This powerful editorial about the election was published by the New York Daily News, Donald Trump’s hometown tabloid. The editorial appeared before Comey injected his explosive news into the election. The Daily News reacted to Comey’s statement with a call for him to be fired for meddling in the election. Then on November 1, the News published a front-page editorial titled: “Damn Right We’re With Her.”
The editorial board of the News knows Trump very well. They have watched him for many years.
If you want to know why Trump must be defeated, this is your reading assignment for today.
The first editorial tells you why Trump should not be president–ever.
The November 1 editorial tells you why Clinton should be elected.
The editorial board has met with both Trump and Clinton many times.
And this is why they doubled down on their endorsement despite Director Comey’s intervention:
The Daily News again extends its wholehearted endorsement of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
We do so with faith that Clinton would be a transformative leader for the good, far beyond making history as the first female President.
And we do so with fact-based, fearful conviction that Donald Trump would lead a nation divided against itself, with catastrophic consequences at home and abroad.
Lost in a campaign distorted by Trump’s ego-driven demagoguery is the indisputable truth that Clinton’s instincts, skills and programs are an excellent match for the challenges of a uniquely frightening American moment.
We are a country at war. The 50 states are united in rage. The 320 million people of this land tear at one another in a battle to reclaim their destiny from a government that, put bluntly, screwed them on a bipartisan basis.
Almost an entire American generation has been born since the country last had a semblance of responsive, responsible governing. Instead, Democrats and Republicans alike have exhausted the nation in stalemates over symbols and dogma.
Meanwhile, the working and middle classes suffered joblessness, home foreclosures, wage stagnation, massive student debt, opioid addiction and further ills – as the wealthy rode the waves ever more comfortably, often with Uncle Sam manning the galley oars.
Now comes a reckoning that made vengeful soulmates of the unlikely Bernie Sanders and the ungodly Trump. Vessels for white-hot anger, the socialist and the tax-evading billionaire built their candidacies on destroying a “rigged” system as champion of its victims.
But revenge for the sake of revenge – which is the heart of Trump’s campaign – would be madness as the chief motivator for selecting the custodian of the world’s shining-star democracy, largest economy and mightiest military.
On Oct. 20, the Daily News Editorial Board published the longest editorial in its 97-year history – a call for burying Trump in a landslide. We needed 7,500 words to document his unfitness for the presidency as an ignorant and divisive “liar, thief, bully, hypocrite, sexual victimizer and unhinged, self-adoring demagogue.”
Leaving aside his Trumpian mountain of disqualifications, the crucial distinction between the renegade Republican and Clinton is that Clinton is, at heart, a forward-looking optimist who offers rational programs targeted to create a stronger, fairer, more unified America.
Her unparalleled understanding of the world, her unmatched grasp of policy successes and failures and her proven ability to broker constructive compromise between hunkered-down ideologues must far outweigh the nagging mistrust that Clinton generates after her decades at the height of national service….
No illusions: Expecting to hold the House, Republicans have telegraphed plans to launch multiple anti-Clinton investigations. Still more, Senate GOP leaders have pledged to block all Clinton Supreme Court nominations.
Even so, victory — the more solid the better — would position Clinton to win action on behalf of the working and middle classes by addressing the interests both of her ideological foes and of all the Americans who are furious that Washington catered to a corrupt, elite establishment while condescendingly dismissing their needs and beliefs.
Donald Trump is all about selling a single repulsively flawed product: himself.
Hillary Clinton is no saleswoman. Instead, she is a doer who has a historic chance to prove that the U.S. government can actually work to the benefit of its citizen bosses.
No election in our lifetimes has produced a clearer choice: Clinton over Trump, urgently and by acclamation.
There is more. It is worth reading, as is the first editorial referenced here.
Bottom line is that Clinton has plans to improve life for our nation, while Trump is an egotistical bully, a liar, and a vengeful hypocrite who would bring our nation and our economy to ruin.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Watch this recent interview with Julian Assange to get a broader perspective. It’s not so black and white, good vs bad.
https://www.rt.com/news/365405-assange-pilger-full-transcript/
LikeLike
Yes it is black and white. .First we deal with narcissism, fascism and demagoguery then we deal with the problems of our representative democracy and who it represents . My only problem is not with their conclusions but their false equivalence , between the behavior of the two parties. Doing so has got us to where we are.
Trump is the logical conclusion of 35 years of Republican appeals to the most vile instincts of the American people. After this threat to the nation is dealt with . It is time to deal with all of those policy issues both Domestic and Foreign where as you say it is not black and white. Some of these issues might even involve the past behavior of the Daily News Editorial Board. In March of this Year .
LikeLike
I wouldn’t bother to respond as you clearly didn’t watch the video or read the article. (Here is another: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/julian-assange-claims-libya-was-hillary-clintons-war-fbi-out-payback-over-her-resistance-1590008). However, if there is another world war, which is likely, it will be nuclear. Podesta even jokes about it in his emails. They don’t care! The Clinton/Bush establishment is so seriously dangerous you all must get educated and you must start reading Wikileaks even if you don’t like the messenger.
LikeLike
Thanks for noticing, RTBH. Few here will until we’re so up the creek that it will be impossible to miss. And then, many will rationalize it: if a woman is bringing us to war, it must be necessary. If a black man orders deaths in the Middle East, that’s okay, too. Just as long as it isn’t a white, male, Republican. THEIR warmongering and international bullying is unacceptable!
LikeLike
Do you have direct links to any of these emails referenced by Assange?
“There’s more than 1,700 emails out of the 33,000 of Hillary Clinton’s emails we published just about Libya. It’s not about that Libya has cheap oil. She perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan state something that she would use to run in the general election for president.”
LikeLike
RaiseTheBarHigher
I believe I was one of the first to point out and argue with Diane that our policy toward Russia was “MAD”. But seriously Assange as a source of raw material is one thing and i get it. I also get that Russian hackers have been a major source of hacked material long before Wiki leaks came into existence. You can bet your butt they like a government check when they can get one .
As an analyst of American politics please !!! He has been trapped in the Ecuadorian embassy for 4 years. It kind of affects his impartiality and analysis . Wow what a revelation that the Saudis have been funding radical Islamic movements currently as a hedge against Iran. Shocked that access is equally important and quid pro quo is difficult to prove.
She is not running against Bernie no more .
My take on the FBI is a bit different. It has always been a very conservative law enforcement organization. It is not the ACLU .
There is a close relationship between the NYPD rank and file and Giuliani . Who never met a cop with a plunger handle he didn’t like.
Who encouraged a police riot on the steps of City Hall to help defeat the incumbent black mayor . There was always a close relationship between the NY office of the FBI and the former prosecutor of the Southern District of NY. Giuliani!!!! as well as the NYPD. Notice the focal point of the FBI rebellion is the NY office . Big smiles on Rudy’s face as he bloviates of big things coming 2 weeks ago. Heads should now roll in that office and is subverting a fair election Sedition on Rudy’s part?
But that is not what we are discussing . Trump and what is happening at his rallies is more reminiscent of a Banana republic. His constant attacks on the press the foaming at the mouth supporters at his rallies attacking a Republican with an anti Trump sign,causing a Secrete Service response, says it all . Then they went on to attack a CNN cameramen. Lock her up!!!!!!, followed by threats to not accept the results of the election. The target of the FBI should be Trump after this election. I would love to hear the discussions between him and Bannon.
LikeLike
Joel, we really are well past the point of the boys (and a few girls) who cry wolf WAY too bloody often to be believed. Everything is treason. Everything is sedition. Bill Clinton’s roaming penis launched an unprecedented era of Dems and Repubs who apparently have never seen an act by the opposition POTUS and party leadership they couldn’t construe as treasonous and impeachable.
Enough, already. They’re almost all crooks, posturing like televangelists for your $$ and outrage. Not one of them is going to jail, or if s/he does, it won’t be for their real ethical bankruptcy, but for something silly like dallying with an intern or playing footsie in the bathroom with a cop.
LikeLike
Raise,
Assange is a worm, a man who glories in pilfering the files of others. What he does is no different from the Watergate burglars. Note he never hacks Republicans.
LikeLike
That interview literally left me sick to my stomach.
I haven’t really paid much attention to Assange, but the vile innuendoes about Hillary were worthy of Goebbels. Hillary – and her cabal of powerful money men he just barely refrains from calling “Jewish bankers” – are responsible for all the ills of the world. You’d think the Republican Party was powerless to prevent such Hillary-led actions like arms sales to Saudi Arabia. But the blameless Republicans of course were helpless — along with Obama — when faced with the all-powerful juggernaut that was Hillary Clinton, controlling everything.
Assange is evil. This interview was not with a man who sees corruption and wants to help end it. Such a person would never scapegoat Clinton for all the ills of our country while acting as if the Republican Party had no choice but to lay themselves down in front of her. It is absurd. But frightening. And it is exactly the kind of propaganda Goebbels excelled at.
Assange is as much a hero as Hitler is a hero. After all, both of them tried to stop the Jewish finance money that was the sole cause of the suffering of the poor in their countries. And that was it — smear one group as the sole cause and attribute them with so much power that they must be stopped. The fact that Assange’s selected candidate ran his “closing ad” full of the same kind of innuendo about Jewish power controlling Hillary in order to keep real Americans down is not a coincidence.
LikeLike
So how about Bibi Netanyahu? He reminds me more of Hitler than do the people you keep nominating for the new fuhrer position. He’s certainly no fan of dissent or democratic debate. He seems to be comfy with seeing an entire ethnicity abused, hamstrung, ghettoized, killed, etc. You must be outraged. Oh, sorry: he’s Israeli and Jewish, hence exempt from such criticism.
But anyone who doesn’t see eye to eye with you politically is the next incarnation of Hitler. And, of course, there’s absolutely no reason for anyone in any country – foreign or domestic – to blow a whistle on the CIA, the NSA, the FBI (hey, well, they’re bad guys, right?), the State Department, the Pentagon, the White House, ad nauseam. They’re all fabulous organizations who do nothing but good, spreading enlightenment, peace, and prosperity throughout the globe, always looking out for the little guy, never serving the interests of global capitalism. . .
