, then the family only has to figure out the other $4,000. There is no leaping involved…just simple math and budgeting.
in areas where vouchers have been approved market forces have led to quality schools that charge the exact amount of the vouchers received. this is not that hard to do as public schools are invariably bogged down by top-heavy bureaucracy and stringent union rules that put children second. . For instance nobody really believes you cannot educate a child for far less than the $13,000 per child spent by the WashingtonDC school district, one of the worst districts in the country