Rep. John Lewis: 'Make Some Noise' on New Voting Restrictions
Andrew Cohen
The Atlantic
AUG 26 2012
The civil rights icon issues a call—
"All of us should be up on our feet"—to protest partisan voting restrictions this election season.
"...And I stood up and said, I don't understand it. I don't understand it, how President Johnson can send troops to Vietnam and cannot send troops to Selma, Alabama, to protect people whose only desire is to register to vote. And the next thing I realized, I had been admitted to the Good Samaritan Hospital, a short distance away. There were 17 other people who had been hurt."
–Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), on NPR in 2010, marking the 45th anniversary of "Bloody Sunday," the 1965 civil rights march from Selma to Montgomery.
If there is an American alive today who is well suited to evaluate the partisan push for new restrictive voting laws this election cycle, it is Rep. John Lewis, the civil rights icon who put his skull where his heart and mind were on the Edmund Pettus Bridge all those years ago...
When young John Lewis marched that day, he was marching for the rights of blacks to register to vote. And it would take only 142 days, from the march on March 17, 1965 to the passage of the Voting Rights Act on August 6, 1965. Now that federal law is under siege. The conservatives of the United States Supreme Court are poised to strike down one of its central provisions. And Republicans in states like Florida, Texas, and South Carolina have passed photo identification laws that could disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of registered voters who have long cast their ballots without incident. Republicans in other states, like Pennsylvania, have done likewise.
Meanwhile, Republicans in Ohio have moved to restrict early voting access, which has traditionally been used by minority voters. As with the photo ID requirements, the new restrictions were enacted under the guise of protecting elections from "voter fraud." But, as with the other restrictions, there is virtually no evidence of such fraud. And the impact of the new restrictions will have a disproportionate impact upon minority voters, many of whom don't have the time or the money or the means of transportation to obtain the required new forms of identification.
...With all that in mind, last week I asked Rep. Lewis for some context and perspective on the link between the civil right movement of a half century ago and today's voting rights movement. I wanted to know if the connection was valid and, if so, why so many of the voices which sounded so loudly in the 1960s have been so silent today. Is it because the texts of the new voting laws are "neutral"—technically applying their restrictions to whites and blacks alike? Or is it something more. It's a timely topic—with so many judges in so many states poised in the next few days and weeks to give their own answers.
Here is the interview.
I've made the argument (here at The Atlantic) that there are strong links between the aims of the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s and the aims of people today who are fighting against partisan restrictions on voting. How strong do you think that link really is?
The link is solid and very strong. The forces that fought against the goals and aims of the Civil Rights Movement in the '50s and '60s are very similar to the forces standing against voting rights today. Fifty years ago, they were primarily Southern segregated and racist groups who used brute force, arrests and violence to discourage people from participating. Today those forces are not just relegated to the American South, but they are operating throughout our country.
The documented incidences of voter fraud are very rare, yet throughout the country, forces have mobilized in over 30 states to stop it. These efforts are very partisan. They are not using overt violence and harassment, but subtle, more sophisticated devices to discourage and prevent people from participating in the electoral process.
How much of these new laws are based upon the fear of permitting minority votes to determine the coming election?
It is not outlandish to conclude that these new laws are based on the simple objective of blocking minorities from casting a vote that will determine the outcome of elections. Some appointed and elected officials have stated these aims and have made it very clear that they are working to disenfranchise minority voters in this election.
Showing posts with label . Obama (President Barack Obama). Show all posts
Showing posts with label . Obama (President Barack Obama). Show all posts
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Obama: Education data justify jobs plan
Obama: Education data justify jobs plan
Associated Press
August 18, 2012
Tight school budgets have meant fewer teachers, larger classes and shorter school years, according to a White House report that President Obama says shows the need for Congress to pass his proposals to help states reduce teacher layoffs.
The study concluded that 300,000 education jobs have been lost since the official end of the recession in 2009 and that student-to-teacher ratios have increased by 4.6 percent from 2008 to 2010 and are on track to grow more.
"If we want America to lead in the 21st century, nothing is more important than giving everyone the best education possible - from the day they start preschool to the day they start their career," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday.
For Obama, the report offered a fresh chance to push a nearly year-old jobs plan he proposed that provided money for states to keep teachers, police officers and firefighters on the job. The proposal included payroll tax cuts and jobless insurance provisions that Congress has passed. But other proposals in the plan have run aground amid mostly Republican opposition.
Obama is pressing Congress to act, part of an election-year strategy to portray Republicans as obstructionists. Republicans have proposed their own measures, but they have not advanced in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
While the private sector has continued to create jobs, though at a sluggish pace, the public sector has been posting monthly job losses, contributing to an 8.3 percent unemployment rate.
Obama's plan includes $25 billion in aid to prevent layoffs of teachers and pay for other education jobs. It is part of a broader effort to retain state and local government jobs...
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/Obama-Education-data-justify-jobs-plan-3798736.php#ixzz240zuqFFt
Associated Press
August 18, 2012
Tight school budgets have meant fewer teachers, larger classes and shorter school years, according to a White House report that President Obama says shows the need for Congress to pass his proposals to help states reduce teacher layoffs.
The study concluded that 300,000 education jobs have been lost since the official end of the recession in 2009 and that student-to-teacher ratios have increased by 4.6 percent from 2008 to 2010 and are on track to grow more.
"If we want America to lead in the 21st century, nothing is more important than giving everyone the best education possible - from the day they start preschool to the day they start their career," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday.
For Obama, the report offered a fresh chance to push a nearly year-old jobs plan he proposed that provided money for states to keep teachers, police officers and firefighters on the job. The proposal included payroll tax cuts and jobless insurance provisions that Congress has passed. But other proposals in the plan have run aground amid mostly Republican opposition.
Obama is pressing Congress to act, part of an election-year strategy to portray Republicans as obstructionists. Republicans have proposed their own measures, but they have not advanced in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
While the private sector has continued to create jobs, though at a sluggish pace, the public sector has been posting monthly job losses, contributing to an 8.3 percent unemployment rate.
Obama's plan includes $25 billion in aid to prevent layoffs of teachers and pay for other education jobs. It is part of a broader effort to retain state and local government jobs...
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/Obama-Education-data-justify-jobs-plan-3798736.php#ixzz240zuqFFt
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Rumor about Mitt Romney's birth in a Mormon colony in Mexico is ridiculous
I believe that our political discourse would be far more civil and reasonable if our schools offered better educations.
An example of our unreasonable discourse is the foolish rumor that presidential candidate Mitt Romney's mother returned to land of her husband's birth when she was pregnant. She must have known that her own country offered far better hospitals. The rumor that Mitt Romney was born in a Mormon colony in Mexico is just as ridiculous as the rumor that Barack Obama's mother went to the land of her husband's birth when she was pregnant.
