A lot of people seem to find Kerry’s manner of speaking to be tremendously amusing. The way he pauses before speaking a phrase in an almost Shatner-esque way. Al Gore did much the same thing.
After three years of Bush, it may be confusing, but…that’s how intelligent people talk. Carol Kalish spoke much the same way.
See, many people just say whatever’s running through their mind, and the phrases often don’t parse as sentences. Just ask anyone who’s ever had to transcribe an interview. In such case, more often than not, a sentence begins in one place but doesn’t end where it should because the speaker has gone off track.
Notice that when Kerry speaks, he usually does so in complete sentences. When he’s pausing, he’s mentally constructing what he’s going to say so that it will track from beginning to end. He considers his words and then uses them. By contrast, Bush just flails. He starts sentences without a clue where he’s going with them, and oftentimes trails off into confusion or dead ends. What saves Bush is that people have come to understand he’s inarticulate and it doesn’t bother them, because many of them aren’t much better, have only a vague grasp of the English language, don’t read much, and get annoyed or intimidated by people who are smarter than they.
Mark this period of time well, folks. Thirty years from now, future generations will look back at what went on in these days with a sense of revulsion and they will ask you, their parents and/or grandparents, how in the world the activities of George W. Bush and his Administration could have been allowed to happen. Bush supporters, be sure to save hardcopy of all your postings because, when you feel embarrassment thirty years hence, at least you can present some sort of explanation as to what the hëll was going through your mind.
PAD
• 
Roger, that’s good. I think that part of the reason that civil discussions are getting so rare is because it’s easy to think about those “other people” in (self indulgently) negative ways when they aren’t folks who have demonstrated their capacity for friendship and love.
Whenever there’s an election and the losing party members staggar around saying dopey things like “I don’t get it…how did this happen? NOBODY I know voted for _________” I have to marvel at the mindset that could possibly end up with only friends of a particular political party.
“And how many fights as a fighter pilot was Bush actually in?
“That was a really ignorant response. You have many but this one was really ignorant.”
And yet no answer was forthcoming…
PAD
Roger, that’s good. I think that part of the reason that civil discussions are getting so rare is because it’s easy to think about those “other people” in (self indulgently) negative ways when they aren’t folks who have demonstrated their capacity for friendship and love.
Whenever there’s an election and the losing party members staggar around saying dopey things like “I don’t get it…how did this happen? NOBODY I know voted for _________” I have to marvel at the mindset that could possibly end up with only friends of a particular political party.
Ding! Ding! Ding! Give the man a prize! I think that’s exactly how we should approach things.
I think there HAS been an unfortunate tendency for people nowadays to group together with only like-minded folks; makes it easy to demonize others. While it’s very apparent in racial matters, it crosses all sorts of political, class and ideological lines. And this encourages a type of thinking that’s not so very different from the people we oppose or are fighting against. Hm. A point in favor of message boards like this.
I think we should be on guard against that kind of group think or monoculture. Recognize that there are things we all agree on (Democracy in Iraq? Goooooood. Abusing prisoners of war? Baaaaaaaaaad) and there are things we can legitimately disagree on (What’s the best way to do this?)
Of course, that doesn’t mean everything has to be sweetness and light…Some of my friends have this amazing ability to really piss me off sometimes….
This is how distortions thrive. This is how lies surpass the truth. This is how Americans get suckered, and this is how GOP spinmakers convinced everyone that Al Gore claimed to have invented the internet and that John Kerry changes his mind on everything (while glossing over Bush’s acclaimed “We shouldn’t be involved in nation building” statement four years ago.) They do it by repeating distortions over and over again (just as you guys did) until everyone remembers the lie instead of the truth.
History may come down against Mr Bush on the war (hëll, I wasn’t crazy about it to begin with, and I’m a Republican who plans on voting for the President again this fall), but don’t succumb to the same temptation you were railing against Steve for, namely ignoring uncomfortable facts when they’re inconvenient. Al Gore honestly did say
“And yet no answer was forthcoming…”
Do you think it is because the question had nothing to do with the topic and was of no importance on establishing Bush’s intelligence?
“Janeane Garafalo opined that, by this point, supporting Bush represents a character flaw. That the only way someone couldn’t admit the Bush presidency is a disaster of global proportions is that they’re simply too stubborn or personally invested to do so. I don’t know that I entirely agree with that assessment, but there’s certainly a grain of truth in it.
PAD”
So Janeane Garafalo is the Democratic Poster child now? I wouldn’t take too much stock into what she says. Doesn’t she equate Bush as being as bad or worse than Saddam?
