Quote of the day
posted at 9:30 pm on April 25, 2009 by Allahpundit
“Of course, the lack of bipartisanship isn’t limited to Capitol Hill. Obama has taken gratuitous swipes at the Republicans who recently decamped Washington, blaming President Bush for everything from the economy and the war to the lack of sufficient puppies and rainbows. And who could forget the Rush Limbaugh flap — in which Obama’s top advisers, including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, orchestrated a public relations campaign meant to undermine the Republican National Committee chairman, Michael Steele, by framing talk-radio personality Limbaugh as the real head of the Republican Party.
For now, Obama’s back-pedal on the bipartisanship promise just makes him look insincere. But the real consequences of the mistake will be felt soon enough. As Presidents Bush and Clinton could tell him, congressional majorities do change — and at some point, Obama will need Republicans on his side. He’d be smart to spend his second 100 days making up for the serious snubs of his first.”
Update: Contrary to what the Post originally claimed, Palin didn’t say this. See here.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »
I do think it’s true though that a lot of Republicans buy into the siren song every now and then that goes, “This is the most electable candidate the GOP can put forward”, sung by the MSM-types who don’t have the GOP’s best interests at heart, to say the least. The last go-round the MSM was more afraid of Romney, therefore he got bad press and constant harping on his religion and “Is America really ready for a Mormon president?? Hmmmmm???”
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 12:37 AM
It almost appears the Republican Party went PC after 2004 and completely abandoned conservatism. Was this a product of who was in the GOP Congressional leadership or was it simply that the GOP elitists took over the party and as Rush said ‘abandoned the blueprint to landslide victories’.
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 12:38 AM
He is the most consistently conservative Republican we had in the primaries. All others were either moderate – or had flip flopped on the core issues.
They tried to brand Thompson as a flipper on abortion. Thompson’s earlier stances (early 90′s) stated that he was for allowing the States to decide the issue. By definition – that is an anti-Roe position. He also supported heavy restriction on abortions – no government funding, no late term abortions, parental notifications where abortions were performed.
The tactic of the left – in retrospect – was to cut each of the primary candidates off from it’s water supply – the Conservative base. They did this for every candidate that even smelled like a Conservative. They DID NOT do it to McCain but instead – gave him high praise. Clearly, when a liberal is attacking they are attacking someone they fear. When you get their approval – it’s because they want to sucker you into making a bad choice.
This is what happened with McCain. This is how we got McCain.
HondaV65 on April 26, 2009 at 12:40 AM
msm:
I am saying that some of the stuff on talk radio and on TV and on the blogs alienated a lot of the hispanic voters. I am not talking about illegals here, I am talking about American citizens many of whom are not really all that liberal…they were made to feel as if they were looked down upon. I don’t think that most conservatives intended for that to happen, nor do I think they meant any disrepect to other Americans. But that is not how a lot of those folks heard it.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 12:40 AM
I can agree with you on pro-lifer and social conservative. He was a believer in strong national security and he did a fine job of keeping us safe; however, his handling of the wars left something to be desired.
I wish he had been a lot more fiscally conservative. He paved the way for Obama.
I’m not a big fan of NCLB. There’s a reason the D’s like it.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 12:41 AM
But this doesn’t really answer my question. Even if I accept that he was against Roe, that doesn’t mean he was the most conservative.
Also, even if he was the best conservative, he didn’t do a very good job of getting out the message.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 12:43 AM
technopeasant:
I don’t think it was either. A lot of the rank and file Republicans out there are not real far right. That is why they elect people like Lugar, he is not just someone they are forced to vote for, he represents them.
I think the pendulum kind of goes back and forth and it could be that it went a little left in that time. But I think that with the Tea Party protests and all, that it might be going right again.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 12:44 AM
Upstater:
Even if he got out the message, how many real conservatives are there in the country? Most Americans do not consider themselves liberal or conservative to a great degree. It might not be a question of getting out the message, it might be that people were not in the mood to hear it, that it did not resonate with them.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 12:45 AM
Yet despite all of that information in that article, and one can only imagine the Obamage to our country still to be wrought on us, the people of America give him high marks and a near lofty approval rating. Or, so we would be convinced of it’s loftiness.
