so- the Sec Ed nominee is big on standardized testing, and the Sec Ag is a big GM crops proponent...

[dysfunctional press]

didn't our side WIN the election...? :shrug:


Duncan
http://www.gregpalast.com/update-obama-slam-duncans-education/

...The problem with Duncan is not party affiliation. The problem is education philosophy. And Duncan is a Bush baby through and through, a card-carrying supporter of the program best called, "No Child's Behind Left."

At the heart of the program is testing. And more testing. Testing instead of teaching. When tests go badly, the solution is to push the low-test-score kids to drop out of school. If triage isn't enough, then attack their teachers.

Here's how Duncan operates this Bush program in Chicago at Collins High in the Lawndale ghetto. Teachers there work with kids from homeless shelters from an economically devastated neighborhood. Believe it or not, the kids don't get high test scores. So Chicago fired the teachers, every one of them. Then they brought in new teachers and fired THEM too when, surprise!, test scores still didn't rise.

The reward for a teacher volunteering for a tough neighborhood is to get harassed, blamed and fired. Now THAT'S a brilliant program, Mr. Duncan. But Duncan's own failures have not gotten HIM fired. As long as his 20-foot jumpshot holds, he's Mr. Secretary.

Vilsack
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/rateConnection.php?id1=1621&id2=6989

Unfortunately for those who care about agriculture and environmental issues, small farming, organics, hunger issues, food safety, food security, and ethical eating, Vilsack is not the kind of policy maker who can be counted on to transform our trainwreck of a food culture.

Vilsack is currently a private citizen, an attorney with the firm of Dorsey & Whitney, and teaching at Harvard. But just five seconds ago, he tossed his knife onto the kitchen counter of Democratic politics and made a run for president. He bowed out when Hillary prevailed, campaigned for her, then hitched his chumwagon to Obama's star when Hillary lost the nom. Congressional Quarterly cited congressional aides, interest groups and people close to the transition as their sources for naming Vilsack the front runner for Ag Aecretary.

Vilsack's reign as governor of Iowa makes him a very disturbing choice, and his selection is certain to cause all kinds of food fights. He's historically been a major supporter of pharmaceutical corn and genetically engineered corn and soy beans, particularly for use as biofuels (a problem for global hunger, and a problem for the environment). According to The Organic Consumer's Association, which is lobbying against Vilsack, while he was helming Iowa, Vilsack was named Governor of the Year by Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), the biggest pro-genetic engineering lobby in existence, because he'd championed local transgenic r&d corporations like Trans Ova, which clones cows. Vilsack was also the founder and former chair of the Governor's Biotechnology Partnership. So: Vilsack's apparently The Mouthpiece of Monsanto, the Fiddler for the Frankenfood Fiefdom.

But it gets worse. Vilsack is also the Satan of the Seedsavers. He's lobbied hard to get seed pre-emption bills into state legislative bodies, beginning in 2005. These bills seek to control the use of seeds on the state level, and thus deny local communities (and small farmers, and even backyard farmers) the power to establish their own regulations for protection from genetically engineered seeds. If seed pre-emption bills become law, citizens will not be able to regulate where genetically engineered crops are grown, the creation of GE buffer zones, or the banning of pharmaceutical crops, among other things. The use of seeds becomes entirely regulated by government, and opens the door to human and plant exposure to every adverse effect of genetically engineered crops. --And simultaneously ruins biodiversity, because once transgenic seeds prevail, there's no going back. Seed pre-emption bills have been introduced in sixteen states, and the battle is ongoing. But Vilsack has been one of the chief architects of looming biodiversity disaster, and there's no reason to believe he'd halt his love affair with genetic engineering and Big Ag just because he's working for Obama. Or that he'd suddenly realize that biofuels made of corn and soy are causing starvation around the globe.

Vilsack has also proved himself a master of disaster in policy areas outside agriculture, too. For instance, he's a big proponent of price indexing as a way to "fix" Social Security, which essentially guts the system. Andrew Olmsted explains Vilsack's mis-guided idea here, in layperson's terms, on his blog Obsidian Wings.


(btw- somebody should break the news to these petition people:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/no-to-former-iowa-governor-tom-vilsack-to-usda?page=3
NO! to Former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack to USDA
Thank you everyone who signed this petition. As it turns out Mr. Tom Vilsack is no longer being considered for the USDA position according to a recent article. )

[MadHound]

1. But. . .but. . .but. . .we're not supposed to criticize these picks

After all, they're not reflective of how Obama thinks. Or how he will govern. Or what his policies will be. And besides, he hasn't taken office yet.:puke:

It is becoming increasingly clear that Obama is another center, center right corporatist who is going to govern much in the manner of Clinton. We will see a kinder, gentler face on the corporate control, but corporatism it will continue to be.

I will be thrilled to be proven wrong, I hope that I'm proven wrong. But sadly, I don't think I will be proven wrong.

[dysfunctional press]

2. that's how it seems to be shaping up....

the ascension of the dlc.

[bvar22]

13. Waa ..Waa.. Waa ... Some people are overjoyed with obama's picks !!!

..So get with the program.

"The new administration is off to a good start."
-- Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell.


"Superb ... the best of the Washington insiders ..."
-- David Brooks, conservative New York Times columnist


"Virtually perfect ... "
-- Senator Joe Lieberman, former Democrat and John McCain's top surrogate in the 2008 campaign.


"Reassuring."
-- Karl Rove, "Bush's brain."



"I am gobsmacked by these appointments, most of which could just as easily have come from a President McCain ... this all but puts an end to the 16-month timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, the unconditional summits with dictators, and other foolishness that once emanated from the Obama campaign ... Clinton and Steinberg at State should be powerful voices for 'neo-liberalism' which is not so different in many respects from 'neo-conservativism.'"
-- Max Boot, neoconservative activist, former McCain staffer.



"I see them as being sort of center-right of the Democratic party."
-- James Baker, former Secretary of State and the man who led the theft of the 2000 election.



"Surprising continuity on foreign policy between President Bush's second term and the incoming administration ... certainly nothing that represents a drastic change in how Washington does business. The expectation is that Obama is set to continue the course set by Bush ... "
-- Michael Goldfarb of the neoconservative Weekly Standard.


"I certainly applaud many of the appointments ... "
-- Senator John McCain


"So far, so good."
-- Senator Lamar Alexander, senior Republican Congressional leader.


Hillary Clinton will be "outstanding" as Secretary of State
-- Henry Kissinger, war criminal


Rahm Emanuel is "a wise choice" in the role of Chief of Staff
-- Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, John McCain's best friend.



Obama's team shows "Our foreign policy is non-partisan."
-- Ed Rollins, top Republican strategist and Mike Huckabee's 2008 campaign manager



"The country will be in good hands."
-- Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush's Secretary of State


http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/109160/neocons%2C_republicans_and_war_criminals_rave_about_obama%27s_%27team_of_rivals%27/

:party:

[QC]

14. Why do you hate America? Why? n/t

[Buzz Clik]

3. "At the heart of the program is testing. And more testing. Testing instead of teaching." Okay,...

... but keep in mind that Obama campaigned on reducing the amount of testing. Who do you think will ultimately make that decision?

[OwnedByFerrets]

4. It IS very disturbing.

[mmonk]

5. Change means you get to complain about a different party.

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. Eeeeeeek!!!!!!!!!!!

She said, running out of the room.

[progressoid]

7. As an Iowan, I'm not too impressed with the choice of Vilsack.

He does NOT represent change in any way.

[ananda]

8. They're both horrible corporate picks.

Horrible.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

9. Vilsack -- a Monsanto lackey -- is the worst choice.

Let's hope that your last sentence is true... "Thank you everyone who signed this petition. As it turns out Mr. Tom Vilsack is no longer being considered for the USDA position according to a recent article."

[appal_jack]

10. The Change: Things will worsen more slowly

During my lifetime, the corporatist control over society has worsened at an alarming pace under Republicans. Under Democrats, the slide into martial-corpo-tocracy has slowed ever so slightly, and somehow I am expected to be grateful, hopeful, and elated over this.

As the noted political philosopher poets of Chumbawamba have observed: "They break our legs, and we thank them for giving us crutches." Except with Vilsack, the (flawed, unsustainable) 'crutch' of GMO foods will be sold to us at an outrageous and patent-protected price. Will the Democratic Party be expecting another donation from me for this kind of change? &^$%&^ that!

If Obama continues the trend of same-old-shit with minimal 'change' window-dressing, then he will prove that true change within the electoral process is impossible. And it will then be time for us all to turn inward toward local change, and/or hit the streets to shake up the nation.

-app

[Greyhound]

12. Not saying you should donate, but that is exactly what they want. The millions of small

donations that fueled Dean and later Obama, represent the greatest threat to the Democratic wing of the Corporate Party. It puts the big donor lobbying powers back into a position to dictate governance.

[appal_jack]

18. OK, but I want (some) results now

To me, the Clinton years were a depressing series of losses on many fronts (NAFTA, Telecommunications Act, Anti-terrorism Act, Salvage Logging Amendment, etc.). Basically, corporatism run amok. Yet I still donated, agitated, and organized for Democrats (and Obama particularly) this past year, in the hopes that Democrats would not just slow down the slide toward fascism, but actively reverse it. I voted for a better tomorrow, not just a delay in the day of reckoning.

Now that 'we' have 'won,' I want to see at least a few things get BETTER: green collar jobs, organic agriculture, affordable health care, marijuana legalization (or at the very least complete decrim), vigorous & robust civil liberties for all, meaningful public education. Saying that 'we' have got to take things slowly, and be careful to not risk the 2010 elections will NOT cut it with me.

-app

[thewiseguy]

20. Obama is not the president yet and you want some results "now"?

:rofl:

There are two things that I care about more than others. Jobs, affordable health care, and civil liberties. If he delivers on those then I will be very happy.

[appal_jack]

21. These nom's ARE the first results...

These nom's ARE the first results of Obama's election. And they do not bode well for We the People.

You can insert ROFL smileys all you want in unsuccessful attempts to delay a frank evaluation of Obama's initial priorities. I prefer to pay close attention to our recently-elected politicians, and demand that they honor at least some of their campaign promises and rhetoric. After all, they DO work for US.

That said, if Obama unveils significant and progressive initiatives on jobs, affordable health care, and reinvigorated civil liberties during his first 100 days, then I will be encouraged and enthusiastic as well.

-app

[Greyhound]

22. I understand and feel the same. Obama was way down my list of preferences

for just this reason. Another Clintonesque administration of saying one thing and doing the opposite will put the final nail in our national casket.

We are in dire straights and nothing short of immediate, radical change is going to halt the outcome that three decades of idiocy has wrought. Half measures, platitudes, and "business as usual" will do nothing but continue the slaughter and grand theft that has been going on most of my life.

OTOH, great chaos and suffering is the environment that breeds revolution. Unfortunately, the result of revolution is usually just as bad or worse, at least in the short term.

[QC]

11. But he only hired these people so he could force them to shape up

and then fire them if they don't!

Honest! I read it on DU! (about a hundred tmes.)

:silly:

[thewiseguy]

15. You are very bitter these days.

[SammyWinstonJack]

17. !

:evilgrin:

[Horse with no Name]

16. I am going to say exactly what I think even if it gets me a pizza

Obama, IMHO, was never a Democrat. He is an Independent but Indy's don't get elected to higher office.
So, to answer your question, OUR "side" did NOT win this election.

[WI_DEM]

19. that is utter nonsense.

[ensho]

23. disappointing isn't it

nt

[mopinko]

24. you people don't know jack shit about arne duncan, or chicago schools.

and i am getting tired of trying to correct the bullshit. but it is bullshit. i like greg palast, but he up to his eyeballs in bullshit this time.

chicago schools have improved by leaps and bounds since mayor daley took them over, and put arne duncan in charge. he cares about test scores because all federal money is tied to them. they are a teeeeeenie tiny part of what has happened to the schools here.

please stop the crap. please.

[Romulox]

26. I'm more worried about the Rightwing "Chicago School" economists in the cabinet...nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. Did Obama ever promise to oppose genetically modified crops?

:shrug: