The Teachers Are Not Okay

AP Photo/Matt Rourke

Linda McMahon, WWE maven and former Small Business Administrator in the first Trump administration, is in the Senate hot seat today for the start of her confirmation hearings as the nominee to head the Department of Education.

Advertisement

This is another chance for Democrats to trot out the 'hostage puppy' card (a really clever phrase I just heard yesterday) [Beege notes: Y'all in the comments reminded me of National Lampoon's Buy This Magazine].

There is a tactic that I call the “hostage puppy.” A group spends much or most of its time and money in horrible, counterproductive ways, but they are also keeping an extremely cute and vulnerable puppy alive. If anyone tries to cut their funding or shut them down, they wheel out the puppy, show its soulful eyes to the cameras, and explain that if their budget is cut or they are shut down, the cute little puppy will die. 

The puppy takes many forms and can be more or less literal.

...Maybe the puppy is some important service that people rely on, which, when a budget is cut, is shut down first, in order to inconvenience the greatest number of people to cause pressure for restoration of service.

... The puppy can take many forms, but the common theme is that if you try to fix or shut down the failing organization, everyone will learn you’re a puppy killer. Surely you wouldn’t want to be a puppy killer?...

Advertisement

It's brilliant, and I am stealing it and using it forever.

Democrats are already emotively slinging with abandon for all they're worth in the few snippets I heard on the radio, as McMahon is basically interviewing for a department Trump has already said he wants to eliminate.

This is a custom-made set-up for traditional Democratic 'What about the CHILDREN?' gaslighting.

They also have their dedicated nutcases in the hearing room audience to add some extra punch to the proceedings.

What came first, the teacher or the egg...head?

If anyone needs convincing that DoEd should be terminated, let them shriek away.

McMahon was cool as a cucumber - she always is. I would be too if I had this guy sitting right behind me covering my six.

Advertisement

Scream away.

And, yeah - with Democrats losing their cookies over FOR THE CHILDREN, you have to know there are oodles of cash involved that have shown little to no return for the taxpayer. 

Then McMahon flat-out said so.

God bless America. Where does all that money go?

I kind of have a good idea as another person is whining about the cruelty of STARVING CHILDREN by closing the DoEd even as she rakes in buttloads of government lucre for her teachers' union.

And again, with the hostage puppy - that confirming Linda McMahon and advancing Trump's plan to get rid of the department would starve poor children. 

Only they don't actually feed children. The Dept of Education has nothing to do with meal programs.

WHO NEEDS FACTS WHEN IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN

Advertisement

McMahon was stalwart in her defense of Trump's plans to, at the very least, condense the sprawling department and return some of its functions to 'the local level.' As she put it, they both feel there are some decisions that belong closer to the children in the community than one-size-fits-all diktats from D.C.

Gracious. Heads exploding.

There will be plenty more if she gets confirmed.

...Up until recently, not much was known about McMahon's policy positions on education. But in January, AFPI shared more about where she stands: McMahon supports "parental rights in education," the expansion of school choice beyond district boundaries, career and technical education programs, and prioritizing "evidence-based learning" in core subjects like math and reading. She opposes "political indoctrination in classrooms," and "one-size-fits-all education models." More broadly, McMahon aims to uplift local control of schools and reduce "the Federal Education Bureaucracy."

Two former education secretaries - Bush and Obama secretaries - weren't quite as worried as senators and the shrieking teachers from the peanut gallery appeared to be. In fact, one was downright sanguine, noting that McMahon's business experience and reputation for being a consummate professional would serve her well.

Advertisement

...[Margaret] Spellings says some downsizing could have its benefits.

"I'm not hearing anyone say, 'We need to abolish Title I, we need to get rid of Pell Grants.' So it's a matter of who is best to manage those programs. Where should they live? How can they be most accountable to the taxpayers and citizens and students, in this case, of our country? And I think that's a worthy discussion."

But [Arne] Duncan worries shrinking the department could mean losing a wealth of knowledge from career staffers.

"Their advice, their guidance was just extraordinarily helpful," he says.

"The execution, the implementation of ideas, you sort of can't do it without the career staff."

For Spellings, McMahon's background as a business executive and in the federal government has prepared her well for the top education job in the country. She says a background in education isn't necessary to lead the department effectively.

"The Department of Education is not a school," she says. "It's a bank. It's an advocate. It's a relationship partner with states, localities, the Congress. It's a policy shop."

Duncan does have concerns about McMahon's lack of education experience, but he notes, "there are people with far more experience in education who could be much more disastrous than she."

And the teachers McMahon was advocating for in her opening statement might have a chance to really do some good work - to be alright...

Advertisement

...instead of being silenced by the lunatics now running the asylum. 

These people are not right.






 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
David Strom 2:00 PM | February 18, 2025
Advertisement