All but a measley couple of media outlets are in Obama’s pocket and toeing the company line, come hell or high water. So no matter what Obama does, or what Obama says, or what Obama promises or what campaign pledges Obama reneges on, he can do no wrong. Ever.
Except for one or two mass media sources of information, when is the last time anyone has seen or heard ANYTHING even remotely in a negative vein when our Main Stream Media outlets report on Obama and his accomplishments, or especially the lack thereof?
That is all the people get to know about and hear about, and it as all they will ever know and hear about if our top media outlets have anything to say about it.
The recent Tea Party stories and reporters behaviors we witnessed bears true testimony to the elitist media and their unwavering support of their elitist God. It was just a tiny peek in the light of day at our country’s Main Stream Media’s idoltry. There are numerous similar examples to glean from, but the Tea Party’s were extraordinarily revealing. I’d bet that plain and open truth be told, taking into account what we will never see or hear from behind the closed doors, the sewer would be too posh and swanky for our Main Stream Media.
If your idol gives you lemons, make lemon kool-aid.
SilverStar830 on April 26, 2009 at 12:45 AM
I was listening to Sean Hannity this week when a gay man phoned in and had a lengthy conversation with Sean.
It came to light that Sean doesn’t support adoption for gays while the conservative gay man did. But what was striking they didn’t shout at each other over the disagreement, that they stated their positions and decided to agree to disagree.
I have always wondered why more conservative and Republicans can’t take this tone and why every issue appears to be a make and break issue where a certain group threatens to pick up their marbles and go home?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 12:47 AM
Christmas?
Daggett on April 26, 2009 at 12:48 AM
Perhaps, but if you can’t get the base excited, then how are you to expect the base to go out and get the vote.
Further, there are some issues that I think many American’s are very “conservative” with regards to.
Keeping the home front safe and a government that doesn’t preen into the lives of law abiding citizens. I didn’t hear a lot of the later…
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 12:48 AM
No I agree with you on that. He didn’t do well at all with that.
HondaV65 on April 26, 2009 at 12:48 AM
Good point.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 12:50 AM
Upstater:
I do not believe that Bush paved the way for Obama. Obama was going to do what he was going to do no matter what Bush did or said.
Bush did cut taxes and when the Democrats took control of Congress the deficit was $160 billion. It runs more than that in a month now. I hear people say that Bush was not fiscally conservative enough, but he ran deficits right about where Reagan did and most of these same people think he was a fiscal conservative.
In truth, I think that there was a lot of strange things going on in the economy in September and I wonder if we will ever really know what happened. But if any president was told that complete collapse was imminent if he did not do something, I can not imagine any President ignoring that. Imagine the reaction to Katrina when it appeared the government did not act fast enough to save people.
That does not mean I think there should be some nationalization of all sorts of things and no end in sight to money being spent…an emergency is one thing, socialism is another.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 12:51 AM
I can remember when Bush had a 90% approval rating, for a long time he did a good job of getting his message out. He was the same man in 2006 that he was in 2002. Maybe we changed, not him.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 12:54 AM
I understand the emotional reaction to want to do something; however, from history we can observe that such actions tend not to be the best actions taken.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 12:55 AM
Why not counter Olbermann’s challenge to Hannity, and donate $1,000 for every partial-birth abortion in which KO assists (on film, of course)? There are many worthwhile organizations that could benefit, and KO (with footage) could be his own Worst Person Ever.
My checkbook is on standby.
sybilll on April 26, 2009 at 12:56 AM
One of the most overlooked stories on HA occurred on April 16, 2009 when it was revealed that TARP 1 did not work in loosening credit among banks.
Well why did McCain vote for TARP 1?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 12:57 AM
Well, gays can stay if they’re waterboarded daily.
platypus on April 26, 2009 at 12:59 AM
Upstater:
The Democrats do not like No Child Left Behind, in fact the Teachers Unions hate it and disliked Bush for pursuing it.
Bush used that sort of plan in Texas to cut down on illiteracy. It worked well on a state level and so he wanted to try and use on a national level to improve grade school test scores.
This is one of the areas that I think some conservatives are wrong. We have children in inner cities who have drop out rates of 60% or better. That is shameful. Education is very important to most people. Bush might have believed in pushing for higher standards in grade schools, but he also supported school vouchers.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 12:59 AM
Why have conservatives allowed the Left to run the education system over the last 30-40 years without much of a resistance to ‘Bill Ayres’ radicalism in education?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:01 AM
It’ll never get any better until the NEA is history.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:01 AM
Good observation and very good question. That question needs to be answered and resolved soon.
There is little doubt the GOP elitists have taken over the party and are exhibiting the same record of performance they achieved from the New Deal through 1992 as far as congressional elections and the outstanding successes of the Ford, and Bush I (second term) presidential elections. McCain was a solid win for the elitists. They got their candidate, their message, their campaign. THAT was an outstanding success, wasn’t it? They have a ways to go in Congress though, they aren’t quite down to 100 representatives yet, but there’s still time. However, your question is still valid; were there also issues with what the GOP leadership was doing as well.
This has got to be resolved, our republic will not stand if the 2010 elections don’t provide some relief. The USSA will become so entrenched by 2012 that freedom-loving people will need to start looking for alternatives.
AZfederalist on April 26, 2009 at 1:03 AM
Mainly because conservative don’t usually do anything except play defense. They’re too afraid of being called Hitlers. They let the left set the agenda and dictate the rules of the game.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:04 AM
technopeasant:
Well for one thing it is impossible to know what would have happened if they did not pass TARP1, for another it was not supposed to just fix everything like magic, it was supposed to keep the system functioning. I think McCain supported it because the information they were getting lead them to believe that the risk of collapse was too real to ignore. If I remember correctly a lot of conservatives backed doing something as well.
It is like the Savings and Loan bail out years ago. That was limited, it was paid back with interest and it worked. I think that most people would support something like that,but what Obama is doing is way and beyond anything like that.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:04 AM
For decades, few conservatives have wanted careers as public school teachers. And today, how many young conservatives are there who want such a career? I would guess, few.
Why?
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 1:05 AM
ddrintn:
Conservatives do not want to run the education system. They want to leave it alone and because they left it alone, the left moved in.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:05 AM
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:04 AM
But wasn’t the primary intention of TARP to loosen credit or for banks to start lending again to get the economy going or am I wrong about this being the primary intention?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:07 AM
AZFederalist:
I think that is just a way to avoid responsibility. Blame the elitists. But McCain picked Palin and most of the socalled elitists don’t much care for her.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:07 AM
I love Sarah Palin sooooooooooooo much!
She’s never been afraid to go after Ogabe on substance: she wasn’t afraid to before the election (after which McCain would diffuse whatever momentum she had going…) and she’s not afraid to now.
Sarah’s going to run for and win the White House in 2012!
Let’s roll.
Jenfidel on April 26, 2009 at 1:08 AM
Which is what happens when you yield ground: you end up perpetually playing defense.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:10 AM
technopeasants:
The primary reason was that the President and several other heads of state got the word that the financial system was going to collapse, it was seizing up. Money was not moving and a great deal of money was being withdrawn. In fact I read that a DoJ investigation began to try and track down where some of that money was going when it was taken out of the banks. But people were still nervous and that was effecting the system.
And the truth is people are buying houses and cars, it is possible to get loans. I think a lot of the problem right now is fear.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:11 AM
I get the impression that the choice of Palin by McCain was the only thing that did not go right for the Beltway crowd in 2008, except of course not getting more Republicans elected to Congress.
Truthfully if the GOP members in Congress were not such suck-ups to Obama I don’t think that Sarah would have the following she has and her op-ed today wouldn’t have made the impact that it apparently has over the internet.
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:11 AM
Education is one of the areas almost entirely dominated by the left. And this causes enormous damage.
This is not the fault of liberals. It is the fault of conservatives abandoning this field almost completely.
Explanations are not flattering. Is the pay not enough? Do conservatives not like working with children? Are conservatives impatient? Are conservatives poor at teaching?
What is it?
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 1:12 AM
ddrintn:
You see this is my point. Bush comes in and tries to pass legislation designed to improve reading etc among younger students. It requires more of teachers. What do conservatives? complain that he got involved.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:12 AM
Did Bush ever try to address or speak to the Bill Ayres radicalization of education?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:14 AM
Loxodonta:
I agree. I think that conservatives stay away from journalism and education. I would say it is the red tape, but then again they will get involved in the military and they are experts on red tape.