Just because her husband was born in a foreign country doesn't mean that an American woman is going to risk her life and her child's life to give birth in an undeveloped country. Why would she do that? The hospitals in Mexico might have been better 65 years ago than the hospitals in Kenya were 50 years ago, but they weren't as good as the ones in the United States.
Mitt's father, George Romney, was born in Mexico, the descendant of American Mormons who had fled bigamy laws in the US.
Then, in July 1912, the Romney family fled the Mexican Revolution and returned to the United States. The family subsisted with other Mormon refugees on government relief in El Paso, Texas for a few months before moving to Los Angeles, California, where George's father worked as a carpenter.
In kindergarten, other children mocked [George] Romney's national origin by calling him "Mex".
But that doesn't make George Romney's American-born son a Mexican citizen. He's a natural-born American citizen, every bit as much as Barack Obama.
Get a grip, birthers. ALL the birther rumors are silly.
An example of our unreasonable discourse is the foolish rumor that presidential candidate Mitt Romney's mother returned to land of her husband's birth when she was pregnant. She must have known that her own country offered far better hospitals. The rumor that Mitt Romney was born in a Mormon colony in Mexico is just as ridiculous as the rumor that Barack Obama's mother went to the land of her husband's birth when she was pregnant.
Just because her husband was born in a foreign country doesn't mean that an American woman is going to risk her life and her child's life to give birth in an undeveloped country. Why would she do that? The hospitals in Mexico might have been better 65 years ago than the hospitals in Kenya were 50 years ago, but they weren't as good as the ones in the United States.
Mitt's father, George Romney, was born in Mexico, the descendant of American Mormons who had fled bigamy laws in the US.
Then, in July 1912, the Romney family fled the Mexican Revolution and returned to the United States. The family subsisted with other Mormon refugees on government relief in El Paso, Texas for a few months before moving to Los Angeles, California, where George's father worked as a carpenter.
In kindergarten, other children mocked [George] Romney's national origin by calling him "Mex".
But that doesn't make George Romney's American-born son a Mexican citizen. He's a natural-born American citizen, every bit as much as Barack Obama.
Get a grip, birthers. ALL the birther rumors are silly.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Mary Brown, 'Obamacare' foe -- and broke
Mary Brown's hospital bills will be shifted to others since she refused to carry health insurance
Mary Brown, 'Obamacare' foe -- and broke
A woman whose case is before the Supreme Court is an exemplar of a problem the healthcare law was designed to address.
Los Angles Times editorial
March 11, 2012
Mary Brown, whose case against the 2010 healthcare reform law is pending before the Supreme Court, argues that the government shouldn't be able to force her to carry health insurance. Joined by three other individuals and a small-business trade association, she's asking the justices to rule that the law's insurance mandate is unconstitutional and that the rest of the act should be thrown out with it. But new revelations about her own situation make the case for the other side.
As The Times' David Savage reported, Brown and her husband have fallen on hard times since filing the lawsuit, largely because their auto repair business in Florida failed. The couple have filed for bankruptcy protection, asking a federal court to wipe out close to $60,000 in consumer debts. Significantly, their unpaid bills include $2,750 owed to a local hospital and physicians group and $1,735 to out-of-state medical specialists.
The disclosures are political gold for the Obama administration, transforming Brown from a champion of individual liberty into an exemplar of a problem the new law was designed to address. Uninsured and underinsured Americans rack up about $60 billion in medical bills every year that they cannot afford, forcing doctors and hospitals to pass those costs on to federal taxpayers and those patients who can pay their bills. It's not impinging on personal freedom to ask people to cover their own medical tabs. The mechanism Congress created to do that is the individual mandate.
Mary Brown, 'Obamacare' foe -- and broke
A woman whose case is before the Supreme Court is an exemplar of a problem the healthcare law was designed to address.
Los Angles Times editorial
March 11, 2012
Mary Brown, whose case against the 2010 healthcare reform law is pending before the Supreme Court, argues that the government shouldn't be able to force her to carry health insurance. Joined by three other individuals and a small-business trade association, she's asking the justices to rule that the law's insurance mandate is unconstitutional and that the rest of the act should be thrown out with it. But new revelations about her own situation make the case for the other side.
As The Times' David Savage reported, Brown and her husband have fallen on hard times since filing the lawsuit, largely because their auto repair business in Florida failed. The couple have filed for bankruptcy protection, asking a federal court to wipe out close to $60,000 in consumer debts. Significantly, their unpaid bills include $2,750 owed to a local hospital and physicians group and $1,735 to out-of-state medical specialists.
The disclosures are political gold for the Obama administration, transforming Brown from a champion of individual liberty into an exemplar of a problem the new law was designed to address. Uninsured and underinsured Americans rack up about $60 billion in medical bills every year that they cannot afford, forcing doctors and hospitals to pass those costs on to federal taxpayers and those patients who can pay their bills. It's not impinging on personal freedom to ask people to cover their own medical tabs. The mechanism Congress created to do that is the individual mandate.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Teachers, school leaders come together in Denver
It sounds like teachers are the problem in New York City. They won't even come to the table because the possibility of layoffs was mentioned. Everything must be on the table in order to seriously talk about reform. I don't happen to think layoffs are a solution to improving education. I just think sacred cows are a hindrance to reform. Here's what I think is needed.
February 15, 2011
Teachers, school leaders come together in Denver
By KRISTEN WYATT
Bloomberg BusinessWeek
A first-of-its-kind summit among teachers and their bosses -- school board members and administrators -- kicks off Tuesday in what the Obama administration is touting as a watershed moment in collaboration for school improvement.
More than 150 school districts from 40 states are sending administrators and union leaders to a U.S. Department of Education summit billed as the nation's first large effort to have school labor and management talk about student achievement, rather than the nuts and bolts of labor contracts.
It's a summit organizers are hailing as a fresh start to kick off education overhaul efforts looming in Washington, including delicate negotiations over how teachers should be evaluated.
But already cracks are showing in the let's work together effort. The nation's largest school district -- New York City -- and the Washington D.C. district pulled out of the summit after teachers accused school administrators of going back on their word. Other large districts, including Chicago and Los Angeles, are also missing from the all-expenses-paid trip funded by the nonprofit Ford Foundation.
In New York, teachers last month withdrew from an agreement to attend after some officials talked about seeking layoffs. In Washington, the teachers' union withdrew after union officials say they felt "hypocritical" presenting to other school districts how to work together with management...
February 15, 2011
Teachers, school leaders come together in Denver
By KRISTEN WYATT
Bloomberg BusinessWeek
A first-of-its-kind summit among teachers and their bosses -- school board members and administrators -- kicks off Tuesday in what the Obama administration is touting as a watershed moment in collaboration for school improvement.