Maybe she can be Kerry’s running mate.
“The question isn’t why do I have issues with Bush. The question is, why in hëll don’t you?
PAD”
I think he has done a great job as our President. He says he’s going to do something and it gets done. That’s the bottom line.
I am so glad that he was President when we were viciously attacked. I hate to think what would have happened if Gore was President instead.
“The question isn’t why do I have issues with Bush. The question is, why in hëll don’t you?
PAD”
Novafan:
>I think he has done a great job as our President. He says he’s going to do something and it gets done. That’s the bottom line.
The economy, employment, healthcare, finding those responsible for the 9-11 bombings, taking out a country that was on the verge of setting off nukes and revealing them, and resolving the North Korea conflict to name a few….. maybe not so much.
>I am so glad that he was President when we were viciously attacked. I hate to think what would have happened if Gore was President instead.
Possibly utilize the simpathy that the entire worldhad for us and work as a global community to focus specifically on bin Laden and his cronies, revealing them to the world as the weasals that they are.
“I am so glad that he was President when we were viciously attacked. I hate to think what would have happened if Gore was President instead.”
Well, for starters, he might not have stonewalled the concept of a Department of Homeland Security simply because it was a recommendation of the Clinton Administration, and there might not have BEEN a vicious attack.
Certainly Americans wouldn’t be dying in Iraq and the world wouldn’t despise us.
PAD
“The economy, employment, healthcare, … maybe not so much.”
You know what? I was out of work for six months and couldn’t collect unemployment benefits. I don’t blame this on Bush for one second. So you’re barking up the wrong tree if you want to tell me Bush was to blame for our economy and unemployment rate being in the tubes.
“finding those responsible for the 9-11 bombings….. maybe not so much.”
It’s not like we have the Biggest manhunt in the history of the world ongoing right now for Osama Bin Laden is it? He’ll make a mistake one day and be found.
“taking out a country that was on the verge of setting off nukes and revealing them…. maybe not so much.”
I’m guessing you’re talking about Iraq here? Saddam was capable of obtaining Nuclear weapons and would not have had a problem with using them.
“and resolving the North Korea conflict to name a few….. maybe not so much.”
This won’t be so easy since they probably have Nuclear weapons and the capability to deliver them.
“Well, for starters, he might not have stonewalled the concept of a Department of Homeland Security simply because it was a recommendation of the Clinton Administration, and there might not have BEEN a vicious attack.
Certainly Americans wouldn’t be dying in Iraq and the world wouldn’t despise us.
PAD”
And just how many years did Clinton and Gore have in office to get this Department of Homeland Security established? Can you refresh my memory?
hmmm
Then you’re blaming Bush for not having it established before 9/11 because it was a Clinton/Gore recommendation.
Good grief.
“The economy, employment, healthcare, … maybe not so much.”
Novafan:
>You know what? I was out of work for six months and couldn’t collect unemployment benefits. I don’t blame this on Bush for one second. So you’re barking up the wrong tree if you want to tell me Bush was to blame for our economy and unemployment rate being in the tubes.
I didn’t blame him. I was responding to your statement that Bush has done everythig that he said he would. He has not accomplished any of the promises of the things that I listed.
No, Novafan, Peter’s not blaming Bush for not having the DHS in place before 9/11.
He’s just possibly blaming Bush for stonewalling the formation of the department until he could (a) get the union-busting provision in he wanted, and (b) use it as a campaign issue against the very Democrats who helped propose it in the first place. (I may be putting words in his mouth, but if I were in his shoes that’s what I’D have meant by the statement.)
You might want to do a little research into the history of said department before leaping to conclusions.
TWL
I think he has done a great job as our President. He says he’s going to do something and it gets done. That’s the bottom line.
Well, that’s the point. He has NOT gotten it done. The whole Iraq war is a stunning example of incompetence. He MAY have got the job done militarily (remember…the guerilla was seems to be a preconceived plan that Saddam and his loyalists may have planned out earlier), but he’s fallen miserably short on the political and diplomatic end. Judging by his own goals, he’s fallen short in at least two out of three areas.
You’re going to give him a pass for failing two of three areas?
Tim,
While your comments on the dept of Homeland Security make sense, this is what Peter actually wrote:
“Well, for starters, he might not have stonewalled the concept of a Department of Homeland Security simply because it was a recommendation of the Clinton Administration, and there might not have BEEN a vicious attack.”
So it isn’t surprising if Novafan takes away from that the idea that Peter thinks that Bush could have prevented 9/11 if he had established the dept earlier. I wasn’t aware that Clinton had even proposed such a thing. regardless, I doubt it would have had much traction up to and including 9/10.
“Well, for starters, he might not have stonewalled the concept of a Department of Homeland Security simply because it was a recommendation of the Clinton Administration, and there might not have BEEN a vicious attack.”
“So it isn’t surprising if Novafan takes away from that the idea that Peter thinks that Bush could have prevented 9/11 if he had established the dept earlier. I wasn’t aware that Clinton had even proposed such a thing. regardless, I doubt it would have had much traction up to and including 9/10.”
It isn’t surprising since Novafan parrots the Bush line word for word, but that’s not the point. My understanding is that Clinton commissioned a thorough study of the intelligence situation in the United States and that commission came back with a report in the last months of the administration that cited major gaps in communication between the Federal intelligence gathering agencies. The creation of a Department of Homeland Security was strongly urged in order to bridge that gap.
However, Clinton’s administration felt there was simply no time to do so in the brief months left to their administration. So the report for the creation of such a Department, along with some of the personnel who made the report, was handed over to the Bush administration.
Where it was stonewalled. The Clintonians advocating a Department of Homeland Security got absolutely nowhere with the Bush people, who were too busy focusing on Saddam Hussein and overturning every other Clinton initiative they could. The intelligence gaps continued unabated, and it was that lack of communication that has been repeatedly cited as being a factor in the signals for 9/11 being missed.
I never said Bush “could” have prevented 9/11. Indeed, my guess is that it would have happened eventually, but it would be called another date. But he *might* have prevented it if he’d only listened. Instead, after the horses escaped, he closed the barn door and dubbed the barn the Department of Homeland Security. Nice idea. Too bad it wasn’t his, and too bad he didn’t do it sooner.
PAD
Early on, Clinton opted to combat terrorism with a so-called law enforcement strategy, by indicting and prosecuting them in court, but the failure of that was plain to all on September 11. President Bush is not immune from criticism; he held over many of Clinton
Could someone explain to me why PAD hates blind people and thinks they’re stupid?
It’s not like we have the Biggest manhunt in the history of the world ongoing right now for Osama Bin Laden is it? He’ll make a mistake one day and be found.
Too bad Bush took away resources from that manhunt for Operation Fix Daddy’s Mistake and only restored those resources when he realized there was an election. Maybe they would have found him by now.
You liberal elitists are all such intellectual heavyweights. According to your comments, what makes a President great is determined by their ability to speak articulately. Well, Adolf Hitler was a tremedous speaker. Perhaps you would like to express your admiration for him? I also find it funny how the majority of intelligent educated people will vote Bush and the majority of uneducated victims (who need free handouts and don’t understand the concept of actually working hard in life) will vote Kerry. Wow – your insightful opinion is so revolutionary! It’s just exciting!
Rick:
>You liberal elitists are all such intellectual heavyweights. According to your comments, what makes a President great is determined by their ability to speak articulately. Well, Adolf Hitler was a tremedous speaker. Perhaps you would like to express your admiration for him?
The man wasone of the world’s greatest monsters, but he knew how to work a crowd. One of his shortcomings was that he was fanatical in his drive, spread his army out too far, and alienated most of the world. Sound familiar?
Had Hitler not sent off a huge percentage of his troops unprepared, only to have them freeze to death in the winter wasteland of the Soviet Union but had he spent more time planning and listening to consult more than he did, he may well have come closer to accomplishing his goal.
Before anyone comes to the conclusion that I’m stating that George is as cold-hearted and murderous as Hitler was, I’ll state clearly that this is not my point. You are right though… he sure aintas articulate.
>I also find it funny how the majority of intelligent educated people will vote Bush and the majority of uneducated victims (who need free handouts and don’t understand the concept of actually working hard in life) will vote Kerry. Wow – your insightful opinion is so revolutionary! It’s just exciting!
Wow….. talk about insight.
“Had Hitler not sent off a huge percentage of his troops unprepared, only to have them freeze to death in the winter wasteland of the Soviet Union but had he spent more time planning and listening to consult more than he did, he may well have come closer to accomplishing his goal.”
Another blockade in the Nazi path, thank heavens, was Hitler’s tendency to micromanage his military’s technology. The Messerschmitt Me-262 should have been the world’s first practical jet fighter, and given the Nazis control over European airspace – but Hitler insisted it should be a bomber as well, which slowed development enough that by the time the first 262 took to the skies, it was too late to turn the tide.
I kind of liked David Brin’s response, when asked to contribute to an anthology of “what-if” stories about the Nazis winning WWII. “I couldn’t come up with a plausible way it could have happened, because the Nazis were just such *schmucks*!”