I do not know why they just walked out of the class room.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:15 AM
But that’s not a conservative approach. If it were up to me, I’d do everything I could to bust the NEA and give local and state governments the say in how their educational systems should be run. More unfunded federal mandates is not the answer.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:15 AM
technopeasant:
Did Bush ever try to do what? What was he supposed to do about it? On one hand we say the man can not push for higher test scores and on the other we are saying he should have kicked Ayers out of the school system.
A better question would be why did parents send their kids to those schools. After all, that is their job, their responsibility.
I think that is why a lot of people send their kids to religious schools or even home school them. They want to keep them away from certain people.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:18 AM
I guess I’m asking how did the curriculum get so out of whack with the traditions of America; was there a semblance of white guilt involved that whites simply wanted to sweep its ‘evil’ past under the rug and embrace the multiculturalism of the Left?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:19 AM
I would love to see a group of conservatives, with some financial backing, promote educational careers for conservatives and conservative curricula.
Also, conservative summer camps to deprogram America’s indoctrinated youth and college students. Plus support groups for conservatives trying to survive in liberal academia.
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 1:21 AM
No, people started to become overwhelmed when the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan went south.
Yes, you can argue that the media was biased, but there was a point where they couldn’t say anything… We have to admit that his handling of the wars was not so great.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 1:21 AM
ddrintn:
His way worked. For years I have been hearing conservatives say that we should get rid of the Department of Education. Reagan said that, he was president for 8 years and when he left office it was still there.
There is nothing that says local schools can not work within the confines of something like NCLB and still run their local school systems. Unless of course they want to make not teaching their kids to read and write part of the curriculum.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:21 AM
I can tell you why, it’s money. While the unions have kept teachers progressing through the pay scale there is no reward for being a good teacher economically. Obama thinks he can change that with merit pay but he is going to have a fight with the NEA on that one.
Terrye
Thanks for the explanation, I see what you mean now.
msmveritas on April 26, 2009 at 1:22 AM
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:18 AM
I don’t know if anybody has ever done a study on this phenomenon but I understand because the Left aborts so many babies that it has a smaller percentage of students in school than conservative parents. If this is so why haven’t conservative parents had more influence on the curriculum of a county or state? Again is white guilt a big factor in determining the curriculum of a school?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:23 AM
Kennedy didn’t seem to have qualms about NCLB.
Yes, the unions may not have liked Bush’s version, but now O gets his shot at it.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 1:24 AM
Local schools work within the confines of federal bureacracy, and within the guidlines of unfunded federal mandates. Now teachers all too often are just “teaching for the test”. That is no way to go.
Reagan couldn’t get rid of the Dept of Education, which proves the eternal nature of any bureacracy. Once it’s there, it’s there.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:25 AM
+1
There are some, but there should be more.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 1:25 AM
Upstater:
I think that was part of it, yes, but I also think that once Republicans won in 2004 they were where they wanted to be..and then the drive that had pushed them to win was gone. All of a sudden they wondered if Bush was going to kill us all by selling our ports to terrorists, as if…or if Harriet Miers were a closet liberal, never mind Roberts and Alito.
Then came Katrina and even Michelle Malkin went after the hapless Brown.
Some people say things began to change with the Terri Schiavo incident.
So yes, I think the war put stress on public opinion, but I also think a lot of people began to act more than a little selfish.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:25 AM
*bureaucracy
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:26 AM
ddrintn:
Children are reading better. That is what matters. And if those local schools had been doing a better job of teaching those kids in the first place, there might not have been a need for some sort of testing.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:27 AM
I don’t really think that this is an abdication of responsibility so much as a needed post-action assessment of what happened. A political failure review board so to speak. The fact is that there are two factions in the Republican party, the first is staunchly conservative, but, notwithstanding its detractors, very much supportive of individual freedom and federalist type governance (i.e., a smaller federal footprint with more responsibilities by the states). That is the faction from which people such as Reagan, Goldwater (in his earlier years — not sure what happened near the end), and Newt (at least for the Contract with America, again not sure where he sits now) come. The second is much more statist, just not as statist as the democrats. This group tends to be very heavily Ivy-league educated, more trust-fund inheritance society crowd types who are more business-oriented than politically oriented. i.e., the cream of this crop run major industries, those who don’t do so well at that go into politics. You have the Rockefellers and similar families. They appear to be more interested in making sure that their societal status is not harmed than in strong ideological positions. It is from this faction that we get candidates like Nixon, Ford, McCain, to an extent – the Bushes and representatives like Spectre, Snow, or Collins.
