Scudder Parker released a position paper on “Investing in our Youngest Children.”
(He’s the guy running for governor against Douglas.)
Click here to open the PDF of Scudder’s proposal in another window.
There is no one answer to funding a comprehensive and coordinated early childhood system that meets the needs of Vermont families and their young children. I will find creative ways to pay for the care and education of our children in their early years, with a combination of resources from parents, business and the public sector, such as tax credits to employers or families.
He criticizes Douglas for not supporting the early education bill that would have added pre-school for 3- and 4-year-olds to the state education budget. That is the budget funded with property taxes. The one that is already increasing at an out-of-control rate. Douglas was right on that issue.
Vermonters may care about the young, but when it comes to increasing the tax burden on already strapped tax-payers, this is a losing issue for Mr. Parker. The number of people looking for state funded early child care and education programs is outweighed by the number of people who will not be willing to foot the bill for a service they will not use.
Some of his principles:
- We need to help our children grow as competent and confident learners and communicators, healthy in mind, body, and spirit, and secure in their sense of belonging.
- We must provide an environment that fosters children’s learning and development.
- I strongly believe that if our children are safe, nurtured, and provided with quality early care, health and education, these investments will improve their opportunities for success throughout their school years and in life.
I hate to state the obvious, but all of the same benefits can be obtained by the child staying at home.
I am not suggesting that the government mandate all families have one parent at home, but if both parents choose to work, then it is their responsibility to make arrangements for their children. The only possible exception being for single parents transitioning off welfare.
I know not everyone holds my extreme right wing view on this, but I am willing to bet that there are enough people tired of paying higher taxes to fund education that this will prove to be a losing issue.
August 25th, 2006 at 3:55 am
I think I’m voting for Douglas. He’s pretty good.
August 25th, 2006 at 6:44 am
Oh… and PS-
Politics Vermont is Fake!
August 25th, 2006 at 12:15 pm
“Politics Vermont is Fake!”
10 months without a Tarrant post. Read it and weep nutjob.
August 25th, 2006 at 10:18 pm
10 months without a Tarrant post.
Listen Doodle- Keep going with that weak-ass defense if you want to, but you and PolVT are about to be toast. I’d hit the road if I were you.
August 26th, 2006 at 12:07 am
I don’t know what kind of insult “doodle” is but you obviously didn’t think about the 10 month gap before starting this silly bullshit, otherwise you would have concocted some sort of far-fetched explanation ahead of time. No one in their right mind would think that a blog is going to run for 10 months before revealing their true nefarious nature just to give the appearance of neutrality. Don’t let me stop from making a fool of yourself though
August 26th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
PolVT only goes back to August 16, 2006 in their current incarnation. I tried to google cached versions of the old “politicsvt” (as opposed to the current “politicsvermont”) and it’s slim pickin’s. I can find the first ten months.
So tell me, “anonymous” do you just have that information about the “10 month gap” from memory, or did someone give you the talking point? Who would know that?
Fox news knew Tarrant might run in April 2005. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,154035,00.html So it would seem PolVT would have had to go out of its not to write about him for six months after that.
Please explain how you happen to be aware of the “10 month gap.”
August 26th, 2006 at 3:24 pm
You worked on that for over an hour and that’s the best you could do? You really don’t know how to use Google, do you?
1. “The Capitol Bureau” registered on blogger.com in January, 2005. Google “capitol bureau” site:blogger.com
2. The earliest post for politicsvt.blogspot.com in Google’s cache is 3/2005, with blogger.com-generated links to several other earlier posts – which means that many of their original posts have expired from Google’s cache. Blogger users cannot fabricate links to prior posts.
3. “So it would seem PolVT would have had to go out of its not to write about him for six months after that.” – assuming that you meant “go out of its way,” that does seems a bit unlikely, doesn’t it? I’m not sure what you were getting at here, but intentionally or unintentionally you’re making my point for me.
4. “I can find the first ten months.” – then what’s the problem? If you meant “can’t,” try using your brain and look at the fact that blogger archives use the year and month in the url.
5. The first post about Tarrant was made in October, 2005.
August 26th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
this is what I got. There are TWO blogger profiles for these people. One is not available, and one was started this month.
I’m not sure what you were getting at here, but intentionally or unintentionally you’re making my point for me.
I’m saying PolVT avoided talking about Tarrant, precisely so that when somebody like me noticed they were a shrill, someone like you could make the argument you’re making now.
Why do you care so much?
August 26th, 2006 at 7:11 pm
“There are TWO blogger profiles for these people.”
There’s the old one and the new one. Surely you understand that “politics vermont” has existed under two separate url’s. The original “politics vermont” blog started in January 2005. Again, I’m not sure what your point is.
“I’m saying PolVT avoided talking about Tarrant, precisely so that when somebody like me noticed they were a shrill,”
Yeah, they ran the blog for TEN MONTHS without mentioning him just to throw everyone off the trail. What a coincidence that they started writing about him right when everyone else did, and primarily by paraphrasing other outlets’ stories about him. I can see it now, “should we run a legitimate politics blog for five months before mentioning him? That should do it!” “No, it has to be TEN MONTHS or everyone will catch on!”
Do you have any idea how fucked your hypothesis is at this point, especially since it’s obvious that you had no idea how long they were in existence before writing about Tarrant until just now?
One more thing – if your retarded detective skills ever do happen to turn up a a blog that’s “secretly” stumping for one candidate, try to remember that the word is SHILL, you fucking idiot.