|
|
Re: NCLB: 'Reading First' Info Sent to Justice Dept.
Posted:
Apr 25, 2007 10:47 PM
|
|
Haim's response reminds me of some of Bush's favorite moments when he
robotically repeats, "I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation." His
cronies, of course, then repeat the same BS even when the investigation
is over and facts are in.
Haim predictably pretends that the investigation is ongoing. Well, in
some sense it is true--the Justice Department is now looking into it.
But there is also the investigation that's quite complete--the one by
Inspector General. And there is plenty of evidence of corruption.
I was among many who pointed out several times over the past seven years
that people with a direct financial stakes in products connected with
various ED programs should not be involved in decision-making on ED
panels. That includes people who directly benefited from Reading First
recommendations as well as various members of math panels. This is a
simple issue of a conflict of interest--it should not be a matter for
investigation. Conflict of interest is easy to spot before people are
appointed to panels. Incompetence is another matter.
But the referral to the DoJ means that there is a lot more than just
conflict of interest at stake here. The referral is for criminal fraud.
So, please, "Haim", quit pretending that there is nothing going on. We
are not in Oz.
VS-)
Haim wrote:
> MPG Posted: Apr 25, 2007 8:59 PM
>
>> Speaking of corruption about which the silence of the
>> Waynes (and Haims) is audible):
>>
>
> It is kind of you to think about me, but I don't know what to say. You see, in the matter of "Reading First", allegations have been made, there is an investigation that may lead to court and, if in court, there may be convictions. I.e., if a crime has been committed, then guilty people are likely to pay and I am content to let the process work itself out.
>
> On the other hand, where are the allegations, the trials, the convictions, for the $600 Billion per year shambles of our public schools? Where is your outrage? Oh, you are on the offensive, alright, but always against anyone who criticizes the status quo. What's up with that?
>
> Haim
> Je me souviens
>
>
>
|
|
