This is what Democratic nominee Bill de Blasio told the Association for a Better New York. This is an organization of powerful people, many in the real estate industry. They have been cool to him in the past. This speech won a standing ovation, according to this morning’s New York Times.
How many elected officials in your city or state would say what de Blasio said here:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 4, 2013
New York, NY – A year to the day after introducing his bold tax plan to fund universal pre-kindergarten and expanded after-school programs, Democratic nominee for mayor and Public Advocate Bill de Blasio returns to the Association for a Better New York today. De Blasio will lay out his comprehensive vision to tackle income inequality and end the Tale of Two Cities, bringing New York together as one city.
Good morning.
I want to thank ABNY for hosting this discussion and inviting me to attend once again. Throughout its history—from the fiscal crisis through today—ABNY and its members have provided a forum for discussing the challenges facing our city.
I want to thank Bill Rudin for his leadership of ABNY, and his longstanding commitment to the City of New York.
It is an honor to come before you, as I did exactly one year ago today. Then I called for real, concrete change to fight the growing economic inequality in our city. I made the case that we needed new ideas and new resources to produce that change.
Today, I want to talk about how we can work together to make that vision a reality.
I want to start with the plan I described to you one year ago. I believe we must guarantee every child in our city a quality pre-kindergarten education and every middle school student a safe after-school environment that keeps them on-task, off the streets, and out of harm’s way.
And I strongly believe we must back up our commitment with real dollars — a modest tax on those earning more than a half-million dollars a year.
As I said a year ago, these investments are not only critical for those who are struggling, but will help all New Yorkers — because we all benefit when the middle class is growing, and more of our fellow citizens are lifted out of poverty.
Over the course of this past year, our case has only grown stronger.
We have seen President Obama and Governor Cuomo elevate the importance of early education as the key to transforming our education system – and transforming young lives in the process.
We have seen studies by the National Bureau of Economic Research that show that providing free pre-kindergarten to families in need is among the most effective means of reducing income inequality, increasing social mobility, raising college graduation rates, reducing crime, and increasing wages.
That’s why the plan I announced here a year ago has become a centerpiece of my vision for progressive change in New York.
But this investment won’t simply set those children – our children — on the right path for a brighter future. It sends a signal to families across our city that beyond the skyscrapers and high-rises that paint our magnificent skyline we haven’t forgotten what New York City is really about, a city of neighborhoods.
A city that understands our economic might isn’t measured solely by the number of millionaires who call New York home, but by the promise that every family has a shot at living and working and raising children in our five boroughs.
Throughout this campaign, I’ve spoken about New York becoming a Tale of Two Cities – one that has worked very well for our city’s elite but one that’s left millions of everyday New Yorkers behind.
And while we certainly don’t begrudge our fellow New Yorkers their success, we also can’t ignore those who struggle to find good jobs and quality schools, those who can’t find affordable housing and needed health care, those who don’t have access to early childhood and after-school programs that set our children on the right path, and keep them there.
Make no mistake. When so many New Yorkers are being priced out of their own city, it’s not merely another problem for us to consider. It’s a crisis of affordability – a crisis that’s reached a tipping point in the years since the Great Recession.
At the same time Wall Street has not only recovered to its pre-recession levels, but managed to set new records, nearly half of our city lives below or near the poverty level.
This affordability crisis is different from the soaring crime we faced twenty years ago, different from the turmoil that followed 9/11. But it is no less urgent, and requires no less commitment on the part of our city’s leadership to address.
It is felt by parents speaking in worried whispers after their kids have been put to bed, parents who are living paycheck to paycheck, with nothing left over. It is felt by working single moms who have to cast aside nervous thoughts of their children’s whereabouts during those long hours after school lets out, but before their work day ends. It is felt by once solidly middle class families who are being squeezed by skyrocketing housing costs.
This crisis can be seen starkly in the changing nature of New York City’s jobs landscape. Our city has a quarter million more jobs than it did in 2000—and for that I give Mayor Bloomberg his share of the credit.
But 200,000 of those jobs are in a handful of low wage sectors, sectors like retail and food service where the average pay is less than $28,000 per year. Meanwhile, we’ve shed more than 50,000 middle class jobs in that same time frame.
The combination of low-wage jobs and a housing market that fails to produce sufficiently affordable homes has created painful outcomes. Just one stunning example — 28% of families in our homeless shelters include at least one employed adult.
Think about it: these are thousands of our fellow New Yorkers who work hard at their jobs, have families with children, but have no home.
It is a foundational American principle that if you work hard and play by the rules, you should be able to make a life for your family. But now, for too many New Yorkers, that dream is in danger of slipping away.
As many of you know, I’ve been talking about these issues over the course of this election, and calling for a dramatic change in direction. However, my opponents in this campaign don’t think we need a course correction.
They choose to accept – or else willfully ignore – the income inequality that threatens the foundation of who we are as New Yorkers.
I have a different point of view. I don’t accept this as our destiny. I am committed to tackling this crisis. I know we can solve this crisis of affordability, and we will, but only if we work together.
We cannot resign ourselves to the mindset that says rising inequality is a necessary byproduct of urban success. Instead we must recognize that the economic insecurity steadily creeping steadily up into the middle class is a threat to our city’s long-term future and something we must urgently address.
There is nothing divisive about acknowledging the struggle so many New Yorkers face. It’s not class warfare. As my old boss Bill Clinton would say, it’s arithmetic. And it’s reality, the daily experience facing so many across New York.
And before we can address this great challenge, we first must be honest with ourselves. We must first admit that the affordability crisis exists – and then resolve, together, to do something about it.
Many of today’s policies have sidestepped the problem – or even made it worse.
City and State support for CUNY—that great engine of middle class strength—has declined sharply, leaving students to pick up the tab through higher tuition.
We’ve lost more than 30,000 seats in our after-school programs since 2008, depriving young people of safe, supervised alternatives to the lure of gangs and violence.
And while the Bloomberg administration’s New Housing Marketplace plan was admirable and is on track to reach its goal of 165,000 new or preserved units of affordable housing, we are in many ways treading water, barely producing enough new units even to offset the affordable homes we lose in any given year.
Housing costs in New York City are at an all-time – with average rent having just crossed $3,000 per month for the very first time.
We need fundamental change that addresses the struggle of millions of New Yorkers – policies that take dead aim at this Tale of Two Cities.
Instead of giveaways that disproportionately favor luxury housing, I have laid out a plan for hard and fast rules to require construction of new affordable homes for working and middle class New Yorkers.
