this about poverty and education in dialogue with the Gates Foundation:

Our education reformers want teachers to come into the schools like knights on white horses, plaster the walls with college logos, and push students to new heights with our high expectations. I have seen this in dozens of classrooms of novice teachers, often associated with programs like Teach For America. We are pretending that there is some sort of level playing field here, but we are failing to create such a field. Instead, we just pretend these students are going to be able to compete with their well-heeled counterparts in the suburbs for shrinking higher educational opportunity. For most of them it is an empty promise.

At the end of the day, whatever advances teachers can make with their students are swamped by the statistical mix of unsupportable life circumstances, and progress is not "adequate". There will be a few individuals who emerge from this system as success stories, by luck, by extraordinary resilience, and through the dedication of their teachers. Education reformers elevate these exemplars to prove that "anyone" can make it, and condemn the teachers for failing to accomplish similar results for all their students. The whole system is built around the idea that anyone can make it and therefore we will ensure the highest level of success if we attempt to hold everyone to the same high standards, while largely ignoring the conditions in which they live.

The Gates Foundation's response to him concluded with this:

What we can't do, however, is address all of the problems that put or keep families in poverty. We just don't have the resources to do that. But we are part of a community of donors who are committed to eliminating the causes of poverty. We believe the most effective philanthropic efforts are ones that remain focused on addressing particular problems and are creative about their approach to supporting solutions. That philosophy is based on the data and research of successful philanthropy.

We agree with Anthony Cody that poverty is a central problem; we just don't think we can ever effectively turn the tide by creating false choices for the daunting series of challenges students in our schools face.

If the Gates Foundation can't effectively address the issue of poverty, there's only one avenue left: government. Really, think on that. Warren Buffett has given much of his fortune to the Gates Foundation. Gates has done a lot of work trying to eradicate malaria in Africa and spread of the HIV/AIDS virus. Really important work. Yet they admit they cannot, even within a philanthropic community, make a dent in the issue of poverty.

So if the bus driver and the Gates Foundation aren't part of the solution, how does Mitt Romney think students actually succeed? And why on earth would he opt out of a solution that, in the long run, invests in our educational system and our economy to produce 21st century productive workers?

Mitt Romney is simply wrong about that child's success. And if you thought he was wrong, wait until you see how wrong Paul Ryan is. Jeff Bryant :

With Ryan teaming up with Romney, what we have is a devastating duo when it comes to supporting children. A page at the website for Care2.org lists even more travesties:

• Cutting as much as $1.1 billion from early childhood education, denying "more than 2 million poor children the opportunity for high-quality early education."
• "Blocking support intended to help avoid educator layoffs and prevent ballooning class sizes.
• Increasing support for school vouchers, "which give public money to families to attend private and religious schools."

Romney-Ryan don't spare higher education from the assault either, as they've voiced opposition to federal funds and lending that help disadvantaged students attend college and promoted privatization of the public university system.

And that's okay with them, because Mitt and Paul "credit the student, not the bus driver."