Did Obama pull a bait and switch with cabinet appointments?

[Radical Activist]

March 2, 2008
Barnstorming Obama plans to pick Republicans for cabinet

Earlier Obama had told the audience at a suburban high school rally in Dallas, Texas, that he intended to follow the example of his hero, President Abraham Lincoln, and appoint a cabinet of the talents, irrespective of party labels.

“I think America deserves the best person for every job and so we are going to be canvassing far and wide if I am fortunate enough to be elected,” he said.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3466823.ece


I'd like to thank Obama for being the kind of leader who does what he says he will do. Obama's cabinet picks aren't a sign that he's moving right. They're a sign that we're getting the pragmatic progressive we voted for who wants to represent all Americans.

And I'd like to tell everyone who said Obama would shut liberals out of the cabinet to suck on it. You were wrong. Julius Genachowski is the latest liberal appointed to the cabinet along with Solis, Chu, Rice, Jackson, Donovan and others. Despite all the negative attention to a few high profile nominees, it looks like Obama will have a balanced cabinet with a diversity of viewpoints that leans left.

[NJmaverick]

1. The AODs don't want the facts. So I fear you are wasting your time

[Radical Activist]

6. AOD's?

[NJmaverick]

7. Anti-Obama "Dems"

[Two Americas]

32. that is inflammatory

Critics are not "anti-Obama" any more than critics of the war in Iraq are "anti-American." Putting Dems in quotes is a subtle and nasty little smear, a way to make an insinuation and nit be called on it.

I welcome debate, but you rarely stand still in one place and defend your views honestly and forthrightly, rather you move from thread to thread getting in little digs and smears against those who disagree with you.

[Teaser]

33. Who said anything about critics?

the term was anti-Obama Dems.

It was you that inferred that this meant any Dem engaging in criticism of him.

[Two Americas]

40. lol

Oh, yes, "anti-Obama Dems" is intentionally left vague and ill-defined, so people are free to fill in the blank with whom they should be suspicious of and antagonistic toward. That makes it more reprehensible, not less.

[Teaser]

57. that's a fine piece of sophistry there

the craftsmanship is superb.

[Two Americas]

58. hardly

You may think my argument is invalid - you haven't refuted it, though - but you can hardly know it to be intentionally false.

Are you claiming that "AOD" is defined clearly? Or was it left vague and ill-defined?

[NJmaverick]

41. Good thing I have your posts, as shining examples of what is non-inflammatory

:eyes:

[Two Americas]

45. I hope so, yes

I put a lot of effort into saying what I think needs to be said without being hostile or making personal attacks.

[NJmaverick]

46. I suggest you redouble your efforts

[Two Americas]

47. count on it n/t

...

[Bucky]

68. Thanks, Two.

Well said and perfectly concise. Some people get on the internet to vent their intolerance. Sadly, this happens even on liberal websites.

Some days I try to just ignore the hit-and-run insulters, but other days it has about the same effect as ignoring cockroaches.

[BlooInBloo]

63. Thanks - excellent moniker.

[John Q. Citizen]

19. That's how experts talk. You know, inside jargon.

of the DU Obama taliban. (don't ask me what that is because I'm not at liberty to say)

Glad you like the picks. I like some better and some worse. No matter what, we are better off now than we were four years ago in terms of our incoming administration. That's a fact.

[Cha]

8. What I wanna know is..

Why are the AODs on DU? What the fuck good do they serve?

[merh]

9. I think they are suffering from ODS

which is closely associated with FOL which manifests itself in RD&C.

I could be wrong. :shrug:

[Cha]

10. They should give

Peas a Chance:)

[merh]

11. Definitely peas

instead of casting asparagus

:)

:hi:

[Cha]

26. lol!

:hi:

[tridim]

20. I'm fixing myself a PB&J and a glass of OJ.

So I can learn to "show love" like an OBGYN.

[merh]

21. Will you be watching wheel of fortune?

I love it when they buy vowels. :silly:

[Radical Activist]

13. Every President needs critics

including Obama. I just wish people would keep their criticism a little more grounded in reality. If Obama really does turn right at some point 1/3 of DU is going to look like the boy who cried wolf when they complain about it.

[merh]

18. grounded in reality

what a nice change that would be for so many here.

[Cha]

23. But, I'm not saying "Critics" ..I'm saying

Anti-Obama. And, we all know they're here.

I've got some critques myself and have communicated that http://change.gov/page/content/openforquestions20081229/ but I want to know why the ragging on him day in and day out to try to and bring the board down to their level is still standing?

[Bucky]

69. Are people "ragging on him" constantly? Or are there different people taking turns?

If you read 40 posts from 30 people, each saying something critical of Obama, it may seem like a trend to you, but it's not. Most of the people have only offered a healthy complaint or two. All the other posters have been positive overall about the new administration. Besides the human tendency to give more weight to comments when they're negative, you also have to remember that an internet discussion board is like a bug light for disgruntled comments.

Some people just use it to vent their general disatisfaction in life without thinking about the overall mood such dumping creates.

[rudy23]

35. Rahm?

Are you trying to coin a phrase on Obama's behalf? Why not just leave that to his PR people?

[NJmaverick]

37. By now you must know I am a doer, not a complainer.

[rudy23]

44. I know you're something ;)

...and I don't equate critical thinking with complaining---hopefully that era is over.

[MADem]

2. I'd like to tell everyone who said Obama would shut liberals out of the cabinet to suck on it.

Guess that hope and change stuff didn't rub off.

Sore winner, or what?

:shrug:

[Radical Activist]

3. lol

There's one message for most of the rational world. Then there's another message for people at DU who are looking to be proven "right" about their picking someone else in the primary and calling Obama a conservative all along. Attacks that are irrationally negative and based on nothing but ugly speculation should be dismissed for the BS that they are.

Someone posted just yesterday that Obama was shutting out liberals. Some people need reality shoved in their face before they get it.

[Occam Bandage]

4. Good post. I think the answer is pretty clearly, "no."

[Radical Activist]

16. thanks

[ClarkUSA]

5. Well-said. Couldn't agree more.

K&R :thumbsup:

[Cleita]

12. Uhm, where are the Dennis Kucinichs and Bernie Sanders, meaning the

liberals? So far things aren't looking that diversified to me. His cabinet won't lean left until he does.

[Occam Bandage]

14. Believe it or not, there are more than two liberals in the world. nt

[merh]

25. well, there's me and then there is you

who else? :shrug:

[Radical Activist]

28. a dog

I believe it's a labradoodle.

[merh]

29. silly -- just the name tells you that a labradoddle isn't a liberal

but is an elitist. I mean come on labradoddle

[smalll]

38. But it's half-Canadian (the Labrador part) and half-French (the Poodle part) --

I think it's a safe bet to say the dog is a liberal! And maybe it is elitist, but in a latte liberal way.

[Radical Activist]

15. Solis has a record

as liberal as either of those two. Have you read about the other appointments?

Obama has leaned left for his entire career so that's pretty well covered.

[Cleita]

17. I would have preferred liberals in the more powerful appointments like

Health and Human Services. Daschle isn't even left of center on his opinions about universal health care.

[Radical Activist]

22. Daschle is the person

who has the greatest ability to get something through Congress. It's an excellent appointment if Obama is interested in actually passing something instead of setting up ideological hoops to jump through. It's unlikely that Daschle will be the one calling the shots about what the final version looks like. That's the job of Obama and Congress.

I think it's a fantastic appointment that signals we'll be getting major health care reform in the next two years. He's much better than someone like Kucinich who is right on the issues but can't pass a bill through a wet paper bag.

[Cleita]

34. Did you read his book on health care?

He favors the plan to give everyone private insurance by mandate, the same plan favored by Arnold Schwarzenegger and that is presently in use in Massachusetts where it is failing. He is thoroughly in the pocket of the health care insurers. The result is that people who need health insurance still aren't covered because they can't afford to buy into it. Kucinich can't get legislation passed for the same reason Conyers can't, the Speaker of the House won't let them come up for debate. We need someone in the cabinet who can put the pressure on Pelosi to do this, but it isn't Daschle unless he and Obama have a change of heart.