I think where you do have a point is that the conservative faction folded pretty much during the 2006 campaign. Rather than hold candidates to account for their profligate spending by replacing them during the primaries, they simply sat out the election and allowed the dems to win. That is a position I have never understood — even though our guys were doing things with which we disagreed, it was better to let the other side, that would do even more of those things, win? Then, when we let the elitist faction set the primary rules (open primaries) and let them and the media pick the presidential candidate, the 2008 election was pretty much lost. Palin invigorated the base, but it was too little, too late, and with the manufactured crisis in the middle of the campaign, we were cooked.
In this next election cycle, the conservative faction must regain the ability to get solid candidates, must reformulate the message to show that conservatism does not equal fascism or moralism, but that those positions demonstrate the commitment to freedom and liberty for all people in the country. This is going to have to start at the grass-roots level and support for local candidates. It’s pretty obvious that the RNC still has no clue.
AZfederalist on April 26, 2009 at 1:29 AM
I don’t know why. I lived through that period, and never understood “white guilt” or blaming all whites for the actions of some.
However, as a “bleeding heart” conservative, I have done a lot of volunteer work helping disadvantages people. I have rarely met other conservatives in such work.
Conservatives seem to be the “doers” in society, while liberals tend to be the “carers.” Unfortunately, extremist left-wing ideology gives the initial impression of being “caring,” so many liberals get sucked in.
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 1:30 AM
Upstater:
Obama is talking about killing it along with the voucher program just to make the unions happy.
And just because Kennedy worked on it does not mean we have to knee jerk hate it. The truth is Bush did not have the kind of Republican votes that Obama has with Democrats, he had to work with the Democrats. In fact I think they were in control of the Senate when he came into office.
Besides, Bush ran on that. He did not hide it, or pretend he was not going to do it. He said he wanted to be the Education President. And then 9/11 happened.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:31 AM
Loxodonta:
It might be the money. Conservatives do not want to pay for college to be a teacher. But people with a mission will.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:32 AM
What I have long realized that if you don’t really believe in something you will not be able to sound convincing and bring across your ideas.
That Sarah Palin, from the remotest state in the USA (Hawaii is a tourist destination)is considered a major player in GOP politics perhaps reveals how desperate conservatives are to find somebody who really believes in the conservative message.
Is this perhaps the main problem with the GOP-that simply the candidates running for office and getting elected recently are not true conservatives? And if they aren’t why should we be surprised by the policies they advocate or that they suck up to the Messiah?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:33 AM
What about private schools? Does anyone know if there is a higher percentage there? Is the pay better there?
As to merit pay, the problem is educators don’t produce anything that is easily quantifiable, except a pre- and post-instruction standardized test.
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 1:36 AM
Sorry, but I’d have to disagree. I don’t know if reading scores have improved across the board, but making reading scores the criterion illustrates how teachers are under pressure to “teach to the test”. I’m not convinced that NCLB has really had an appreciable effect on the quality of public-school education in this country in the overall sense. I don’t think the situation will improve until the union is no more. The NEA stranglehold is still there, and it will be there until someone has the nerve to take the union on, squarely.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:36 AM
When I was at Evansville, I tried to reason with her to reach out to Obama and the Dems and get on board with the Obamalution. I even brought the kool-aid in a bottle for her.
But, she slapped it out my hands, decked me, and then went totally rogue.
The whole time Todd just stood there shakin his head and grinnin.
Fascists!
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 1:37 AM
AZFederalist:
Or maybe they never tried.
You know I was a kid during the civil rights era. When I was very young I considered myself a Democrat because when I was growing up Goldwater did not support the Civil Rights Act. He put himself on the opposite side of Martin Luther King.
The interesting thing is that without the support of the Congressional Republicans, the Civil Rights Act might not have passed. And there were a lot of southern Democrats who did not support it.
But when push came to shove the end result was that Eisenhower got about 45% of the black vote, but in a decade the black support for Republicans would fall into the single digits.