More than 150 school districts from 40 states are sending administrators and union leaders to a U.S. Department of Education summit billed as the nation's first large effort to have school labor and management talk about student achievement, rather than the nuts and bolts of labor contracts.
It's a summit organizers are hailing as a fresh start to kick off education overhaul efforts looming in Washington, including delicate negotiations over how teachers should be evaluated.
But already cracks are showing in the let's work together effort. The nation's largest school district -- New York City -- and the Washington D.C. district pulled out of the summit after teachers accused school administrators of going back on their word. Other large districts, including Chicago and Los Angeles, are also missing from the all-expenses-paid trip funded by the nonprofit Ford Foundation.
In New York, teachers last month withdrew from an agreement to attend after some officials talked about seeking layoffs. In Washington, the teachers' union withdrew after union officials say they felt "hypocritical" presenting to other school districts how to work together with management...
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Sarah Palin's weird 'Sputnik' story
01/27/2011
Sarah Palin's weird 'Sputnik' story
By Stephen Stromberg
Washington Post
On Wednesday night, Sarah Palin attacked the "Sputnik moment" line from President Obama's second State of the Union address.
That was another one of those WTF moments, when he so often repeated this Sputnik moment that he would aspire Americans to celebrate. And he needs to remember that what happened back then with the former communist USSR and their victory in that race to space, yes, they won, but they also incurred so much debt at the time that it resulted in the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union.
Yikes.
In her rant, Palin wildly misconstrued the president's argument, which was not about emulating the Soviets in the 1950s but instead about the Americans who responded to early Soviet success in space exploration by educating themselves and out-innovating the Soviets. Did she listen to the speech? Alexandra Petri has more on this here.
But let's pretend that wasn't Obama's point. The Soviets didn't have an empire-draining debt problem until some 30 years after Sputnik passed over America. And when they did, it was in large part a result of massive overinvestment in heavy industry, which supported Soviet military pretensions. None of this is to argue that the Soviet economy is anything we should emulate. But let's at least get the basic facts right when we criticize it.
It's a fair guess that Palin thought she was borrowing her "insight" from the mythology of Ronald Reagan, who massively increased America's spending to spur the sort of competitive expenditure that contributed to the ballooning of Soviet debt in the 1980s. According to many conservatives, this was a -- if not the -- crucial factor that catalyzed the Soviet collapse.
But in claiming that the Soviets incurred their consequential debts long before Reagan was president, Palin ends up arguing that the Gipper wasn't nearly that responsible for the USSR spending itself to death...
Sarah Palin's weird 'Sputnik' story
By Stephen Stromberg
Washington Post
On Wednesday night, Sarah Palin attacked the "Sputnik moment" line from President Obama's second State of the Union address.
That was another one of those WTF moments, when he so often repeated this Sputnik moment that he would aspire Americans to celebrate. And he needs to remember that what happened back then with the former communist USSR and their victory in that race to space, yes, they won, but they also incurred so much debt at the time that it resulted in the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union.
Yikes.
In her rant, Palin wildly misconstrued the president's argument, which was not about emulating the Soviets in the 1950s but instead about the Americans who responded to early Soviet success in space exploration by educating themselves and out-innovating the Soviets. Did she listen to the speech? Alexandra Petri has more on this here.
But let's pretend that wasn't Obama's point. The Soviets didn't have an empire-draining debt problem until some 30 years after Sputnik passed over America. And when they did, it was in large part a result of massive overinvestment in heavy industry, which supported Soviet military pretensions. None of this is to argue that the Soviet economy is anything we should emulate. But let's at least get the basic facts right when we criticize it.
It's a fair guess that Palin thought she was borrowing her "insight" from the mythology of Ronald Reagan, who massively increased America's spending to spur the sort of competitive expenditure that contributed to the ballooning of Soviet debt in the 1980s. According to many conservatives, this was a -- if not the -- crucial factor that catalyzed the Soviet collapse.
But in claiming that the Soviets incurred their consequential debts long before Reagan was president, Palin ends up arguing that the Gipper wasn't nearly that responsible for the USSR spending itself to death...
Monday, December 27, 2010
Obama is USA's most-admired man, Clinton most-admired woman
Obama is USA's most-admired man, Clinton most-admired woman
10 MOST ADMIRED
Most admired man:
1. Barack Obama
2. George W. Bush
3. Bill Clinton
4. Nelson Mandela
5. Bill Gates
6. (tied) Pope Benedict XVI
6. (tied) Billy Graham
8. (tied) Jimmy Carter
8. (tied) Glenn Beck
10. The Dalai Lama
Most admired woman
1. Hillary Clinton
2. Sarah Palin
3. Oprah Winfrey
4. Michelle Obama
5. Condoleezza Rice
6. Queen Elizabeth
7. Angelina Jolie
8. Margaret Thatcher
9. (tied) Aung San Suu Kyi
9. (tied) Laura Bush
9. (tied) Barbara Bush
Source: USA TODAY/Gallup Poll of 1,019 adults taken Dec. 10-12, 2010.
Obama is USA's most-admired man, Clinton most-admired woman
By Susan Page
USA TODAY
Dec. 27, 2010
His party may have suffered a shellacking in November's elections, but President Obama remains the unchallenged champion on another front: For the third year in a row, he is by far the most admired man in America.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continues an even longer run, ranked in the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll as the most admired woman for the ninth straight year. Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin is second, as she was in 2009.
Despite Americans' unhappiness with the nation's politics, politicians dominate both lists. The top 10 men include not only the president but also the three living former presidents. Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton take the top three spots...
10 MOST ADMIRED
Most admired man:
1. Barack Obama
2. George W. Bush
3. Bill Clinton
4. Nelson Mandela
5. Bill Gates
6. (tied) Pope Benedict XVI
6. (tied) Billy Graham
8. (tied) Jimmy Carter
8. (tied) Glenn Beck
10. The Dalai Lama
Most admired woman
1. Hillary Clinton
2. Sarah Palin
3. Oprah Winfrey
4. Michelle Obama
5. Condoleezza Rice
6. Queen Elizabeth
7. Angelina Jolie
8. Margaret Thatcher
9. (tied) Aung San Suu Kyi
9. (tied) Laura Bush
9. (tied) Barbara Bush
Source: USA TODAY/Gallup Poll of 1,019 adults taken Dec. 10-12, 2010.
Obama is USA's most-admired man, Clinton most-admired woman
By Susan Page
USA TODAY
Dec. 27, 2010
His party may have suffered a shellacking in November's elections, but President Obama remains the unchallenged champion on another front: For the third year in a row, he is by far the most admired man in America.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continues an even longer run, ranked in the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll as the most admired woman for the ninth straight year. Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin is second, as she was in 2009.
Despite Americans' unhappiness with the nation's politics, politicians dominate both lists. The top 10 men include not only the president but also the three living former presidents. Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton take the top three spots...
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Getting things done requires a mix of compromise and confrontation
"...getting things done requires a mix of compromise and confrontation,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director.
Obama Is Set to Shuffle His Staff
By JEFF ZELENY
New York Times
December 23, 2010
President Obama is planning the first major reorganization of his administration, preparing to shuffle several positions in the West Wing as he tries to fortify his political team for the realities of divided government and his own re-election...
“In a world of divided government, getting things done requires a mix of compromise and confrontation,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director. “What are the things you can do without Congress? In some cases, that involves executive orders, but it also involves using the bully pulpit of the presidency to make a political argument about the direction of the country.”
Obama Is Set to Shuffle His Staff
By JEFF ZELENY
New York Times
December 23, 2010
President Obama is planning the first major reorganization of his administration, preparing to shuffle several positions in the West Wing as he tries to fortify his political team for the realities of divided government and his own re-election...
“In a world of divided government, getting things done requires a mix of compromise and confrontation,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director. “What are the things you can do without Congress? In some cases, that involves executive orders, but it also involves using the bully pulpit of the presidency to make a political argument about the direction of the country.”
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Most Americans want schools to stay the same; unions seem to succeed in anti-reform message
Fewer Americans Back Obama’s Education Programs
By Dakarai I. Aarons
Education Week
August 25, 2010
Support for President Barack Obama’s education agenda is slipping among Americans, according to a poll released today of the public’s attitude toward public schooling.
The survey, conducted by Phi Delta Kappa International and the Gallup Organization, reports that just 34 percent of those polled would give the president an A or B when grading his performance on education during his first 17 months in office, compared with 45 percent in last year’s poll, which covered the president’s first six months in office. ("Obama School Ideas Getting Good Grades," Sept. 2, 2009.) The president’s grades fell not just among Republicans surveyed, but also among Democrats and Independents, who increasingly gave Mr. Obama grades of C or lower.
Poll respondents, for example, took a decidedly different tack than the president and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan when it comes to turning around low-performing schools. When asked what was the best solution, 54 percent said the school should remain open with the existing teachers and principal and receive outside support...
By Dakarai I. Aarons
Education Week
August 25, 2010
Support for President Barack Obama’s education agenda is slipping among Americans, according to a poll released today of the public’s attitude toward public schooling.
The survey, conducted by Phi Delta Kappa International and the Gallup Organization, reports that just 34 percent of those polled would give the president an A or B when grading his performance on education during his first 17 months in office, compared with 45 percent in last year’s poll, which covered the president’s first six months in office. ("Obama School Ideas Getting Good Grades," Sept. 2, 2009.) The president’s grades fell not just among Republicans surveyed, but also among Democrats and Independents, who increasingly gave Mr. Obama grades of C or lower.
Poll respondents, for example, took a decidedly different tack than the president and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan when it comes to turning around low-performing schools. When asked what was the best solution, 54 percent said the school should remain open with the existing teachers and principal and receive outside support...
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Is the deeply corrupt Karzai a reliable partner in Afghanistan? Is General McChrystal?
UPDATE: McChrystal is out. McChrystal was more loyal to the deeply corrupt Afghan president than he was to the American president.
In replacing McChrystal with Gen. David Petraeus, Obama reasserts authority
By Linda Feldmann
Christian Science Monitor
June 23, 2010
“The conduct represented in the recently published article does not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general,” Obama said. “It undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system. And it erodes the trust that's necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan.”
...Earlier, McChrystal had been criticized for his role in the faulty reporting of the 2004 friendly fire death of Army Ranger (and former NFL football player) Pat Tillman in Afghanistan.
...In a rare show of bipartisanship, Democrats and Republicans alike applauded Obama’s decision.
Obama's choice of Petraeus a 'masterstroke'
June 23, 2010
...CNN: What do you think of the president's decision?
Fareed Zakaria: This is a masterstroke. Petraeus needs no on-the-job training, knows the theater, and is beloved by the troops. He understands COIN [counter-insurgency strategy], literally wrote the book on it, and most important -- knows how to execute it. He has superb political skills and understands that a close working relationship with his civilian counterparts from the State Department, White House, and other agencies is not a bother but at the heart of the mission's success...The question I have, which in some ways is greater, is not whether Gen. McChrystal is guilty of insubordination but of incompetence. ...What you see in Gen. McChrystal is someone who is openly disdainful of and sets himself up almost in opposition to the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, the State Department high representative Richard Holbrooke, the national security adviser, the vice president...If McChrystal and his team are so contemptuous of these other people whose support is absolutely critical to the success of the mission, then he's failing at his mission...
If you compare McChrystal's attitude toward his civilian counterparts with that of Gen. Petraeus in Iraq, it's night and day. Petraeus was extremely respectful of Ryan Crocker, the ambassador, extremely respectful of the State Department, always talking about how he really admired and appreciated their efforts and wanted them more involved, held almost all his briefings along with Crocker. And that clearly was a crucial part of why the surge succeeded, because the whole premise of the surge is that the military part is not by itself going to be enough...
ORIGINAL POST:
Can the US win in Afghanistan? It would be more likely if Karzai and McChrystal were more loyal--not just to each other, but to the people of Afghanistan and the US, respectively.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal to explain anti-administration comments
The top U.S. general in Afghanistan was summoned to Washington for a White House meeting after apologizing for flippant and dismissive remarks about top Obama administration officials.
By Greg Jaffe and Ernesto Londoño
Washington Post
June 23, 2010
...During his 12 months in Kabul, McChrystal has earned a reputation as a forthright commander with an unscripted style and a strong work ethic. He has forged a close working relationship with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who was quick to come to the general's defense Tuesday, saying that his loss would be a major setback for the war effort.
ad_icon
Still, McChrystal has stumbled frequently in his interactions with the media, often to the great irritation of the White House. It has interpreted the general's outspoken manner as an effort to box Obama into backing a major troop surge and large-scale counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.
In the article, McChrystal suggests that Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry, the top U.S. civilian in Afghanistan, "betrayed" him by suggesting in a classified cable last fall that Karzai was not a credible partner in the counterinsurgency strategy that McChrystal was advocating...
In replacing McChrystal with Gen. David Petraeus, Obama reasserts authority
By Linda Feldmann
Christian Science Monitor
June 23, 2010
“The conduct represented in the recently published article does not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general,” Obama said. “It undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system. And it erodes the trust that's necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan.”
...Earlier, McChrystal had been criticized for his role in the faulty reporting of the 2004 friendly fire death of Army Ranger (and former NFL football player) Pat Tillman in Afghanistan.
...In a rare show of bipartisanship, Democrats and Republicans alike applauded Obama’s decision.
Obama's choice of Petraeus a 'masterstroke'
June 23, 2010
...CNN: What do you think of the president's decision?
Fareed Zakaria: This is a masterstroke. Petraeus needs no on-the-job training, knows the theater, and is beloved by the troops. He understands COIN [counter-insurgency strategy], literally wrote the book on it, and most important -- knows how to execute it. He has superb political skills and understands that a close working relationship with his civilian counterparts from the State Department, White House, and other agencies is not a bother but at the heart of the mission's success...The question I have, which in some ways is greater, is not whether Gen. McChrystal is guilty of insubordination but of incompetence. ...What you see in Gen. McChrystal is someone who is openly disdainful of and sets himself up almost in opposition to the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, the State Department high representative Richard Holbrooke, the national security adviser, the vice president...If McChrystal and his team are so contemptuous of these other people whose support is absolutely critical to the success of the mission, then he's failing at his mission...
If you compare McChrystal's attitude toward his civilian counterparts with that of Gen. Petraeus in Iraq, it's night and day. Petraeus was extremely respectful of Ryan Crocker, the ambassador, extremely respectful of the State Department, always talking about how he really admired and appreciated their efforts and wanted them more involved, held almost all his briefings along with Crocker. And that clearly was a crucial part of why the surge succeeded, because the whole premise of the surge is that the military part is not by itself going to be enough...
ORIGINAL POST:
Can the US win in Afghanistan? It would be more likely if Karzai and McChrystal were more loyal--not just to each other, but to the people of Afghanistan and the US, respectively.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal to explain anti-administration comments
The top U.S. general in Afghanistan was summoned to Washington for a White House meeting after apologizing for flippant and dismissive remarks about top Obama administration officials.
By Greg Jaffe and Ernesto Londoño
Washington Post
June 23, 2010
...During his 12 months in Kabul, McChrystal has earned a reputation as a forthright commander with an unscripted style and a strong work ethic. He has forged a close working relationship with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who was quick to come to the general's defense Tuesday, saying that his loss would be a major setback for the war effort.
ad_icon
Still, McChrystal has stumbled frequently in his interactions with the media, often to the great irritation of the White House. It has interpreted the general's outspoken manner as an effort to box Obama into backing a major troop surge and large-scale counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.
In the article, McChrystal suggests that Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry, the top U.S. civilian in Afghanistan, "betrayed" him by suggesting in a classified cable last fall that Karzai was not a credible partner in the counterinsurgency strategy that McChrystal was advocating...
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Glenn Beck attacks Obama's 11-year-old daughter
Glenn Beck Apologizes for Mocking Obama's Daughter
Lauren Frayer
AOL News
May 29, 2010
Conservative talk show host Glenn Beck has apologized for a segment on his radio program in which he made fun of President Barack Obama's 11-year-old daughter, imitating her in a childish high-pitched voice and criticizing her intelligence...
Read full post here.
Lauren Frayer
AOL News
May 29, 2010
Conservative talk show host Glenn Beck has apologized for a segment on his radio program in which he made fun of President Barack Obama's 11-year-old daughter, imitating her in a childish high-pitched voice and criticizing her intelligence...
Read full post here.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Obama to Wall Street: ‘Join Us, Instead of Fighting Us’; Steve Schwartzman doesn't get it
This related story seems an apt introduction to Obama's words:
Wall Street's know-it-alls can't tell right from wrong
By Steven Pearlstein
Washington Post
April 23, 2010
I know you'll all be comforted, as I was Wednesday, by the public vote of confidence from Steve Schwartzman, chief executive of private equity giant Blackstone Group, when he said that his firm would continue to do business with Goldman Sachs and that he's never had a shred of doubt about the investment bank's ethical character.
So let me get this straight. Goldman Sachs is now relying on the character reference of a Wall Street sharpie who notoriously snookered investors into buying non-controlling shares of a private equity firm at the very moment when a credit-induced takeover bubble was about to burst...
Obama to Wall Street: ‘Join Us, Instead of Fighting Us’
Ruth Fremson/The New York Times
By PETER BAKER
April 22, 2010
President Obama challenged some of the nation’s most influential bankers on Thursday to call off their “battalions of financial industry lobbyists” and embrace a new regulatory structure meant to avert another economic crisis.
Speaking in the bankers’ backyard, at the Cooper Union in Manhattan, Mr. Obama castigated a “failure of responsibility” by Wall Street for having led to the financial crisis of 2008, and he pressed his case for what he called “a common-sense, reasonable, non-ideological” system of tighter regulation to prevent any recurrence. He took issue with the claim that his proposal would institutionalize the idea of future bailouts of huge banks.
“That may make for a good sound bite, but it’s not factually accurate,” Mr. Obama said. “It is not true. In fact, the system as it stands is what led to a series of massive, costly taxpayer bailouts...
Wall Street's know-it-alls can't tell right from wrong
By Steven Pearlstein
Washington Post
April 23, 2010
I know you'll all be comforted, as I was Wednesday, by the public vote of confidence from Steve Schwartzman, chief executive of private equity giant Blackstone Group, when he said that his firm would continue to do business with Goldman Sachs and that he's never had a shred of doubt about the investment bank's ethical character.
So let me get this straight. Goldman Sachs is now relying on the character reference of a Wall Street sharpie who notoriously snookered investors into buying non-controlling shares of a private equity firm at the very moment when a credit-induced takeover bubble was about to burst...
Obama to Wall Street: ‘Join Us, Instead of Fighting Us’
Ruth Fremson/The New York Times
By PETER BAKER
April 22, 2010
President Obama challenged some of the nation’s most influential bankers on Thursday to call off their “battalions of financial industry lobbyists” and embrace a new regulatory structure meant to avert another economic crisis.
Speaking in the bankers’ backyard, at the Cooper Union in Manhattan, Mr. Obama castigated a “failure of responsibility” by Wall Street for having led to the financial crisis of 2008, and he pressed his case for what he called “a common-sense, reasonable, non-ideological” system of tighter regulation to prevent any recurrence. He took issue with the claim that his proposal would institutionalize the idea of future bailouts of huge banks.
“That may make for a good sound bite, but it’s not factually accurate,” Mr. Obama said. “It is not true. In fact, the system as it stands is what led to a series of massive, costly taxpayer bailouts...
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Obama Donates $1.4 Million Nobel Prize
Obama Donates $1.4 Million Nobel Prize
AP
posted: 12 DAYS 9 HOURS AGO
WASHINGTON (March 11) — President Barack Obama plans to donate the $1.4 milllion from his Nobel Peace Prize to helping students, veterans' families and survivors of Haiti's earthquake, among others, drawing attention to organizations he said "do extraordinary work."