Instead of pouring billions of dollars into unnecessary and overly generous tax incentives for big corporations, we need to invest in small businesses, in workforce training, and in CUNY—the most reliable pathways for those seeking a shot at entering the middle class.
Instead of an economy that generates poverty-wage jobs, we need to raise the wage floor so that working families on every step of the economic ladder can make ends meet and see a way up.
That’s real change. That will make a difference not just for a fortunate few—but for hundreds of thousands of families who have felt shut out of our economy for far too long.
It’s big thinking – that’s true. But thinking big is what we New Yorkers have done throughout our history.
And it’s time to think big again, and change our approach so that opportunity is something that is open to everyone. We cannot expect prosperity to trickle down from the top; that is a philosophy that’s failed time and again. Instead, we must build opportunity from the ground up.
I give Mayor Bloomberg great credit for recognizing the need to diversify our economy from its over-reliance on the finance sector, and for strategic investments to create jobs to offset the decline of traditional manufacturing.
The administration’s emphasis on expanding New York’s research universities as a magnet for talent, growing the tech sector and launching the applied sciences initiative, helping to bring back and grow New York City’s film and television industry, and spurring a rebirth in the next generation of manufacturing have all created jobs, diversified our tax base and made our economy more resilient.
These policies were important, and we shouldn’t step back from them — and we won’t.
But while all of those efforts were necessary, alone they are not sufficient to meet today’s economic crisis.
Where these policies have come up short is that they have failed to provide meaningful opportunities for the majority of New Yorkers.
Today too few graduates of our public high schools and our CUNY system are finding employment in these emerging industries. And the vast majority of our unemployed and underemployed citizens are cut off from opportunities in these rapidly growing fields.
We can do more to fuel the growth of each of these sectors while ensuring more New Yorkers are filling these jobs.
That’s why in the Tech sector, I’ve proposed: a dedicated 2-year STEM program at CUNY to connect more graduates of our public university system to jobs in the tech industry; a scholarship that encourages tech graduates from CUNY to stay in New York City after graduation to grow companies or start new ventures;
and 14 additional industry-linked Career and Technical Education high school programs aligned with job growth projections.
We must move forward with the Brooklyn Tech Triangle plan and replicate that model, to build new economic development hubs across the City.
To grow the film and television production sector and to create more opportunities for New Yorkers in it I’ve called for: a New Film, Post-Production and Animation School at the Brooklyn Navy Yard; tripling the enrollment in the Made in NY Production Assistant Training Program; creating a “Film & TV Lab,” modeled after the EDC’s successful “Media Lab” for Film Production, Post-Production, and Animation; and bringing more production to Brooklyn, the Bronx, Queens, and Staten Island.
We must continue to re-envision manufacturing in New York City. Manufacturing was once the backbone of New York’s middle class economy. Today, the average annual wage for a manufacturing worker is over $53,000.
In Brooklyn, the number of manufacturing jobs – after decades of decline — has increased in the past three years.
Advanced manufacturing firms, touting new technologies, like 3D printing, are rediscovering what made New York such a successful manufacturing hub in the past: our density, our diversity, our shipping infrastructure, and the innate talent of our people.
To allow these firms to grow and thrive, we must: tighten restrictions in the zoning code to strengthen the city’s 16 Industrial Business Zones; change zoning laws to meet the surging demand for live-work spaces and mixed-use development; replicate the success of the Brooklyn Navy Yard on other City-owned industrial land; expand support for manufacturing by investing in maritime and transit infrastructure, and digital connectivity that increases the value of Industrial Zones; and scale up workforce development programs like Brooklyn Workforce Innovations that connect unemployed and underemployed New Yorkers to the industrial jobs of the future.
Our workforce development programs must be more about quality than quantity. If all we’re doing is placing New Yorkers in minimum wage jobs — with no opportunity for upward growth and mobility — then quite frankly we are all failing.
That is why I have laid out a plan for strengthening the way we train our workforce – by: integrating community-based organizations into a city-wide workforce development system; expanding use of apprenticeship programs in major city construction and service contracts to give opportunities to New Yorkers in all five boroughs; reinvesting $150 million annually in CUNY, and ensuring every city high school is connected to a specific college, or a specific company or sector; and establishing a job creation coordinator to oversee all workforce development programs in the city.
In addition to supporting these emerging sectors, we need to continue to nurture immigrant entrepreneurs who have always been at the heart of New York City’s thriving neighborhood economies. To do that I have proposed: creating economic development hubs in at least twelve immigrant and low-income neighborhoods, these would be one-stop shops in multiple languages that bring together all of New York City’s business development services in accessible neighborhood locations; establishing a $100 million revolving loan fund for neighborhood entrepreneurs; giving local businesses, including immigrant small businesses, a second-shot at City contracts — this would let local firms match the price offered by a lowest responsible bid, encouraging local business, while still getting the best deal for the taxpayer; and ending City Hall’s fine assault on small businesses by banning quotas, utilizing warnings instead of financial penalties for first-time and minor violations, and making the appeals process for small business owners easier to navigate.
We need to do all of these things to continue to grow and diversify New York City’s economy.
But most fundamentally, we need to do more for the millions of New Yorkers who work long hours for low wages and who suffer the most from New York’s affordability crisis.
We must raise the wage floor by: expanding our Paid Sick Leave law to include hundreds of thousands of working New Yorkers not currently covered, because you shouldn’t lose a day’s pay to take care of a sick child; passing a real living wage law that says if you are receiving city subsidies you are going to creating good paying jobs for New Yorkers; cracking down on wage theft that is all too prevalent in our economy; and supporting efforts to raise wages and improve conditions in low-wage sectors like the fast-food and carwash industries, where workers are struggling to assert their most basic rights to come together and bargain collectively for higher wages.
For nearly a century, unions have provided the most secure path for Americans in low-wage jobs to join the middle class and it can and must be that way again.
In addition to creating good jobs for New Yorkers, we need to tackle the root of our affordability crisis – the rising cost of housing.
That’s why I have proposed an ambitious plan to build or preserve 200,000 new and preserved units over the next decade— that will put affordable housing in reach for more families in every neighborhood.
We will get there by converting a system based on incentives that have yielded too little, to one based on clear requirements for affordability. We need a stronger hand to make sure development will create and preserve places for a diverse range of families to live and raise their kids.
When the public action of rezoning creates huge new value for developers, we will require, not simply encourage, the production of affordable housing.
Taken together, the elements of this platform amount to a very different vision for our city.
It is a vision that says we need a City government that recognizes itself as an instrument to lift people up, and to truly foster opportunity for all.
Look, I know not everyone in this room agrees with every part of my plan.
But I know we all share a set of values – that every child deserves a first rate education; that everyone who works hard and plays by the rules should be able to earn a wage that can support a family; that people should be able to live in the same neighborhoods they’ve spent their lives.
And most of all we all share a belief: that New York City is the greatest city in the world – not simply because of our economic might and stunning skyline and vibrant culture, but because we are a city that leads the nation and the world in remembering that we are bigger and stronger and better as a city when we make sure everyone has a shot.
So today let’s go forth – together – and resolve that the Tale of Two Cities will be in our past and that building one city will be our future.
Thank you.
How can you in good conscience back this man? Trips to Cuba , at a time when that was not permitted to a U S citizen… He seems to be enamoured by that form of governance. PLEASE research his background. His worldview is FAR removed from mine.
Is that all you’ve got as far as negatives go? Many believe the embargo against Cuba is wrongheaded anyway, so de Blasio won’t be politically affected by that, and the polls confirm it.
As for de Blasio being “enamored” of Cuba’s form of governance, prove it. I highly doubt that.
NY Times front page article 9/22/2013 article..Javier Hernandez “A Mayoral Hopeful Now, deBlasio Was Once a Young Leftist”.
Google the article and ask if a zebra can change its stripes.
http://WWW.theblaze.com. search deBlasio to watch Beck comment on NYT article.
Polly,
You don’t need to worry about de Blasio being a “democratic socialist” in his youth.
As mayor of NYC, he will have many constituencies.
His goals are just right for a city that has operated for the benefit of billionaires for the past 12 years.
Oooh, Polly wants us to read THE BLAZE? I would, but every time I go there, the exposure to Teabillies threatens to suck brain cells out of my ears. I’ve never seen a more hate-filled bunch of ignoramuses than the folks who comment there outside of a flat-out neo-nazi or KKK web site. Anything written there about the Common Core that isn’t flat out insane got there by accident. If that’s your idea of a source and Glenn Dreck is your authority for weighing character, your feet must be a-itching to move to Idaho, Mississippi, or maybe 1930s Berlin.
Polly, I’m still waiting for evidence of where de Blasio stands today. Everyone changes their views in their lives. I’m a former moderate-conservative, but now a progressive. People change. Your alarmism and link to a rightist pub doesn’t sway me, or probably anyone.
De Blasio’s speech certainly appeared heart-felt and was joyful to read. @Polly… are you for real? What a silly comment. This is not the Cold War 1950’s or do you think iti is? As for Cuba… it supposedly has a superb education system. Politics aside and humanity in the forefront, educators would benefit to see their universal pre-k style education. First and foremost, humanity is what should drive us not politics. Politics should be a facilitator of humanity and not the other way around.
Amen
@polly: you may have picked the wrong person and place to do ’50s-style red-baiting. And certainly you’ve picked the wrong city.
I bet you’ll discover he’s married to a thezzzzbian, or at least met one. Richard Nixon, Joe McCarthy, and Roy Cohn must be smiling somewhere, though it might be warmer than you’d prefer.
We haven’t heard that kind of inspiring campaign speech since…..2008. I hope that de Blasio does a better job of fulfilling these promises.
You shouldn’t back this man because he took a trip to Cuba? I bet deBlasio’s enemies also think he slumbers in his sleep.
I heard that he’s been caught masticating in public!
In a RESTAURANT, no less!
I’ll “chew” on that but suggest reading NY TIMES article I noted in prior comment. Javier Hernandez authored this page one backgrounder on deBlasio. Inquiring minds should be interested.
Inquiring minds shouldn’t care about teenage whims that everyone has, and grows out of. There’s nothing to chew on here.
New York City voters, it sounds as if you and your city have a chance for the better if you back this man!
@Polly.. no… “enquiring minds” should go to the grocery store and read “The National Enquirer”!
Unless if there is a green candidate……you will have to look on your own, since the media does not let them be heard
1. GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY
Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect their lives and not be subject to the will of another. Therefore, we will work to increase public participation at every level of government and to ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people who elect them. We will also work to create new types of political organizations which expand the process of participatory democracy by directly including citizens in the decision-making process.
2. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law.
3. ECOLOGICAL WISDOM
Human societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society which utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture which replenishes the soil; move to an energy efficient economy; and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.
4. NON-VIOLENCE
It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to society’s current patterns of violence. We will work to demilitarize, and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations. We promote non-violent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.
5. DECENTRALIZATION
Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. Therefore, we support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all citizens.
6. COMMUNITY-BASED ECONOMICS AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE
We recognize it is essential to create a vibrant and sustainable economic system, one that can create jobs and provide a decent standard of living for all people while maintaining a healthy ecological balance. A successful economic system will offer meaningful work with dignity, while paying a “living wage” which reflects the real value of a person’s work.
Local communities must look to economic development that assures protection of the environment and workers’ rights; broad citizen participation in planning; and enhancement of our “quality of life.” We support independently owned and operated companies which are socially responsible, as well as co-operatives and public enterprises that distribute resources and control to more people through democratic participation.
7. FEMINISM AND GENDER EQUITY
We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control with more cooperative ways of interacting that respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.
8. RESPECT FOR DIVERSITY
We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across these lines.
We believe that the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We acknowledge and encourage respect for other life forms than our own and the preservation of biodiversity.
9. PERSONAL AND GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY
We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well-being and, at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace, economic justice, and the health of the planet.
10. FUTURE FOCUS AND SUSTAINABILITY
Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or “unmaking” all waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counterbalance the drive for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who will inherit the results of our actions.
Ten Key Values of state and local Greens
There is no authoritative version of the Ten Key Values of the Greens. The Ten Key Values are guiding principles that are adapted and defined to fit each state and local chapter.
Taken from http://www.gp.org/tenkey.php
NY Times front page article 9/22/2013 article..Javier Hernandez “A Mayoral Hopeful Now, deBlasio Was Once a Young Leftist”.
Google the article and ask if a zebra can change its stripes.
http://WWW.theblaze.com. search deBlasio to watch Beck comment on NYT article.
Mr. Beck makes millions of dollars a year setting one part of the lower and middle class against the other.
That’s his job. It’s enormously lucrative and he doesn’t have any other marketable skill.
I think it’s unlikely that a person who worked for Bill and Hillary Clinton is a raving communist, Polly.
