Isn't there something wrong with the implication that Obama equals Bush

[ProSense]

but the alternative (in 2008), McCain, would have been worse?

How does that make sense?

[rucky]

1. It's drama queenery.

With a shred of truth underneath.

[treestar]

26. And it's enjoying that oh so superior I'm above politics cynicism

Being just too good for this country and this world.

[HughMoran]

2. Obama does equal Bush - doncha know?

You just don't know what's good for you!

Follow me, I'll take you to the promised land...

[CrispyQ]

6. I've seen this vid before.

What movie is it from? It's kind of mesmerizing.

[avaistheone1]

21. Obama and Bush appear to become closer by the day.

For example look at how both handled FISA, the Patriot Act, escalating wars, and bankrolling Wall Street - both very similarly.

It is particularly troubling as well that Obama has kept all the Bush appointees at the Justice Department.

These are major issues where both have Bush and Obama have much in common.

[treestar]

25. So McCain wouldn't have been any worse?

McCain would have continued Bush's policies.

[avaistheone1]

28. One the key issues so is Obama as I described in my post.

[winyanstaz]

32. So please tell us how Obama has deviated from Bush's policies?

He has even quietly extended the Patriot Act..kept the illegal spying on American citizens, kept the right to do secret renditions, bailed out the corporations and the banks, escolated the war in Afganistan and is starting a new one in Pakastan, has not shut down the prisons and he has folded on single payer healthcare.
Please Obama supporters..please tell us lost democrates exactly what it is that Obama has changed from what Bush was doing?

[ClarkUSA]

43. Here's how Obama Does Not Equal Bush --->

<<He has even quietly extended the Patriot Act..kept the illegal spying on American citizens>>
Only in counterterrorism cases and with the approval of the FISA court. So you're wrong about Obama = Bush.

<<kept the right to do secret renditions>>
Actually, he's like the guy who started it all --> Bill Clinton. So you're wrong in principle.

<<bailed out the corporations and the banks>>
BushCo bailed out the banks with TARP and I don't hear the UAW complaining about saving GM and Chrysler. Bush Republicans
wanted to let GM and Chrysler fail, so you're wrong on both counts.

<<escolated the war in Afganistan>>
Wrong again. Bush took his eyes off the war in Afghanistan while candidate Obama campaigned on "finishing the job".
Guess you forgot and your Outrage means you didn't vote for him, right? :eyes:

<<and is starting a new one in Pakastan>>
Total bullshit. The Pakistan government forces is at war with the Taliban and al-Qaida as we speak. Wrong again.

<<has not shut down the prisons>>
Wrong again --> see below "Obama Orders Secret Prisons and Detention Camps Closed" (click on link for more info)

<<he has folded on single payer healthcare>>
WTF? He never promised single-payer. Wrong again.

<<Please Obama supporters..please tell us lost democrates exactly what it is that Obama has changed from what Bush
was doing?>>
See below text review and check out more info at the link.

<<Credendo vides - "In believing, one sees">>
Try opening your eyes first. :eyes:

OBAMA'S PAST 10 MONTHS' ACCOMPLISHMENTS:

Appointed a Special Envoy for Middle East peace

Order the closing of Guantanamo Bay

Prohibit use of torture

Obama Orders Secret Prisons and Detention Camps Closed

Obama Sets Bold New Principles for U.S. Energy, Climate Policies

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act

Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program Act of 2009

Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 or FERA (PDF)

Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009

Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009 (Kerry-Lugar includes funding for Obama's global poverty initiative)

Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act of 2009

End of 22-Year Discriminatory Travel Ban

Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act

Stopping Conflict-related Sexual Violence Against Women and Children

The UN, Women & Girls

New policy steps towards Cuba

Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia

Strategy to address the international nuclear threat

For the Media: "30+ Reasons Obama deserves the Nobel Peace Prize"

Russia on Nobel Peace Prize: Obama thawing 'second cold war'

World Reaction to Obama Winning the Nobel

Turkey, Armenia sign historic accord

Why the Stimulus Worked

Green jobs for real people: The story behind the recovery numbers

Obama's Plan: Financial Regulatory Reform: A New Foundation (PDF)

Requiring Strong Supervision And Appropriate Regulation Of All Financial Firms (pdf)

Strengthening Regulation Of Core Markets And Market Infrastructure (pdf)

Strengthening Consumer Protection (pdf)

Providing The Government With Tools To Effectively Manage Failing Institutions (pdf)

Improving International Regulatory Standards And Cooperation (pdf)

House Panel Moves Derivatives Toward Obama’s Proposal

FACTBOX: Major U.S. financial regulation reform proposals

Obama says Senate bill on tax havens would stop abuses

Statement by President Barack Obama on House and Senate Introducing Legislation to Crack Down on Overseas Tax Havens

Obama to chair historic U.N. council nuclear meeting

G20 to Become Forum for Global Economic Cooperation

Next comes Obama's budget, health care reform and more.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8730317&mesg_id=8730317

[billh58]

46. But, but,

I didn't get a pony!

[ClarkUSA]

47. Ain't that the truth?

That and the bitterness over last year has poisoned brain cells. :crazy:

[winyanstaz]

48. your links dont link....

[ClarkUSA]

49. It works fine. There is only one link and it's at the bottom.

:)

[winyanstaz]

74. So far I have found a lot of your links to be to cosmetic fixes ..and

a lot are just restoring the very things that caused the mess in the first place.
Try reading the whole article posted in your link that you will find in that last link AS WELL AS THE COMMENTS and follow the links to some very good reasons why people are saying...Obama is keeping and restoring the mess that he inheirated under Bush.
Here is the link (I found it in a retort of that link you posted) so you can follow the reasoning.
Read the whole article.
http://www.truthdig.com/arts_culture/item/20091105_steve_fraser_on_the_crisis_of_capitalism/

[dionysus]

30. if you equate the two then you are the one with issues...

[ClarkUSA]

44. "escalating wars"? Um, Pres. Obama is WINDING DOWN THE IRAQ WAR AS PROMISED.

And he always said he'd finish the job in Afghanistan. Funny how there was zero percent Outrage over this last
year... :eyes:

Also, the Patriot Act applies to FBI counterterrorism cases and the FISA court will have to approve every request.
"Bankrolling Wall Street" = TARP is BushCo's ballywick, not Obama's.

<<t is particularly troubling as well that Obama has kept all the Bush appointees at the Justice Department.>>

Wrong. He installed all new people at the top and throughout in all key positions. Any Bush appointee is taking orders
from Democratic bosses now.

So having debunked all of your claims, I guess you feel better now? :)

[spiritual_gunfighter]

51. Obama=Bush

when it comes to Patriot Acts and bailing out Wall Street, or havent you noticed?

[ClarkUSA]

52. Wrong.

TARP was implemented under BushCo. And unlike BushCo, the FBI under the Obama administration have to get
approval from FISA for any surveillance warrants in counterterrorism cases via The Patriot Act.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

53. Oh really?

New Plan Leaves Bill for Taxpayers

Published: February 10, 2009

Timothy F. Geithner’s new version of the Troubled Asset Relief Program — called the Financial Stability Plan — may be a little more comprehensive than the original. But because it shies away from attaching aggressive conditions or much upside sharing to bailouts, taxpayers will be stuck subsidizing past and future private investors.

Take the latest $500 billion to $1 trillion “bad bank” concept, which is supposed to be financed jointly by the government and the private sector. Specifics are still disappointingly scarce after Tuesday’s announcement, contributing to a slide in the stock market. But private sector investors won’t bite unless dodgy assets are bought from banks at genuine market prices — or even at a discount.

That may require further write-downs for banks. To avoid or minimize those, the United States government could prop up prices by agreeing to absorb future declines, through guarantees or otherwise.

Unless the government also gets a big chunk of any upside — for example, when troubled assets end up being worth more than expected — then even in the best case, taxpayers can’t really do better than break even, though they are more likely to take a loss.

That could be a reasonable outcome provided the Treasury is clear about it and requires groups like the shareholders and creditors of banks that have received government help to share the pain. These constituencies have suffered because the prices of the securities they own have tumbled. But there’s a case for wiping out at least the equity holders in such cases, rather than leaving them in the game, which would leave the taxpayer holding much of the upside.

Mr. Geithner is eyeing more stringent terms for further capital injections, and he plans to be tougher on issues like pay and perks than was his predecessor, Henry M. Paulson Jr. So far, though, the trillions of government investments, guarantees and other programs mostly relieve the private sector of the risk of further losses while not limiting the potential for profit. To bring private investors into the bad bank, it’s likely that a similar equation will apply.

Sure, taxpayers won’t lose all the money they put up. But much of what they do lose will go into the pockets of past and future investors in banks — both good and bad.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/business/economy/11views.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&ref=economy&adxnnlx=1259431238-l/XrlNSvxLDPkM0QquNeeQ

and

With public attention focused on the economy, Afghanistan and health care, the White House is moving in stealth to renew some of the worst Patriot Act provisions enacted by the Bush administration. Specifically, the administration seeks to renew three parts of the Act that are set to expire on December 31, according to the Inter-Press Service:

National Security Letters (NSLs)

The FBI uses NSLs to compel Internet service providers, libraries, banks, and credit reporting companies to turn over sensitive information about their customers and patrons. Using this data, the government can compile vast dossiers about innocent people.

The 'Material Support' Statute

This provision criminalizes providing "material support" to terrorists, defined as providing any tangible or intangible good, service or advice to a terrorist or designated group. As amended by the Patriot Act and other laws since Sep. 11, this section criminalizes a wide array of activities, regardless of whether they actually or intentionally further terrorist goals or organizations.

FISA Amendments Act of 2008

This past summer, Congress passed a law that permits the government to conduct warrantless and suspicion-less dragnet collection of US residents' international telephone calls and e-mails.

http://www.truthout.org/11260901

Feel free to continue spinning.

[ClarkUSA]

58. So what? The Obama administration added safeguards in February. TARP was still BushCo's idea.

You're the one who's spinning known historical fact. :crazy:

[spiritual_gunfighter]

59. How does it feel to prop up failing banks with your hard earned money?

I guess since Obama and Geithner are doing it it's okay with you.

[ClarkUSA]

60. lol! Moving the goalposts? Feels fine, considering taxpayers are being paid back w/5% interest.

Taxpayers have reaped more than $70B since TARP was first handed out. That's better than the global economic
collapse the wingnut Republicans who voted against TARP were willing to risk. You seem to agree with them, it
seems. :eyes:

[spiritual_gunfighter]

61. I tend to side with those Dems that voted against it

Which Dems Voted Against Obama on TARP?



Wondering just which Democrats voted to NOT let President-elect Barack Obama have access to the remaining $350 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds?

And which Republicans voted to let him have at it?

From our Senate booth, ABC News' Z. Byron Wolf tells us that if you look at the roll call, you can see that nine Democratic senators voted against giving Obama the money (for the anti-TARP resolution).

They were:

Perennial vice presidential bridesmaid Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bernie Sanders of Vermont (technically an Independent), Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Ron Wyden of Oregon.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/which-dems-vote.html

Bernie Sanders, Russ Feingold, Jeanne Shaheen and Ron Wyden? It seems I am in good company.

[ClarkUSA]

65. And you sided with ConservaDems Evan Bayh, Blanche Lincoln, Brain Dorgan and Ben Nelson, too.

Congratulations. :eyes:

[spiritual_gunfighter]

66. Those are Republicans who call themselves Dems

They voted against TARP for completely different reasons, but obviously that is completely lost on you. Go read about it.

[ClarkUSA]

67. Yet you agree with their TARP votes.

Whatever the reasons, you're in bed with them. :thumbsdown:

[spiritual_gunfighter]

69. Explaining politics to someone who is willfully ignorant

is a futile endeavor.

[ClarkUSA]

70. Debating with someone who doesn't acknowledge factual political reality is even more so.

:hi:

[Cha]

63. Too bad that's all you can come up with.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

81. It's not

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

3. Saying Obama equals Bush is grotesque, of course

[tularetom]

4. Yes there is but I'm starting to believe that Obama equals Clinton

May not be all that far fetched.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

39. Exactly

Obama does not equal Bush but he most definitely equals Clinton, at least so far. And we all know that Clinton was our greatest Republican president.

[Poll_Blind]

5. I love Progressives: We are a very diverse group. However, sometimes it is easier to...

...focus on the negatives than the positives because we have such high hopes for the future. When we feel let down by a politician it is hard not to feel betrayed. However, it is very important to keep a sense of perspective: Obama is leaps and bounds ahead of what we would have gotten with another Bush term or a McCain term.

Obama is a hard read for me: He jukes and weaves and I'm never really sure what the hell he's REALLY going to do until the last second. Usually he does something that I would like him to do, but definitely not always.

In my own opinion, based on his actions, I believe he's the most Progressive politician since Carter. He's no Kucinich; that's also true. But I'm glad he won. Will I toss an imaginary empty beercan at the imaginary portrait of him that hangs in my house on occasion? Definitely. But I'll go an straighten the imaginary frame and clear off the imaginary beer droplets off his portrait afterward, as well.

PB

[ShortnFiery]

9. I love LIBERALS best. Besides, when Obama changes nothing re: civil liberties and occupations.

We liberals are not known for out love of war and being denied our civil liberties.

However, when we decry that President Obama has changed NOTHING in the above two critical areas, all of a sudden we're "haters" and not to be taken seriously.

Weren't we, the LIBERALS, the first to come out in protest of BOTH the Iraq and Afghanistan invasion? Sure we voted for Obama and KNEW he would not immediately pull out of Afghanistan. But like hell, we never would have protected that he'd fully pull a JINGOISTIC SCENE and announce troop increases in front of the Professional "to be" Army Officer Corps at West Point. That's just plain vile.

And I'm most of all SADDENED, not "a hater" that a man as gifted and intelligent as President Obama would side with the Professional Military (mostly General and Field Grade Officers aside from the "ring knocker" LTs graduating from the Service Academies).

Yes, I'm deeply saddened.

[treestar]

29. changed nothing is inaccurate IMO

closing Gitmo is one thing. Just because it takes more time than the instant gratification society requires doesn't mean it's not a major change.

[winyanstaz]

33. umm so your saying he is closing Gitmo but hasnt done it yet...

makes the statement that he changed nothing inaccurate? If he hasnt done it...umm sheesh why am I bothering?

[treestar]

35. Do you imagine these things can just be done in one day?

They still have to look at each person in case the neocon cabal actually inadvertently did bag a terrorist.

[winyanstaz]

36. Actually yes I do.

The commander in chief gives the order...the military obeys.
That is what is supposed to happen according to our Constitution.
As to having to "keep it open so they can look at each case" ..Isn't that what they are supposed to have been doing all this time? Investigating the evidence?
No one said to turn them all loose..but if they don't have the evidence already after years of torturing these poor people almost to death...then yes it should be said..and done.....they should be turned loose.
If they have been doing their jobs right in the first place..(we shouldn't be throwing people into prisons, let alone to be tortured unless we have EVIDENCE in the first place)..then they already know dang well who each person is and what they did not do or did.

[treestar]

40. If you ever have to deal with any type of system, legal or administrative

You learn nothing can just be done overnight.

[winyanstaz]

76. Overnight? How long have the Democratic party been in power now????

A lot longer than "Overnight".

[MadMaddie]

7. For those that are trying to tie President Obama to * is an insane

comparison. He is not making knee jerk gut decisions. He is contemplating all of the possibilities. I don't think any of them are good.

Someone on DU wrote that it's a no win situation either way he goes in Afghanastan. Withdrawing completely Afghanastan goes back to the Taliban and the drug trade gets 10X worse than it already is, more women and girls will be murdered etc.

Staying and sending more troops....we will never win...no invader has ever won in Afghanastan. Russia's military back was broken trying to do the impossible.

Karzai is the weakest link in any improvement, he has no power outside of the city and region he is in. More and more evidence is pointing to him being very corrupt too....

* and Cheney never had a plan and they fired any General that said you just can't go there without a plan.

Here's the other thing that run across my mind if McCain would have won he would NOT be making any choice at all, he would be sending more troops to Afghanastan without an exit strategy in other words perpetual war.

Either choice is bad.

[ShortnFiery]

13. Newsflash: We don't REALLY have an exit plan - it's all hype to pacify the masses and ...

manufacture consent.

Our ORIGINAL mission was SIMPLY to get Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. NOW General McCrystal admits publicly that al Qaeda is not in Afghanistan.

Soooo we do MISSION CREEP in order to justify to the public that we must stay there. It's bullshit that we're there to keep America safer. Further, Al Qaeda has now MORPHED into the mostly NATIVE Taliban ... now it's "we've always been at war with the Taliban" but but you said in 2001 that it was Al Qaeda who attack us. - we're supposed to forget that truism.

We can send SF in to attack any remnants of al Qaeda in Pakistan and/or Afghanistan if or when they may choose to re-populated there.

However, if President Obama values THE LIVES of our troops and that of innocent Afghan citizens above Geopolitics and/or the profits of the corporations comprising the MIC, he will announce a systematic WITHDRAW from both occupied nations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjE2wMWMJwI&feature=player_embedded

[Cha]

16. I got a NEWSFLASH for the NEWSFLASHER..

it would nice if you knew what you're talking about.

Stop rambling on about "no exit strategy" when you don't know what's going on.

[avaistheone1]

55. SUPERFLASH.

Neither do you.

[msallied]

56. The difference is the previous poster considers available evidence and draws a reasonable conclusion

Obama rejected all previous proposals that didn't have exit strategies. Using basic Logic 101, it is at the very least reasonable using that information to assume that Obama's plan will include some sort of an exit strategy. You, on the other hand, are drawing from a bottomless pool of angst and resentment against the President to draw your conclusions.

[avaistheone1]

57. Psycho babble.

This exit strategy is going to take at least seven years and slaughter thousands of Afghans and Americans, and blow billions of dollars we can not afford to lose in a rathole. There is nothing reasonable about that kind of "exit strategy". It is as false as the promise of "Change" has been.

[Cha]

64. Look who's talking.

[Cha]

62. Hey Flasher..I know I don't know.

[Cha]

8. There's a thread going now

that asks if Obama's family is being threatened and that's why he's changed so much.

Just narcissistic whining that their personal needs haven't been met.

[HopeOverFear]

14. You're kidding? where?

[Cha]

15. ..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x19363

[HopeOverFear]

18. LOL

the left has their own teabaggers, don't they?

[Cha]

19. If teabaggers equal whiners

who don't know what they're talking but that doesn't stop them from making asses out of themselves..then yes.

[HopeOverFear]

20. you nailed it n/m

[AllentownJake]

10. About as much sense as the threads saying that people who support the President

on the war escalation are no longer welcome on DU, or about as much as the threads that post bad internet forwards with accomplishments that have not happened, or about as much as the threads which is one group saying fuck you to another, or about as much sense as the threads that say people on DU want a GOP president.

Generally you are better than these types of postings and I don't mean that as a back handed compliment I mean it as a full compliment.

[Xipe Totec]

11. Well, one plus a zero still equals one n/t

[LoZoccolo]

12. Recommended. n/t

[Cha]

17. It's a lazy ass hyperbolic soundbyte..

that weakens any argrument they might have had.

[autorank]

22. The first thing wrong with it is that it's wrong

Bush invaded Iraq based on deliberate lies. That invasion resulted in the needless death of 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians due the civil strife that Bush and Co. knew would result. Thousands of U.S. troops have been killed or seriously injured. Lying to start a war is illegal. Over one million deaths constitutes a major series of crimes. Bush is one serious monstrosity.

The second thing wrong with the comparison is that we're even hearing it. But what do you expect people to do when we get Tim Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury, more bailouts , and more war. We got a low profile signing of the Patriot Act and no corrections to anti-constitutional measures by Bush. The foreclosure relief bill failed, there's no cap on credit card rates, and no major health reform. Bush is in a league all by himself but Pres. Obama's record to start endorses to much of what we've had to put up with in the country for decades - policies for the super rich, war, and the in last place.

[Cha]

77. I expect them not to be stupid.

[jgraz]

23. Isn't there something wrong with posting the same strawman bullshit over and over?

The problem is not that Obama is better or worse than Bush. The problem is that President Obama is far, far worse than the guy we thought we were voting for.

For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZG8Zq8V54k

Now, you've already demonstrated your, um, less than encyclopedic knowledge of the financial reform package, but just try to line up the first two minutes of Candidate Obama's promises with what President Obama has either proposed or already done.

[ProSense]

24. Strawman?

"The problem is that President Obama is far, far worse than the guy we thought we were voting for."

The problem is that some people obviously didn't pay attention.

"Now, you've already demonstrated your, um, less than encyclopedic knowledge of the financial reform package, but just try to line up the first two minutes of Candidate Obama's promises with what President Obama has either proposed or already done."

Yeah, speaking of bullshit!

[jgraz]

34. Do you ever actually rebut anything?

Or do you just quote posts and add a snide comment or :rofl: ?

[ProSense]

42. Read the post again

Maybe you missed the point because you were overcome with premature laughter.

[vaberella]

27. Not in the views of DU. One person said he's making the nation worse. n/t

[ShortnFiery]

31. I know that an escalation of combat troops will make America and Afghanistan LESS SAFE.

That is a given. :(

[vaberella]

68. So are you defending the remarks by saying...

If Obama escalates the war---then America will be worse because we'll be open to more attacks. In essence you think he is making the nation worse. Fuckin' hell.

[ClarkUSA]

71. That one person probably thinks everything Pres. Obama is doing makes the nation worse.

:eyes:

[RepublicanElephant]

37. k&r nt

[davidpdx]

38. I have no problem with people disagreeing with him or his policies

but that type of hate doesn't need to be on DU. Say you disagree fine, comparing him to Bush, ridiculous.

[yodoobo]

41. Nothing wrong except that its wrong

[ClarkUSA]

45. Nothing's wrong except your hit-and-run bullshit.

:hi:

[Name removed]

50. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Peacetrain]

54. Has had me baffled ...

[LWolf]

72. I don't think Obama equals Bush.

He's more dangerous, because he's smarter. I'd like to see his policies and his appointments show a much cleaner, clearer difference.

I don't know how much worse McCain would have been. I wasn't willing to risk finding out, since the only thing between McCain and a Palin presidency would have been his rather frail self.

[ProSense]

75. "He's more dangerous, because he's smarter."

Ludicrous.

[LWolf]

78. Great word.

I like to use it myself.

It doesn't apply here, though. A more intelligent person is more dangerous than a less intelligent person.

[ProSense]

79. "A more intelligent person is more dangerous than a less intelligent person."

A more intelligent Bush is more dangerous than a stupid, incompetent Bush.

Obama is intelligent.

Intelligence isn't the same as dangerous.

You seem prepared to push the Obama is Hitler meme.

Obama is not doing anthing to intentially put anyone in danger. He isn't calculating the next moves to screw people over. He isn't callous. He isn't negligent. He isn't Bush.

To claim that Obama being more intelligent than Bush makes him more dangerous is, appropriately, ludicrous.

[LWolf]

80. You seem eager to put words in my mouth I've never even hinted at.

"Obama is Hitler" IS ludicrous, and so is trying to pin that garbage on me.

Obama is more intelligent than Bush, and he is continuing down many paths that Bush helped lead us onto. The privatization of public education, for example.

That IS dangerous.

Being a more intelligent hawk, privatizer, union-buster, and corporate shill makes him more dangerous than Bush.

That's reality.

[ProSense]

82. You seem to be dancing around trying to spin Obama equals Bush

"Obama is more intelligent than Bush, and he is continuing down many paths that Bush helped lead us onto. The privatization of public education, for example."

Obama is not trying to privatize public education. You may not approve of Obama's approach, but it is completely ridiculous to compare his actions in the education area with Bush's.

[LWolf]

83. Actually,

I don't think Obama = Bush and I've never said so. As a matter of fact, I said exactly that in my response to your OP: "I don't think Obama equals Bush."

You seem to be trying to pin a common meme onto me, except that it doesn't fit.

If you knew me better, you'd know that. You might want to address the actual issues, instead of trying to make it about me, and mis-characterizing me in the process.

It is not ridiculous to compare his actions in the education area with Bush. It's not ridiculous to compare any president's actions in any area with any other president.

Obama made his positions on education clear in the primaries, which is another reason why I never supported him. I'm a teacher. I'm on the front lines dealing with the bullshit politicians mandate for political capital every day. I know what GWB did to public education nationally, I know where it came from, and I know what it looks like when another politician escalates it.

The appointment of Arne Duncan was the first clue. Not an educator, but a "CEO," despite the fact that public education is not a business and it doesn't work to try to run it like one. As my colleague from Chicago, and the editor of "Substance," an online educator's journal from Chicago, George Schmidt, said, Duncan is a "privatizer, union-buster, and corporate stooge."

And the RTTT proves it, pushing the privatization and union-busting tools of charter schools and merit pay, and blackmailing states into "getting on board" by withholding stimulus money from those who don't. Which is an unethical and inappropriate use of money supposedly intended to stimulate the economy, imo.

[ProSense]

84. Well, this is an opinion

Obama made his positions on education clear in the primaries, which is another reason why I never supported him. I'm a teacher. I'm on the front lines dealing with the bullshit politicians mandate for political capital every day. I know what GWB did to public education nationally, I know where it came from, and I know what it looks like when another politician escalates it.

There are a lot of teachers in my family---a lot who teach and taught in the NYC public school system. They don't share your sentinment. They were, in fact, excited about his educational platform, especially after eight years of neglect by the Bush administration. Not everyone is against NCLB. They wanted the program funded and other reforms enacted.

There is a huge difference between Obama and Bush on the issue:

Statement by Randi Weingarten,
President, American Federation of Teachers,
On President Obama’s Remarks About Education Reform Efforts

WASHINGTON—We agree with President Obama that the possibilities for student success should be limitless. If we embark on a course of shared responsibility and collaboration, we will be much closer to reaching the ultimate goal of providing a great education to all students. When teamwork, trust and respect become ingrained in the fabric of a school district and are incorporated into all decision-making—not just used during contract negotiations—the outcome is good for kids. Teachers want their students to do well, but they need the tools and resources that will create the conditions to help their students succeed.

States, cities, school districts and teachers unions must be able to embrace real innovation, real collaboration and a real commitment to building programs that will genuinely improve teaching and learning. These programs—including those associated with the federal Race to the Top competitive grants—must deal with issues both inside and outside the classroom.

President Obama cited just a few of many recent stellar examples where collaborative partnerships are making a tangible difference for students and teachers.

In New Haven, Conn., the contract negotiations process that led to a reform-minded contract has been hailed as a model. The city and the teachers union worked as a team to negotiate a contract that lays out an innovative template for urban school reform that recognizes the value of incorporating teachers’ views in all key decisions. The contract includes a teacher evaluation process that will consider student progress as one measure.

“The teachers union and the school management want to extend the collaborative relationship that was formed during the negotiations to all of our work now. We are convinced that when the adults work well together, we can put students’ interests first,” said Dave Cicarella, president, New Haven Federation of Teachers.

In Austin, Texas, the teachers union and the school district are collaborating on an alternative teacher compensation plan designed to raise student achievement, improve teacher recruitment and retention and recognize exemplary practices.

“Compensation plans like this are good for teachers and students, but can only be successful with teacher input and buy-in. This should become standard operating procedure for education reform plans everywhere, so that a full range of ideas are explored and their merits debated,” said Louis Malfaro, president, Education Austin.

There are numerous other stand-out innovative, collaborative reform efforts that are raising student achievement, including in the ABC school district in southeastern Los Angeles County; Baltimore; Hillsborough, Fla.; Philadelphia; and Pittsburgh.

[LWolf]

85. Randi Weingarten doesn't speak for me.

My association, the NEA, also issued a response to RTTT. It begins with 5 paragraphs lauding the goals as "admirable." The rest of the long response points out that RTTT "misses the mark," focusing on the wrong things, and suggests better ways to improve education.

Just a small <snip> from many valid points:

Given the details of the July Race to the Top grant proposal, NEA must now ask: Where did that commitment to local communities go?

The details of the RTTT proposal do not seem to square with the Administration’s earlier philosophy. The Administration’s theory of success now seems to be tight on the goals and tight on the means, with prescriptions that are not well-grounded in knowledge from practice and are unlikely to meet the goals. We find this top-down approach disturbing; we have been down that road before with the failures of No Child Left Behind, and we cannot support yet another layer of federal mandates that have little or no research base of success and that usurp state and local government’s responsibilities for public education.

Instead of focusing on strengthening enforcement of civil rights laws to promote access and opportunity for students, the Administration has chosen the path of a series of top-down directives that may discourage rather than encourage productive innovation in classrooms and schools across the country. Despite growing evidence to the contrary, it appears that the Administration has decided that charter schools are the only answer to what ails America’s public schools—urban, suburban, exurban, and rural—and all must comply with that silver bullet, despite the fact that charters have often produced lower achievement gains than district-run public schools.

We urge the Administration to step outside of this narrow agenda and embrace the diversity of choices available to students, parents, school districts, and states across the country. Well-designed charters are not the only way to innovate, and we need to embrace and champion other models such as magnet schools.

Assessing student learning is another area where we need more and better options. What is being proposed is simply tweaking the current top-down, federally mandated insistence on hewing to standardized test scores. We know that model is not working, so basing even more educational decisions on these same test scores is counterproductive and counterintuitive. Enough is enough.

http://www.nea.org/home/35447.htm

Of course, both the NEA and the AFT are likely to be kinder to Obama in discussing his bad policy than individual teachers are; that's part of their job, to lobby for positive change. There are plenty of other voices speaking for education, in opposition to the Obama/Duncan plan. One of the best died unexpectedly this fall; Jerry Bracey. We miss him.


I've yet to meet a teacher in the flesh who likes NCLB, Duncan, or "RTTT." Or the political philosophy driving them.

I'm sure they're out there. You'd think, though, that if they were the norm, I would have found at least one in my 26 years in public education, large district, small district, two states spanning 1100 miles. :shrug:

[ProSense]

86. The AFT issued a similar statement previously. The most recent comments from the NEA

NEA President: collaboration is the key to improving student achievement

Obama administration and NEA share education vision

WASHINGTON - November 04, 2009 - President Barack Obama and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan today visited Wisconsin to highlight the state’s collaborative efforts to improve student achievement and transform public education. Obama and Duncan visited James C. Wright Middle School, a fully unionized charter school in Madison. The Wisconsin legislature is poised to vote this week—with the support of the Wisconsin Education Association Council, an NEA affiliate—to make a technical change allowing greater flexibility in how teachers are evaluated. The change, if approved, will keep the state in the running for the administration’s $4.35 billion Race to the Top grants.

“Wisconsin is the latest example of what is possible when educators, school boards and other education stakeholders work collaboratively with the clear goal of improving student learning,” said NEA President Dennis Van Roekel. “The type of collaboration WEAC is championing benefits students, schools and communities.”

“We applaud the Obama administration for keeping its commitment to work with educators,” said Van Roekel. “This is an affirmation that we share the goal of transforming public education so that every public school is a center of excellence, and all students gain the skills and education needed to be lifelong learners and productive citizens in this global society.”

While all charter schools are not created equal—and they are not the only model of reform—NEA supports charter schools like the ones championed by WEAC. Wisconsin has a strong system of great charter schools governed by local school boards, led and staffed by WEAC members. James C. Wright Middle School – like the majority of charter schools in the state – is an instrumentality charter school, meaning that it has flexibility to be innovative outside of the traditional school setting, but it retains all the local controls and is staffed by union teachers employed by the local school board.

“Our union of educators has spent a great deal of energy working collaboratively to improve student achievement in Wisconsin,” said Bell. “We are proud to be part of efforts that position Wisconsin for meaningful change. We support sound educational policies that will uphold our state’s rich tradition of academic excellence.”

WEAC is the latest NEA affiliate to take steps to usher in innovative initiatives to transform public education. For example, Seattle, Washington is using collective bargaining as a vehicle to improve student learning, including contractual language that allows educators to conduct home visits and engage parents and families. Under a contract negotiated by the Evansville Teachers Association and the Evansville Vanderburgh School Corporation (EVSC) in Indiana, some EVSC schools could see different administrative structures, including a longer school day or longer school year, a different staffing formula, and increased autonomy. New Haven, Connecticut put in place CommPACT (Community, Parents, Administrators, Children and Teachers) to take a novel approach to improve schools and close the achievement gap.

[LWolf]

87. And more:

<snip>

If we want better results for students:



* We should not continue the unhealthy focus on standardized tests as the primary evidence of student success.

We should not use data inappropriately in the educational system.

We should not continue to narrowly focus on charter schools as the only model of reform for schools worthy of serious attention.

Of course, I differ with my association on this point; many of us do. Many of us don't see charter schools as an appropriate mmodel of reform for schools in any capacity.

[TankLV]

73. Not only is it vastly factually wrong, but it's a LAZY comment in a discussion, at best...

NOBODY could "equal" that AWOL War Criminal bush* - NO ONE!!!