That is one problem Republicans often have, they can not get out of their own way. They mean well, they are not without principle..but in the end they cancel each other out.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:39 AM
Oh did basement bottom-boy get his wittle feelings hurt?
:(
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 1:39 AM
I have a daughter in college and it isn’t just a matter of paying for an education to be a teacher. Really the unions create a socialist environment, there is no reward for excellence. Obama will not be able to change that without serious problems with unions. Money may not be the only reward in this world but it is a practical consideration.
I did however, encourage her to take something that she could eventually teach. At her age, especially after spending 12+ years in school, I think they can’t imagine spending the rest of their lives in a classroom.
msmveritas on April 26, 2009 at 1:41 AM
Do you see my point? Most of the talk on this thread has been about reading and writing but not what goes into the heads of the students such as ‘America has exploited generations of blacks and minorities’.
Sure illiteracy should be rooted out, but what is disturbing is so many so-called educated people are carrying around with them such radical ideas about America being the villain and that George Bush or Dick Cheney are way more evil than Osama Bin Laden; that not just distorted; it’s perverted. These folks I believe comprise many of the internet trolls and are simply Fascists and very dangerous. Doesn’t anyone wonder how they got this way and what can be done to stop it in its tracks?
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:42 AM
I came across an article by Charles Murray from a few years back that says it pretty well:
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:42 AM
Dude, did you see what was in the bill? Obama has never seriously tried even once for bipartisanship. It’s his way or your unicorn mysteriously dies during the night.
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 1:44 AM
ddrintn:
Yes, kids are reading better.. and what does that have to do with the unions? Conservatives will not even try to become teachers and kill those unions, they just let the same people run the class rooms year after year and then make some comment about getting rid of the unions. Who is going to get rid of them? The locals? Have they ever tried? Has there been some uprising among parents and students against unions of which I know nothing?
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:44 AM
Maybe that rag will last longer than the NYT.
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 1:45 AM
Private school pay is atrocious. It is often poverty level and only a stepping stone to get in the public schools. I think any good principal can tell who is a good teacher without looking at standardized test scores. I have had two kids through the same school system and I can count on one hand who the good teachers were. But the good ones were worth their weight in gold.
msmveritas on April 26, 2009 at 1:46 AM
ddrintn:
I don’t care what Charles Murray says. These people do not come up with ideas to improve education. Do you think that people want a lecture on federalism when they are concerned about their child getting a decent education?
You don’t have better ideas. You just say if it came from Washington it sucks, kill the unions.
Education matters more to more people than immigration does. This is the problem.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:47 AM
There is also no allowance for individuality, creativity, thinking outside the box, innovation, or differences of opinion.
I have had little experience with the public schools. My experience is more in higher ed. There, the culture has become stifling. I don’t know how conservative students, instructors or staff survive it.
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 1:47 AM
The 60′s radical SDS types who became tenured, the New Left mindset that became pervasive, lots of things. If you’re talking about a “conservative” resurgence in education, you’d also have to talk about a “conservative” resurgence in the culture in general — in particular, the popular culture. I don’t see that happening any time soon. Over time, maybe.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:48 AM
It almost appears the worst sin that a conservative can commit is to try to out-bleeding-heart a Democrat or a Leftie. Like Rush says if we stay true to who we are we’ll have a better chance at victory.
I know Rush is looked at with disdain by many Republicans but I wonder if the GOP had taken him up on his suggestions if they would have found themselves in the pickle they are in right now.
technopeasant on April 26, 2009 at 1:48 AM
My God! How much of the kool-aid have you drank? There was NEVER any hand offered.
FCOL, you must be a teenager or something, or a touchy-feely young girl or something.
Get a hold of yourself.
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 1:49 AM
There has been many attempts by leftest to rewrite history and teach it in thee skrewls.
Not enough people have raised the concern meter, except Fox News.
Kini on April 26, 2009 at 1:49 AM
Sorry for not keeping up with the thread…
Yeah, I know he didn’t hide it; however, I think I’ve shifted more to the right. I used to think Compassionate Conservatism sounded great, but I realized that the government does a bad job of pretty much anything be they conservative or liberal… Therefore, I crave my small gov’t.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 1:51 AM
Read the article. It’s from 2006, but it shows how touting test scores can be sleight of hand.
I don’t have “better ideas”, so I’d best shut up and let the bureaucrats do their work? BS. I judge based on performance, and the public school system in this country has absolutely sucked for quite some time now. I may not have definite “better ideas”, but I think we’ve all had a pretty clear demonstration of what NOT to do.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 1:51 AM
Excellence is always unusual in any field, but in most fields it’s at least encouraged.
What are conservatives doing to recognize and reward these teachers? There should be some programs, from pre-school through graduate school, from town to state to national, to encourage the cream to rise to the top of the milk, instead of the scum rising to the top of the pond, as is the current situation.
If conservatives are doing nothing or not enough, it is up to you younger people, and parents to push for it.
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 1:52 AM
I think Miers was a legitimate gripe. If cons hadn’t challenged him on it, they wouldn’t have any credibility.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 1:53 AM
Multiculturalism was certainly a big factor in the decline of education. Educators came to take it as an article of religious faith that all cultures are equal, and there is nothing exceptional about the West in general, or the United States in particular. This became one of those absolute beliefs that causes people to warp their perceptions of reality, to make the facts fit the theory. Since the rest of the world was so obviously behind the United States economically, ethically, and technologically, it became necessary to beat the American system down until it was level with all the others.
From the late Sixties onward, the mission was to find bad things about the West and America to focus on, both in history classes and in fields such as economics education. During the Cold War, it was also considered important to find ways to cut the West down to size in comparison with the Soviet Union, which many top educators were extremely sympathetic to, even when they weren’t outright Communists. This evolved from a nearly subconscious set of prejudices, to open and hostile politics in the public school system. Few of us who passed through grade school in the Seventies could escape a few classes where we were taught the Soviet command economy was at least equal to capitalism, and possibly superior. The bottom line, for the increasingly monolithic and political public education system, was to cleanse all notions of American or Western exceptionalism from the minds of students. Decades of pushing multicultural dogma have led most academics to hold almost exactly the opposite view: they see their own culture as unique primarily in its wickedness.
I think one of the other reasons public education is so slanted against conservative and libertarian views is the academics’ romance with the notion of Great People doing Great Things. This is similar to an even more passionate love affair on the part of journalists. As journalists of the past, academics love the epic tales of towering, charismatic figures changing the course of history. World War II pretty much put an end to the old notion of the mighty conqueror writing his destiny in blood, so the romantic focus shifted to the worship of “progressive” titans changing the world with their fantastically expensive programs.
This is one of the reasons academic leftists love Fidel Castro, with the intensity of a teenager mooning over a pop idol on a poster in her bedroom. The mythology of the daring revolutionary putting the ideas academics cherish into action, sweeping aside an old, selfish order to seize absolute power in the name of “the people,” is breathtaking to them.
On the other hand, conservative and libertarian philosophy offers no such romance – no charismatic Lightworkers using vast government power to “solve” the problems of poverty, health care, economic cycles, and so forth. A philosophy that offers no Great Societies or trillion-dollar nationalization of industries has no heroic narrative to thrill the academic. Most professors dream about a day when they will be asked to ascend to Olympus and use their superior minds to correct the problems of society and construct a utopia, and liberal ideology flatters that belief, by proposing that enlightened leaders of superior intelligence and virtue can administer better, fairer society than millions of dim-bulb peasants going about their business. If conservatives get their way and return all the power from Washington to the states and municipalities, where will Mount Olympus be? How will legendary political heroes rise up and implement the thrilling ideas of academia, if there’s no vast centralized power in Washington for them to wield?
A conservative looks at ordinary people living their lives, caring for their families, and contributing to the wealth of the nation through their industry, with reverence and admiration. A liberal academic looks at such people as ignorant nobodies, and sees no way to write massive, provocative histories about their endeavors. Nobody’s going to win a Nobel Prize writing monographs about a bunch of middle-class non-entities raising a couple of kids and trying to run a small business. Ten thousand doctors schlepping into their offices every morning only becomes a heroic narrative when a bold, progressive President takes control of their industry.
Doctor Zero on April 26, 2009 at 1:53 AM
My daughter definitely feels in the minority and that is very sad. I do think that home has the most influence and neither of my kids bought into the distortions in education. The other conservative students my daughter knows were primarily influenced by their parents.
I agree with your later post, it is up to us parents to push for a reward for conservatives in education. My daughter goes to one of the dreaded ivies and no one goes into education. There is no carrot unless we push for one I guess.
msmveritas on April 26, 2009 at 1:56 AM
With the trolls out in numbers on this one, you know this one hurt the Messiah and his minions.
The reddest of red meat.
It’s like she took down a caribou with a knife in front of us, cut out the heart still beating and let us have the first bite.
How can you not love this gal?
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 1:58 AM
ddrintn:
I have heard the whole thing about doing it for the tests before…because there have always been standardized tests. There were test eons ago when I was a kid. That is the only way to know or gauge improvement.
The point is that by using this program in grade schools teachers have been forced to be more accountable, which is exactly why the unions do not like it.
And I am not telling you to shut up, I am telling you that if and when people want to change this system they can. They have the power to do it, but they expect government to care about public education. They do not consider it an intrusion.
Around here a lot of people just send their kids to Christian schools, they do not even try to change the system. They just opt out because they can.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 1:58 AM
Except that we are to blame for all the ills of the world, for which Obama must apologize to everyone at every opportunity.
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 1:59 AM
This pretty much sums up the modern American liberal movement.
Man can solve problems (man is to be trusted to solve problems).
I’m afraid the Republican party is inching towards this ideology. It’s tempting and “natural” to use phrases such as “The GOP will be able to fix things.” But this is nothing more than the stance many progressives take on their newest hero. The GOP should remain the party of ideas and not “government solutions.”
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 1:59 AM
In my case, during the undergrad years, I camouflaged myself as a moonbat. You learn to b.s. professors and say and write all the correct lefty things. But it IS stifling. I think that during my entire college years I only had 2 professors I would call “conservative”, and they were both Econ profs.
ddrintn on April 26, 2009 at 2:00 AM
I’m sorry that I didn’t see this post till now (having trouble keeping up).
Just the other day I walked by two professors. This is the conversation I heard.
Prof A: He’s a pretty good guy. The only bad thing I can think of is that he’s a Republican.
Prof B: Ah… Yeah, that’s a problem.
McCarthyism is alive and well in our “liberal” institutions.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 2:02 AM
Upstater:
I think the cons said that the president deserved an up or down vote on his nominee, until he nominated someone they had not put on their short list. And then came one of the ugliest and most personally nasty campaigns against a nominee I have ever seen. I can still remember Ann Coulter making fun of the woman for going to a state university and calling her a char woman.
We will never know if Miers might have been up to the job, she was scuttled before she ever had a chance.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 2:03 AM
And you support 50,000,000 murdered babies since Roe vs. Wade become the law of the land.
STFU
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 2:03 AM
Ah! Sorta like conservatives are rooted in reality and liberals are stuck in a Harlequin romance novel.
Kini on April 26, 2009 at 2:04 AM
Perhaps, but then again, she hasn’t necessarily started to shine. Perhaps it was nasty. I agree that some of the nastiness was inappropriate; however, I think we got better Justices in the end…
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 2:05 AM
Except the title is “The Audacity of Hope.”
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 2:06 AM
Upstater:
You got two good justices, and I doubt very much that the same man who nominated Roberts and Alito would have nominated someone he thought was unqualified.
Terrye on April 26, 2009 at 2:06 AM
That’s right, you never told us when. But we all knew you’d be back when Sarah bitchslapped your messiah for his fake attempts at bipartisanship.
Right on cue.
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 2:08 AM
And, word has it that site is doin OK.
Sapwolf on April 26, 2009 at 2:10 AM
I see you got to our national wickedness.
As to the lack of romanticism, this is again a problem inherent in conservatism. It’s almost an issue of temperament. Almost like conservatives are from Mars and liberals are from Venus.
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 2:11 AM
Yeah, but we didn’t get them until after Miers. Further, what about say Gonzales? Guilty or not, he didn’t appear very professional – more like a good ole pal of Bush. I think some of the Bush appointees are nothing to praise as great.
Upstater85 on April 26, 2009 at 2:11 AM
Any time you youngsters can’t keep up with me, makes me feel young and almost functional. So thanks!
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 2:12 AM
If you want something, you have to ask for it.
Loxodonta on April 26, 2009 at 2:15 AM
I beg to differ. Liberals are from Uranus.
:)
Kini on April 26, 2009 at 2:16 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »