Back in April of 2012 we reported on how 71% of New Hampshire’s public schools failed to meet their adequate yearly progress in math and reading. (Not very ‘progressive’ of them.) We later debated the potential benefits to local New Hampshire school districts who could ‘potentially’ collect a tax windfall per student with the program–more than they would lose if the new voucher legislation was passed. (It passed.) We made fun of left wing criticism (narrative) against the scholarship program and even showed how it had saved other states money. We even reminded Liberals that they have been known to argue against overturing settled law (which the school voucher program is), the same Democrats who were now focusing on the budget as promised trying to overturn every law Republicans passed that they could–as quickly as possible.
Well, New Hampshire Democrats are still Democrats and the scholarship program passed by House Republicans is a threat to their union monopoly on education. So a scholarship program that is specifically designed to direct private money to help the most vulnerable, low income families in our state, gain access to schools with the potential to deliver better outcomes, must be repealed.
Not if you’re Martha Raddatz of ABC News.
“What difference, at this point, does it make?”, was shouted this past week from the naturally delightful, demure, and unquestionably feminine Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a congressional hearing in response to a question of whether or not the administration’s immediate response to the 9/11/2012 Benghazi killings was misleading by saying the attack was “sparked” by a video– as the administration claimed at the time, to be sure, you know, to not shoot first and aim later.