Oh, and Diane: you might note that for the last 8 years, the US government has been under a Democratic administration. When GWB was running things, Wikileaks was not exactly friends to the GOP. Maybe the issue isn’t that he likes Republicans more than Democrats, but that Assange is going after the system and whoever rules here. Let the GOP take back the Oval Office and I think you’ll suddenly appreciate Mr. Assange. Daniel Ellsworth a hero to you or a thief? Someone on the inside has to make acts of conscience. Abby Hoffman couldn’t blow the whistle on Watergate.
LikeLike
The CIA’s, NSA’s, FBI’s, State Department’s, Pentagon’s, and White House’s communications should all be public.
LikeLike
But that will never happen.
LikeLike
MPG says:
“…anyone who doesn’t see eye to eye with you politically is the next incarnation of Hitler.”
Trump is the first politician I have compared to Hitler. Being able to make speeches where 75% of the things you say are outright lies that offer up scapegoats to a hungry crowd of haters sure brings up Hitler to me. Especially when you have a certain talent for it.
I never said that Assange is Hitler. I am pointing out that in his interview he placed all the blame for all the problems in the world on a cabal of people who control ONLY the opponents of the Republicans. Apparently, Trump, Pence, and the Republican Party aren’t controlled by this cabal — only Hillary. That interview was frightening because he did seem to be a true believer. The Democrats are controlled by this evil cabal. No mention of any concern about the Republicans — they may be racists and appealing to white power, but I guess that’s a just genuine attempt to fight this cabal.
With regards to Netanyahu, I have been a supporter of J Street since it was established. No doubt J Street to you is just as much of a sell out to billionaire interests as Hillary Clinton is, and their criticism of Netanyahu is simply propaganda to appease the non-Netanyahu fans. I agree with you that Netanyahu has taken many actions that I dislike, much as Obama has — and innocent lives have been lost. I would be delighted if he were out of office.
But it’s rather ironic that “seeing an entire ethnicity killed” is more likely to be found among the leaders of Hamas and some radical Islamic clerics.
You do realize that the same war-mongering leader, killing innocent civilians was the charge hurled at FDR and Truman, right?
FDR bombed Dresden because some billionaire bankers told him to. Truman dropped the bomb because some rich billionaire bankers told him to. Or possibly because FDR hated Germans and wanted to kill as many children as possible — same with Truman hating Japanese.
They were not simply bad choices made by flawed men trying to figure out the best way to address a terrible situation in wartime.
Nope, like Hillary, it was all about the money and killing as many people as possible. Evil FDR and Truman. Evil LBJ and his bombings during the Viet Nam War. All of them conspiring to do as much evil as possible because of the money. Or simply Hitler-like hatred.
It’s very easy to smear every Democrat with the same brush. All evil. All out for themselves or their billionaire backers. Assange knows.
LikeLike
“With regards to Netanyahu, I have been a supporter of J Street since it was established. No doubt J Street to you is just as much of a sell out to billionaire interests as Hillary Clinton is, and their criticism of Netanyahu is simply propaganda to appease the non-Netanyahu fans. I agree with you that Netanyahu has taken many actions that I dislike, much as Obama has — and innocent lives have been lost. I would be delighted if he were out of office.”
Do us both a favor: don’t project your fantasies of me onto me. You have zero basis to speculate about my views of J Street. How do you deduce that from anything I’ve written?
Hillary didn’t sell out, by the way: you can’t sell out what you don’t have to begin with. She simply takes money in exchange for what she wants. All she had to do was agree to do what she already was inclined towards. Now, if Sanders were elected to office and suddenly started agitating against Russia or Palestinians, I’d smell an enormous rat.
Dresden and Hiroshima and Nagasaki were atrocities – war crimes we will never admit to or be held accountable for. There’s no rationalizing them, and no one forced either FDR or Truman to order those slaughters. They weighed their options and felt that the equation weighed in favor of attacks that were more about racism and cowing the Soviet Union than they were about doing things NECESSARY to winning WW II. Just my view. But that said, I fail to grasp anything vaguely similar to Clinton’s actions or words in Libya, etc. Gloating? I must have missed FDR and Truman doing that. Gloating over the killing of another country’s leader, particular a country not at war with the US, is bizarre. Sickening. Worse than saying, “Grab ’em by the p____!” on my view.
As for Vietnam, the Democratic establishment of that era, the Republican one under Nixon, all deserved prison after international war crimes trials. No smearing needed by Assange. Their own words condemn them, as anyone who bothers to read history knows.
You can apparently rationalize anything. I can’t. You’re going to LOVE 4-8 under Hillary Thatcher.
LikeLike
Thank you!
I’m glad you acknowledged the war crimes that FDR, Truman, and LBJ were guilty of and certainly it would have been better if they had lost the election. It’s obvious there was no difference between them and their opponents.
Although I have to say your faux outrage over Hillary’s supposed “gloating” over a pretty despicable Khaddaffi’s death as somehow much worse than Truman, FDR and LBJ looking to kill as many children as possible in one fell swoop as not being quite as evil as that “gloating” sure does speak volumes.
With regards to Bibi, I was just responding to your comment: “You must be outraged. Oh, sorry: he’s Israeli and Jewish, hence exempt from such criticism.” You assumed I was a knee-jerk Bibi supporter just like I assumed you would despise J Street for supporting someone as evil as Hillary who you keep characterizing as someone who wants to kill as many innocent Muslims as possible.
LikeLike
Michael Paul Goldenberg: Your equating of Netanyahu to Nazis is the worst kind of antisemitism. Criticism of policies is fine, but equating Jews to Nazis is disgusting.
I have no respect for you. I, for one, will NEVER read a post of yours again, and I encourage others to do the same.
He’ll still post, but his garbage won’t be read.
LikeLike
Another non-reader! Here is precisely what I wrote about Bibi: “So how about Bibi Netanyahu? He REMINDS MORE OF HITLER THAN DO THE PEOPLE you keep nominating for the new fuhrer position. He’s certainly no fan of dissent or democratic debate. He seems to be comfy with seeing an entire ethnicity abused, hamstrung, ghettoized, killed, etc. You must be outraged. Oh, sorry: he’s Israeli and Jewish, hence exempt from such criticism.” [emphasis added]
That equals that I’m EQUATING them? Sorry, I only read and write English, not Fantaspeak. When you want to be honest, I’m always happy to talk. When you want to lie about what other people write, that’s a drug on the market here lately.
And if you think you’re going to be able to silence NYC parent, you’re delusional. But at least I won’t have YOU to kick me around anymore, I guess. I’ll call that a draw.
LikeLike
Oh, I read it. And I know exactly what you said. You can deny it, but I know what you said.
LikeLike
But I don’t care about your fantasies and lies. The words are there for all to see. You just can’t actually read them without your insanity blinding you. Lots of Israelis hope Bibi drops dead tomorrow. I’m with them. You’re not. What a shocker. But at least don’t lie about what I did say, and in the context I was saying it, my point was clear: these Hitler comparisons are odious and wrong-headed. If you read something else, that’s YOUR problem, not mine.
LikeLike
Oh, and TOW, your vow to never read me again didn’t even last ONE post. Kind of weak-willed, aren’t you?
Consider consulting with NYC on a good neurologist. Or just a reading coach. There are some excellent home study programs for vipassana meditation. Mindfulness helps one see what is actually there and deal with it without distortion. Couldn’t hurt.
LikeLike
Trump is bad. But many are not convinced Clinton can and will improve life for our nation. Clinton is not receiving affirmative votes as much as votes against the disaster a Trump presidency would impose on America. Most in the rust belt see Clinton as remote, unsupportive, and untrustworthy. Neither does she seem to understand nor want to address the issues facing Middle America. Clinton should be elected over Trump by a rational nation. But the valid issues raised in this campaign aren’t going away. In two years, we will likely see a Republican senate. And Republican elites also seem out of touch, offering only failed, stale solutions. In four years, we repeat this election. And if true progress isn’t made, with another demagogue, only likely worse.
LikeLike
In a rational nation, my dog would be elected over Trump. In a landslide. The fact that Hillary is this close says an awful lot about her and what the Democratic establishment is trying to foist on us.
LikeLike
I’d vote for your dog over either of them, Dienne. I’m sure your pet is better-qualified. I have several cats who would do a reasonably good job, too.
What kills me is that we had such an extraordinary opportunity with Sanders. I suppose that when HRC wins and the Dems take the Senate, he’ll have the most influence of his life due to seniority and committee chairmanships. And that will be a very good thing indeed.
LikeLike
My dog is so disgusted by the tenor of this election, he refuses to run no matter how much I plead for the good of the canine and human worlds.
I see so much disgust, fear, and anger out here, it is pretty clear this is just the beginning. The election will resolve little.
LikeLike
Agreed and unless she has an epiphany and goes bold. We will “Triangulate” into hell.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/13/the-politics-of-triangulation/
LikeLike
I have no doubt that Donald Trump would make a horrid POTUS. I don’t doubt for a nanosecond that I wouldn’t like him much personally or want to be a contestant on his reality TV show or be in business with him (let alone against him).
However, it’s curious that the NY DAILY NEWS, not exactly a bastion of progressive politics (though driven a bit more to the center from decades of competition for the low-brow readership of NYC by Rupert Murdoch’s execrable NY POST), is so fiercely anti-Trump and gleefully pro-Hillary Clinton. I was already living in Michigan when Bill Clinton was first elected in 1992, but I’m fairly sure that the NEWS was rarely, if ever, in his corner. But now, it seems even the POST isn’t gung-ho for Trump (they’re probably waiting for Newt Gingrich or Paul Ryan or Scott Walker to ride in and save the day). And the folks on Wall Street? Are they just “hedging” their bets or is there something about Hillary Clinton that works far better for them than does Mr. Trump (who should be, at least on the face of things, one of their own)?
I can’t help but feel that we’ve been set up to elect Hillary Clinton. And I’m confident (in a depressing way) that that is what we’ll do tomorrow (or at least be told we did). I think that’s how the oligarchy has wanted it. Even one of the Koch brothers made noises about being able to live with her as POTUS. Reverse psychology? Don’t throw me in the Clinton patch?
Well, not trying to sway anyone, particularly since I’ll be enraged Tuesday night regardless of which one of them is given to us as our burden for the next four-to-eight. I just find it remarkable how many people who clearly view themselves as left-of-center, who know they were fooled badly by Obama in 2008 (and who, like me, STILL fell for the evil of two lessors argument in 2012), are almost psychotically terrified that Trump will be POTUS and calmed by the thought of Hillary Clinton, our second female president (you do realize that our first was Edith Wilson, right?)
LikeLike
We’ve been “set up” to elect someone who is running on one of the most progressive platforms in recent history.
We’ve been “set up” to elect someone whose ACTIONS have never been “how can I make the oligarchy more powerful?” ‘How can I arrange to kill more innocent Muslims overseas because the billionaires and foreign leaders who pay me will be happy?”
Why do you think this near 70 year old woman with (as you keep telling us) more money than she and Chelsea and her grandchildren can spend in a lifetime would want to spend 4 years of the precious time she has left as President? To make more money for her grandkids? To insure that the .01% can continue to rule at the expense of the 99%? Because she just enjoys the naked power that being POTUS brings?
I have not yet cast a vote for Hillary Clinton and I have had 2 primaries to do so. I preferred Obama and Bernie because I believed (wrongly about Obama) they would offer a more FDR-like government.
But I became a convert not because of some naive reverence or belief she was the second coming of FDR and had no flaws.
I became a convert because this was the first time in the 9 (!!) elections I have voted where the Democrat candidate was PROUDLY espousing the ideals of the party of FDR instead of running away from them as fast as she could.
For 9 elections, I watched the Democrat candidate pivot to the right once they won the primary. Hillary Clinton pivoted to the LEFT in the general election. She threw caution to the wind and went with what was right, knowing that the Republicans have delighted in convincing white Americans of how much the Democrats despised them. She campaigned on a platform of America TOGETHER — and not just white American together. And she didn’t pander to the white vote and “prove” she wasn’t really anti-white through some major speech chiding minorities for all their flaws. That’s what the “deplorables” comment was really about. She got it. Those people were racist and looking to scapegoat minorities and there was nothing she could say to reach them. She distinguished them from the other white Trump supporters who she believed could be reached, or at least she could try, but not by proving her pro-white bonfides. By trying to tell them what she hoped to do for them in her wonky manner.
I see the chance for America to have one of the most progressive Democrats since LBJ and instead she’s being attacked for not being progressive enough. Or worse – the corrupt scandal-driven President who only wants to govern because she can’t wait to collect all the money foreign billionaires and American oligarchs will reward her with when she does their bidding. Some far more to the right and far more in the pocket of Wall Street than Obama.
I’m not naive. Clinton may be as conservative as Obama. But I’d mourn for this country if we did not give a Democrat offering the most progressive platform since LBJ a chance to see if she means it. Especially one who seems able to stand up to the bullies who don’t want to get anything done.
LikeLike
There are none so blind….
LikeLike
Hear, hear. I looked up the word “delusional” and saw a photo of. . . :^)
LikeLike
Hillary Clinton is not, has never pretended to be, and most certainly won’t be a progressive:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/13/trump-clinton-election-chances-moderate-policies-economy
LikeLike
I don’t want to insult you, NYC psp, but I don’t think you’d get a lot of Syrians, Libyans, Palestinians to join hands with a lot of Vietnamese in celebrating HRC or LBJ. Progressive is becoming a meaningless term as currently used by centrist Democrats and the Clinton Team. It’s like “socialist” and “democratic” in all those puppet Soviet bloc countries before the fall of the Berlin Wall. Is it Iceland that has a “Progressive” party which is the one to which all the oligarchs belong?
LikeLike
Did you even read what I wrote?
I am not saying that Hillary is absolutely going to be progressive.
I am saying that she pivoted to the left instead of the right as every other Democrat I have seen do. It would be absurd of me not to see if that plays out in a more progressive government. Every criticism of Hillary seems to be “don’t look at what she does, look at what the innuendo says she does or is going to do”.
It truly astonishes me that you wouldn’t want to give her a chance. If it were your beloved Bernie, I could list a dozen things he did that made him seem like a sell-out who would never do what he promised. So what?
Same with Elizabeth Warren. She has supported things that could be characterized as “selling out to billionaires”. Does that mean I shouldn’t say “give her a chance to see”?
And as much as you despise LBJ, as much as he sold out, some of his domestic policies did good for people. You can say he was all-evil and we’d be better off if Goldwater had won. No one knows.
LikeLike
Does it bother you even a little bit, NYCpsp, that you are making things up, attributing them to me, and that that is the extent of your responses? I never said that LBJ was all evil. But he surrounded himself with liars and amoral men who knew how to play him. And play him they did, into a decade-long quagmire from hell. Doesn’t obviate his social agenda and accomplishments. But it can’t be ignored, either.
I’m not going to debate the reality of Sanders with you. He’s got a long, proven track record of progressive work in American politics. I have friends who worked with him in Vermont when he was getting his start. He really IS the progressive who knows how to get things done. I don’t agree with him on everything. I don’t even agree with myself on everything. But I believe in him as a person. That’s not been the case with Sec. Clinton for a very long time. And the proof will be in her cabinet selections, advisors, and first 100 days or so in office. She’s no more of a progressive than the rest of the inner circle of powerful Democrats. They spit on the left, they gladly deny constitutional rights to those who oppose or in any way fail to bow to their will. Schumer, Feinstein, Pelosi, etc.
LikeLike
“I don’t think you’d get a lot of Syrians, Libyans, Palestinians to join hands with a lot of Vietnamese in celebrating HRC or LBJ.”
And the people of Dresden joined hands to celebrate FDR? And the people of Hiroshima joined hands to celebrate Truman?
FDR and Truman — by your standards two of the most evil Presidents in history and it’s too bad their opponents didn’t win so the world could become a much better place.
By the way, who would the Syrians, Libyans, Palestinians be joining hands to support? Which leader anywhere is their savior?
That isn’t a facetious question. I really want to understand the leader that you are certain the Syrians, Libyans and Palestinians would rejoice in having?
LikeLike
Please, stop. I can’t pretend to have meaningful dialogue with you: you’re in a world I don’t inhabit, in which you make up your own versions of my writing, then expect me to be held accountable to that nonsense. I will not reply directly to anything you say henceforth, though I reserve the right to debunk it.
LikeLike
You can’t stop yet. Your debates with NYCPP remind me of this scene.
LIGHTMAN: It hasn’t learned! Is there any way to make it play itself?
DR. FALKEN: Yes. Number of players: zero.
LikeLike
“Learn, damn it!”
“It must be caught in a loop.”
“It’s drawing more and more power from the system!”
LikeLike
Now it’s happening to me!
“On the other hand, FLERP! agrees with you and believes everything I post is completely without merit. FLERP! wants you to continue your good work to convince people it’s better to vote for Jill Stein than someone who is no different than Trump.”
LikeLike
Not much fun, is it, FLERP! But I’ve put up with it for years in the Math Wars. Some folks simply operate out of nearly-complete solipsism. They take everything reasonable that their dissenters say and turn it into nonsense that a reasonably alert 12 y.o. could demolish on a bad day. And wonder why no one is congratulating them for their remarkably incisive minds.
LikeLike
MPG,
Obviously, I am trying to convince you of something you will never believe. I’m questioning why you can’t see Hillary with the same shades of grey that you see FDR and Truman.
On the other hand, FLERP! agrees with you and believes everything I post is completely without merit. FLERP! wants you to continue your good work to convince people it’s better to vote for Jill Stein than someone who is no different than Trump. No doubt you and FLERP! can convince a few minds of the rightness of your view and the wrongness of mine.
LikeLike
NYC PSP,
Not worth your time trying to persuade MPG. He will do what he wants. This is America. Free choice.
LikeLike
If your take on FLERP! is as accurate and grounded in what appears here as is your take on me, then the goal might well be to have us vote for Mitt Romney or Kim Kardashian. That is, I don’t find you a very good reader or interpreter of the state ideas of others.
That said: my goal at this juncture is hardly to get anyone to vote for my candidate. And since I abhor both Trump and Clinton (though I don’t think they are “the same”), it’s not to dissuade anyone from voting his or her preference. But I resent the hell out of being misrepresented and having my very clear comments distorted into nonsense, fed through your bizarrely distorting lenses.
Where is Andrea Martin when we really need her?
“she played a ridiculous range of characters, from Indira Gandhi singing “Don’t Cry For Me, Rawalpindi” in a musical parody of “Evita”
I’m ready for her doing a musical parody of Hillary Clinton. “Don’t Cry For Me, Bernie Sanders”?
LikeLike
Diane Ravitch,
I’m not trying to get MPG to change his mind. I’m just trying to correct the record when he keeps up his EVIL Hillary who can do only evil meme. People read that and believe him. It’s exactly what the Republicans hoped and he’s doing their dirty work for them. I don’t like seeing any of those Karl Rove/Roger Ailes portrayals of her go unanswered.
Or maybe everyone already knows his posts are full of false innuendos and slurs and no one believes his insistence that Hillary is as evil as Giuliani. But I’m assuming there are posters who agree and someone should offer them an argument for why MPG’s views are wrong.
LikeLike
NYC PSP,
Sometimes it is best to walk away from a dispute, recognizing that you won’t change his mind, and he won’t change yours.
LikeLike
Yes, it’s definitely best to walk away from a debate when you become so unhinged you can’t even hear what the other person is saying and you start putting words in people’s mouths. Michael has been trying to point this out for a number of threads running now, but NYCPSP has now conclusively proven it with his/her delirious attack on FLERP! who is, in fact, on his/her side.
Seriously, it all ends tomorrow and your horse is going to win, so please just relax. Then the ball will be in your court when your candidate starts doing exactly what we’ve said she will.
(And, yes, on the unlikely chance I’m proven wrong on that, I’ll happily and publicly eat a heaping plate of crow because it will be the best and happiest surprise for the country and the world.)
LikeLike
Dienne,
FLERP! is never on “my side”. LOL! He may be voting for Clinton, but even if we (on rare occasions) agree, FLERP! loves to chime in with a gratuitous remark to knock me down a peg. I don’t mind. I do apologize for snarkily implying that he and MPG were in agreement which seems to have caused so much trouble. He inserted himself with his usual nonsense in a debate I was having with MPG so I decided to have a bit of fun. I’m guessing FLERP! – were he to honestly reply – knew I was intentionally trying to insult him by pretending I thought he was as deluded as MPG in his anti-Hillary beliefs. But in any event, I should not have been so snarky to FLERP and I apologize.
I try not use ugly words like “unhinged” when someone disagrees with me — I realize I post a lot but so does MPG and unlike the both of you, despite our disagreements I didn’t try to imply he had psychological issues. And Dienne, I often compliment your posts about education and I admire their thoughtfulness. I’m not really sure what you and MPG think Hillary is going to do exactly. I don’t think she is going to be the second coming of Bernie but I do think she wants to be President to make this country better and not to pursue some corrupt goals to make herself even richer than she is now. So I think if she wins and has a semi-willing Congress, she will be better than Obama. I realize that may not be good enough for many people, but I’ll take it. You and MPG will no doubt think me deluded but I admire Hillary’s wonkiness and I think that’s what will make her a good President. Not a charismatic or necessarily one who does all that I hope for or want. But she studies up on issues and in this complicated world where there are often no good choices, I do trust that she’ll try to do what’s best for the country and not for big donors or be the wholly owned corrupt politician she has been portrayed.
Like you, if I’m proven wrong, I’ll very sadly and dejectedly eat a helping of crow. And be supporting a better candidate next time.
LikeLike
NYC psp,
I agree with you about Hillary.
As I have said many times, I think she is a good and decent person. She is intelligent, thoughtful,responsible, and I think she will exercise good judgment and wisdom.
I think she will be a fine President.
Don’t feel defensive.
We will get back to education after the election.
And there I’ll be many areas where we can work together.
LikeLike
Thank you, Diane.
It’s definitely discouraging to see teachers and educators on here using words like “unhinged”, “mini-strokes”, “psychological disorder”. I don’t know if the ugliness of the Republican campaign has trickled down or if this is just what our discourse has devolved into but it’s a shame that’s now part of the modus operandi if you disagree. Or if you decide your opponent misunderstands your view. It’s certainly easier to call them “unhinged” than to defend yourself. Or explain yourself and clarify the misunderstanding if you truly believe there is one.
LikeLike
I think I would be just a bit more disappointed with the election of the one who has demonstrated by his own actions that, he is a Narcissistic ,Fascist , Demagogue ,Fraud.
The Daily News is a center right mouth piece. Backed Bush/ Obama / Romney in the past. Trumps antisemitic dog whistles probably have Zuckerman rightfully upset . He will be perfectly happy with a triangulating Clinton .
LikeLike
On another note… and no doubt I’m preaching to the congregation here… Trump has boldened this guy and his ilk to slime out of the woodwork and espouse their ignorance and hatred in broad daylight. They really think their day is coming, and they think that Trump is going to raise them victorious on a national level. I’m glad these people are speaking out bec/ they remind us that racism and anti-semitism and xenophobia, etc., are (sadly) still very much alive in our country, and that we need to step up our vigilance and be wary of complacency. I am VERY disappointed that Trump has done NOTHING to distance himself from these people, and has done NOTHING to refute the lies that they are espousing. To me, Trump’s silence is just as dangerous as their outspokenness. Maybe more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMLg_0vAefo
Then again, maybe Trump’s “with them.” Here’s his latest campaign ad. Antisemitic undertones??? http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-campaign-fires-back-adl-blasts-anti-semitic-imagery-trump-ad/
LikeLike
That’s ok — preachers are supposed to preach to the congregation.
LikeLike
For what it’s worth (i.e., nothing), I saw an ad on Michigan television Saturday night that was the first one of the post-convention season from EITHER candidate that didn’t completely roll in the mud non-stop. It actually addressed real concerns of many Americans of the non-elite kind, of all ethnicities (someone did her/his homework in choosing the people shown), and of the sort who have been economically devastated over the last 10 years by Wall Street corruption and horrible trade agreements (NAFTA, TPP, etc.) It didn’t attempt any sort of play for dog-whistles, wasn’t a character-assassination filled diatribe against HRC, and in fact wouldn’t have been a bad template for Bernie Sanders.
The same night, I saw again the one HRC’s using that shows little kids watching TV while Trump says bad things. You can see him mouth “Go f—- themselves” and “Grab ’em by the slang word for female genitalia” and so forth. The conclusion is, of course, that he’s unfit. Not a word, by the way, about the candidate who approved the message or how she is fit or what she’ll do instead. Were I just dropped here from Mars, and saw only those two ads without knowing a thing about the candidates but those commercials, I’d vote for Trump in a heartbeat. He actually addressed real economic concerns; she slung mud. Granted, his “Make America Great Again” slogan is meaningless to me personally. But it really disturbs me that that attack ad from HRC was what she felt was needed here in Michigan to secure the state for her column tomorrow, after a quarter-century winning streak for the Democratic Party for POTUS. Not what she’ll do or why she’s fit, but “we don’t want little kids learning nasty talk, attitudes, or beliefs from Trump.” Yes, and we didn’t want them learning from Bill Clinton, so we (meaning many Dems) punished Al Gore, the party, the nation, and the world by voting for George W. Bush, the truly least fit candidate to be nominated by any major American party, and a two-term stealing POTUS. Don’t blame poor Ralph Nader supporters. It was the tens of thousands of Democrats who went for Bush that gave us 8 years of neoconservative horror under Dick Cheney and his cronies.
LikeLike
I agree with most of the op ed but was turned off by this statement: “Now comes a reckoning that made vengeful soulmates of the unlikely Bernie Sanders and the ungodly Trump.” Bernie and Trump are in no way, shape or form soulmates. Bernie is the real deal, he’s actually for the people and he’s quite honest and straight forward. He’s not a demagogue. He’s a democratic socialist and he’s for all the policies that would help the great mass of Americans. However, when you listen to HRC and DT speak there is a huge difference; one is a ranting and raving demagogue who often speaks meaningless gibberish or repeats empty slogans while the other candidate is his polar opposite. HRC gets my vote.
LikeLike
I also resent that remark about vengeful soulmates of Trump and Sanders, what with it being so blatantly idiotic and all. I’d also add that Comey has now gone back on his ridiculous insinuation, a la Emily Litella, “Never mind.”
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
LikeLike
What are Hillary’s positions? I’ve watched her rallies, debates, and commercials and all I see are attack ads at Trump. I want a president that will bring jobs back to America. My husband’s job was outsourced to India several years ago, which has made life difficult. Obamacare premiums and deductibles are way up, and when you don’t qualify for subsidies healthcare becomes your biggest bill (we pay $1700 per month). Does HC want to bring education locally and get rid of Common Core, or to continue down the testing road, which means I will have to continue to homeschool. Illegal immigration has taken over my southern California city…upwards of 1,000 people day are crossing into San Diego illegally (per Border Patrol). Instead of being turned around they have orders to give them a ride into San Diego. In California illegal immigrants will get Obamacare, free education, driver’s licenses, free preschool, food stamps, and subsidized housing. Many are released for crimes back into the community. Hillary wants open borders, but honestly, for people in border states, we already have open borders. I want people to come in, but through a process and with limits in place. Does HC have any limits on immigration, or is it open borders for all who want to come? These issues are very important to my family: American jobs, unaffordable Obamacare, Common Core, and illegal immigration. What is HC promising on these issues? I am trying to prepare myself for her possible election and I need to know what to expect from her. Thank you for any honest comments.
LikeLike
Good work, Mom: in one post, you help the HRC-worshipers rationalize their support of her. Your immigration-focused Trumpery is precisely the sort of xenophobia that makes the Trump base look like nothing but knuckle-dragging racists. It doesn’t matter if there are legitimate reasons to oppose Hillary (they are legion) or support Trump: you prove to everyone not supporting him that they are 100% right to do so. You almost have ME wanting to vote for her, and that’s saying something.
LikeLike
I could lie to you and tell you illegal immigration doesn’t directly affect my life living in a border town, if that makes you feel better. Sorry it isn’t what you want to hear but it’s a strain on our economy, schools and healthcare. It is very expensive to fund illegal immigrants, period. Taxes will have to go up to cover everyone coming in, as entitlements rise. I voted Trump and I haven’t given up hope, but I am realistic to know this is a very tight race. And, if Hillary wins I would like to know where she stands on issues since ALL she talks about is Trump. Interestingly enough, I haven’t heard anything about what she stands for. Do any of you know?
LikeLike
You don’t have to lie. But the racist, narrow-minded focus of your comments is, to say the least, not in your own best interests.
I have friends in El Paso. They have some of the same concerns you do, but they manage to communicate them without the tone and language you employ, and without making it sound like the issue is lazy, good-for-nothing furriners.
Trump would not save you from any of that. Clinton won’t, either. The reality is that there is ZERO reason historically or recently to think that either party or candidate cares about working-class or lower-middle-class people. Trump’s phony populist rhetoric is Huey Long with a northern accent (look up the Kingfish if you don’t know him). Clinton’s “progressive” rhetoric, which she uses only with certain audiences, masks the reality of a Wall Street-funded, neoliberal/neocon exceptionalist who will be pleased as punch to send your kids to die in Syria or the Ukraine. They’re both frauds. And it doesn’t matter what she SAYS she’ll do. What matters is what she’s already done when in power, coupled with the fact that even if she were the second coming of FDR, she isn’t going to destroy herself politically for the good of the American people or anyone else.
LikeLike
Does it make you feel superior to call people racists when they disagree with your views? Or, do you fall back on that slandering remark because you’ve got nothing else? Stop calling people racists because they want to follow the laws of our country. It is so easy to offend snowflakes nowadays. The tone and language are never good enough, but I’m happy your New Mexico friends were able to make you feel better when they put it to you in a more politically correct way that– Anyone who crosses our border illegally or overstays a visa has broken the law. This includes whites, blacks, Mexicans, Russians, Asians and every other race on our planet. Open borders, with no limits or exceptions, will be expensive and dangerous. Our country is 20 trillion in debt and many live paycheck to paycheck. Stop making it about racism when it is not.
LikeLike
Learn to read. I didn’t call you a racist. I referred to racist comments. You made some. Every American is tainted by racism. Some people fight it. Some deny it. Some wallow in it.
Of course, it’s about racism. And xenophobia. But only on the surface. You’re just being played by the oligarchs. And again, some people fight that, some deny it, and some wallow in it. Temporarily embarrassed millionaires. 🙂
In the ’30s, the US government passed a host of restrictive immigration laws that favored northern Europeans (Anglo-Saxons, Germans, etc.) over all other ethnic groups and countries of origin. The result? Countless European Jews and non-Jews were denied the opportunity to come here. People who believed in “nativism” and “America first” were, no doubt, thrilled, even as people from their countries of origin were admitted. Care to take a wild guess what happened to many of those who were kept out? Or would that be a little too ugly to think about?
It’s generally easy to rationalize being on the wrong side of history by citing personal considerations. I really work hard not to do that. I turn down jobs because I can’t rationalize working for certain corporations or doing certain kinds of work. It’s not been good for me personally. But I do sleep better.
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Diane Ravitch’s blog wrote:
> Momoffive commented: “Does it make you feel superior to call people > racists when they disagree with your views? Or, do you fall back on that > slandering remark because you’ve got nothing else? Stop calling people > racists because they want to follow the laws of our country. I” >
LikeLike
Mom I am sorry for your hardships. My husband lost a job due to outsourcing and we also have had to homeschool for a time, due to the common core. There are some of us who really do understand and care about people like you. I doubt the Neo Democrats do.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/31/the-podesta-emails-show-who-runs-america-and-how-they-do-it
LikeLike
Here is what you can expect from Hillary:
A woman who has spent her life studying and observing and trying to figure out the best solution when there is no easy solution. A woman who won’t lie to you and say “elect me, and you husband will have a fantastic high paying job again because I alone can fix it”.
A woman who genuinely wants to make life better for Americans. A woman who will look at joblessness and the lack of good jobs for Americans like your husband and try to figure out the best solution when there isn’t an easy one. It will likely be higher taxes on the rich and using that to create well-paying jobs to improve our infrastructure and support new industries like pollution clean-up or clean energy. It may not directly help your husband, but she will be looking for policies that will help.
What I can tell you for sure is that Trump will do whatever is best for him. He will say whatever it takes to close the sale and get you to vote for him.
Once he wins, he will govern in the way that suits him. That may mean that somehow your husband benefits or maybe he doesn’t but whether your family benefits is besides the point. Trump is only interested in himself. Whether that helps people like your husband get jobs is not important.
LikeLike
I don’t think anyone wants to see a President Trump less than I do. But you are laying it on a bit thick in this post.
LikeLike
“laying it on a bit thick”?
In terms of Trump or Clinton?
Care to be more specific? Or did you just see an opportunity to bash me in your usually snarky way content in the knowledge that you and Michael Paul Goldenberg are two of a kind.
I didn’t make any promises. I didn’t tell him Hillary would be the savior of the working class. I merely declined to paint her in the portrait that MPG (and perhaps you?) are so certain is the truth. After all, how dare I suggest she “genuinely wants to make life better for Amricans”. When you and MPG understand that is way down her list, after “enrich myself, help the billionaires who fund me, and kill as many Syrian babies as I can”.
Will it make you happy if MPG’s nihilistic view of “there’s no difference between Clinton and Giuliani as Secy of State” goes without criticism? I understand how much you are bothered that I don’t simply let that truth — as you see it — stand or have the chutzpah to call it out as untrue.
I’d like to say that I will try very hard to be the good little follower who offers no criticism to people who speak what – to my mind – is a lie. You are free to take MPG’s side that Hillary has no redeeming qualities (unlike FDR, LBJ, and Truman). Surely you and he can convince more undecideds that a vote for Hillary is no different than a vote for Trump. You still have time to change a few minds.
LikeLike
“Will it make you happy if MPG’s nihilistic view of “there’s no difference between Clinton and Giuliani as Secy of State” goes without criticism? I understand how much you are bothered that I don’t simply let that truth — as you see it — stand or have the chutzpah to call it out as untrue.”
If I could sue you for twisting my reasonable words into the sort of absolutist claims I work hard to avoid making (but which fit your dualistic world view perfectly), I could retire a wealthy man.
If memory serves, FLERP! and I don’t generally line up on the same side of a lot of debates. But if we both realize that Hillary Clinton is a neoliberal disaster ready to befoul the earth for 4 to 8 years, then I guess that’s an agreement to be proud of.
LikeLike
With respect to Clinton. A few of your sentences read like the first draft of the voiceover for a Clinton campaign ad.
And lighten up! I’m not taking MPG’s side, at least not wholesale. I agree with much of what you’re writing, and I also see where MPG is coming from. But if you and MPG express much more indignation, my monitor is going to catch fire.
LikeLike
FLERP! says:
“I agree with much of what you’re writing, and I also see where MPG is coming from….”
If you really do see where MPG is coming from, as you claim, I wonder if you’d do me the kind favor of explaining it to me. You obviously understand him and I don’t.
I’m not being snarky. Since you see where MPG is coming from, can you please explain it to me?
LikeLike
The Trump campaign brought up real issues facing Americans. Around here, a major bank hires H1bs over Americans leading to American tech workers washing dishes and H1bs driving Mercedes. And that is not hyperbole. As David Brooks mentioned, what has been lost more than jobs, income, and security is dignity. And that pushes good people into anger, despair, and a sense American citizenship means little to the point immigrants have more rights and benefits by “cutting in line”. What Trump exploited was this reality, but his solutions are dangerous and destructive.
But electing Hillary is just more of the same. So the fear and boiling rage will remain even after the election. No matter how much progressives try to put the toothpaste back into the tube by calling Trump supporters deplorables, racists, and ignorant (some are), there’s no reason to think these issues are going away. Democrats missed a major opportunity to bring many of the Trump supporters into the party. Hillary and the Democratic elite just don’t get it.
LikeLike
While I don’t think your comments are utterly off-base or without merit, I can’t help but recall the following after what you said about those H1bs driving Mercedes:
“Ni_g_rs are having a good time with our policy banks up in Harlem, drivin’ them big new Cadillacs.”
The speaker? Sonny Corleone in THE GODFATHER
Well, at least no one is having his/her “rightful” job taken by numbers bookies in 1940s Harlem. My grandfather did all his bookmaking in Bensonhurst.
That said, David Brooks isn’t my go-to guy for much. But he’s not wrong to point out the serious curtailment of American jobs. He just doesn’t want to spread the blame quite broadly enough. Like back to Ronald W. Reagan and the economic bandits he promoted. The GOP neocons and the Democratic and Republican neoliberals should have all been taken out and shot against the wall long ago. Instead, the majority of Americans seem content to play Cops and Robbers, where each side sees the OTHER team as the robbers, of course.
You’d think that the mortgage-fueled collapse of the US economy and the neoliberal failure by Obama and economic advisors/handlers to do one single thing to prevent it from happening again (see THE BIG SHORT if you haven’t. See it again, if you have). You’d think that if Brooks were not only smart but also honest, he’d be singing “mea culpa” non-stop. But instead, he wants to act as if it’s all the fault of Dems. And the Dems, led by the rapidly irrelevant Clinton shill, Paul Krugman, want to pin it all on GWB, Alan Greenspan, and anyone but Obama, his people, and the people we know almost certainly will do the same when Hillary is in charge.
I have enormous empathy for Americans who’ve worked their asses off and gotten screwed six ways from Sunday since 1980 by both parties. But none for those pinning the blame on immigrants (documented or not), unless they are pure-blooded Native Americans, in which case I couldn’t agree more. The gall of “Americans” who either descended from those who stole this country and murdered countless people to get it or from those who were damned lucky to be able to come here (my grandparents came here between about 1885 and 1910, except for my maternal grandmother, who was born in Brooklyn in 1890), and in any case benefited from the theft and murder, is truly revolting. No one here has the right to bitch about immigrants if they weren’t here before 1492 or so. And yes, I know that many Americans of African descent have ancestors who were slaves, but that still doesn’t justify xenophobic comments about Muslims or Mexicans, etc.
If you focus on recent immigrants and not on the system that makes you have to fight for a minimal economic life with basic rights like medical care and education and elder care guaranteed, in the richest, most powerful country in human history, then you’re irredeemably gullible and, probably, pathetically unthoughtful. You can’t be bothered to read real history or draw any lessons from American or European sagas of power and wealth exploiting, conquering, and killing anyone and everyone they feel like to get more and more and more.
My son worked for the last three years in crappy, minimum wage restaurant jobs. Most of his co-workers at the non-serving jobs were Mexicans and other Latin Americans. They worked their asses off. More than a few were undocumented. Most, in fact, according to what he told me. I’d love to have some of the folks who bitch about immigrants stealing their jobs explain: 1) why they don’t take those jobs instead, since my son says they are always available; 2) why they are SO fixated on what the working poor are “stealing” from them in the way of one thing or another, but not burning down the houses of the billionaires (like Donald Trump) who make it necessary for so many poor people to have multiple jobs from multiple household members just to starve to death slowly; and 3) and why any of them would vote for someone like Trump, who couldn’t care less about them, any more than does Hillary Clinton or the mainstream power brokers of either party.
I’d like to ask, but sadly, I already know the sorts of responses I’ll get, not the least of which will be the snide one about trying to enlighten poor white racists. Trust me: I’m an equal opportunity snob: I think all uneducated, propagandized, willfully ignorant people should get their heads out of their tails, read some real history, read some sane political philosophy (no one better to start with than Sheldon Wolin), and stop letting themselves be played by the ideologues and oligarchs. Don’t care about color, sex, religion, or anything else: you either start seeing who your friends and enemies really are, or you spend your life a slave, not the least of which being to your own intellectual laziness and emotional infantilism.
LikeLike
Hard truths that both sides refuse to hear.
The election is over. You may release your pearls. The Clinton machine will take it. Read about how big that machine actually is. What I want to know is what the plan needs to be to protect public education in the future dynastic neoliberal Clinton Administration. I look forward to Diane’s thoughts on this in future.
LikeLike
There is no such thing as a free press in America.
LikeLike
This morning, Chuck Todd said Comey’s announcement 9 days ago, may have cost the Democrats, the Senate. The implication is that the target of the “rogue’ FBI may have been, down ballot from Hillary.
LikeLike
Linda, I wouldn’t take Chuck Todd overly seriously. He HOPES the Democrats don’t take back the Senate. I wouldn’t put it past him to vote for Trump. 🙂
LikeLike
If Democrats win the Senate then we get Chuck Schumer and that has its own down sides for everyone. It’s a distasteful election indeed.
But you’re right, Chuck Todd is ignorable if nothing else but for his arrogant television persona.
LikeLike
Schumer is another despicable Democratic hawk and racist, which is to say that regardless of what he thinks personally of Arabs or Arab-Americans, he’s certainly happy to exploit American fear and loathing of those “others” for political gain. Gee, if Donald Trump said stuff about Arabs and Muslims to rival Schumer’s comments, we’d think he was a very bad person indeed. Luckily for many Democrats, anti-Islamism is okay if it’s in the name of the Democratic Party and/or Israel.
LikeLike
Schumer is my Senator and I missed all the Trump-like comments he said about Arabs and Muslims to foment hate against those groups.
There are large communities of Arabs and Muslims in Queens and Brooklyn that I assume know how evil he is. And how evil Hillary is. Funny how that isn’t the hotbed of Trump support. Do you know where it is? In the white ethnic neighborhoods where many 1st generation Eastern European whites live. Those who came as children, or whose parents came here and see Putin as the same grand leader as Trump sees him.
LikeLike
You don’t even pretend to read the stuff that explains exactly why Schumer is an open enemy of Muslim-Americans and Arab-Americans, to say nothing of Muslims and Arabs in their homelands.
The issues isn’t Trump. It’s what Chuck Schumer openly professes. Your ability to deal with even slight nuance appears to be non-existent. You’re blind to so much because you have convinced yourself that Trump is Satan/Hitler (of COURSE he is, not just a rich, classless jackass) and hence Hillary is our White Knight. If she had one tenth the integrity of Brienne of Tarth, I’d be making calls for her, not arguing with the willfully blind. That she doesn’t is why she will be another neoliberal disaster. But you’ll sleep better because. . . ?
By the way: I was born in Brooklyn. I lived there again at 19, and was living there for several years prior to relocating to Michigan in 1992. My closest friend and his wife lived across from the Brooklyn Museum until going upstate a bit two years ago, so I spent a LOT of time there (some work-related) over the past quarter-century. Haven’t exactly lost touch with NYC, nor am I unaware of the politics of many white immigrant enclaves in Brooklyn and Queens. But so what? How does any of that have to do with progressive politics, Islamaphobia, and the fact that both Republicans AND Democrats exploit that fear and ignorance to further their own power?
It’s not okay that Schumer is a Zionist pig, just because he’s Jewish and a Democrat. When you figure out that the politics of fear has no team, just an enormous bipartisan roster, maybe you’ll realize why Obama wasn’t quite so good and Hillary won’t be either. Screaming at those of us who won’t bury our heads in the sand and fantasize for another 4-8 years no doubt makes you feel swell, but it’s hardly persuasive.
And your inability to understand that I have not characterized FDR or Truman as utterly evil, but rather I recognize that they did some very evil things that I’m sure they believed were necessary and ethical and won’t pretend otherwise is precisely why you don’t understand me or what I have to say. And why you are so aghast that I dare to criticize “my own.” I hope to hell that were I in a position of power, “my own” would criticize the crap out of me every single day.
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Diane Ravitch’s blog wrote:
> NYC public school parent commented: “Schumer is my Senator and I missed > all the Trump-like comments he said about Arabs and Muslims to foment hate > against those groups. There are large communities of Arabs and Muslims in > Queens and Brooklyn that I assume know how evil he is. And how evil ” >
LikeLike
I do read your comments. You talk about LBJ and FDR very differently than you talk about Hillary Clinton.
“And your inability to understand that I have not characterized FDR or Truman as utterly evil, but rather I recognize that they did some very evil things that I’m sure they believed were necessary and ethical and won’t pretend otherwise…”
That is the ONLY thing I am asking you to do with Hillary Clinton. Instead of characterizing all her actions as evil, why can’t you give her the same acknowledgement you give them that you are sure “they believed were necessary and ethical…”
To me, motives are important. For most issues of governance there are not easy solutions. And the politicians offering them – like Trump – are merely lying. There are policies that will cause harm and do good and we hope to elect someone whose motives are good. I think Bernie’s motives are good. I think Hillary’s motives are good. That doesn’t mean they come to the same place when decided what policies to enact. Just like Michael Paul Goldenberg as President would not acted as Truman did and would have decided that continuing the war for a while was a good price to pay for preventing civilian deaths. And you seem to give Truman a pass for making another decision. But you refuse to do that with Hillary. To you, she is no different than Giuliani and you can’t see beyond that because every action she takes is for herself. It’s odd that you give those early Dems a pass by not characterizing them as completely evil as Hillary is. I mean, I’ve seen your posts for months and I have seen no sign you see ANY redeeming characteristics of Hillary. She is no different than Giuliani, Trump, etc. But to you, she is VERY different than FDR and Truman and LBJ. That’s what I just don’t get. How you give those men a pass for all the evil they do — sure you criticize it but are willing to acknowledge they aren’t entirely bad — but can’t give the same to Hillary. And in truth, Hillary’s actions as Secy of State are nowhere near as reprehensible as those men’s were, and she certainly was not the ultimate decision maker. I mean, it’s not as if the last 4 years when she was gone demonstrated a huge change because her evil influence wasn’t there.
LikeLike
You seem to miss so many obvious points. First, you started by accusing me of painting FDR and Truman as demons (or so it seemed). I never did. But I did condemn particular things they did that you mentioned. So I tried to make clear my views.
So what do YOU do? You turn around and say, well, gee, you’re cutting THOSE people breaks. Why not Hillary Clinton?
That tactic alone suffices for me to find you beyond annoying: you’re willfully playing the weasel in order to win. . . well, I honestly have no idea what you think you’re going to win here with me.
2) You can’t win anything from me. I won’t vote for Hillary Clinton tomorrow. Or for Trump. What I will do isn’t really your business, but it’s not a secret: I’m writing in Sanders. And I don’t care if that harelips everyone in Bear Creek (a DR STRANGELOVE reference). As for “cutting her a break,” why in the name of Manuel the Gardener does she need a break from me? I have zero power to impact her. She made clear for well over a year that she couldn’t care less about what people like me think. So even if it mattered, why does she DESERVE the benefit of the doubt from me?
3) I was not born when FDR died in 1945. I was 2 1/2 when Truman left office in 1953. I couldn’t vote for or against LBJ in 1964 or in ’68 if he’d chosen to run. The voting age was still 21 that year and I was only 18.
But I’m 66 and I can make rational choices about whom to vote for tomorrow. Had I been able to vote for Truman in ’48, I probably would not have done so. Neither of my parents did. They voted for Henry Wallace. Neither has ever expressed the slightest regret about that choice. (That’s HENRY Wallace. Not GEORGE Wallace. Not Strom Thurmond, either, who ran in ’48). I might have voted for LBJ in ’64. I did work for him. I would NOT have voted for him in ’68. Four+ years of needless killing in Vietnam had an impact on my teenage thinking. And I wasn’t alone.
But here’s why I won’t “forgive” Hillary: she’s done so much evil and not even BEEN POTUS. Now you want me to “give her a shot”? Are you mad? I can’t stop her, but I sure as hell won’t live with voting FOR her on my conscience. No matter what I think of Trump.
And tomorrow night or Wednesday morning, when you’re basking in the glow of the death of the Trumpian demon, then what? Will you have the honesty and courage to face what you and the DNC and their owners will have wrought? Will you castigate her for her evil-doing when she does it? Or will you find it easy to rationalize your vote and her betrayal of even the semblance of progressivism outside of a sop or two thrown to identity groups? I hope so, but I am very, very doubtful that you will. She’s a woman. She’s a Democrat, and she LOVES the Jews (you SERIOUSLY think that Trump is anti-Semitic or anti-Israel?) Maggie Thatcher was two of those three, and the poor people of Britain groaned for years under her yoke. And she didn’t control the US military.
LikeLike
MPG,
You completely missed my point with the FDR and Truman references. And I’m more than willing to say that it’s my fault for inept writing. But my point was very simple:
Why were you willing to give those men a break and be able to see the grey in them, and yet Hillary Clinton is a caricature of evil to you?
I don’t care one whit about who you vote for. You don’t get it. I’m not trying to convince you to change your mind. I am calling your untruths. I am skewering the double standard you reserve only for Hillary Clinton. I am pointing out your nihilism when you shout that having Giuliani at Secy of State is no different than having Clinton. I am doing my darn best to point out how wrong headed your arguments are. I don’t care if you disagree with me. I don’t care if FLERP!, Ellen, Joel and anyone else disagrees with me and wants YOUR view of “Evil Hillary, no different than Trump” to carry the day. Because I don’t care about you. I care about people reading you and thinking that this man is upright and sticks to his principles and never judges a woman — Hillary — with a double standard he would never judge Truman and FDR. Sure, they were bad, but not EVIL like Hillary.
“she’s done so much evil and not even BEEN POTUS. Now you want me to “give her a shot”? Are you mad? ”
I don’t think I’m mad, but I do think you are with statements like that. You don’t even realize what a HYPOCRITE you are.
“I’m voting for Bernie, the guy who is going around the country campaigning for a woman who has “done so much evil and not even BEEN POTUS”.
If Bernie is half the man you think he is he would not be going around campaigning for a woman this evil — even if Trump is a little worse. He would do what Kasich is going and sit this out. Apparently, you credit Gov. Kasich with more principles than Bernie has!
I could care less who you vote for. But I do care that your outrageous characterizations of EVIL HILLARY don’t get shot down for the hypocrisy that they are. People like you are doing great harm to this country because your statements are pervasive among many low-education voters. And I will continue to do my darn best to call them out. Even if people like FLERP! wishes I would shut up and let people like you convince them of Hillary’s evil. If you believe everything you write is the truth — as FLERP! believes you are doing – of course you would attack someone trying to correct the record.
LikeLike
You forfeited the right to suggest anyone has not gotten your point after not once, but twice, and then repeatedly after I pointed it out misconstruing completely my actual statements about FDR & Truman, coupled with your misrepresentation of what I’ve actually said about Hillary, and your repeated false claims that I’ve equated her and Trump.
And yet YOU are the one who is “misunderstood”? Thanks for the giggle.
But why are you so obsessed with getting me to somehow concede something to you regarding the inevitable next POTUS? She doesn’t need me. She doesn’t need my vote. She doesn’t need my approbation or approval. Why do you?
I hate playing dime store psychologist, but I don’t think it’s jumping off a cliff to suggest that you’re guilty about how absurd your “arguments” are. You know she’s horrid, but you need deeply to justify voting for her, and after all, TRUMP!
As for why many Sanders supporters aren’t following his “Vote for Her” mantra, maybe you should give that a moment’s thought. Could it POSSIBLY be that he has no real choice if he wants to have influence after she wins? What if he DIDN’T campaign for her and she won and the Dems control the Senate? He’d be a pariah. If he ran against her after the convention and she lost (which she would have), he’d be below the Untouchable caste.
So he did the right thing. Not because she’s good or that he suddenly forgot all her negatives. But because it’s his only sane play. Any other move rips the country apart and fails to advance his concerns. He’s hardly stupid or suicidal. And he does care about the things he’s worked for his whole political life.
That doesn’t mean that he thinks that his supporters will vote for HRC en masse. Again, the man isn’t stupid and he hasn’t suffered a stroke since July. And he’s been stating clearly that he will block regressive policy initiatives to the best of his ability. Works for me, because I believe him.
Does that not make sense to you? Probably not. I don’t have to publicly make nice to HRC, I’m happy to say. Nor do I have to wonder why I’m not just mindlessly lining up to work for HRC. I am 100% sure that Sanders would get it.
When the dust clears, I’ll still be with him. I’ll work locally and nationally for his overall agenda and specific initiatives when they make sufficient sense. But bow down to the corrupt DNC establishment, regardless of who is the Oval Office? Not this Billy Clyde Puckett.
Stop telling me that I don’t get you. And for Pete’s sake, quit putting ridiculous things in my mouth. I doubt highly that you’re convincing anyone who isn’t already a full-blown true-blue Hillocrat.
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Diane Ravitch’s blog wrote:
> NYC public school parent commented: “MPG, You completely missed my point > with the FDR and Truman references. And I’m more than willing to say that > it’s my fault for inept writing. But my point was very simple: Why were you > willing to give those men a break and be able to see the grey in t” >
LikeLike
MPG,
I can’t even believe how revealing that post was about your true feelings about evil Hillary. You despise her in a way that most Republicans don’t even believe. And I can tell you are truly convinced of the righteousness of your view. There is absolutely nothing good in her at all. Pure, unmitigated evil. Roger Ailes could not have said it better himself.
I do have to wonder why your extreme hatred is reserved for her and not Obama. I suspect you’d find some redeeming things about Obama despite his obvious agreement with Hillary about killing as many overseas Islamic innocents as possible. But with Hillary, Nada.
Let me say again, I don’t care who you vote for. I’m not trying to change your mind. But I am not going to let your characterization of Hillary as pure evil go unanswered because other people might read it and decide you are right and they should also vote for anyone but Hillary – even Trump. At least they will see my post after yours and can be free to make their own decisions:
I will remind them that this poster sees the nuances in FDR, Truman, and LBJ and doesn’t paint them as pure evil despite the evil things they have done, but is very certain that Hillary is all-evil based on her 4 years of enacting pure evil policies as Secretary of State, designed to do nothing but further her selfish goals. Whatever was good for America didn’t matter; killing thousands of innocents didn’t matter. It was all about pursuing her selfish self-interest.
If you believe that is the truth picture as MPG paints it, you have no choice but to vote for Trump or Jill or write in someone else. Not Bernie, since he supports pure evil, but someone who won’t sell out the US to pure evilness as Bernie wants to do.
If you believe that MPG has convinced himself of an evil Hillary that is an exaggerated caricature of a very flawed but – like Truman or FDR – still a decent human being, vote Hillary.
LikeLike
NYC: I think you’re certifiable. Congratulations on another brilliant takedown of your own imagined enemy. You must have a doctorate in defeating straw opponents. Arguing against actual people? Not your long suit.
If you ever want to try replying to things I DO write, let me know.
LikeLike
MPG,
Ok I misunderstood you when you said this:
“But here’s why I won’t “forgive” Hillary: she’s done so much evil and not even BEEN POTUS.”
“Can’t see how anyone who would be comfortable with HRC as Sec. of State or POTUS would not feel comfy with Giuliani in that position.”
MPG, you were able to say something positive about FDR, LBJ, Truman. You didn’t paint them as the ugliest caricatures.
I challenge you to say one good thing about Hillary Clinton. Something that proves you aren’t a liar when you accuse me of mischaracterizing your viewpoints. I believe that you have portrayed Hillary as pure evil with no redeeming qualities. You found redeeming qualities in FDR and Truman despite their despicable intentional war crimes. Can you do the same for Hillary? Or am I correct that your characterization of her is exactly as I describe and you are the one lying. You don’t even describe Obama in terms of the unmitigated evil that you believe Hillary is.
All I had to do was read my Facebook feed to see the ugly anti-Hillary posts of the Trump supporters I grew up with to be reminded that you seem to agree with almost every word they say about Hillary Clinton. You seem unable to say anything good about her because there IS nothing good to say about her, in your view. She has no morals. No scruples. No values. That’s what I get from your posts. And if I’m wrong and you can come up with one decent thing about Hillary Clinton (the way you have with FDR and Truman), you’ve certainly kept it hidden.
Show me up for the fool you keep saying I am. Name one redeeming quality of Hillary’s that shows that you see her as a flawed politician as FDR and Truman were. Or if you believe she is as evil as I think you do, no need to reply.
LikeLike
Shall we next take the Pepsi Challenge and the Ice Bucket Challenge? At least the latter goes to a good cause.
You must really have an odd world view if you believe you can manipulate me into trying to win your acceptance or approval or to somehow demonstrate my honesty, decency, or anything else to you (unless I wanted to in the first place). And of all my recent antagonists online, you’re way towards the bottom of people whose views of me matters. Seriously.
You just can’t manage to read without putting your own spin on everything. It’s truly pathetic in what I assume is a publicly educated adult of more years than mine (a rapidly shrinking set of people). I wasn’t trying to be terribly subtle. I assumed that anyone who bothered to read what I wrote would get it. I hadn’t taken into account someone like you.
I don’t buy most of what the GOP has been trying to pin on her going back to the ’90s. What I find despicable about her are things that real Republicans, neocons, etc., should be praising to the skies (and some are, in case you haven’t noticed or grasped the significance thereof). I think the Benghazi business is ridiculous. I don’t think she killed Vince Foster. I never gave one second’s thought to Travelgate.
What I can’t stomach can be documented by the things she’s done publicly, the things she’s openly PROUD of, that are anathema to me and everything I’ve worked for politically since I was a teenager. I am under zero obligation to overlook those things. I weigh them as I see fit. On balance, she’s a horror show. But you can obviously stand at just the perfect angle to her and with a trick of the light convince yourself that she’s not ethically bankrupt, that. in fact. she’s admirable. Be my guest. Have I asked you to prove that you’re SINCERELY what you seem to be to me? No. Why would I? I’m truly convinced that you’re just as you seem. I won’t sleep better if you suddenly summarize my position accurately (particularly since you’re demonstrably incapable of even getting close.
So don’t ask me to pronounce any shibboleths on your account. I’d much rather have you continue as you’ve been doing: getting me absurdly wrong. Because clearly, you can’t refute what I actually say and think by attacking your own outlandish mischaracterizations of it.
LikeLike
MPG,
I thought you were a teacher, who would recognize a student that questions what you are saying but honestly wants to understand it.
And not a teacher who gets thin-skinned and angry if his student doesn’t immediately understand whatever concept he wants to teach.
You misunderstand me. I have been trying to understand what it is you despise about Hillary. I will repeat for the 1,000th time I do NOT want to change your mind. I don’t care about who you vote for just like I don’t really care who a Fox News reporter who is smearing Hillary Clinton with Benghazi is going to vote for. I’m not objecting because I want that reporter to vote for my candidate. I’m objecting because I want him to be truthful in his portrayal of that candidate in news reports because words have power and trying to offer an honest description is important. I don’t care whether everyone at the NY Times votes for Trump. I do care whether they write dishonest caricatures of Clinton that describe her as a monster and can’t defend such characterizations when readers challenge them. Can you please put aside your extreme dislike for me and just try to understand that? You are welcome to your choice to vote for anyone you want. I am not trying to convince you to support Hillary — I am trying to convince you to stop writing about her as if she was the most unethical Democratic candidate in history. Why do I care? Because that is exactly the lie that is convincing many Americans to vote Trump because at least he doesn’t lie as much as Hillary does. I think that lie is dangerous and may very well bring us President Trump.
I wanted to see if you could possibly offer a negative portrayal of Clinton that ALSO accepted she wasn’t entirely unprincipled. You couldn’t. The problems you have with Hillary’s POSITIONS are not why people are voting for Trump. Many of those voters agree with her positions. They are voting for Trump because they believe Hillary is the most unprincipled, dishonest, greedy candidate in either party to have run for president for the last 40 years. You have turned a criticism with her neoconservatism — which I AGREE with — into a wholesale smear of her integrity and honesty as a person.
I naively thought if we had a debate you would say “of course she isn’t evil, she is a neoconservative who will stick to the neoconservative line and I despise that.” And maybe that is ALL that you are saying and I am misreading your posts. Is that your point? I truly do not understand you. I read your posts as you saying Hillary is evil. I’m happy for you to say I am mistaken and you don’t think she is evil. Am I mistaken?
LikeLike
Sorry, NYC, but we don’t have a teacher/pupil relationship, any more than we would have a doctor/patient relationship if I were a psychotherapist. We’re two semi-adults who disagree about much. Your sorry attempt to make my profession an issue (as if I deal with actual students like I deal with people who can’t even be honest about my published words) has been tried online for about a quarter century: it never works and never will. I understand boundaries. You apparently don’t. Another non-surprise in what has become a tediously predictable day of your desperate attempt to accomplish something that I suspect no one understands but you. What would satisfy you? My capitulation to the marvels of Hillary Rodham Clinton? You could be Houdini, Rasputin, and the world’s greatest propagandist rolled into one: you’d walk away disappointed.
LikeLike
^never mind. I see below that you came up with “doesn’t abuse animals”. I guess other than that, Hillary is entirely unethical and corrupt. You’ll find plenty agreement among the Trump voters who can’t wait to “lock her up”.
LikeLike
Okay, now: you’re trying to make it look like I’m bullying someone who is . . . helpless. I made clear in a follow-up to Diane (though it should have been obvious from the post you cite) that I was playing with your silly demands. But I really didn’t think you’d be so transparent as to say, “Oh, yeah, but other than not abusing animals, she’s utterly irredeemable” or words to that effect.
So what would you expect now: I say something else non-negative or even flattering about her, and then you write, “Oh, but other than humaneness towards animals and not punching blind people in the street, you’ve got nothing good to say about her!” and we dance around like that until Doomsday? It was funny once. This second time, it’s getting sad. Once more and it’s turning into punching an unconscious person until their brain starts coming out his/her ears. And my sainted grandmother wouldn’t approve.
LikeLike
There is a difference between saying “Hillary is a neoconservative” and “Hillary is a instinctual liar”. You seem to believe she is both but when I call you out on it, you just keep saying I get it wrong.
If all you have been doing is saying “Hillary is a neoconservative” and I have been misunderstanding you, then I apologize. I mistakenly understood you to be saying she was a corrupt, greedy liar selling out America for a buck. Which is the same thing I hear from all the Trump supporters.
I apologize for not understanding that is not what you are saying at all. My bad.
LikeLike
Hillary is not a neoconservative. I was a neocon in the 1980s and 1990s, and take it from one who knows. She is a liberal. Not a neocon.
LikeLike
I believe that Hillary should be given a chance to govern without being tied to everyone’s suppositions regarding what she will do once elected. I was and am a Sanders supporter!. My biggest fear has been that Hillary would govern like Bill. I didn’t like his rush to the center, triangulation and the further destruction of labor rights under his administration.
I choose to have hope that Hillary has learned a few things in the past few years. I heard some hopeful news regarding who she plans to bring into her administration if she is elected. On the other hand, Trump is talking about bringing in Rudy Giuliani as Secretary of State and Newt Gingrich as his right hand man, or is it the other way around.
Donald Trump is a disgusting, incompetent, lying psychopath. I really can’t believe that there are people here that would vote for such a man.
LikeLike
Can’t see how anyone who would be comfortable with HRC as Sec. of State or POTUS would not feel comfy with Giuliani in that position. If I were Syrian or Palestinian, I’m pretty sure either of those would be very very bad for my health. Bernie Sanders in either office would be much, much better. But then, I’m a dreamer: I imagine a United States that finally grows tired of being the bully of the world who justifies it with a fraudulent appeal to “spreading free democracy” while simply extending doctrines of manifest destiny and American exceptionalism to run roughshod over the “brown, black, yellow, red, and unimportant white people of the globe.”
LikeLike
“Can’t see how anyone who would be comfortable with HRC as Sec. of State or POTUS would not feel comfy with Giuliani in that position.”
MPG I don’t know if you post this sentence just to rile people up or if you really and truly believe it.
But if this is what you truly and honestly believe, then there is absolutely no point in having a reasonable discussion with you. You are welcome to your views. I happen to think that people like you are among the biggest dangers to our society, whether on the left or the right, because they aren’t interested in any nuances. But there are certainly lots of people like you in this country.
LikeLike
Amen!
LikeLike
I’m so disappointed. I used to enjoy dianeravitch.net when it was an education blog. However, it’s become a propaganda machine for liberal Democrats. For the record, there are some Republican teachers out there. It would be nice to talk about education news instead of Diane’s political views.
LikeLike
I agree. I thought Diane hated Common Core and testing, but it is crickets on that now and everything pro Hillary and anti Trump. Nothing about education.
LikeLike
Mom of five,
My education views have not changed. Common Core now belongs to the states. The president can’t abolish it. Governors and state boards and legislatures can.
LikeLike
You are aware that Pence destroyed public education in Indiana?
Thank you Diane. As Michael Moore (he was right about no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq) said, “hope”, solely, resides in Hillary, this presidential election.
Any woman, person of color, government worker (including teachers) student at a state university or, person making less than $100,000 in each of the prior 5 years, is dumber than a box of rocks, to vote Republican.
LikeLike
As someone who wrote multiple blog pieces against the Common Core when most Americans hadn’t clue one as to what it was, and well before the Tea Party put two and two together and got “Obama + Common Core = Commie/Islamist plot to ruin our children” rather than “Obama + $$ = more $$ for the elite,” I think it would be impossible to find the perfect candidate unless you only have ONE issue and choose on that basis alone.
I tried multiple times here back in Primary Days to point that out regarding my support for Bernie Sanders even if he seemed ill-informed about charters, particularly since no one running for POTUS seemed well-informed or likely to oppose them, and he was the most likely to listen to reason. I haven’t changed that view. Hillary and Trump are both going to be disastrous for US education. The problem is, I suspect your opposition to Hillary, like that of many Republicans who started hating her in 1992, is almost entirely for the wrong reasons from my perspective, just as is so much opposition to the Common Core.
Makes it damned difficult to have productive conversations about either. Maybe 1 in 50 people I discuss math education with is willing and able to suspend disbelief long enough to actually listen to and hear my professional views on the subject. I don’t require that anyone bow to my experience, training, or education, but to not even listen because “Obama is trying to dumb down children so he can control them” is just asinine.
So to reiterate a point I used to make regularly, I hate the Common Core, but from the Left. I hate national standardization of education. I don’t like state standardization much more. One of the best things Mao ever said, in a different context, was, “Let a thousand flowers bloom.” Apply that to education and maybe we make a real difference for most kids. But expecting a major US candidate for POTUS or even the US Senate to get that, let alone to run on it? Dream on.
LikeLike
I find this blog, for the most part, open more than most and have a higher level of discussion. There are still plenty of educational issues posted, but I enjoy the election posts as well.
I do find Republican teachers interesting. Republicans have moved away from rational, liberal thought, science, and towards darker emotions, fear, and denial. Gone is the party of family values, strong communities, and ethics. So sad, and a reason I left not too long ago. I do not recognize the party of Lincoln.
LikeLike
Best high school teacher I had was a Republican – a moderate Republican who also led a teachers’ strike the previous year and was the scourge of the establishment GOP in town.
LikeLike
Those were the days…
LikeLike
Thanks for the history lesson. Thank goodness for smart people like you to put us little white people back in our place. Enjoy your day and God bless
LikeLike
My comment was for Michael Paul Goldenberg, not Long Island Teacher. Sorry for wrong posting place!!
LikeLike
Well, my sainted Jewish grandmother, dead more than half a century, always taught me to respect my elders. So here you go, NYC: I am certain that Hillary Clinton does NOT abuse animals. As the owner of five rescue cats, that matters to me.
Can’t say that with confidence about LBJ. Pulling beagles by the ears was shocking. And he couldn’t pronounce “Negro” without sounding like he was trying to avoid saying something more offensive.
FDR cheated on his wife.
Truman was involved with a graft-filled political machine in Missouri.
We good now?
LikeLike
MPG,
When you find a president with no flaws, that would be news.
LikeLike
No, that would be fantasy.
Looking for one who doesn’t lie so instinctually that s/he thinks that’s transparency.
LikeLike
Or did you think my point was to find fault with those men because I am looking for perfect?
I was just trying jape at my antagonist who thinks I excuse everyone’s frailty and foibles but poor Hillary. Or so she keeps complaining. Just thought I would throw her some hush puppies.
LikeLike
“FDR cheated on his wife?”
How about “FDR bombed Dresden and killed thousands of innocents” How about “FDR waged an unnecessary war in Europe and killed countless Americans and foreigners because he thought it would be good for the economy”. How about “Truman dropped an atomic bomb and killed some 140,000 innocents for no good reason except to rattle his saber”. What “bad” thing could Hillary Clinton do that could make her worse?
“Looking for one who doesn’t lie so instinctually that s/he thinks that’s transparency.”
Got it. It’s her instinctual lying. Bill Safire, speechwriter for Nixon, understands there’s Nixon level lying, and there is “congenital lying” like Hillary has where every word she says is dishonest.
After all, that’s what Roger Ailes and Fox News have been telling us for the last year. Some people, like Trump, lie, and some people, like Hillary, lie instinctually. It’s their nature.
It is exactly this caricature of Hillary Clinton that I object to because it is dishonest and dangerous. Saying that Hillary is not the instinctual liar you seem to be alluding to does not mean I think she is perfect. Far from it. But that lie — and that is what it is, a lie — has never been backed up with real facts. I hope this is another one of those apparently non-stop times when I have misunderstood you and you aren’t really saying Hillary lies instinctually.
LikeLike
Have you had neurological tests to try to get at the crux of your reading problem? Whose writing are you responding to when you put my initials in front of these non-responses? Not mine, that’s clear.
This has gone on long enough. Deleting anything else that comes in with your name so I can give the other folks here a break. Good luck with recovering from the mini strokes or whatever disorder is causing your issues.
LikeLike
My apologies, MPG, feel free to “jape” at me all you want and I will do my best not to offend you by replying.
LikeLike