Oh, but you’re wrong, @Chiara, at least in the tiny minds of Polly and the rest of the folks who lap up the bilge and filth being purveyed by Glenn Dreck, Rush Limbloat, and Faux Snooze. Remember all the mud slung at Bill Clinton for the 8 years he was in office? It’s a safe bet that funding for a lot of that slinging came from some of the same people tossing filth at Barack Obama. And it would be surprising if some of those fine Americans weren’t shooting a few bucks into the coffers of anti-deBlasio loons and political operatives.
Note, that the major attacks on Diane Ravitch have accused her (horrors!) of being a leftist or at least a darling of leftists. To which the only sane response is: so what? Obviously, it’s not a crime in this country to worship Roy Cohn or Joe McCarthy (and in the case of Ted Cruz, to actually LOOK like Joe McCarthy). So why is it wrong to support progressive political causes and candidates?
The radical right has been controlling the conversation in this country for far too long. They have their own major network and squawk shamelessly that NBC is a “leftist” network! That would account, I’m sure, for the panelists on Education Nation: a real bunch of commies, that lot.
Polly’s little attempted sliming is right in line with the constant accusations on The Blaze that the Common Core was written in part or its entirety by Bill Ayers, even though Ayers publicly decried Obama/Duncan educational policy (don’t want to let facts stand in the way of a good red-baiting smear, after all). And again, the rap against Ayers is that he was a “terrorist” in his 20s. And hence, he must be one now. Simple Teabilly “logic.” The last 45 years or so of his life in which he’s been a tireless defender of the poor and brilliant professor of education? First of all, that’s meaningless, and second of all, that might be the REAL beef these knuckle-draggers have against him. My fondest wish is that Obama actually WOULD take a hint from people like Bill Ayers, fire corporate zombie Arne Duncan, and drop the execrable Race to the Top, Common Core, and the rest of his educational sell-out to corporations, privatizers, and predatory disaster capitalism.
Fat chance. And yet over at The Blaze and throughout Teabilly Land, you’d think Obama was a real left-wing radical preparing to join forces with 1950s Soviet Russia. Oh, well, that, too, turns out to be true, in certain quarters. Just read the inimitable Charlotte Iserbyt, who claims that Ronald Reagan, of all people, signed a secret pact with the Soviets to merge our education system with theirs. You can’t make this stuff up: http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/
Chiara…de Blasio is far from a “raving Communist”…but Glenn Beck is a verifiable raving lunatic….litany and lies forever, for huge paychecks.
I think Beck is much more a very well paid entertainer than a raving loon.
( I personally think what he says is looney, but he must be a pretty slick guy getting paid millions to spew nonsense, IMHO).
Beck is not the subject here nor should he be. He is not paid millions ,he has earned millions in our free enterprise system.
Go ahead and elect deBlasio. The man behind the mask will be revealed as was Obama.
NY Times has sent out early warning , Beck only passed it along to his audience. I am fortunate to count myself in that company.
@Ang: tough call with some of these guys deciding how much is bluster and how much is stuff they’ve hypnotized themselves into believing. Not sure it matters all that much. Elmer Gantry was just as effective and just as dangerous whether he believed what he said or not. He had that salesman’s gift, as do these bloviators (though neither of them is exactly what I’d call charming).
But there seems to be no line-drawing on the radical right these days. No lunacy is crazy enough to be too crazy. No screaming Teabilly conspiracy theorist is far enough out on the edge to be over it. Alex Jones has the woman in the Capitol shooting as a “false flag” operation.
Charlotte Iserbyt “reveals that changes gradually brought into the American public education system work to eliminate the influences of a child’s parents (religion, morals, national patriotism), and mold the child into a member of the proletariat in preparation for a socialist-collectivist world of the future. She says that these changes originated from plans formulated primarily by the Andrew Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Education and Rockefeller General Education Board, and details the psychological methods used to implement and effect the changes.” And later claims that Reagan, her one-time boss, made a pact with the Soviets, and a host of other fun things that are just a tad beyond plausibility.
And yet Iserbyt’s name pops up with increasing frequency in right-wing discussions about the CCSS.
If you listen long enough, you find out that everyone’s a communist in the eyes of these folks. I’m just waiting for them to start accusing each other.
Diane,
We are both residents of New York City.
It’s true that de Blasio is the best out of all the candidates, maybe except for the no longer running John Liu.
But beware to all.
De Blasio is courting new chancellors who head up and have mostly experience with charter schools.
Is de Blasio the next new Obama? Preaching real populist rhetoric and then turning around once elected and singing a lullaby and coddling the rich and Wall Street?
Will he use his black wife and black (appearing) son as the pigmentation to fool all suffering middle and working class people in New York City as well as teachers and principals?
Will he take a stand firmly against tying test scores to teacher evaluations?
I’m sorry.
I’d like to trust him. I’d like to like him, and I do on the surface.
His rhetoric on its own is truthful, beautiful, rich, and powerful. But it’s still contained in the gift box, and once opened upon his being sworn in, will he remove the gift from its packaging and actually put it to full and catalysmic changing use? Or will it sit in the box and collect dust? It is one of those gifts that has to be used in its entirety, like a hand held immersion blender. You can’t use just one part. The motor alone, or the blade alone will do nothing.
It just seems that most every modern mayor of the Big (rotting) Apple, has become the concubine of Wall Street.
De Blasio’s trips to Cuba are political puffery.
I think that leaves no decent candidates left. . . . .it’s as though they’ve all crossed over to the dark side.
Run.
Run fast, and run for your lives . . . . . . .
Robert et al…I too am a ‘wait and see’ person who was deeply disappointed in Obama, having been relatively hooked by his Hope and Change dictums, at least until he actually was elected. When his core group suddenly appeared in every photo, he was surrounded by the worst of the deregulators, Summers, Rubin, and all the Goldman Sachs boys who were his largest contributors, and who, to this day, are his closest advisors. That was true ‘shock and awe’ for those of us who worked so hard to get him elected.
And now we all are dealing with RttT and Arne (shoot from the key) Duncan.
As to Polly who is living in the past, Cuba is an education for the world with total literacy, health care for all, and the best jazz anywhere. To say someone was a Leftie in their youth is to say they were thinkers and this might apply to most serious college students then and now.
Many of us find our favorite Senator is Bernie Sanders, the self proclaimed Democratic Socialist, who is the only consistent legislator to work toward peace, prosperity for all, and who offers truth in governing.
Would that Mayors in every city in America had the same words, to action, that de Blasio offers in this speech.
Hear, hear!
Bernie Sanders is a hero of mine.
I agree with you. There are Bernie Sanders type of Democrats (not too many of them) and the rest oare ersatz at best.
Cuba always fascinated me because of what appears to be universal healthcare, great education, and music and food to die for. However, there is a lot of run down aspects of the infrastructure there, depending on which part.
But you are right, Ellen.
Let’s wait and watch de Blasio. I almost will not hold my breath . . . .
OH NO!!!!! Another correction in grammar: “There ARE a lot of run down aspects . . . . . ”
No editing features in this blog . . . .
Correction: “. . . . cataclysmically changing use . . . “
The idea that Bill De Blasio has a radical socialist agenda is very paranoid (or wishful thinking, depending on your perspective). And the idea that De Blasio is speaking truth to power is very naive. Why would NYC’s “power elite” give a standing ovation to Bill De Blasio? Why would NYC’s real estate developers applaud a proposal to require affordable housing percentages for new large developments? As people here sometimes like to say, Cui Bono? The key is rezoning — developers are counting on De Blasio to approve rezoning proposals that would open up large sections of NYC for development. He has a good record on this, from the real estate industry’s perspective. (That doesn’t mean he’s anti-populist — it may well be that this strategy is the best way to create more affordable housing units. But it’s a pro-business perspective.)
I wonder if the people who are invoking the name of Glenn Beck realize that he is opposed to the Common Core?
I have mixed feelings about his rants, because they make anyone opposed to Common Core look at nutty as him by extension, but still — the man is opposed to Common Core.
Ron, I think we’re all aware. Lots of folks in Teabilly Land oppose it. The question is, why? Most of what they write about CCSS is ludicrous. Yesterday, I found some conservative blogger who wrote that the CCSS math standards would not teach how to find the area of a triangle. I immediately went to the actual content standards and was able to cite chapter and verse from the 6th, 7th, & 10th grade standards to give the lie to her made-up blather.
She also claimed that the CCSS geometry curriculum was taken from a failed Soviet approach to teaching geometry. Evidence? Well, none, but it must cut a lot of ice out there with the right-wing nut job base.
So sorry, but Glenn Beck’s very recent discovery of CCSS as a new way to attack Obama, bash everything that doesn’t fit his angstrom-wide world view, and, of course, pitch buying gold from his sponsors to his zombie-like listeners doesn’t make him someone worth heeding. Not about politics. And not about education.
I don’t jump into bed with people politically just because there are places where, on the surface, it appears we’re in agreement. The educational agenda the Becks and Limbaughs of the world would put in place of the Common Core is, if anything, far worse. See Ron Paul’s home schooling curriculum, for example: http://www.ronpaulcurriculum.com/
So, does this mean that you are in favor of the math CCSS? “Teabilly” is a new one for me. We are the descendants of the Cromwellian Roundheads, who first proposed universal suffrage (male though) in the Putney Debates. We are not very tolerant of government by kingly decree. Yee Haw!
Well said.
Harlan, how anyone would deduce my favoring the Common Core, math or literacy or science and social studies to come, eludes me. I’ve written countless pieces and comments opposing the very idea of common standards. Don’t recall announcing a shift in viewpoint on that.
What I have also written about many times over the summer is my refusal to buddy up with people merely because they oppose the Common Core. And that’s because there are far too many right-wing and libertarian nut jobs who’ve apparently discovered another way to attack Obama and their distorted versions of progressive politics, progressive education (particularly mathematics education), etc. The more I read things on various Facebook group pages and the links they lead to, the more convinced I am that it would be sheer madness to pretend to ally with such people. Doesn’t mean we can’t both dislike the Common Core, but the reasoning I prefer is grounded in what’s actually written, what policies are actually demonstrable, what claims have more solid documentation than usually appear at TheBlaze, etc.
Bill Ayers didn’t write a word of the Common Core (and if he had tried, it wouldn’t have made it into the documents, any more than would my take on solid mathematics education. Neither of us was invited to contribute, though maybe those claiming he’s behind it all will get a chance to squawk more when the social studies standards roll out: anything that isn’t right-wing drooling patriotism will be attributed to Professor Ayers, though once again, he is not involved and has publicly criticized the entire Obama/Duncan educational disaster). The math standards have not eliminated teaching basic math facts, geometric formulas, solving the usual gamut of algebraic equations, or deep-sixed trigonometry.
But Harlan, that doesn’t mean I think they’re wonderful. I prefer to criticize what’s actually in them that’s bad or what’s not that should be. And mostly, I criticize the notion that a single set of standards should determine what every kid in the country “must” know and when. Perhaps if this stuff had simply been presented for true national debate, perhaps if it hadn’t been so completely top-down, perhaps if real teachers had been involved in drafting them, perhaps if real parents had been invited as well, perhaps if the high stakes tests weren’t the point of it all, with the concomitant dire consequences, perhaps if the naked greed and power grabbing behind it all weren’t so patently obvious. . . .then MAYBE I would only dislike the magnitude of the project and its inescapable rigidity. But all those other elements are there, and there are certainly enough specific issues about the content, particularly having to do with developmental appropriateness, to make it all quite objectionable.
So I’m still stymied as to what motivated your question. But don’t feel obligated to explain. I suggest you just read this from the other night: http://atthechalkface.com/2013/09/30/david-coleman-runs-the-voodoo-psychometrics-down-and-hopes-were-all-zombies/
followed by this:
http://atthechalkface.com/2013/10/05/we-gotta-get-out-of-this-place-looking-for-a-heart-of-math/
Or just subscribe to my blog over on @thechalkface. If I have a gigantic switch in my thinking about any aspect of the Common Core, you’ll read it there first, I’m sure.
MPG:
I think we see things in an overlapping fashion at times with the ever intentional Harlan Underhill, but we probably see it from different angles . . . .
Harlan thinks that anyone who is of the democrat persuasion (I realize that definition has changed rather radically) has caused the blunders in public education.
Harlan does not acknowledge that the Koch brothers fund the tea party, and that both parties across the aisle are rotten to the core. Harlan hates Obama. So do I. But how Harlan can even suggest that Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney would have been good for this country is bizarre . . . .
Again: they ALL __________________ in Washington D.C., all but a few on either side.
I am rather enjoying the bind progressives find themselves in when they oppose the CCSS. It goes far beyond the difficulties of getting in a corn husk political bed infected with Teabilly fleas. As far as I can see being FOR a public school system entails support for the CCSS because those standards are the epitome of top down, government imposed tyranny, which is, in essence, what progressivism in education really is all about and what Obama is all about, rule by the divine right of bureaucratic elites.
The fundamental hypocrisy of progressivism is that it does not want freedom, but rather power and control over everyone. So, opposition to the CCSS goes counter to the fundamental progressive impulse, leaving aside for the moment the actual content of the standards. I am, of course, hoping that this fundamental internal contradiction will eventually kill the progressive philosophy of education, like a dragon exploding. And then we can get back to good old fashioned God, Guns, and the American Way.
Just as a side note, evolution is evolution whether anyone denies it or not: we’re all modified monkeys, however creationist one wants to teach your biology. Who cares? Modern medicine is evolution in action, so what the schools tell the Texas little town boys and girls is of almost no consequence as long as Baylor is operating.
It’s also amusing to see the progressive blogger at chalkface making belief in global warming a litmus test for progressive virtue. We on the Teabilly side see that as another self-destructive irrationality in progressive thought. It’s the creationism of the left. It doesn’t exist, never did exist, and is a fiction invented by the United Nations to steal wealth from the rich nations to redistribute to the dictators of the poor nations.
It’s too much, I suppose, to hope that progressivism will just go “pooof” and disappear, any more than the illogicalities of all religions are likely to make them untenable to the masses who love them. But in this one area, education, one would hope that the challenges of charters, vouchers, and private education in general, will bring pragmatism and humility to the most vocal of the screamers for utopianism in public education. Nah. Scratch that last. Won’t happen. Defund Obamacare, defund CCSS. Two disasters we can do without but up with which we will probably have to put.
This is exactly what they want out of you……debate and argue, blame each other…..in reality it is a manufactured belief that we live in a democracy. They are all on the same team…..it doesn’t matter rep. or dem…….they all are in bed with the corporations getting richer by the minute.
Go Green Party!
Is your platform Agenda 21 friendly?.
We live in a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC. NOT a Democracy.
Harlan,
Your views are complete; you’re being informed is not.
However, I do almost agree on what you said here:
“As far as I can see being FOR a public school system entails support for the CCSS because those standards are the epitome of top down, government imposed tyranny, which is, in essence, what progressivism in education really is all about and what Obama is all about, rule by the divine right of bureaucratic elites.”
Everything you say is right on target, except that I am for public school system and am against top-down style policies. Being “public” is not defined by the evil that is occurring now. One can support public school without supporting the bad policies that are imposed upon it. In fact, public schols used to resemble and lean toward something your silly party would favor: local, backyard control and not so much big government.
Presently, public education has become far too bureaucratic, but you should not mingle “progressivism” into your point because if you do, then you really don’t understand that there’s real progressivism out there vs. the neo-liberal garbage that Obama et al stand for.
You are, moreover, not incorrect about “tyranny” in this instance. What Obama has done to public education is tyranny and fascism, pure and simple. He has deliberately shut out educators’ voices with exquisite intention and design . . . . .
I love old timey local public schools too. But NOT NCLB and CCSS.
I don’t think you’ll get tons of arguments here in favor of either NCLB or CCSSI. But how old timey are the schools you like? There were/are probably public schools in this country I’d have enjoyed a lot more than the ones I attended in NJ, but on balance, I’ll take Sudbury Valley School or something closer to that. Not that it was a choice for me at the time.
Sudbury Valley is my ideal too. Granted my public school education, as far as it went, totally omitted any encouragement for development of personal passions. Only in so far as I ignored the public school ethos, did I truly live. Science fiction saved me. Vance Boujailly ring a bell? Then drama club. Then poetry. Now math.
As I have written here before, it is an unusual and unsought partnering of progressive and well informed, mainly educators, who understand the fallacies of CC, seemingly coupled with the uninformed and bias-filled opinions of the Tea Party…but politics, and now educational politics, do indeed make for strange bedfellows.
The ‘Rand/Ron Paulians’ and their ilk, merely object to all forms of government control…in anything, circa Ayn Rand. The critically thinking educators and public who oppose CC as it stands, understand that :
1. CC has not had longitudinal, long term, over all states, testing for outcomes
2. it has many design flaws which trained educators define
3. it is already bringing in huge profits to the free market investors, from Coleman to Pearson, to Murdoch and Gates and Klein and Bloomberg, hedge funders, et al.
Please keep informed about the many fund managers who are holding classes nationwide to educate their clients as to this huge new investment opportunity of now privatized, formerly public school, education for America’s children.
I admire your optimism, but I would be wary of Mr. DeBlasio (who was born Warren Wilhelm).
His plan to tax those w/over $500,000 income likely won’t become reality because of Gov. Cuomo. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/cuomo-clash-de-blasio-tax-cuts-article-1.1474856
It seems taxing Wall Street (which NYC actually does now, but then refunds ALL of the tax to WS at end of each year) would be THE way to fund ALL NYC schools with plenty left over for things like: infrastructure, libraries, hospitals, JOB creation, ending poverty, feeding poor children, etc. Mr. DeBlasio has not even broached this subject in his campaigning.
As for his work in Nicaragua, here is a good article to read: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/nyregion/a-mayoral-hopeful-now-de-blasio-was-once-a-young-leftist.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
James Surowiecki’s September 23, 2013 article is, I think, especially realistic.
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2013/09/23/130923ta_talk_surowiecki
This article by Josh Barro at http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/09/29/bill-de-blasio-has-resume-of-an-insider/ gives a thoughtful expose of ‘both sides of the coin’ that is DeBlasio.
I work with the organization United Front Against Austerity, and we were instrumental in getting the Tax Wall Street Party on the Democratic primary and now on the Nov. 5 ticket with Randy Credico as the candidate. Randy is unconventional, he also went to Nicaragua, and he’s a comedian. He did very well in the primary with almost 14,000 votes that were gotten on a shoestring, literally.
I think people are looking for much more honesty than any of the candidates seem to exude. I expect that DeBlasio will be the next NYC mayor, and I hope he lives up to your expectations, but do not look at him with blinders. He has issues, too, that seem to indicate he, like most Democrats and Republicans, are in the pocket of Wall Street.
We will judge him by his works.
I cannot take seriously the NY Times effort to “red bait” what de Blasio did as a young man.
Many voters, sick of Bloomberg’s gold-plated arrogance, will be heartened by de Blasio’s youthful radicalism.
You fool, you just endorsed common core & open education! Sell out! DeBlaisio is Soros’ man looks like you were too all this time…goodbye!
Sven, you have a lively sense of humor, you rogue!
Sven and others,
I am watching and waiting to see what de Blasio will do. So far, I have little faith or trust in him, especially when it comes to really taxing the rich, removing the tie between scores and educator evaluations, and charter schools.
Yet time does tell all.
Please do not refer to Diane as a “fool” or use other insults. Doing so violates the very few simple rules of this forum.
Yor views are always welcome; your style as indicated is not . . . .
Any Green Party candidates?
Ask, and you shall receive!!! See below 😉
URGENT:
PLEASE send this to every public school parent you know.
The way FERPA was amended by Arne, without congressional approval, parent permission is NOT required.
Excerpt:
InBloom seems designed to nudge schools toward maximal data collection. School administrators can choose to fill in more than 400 data fields. Many are facts that schools already collect and share with various software or service companies: grades, attendance records, academic subjects, course levels, disabilities. Administrators can also upload certain details that students or parents may be comfortable sharing with teachers, but not with unknown technology vendors. InBloom’s data elements, for instance, include family relationships (“foster parent” or “father’s significant other”) and reasons for enrollment changes (“withdrawn due to illness” or “leaving school as a victim of a serious violent incident”).
Ms. Barnes, the privacy lawyer, said she was particularly troubled by the disciplinary details that could be uploaded to inBloom because its system included subjective designations like “perpetrator,” “victim” and “principal watch list.” Students, she said, may grow out of some behaviors or not want them shared with third parties. She also warned educators to be wary of using subjective data points to stratify or channel children.
One scene in the inBloom video, for instance, shows a geometry teacher virtually reassigning students’ seating assignments based on their “character strengths” — helpfully coded as green, yellow and red. On his tablet, the teacher moves a green-coded female student (“actively participates: 98 percent”) next to a red-and-yellow coded boy (“shows enthusiasm: 67 percent”).
Executives at inBloom say their service has been unfairly maligned. It is entirely up to school districts or states to decide which details about students to store in the system and with whom to share them, Sharren Bates, inBloom’s chief product officer, said. She said the company does not look at, use, analyze, mine or sell the student data it stores.
If you want an independent political alternative that makes education a priority, and has a long record of proven capability in this field, I am running for mayor on the Green Party. Please check out my web site at http://www.votegronowicz.info
Hip hop hooray……,!
Give this guy a chance! Corporate media won’t ever mention him
Here’s more to chew over regarding the differences in analysis from left and right on the Common Core: http://atthechalkface.com/2013/10/05/34229/
Looks like Polly1 & Polly2 are with us: twin sisters, or one person with two ids? Or. . ?
So Polly1 tells us that we’re not a democracy, we’re a representative republic. I know, because the government school I attended in the ’50s & ’60s taught such things. I bet government schools today still teach them. But it is not exactly unusual for US politicians to refer to us as a democracy. I believe we fought WWI to “keep the world safe for democracy.” I believe presidents of various political stripes have spoken about the US as bringing democracy to the world, promoting democracy, and so forth. It doesn’t matter if they mean anything by that. What matters is that most educated folks know that pure democracy can’t exist in a large population and that in that technical sense, we’ve never been and never will be a “democracy,” but we seem pretty sure that we believe as a nation in democracy and democratic values, democratic elections, etc.
But I notice that anytime someone uses the words “democracy” or “democratic” in one of these “multipartisan” forums, someone from right of center, often someone self-identifying as a Tea Party member, insists on adding, nearly word for word, Polly1’s latest contribution. I’m sure that’s not a coincidence. I’m sure it’s deeply important to the people who insist upon inserting into various discussions, and yet oddly, there’s never any follow-up. It’s as if it suffices to toss that in and the rest of the folks in the conversation are supposed to be – what, exactly: enlightened? chastened? silenced? Frankly, I’d love to know. Well, that might be overstating things.
And now Polly2 asks about Agenda 21, another sure-fire show-stopper. On a right-wing/Teabilly site, there would be conversation, because everyone there would be all about the horrors of Agenda 21. Here, not so much. I like to look up what it is, periodically, just to see if it’s changed so that I can worry about it. But it doesn’t and I don’t. I’ll leave it to anyone who’s interested to look up what it actually is, suggesting that you stay away from Tea Party interpretations or claims about what it says. All I can say is that no one lives in this world alone. There are such things as the Commons. And some day, the lunatic fringe in this country is going to wish they had paid a bit more attention to it, a bit more respect to it, instead of worrying about the idea of local, regional, national, or continental voluntary agreements about trying to make sane agreements about resources before we’ve managed to become extinct before our time.
Or maybe not. Maybe the existence of Teabillies in 2013 is proof that we really haven’t evolved sufficiently to deserve to continue as a species. All the sci-fi movies in which older, wiser, more developed species determine that human beings are too primitive, violent, selfish, etc., to enter into a greater galactic community are right (of course, most of these stories really do seem to have a lot to do with Americans, or is that just my imagination?) Maybe the sane folks left in the US really should “leave it” and let the fringe bump each other off with all the nonsense they are so insistent upon having: global warming, polluted air and water, unlimited access to high-powered firearms and handguns, and an utter lack of any responsibility to anyone but themselves. Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, Iceland are all sounding better all the time.
I am Polly and 2 though I have no idea how that happened. Thanks for your thoughtfully written and courteous evaluation of who your think I am.
The discussion of deBlasio has been eclipsed by your diatribe regarding ME. I will continue to read Diane’s blog but will not offer comments which you have made a distraction to the discourse. POLLY 1 & 2
Funny, Pollys, the majority of my comments here haven’t mentioned you or been directed to you. However, you don’t seem eager to answer ANYONE’S questions. For example, yesterday, another commenter wrote,
“Polly, I’m still waiting for evidence of where de Blasio stands today. Everyone changes their views in their lives. I’m a former moderate-conservative, but now a progressive. People change. Your alarmism and link to a rightist pub doesn’t sway me, or probably anyone.”
and oddly, you weren’t disposed to answer.
Nor have I actually made much of a “diatribe” about you, but rather posed some questions you seem to wish to avoid. Believe me, I’m not surprised. The “tone” defense is rife amongst the radical right these days, as it is with the corporatists defending the Common Core. Many prefer to write about Diane’s “tone” (inaccurately, but what the heck, right?) than to try to respond to the substance of her critiques. I pose several reasonable questions and you retreat to comments about my writing style. If we’re going to go that route, I would have to suggest that if you’re going to go with sarcasm (your first paragraph) it’s best to maintain that style throughout. And if you’re going to try straightforward prose (your second paragraph), it’s best to write coherent English: that last sentence probably says something, but I’m afraid I don’t know what that is, exactly.
Finally, you are free to ignore my comments, but it’s rather ridiculous to complain that I’m distracting from a discussion of deBlasio when you won’t reply to requests for evidence of his current political views. I wonder, too, if you have ever changed your mind about anything in your entire life. If so, which of your views should we hold you to, the ones from your youth or the ones you hold today? Or is it simply that anyone who has ever held a view too radical for your taste must be banned from politics forever?
Add western europe to your list, especially France . . . .
Harlan, those binds you’re getting a kick out of are mostly in your own mind. I personally am fine distinguishing my opposition to the Common Core from the (mostly) lunacy coming from conspiracy theorists who insist that Bill Ayers, Agenda 21, and black flag ops (that one, as far as I know, isn’t yet a real claim, but the operative word there is “yet”) are all behind the Common Core. I don’t mind people speculating, if they make clear that that is what they’re doing. But there is no such thing as a mere hypothesis in Billyville, as I posted earlier. Everything, no matter how unsupported and unsupportable, is more than truthy enough to feed the monster. Openly ally with such folks? No thanks. If they help bring a halt to the Common Core juggernaut, I’ll acknowledge their influence, but we’re going to be at one another’s throats over public education when the dust settles, and I see no reason to pretend now that we’re pals. Anyone of that party or other non-progressive political views with whom I find more common ground or who can discuss CCSSI without resorting to spook stories and absurdities is more than welcome to join forces with me and other reasonable people. I don’t feel any pinch. Hope that’s not too disappointing.
I’m thrilled for you that you want to “defund” the Affordable Care Act. I suppose that means you have a health insurance situation you feel comfy with. And as long as you’ve got yours, screw everyone else (the motto of conservatives and libertarians everywhere, if they were honest; indeed, some are quite open about it). A few of us who don’t have insurance or much prospect of getting it but haven’t quite reached the age where Medicare, etc. kicks in, are damned happy to see the dawn of what promises to be – not the best possible system, as we didn’t have the guts for that, yet, thanks to the cowardice of so many in Congress – a huge improvement for millions of Americans. And for a good deal less than originally expected.
Since, of course, the ACA is law and the funds are already in place, your fond wish will go unfulfilled. You have a much better chance seeing the Common Core fail due to the withdrawal of funds for testing in a growing number of states, the pull-out from testing and/or the entire boondoggle by some states, and an actual groundswell of resistance from educators, parents, and other stakeholders. That’s not going to happen with ACA, as is clear from the higher-than-expected numbers of people signing up, including plenty of Republicans and red staters. You may discover, in fact, that some of the folks screaming like banshees against it in public (gotta hate anything affiliated with the swarthy fellow in the White House), are quietly signing up. Few people like to cut their own throats, no matter how much they espouse “correct” political views to their pals.
You are no doubt correct in assuming that the right and the left would be fighting each other even if the CCSS were eliminated. We TillyBillys aren’t against public schools, only anti-capitalists in their classrooms poisoning the minds of our nice innocent children with nonsense about global warming, socialism, and everything belongs to everybody. Our objective is to restore this country to constitutional government, i.e. limited government. And if that means some fools in Texas want the freedom to teach creationism, so be it (but not on the public dime. I do draw the line there.) But, we know it may take as long to get out of this mess as it took to get into it, i.e. since Woodrow Wilson. Meantime, Math is where it’s at, yes? Cheers.
So in your world, it’s okay to teach about how great capitalism is, but not about its possible (I know, this’s really a stretch, but I’m willing to risk going out on such an incredibly thin limb) evils or occasional, though no doubt unintentional and unavoidable, evils?
One side fits all?
I managed to graduate high school without hearing a teacher ever speak against capitalism, but somehow I had a pretty clear sense at 18 that something was quite rotten in Denmark. And by Denmark, of course, I mean the good old U S of A. And the stench seemed to have something to do with capitalism, along with Imperialism, paranoid anti-Communism, and a lot of other Cold War ideas that struck me as rather insane.
I’m sure, had I been growing up behind the Iron Curtain, that I would have been having similar thoughts about communism, Soviet expansionism, and paranoid anti-Westernism. I might have been a bit more careful about to whom I mentioned it, of course.
But it sounds like you’re as comfy with the silencing of academic freedom as were lots of Americans in the ’50s & ’60s. And lots of Russians, East Germans, Romanians, Albanians. . .
I do have to wonder, too, how you presume to speak for the entirety or even majority of Teabillies. But I guess a guy who thinks that evolution is science but global warming is not, regardless of how many scientists say that it’s a very real and very serious problem, is capable of saying lots of presumptuous and highly doubtful things. Where do you stand on the vaccinations cause autism issue?
I’m not dumb enough to ask how you’re enjoying this October’s summer, because I know the difference between climate and weather. But those melting ice caps? Just a little fluctuation, perfectly typical, nothing to see here, and no possible chance that all the brainless polluting we’ve done of the air, soil, and water could be any sort of problem to worry about, to rein ourselves in on in any way, to take responsibility for before we completely screw ourselves and who knows how many generations to come?
I know that the radical right has been screaming about not wanting to burden future generations with debt, and hence we MUST reduce the deficit, quit spending (the federal government, that is, not the wealthy, who get to spend all they like on whatever they like and the Devil take the consequences), and we need to do it last week. But apparently they are just kidding, because there’s an enormous and rapidly increasing body of scientific evidence to suggest that those future generations may be quite a moot point.
You’re like the guy who walks past an empty can that’s right in his path, with a trash can right along his route, who when asked why he didn’t pick it up declares,”Well, look at all the other trash around here. My picking up that can won’t make any difference at all.”
This thread is becoming really entertaining as a chronicle of folly and vituperation. Tea, anyone?
I agree, Harlan: you really had no way to respond to my last comments but to discuss tone (even though there was no vituperative whatsoever in what I wrote, though there was some sarcasm) and avoid every single point and question I raised. Masterful and predictable right-wing evasiveness in the face of “uncomfortable” questions.
Why vituperation, Harlan? That’s so negative and instigative.
I liken it to robust discussion and debate. You don’t have to turn it into something angry. Nor does anyonw else . . . .
I wasn’t complaining about responses to me. I was just remarking on the postings about Rheeformers, charters, vouchers, testing, the rich, the President, Duncan, and all the other targets of public teacher ire and support for socialist politicians like deBlasio née Wilhelm, who sweeten the kool aid with sugar he can’t possibly deliver. The spectacle of persistent gullibility in the teacher community combined with utopian anger is becoming almost amusing. You know me, Robert. I can’t be insulted, having no pretensions to any professional status, or ethical wisdom, or knowledge of what’s good for anyone except myself, and I’m not so sure even about the last.