I just saw a Dina Titus commercial on TV. Not bad. She talks about how she wants full-day kindergarten and will demand that 90% of education funding goes to the students, not the bureaucrats. Absolutely impeccapble ideas. Watch for yourself. But is it true?
A cursory glance around her website yields a a major problem for me. I can’t find anything about what she’s mentioning on TV. See, like Gibson, she doesn’t have a button for her issues. Is there something wrong with the democrats running for governor here that makes them incapable of detailing in short form what they believe in? Or is this all some sort of code I don’t understand where they all “know” what the other is thinking? It’s like they’re fucking aliens or something. They Live. I mean, come on.
Today, I won’t dismiss Dina’s hopeless campaign because of her website. I’ll just take a little time to hammer on her education plan. Full-day kindergarten. I like it. My kids both did it – at a private kindergarten (we paid for it). If the state could figure out a way to do it, awesome. But until the people in Carson City can, I can’t figure we need to increase taxes for something that hasn’t been needed since, I don’t know, time began. But the full-day kindergarten thing isn’t what she’s bullshitting us on anyway.
She says she’ll demand that 90% of education money go to students, not bureaucrats. Really? Seriously? Just how the fuck does she think that will happen? I’m going to play the lay person here and ask for help. How the fuck does that happen? Who has to be fired before 90% of our money goes to the students—not bureaucrats? I’m no expert, and these numbers may be old, but I heard once that 55% of tax money goes to bureaucrats in public education, not students. So Dina figures to take the same amount of money, and double the number of dollars that go to students? She’s full of it. Or is this fuzzy math? Someone help me.
Let’s just say that the average school district gets $100 per year. Of all the people there, $45 goes to students, and $55 goes to administration. If you up that to $90 for students, and drop it to $10 for, you know, bureaucrats, you’ll have to fire a shitload of people, including your superintendent, and I’m sure that’s not going to happen. So here’s a simple explanation of how this works. It doesn’t.
Wait, I got it. She didn’t say she’d do it, she said she’d demand it. There is a difference. One means actually standing behind it, the other means fooling people into voting for you. Sorry for the misinterpretation at the beginning there, Dina. I get the professorspeak now. You don’t really mean it, you just want us to think you mean it. My bad.
Dishonesty is one of those things that really bothers me. And when you go on my TV and tell me you’re going to demand something, but I can tell before the end of your 30 seconds that you’re full of shit, I don’t appreciate it. So, like Jim Gibson, Dina Titus has been exposed for the pretender she is. Sorry, Dina. I tried to lay off for a while, but you screwed yourself here.