NY Times backs Bush

In Rescuing Education Reform, the New York Times editorializes strongly — and intelligently — for No Child Left Behind. The edit criticizes Democratic candidates for catering to interest groups by bashing the law.

The Bush administration has the high ground here. Although the program needs more funds and better administration, No Child Left Behind is tackling one of the nation’s most critical problems: the substandard educational opportunities offered to poor and minority children.

Critics are defending a bad status quo, says the Times.

About Joanne


  1. Mad Scientist says:

    The end is near! Repent while you have the chance!

    The Times actually defending Bush and NCLB? What is the world coming to?

    How many of the posters here will cancel their subscriptions? How many will stop deriding NCLB? How many will recant their testimony that Bush is the Prince of Darkness?

    Inquiring minds want to know!

  2. PJ/Maryland says:

    MS, remember that the Devil can quote scripture. Perhaps NCLB isn’t that bad, but Satan W. Bush is using it to lure us further into evil! Alternately, the NY Times may have been taken over by (Republican) aliens. Or maybe today is “Opposite Day”, and everything means the opposite of what it normally does.

  3. Mad Scientist says:


    I guess you are somewhat annoyed that there is actually a challenge to make the kids perform, and that you will be held accountable for the results.

    That’s what we in the real world like to call “the real world”.

  4. Well, yes, the New York Times has the high ground and the status quo is shameful, and NCLB is ambitious, but still. NCLB is like a powerful electric fan in a hen house. Lots of feathers flying but the poop still doesn’t get cleaned out.

    NCLB is pretty bold, but it will soon be history.

  5. The Times actually defending Bush and NCLB?

    Not quite. Read the article – the editorial accuses the administration of “inept leadership” and suggests the Bush administration has “turned out to be part of the problem.”

    This is pretty consistent with many democrats’ positions – NCLB isn’t necessarily bad, it’s just badly implemented and badly funded by the administration.

  6. PJ/Maryland says:


    I have no idea where you are drawing your conclusions from. I was agreeing with you, just suggesting alternates to your “the end of the world is near!” scenario.

  7. Mad Scientist says:


    Did you FLUNK how programs are funded in this country? It seems that CONGRESS alone has the power to allocate money. And since the Democrats were in charge from June 2001-Jan 2003, it would seem they share some of the blame.

    Besides, money is NOT the solution to every problem. School districts are just being held accountable for what THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING ALL ALONG. That really can’t take that many dollars.

  8. The NCLB is better than nothing, but the NCLB is not the problem. The problem is schools that set fuzzy or low standards and don’t require kids to meet them. Actually, the NCLB could eventually be a problem if the incredibly low standards that each state test for are met. How can I be happy about the NCLB as being better than nothing if all it does is institutionalize slow improvements towards a minimal goal? In this sense, it maintains the status quo.

    If you really want to help poor and minority children, give them full choice now. Don’t do nothing and don’t wait until the public school either passes or fails the testing. Even passing or improving is no great deal. Everyone will be happy that progress is being made, but it is fools gold. If failing provides the kids with choice, then this is perhaps a better result. Let’s just skip the NCLB and go directly to choice. Give these kids the choices that only affluent parents now have. Give these kids the opportunity for greatness, not mediocrity.

  9. Mad Scientist says:


    My apologies. It is just that your “Satan W. Bush” comment was a bit too over the top.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Mad Scientist,

    Re PJ’s remarks, see this.

  11. Mad Scientist says:

    Really clever whoever didn’t have the guts to add a name to the last comment.

    It’s just that too many liberal teachers actually BELIEVE that it is “Satan W. Bush” in the White House, that he stole the election, and that the Supreme Court “annointed” him.

    Why not get a life? They are not that expensive, and you can try one on before you buy.

  12. >Chris,
    > Did you FLUNK how programs are funded in this country?

    Mad Scientist,
    I was clarifying the article’s content, not expressing my own personal views on the issue. Calm down.