[Radical Activist]

39. So what Daschle believes

is suddenly what Obama believes? Obama is the President so it works the other way around. No, I haven't read Daschle's book and I'm glad Obama's plan doesn't mandate health insurance on people who can't afford it.

I'm guessing the former Senate Leader knows how to get something done with a Speaker of the House. I'm also glad to have someone who cares enough about passing universal healthcare that he wrote a book on it and devoted a great deal of time advocating it even if I disagree with his approach.

[Cleita]

43. I'm gonna guess Obama is on the same page with Daschle on this matter. n/t

[Radical Activist]

55. I'm going to assume Daschle will do what Obama asks him to do

since that's the most obvious, logical and likely conclusion.

Obama's plan doesn't mandate that everyone buy insurance and it provided health care for those who don't have insurance. That's what I liked about it.

[Sebastian Doyle]

24. The two things that are destroying this country for 28 years are economics and foreign policy

Those are the things that need to change, or this country is permanently FUCKED. And its in those appointments that Obama failed most miserably. Wall Street whores cannot fix the economy, and neocons will not get us out of Iraq or Afghanistan, or prevent the war with Iran that is almost certain if that genocidal lunatic is elected in Israel.

Solis and Chu don't mean a damn thing in the big picture, because we don't have a snowball's chance in Hell of saving this country until we ditch the mentality of the Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush Jr. years that favors the corporate CEO's (and certain foreign interests) above the American people.

[Radical Activist]

27. So only the appointments you don't like are the ones that matter?

Got it.

I'm surprised to learn that the Labor Secretary doesn't deal with economics and that the UN Ambassador doesn't work on preventing wars. Go figure.

The greatest threat of our time is likely global warming. So I disagree that his liberal appointments to environmental policy positions don't matter.

[mopinko]

30. arne duncan

lot more liberal than people think. personally he has a very liberal, help the poor, the way to fight crime and blight is to make sure kids get what they need, philosophy. lotta knocks on him around, but all in all, imho, a great guy. a big city pragmatist. absolutely color blind. and a good administrator and problem solver.

[Radical Activist]

31. It's funny that

even the people I know in Chicago don't have strong feelings about him so it's good to read your view. That's a "wait and see what happens" appointment for me.

[mopinko]

36. his biggest failing is that he followed federal law.

he did what nclb told him to do, for the most part. although he fought many of the provisions. he pissed off the teachers union, also. they don't like charter schools, even though pretty much every one of their members decry 'one size fits all' education. and the union has like 6 charters of their own.

they also don't like that he was never a teacher, but i don't really get that. he has a harvard magna cum laude masters, i believe. sociology is not the worst major to run a big city school system. and his mom is widely lauded for her school for inner city kids, where arne was pretty much raised.

perfect? maybe not. but conservative? no way.

[LWolf]

52. Teachers unions, and teachers,

don't like charter schools, not because they offer choice or diversity in approach, but because they limit that choice and diversity to a few who don't have to follow the rules set for the rest of us.

Allow ALL public schools to run with the same autonomy and freedoms charter schools do, and unions won't be against them.

Charter schools as they now work are just another tool to move privatization forward.

[Radical Activist]

54. That's conspiratorial

Aren't successful public charter schools just as likely to result in all public schools getting those freedoms and autonomy?

[LWolf]

61. Good question.

And that's the mistaken idea that keeps charter schools supported.

Except that it's not true. School districts do not model the rest of the district on successful charter schools. It doesn't happen.

Here's a conveniently ignored factor: Charter schools, by their nature, don't draw from a neighborhood. Students can come from anywhere within or outside a district. Charter schools, unlike other public schools, can cap enrollment. A popular charter school will have more applications than openings, allowing them to sort and filter who gets in. There are plenty of ways to do this without being overt about filtering out the neediest and the hardest to educate; I've seen several in action over the years. The ability to limit and filter enrollment is one of the things that makes a charter school look more successful.

Charter schools can also decide that a student doesn't "fit" the program and route them back into the regular system. Which also makes them look more successful. When you are filtering out students that are more difficult to serve both at the front door and the back, your school looks "better" than those that can't.

As far as adopting instructional methodologies used in charter schools that seem to be working....

One of the things that can make a charter school successful, in addition to the front and back door filtering, is that whatever the charter school is doing works for the students who actually attend. When there is a choice, families will also self-sort into the sort of program or system that best fits their child.

Other public schools can't do that. We don't get to offer diversity in program. The last 15 years, the "standards and accountability" movement, is all about standardization. It's all about using often bad "science" to standardize EVERYTHING that happens in a classroom across a district. Some districts are worse than others, of course.

I left a district 4 years ago that standardized curriculum to the point that if the admin walked down the hall and heard/saw something different happening in a room, that wasn't happening in all the rest, that teacher would be "written up." The fucking bulleting boards were standardized. If your bulletin board did not pass muster on a random room check, you'd be "written up."

That's an extreme, but that's what NCLB is all about. When a district has a school, or a few schools, that don't make AYP for a few years, they have to write an improvement plan for the whole district; not just those schools. That plan includes standardization.

The district I'm working in now is going through that process. Not as harsh as my previous district, but it's still happening.

All that standardization is the antithesis of choice and diversity, and as long as standardization rules public education, public schools will not be adopting anything good that comes out of a charter school. If they did, it wouldn't work. Because as soon as you standardize something, make it one-size-fits-all, when NOTHING works for every student, you've set up some students to fail.

[Radical Activist]

64. You made many interesting points there

but none of it supported the claim that charter schools are a step toward privatization, nor did you show why charter schools won't be used to bolster support for making reforms system-wide in other public schools. Charter schools can be the ideal way to highlight the flaws of standardization that you point out. If standardization is a problem then logically you should support what charter schools are doing.

You're position sounds like the "I don't have a goat. My neighbor has a goat. Kill my neighbors goat" approach. It's also reminiscent of the NRA's conspiratorial opposition to any small form of gun control because they're sure it will lead to everyone's guns being taken away. Another poster pointed out how Chicago charter schools are increasing support for the public education system so the privatization slippery slope argument isn't credible.

[LWolf]

66. Privatization:

The ultimate goal, of course, is to put education outside public oversight.

That's not what charter schools do. They, like vouchers, are a step in that direction, and a tool to further the cause.

The best way to further that cause is to undermine public confidence in public education. That effort has been ongoing since the Reagan years, and has been highly successful.

NCLB furthers that cause with mandated standardization of mediocrity, using questionable statistics and "science."

It creates a market for privatization.

Charter schools are simply one step outside the system.

I don't support charter schools for two reasons: they don't have as much public oversight, and when they are successful, it is because they can do things the rest of the system can't.

As I already mentioned somewhere in this thread, I have visited charter schools, been recruited by charter schools, and spent, and spend, regular time with teachers who teach in charter schools. I also communicate, regularly, with teachers around the nation about education in general. Daily. Since charter school legislation came on, I've yet to see or read about a single school whose reforms have been adopted system-wide in any district. And if they were, they wouldn't be successful, because there is no ONE single reform, "fix," program, etc. that is successful with every student, and the rest of the system doesn't filter kids.

As a matter of fact, I taught for 17 years in two different "schools of choice" in a district in CA. It wasn't a "charter school," because we didn't have a charter. We had all the freedoms that a charter school would have had to "pilot" new programs. Except that, in 17 years, none of those things that we did, no matter how successful we were, (and yes, when high-stakes testing came on board with the STAR program, we always outscored the rest of the district,) were ever adopted by a single other school, let alone system-wide.

It worked the same way with other "schools of choice" we were in contact with around the state and country, and with the charter schools, as well.

I don't oppose charter schools because they can't do good things for students; they can. I oppose them because they are a tool to remove public oversight, and because the same autonomy and diversity is not offered to all schools, which closes the door on those opportunities for the majority of students.

I've always been a strong proponent for local control, and I mean site, not district, control of public schools. I believe there is a way to set up the system so that the district provides the public oversight necessary, while the schools themselves make the decisions about budget, calendar, schedule, and instructional methodology. I have no problem with every school in a district having a different focus, and allowing families some choice about what school would best serve them. There are transportation issues with a plan like that, but they aren't insurmountable.

THAT would use the strengths of what charter schools do to improve all of public education.

That's not what the current vision of "charter schools" is. They remove a few teachers and students from most public oversight, they offer a few families choice, leaving the rest of public ed students standardized with no choice.

Making privatization look better in the process.

[Radical Activist]

67. That's a lot of mind reading about motivations.

It sounds like your experience with charter schools in other areas is leading you to make assumptions about how they work in Chicago. Since your assumptions contradict the very positive things I hear from people who live in Chicago I'm not ready to take your word for it.

You wrote that charter schools can be good for children yet you still oppose them based on mind reading and ideological assumptions about their future that may or may not turn out to be true. Do you have any idea how callous that sounds? I hope you never make that argument in front of parents.

[LWolf]

70. No, it's a lot of talking

to directors at charter schools and teachers who teach at them.

Including Chicago teachers.

[mopinko]

56. speak for your own city.

i'll speak for mine. here they have been a good thing. they are ALL public schools. they all perform or close. they get the same funding as anyone else.

there are people who feel like their toes have been stepped on, and have found some ax to grind. but as a chicagoan with 5 kids, an involved parent, and a tax payer, i think he has done a great job. does everyone in the union love him? of course not. he is management. and the union leadership is calcified. the rank and file don't love their own leadership.
people need to get off this beef about charter schools. we need innovation in education. we need places for the square pegs facing a life in round holes. one size never did fit all.

and i can tell you for a fact that arne duncan is a big, big reason that the city of chicago is thriving, even right now. the work that he and his predecessor. paul valles, and mayor daley have done to improve chicago's schools over the last 10-12 years have not only stopped but reversed the flight to the suburbs that was threatening to hollow out and destroy this city. (and they cut the archdiocese of chicago's school system's feet right out from under them. they are folding.)
i wish i had the time to take a drive around the city, to take pictures of all the new and renovated schools and libraries that have gone up under mayor daley. i would call it 'how arne duncan saved chicago'

[LWolf]

60. I speak for public education

across the nation. Charter schools are private schools funded with public dollars. What makes them private? They get to opt out of most of the rules, regs, and mandates that the rest of public education doesn't.

That's not democratic.

If every public school had the same autonomy, and freedoms to do things differently, that charter schools do, then there would be no "need" for charter schools.

THAT'S democratic, and that's choice within the public ed system.

[mopinko]

62. you are actually very confused about what charters are.

first of all, here, they are subject to the same rules. they get the same money, they take the same tests. some are selective enrollment, some are neighborhood, some are lottery. what makes them charters is either a difference in the focus of the curriculum, or additional services for kids with special needs.
they aren't some sort of free for all zone. but if they were, applying that to every school would be a pretty stupid idea. they are about trying out innovations before you apply them to 300 schools. something the system in chicago needs very badly. especially trying out innovations for populations that do not always succeed.
and under arne duncan, there actually HAS BEEN more freedom for local schools, and more support for innovations on that level. for instance, many neighborhood schools have become specialty schools, like writing, math and science, international studies, languages. this takes a lot of work, and the support of the administration. and it was there for those schools. and there has been real continuing education for teachers, too.

and you know, arne has had his run ins with the teachers union. and it was with people exactly like you. you sound just like some of the fossils in the leadership at ctu. brains like petrified wood. parroting the same little meme over and over. but the system has moved forward anyway. and more and more kids are getting an education that fits THEM. and the union has joined the march of progress.
they got over it. you should too.

[LWolf]

65. No, actually, I'm not.

I've taught in different districts, in different states, for 25 years. I've been recruited by charters. I've met with admins and teachers from local charter schools everywhere I've taught. I've visited charter schools. Currently, I have a charter school a few miles from my current school. I know the teachers there and meet with them a few times a year.

I'm not at all confused about what charter schools are.

It's true that the rules charter schools get their charters under differ from state to state.

It's not true that they have to follow all the rules and mandates that other schools in the district that issues the charter do.

I know what makes them charters; each charter has it's own focus, whether it be in a particular program, in different curriculum or instructional methodology, or something else.

They often also use different calendars, instructional days, have more autonomy about their budget, who they hire, and what they pay. They don't have to honor the contract the district signs with teachers, they don't have to take every student who walks through the door wanting to enroll...the list of things they DON'T have to do is pretty lengthy.

Of course, the other schools in that district, especially since NCLB, don't get that same autonomy. ESPECIALLY in the area of curriculum and instructional methodology. A point I've already made elsewhere in this thread.

[LWolf]

51. Arne Duncan is a disaster,

and educators across the nation, and especially in Chicago, know it.

If you think Duncan is a positive pick, you haven't been paying attention.

As one Chicago educator recently called him:

Arne Duncan: "Privatizer, Union Buster, and Corporate Stooge"

http://schoolsmatter.blogspot.com/2008/12/arne-duncan-privatizer-union-buster-and.html

[Radical Activist]

53. I'm calling bullshit.

First, Chicago PUBLIC charter schools are not privatization, so the blog is misleading. There's a lot of accusations in the post with very little substance or links to back it up. It sounds like one person with a personal grudge.

And the Illinois Federation of Teachers doesn't appear to agree with the blog's claim that he's anti-union.

http://www.ift-aft.org/forms/index3.aspx?CID=1594&TID=top104&PID=44


Selection of Arne Duncan as Education Secretary
Statement of IFT President Ed Geppert, Jr.

President-elect Barack Obama's choice of Chicago Schools CEO Arne Duncan to serve as Secretary of Education is an opportunity to take some of the innovative ideas developed collaboratively with all parties in the Chicago Public Schools and replicate them to benefit public schools across our country.

The Illinois Federation of Teachers, along with our national union, the American Federation of Teachers and local affiliates like the Chicago Teachers Union, has pushed for a thorough review and needed overhaul of No Child Left Behind. Duncan convinced the U.S. Dept. of Education to allow CPS employees to continue to provide tutoring services for 50,000 students under NCLB. That local flexibility will be essential if NCLB is to perform as intended, and we look forward to working with Secretary Duncan once he is confirmed to rework and properly fund the law.

The IFT hopes that Duncan will look at programs he championed with CTU President Marilyn Stewart as models for success that can be used in urban, rural and suburban districts. The Fresh Start schools program helps low-performing schools receive additional resources and support to boost student achievement. The Chicago TAP (Teacher Advancement Program) offers school-wide performance incentives for improvements and professional training opportunities for teachers. Both programs show great promise.

We look forward to working with Arne Duncan in true partnership to find solutions to the challenges we face in public education. We won't have agreement on every issue, but a commitment to work together in mutual respect and understanding will form the foundation of our efforts to make our nation's schools even better.

# # #

[LWolf]

59. You can call it whatever you want. That doesn't change

the reality.

Public charter schools are certainly one of the tools for privatization.

They don't have to comply with the same mandates that other public schools do. But they get to use public money. They are private schools paid for with public dollars.

The person who wrote the piece referenced in the blog is the editor of Substance. Try some of the links he provided in the article.

He's also not the only educator who feels that way. The piece is actually an email from the ARN list, which includes quite a few people. It generated some pretty vigorous discussion among educators across the nation. I linked to the blog because I can't link to an email discussion, which is where it started.

Of course, ARN has a specific purpose; it's the Assessment Reform Network. They ARE liberal educators. You can check them out further if you like right here:

http://www.fairtest.org/get_involved/k-12

You know, I'm a member of the NEA, and I often disagree with Reg Weaver. I've thought, for example, that his stance on NCLB has been weak from the beginning. I want a stronger, more vigorous opposition, rather than a "fund & fix" stance. I'm not "one person with a personal grudge," lol. Plenty of my colleagues feel the same, and say so on a regular basis.

The public political statements made by union leaders are just that. Political statements. Unions will have to work with Duncan. They aren't going to make a public statement against him, regardless of what they, or members, think privately. If you really want to know what educators in Chicago think, ask them, not their political spokesperson.

[onenote]

42. A quibble: FCC Chairman isn't a cabinet post

And I predict that there will be DUers calling for Julius' head within a year.

[CreekDog]

48. I liked the admonition to "suck on it"

:popcorn:

[Radical Activist]

49. Yeah, i was in a good mood.

[leftofthedial]

50. yeah.

right.

And I do mean "right."