• I hope you can convince voters.
    I am a retired teacher in CO, in a city where a right winger managed to make sure our state had its hands tied for years because of his TABOR amendment.  He had a huge influence in our already conservative, we hate taxes, city.  I had been teaching in the district 25 years before the citizens finally passed a mill levy and bond for schools.  I remember years where when it rained, our school (and we were not alone) had the gym, hallways and a few classrooms with buckets to collect the water from the many leaks.  

    So good luck.  Door to door and reminding people that schools, like their homes, needed upkeep...and in the long run, keeping roofs and walls in repair would save them money.

    Wish I knew someone there to tell. But I don't.  

  • How naive of you!

    Or have you just started watching the misogynistic, W enabler, the jerk or simply says and supports whomever or whatever is "in" at the moment.

    Matthews was cheering W AFTER he invaded Iraq.
    Matthews not only personally despised the Clintons, he used his personal vendetta against them to trash Al Gore, lie about Al, and help put W of the "sunny nobility" (Matthews words) into office.

    Long before Obama was even in the race, Matthews was trashing Hillary for being a woman.
    Better himself?   with whom?  some in the progressive community who gave the jerk a pass because he pretended to admire any and everyone who was against Hillary?

    This is a man who STILL invites the likes of Dick Armey on his show and sits in silence as the man attacks and insults a fellow journalist who happens to be a woman.  This is a man who calls the likes of Tom Delay "buddy" and says for all to hear "I owe you one..."
    This is a man who gave a voice time after time to racist Ann Coulter.

    Please.....calling Matthews latest spin "bettering himself" is hardly enlightened.

  • veteran of public schools.

    And frankly, the bs put out by the Reagan administration, A Nation at RiskA was just that ...bs.  

    There are bad teachers to be sure.  There are bad nurses, bad cops, bad doctors.....it is a fact.  But the spin that bad teachers cannot be fired is an urban myth.  They can and have been. I helped get a fellow teacher fired.....and I am a strong union member.   But it takes work, it takes competent administration; it takes documentation and DUE PROCESS.  Everyone deserves due process.

    DOCUMENTATION is needed. And that is what many on the administration fail to do. DOCUMENT, OBSERVE, DOCUMENT. It can't be because parent X doesn't like that the teacher made her child cry; or failed his child.  

    Teaching is an art, not a science.  Not all things work for all children.  There is no magic bullet, no scientific method that works for all kids.
    Students are developmentally at different stages even if the share the same chronological year of birth.  

    I don't know too much about Michelle Rhee but I do know that poverty impacts children in many ways, including educationally.  And while the right is fond of "just throwing money at the problem has failed", money is needed. Incentives (monetary ones) for teachers committing to crime ridden inner city, poverty ridden schools in the rural areas, would help.  Make it competitive for teachers to commit to long term (at least five years) to those schools. DO NOT MAKE IT ABOUT TEST SCORES.  SMALL CLASSES DO MATTER AND they cost money.  

    Great teachers have an innate talent that cannot be measured but mediocre teachers with time, mentoring, support and incentives can become excellent.  

    I would love to discuss this more but I have to head out to substitute.  Good topic.

  • on a comment on No "Reagan Day," Say Some Guvs over 5 years ago

    supported despots in South and Central America.  Because of his capitalism overrides any and everything mentality, people died at the hands of Pinochet and other despots.   People were erased, went missing, murdered and tortured because they dared to fight for the right to organize into unions, wanted to demand decent pay, and wanted lands stolen from them given back.  

    Reagan's policies and actions (as far back as the McCarthy era) hurt workers.

  • how very sensitive some here at this blog are......
    anyone who mentions that there was some Clinton hatred are PUMAs.....

    and for others just the name Clinton sends them off the depend.  Maybe they should go to the MSNBC talking heads for consoling and comfort.

  • Why don't the blue dogs and others on the left see this?  A simpleton can see through their game.  Why the hell are we pandering to the same people who declare FDR a failure with the New Deal and declare the man who started us down the road of the "the rich should get richer" and the "who gives a damn about poor people" a hero.  While FDR got people back to work, made sure we stood up to fascism, Ronald Reagan invaded a small island, aided and abetted despots like Pinochet who murdered thousands, the right still gets away with trashing FDR and putting Reagan on a pedestal.  What the hell is wrong with people?  Why are the democrats telling the American people the truth NOW?  WE WON DAMMIT.

  • have bought hook, line and sinker, that Bill Clinton was Satan and Ronald Reagan was a hero.  

    And the democratic party is seemingly the party of Ben Nelson, Claire McGaskil (teehee we cut the sill stuff out....since when is education, health silly?), who would rather pander to a bunch of pit vipers who would rather sell their soul's (or their mother's souls) to make a buck.

    Krugman is right on and the centrists are screwing us all.....just so we can all sit around and sing kumbaya.

    My only hope is the bill goes back to the "people's house" and they put those "silly" things back in.

  • on a comment on delete over 5 years ago

    it is your interpretation.

    Some of us saw it differently.  Why do you assume that only your interpretation is valid?

  • on a comment on delete over 5 years ago

    You have been trashing Bill over this thing that is clearly subjective.  There are a lot of us who have now watched the video over and over and read it differently than you.

    But YOU are insisting you KNOW what Bill was feeling and what his intent was. I find that pathetically judgmental, biased and unfair.

    Today I watched as President Obama used the right wing "democrat" in the same demeaning way republicans use it....as an adjective.  It bugs the hell out of me because I see it as a way for republicans to insult and demean.   When Obama said it, my first thought was that he made a mistake...I will not assume that as a politician, this democratic president intentionally wanted to stick to the left.  
    I feel the same way about Bill Clinton.  Why would I assume he intentionally wanted to support a sexist remark.  

    Again this thread speaks loud and clear to me...some of the CDS remains in tact.

  • on a comment on delete over 5 years ago

    Bill Clinton on such an intimate level that you know what his remark meant in terms of his feelings?

    Seriously, this strikes me as more CDS.  I don't like how Bill handles relationships with women. I base that on the fact that he cheated on his wife.  But I know quite a few men who have done so....men who on every other level I respect and even admire.  

    But I surely do not know what Bill's or anyone (not my intimate partner) feelings are when they are put in an awkward position of witnessing someone else's stupidity/ignorance.  Clearly to me, Bill was not OK with what Bush I was saying.  I believe his words reflected a knowledge of his own missteps and how he has had to learn to measure his words where clearly old BUSH has not had to...nor has younger Bush had to.  To me it was more of a reflection of how the press treats the Bush family vs how the press treats the Clinton family.  

    I think you assumptions of knowing what Bill was feeling is a bit unfair.

  • on a comment on delete over 5 years ago

    "happy" about letting him get away with it.  That is pretty judgmental, declaring you know what he was feeling. How could you possibly know?  

  • on a comment on delete over 5 years ago

    The Clintons can do no right!!   It not just one side.

  • seemingly a reasonable person. You see one side and resort to labels and nastiness against a diarist who is arguably one of the most fair and compassionate posters I have ever read.

    You are blinded by hate and bias and that gets us nowhere.

  • and take your biases and hate elsewhere.

  • Canadian girl.

    Years, decades, centuries of women and girls being beaten and torture because of some paternalistic sadism based on religion is as unacceptable now as it should have been in the 1980s when in Afghanistan the rise of violence against women and children based on extremist views was coming to the attention of the world.  We stood by silently, our governments, in the name of what?  Tolerance for a those who believe the have the right to beat, kill, enslave women and girls because of religion?  

    It's hard to believe that in this millenium there are still so many societies that tolerate this kind of violence against women.


Advertise Blogads