Campaign 2004: Will you put all your eggs in one basket?

[JailBush]

Suppose Howard Dean wins the nomination, and you're a Howard Dean fan - or you're NOT a Howard Dean fan. Are you going to get behind Dean and tell the world he's the best thing since cream cheese? If Dean is endorsed by the National Education Association, are you going to rave about all the wonderful things the NEA has done for education? If so, shame on you.

That be a slap in the face to the millions of children trapped in derelict public schools. It could also be a disastrous political gesture, when you look at the big picture.

First, we all know that Dean is not perfect. His refusal to make his records available alone is very disturbing. Skiing after dodging the service due to an alleged back injury is also troubling.

None of these would stop me from supporting Dean. I would point out that George W. Bush is even more secretive and far more blatantly corrupt. I'd also point out that Bush is the ultimate chickenhawk, using Daddy's influence to avoid war, then later initiating war for political and corporate gain.

If Dean really did resort to unethical means to dodge the war, I really don't care. Vietnam was a sick joke, and only a moron would have willingly risked his life for the corrupt government that was prosecuting it. And if Dean really opposes the new chickenhawk corporate warfare, he gets some brownie points.

If Howard Lieberman got the nomination, I wouldn't hesitate to criticize him - but I'd tell visitors to my website that they have no choice but vote for the lesser of evils, Lieberman. If Kucinich was the nominee, I'd be overjoyed - but I'd still remain a little cautions. We won't know the whole truth about any of the candidates until they get elected.

Once they do get elected, they're going to have to move mountains if they hope to even begin reversing the damage Bush has inflicted on the United States. And WHAT IF we succeeded in electing a Republican operative? That may seem a distant prospect, but are you prepared for just such a fate?

No candidate is going to get rave reviews from me regarding public education. Even if the candidate beat Bush, children would remain hostage to Microsoft and the National Education Association, and I don't sell out kids; the Republican, Democratic and Green parties are doing a good job at that all by themselves. Still, I might point out that Republicans are outdoing even Dems and Greens in waging war against children. But I will not become a mindless wh*re for any party.

If you mindlessly gush about a candidate, to the point of propagating disinformation or simply avoiding embarrassing issues, then you set yourself up for failure. You impeach your credibility - a credibility you might need during future politicial contests - for Congress, Governor and your local school board.

[jmaier]

1. Um ...

What's your point here? You don't support, Dean. Okay, but by having any single nominee ALL our eggs are in one basket. I don't think it's possible to have more than one, but, if so, it would guarantee * victory. SO, what are you asking for here?

[JailBush]

4. By putting all your eggs in one basket, I mean will you invest

EVERYTHING in the presidential campaign? Dean is about my second or third favorite candidate, after Dennis Kucinich, but that's irrelevant to this thread. It's obvious to me that no candidate and probably less than one voter in a thousand is going to come out swinging for children, and I'm worried that we might unwittingly elect a Republican operative, which would be frightening in the extreme.

If everything in politics hinges on one candidate in one race, then we're pretty well screwed.

[graelent]

2. Could you explain what the NEA has done to raise your ire?

I am not disagreeing with you necessarily, but I would like to know your basis for being so angry with the NEA.

[JailBush]

6. I spent sixteen years in public education.

I LOVED working with children, but the bureaucracy, insanity and blatant tyranny and corruption were unbelievable; it's far worse than the general public knows. After a decade, I began investigating the "Education Mafia" and speaking out. What I learned was extraordianry.

The Seattle Education Association seldom lifts a finger to help its dues-paying members. In fact, many SEA officials stabbed us in the back. The Washington Education Assocation - another NEA affiliate - may be the most corrupt teachers union in America. Its legal defeats certainly made front page news nationwide.

I then began corresponding with teachers from other states and discovered that they feel abandoned by the NEA, too. Many have stories about being stabbed in the back by their union. The NEA seems oblivious to the major problems in education, including derelict principals and corporate takeover.

Here's where it gets weird: I've discovered evidence that suggests the NEA may actually be in bed with Republicans (though that doesn't exclude being in bed with Democrats).

I don't have time to post all the details, but here's an intriguing piece of evidence: The Washington Education Association has been fighting a long legal battle with the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a conservative think tank. In the meantime, I was investigating a sleazy Seattle attorney who appeared to specialized at stabbing teachers in the back. She's a highly regarded attorney, yet I couldn't find ONE teacher she actually helped, and some said they wanted to report her to the authorities.

I was amazed when I discovered that this attorney served as Campaign Treasurer for our state Superintendent of Public Instruciton, Terry Bergeson, another very corrupt individual - three times in a row! But it doesn't stop there.

This attorney used to represent the Washington Education Association. She then started a private practice, but is still used by both the Washington and Seattle education associations. Before I learned the truth about her, I recommended her services at a substitutes meeting. Two substitutes told me they had dealt with her - the union hired her to attack them!

When I released this information, I thought the Evergreen Feedom Foundation would eat it up, using it as more evidence in their war against the WEA. Not a peep.

I've also noticed that "liberal elements" made almost no resistance to the last charter school initiative, which was bankrolled by gazillionaire Paul Allen. Oh yes, Terry Bergeson's first political campaign was bankrolled by one Don Nielsen, who was reviled as the most conservative member of the Seattle School Board.

There's a LOT going on behind the scenes, but you don't have to scratch very deep to discover one fundamental truth - with friends like the NEA, who needs enemies?

[graelent]

9. NEA

I am afraid I still don't understand. I can't speak for the Seattle Teachers Association or the Washington Teachers Association (I live in Texas), but the NEA is bankrolling the fight against vochers, it is funding congressional candidates who know the "No Child eft Behnid" Act is garbage, it advocates for high teacher standards and higher pay. They have batle against the Privatization of schools by groups such as Edison.

It sounds like your areas teacher groups may have some problems, but I am not sure that means the NEA is deserving of the blame, especially when they are funding a lot of good initiatives.

[bookman]

3. NEA

I'm always amazed at how powerful the public thinks the NEA is. I worked in pretty strong NEA affiliated state. Teachers get very little input into school policy. Believe me the schools would be in much better condition if teachers had more of a voice in policy. Local control usually means "not with my taxes" and a bunch of bureaucratic BS. I actually have seen a decline with standardized testing and grade inflation ( due to weak administrators).

I can only imagine how much worse it is in states where the union is weak. While pay is low the main reason I think good teachers leave the profession is they are not allowed to do their job properly.

PR is king, Parents and adminstrators refuse to face reality, there are no consequences for anything (even attacking teachers).

NEA the problem. Not by a long shot.

[JailBush]

8. You're amazed at how powerful the public thinks the NEA is?

How much power does an organization need to SPEAK OUT??? I mean, how hard would it be for the NEA to GET A CLUE about some major education issues and publicize them on its website?

You say you've seen a decline with standardized testing and grade inflation (due to weak administrators). Gee, do you think maybe the NEA should speak out more strongly against standardized testing? Grade inflation? "Weak" administrators? Considering that so many teachers are BATTERED by derelict principals alone, doesn't that suggest a NEA initiative?

You say there are no consequences, even for attacking teachers. Imagine if one of those consequences was being fingered by the NEA. What a fantasy; the NEA doesn't give a damn!

The NEA IS the problem - or one of many problems.

[MsFlorida]

5. my oldest son

just after getting a broken ankle -- played football, went fishing, rode his bike, crashed his bike, etc. etc. What I am trying to point out here is we are all entitled to youth error and not always making the best judgement as to when Dean went skiing after dodging Vietnam.

On another note, should the draft come back, my son will not go even if I have to tie him up myself and ship him to canada!

[damnraddem]

7. We shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket -- that's ova confidence.

But I don't think most of us will. Any of the Democrats other than Lieberman. If the Dems nominate Lieberman, however, I will then have a Green future in 2004.

So, I won't put all my eggs in one basket -- but I will exclude rotten eggs.

[Myra]

10. Great points JailBush

In particular this:

"If you mindlessly gush about a candidate, to the point of propagating disinformation or simply avoiding embarrassing issues, then you set yourself up for failure. You impeach your credibility - a credibility you might need during future politicial contests - for Congress, Governor and your local school board."

[library_max]

11. We're talking about eggs that either go in this basket or none.

There won't be two different presidential races in 2004, just one. There's nothing else to save our "credibility" for. Are you seriously suggesting that by merely supporting Dean, should he be the eventual nominee, Democrats will be sacrificing credibility in front of the electorate as a whole? Get real - everybody expects partisans to support their nominee, whether the nominee was their personal first choice or not.

Even if Dean sprouts horns and a tail during the general election, people aren't going to blame Democrats for supporting him. Look at all the Nixon supporters who are around now, respectable as all-get-out in their party. Do you seriously think Dean is going to end up looking worse than Nixon?

No, this is just a disunity thread, trying to encourage Democrats to meataxe each other over ideological differences and candidate preferences. When will we learn that this is the way we piss away elections? When has an "anybody but < >" campaign resulted in a Democratic victory? C'mon, people, unity! ABB!

[Eric J in MN]

12. After the Convention, you can't give to a Pres. campaign.

After the Democratic Convention, you can't give to the Democratic Presidential campaign.

Bush and the Democratic nominee will each use $74 million in public money from their respective nominations to November.

You can give to Congressional campaigns, Senatorial campaigns, Move On, etc.