As an aside, Fred – sometimes it’s better not to feed the trolls, ya know? 🙂
I also find it funny how the majority of intelligent educated people will vote Bush and the majority of uneducated victims (who need free handouts and don’t understand the concept of actually working hard in life) will vote Kerry. Wow – your insightful opinion is so revolutionary! It’s just exciting!
I find it funny that you assume that this is true without a shred of proof to support it.
And for the record: I have a Master’s degree (educated) and two jobs plus I help my wife with her business (work hard for a living), I’ve never in my entire life been on any kind of public support (no free handouts), and I’m not voting for Bush because he’s proud of being uneducated (C student who never reads), has never worked hard for anything in his life (had everything handed to him), and the only successful business he ever ran was a baseball team that was heavily subsidized by the taxpayers (free handouts).
Posted by Rob S. on May 7, 2004 09:57 AM:
“Tim,
“Where would you go? Seriously?”
Now, obviously I’m not Tim, and this is only tangentially related to the main topic, but I’ll comment on it anyway… Do the questions above mean that you seriously couldn’t consider living in any other country than America? (Which is where I assume you live, Rob.) Not even Britain? If so, why is that?
This just fascinates me, because I see this attitude a lot in individual Americans’ views: that America is all they really know about and all they’ve ever cared to learn about. (I’m simplifying a bit for the sake of discussion.)
Not saying it’s true in all cases, of course. In the time I’ve been attending university, for example, we’ve had three visiting American lecturers, including Professors Hugh Malafry and Robert DiGiulio. The former in particular, though currently living in America as far as I know, has traveled a lot and seemed capable of genuinely appreciating the different hues and colors of living offered by countries other than the U.S.A.
Still, the isolationist attitude is more prevalent in America than in other “Western” countries. Even the trying times your country – and by extension (given its influence in world politics) the rest of the world – is currently facing hasn’t changed that. Not yet, anyway. (Tim isn’t the only American I’ve recently seen express reservations about continuing to live in the U.S. if things keep getting worse.)
On that, I’d just like to say that it greatly relieves me to know that there are a lot of people like Peter David and Tim Lynch, people with integrity, intelligence, and independently considered opinions, among the voting public over there.
Hopefully there’ll be enough to turn the tide.
Simo,
Turn the tide of what, exactly?
Karen,
You have made some specific claims, some repeatedly, and i was wondering if you could be specific regarding the following:
1.) How exactly has Bush harmed the environment?
2.) What control/responsibility does any president really have over the economy. Or as a Japanese businessman was famously quoted as saying during the Election 2000 hubbub, “What’s the big deal? It’s not like they’re replacing Alan Greenspan:)
Karen and Tim,
Regarding education, Bush has been decidedly LEFT of the political spectrum.
1.)The No Child Left Behind Act increases the Federal commitment to education from 10% to 14% of all education spending (That still leaves a whopping 86% of spending to states and local municipalities, a vast number of which decline to spemd adequate dollars for education. maybe you should be mad at them.)
2.) Secretary of Education Rod Paige was quoted as saying, “After spending $125 billion of Title I money over the last 25 years, ‘for the disadvantaged,’ we have virtually nothing to show for it.”
But what did Bush43 do? he signed legislation that extended the life of and provided more funds for the Title I program! The bášŧárd!
3.) The Right has been more than a little upset about Bush’s leftward tilt on education. Bob Noval quoted an unnamed Republican congressman as saying, “We always knew that…(Bush) would go left on education, but that is a small price to pay for a president who is pro-life and pro-defense.”
Everyone,
There have been many posts here that have people claiming they support our troops, regardless of whether or not they support the war.
We now all have a chance to put our money where our mouth is.
Dave Cockrum, the oft-overlooked father of the modern X-Men, is currently lying in a hospital seriously ill, with double-pneumonia and a host of other problems/infections he was susceptible to because of his diabetes.
Sadly, this Vietnam War veteran struggles to breathe from an oxygen tank and, as his creations generate hundreds of millions of dollars, he is unable to afford any medical treatment beyond what the government grants him as a veteran.
If you would like to donate to help defray the cost of medical expenses for this man who served his country honorably and gave us all hours of entertainment, please send checks to:
Dave Cockrum Fund
c/o Wizard entertainment
151 Wells Ave.
Congers, NY 10920
Thank you.
Jerome Maida said:
“The No Child Left Behind Act increases the Federal commitment to education from 10% to 14% of all education spending (That still leaves a whopping 86% of spending to states and local municipalities, a vast number of which decline to spemd adequate dollars for education. maybe you should be mad at them.)”
The Wisconsin Attorney General has filed suit against the No Child Left behind Act, claiming essentially that it is what it is — an attempt by Bush to look as if he’s Doing Something About Education (to make lefties happy) without actually Doing Anything [like spending real Federal money] (to keep the Right Radicals happy.
Like most such compromises, it has actually mostly succeeded in ticking off both sides.
Also, you said, about Dave Cockrum:
“Sadly, this Vietnam War veteran struggles to breathe from an oxygen tank […] he is unable to afford any medical treatment beyond what the government grants him as a veteran.”
I wish that i could contribute something, but i have problems of my own; while my own situation is not *quite* so dire — i’m merely about to lose teeth if i can’t register with the VA and get some help — it hurts me (as it usually/always does) to see a veteran who fought for his country in such straits.
But it’s an all-too-common situation to find someone who contributed so much (and made so much money for others) in a bad way for lack of money — a few years back Dave Guard had to auction (or maybe raffle) the banjo he’d played on most of the original Kingston Trio albums for similar reasons.
Ah, well.
PAD said: “Actually, I’ve said the exact opposite, repeatedly: That Kerry is likely going to lose.”
Zogby (is that his right name and spelling? The Pollster), is saying that it looks to him like this is Kerry’s election to lose, not Bujsh’s to win.
And Bush Minor’s ratings are slipping lately…
Jerome,
1) Well, how about if you go to this website and see their take on the issue. The Sierra Club is hardly a bastion of liberals.
http://www.sierraclub.org/petition/strategicignorance/
2)The man in that position sets the tone and has an agenda. Bush has pushed through many bills that have impacted the economy. But I also blame congress. Not just Bush. The economy under Clinton was vastly better than what we have now, although there were numerous things I wish he’d done differently, including NAFTA. Part of it is the people he has advising him and carrying out directives.
I would also like to point out that I rarely single Bush out directly. On most occasions I criticize the whole administration. Now, of course, that is composed of his appointments. But do you really think that the people at the top of our government are the best and brightest, capable of bringing this country to new heights?
Next Post
The No Child Left Behind bill has put unrealistic expectations on schools and was never fully funded. There is some thought that it was set up so that public schools would fail, thus bringing school vouchers back into the discussion, even though most people vote against them. If a school doesn’t show improvement it loses funds. And the children are able to go to different schools. How is this different from vouchers? How is this ever going to help improve the schools that need the most help? Testing and the resultant scores are an integral part of showing improvement, so now we have teachers teaching the tests. How is this helping to bring quality education to our children? We have had many studies that have the solutions to education problems. Smaller classes and more individual attention. Instead of intricate and complex bills, why not go with the simple answer?
Bryans said: “Yes I see how much like Clinton Kerry is, he thinks about what he is to say and presents it in an articlulate, intellegent manner….
“It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.”
Yep, Just Like Clinton”
Of course, that remark has been distorted by that great Republican rhetorical method, Quoting Out Of Context — it was, unfortunately for Clinton, an example of how the mind of a smart-ášš good-ole-boy Rhodes scholar works; granted, it is question-dodging, but whoever formulated that question absolutely screwed up and left it wide open..
Essentially, Clinton was pointing out that, by strictly interpreting the meaning of the word “is”, he could give an answer, that, while not false in that context.
Here is Clinton’s exact testimony that includes the infamous quote: “”It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the–if he–if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not–that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement….Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.””
Here are the latest poll numbers on the race and concerning our soldiers:
1.) Bush’s Approval rating is a dangerously low 46%, yet the race is still a statistical dead heat. Which points out two things:
A.) It is pretty pathetic that Kerry hasn’t found traction yet. Bush almost certainly can’t have a WORSE three months than he has just had. We’ve gone right from the Commisiion Hearings to the struggle in Fallujah to the prisoner abuses, and kerry still can’t pull away. Part of this may be the aforementioned have sucked all the oxygen out of his message as well. At acouple events last week, when he was supposed to be focused on his education message, all the questions were about the prisoner abuses, and those are tricky questions to answer without pìššìņg a lot of people off.
Of course, there’s also:
B.) Bush better get his act together, and fast. The fact that he is an incumbent and his opponent thus far has gained little traction in the polls, and yet he is STILL in a dead heat, well…it’s not good.
First, the state of the union speech was going to get him off to a flying start. It bombed.
His press conference, while it helped him a little, was hardly triumphant.
Or, to lose a baseball aanalogy, it’s one thing to have a bad start, but there comes a point where it can no longer be considered a “bad start” and becomes a “bad season”.
2.) According to CBS, 58 % of Americans still support the war itself
3.)Asked about what America has done in Iraq:
Overall, 49% feel proud; 29% feel ashamed
Among Republicans, 76% feel proud; 9 % feel ashamed
Among Independents, 45% feel proud; 31% feel ashamed
Among Democrats, 27% feel proud; 46% feel ashamed
Those poll numbers aren’t nearly as “pathetic” for Kerry as one might think.
This time in 1980, Carter’s approval ratings were around 40%, yet matchups with Reagan had a dead heat.
This time in 1992, Bush Senior’s ratings were somewhere in the 30’s or 40’s, yet he was 5-10 points up on Clinton in most polls.
Given past elections, the numbers about Bush directly and about what voters think of the country’s direction are a lot more predictive than any set of head-to-head numbers.
TWL
Ham said: “”Really this Bush is dumb Kerry is smart agruement is weak. Very weak. Both graduated from Yale and Bush has an MBA from Harvard and knows how to fly a jet. If you think thats easy ask any fighter pilot on long they had to study before they even looked at a jet.”
And how many fights as a fighter pilot was Bush actually in?
That was a really ignorant response. You have many but this one was really ignorant.
What does how many fights he has been in have to do with his intelligence?”
Very little. (How many he had survived, on the other hand, might have some relevance.)
His fitness to command the military, perhaps a lot.
John Kerry was trained as a Naval officer and a riverboat commander, and received medals.
Bush stopped showing up for physicals and got grounded, then was transferred to another unit where, apparently, he mostly showed up to get free dental care.
I know which this ex-Navy, Viet Nam vet prfefers, and it isn’t the one occupying the Oval Office at the present time.
Karen,
First, never for a moment think that I consider vouchers to be a panacea. But some remarks you make/ “problems” you cite seem to defy common sense:
1.) What, exactly, are “unrealistic expectations”?That a high school diploma actually means something again? That children know how to read and write? Why shouldn’t we EXPECT the BEST from our children? To expect less from children in poorer neighborhoods, is as Bush says, the soft bigotry of low expectations.
2.) “If a school doesn’t show improvement, it loses funds”
Yeah, what’s the problem there? Seriously, why shouldn’t schools have motivation to improve, and why should they continue to get funded at the same or greater levels when what they’re doing isn’t working?
3.)”The children are able to go to different schools”
Again, what’s the problem? Why SHOULD a child be stuck in an underperforming school. The public school monopoly is a big part of the problem. Kids can’t go anywhere else in their district, so why do schools have to knoock themselves out. They get money regardless of whether the kids are learning or not. If you buy a car and it sucks, you can always take it back and buy another car. Monopolies that stifle competition ae NEVER a good thing. I’m pretty sure you agree with this in regard to business, so why would you support a monopolistic school children.
For the record, Karen, I do support smaller class sizes and a LOT more funding. To me, education is the foundation on which individuals can achieve the American Dream and empower themselves. By the same token, quadruplibg the education budget will still do no good (hey, those smug parents of suburban kids, well, if thir schools were doing SO MUCH better than poor schools, as a NATION we wouldn’t lag so far behind – read dead last – in other countries in math, science, reading, civics, etc.The poor districts aren’t skewing the results THAT much) if we don’t do away with corrupt school boards, unaccountable teachers’ unions, and the idea that giving a child a poor, honest grade is somehow worse than sending him or her off into the world with a diploma that means nothing.
Jerome,
Traditionally the challenger in any presidential election is an “unknown” to the public until the nomination is officially made at the convention. Right now the numbers reflect what people think about Bush. Once Kerry accepts the nomination and states his positions, not to mention picking a VP, the numbers will start to be more about him than Bush. Interestingly, there was an article in the Seattle PI today talking about a Kerry-McCain ticket. McCain says it will never happen, but wouldn’t that turn the election upside-down? McCain would not have to switch parties, either.
Tim,
You miss my point. I’m saying that neither candidate has been able to take advantage of the weakness of the other thus far.
Excet Nader, who has grown from 4 to 7 percent, and who of course gets no air time as a result.
The unrealistic expectations include special needs children in the overall test scores. That will bring the average for schools with decent special needs programs down, while schools that don’t have much of a program can keep their average high. I’m talking about the implemantation of a flwed bill. I certainly think actual educational standards should be high. I don’t think teaching to the test, which is the result of test oriented funding is the answer.
If a school is in trouble, just like a student, it needs more attention, not less. We need to work to get it up to speed, not cut it’s funding.
Underperforming schools are in poorer areas of the country. So, shall we write off these schools and bring over-crowding to others, or work to improve them.
Teachers get into teaching because the want to teach. My sister works in the Philadelphia school system and has to use her own money to buy supplies for the children. Teachers care about their students. If they actually got enough funding, maybe we wouldn’t see so much burnout and the good teachers would stay in the schools. And it is one of the resposibilities of government to educate children, because unless you have that, then only those with money get an education.
“implemantation of a flwed bill”
Should be flawed.
Karen,
Yes, having McCain on the ticket would definitely shake things up. I would welcome it, actually. I would look forward to an exchange of ideas and having the best man – who I feel is Bush, win.
See, I am not 100% beholden to either party’s ideology. Mst of these threads hae been on the war, and i do support that, so it may seem I tilt totaly to the right. And I do normally support Republican candidates. But I mainly have a strong sense of two things: justice and personal responsibility and freedom. I don’t like “welfare queens”, but I don’t support corporate welfare either. I don’t like those who try to divide us by race, but I don’t like those who try to divide us by class either (which is why Gore’s “people vs. the powerful” B.S. really turned me off). I don’t like Big Business being subsidized by the government, but I don’t like tons of money being shoveled to failed, counterproductive bureaucracies either.
And I feel schools should be fully funded and there should actually be more of them. I don’t think the way we fund schools is fair, but I don’t think it is fair to keep a child trapped in a bad school with bad teachers either.
BTW, have you ever read “Savage Inequalities” by Jonathan Kozol (or any of his other books). It changed my opinion on education forever. Whether you consider yourself liberal or conservative, you must have rocks in your head and in place of your heart if after reading that book you don’t feel that SOMETHING has to change.
No, Jerome, I’m not missing your point. I’m pointing out that historically, NO challenger has especially strong numbers six months ahead of the election, and thus that your point is flawed.
TWL
a teacher who thinks NCLB is the biggest load of horses**t education policy has seen in years
Karen,
Okay. The special needs thing I understand. But the truth is there are bad teachers, and bad schools. Why not use the money you’re giving a bad teacher to a good one and give him/her a raise for doing a good job. I once had a teacher tell me to my face i was going to fail her class. And i was on scholarship to the Catholic School I went to.She did this to many students. She did this because she only wanted the ‘quick learners. Heck, having a classroom full of A students made her look good. And it would be one thing if she said, “If you don’t buck up, you’re going to fail.” It’s quite another to tell someone they don’t have the capacity to learn. And she did this with fairly bright students! My brother is seven years younger than me, and one of his classmates dropped out of her class because he couldn’t learn in her class and it was going to cost him a college scholarship! And I would be the first to say if I just didn’t apply herself, but i asked her for help multiple times and she Inever did. the The ironic thing is, since i was on scholarship, I was invited with students in my class to a district-wide math contest. On the way there, one of my friends – his mom, drove us to the contest. She was a teacher at the public school, and on the way just said a couple of things and all of a sudden everything clicked. I FINALLY UNDERSTOOD ALGEBRA II! Because she actually took a couple of minutes to explain what i had been getting confused with. I finished second among kids in my class – all of whom were getting better grades than me – at the contest. All because a teacher who cared did what the person whose job it was should have been doing.
Teaching.
The next year, after being pìššëd that I got a 94 on my final and was therefore eligible to take Calculus, I was mocked for thinking of entering the math contest again by this teacher and told i was going to fail. I finally decided it wasn’t worth it and withdrew.
This teacher now teaches at the public school and makes more money in a year than I ever have, and from what I understand she still teaches the same way.
That is NOT RIGHT!
It is our government’s responsibility to educate our children. every child deserves tha foundation.
But for that to happen, the Right has to be willing to open the purse strings, and the left has to be willing to address the failures of the school boards, teachers’unions and bad schools. Again, if money were the only answer, why are suburban students doing porly in relation to other nations also?
Tim,
Well, that “horses**t” policy can’t smell any worse than the odor of constantly finishing at the bottom in comparison to other nations in important subjects, or children protesting a priate company taking over some of the Philadelphia school district’s schools by staging a protest, with signs in which they misspelled words like….school. (“Skul” was the prefeered spelling in many cases).
I’m pretty sure you’re an inteligent and caring teacher, Tim. But it’s ironic that conservatives, who are always blated for wanting to keep the status quo, are the ones who are at least trying a different approach, while the Left doesn’t want to change the system in any significant way.
You have no idea how difficult it is to resist pointing out the three — no, wait, four — spelling mistakes you had in a five-line post about education…
TWL
who again sees the “the Left” being referred to as a monolith and has decided to start laughing rather than objecting
I wrote earlier:
“… I’d just like to say that it greatly relieves me to know that there are a lot of … people with integrity, intelligence, and independently considered opinions … among the voting public over there.
“Hopefully there’ll be enough to turn the tide.”
And Jerome Maida posted:
“Simo,
“Turn the tide of what, exactly?”
As subtly implied in my message, the tide of spreading irresponsibility, willful ignorance, media illiteracy, and disinclination for independent thinking. Regardless of who one is voting for, these are the real threats to America today.
They would be real threats to any nation, of course, including my native Finland, given the right climate to thrive in. Only in no other Western country are they in fact as acutely pervasive as they are in America right now.
Tim: You have no idea how difficult it is to resist pointing out the three — no, wait, four — spelling mistakes you had in a five-line post about education…
It says that computer users have gotten way too used to spell-checkers. I was one of the more literate students in school and one of the better spellers, but computers have made me lazy (or is that “made me more productive”).
Tim,
You know, I don’t think I’m the only poster who, in typing fast, has had words come out wrong. For the record, “preferred”/”private”/”intelligent”/”blasted”/. I know they had been typed incorrectly. I’m going to Philly in a couple of minutes and had to finish my last post in a hurry. Silly me, I thought you would actually respond to the substance of what I had to say rather than focusing on that.
I even complimented you personally, yet you choose to ignore it and focus on me allegedly characterizing the Left as a monolith.
I actually in my recent posts to both Karen and yourself, have detailed steps i think both conservatives (The Right) and the Left need to do to truly improve education.
But in this case, I do feel the Left is more a protector of a status quo, and the Right would be much more agreeable to doing its part and removing its objections if there were systemic changes in place and the feeling wasn’t that it was simply throwing more good money after bad.
So laugh all you want. I really don’t find the current state of education in this country to be that funny, however.
And to be honest, Tim, by now I expected better from you.
Jerome,
You know, I don’t think I’m the only poster who, in typing fast, has had words come out wrong.
Oh, certainly you’re not — but the irony of such a large density of mistakes in a post about education was sitting there with a neon sign begging to be commented on. I should think it’s obvious by now that I don’t normally post spelling flames.
(Saying “oh, I had to post in a hurry before heading off somewhere” is never a good argument, however. If you can’t do it properly in that short time period, then wait to make the post in the first place. In a written medium, you ARE your words.)
you choose to … focus on me allegedly characterizing the Left as a monolith.
Allegedly? When you say “while the Left doesn’t want to do X”, there’s really no “alleged” about it: that IS a monolithic characterization, without question.
As for the substance, I don’t think there’s much need for me to respond. Karen is doing a perfectly good job doing so, and I’ve other fish to fry (such as, for a relevant example, tackling some of the mountain of grading I have sitting near me). When you actually do post detailed suggestions (as opposed to the one-sentence sound bites you’re claiming are such), however, I’ll certainly give them a look.
TWL
Tim,
Thanks for the compliment.
Jerome,
You’ve said that the right is willing to try new things. What they want to do is make sure government money goes to private schools. Private schools should continue to be financed by those who wish to send their children there. Not with my tax dollars. Why do you think the left wants to keep the status quo? We want good educations for our children, too. It is possible that when my daughter gets to kindergarten, that by scraping the bottom of the barrel and cuting out all luxuries and entertainment, that I could send her to a provate school. I have even been urged to do so by some family members so that she will recieve the best education. (She is very smart. Not “I’m going to college when I’m 12”, but she should be one of the more intelligent kids.) I believe in public schools, though and would like to address what’s wrong and work toward fixing those things. It’s very easy to blame the teachers and school boards, but that is not a solution. Smaller classes with more individual attention would see a drastic improvement. Whenever that is implemented learning increases exponentially. And those suburban schools you keep decrying that get all the money and are able to limit class size are the reason the averages are as high as they are. We need to hire more teachers and build more schools. We need to make sure our teachers are paid comensurate with the importance of their job. Now, if you think that’s just my leftest view to throw money at the situation, I guess you are right. But I think that is the only way we are going to be able to make our schools competetive with other countries. I’m sorry about your experience with that teacher, and I have had some that weren’t so great, but most people who teach know they will never get rich. They go into teaching because they either have a love of learning, teaching or kids. They know that their job is important, even when they don’t get the support they deserve. In todays climate of fear in our schools, it is especially difficult for teachers to go in day after day. Yet, they do. If we gave teachers the attention and respect that we give sports figures, perhaps this country would begin to turn around. Our priorities are pretty screwed up right now. Education is just being used as another political battlefield and until that stops nothing will change.