I was pleased to see Hillary Clinton take on Jeb Bush forcefully before the annual conference of the National Urban League.
Jeb! has been trying to position himself as a moderate, which he is not. He is as hard-right as Scott Walker but knows he has to keep his conservatism under wraps, at least until he nails down the nomination. After all, among the GOP candidates, he has raised the most money and has the most powerful connections in the party.
Mrs. Clinton, a Democratic candidate for president, latched onto Mr. Bush’s campaign slogan and the name of his “super PAC” —Right to Rise, his shorthand for a conservative agenda of self-reliance and hope — and turned it into a verbal spear.
“People can’t rise if they can’t afford health care,” Mrs. Clinton said to applause from conventiongoers, a dig at Mr. Bush’s opposition to the Affordable Care Act.
“They can’t rise if the minimum wage is too low to live on,” she said, a jab at his opposition to raising the federal minimum wage.
“They can’t rise if their governor makes it harder for them to get a college education,” she said, a critique of Mr. Bush’s decision as governor to eliminate affirmative action in college admissions.
When Mr. Bush reached the lectern, declaring, “I believe in the right to rise in this country,” the scent of political gunpowder was still in the air.
Jeb’s staff complained that Hillary had “passed over a chance to unite…” What? Since when do political opponents competing for the Presidency “unite”?
Now if Hillary goes after Jeb’s dismal education record and his passion for school privatization and his shredding of teachers’ professionalism, that will be something.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Strong talk from Hillary, but she will do whatever Wall Street commands. She refuses to giver her position on the Trans Pacific Partnership trade deal; she refuses to say what she would do with the Keystone Pipeline proposal. I believe the only reason she is talking so tough is because Bernie Sanders is rising in the polls.
Now she is, to quote Bloomberg, “walking a careful semantic line” on the trade deal as she courts other unions (Randi ensured Hillary bagged the AFT endorsement without our support.) She is walking a fine line between the truth and a lie with this quote from the article: “I never had any direct responsibility for the negotiations at all.”
However, the same article notes: “While Clinton herself would not have been personally engaged in the nitty-gritty of hammering out the TPP, the State Department is represented at the table when trade deals are negotiated. Her downplaying of her role appears to contradict the view of at least one of her peers. Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, last month told Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin that Clinton “participated in everything we did in the first term in a meaningful way,” and “was instrumental in formulating and implementing the re-balance to Asia, of which the Trans-Pacific partnership is a part.”
For working teachers, Hillary shouldn’t even be on the table for consideration. She will continue and further the Obama/reformist agenda. On this there is no confusion or room for interpretation. She is an entrenched corporate-base Democrat. Period. Our only workable option is Bernie Sanders, as he has the potential to see our side. Hillary does not and will not. It is shocking to me that conversations about Hillary even happen among teachers. It’s like we are desperate for her to someday bend in our direction. She never will. Like the first African-American president, and potentially the first female president, we want(ed) them to be everything a broad left could be. Unfortunately they are deep centrists both, with a strong lean towards corporate power.
That Weingarten embarrassingly threw her support behind Hillary so soon can only be seen as a sign of Weingarten’s complete disconnection from the realities facing working teachers, and the total consumption of her psyche with an aggressive form of narcissism and greed. Weingarten has long been absent from the battlefield and we can only assume, through hard evidence, that she is actually working for the reform movement.
Our political focus, as working teachers, should be towards the only candidate who recognizes labor politics as an enormous answer the the challenges facing out economy (Sanders), and more close to home, in removing those false leaders of our unions who are as much our enemies as Rhee, Duncan, Brown, etc. Lets work on separating the Weingarten’s, Mcgee’s, and Mulgrew’s from our money and tacit support.
On our issues…..our livelihoods and place at the economic table now and into the future….there is little if any daylight between Clinton and Jeb Bush or any reformer-owned politician.
I really like Bernie Sanders and he seems like a very straightforward person but he disappoints me on education.
He seems to be avoiding K-12 completely, and that’s cowardly.
Changing the subject to pre-k and college funding is not fair to voters, although it seems obvious to me that’s the general Democratic strategy. I really appreciate his bluntness. I wish he would bring that bluntness to this issue.
I may disagree, but I will absolutely respect him for being the single DC Democrat who is willing to play straight with us. He is the only one who even seems to have the capacity to do so. If he dodges this I’ll think less of him.
Absolutely NYSteacher: she is so in the pocket of Wall Street. The only hope I have is for Bernie to get a clue and support public education. I have given up on the other supposed Dems.
Hillary is never going to stand for public education. Never. Randi sold us down the river again and hoping or wishing or imagining future scenarios that might justify the endorsement isn’t going to change the reality!
Hillary will never go after Jeb’s stance on education because there isn’t much of a difference between the two, except that Hillary is being word coached by Randi.
I agree. Democrats running against Jeb Bush on education will be Democrats running against themselves.
I don’t see any way they manage this with any kind of authenticity or honesty.
How will she distinguish herself from Bush? The only thing they can do is carefully avoid K-12 and promote preschool and community college, because their agenda on public schools is identical to that of Bush.
The sad part is they didn’t even come up with it themselves- they lifted it whole from the Right and tweaked it some, mostly rhetorically. The only thing I can conclude is Democrats don’t have any ideas on education. If they did they wouldn’t have followed George W Bush and Jeb Bush’s agenda.
My one and only wish is they start telling the truth- run on ed reform as it is and admit that if you’re an education voter there is ONE choice in the “marketplace of ideas” and it is the ideas espoused by a certain group of “movement” ed reformers. That’s the truth. They should run on it instead of hiding the ball in this blizzard of BS.
The Clintons have worked closely with Eli Broad to advance the corporate reform agenda. She would never renounce Jeb Bush’s education agenda because they have the same agenda. See “Eli Broad and the Clintons”:
http://www.defendpubliceducation.net/eli-broad-and-the-clintons/
Ken,
Thanks for posting this link. Depressing but informative.
I like this, but in the current climate a third-party challenge is doomed to failure. I suggest we reform inside the Democratic party and within the AFT before we admit defeat and go third party.
No, first go with the alternatives to the two party system as a message. And then go after the AFT first then the Dims second.
Clinton had to go after Jeb in his own backyard, but that would have been a perfect time to bring up his record, and she didn’t because she like the other Neos are following the same game plan. She is also ducking the important questions outside of education. The parade in which she had a barrier blocking her from the press says more about her character or lack of. I want to hear her on the issues, but she is finding ways to avoid it because she thinks she has this nomination in the bag. Now that Biden is considering, she will either have to change her tune or pack her bags because he will answer questions. And hopefully answer questions about his family ties to charters. At this point it’s between Jill and Bernie for me only because I will never vote the lesser of 2 evils again. I will NOT be giving Hillary my vote in the primary. I want her in a position where she must debate Bernie more than once or twice. Voters deserve to see this.
Biden’s brother Frank is a leader of a charter chain in Florida called Mavericks. For-profit.
Lincoln Chafee on ecucation,
On “education reform” in general, Chafee does not believe the politically and publicly popular presumption that America’s schools are failing, saying:
This notion of all these failing schools, if this were true, how did America get to be at the status where we are in the world if it were that bad? So I don’t buy into the trashing of our public school system. Somehow Brown University, and University of Rhode Island and Bryant University, Providence College are full of public school students that are doing very, very well and leading America in many fields. Yes, there’s room for improvement, I don’t deny that and I want to be part of the improvement. But the notion that our public school systems are in disarray and failing, I don’t buy that.[53]
Chafee opposes charter schools, saying, “I am wary of charter schools undermining and cherry picking and skimming off the top of our public school system.”[53]
Chafee is “wary” of Race to the Top, “because Race to the Top includes money for charter schools”.[53] He says he would ask federal officials “what kind of flexibility we might have” to alter Race to the Top, were he elected Governor.[54]
TC,
I don’t understand your description of Chafee’s views. Rhode Island competed for and won a Race to the Top grant. Chafee’s state commissioner Deborah Gist supported high-stakes testing, charter schools, and closing entire schools, firing the staff, as was proposed in Central Falls, with Gist’s endorsement. Gist was a member of Jeb Bush’s Chiefs for Change. Chafee defended her.
Good to know. I just cut and paste wiki. The search goes on..
I will most definitely be voting for the much lesser evil because education is not the only issue. Hillary is liberal on most social issues, she will not be putting restraints on abortion, she’s not saying that climate change is a hoax and she’s not soft on creationism and she’s not pushing to privatize or gut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the ACA. The Supreme Court is very crucial and Hillary will not be appointing right wingers or loony libertarians to the supreme court. I’m voting for Bernie Sanders but if he doesn’t win in the primary, then I will vote for any Democrat to block the likes of Walker or Kasich or Bush. The GOP is rabidly anti-union while the Democrats are a mixed bag on unions. Not all Democrats are anti-union. There is a difference, enough of a difference that I will vote for a Democrat over a nut job GOPer. But if you want to feel good, don’t vote or vote for a truly progressive party which will not win. If the Green Party stood an actual chance of winning, I would vote for it. If by some miracle the Green Party wins, they will have to deal with two hostile political parties and they will have to compromise to get anything done. Then the purists will be screaming against the Green Party and calling them a lesser evil.
I’m with you. Clinton is not my first choice. If Sanders is out, I will vote for Clinton in order to block Bush or Walker. We must not allow them to destroy public education!
Hillary Clinton voted for No Child Left Behind in 2001 even though she criticized President George W. Bush’s claim of a Texas ” test score miracle” as a reason to support it. See the later part of this article by Mercedes Schneider. https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2015/07/21/about-the-upcoming-house-senate-esea-conference-committee-and-one-from-the-past/
What is her position on the ESEA rewrite about to be debated in the Congressional Conference Committee. Does she support continued annual testing? Does she support expansion of charters?
“Hillary Knocks Jeb’s Hard-Right Conservatism”
Pot calling the kettle black??
As I understand it, Bernie also agrees with the testing/salary connection. I haven’t heard him criticize charters, either. I don’t see anyone who has a good stand on education. Maybe Ms Ravitch should run!
I was happy to see Hillary slamming Jeb on his colorblind policies, too. Education activists are so fearful of corporate money–understandably– that if they’re not more careful, will deliver the presidency to the Republicans. People need to remember where and how Hillary developed her political self. It was long before the big money started supporting Her and her husband. That’s the most important difference between her and Obama. She will not be hoodwinked into thinking that a test score is a civil right.
nyti.ms/1DWUj7N
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/01/us/politics/hillary-clinton-hits-jeb-bush-first-and-hard-in-speech-on-race.html?ref=politics&_r=0&referrer=