At Sidwell, Everybody's Top Subject; "She seemed very happy, she was skipping and smiling."

[DeepModem Mom]

WP: At Sidwell, Everybody's Top Subject
By Richard Leiby and DeNeen L. Brown
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, January 6, 2009; C01


The Obamas joked around before Sasha, 7, and Malia, 10, set off for their first day. (Obama Transition Office/AP)

It's hard enough to be the New Kid transferring midyear into any school in a new town, but consider some of the special scrutiny visited upon young Malia and Sasha Obama yesterday as they started classes at Sidwell Friends....

Meanwhile the Sidwell administration, which is accustomed to hosting the progeny of executive office-holders, did its best to make yesterday seem mundane. "It's been a very normal day, the first day after winter break," said Ellis Turner, associate headmaster at Sidwell. "Nothing special was prepared for any of our students."

Utterly normal. Except, of course, for the comings-and-goings of the soon-to-be first daughters: Malia, 10, now a fifth-grader at the school's Northwest Washington campus on Wisconsin Avenue, and Sasha, 7, a second-grader at the Bethesda campus not far up the road....

"We were told to act normally," said one student, who declined to be identified for fear of violating school omerta. "But people were looking out the windows anyway." After the lunch bell rang, he saw Malia in the cafeteria. "She seemed to fit in like any other student. It looked like she made friends on her first day. She seemed very happy, she was skipping and smiling, she already had a lot of friends around her."

The school's custom is to make newcomers feel comfortable. "They really do make a big deal of welcoming new kids in," said one elementary-school parent, citing the experience of his own first-grader. And the girls already are friends with their fellow young campaign veterans -- the granddaughters of incoming Vice President Joe Biden, who also attend Sidwell.

Some of the school's Quaker traditions might require getting used to. There are periods of silence observed at the start of the day, and at the start of lunch. "Each school day begins with silence as students gather by homerooms, and meals and assemblies incorporate silence as we gather," the school's handbook says. The length is "up to the person who's asked for the moment of silence," Turner elaborated. At the middle school, it customarily runs from 8 to 8:05 a.m. according to parents.

All students also are required to participate in the Quaker tradition of the weekly "Meeting for Worship," a period of quiet reflection and discussion.

Both girls will spend their days with one teacher, except for separate science and physical education instruction, Turner said. The fifth-grade has 66 students. The second-grade has 48....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/05/AR2009010503270_pf.html


Sasha is one of 48 second-graders. (Callie Shell/AP)

[Critters2]

1. I'm still blown away at the idea of spending $30,000 a year for grade school.

It's true. The rich are different.

[LynneSin]

2. It's not just about the Obama's being rich - Sidwell can handle high-profile children

They've had Chelsea and I believe some of Nixon & Eisenhowser kids also went to Sidwell.

Obama's children are a potential security risk and therefore the security of those girls are top priority. But the girls need socialization too so Sidwell is the perfect school for them.

BTW, 21% of the students at Sidwell receive financial assistance - so it's not just a school for the wealthy.

[Critters2]

4. I still say it's ridiculous.

But then, I'm well over the idea that this man is a progressive populist.

[LynneSin]

7. well, if you don't mind, I'm going to wait until I see what the man does before I decide

I mean geez, we have 2 weeks until he is actually president.

[Critters2]

9. He didn't run as a progressive.

You think something's going to change now?

[ellacott]

19. I'm glad he's not a progressive populist

That would mean that he lied during the campaign. He never campaigned on being a progressive populist. How could he be if all he talked about was working across the aisle and including some Repubs in his cabinet?

[Critters2]

22. That's why it makes sense to send his kids to a wealthy private school.

It's who he is.


And why I didn't vote for him in the primary.

[ellacott]

29. That's a personal issue you have to deal with

It makes no difference to me who you voted for.

He's done nothing different than many in his position. We have no say over it. I would have done the same thing.

We can whine about it on a messageboard but it's not going to change their minds.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

58. Would you rather they went to god-awful DC public school?

I went to private school for kindergarten. We stopped after kindergarten because it was an expensive folly to do so in an area where public schools are decent, some even better than decent; my town of residence has probably one of the top 5 public school systems in the state. However, I have friends from neighboring towns with shitty public schools who do indeed go to private high schools. Some of them are extraordinarily rich, and attend the appropriate preppy private school, but the local Jesuit schools are filled with average-Joe kids escaping the bad public schools of the backwoods areas of the state. Everyone deserves a decent education, and when your father's soon to be the next president, you need security as well.

[Critters2]

62. Here's a fact that'll just shock you---in rural areas, there are no private schools,

and because of the way we fund schools in this country, many rural schools suck. But people are just expected to make do. Or move to the suburbs. Moving to the suburbs is the expected solution to too many problems in this nation. It's time we had good public schools for everyone.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

68. I fully agree. I am a product, as I said, of public schools.

Barack Obama sending his kids to Sidwell Friends, no matter how much he shells out for it, however, doesn't detract from the issue or put the nation's public schools in any worse condition than they are now. Your veiled and not-so-veiled invective against the "rich" and private school attendees is tiresome, however, as if the rest of us are stupid or naive for not immediately loudly and proudly decrying and mocking the Obamas and similar figures for trying to seek good education for their children. People who have options will use their options. The fact that other people do not have options is a serious issue indeed, but it's not as if the fact that Malia and Sascha, or children of similar (in?)famous status, attend private school is stealing resources from or further harming those who do not attend private school.

[Critters2]

71. I offered no "invective". I just pointed out that wealthy people

have money to spend on such things. Like others, you read too much into it.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

74. Perhaps, and perhaps not.

"It's true. The rich are different."

I think many people sense bitterness or sarcasm or otherwise a kind of dismissal there, particularly with your assertion that paying 30k a year for grade school is absurd. It might well be absurd to the average middle-class American, but what other options do these children have? They want good education, same as anyone else, and they're willing to pay for it.

[Critters2]

75. They have public schools as an option. nt

[WritingIsMyReligion]

78. Sure, if you want your children to attend substandard schools.

Where the Obamas live now and have lived, public schools are not a viable option for anyone who wants a good education for the family children. There are absurdly rich people who send kids to private school when the public schools would suit just fine (in instances around here, the private schools are no better than, say, my public school district), and those people might perhaps deserve some scorn for not daring to allow their precious widdle wons to mingle with the lower classes. In large cities, however, particularly Chicago and DC unless I am very much mistaken, there is an enormous difference between the education you get at a magnet or private school and the education you'd get at a public school, and I do not hold it against anyone who wants to flee such a public school.

[Critters2]

80. Magnet schools are public schools. And many are diverse in their makeup. nt

[Critters2]

83. Right. Only poor children should go to substandard schools,

thus continuing the cycle of poverty. If the wealthy went to these schools, there's good reason to think they'd improve.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

86. Did I say that only the poor should go to substandard schools?

I know wealthy people in various states who do attend public schools, and yes, some of them are substandard.

Perhaps some of the schools should demonstrate an interest in improving so that people who have other options will choose THEM as an option instead of opting for the better education.

[tabbycat31]

107. Amy Carter went to public school

and because of security, she could not go outside at recess. For an elementary school aged child (as Sasha and Malia are) that is a very big deal.

And you would think with all the threats on Obama during the campaign, that he would keep his children protected. Did you complain when Chelsea Clinton went to Sidwell? They've got a track record of handling high profile children, including presidential children.

Besides taxpayers are not paying the tuition. The Obamas are paying the tuition out of their own pockets. It's none of my business how someone spends their money.

[Critters2]

109. They don't have recess at Sidwell Friends?

That sucks.

[tigereye]

113. it would be better if all schools were so good that people didn't need to pick

private schools.


One local private school here is $20,000, a figure I find absurdly high, more than some state colleges. But people are able to pay and want that type of education for their kids. It isn't fair, it's just what it is...

[Rockholm]

88. Plenty of progressive populists go to prep schools.

Most of the New England private schools are hotbeds of progressive thinking. Why, are rich liberals not allowed to have the finer things in life if we can afford them?

[Critters2]

91. Do you know what the word "populist" means? nt

[Rockholm]

110. Sorry. All that money spent on education and no clue.

You are missing the entire point.

[Cha]

13. How ironic that when Obama was

young he had a scholarship to a prestigious school on Oahu.B-)

[Critters2]

14. How sad is that the people we put in charge of education policy

have no firsthand experience of public education?

[Cha]

18. I've been chosing to ignore your

negativity.

[Critters2]

25. Responding to me is a funny way of ignoring me.

Did you go to a private school?

[wndycty]

3. I was told by some friends that many parents choose to schools which benefit them professionally. .

. . .the tuition is thought of as a business expense because in many cases the networking opportunities with other parents (many of whom are powerful) is valuable.

[Critters2]

5. They're not just children! They're investments.

And my ovaries didn't work. There is no justice.

[LynneSin]

6. I think Sidwell was the front runner because they've done president kids before

It really boils down to a security risk.

[Critters2]

8. You can argue this all day. I don't buy it.

I still say there are almost certainly magnet public schools that could've done this, given the opportunity.

[wndycty]

11. I think there are two arguments here. . .the Obama's chose the school they felt was best . . .

. . .for their kids, afterall they are the first family, I can't imagine what business benefit they would get. However some of the parents do think about it as a networking opportunity. Can you imagine being say a defense contractor and the parents of your kids classmates are members of the administration and Congress?

[Critters2]

12. Another reason to send 'em to public school--where they'll be hob-nobbing

with the children of bus drivers who have nothing to gain but friendships.

[wndycty]

21. Hey I am public school product but there is nothing wrong with those who can. . .

. . .sending their kids to the best schools.

I live in Chicago and hope when I have kids I can send them to UofC Lab, Latin or Frances Parker. Hate me all you want.

[Critters2]

23. If I were able to have kids, they would've gone to public school.

It's all I could afford, and it gives them contact with the real world--ya know, poor people and what not.

[wndycty]

34. You know a lot of real world folks BUST THEIR ASSES to send their kids to private schools. . .

. . .your judgments on other folks are just silly.

[Critters2]

35. Methinks thou dost protest too much. nt

[marimour]

52. my mom took out thousands of dollars in loans to send me to private school.

Public school is all well and good when you live in a suburb with a great school system and plenty of property taxes, but I wasn't and neither is DC. She took out loans one year, we got financial aid and she begged them to allow her to make weekly payments instead of a lump sum one year. I bet most if not all of the parents in urban areas like mine wold love to get that opportunity to give their children a better education. I don't see why the Obamas wouldn't want the same.

[Critters2]

55. In the meantime, public schools die of neglect because the people

who "count" have no interest in them. But hey, they're only for poor people.

[marimour]

59. that is a very juvenille view of the issues

Who are the people who count that you are referring to? I recall that it is one of Michelle Obamas top issues in her role and she will be specifically trying to help DC area public schools. It seems like you are just resentful that private schools even exist rather than focusing on trying to improve the public schools that are really suffering. I don't know any good parent that wouldnt want to give their children the best education that they are able to give.

[Critters2]

64. Some people think a good education means exposure to a wide

range of humanity, not just the wealthy. There's more to education than the 3 Rs.

[marimour]

going to an urban public school would not give you a wide range.

Public schools are for the most part still highly segregated, as are most neighborhoods by race and by class. The people that I would have gone to school with would have been mostly the exact same, poor (like me) and black (like me), with a sprinkling of Hispanic. Thats not a lot of range there.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

70. I can assure you that attending public school, in many areas of the country, does NOT expose you

to a "range of humanity." It exposes you to the children who happen to live in your geographic area, and in MANY places (many northern states, any place rural, as you're so aware), the children who live near you are just the same race or socio-economic class as you are. The idea that public schools are bastions of diversity or that private schools are attended solely by the absurdly wealthy is simply false.

[Critters2]

73. Actually, in rural communities where I've served, the richest kids in town

usually the children of doctors, lawyers or large farmers, go to school alongside the poorest-usually the children of immigrants who work in slaughterhouses or factory farms. They also live very near one another. It's a good experience for all concerned, in social terms.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

76. Everyone here is the same.

School systems are probably over 99% white and middle-class, except for in our pathetic excuse for a city. It's the demographics we have to work with. Frankly, going to an expensive and private university will give me more exposure to a range of humanity than going to public schools has.

[Critters2]

79. Going to a publci university was the greatest experience for me,

in terms of diversity. I went to a fairly diverse high school, too. But college was great. Friends from all parts of the state--rural, suburban, urban. All ethnic backgrounds, and a good many international students. I know, from the experience of friends and parishioners who've gone to private colleges, that I would never have had this experience at a private college. For diversity, there's nothing like a large, public university.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

84. Well, I will defintiely not be attending my state university.

It's a haven for people who skated through high school and have no plans of leaving the state, and I can't tolerate that attitude any longer, having dealt with it all too frequently in my 99.99% white home town. The private university I'll be attending has almost 11% of each class from out-of-country and is in an extremely diverse and cultural area of the country, and it's not even an Ivy. :shrug: :)

[Critters2]

87. You have only one state university? We have 12.

At least three are what the Carnegie Foundation calls "major research universities". These attract a lot of international students.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

93. We have a state university system.

The biggest one is the best-known, and it is certainly not a hotbed for any sort of intellectualism at all...you could do much worse than it, but you could also do much better. The spinoff campuses cater to the kids who barely graduated high school; I've taken classes at one this past year and can attest to the appalling lack of interest in education that the student body holds. If any of these schools has a notable international presence, I would be utterly astonished; they are not the types of schools that one generally aspires to attend.

We have three notable liberal arts schools in the state, at least one of which is honored as a better-than-decent school, but you have to pay significant money to go to them, and they are most assuredly not public.

[tigereye]

115. the choice is a bit harder when you have kids - you suddenly think more

about what will benefit them the most, and you work hard to afford whatever than may be. We have no fancy furniture, etc, we pay for school. And I think most parents will try very hard to make the best choice that they can afford for their kids, whatever their SES.

[wndycty]

16. And to your point about magnet schools. . .

. . .the Obama children were already accustomed to going to a private school they went to UofC Lab. Magnet schools are good but I do think when it comes to where ANY PARENT with the necessary means chooses to send their child its their own decision and we should make sure that parents who don't have that option have access to the best public schools available.

[LynneSin]

39. Well you know what - they aren't your kids

They are his kids.

And those kids ARE a security risk. You just want to toss them in any old public school out there and cross your fingers that no harm comes of them? And I don't mean harm as in some kid is picking on them but harm in the sense that some terrorist is casing the joint looking for a hit. Well guess what - that's NOT for us to decide. We didn't elect those girls to office, they came with their father and they deserve to be in a school that has safely hosted several presidential & VP kids during their tenure in Washington DC. Sidwell has proven to be a safe school for these children.

So have all the attitude you want, for me, I want what is best to keep those 2 adorable girls safe for the 8 years they'll be in DC and Sidwell has the track record to assure that. The fact that it is an excellent school is an addede bonus.

[Critters2]

42. I want them to get a well-rounded education. nt

[LynneSin]

49. I do too - but I also want them to be secured

I think if we were to ever see Obama lose his cool it would be if someone got to his wife or kids.

I am all for public education and trying to get the money needed to ensure these schools are sucessful. I just don't think the security of the girls should be compromised to make a point.

:pals:

[Number23]

69. I also think that because Biden's granddaughters go there, that may have been a consideration as wel

It was obvious on election night that all four girls are fond of each other. I have no doubt that Michelle took that into consideration when choosing the school.

I am blown away by certain people's absolute INSISTENCE on using everything they can find as a weapon to be used AGAINST our president-elect. Every step, every breath the man takes is cause for criticism...

Some are criticizing him for sending his children to a school, a GREAT school, that other presidents and VP's and other prominent public servants have also sent their children too. I have not heard a whiff of condemnation for Biden, Clinton, Gore or anyone else who's sent their children to Sidwell. I am so damn tired of the hypocrisy and negativity.

[Critters2]

72. I think all public servants should send their kids to public schools.

It's an important way of keeping them aware of the problems in public education.

[Number23]

96. And why should anyone care what you think?

Opinions are like assholes -- everybody's got one. And it's tragically ironic that your opinions seem so often to eventually lead to the same location -- howling and indignation over every single choice and action Obama makes.

It's amazing that you don't seem to even care how transparent you are.

[Critters2]

98. No one needs to care what I think.

Why do you?

[Texasgal]

101. How would you propose that security

for the girls be handled in said public school? Just curious.

[Critters2]

104. Why would it be any harder in a public school than a private one.

Public school=building with students and teachers.

Private school=building with students and teachers.

Or, are poor students a security risk?

[Texasgal]

105. You are really reaching.

I never said anything about poor people not being good enough for security.

You have failed to answer the question.

Apparently Sidwell is known for using extra security measures having had many high profile kids in their schools previously.

Can you answer the question? How would this work in a school that is not used to that type of security?

[marimour]

114. thats selfish.

Kids should not be used as a political statement. You can be perfectly aware of the problems with public education without sacrificing your child's education and potentially putting them in danger. I see you went to a rural public school so your viewpoint is probably that of a rural small town (safe) public school. Well a lot of people in public schools aren't that lucky.

There was a drive by on the marching band by another school's band members at my cousin's school this semester. And they are supposed to be the nerds of the school! My aunt was in the parking lot waiting for my cousin to come back from the football game when that happened. No one should be forced to put their child in that kind of situation if they have other options.

[NashVegas]

15. Did You Never Hear About This One?

Let's say you are a new parent. And you want to start your kids in a top pre-school so they are on track for an Ivy League education. In New York, that means getting your kids into the 92nd Street Y in Manhattan. Two year olds are given IQ tests. They are interviewed. The parents are interviewed. Tuition runs $15,000 a year.

In addition, parents are expected to make generous donations. In the fall of 1999, this was the situation facing Jack Grubman and his wife LuAnn.

Despite a number of meetings with the school, and promises of support, his twin two-year olds didn't make the short list.

At the time, Grubman was an analyst with Citigroup unit Salomon Smith Barney.

Grubman was the nation's top telecom analyst.

And he didn't like AT&T.

This presented a problem for Sandy Weill, then chairman of Citigroup, and thus Grubman's boss.

Weill was in a power struggle with fellow co-CEO Jack Reed.

Weill needed all the votes he could get on the board to get rid of Reed.

And one of those votes was C. Michael Armstrong, the head of AT&T.

Armstrong was not happy with Grubman's negative rating of AT&T.

And he let Weill know it.

So, Weill began a campaign to get Grubman to take a "fresh look" at AT&T stock.

And so Grubman began to take a "fresh look."

And as he was taking a "fresh look," he wrote a two page memo to Sandy Weill, his boss, titled "AT&T and the 92nd Street Y."

He reviewed for Weill how the "fresh look" was going -- meetings with top AT&T executives, including with Armstrong, promises to keep Weill posted

But wait.

There is this matter of the "ridiculous but necessary process of preschool applications in Manhattan."

"Given that it's statistically easier to get into the Harvard freshman class than it is to get into preschool at the 92nd Street Y, it comes down to 'who you know,'" Grubman wrote.

"Anyway, anything you could do Sandy would be greatly appreciated. As I mentioned, I will keep you posted on the progress with AT&T which I think is going well. . If you feel comfortable and know some of these board members well enough, I would greatly appreciate it if you could ask them to use any influence they feel comfortable in using to help us as well."

Weill then arranged to donate $1 million to the school if Grubman's kids were let in.

And he did.

And they were.

And Grubman upgraded his rating of AT&T stock in November 1999.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0224-21.htm

[Critters2]

20. O.M.G

:puke:

[FrenchieCat]

10. I paid that for my children, and we are hardly rich.

[Critters2]

17. Actually, if you had $30,000 extra lying around to spend on grade school

for your kids...you are rich. No matter how hard you argue otherwise.

[wndycty]

24. THAT IS SO FUCKING UNCALLED FOR!!!

You don't know shit about Frenchie. You don't know what GOD DAMNED sacrifices she made to provide for her children.

You judging of people is FUCKING APPALLING!

[Critters2]

28. $30,000 to send kids to school makes you rich.

If people are offended by being called "rich", that's not my problem. Some people just are rich. Some are proud of it, some are embarrassed by it. I'm not judging the goodness or badness of being rich. I'm just saying that being able to spend $30,000 a year on your grade school kids' education puts you in the "rich" category. Sorry if Frenchie is not proud of her apparent wealth. She can probably afford a therapist to work through that with.

[wndycty]

32. Well maybe if she is rich she can loan you some money for a therapist. . .

. . .because its obvious you need one. I don't see Frenchie going around judging other people and needing to define them as rich or poor, etc. She never said whether or not she is wealthy so its pretty fucked up for you to draw the conclusion that is not proud of her apparent wealth.

[Critters2]

33. She is rich. You're the one who's pissed off.

And the one who's judging.

There's something in your eye.

[charlie and algernon]

27. "No matter how hard you argue otherwise."

i love how you have to shield yourself like that. in fact I think you should have as your subject line "I'm right and you're wrong and I'm never going to change." for every post you make. That way we know not to deal with you.

[Critters2]

31. Me, and everybody else on every message board on the internets.

Not a shield. Just a fact. Some people are rich. Apparently, they're not happy about it. I don't get that, but there you are.

Rich people could always stop being rich by giving their money to poor people. That might make them less touchy about the issue.

[charlie and algernon]

36. ok, so then why raise holy hell towards people who are?

or who go to private school? My parents sent me to private school and they certianly aren't rich. we'll be paying tution costs till i'm old and gray. I certianly turned out fine and have worked way hard for democratic candidates. How about you stop judging people by where they went to school?

[Critters2]

37. I'm hardly raising holy hell. My God, rich people are defensive. nt

[charlie and algernon]

38. lol, for one, i'm not rich

you perhaps missed the part where I said I'll be paying off loans for decades. And you're the one attacking everyone who posts here because you think they may not have had it as tough as you.

[Critters2]

40. Take a breath. I haven't attacked anyone. nt

[charlie and algernon]

45. lol, perhaps you need to take a breath

every other post on this thread is yours. Perhaps you're taking where Obama sends his kids to school and where other, complete strangers go to school, a bit personally. We get it, you've had a hard life, but that's no excuse to attack and judge others.

[Critters2]

46. I haven't said a thing about my life. Nor have I been resentful.

Others here seem embarrassed by their wealth. I don't understand it, but there you are. I said people are rich. I didn't say being rich was bad. I just said they're rich. They've read a judgment into that that wasn't there. I find that amusing, but I didn't cause it.

Maybe they didn't learn to read well at those private schools.

[wndycty]

48. Are you sure about that?

Post #23 in this thread:

If I were able to have kids, they would've gone to public school.

It's all I could afford, and it gives them contact with the real world--ya know, poor people and what not.
I'm from Iowa. I only work in outer space. Capt. James T. Kirk

[Critters2]

50. Simple statements of fact. Not emotion. I couldn't have kids.

You assume that people need kids to feel fulfilled, and not having kids instantly means one is resentful? Again, that's your issue, not mine.

[wndycty]

51. Say what? I don't have kids and I'm pretty damned fulfilled. . .talk about projection

:kick:

[Critters2]

53. Look, I get that you don't think anyone should ever be called rich,

because you see it as some kind of insult. You're going to have to accept that some people are rich. Just as some people are poor. Calling rich people something else doesn't make you a progressive, or whatever it is you're trying to accomplish. And people who can afford to send their kids to $30,000 a year grade schools are rich. This is a simple statement of fact. If I didn't eat a single meal for a year, I wouldn't have $30,000 extra to spend on any luxury. See the difference?

Now, stop hyperventilating because someone used an adjective you don't approve of. Go get yourself a venti latte and relax. Try finding a real issue to argue with someone about. Because I'm done here.

But you're still rich. :hi:

[rvablue]

56. While I think it is fine the Obama kids are going to Sidwell despite the cost I find it freakin'

hilarious how you got tag teamed for calling someone who pays $30,000 a year for their kids to go to school "rich."

Because, without a scholarship, and with more than one child, it is just elementary that someone who has access to that kind of money is er, uh, um......(dare I say it?)....rich.

Anyway, it's weird the vitriol it brought out.

[Critters2]

61. I know. Apparently more than one kid, no mention of a scholarship.

But that doesn't qualify as *gasp* "rich". :rofl:

[rvablue]

63. You can call me "rich" and while wholy untrue.....I won't flame you! n/t

[Critters2]

65. Okay, I'll try...You're rich!

:hide:



:rofl:


Thanks! :hi:

[wndycty]

43. Exactly. . .

:kick:

[wndycty]

41. It's called projection and resentment. . .

. . .some folks who send their kids to private school are rich, some folks who send their kids to private school aren't. It seems that particular poster has a desire to paint everyone who goes to private school with one stroke. The poster has serious resentment issues.

[Critters2]

44. LOL! nt

[rvablue]

57. Wndycty......if you spend $30,000 a year for more than one child to go to school

and aren't getting family help or scholarships, you have a lot of money.

I think the generally accepted term for that blessing is: rich. I tend to prefer "wealthy" myself.

I could care less where people send their kids to school or how much they pay. It is NONE of my business, but your freak-out about the adjective used for people who have a good amount of money is, oh....I don't know......weird.

[Dreamer Tatum]

77. D'ya think that "rich" is generally a pejorative on DU, so it's basically an accusation?

If you have $30K/kid to spend on private school, then you're doing well.

To which I say, GOOD ON YOU. Congratulations for your willingness and ability to
devote your resources to your children.

[rvablue]

81. I don't consider "rich" or "wealthy" a pejorative.......just and adjective and one I'd like someone

to call me one day. I wouldn't freak out about. It's a blessing and makes life easier.....kind of like what you said, being able to give your kids the best possible life and future.

If you read my post, I said it is NONE of business where people send their kids or how much they pay. But if you are dishing out that kind of cash without help, you are rich, or like I said, I actually prefer the term "wealthy."

And your lukewarm definition of "well" is interesting, considering there are plenty families of four who live off that kind of money for the entire year.

[Critters2]

82. Wndycty was the one making that argument.

Was offended by use of the term "rich".

[wndycty]

94. What I was offended by you looking at someone's expenditure and determining they were rich. . .

. . .it speaks a lot of either your ignorance.

The particular DUer may be wealthy, may not be, but who are you to choose without knowing anything about the person other than that expenditure.

[Critters2]

100. See post # 57. nt

[marimour]

54. not true

If you ask some of these parents at these prep schools, some of them are taking out second mortgages, and lines of credits, selling cars to pay for the tuition. Not all but some. This is coming from a the daughter of a poor parent who did the same (and more) to send me to a 12,000 a year private school.

[Catherine Vincent]

112. Maybe not hardly rich but very well off!

Shiiiatt! :)

[cottonseed]

85. I think Presidents are different.

I would be Kucinich would send his kids to school their as well if he were elected.

[moriah]

108. If you have it to spend, or can get the financial aid to do it....

... why not?

I highly doubt that anyone who is spending 30k a year for grade school hasn't already put quite a bit into their children's college fund.

Better than buying a new car every year, or cruises around the world, for sure.

[AZBlue]

117. $30K a year to make sure those little girls are safe? I'm fine with that!

[jesus_of_suburbia]

26. I hope they have a relatively normal childhood (as much as you can being Presidential children).

I hope the media eventually stops following their every move.


Chelsea turned out well despite some of the cruelty from the press.

Let's hope we have learned our lessen. Let them live a life out of the spotlight as much as possible. They seem like such good kids. We should leave them alone.

[Jennicut]

111. Chelsea was well protected, I hope Malia and Sasha are as well

Chelsea proved it can be done, growing up normal in the White House. Its just the internet age was just coming around when Clinton was in his second term, I remember getting the internet at our house with my parents in 1995 when I was a freshman in college. Its way worse now, everyone has a cell phone these days. There were not any cell phones when I was in high school in the 90's. Hope they get the privacy they need, Sidwell seems like a great school and they are used to this.

[Starry Messenger]

30. I hope they will take a Ceramics class. :)

This is the pottery teacher's website:

http://www.huntprothro.com/resume

I don't want hotlink images from this website but it's worth checking out. Nice stuff.

[Ocracoker16]

47. Teaches in upper school- the Obama girls aren't that old

[Starry Messenger]

60. Oh, rats. Maybe later then.

Looks like they do Raku firing. Everybody loves that because it is so immediate and theatrical.

[gblady]

118. wow....

that's beautiful stuff....

[Scooter24]

66. I wish them all the best....

Sidwell is a great school with an equally impressive reputation. I hope they thrive!

[Bucky]

67. It's Skipping-&-smiling-Gate! You heard it here first!!

[firedupdem]

89. Great for the girls. I'm hoping they continue to be happy and have

wonderful days at school.

[EraOfResponsibility]

90. Thank you, mycritters2, for turning this thread into a bitch-fest. n/t

[Critters2]

92. Just by using that one little word.

It's a funny ol' world! :hi:

[Jackeens]

95. Huh, that's rich.

:hide:

[Number23]

97. S/he obviously gets very little attention in whatever other places in the world in which they dwell

S/he is having the time of their life hijacking what should have been an innocuous thread with asinine comments and getting responded to by 20 different posters. Kind of pitiful actually...

[Critters2]

99. Yet here you are, making an issue of it.

Kind of ironic, actually. :rofl:

[Number23]

102. You had to edit that simple comment??

Let me guess, you picked the wrong smiley!! Spelled "actually" wrong??

You seem to be such an accomplished shit-starter, I'd have guessed you had it down pat by now... ah well... I'm sure you'll get alot more practice soon. Probably starting with another truly inane and insipid comment in response to this post. ((waiting patiently))

[Critters2]

103. It's like a sport with you! Such fun. Like a fly to honey!! nt

[Number23]

106. And there it is! Right on time and as lame and witless as we all knew it would be!

And thanks for calling me honey you big, nasty fly you! :hi: :*

[AZBlue]

116. Actually, being the new kid mid-term is great!

Everyone wants to be your friend and you can get right into the flow of things. I've done it and it's much, much better than being the new kid at the beginning of the year.