Obama is giving a total of $750,000 to six groups that help kids go to college. Fisher's House, which provides housing for families with loved ones at Veterans Affairs hospitals, will receive $250,000, the White House said Thursday. And the Bush-Clinton Haiti Fund, for which two former presidents are raising money to rebuild earthquake-ravaged Haiti, will receive $200,000..
AP
posted: 12 DAYS 9 HOURS AGO
WASHINGTON (March 11) — President Barack Obama plans to donate the $1.4 milllion from his Nobel Peace Prize to helping students, veterans' families and survivors of Haiti's earthquake, among others, drawing attention to organizations he said "do extraordinary work."
Obama is giving a total of $750,000 to six groups that help kids go to college. Fisher's House, which provides housing for families with loved ones at Veterans Affairs hospitals, will receive $250,000, the White House said Thursday. And the Bush-Clinton Haiti Fund, for which two former presidents are raising money to rebuild earthquake-ravaged Haiti, will receive $200,000..
Friday, October 09, 2009
President Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize
US reaction to Obama's win of Nobel Peace Prize
By The Associated Press (AP)
October 9, 2009
"Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations. To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize." — Obama.
"The president has consistently shown that he is committed to reaching out to other nations and positioning America to once again be the global leader for peace and prosperity. This is a great honor for our country and reminds us all of the promise our nation holds." — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, R-Calif.
"...This was not an award for him. It was an award for America and its values, and it really is a tribute to our country and what we stand for." — Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
"The Nobel Committee's decision to award this year's Peace Prize to President Obama is an affirmation of the fact that the United States has returned to its long-standing role as a world leader." — Gov. Tim Kaine, D-Va., Democratic National Committee chairman."
"He has changed the tone of U.S. foreign policy by making it clear to the world that we are in a race between cooperation and catastrophe, and he has reshaped the global focus and debate." — Former Sen. Sam Nunn, co-chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative."
Sunday, September 20, 2009
La Mesa/Spring Valley's Rick Winet continues to amaze: he sees a death threat in Emerson quote
This post is a follow-up to this story about the banning of President Obama's speech in La Mesa-Spring Valley School District.
San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial
A school board polarized by politics
September 17, 2009
“Resign, resign, resign!” The chant rolled through the auditorium.
On Labor Day, the La Mesa/Spring Valley School Board met to ban live broadcasts of President Barack Obama's nationwide speech to students. It was a meeting called in haste, little publicized and attended by virtually no one. And it angered many. Eight days later, parents packed the auditorium at Parkway Middle School in La Mesa, intent on retribution.
Board President Penny Halgren apologized profusely for her motion to bar the presidential speech. Bob Duff apologized for being the swing vote, and a still-defiant Rick Winet acknowledged only that the board could have done better...
Then the board effectively undid its apology.
Winet seized upon the words in a union official's e-mail (“If you are going to challenge the King, you'd better kill the King” — an often-mangled quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson) to see a death threat. The board authorized use of all legal means against anyone making a personal attack, be it verbal or physical...
Maura Larkins' comment: I don't know who wrote the above editorial but I'm sure it was someone other than the confused and anonymous individual who wrote the following editorial for the same newspaper. This unethical pundit clearly blames the minority trustees for the banning of Obama's speech--when they voted against the measure.
What was the writer of the following editorial thinking?
School board's holiday meeting
San Diego Union Tribune Editorial
September 12, 2009
Mark Twain had some choice words about them: “In the first place, God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made school boards.”
It's not certifiable that the La Mesa/Spring Valley board members — Penny Halgren, Bob Duff and Rick Winet, the majority, or Emma Turner and Bill Baber, the minority — are idiots, but they sure left themselves open to second-guessing.
[Blogger's note: Shame on the San Diego Union-Tribune for adding the two minority trustees, who, as most school board members across the country, did NOT forbid showing Obama's speech to students. Only the first three people on the list--Winet, Halgren and Duff--left themselves open to "second-guessing."]
...Ami Adkins of El Cajon, parent of an eighth-grader, is unhappy. “Just to put this into context,” she wrote us, “two weeks ago my daughter was taken out of class during school (without my permission) to attend a district-sanctioned sales presentation given by a private corporation, where she was strongly ‘encouraged’ to sell cheap and useless junk (crap) from a magazine in order to pad the school's budget.”
So yes, we were not enthusiastic about the poorly timed broadcast. Neither do we support government censorship decided in a near-empty room on a holiday.
Dunce caps for the electeds do seem in order.
[Maura Larkins' comment: Dunce caps for Winet, Halgren, Duff and the Union Tribune are in order. Emma Turner and Bill Baber are the only board members who behaved well in this matter.]
San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial
A school board polarized by politics
September 17, 2009
“Resign, resign, resign!” The chant rolled through the auditorium.
On Labor Day, the La Mesa/Spring Valley School Board met to ban live broadcasts of President Barack Obama's nationwide speech to students. It was a meeting called in haste, little publicized and attended by virtually no one. And it angered many. Eight days later, parents packed the auditorium at Parkway Middle School in La Mesa, intent on retribution.
Board President Penny Halgren apologized profusely for her motion to bar the presidential speech. Bob Duff apologized for being the swing vote, and a still-defiant Rick Winet acknowledged only that the board could have done better...
Then the board effectively undid its apology.
Winet seized upon the words in a union official's e-mail (“If you are going to challenge the King, you'd better kill the King” — an often-mangled quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson) to see a death threat. The board authorized use of all legal means against anyone making a personal attack, be it verbal or physical...
Maura Larkins' comment: I don't know who wrote the above editorial but I'm sure it was someone other than the confused and anonymous individual who wrote the following editorial for the same newspaper. This unethical pundit clearly blames the minority trustees for the banning of Obama's speech--when they voted against the measure.
What was the writer of the following editorial thinking?
School board's holiday meeting
San Diego Union Tribune Editorial
September 12, 2009
Mark Twain had some choice words about them: “In the first place, God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made school boards.”
It's not certifiable that the La Mesa/Spring Valley board members — Penny Halgren, Bob Duff and Rick Winet, the majority, or Emma Turner and Bill Baber, the minority — are idiots, but they sure left themselves open to second-guessing.
[Blogger's note: Shame on the San Diego Union-Tribune for adding the two minority trustees, who, as most school board members across the country, did NOT forbid showing Obama's speech to students. Only the first three people on the list--Winet, Halgren and Duff--left themselves open to "second-guessing."]
...Ami Adkins of El Cajon, parent of an eighth-grader, is unhappy. “Just to put this into context,” she wrote us, “two weeks ago my daughter was taken out of class during school (without my permission) to attend a district-sanctioned sales presentation given by a private corporation, where she was strongly ‘encouraged’ to sell cheap and useless junk (crap) from a magazine in order to pad the school's budget.”
So yes, we were not enthusiastic about the poorly timed broadcast. Neither do we support government censorship decided in a near-empty room on a holiday.
Dunce caps for the electeds do seem in order.
[Maura Larkins' comment: Dunce caps for Winet, Halgren, Duff and the Union Tribune are in order. Emma Turner and Bill Baber are the only board members who behaved well in this matter.]
Friday, September 11, 2009
Joe Wilson, who yelled "You lie!" during Obama address to Congress, is no Winston Churchhill
Joe Wilson uses presidential address as heckling opportunity. President Obama did not lose his cool."If we become accustomed to hearing people call a politician a liar everywhere else — for example, in town halls — suddenly it seems more natural in a place where it's never been acceptable," says Jamieson.
Heckling of president is rare in American history
By JOCELYN NOVECK (AP)
Sept. 11, 2009
...And then there was the 1838 pistol duel in which William Graves of Kentucky shot and killed fellow congressman Jonathan Cilley of Maine over words spoken on the House floor. (He wasn't even expelled.)
Given those breaches of congressional protocol, it would seem that a mere shout of "You lie!" from a 21st-century South Carolina congressman [Joe Wilson to President Obama during Obama's address to congress] would be small potatoes...
Yet there's little if any historical precedent for a U.S. congressman individually challenging a president during a speech to Congress — let alone accusing him of lying — which is just one reason why some longtime political observers were stunned by Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst...
"Occasionally, members of the opposing party have been known to boo and jeer as expressions of dissent on a specific point," says Beuttler, citing instances during the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. But before Wednesday, he says, "expressions of individual opposition of members to a president's speech had not been recorded."
Some have compared Wilson's outburst to those that occur routinely in Britain's House of Commons, when the prime minister is answering questions. But one political analyst says this is vastly different, because the prime minister isn't the head of state.
"Our president is the head of government and also the head of state, the combination of the country and the government," says Steven Cohen, professor of public administration at Columbia University. "We expect a certain amount of deference to the president, in the same way as we would for the queen. Here, we combine the two roles."
To another political analyst, it's the nature of the accusation — an elected official calling the president a liar — that is not only a serious breach (accusations of lying are forbidden under House rules) but also extremely rare in politics.
"Accusing someone of lying is impugning their integrity," says Kathleen Hall Jamieson, an expert on political communication at the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. "It was done in print a lot in the 19th century. But it is not routinely done in political discourse."
Congress is a place of deliberation, Jamieson adds: "If you call someone a liar, you've ended the deliberations. This is such a strong norm that it's been in the House rules since Jefferson."
...Winston Churchill was more subtle about the charge of lying, once describing a statement by another lawmaker as a "terminological inexactitude," now a commonly accepted euphemism for a lie...
La Mesa-Spring Valley trustee Rick Winet says Obama speech was "assault on constitution"; Halgren and Duff are sorry they voted with Winet
Board members Bill Baber (left) and Emma Turner (right) tried to defend openness and honesty in La Mesa-Spring Valley. They voted to allow students to hear President Obama's speech. Penny Halgren and Bob Duff now agree with them, and Rick Winet stands alone in his opposition.Statements from La Mesa-Spring Valley school board members
San Diego Union Tribune
September 10, 2009
The La Mesa-Spring Valley school board voted 3-2 to prevent teachers from showing President Barack Obama's education speech to students on Tuesday. The three board members issued the following statements later this week:
Statement issued by Rick Winet on Sept. 8:
...My personal objection to the proposed presentation and curriculum by the President and the Secretary of Education centered on 2 areas:
1. This was a direct assault on The Constitution of The United States of America. U.S.C. code 3503 clearly states that Congress prohibits the Executive Branch from overriding local school boards and local branches of government of control of public school curriculum..I would not and will not ever support this sort of selfish, socialistic message as public school curriculum.
2. The President's speech and lesson plans were, in the end, clearly focused to deliver a message to high school age students... this message was not appropriate for a vast majority of our students...
Statement issued by trustee Penny Halgren on Sept. 10:
I apologize for my vote to delay showing President Obama's speech to the children in our school district. If I could roll back the clock and do it again, my vote would have been to show the speech live in our classrooms.
My intent was purely to create a rich and personally meaningful educational experience for each child in our district. Because of that narrow focus, I missed completely the value of the group experience gained by having all children listen to the speech at the same time.
Statement issued by trustee Bob Duff on Sept. 10:
After seeing the President's speech, I now believe the message should have been viewed live and I regret I was responsible for the delay. All should had the opportunity to have seen it live. For this I truly apologize.
Trustee Penny Halgren'If I Could Roll Back the Clock'
Voice of San Diego
by Emily Alpert
September 10, 2009
I just got an e-mail from La Mesa-Spring Valley school board member Penny Halgren, apologizing for her vote to delay showing President Obama's speech to schoolchildren.
The East County district decided to make schools wait to show a recorded version of the speech until Wednesday so that it could be reviewed, barring them from turning on the live speech on Tuesday.
Halgren wrote:
If I could roll back the clock and do it again, my vote would have been to show the speech live in our classrooms.
My intent was purely to create a rich and personally meaningful educational experience for each child in our district.
Because of that narrow focus, I missed completely the value of the group experience gained by having all children listen to the speech at the same time.
... She explained that she hadn't understood that the group experience -- not the exact content of the speech itself -- was part of what made the event important. Two teachers who talked with her about it convinced her that it should have been a collective experience. "There are certain things that you do in life that bring us together as a community and as a nation," she said...
Green jobs czar resigns after saying George Bush knew ahead of time about 9-11 World Trade Center attack
See all posts on WTC collapse.
Obama did not order Van Jones' resignation, adviser says
September 6, 2009
CNN
The resignation of Obama administration figure Van Jones, following controversies over a petition he had signed and his comments about Republicans, did not come at the request of the president, the White House senior adviser said Sunday.
"Absolutely not -- this was Van Jones' own decision," David Axelrod told NBC's "Meet the Press" when asked if the president had ordered the resignation.
The chairman of the House Republican Conference, Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana, had called for Jones to resign or be fired...
Jones has frequently been dubbed a "green-jobs czar" for the administration.
In a statement Saturday night, the White House said Jones was giving up his post at the Council on Environmental Quality, where he helped coordinate government agencies focused on delivering millions of green jobs to the ailing U.S. economy.
"On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me," Jones said in the statement. "They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide."...
The decision followed an uproar over a petition Jones signed in 2004 calling for an investigation into whether government officials deliberately allowed the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to occur...
Obama did not order Van Jones' resignation, adviser says September 6, 2009
CNN
The resignation of Obama administration figure Van Jones, following controversies over a petition he had signed and his comments about Republicans, did not come at the request of the president, the White House senior adviser said Sunday.
"Absolutely not -- this was Van Jones' own decision," David Axelrod told NBC's "Meet the Press" when asked if the president had ordered the resignation.
The chairman of the House Republican Conference, Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana, had called for Jones to resign or be fired...
Jones has frequently been dubbed a "green-jobs czar" for the administration.
In a statement Saturday night, the White House said Jones was giving up his post at the Council on Environmental Quality, where he helped coordinate government agencies focused on delivering millions of green jobs to the ailing U.S. economy.
"On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me," Jones said in the statement. "They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide."...
The decision followed an uproar over a petition Jones signed in 2004 calling for an investigation into whether government officials deliberately allowed the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to occur...
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Superintendent Amalia Cudeiro bans Obama speech from Bellevue schools
San Diego Unified School District allowed teachers and parents to decide for themselves whether they wanted students to see President Obama's speech to America's school children on September 8, 2009. La Mesa/Spring Valley school district outright banned the viewing of the speech, but that's no surprise, given that Rick Winet and friends have a majority on the board.
Up in Washington, Amalia Cudeiro started out her tenure at Bellevue School District by going on a "listening" campaign. But she doesn't think students should be allowed to listen to the President of the United States. No, that's not necessarily true. I'll bet she would have let the kids listen to George W. Bush or George H.W. Bush (the latter did address the nation's students during his term).
Politics Bellevue School District: We Didn't Ban Obama's Speech Because We're Right-Wing, Teabagging, Evangelical Racists
We Did It Because We Did Zero Research and We're Beholden to Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories
Posted by Dominic Holden
September 8, 2009
...Bellevue School District won't allow its students to watch the president's national address to students this morning.
The district's superintendent, Amalia Cudeiro, decided to ban—or at least suspend—classrooms from airing Obama's speech last Friday.
She posted a notice on the district's website, stating that "the tape will be made available to any teacher who wants to use it in a balanced discussion, so long as it fits within the education objectives of the class." And she sent district staff a message saying that, when she made the decision, "none of us had seen the script of the speech and we received multiple contacts from parents and community members who were concerned that this was going to be a political speech rather than just a motivational one."
But school district spokeswoman Ann Oxrieder says there was no evidence that the speech would contain inappropriate content.
Despite the uproar stoked by the radical right, other local school districts didn't block the speech, instead choosing to let parents or students opt out.
Was the Bellevue district concerned that the objections were based on rumors and speculation—and that there was no indication the speech would contain the socialist "indoctrination" messages that Glenn Beck and other right-wing pundits warned it would?
"At that time nobody had time to research," says Oxrieder. "We just knew that people were saying it was going to be a political message. We didn’t know where it was coming from. It was coming from our families."
Oxrieder doesn't know if the school district aired similar addresses to students by former presidents George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan.
"I don’t think there is any reason to worry because we have read the script now," Oxrieder says. Of course, they're still not airing the speech.
Up in Washington, Amalia Cudeiro started out her tenure at Bellevue School District by going on a "listening" campaign. But she doesn't think students should be allowed to listen to the President of the United States. No, that's not necessarily true. I'll bet she would have let the kids listen to George W. Bush or George H.W. Bush (the latter did address the nation's students during his term).
Politics Bellevue School District: We Didn't Ban Obama's Speech Because We're Right-Wing, Teabagging, Evangelical Racists
We Did It Because We Did Zero Research and We're Beholden to Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories
Posted by Dominic Holden
September 8, 2009
...Bellevue School District won't allow its students to watch the president's national address to students this morning.
The district's superintendent, Amalia Cudeiro, decided to ban—or at least suspend—classrooms from airing Obama's speech last Friday.
She posted a notice on the district's website, stating that "the tape will be made available to any teacher who wants to use it in a balanced discussion, so long as it fits within the education objectives of the class." And she sent district staff a message saying that, when she made the decision, "none of us had seen the script of the speech and we received multiple contacts from parents and community members who were concerned that this was going to be a political speech rather than just a motivational one."
But school district spokeswoman Ann Oxrieder says there was no evidence that the speech would contain inappropriate content.
Despite the uproar stoked by the radical right, other local school districts didn't block the speech, instead choosing to let parents or students opt out.
Was the Bellevue district concerned that the objections were based on rumors and speculation—and that there was no indication the speech would contain the socialist "indoctrination" messages that Glenn Beck and other right-wing pundits warned it would?
"At that time nobody had time to research," says Oxrieder. "We just knew that people were saying it was going to be a political message. We didn’t know where it was coming from. It was coming from our families."
Oxrieder doesn't know if the school district aired similar addresses to students by former presidents George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan.
"I don’t think there is any reason to worry because we have read the script now," Oxrieder says. Of course, they're still not airing the speech.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Democrats for Education Reform like Obama's efforts to change the status quo in education
“We like the way the administration is using Race to the Top to send a message about its priorities,” said Joe Williams, executive director of Democrats for Education Reform. “We like that it’s gotten states to take a close look at their laws and practices.”
Dangling Money, Obama Pushes Education Shift
New York Times
By SAM DILLON
August 16, 2009
Holding out billions of dollars as a potential windfall, the Obama administration is persuading state after state to rewrite education laws to open the door to more charter schools and expand the use of student test scores for judging teachers.
That aggressive use of economic stimulus money by Education Secretary Arne Duncan is provoking heated debates over the uses of standardized testing and the proper federal role in education, issues that flared frequently during President George W. Bush’s enforcement of his signature education law, called No Child Left Behind.
A recent case is California, where legislative leaders are vowing to do anything necessary, including rewriting a law that prohibits the use of student scores in teacher evaluations, to ensure that the state is eligible for a chunk of the $4.3 billion the federal Education Department will soon award to a dozen or so states. The law had strong backing from the state teachers union...
Dangling Money, Obama Pushes Education Shift
New York Times
By SAM DILLON
August 16, 2009
Holding out billions of dollars as a potential windfall, the Obama administration is persuading state after state to rewrite education laws to open the door to more charter schools and expand the use of student test scores for judging teachers.
That aggressive use of economic stimulus money by Education Secretary Arne Duncan is provoking heated debates over the uses of standardized testing and the proper federal role in education, issues that flared frequently during President George W. Bush’s enforcement of his signature education law, called No Child Left Behind.
A recent case is California, where legislative leaders are vowing to do anything necessary, including rewriting a law that prohibits the use of student scores in teacher evaluations, to ensure that the state is eligible for a chunk of the $4.3 billion the federal Education Department will soon award to a dozen or so states. The law had strong backing from the state teachers union...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)