Rahm lists Obama's Achievements, MUST READ for all you Democratic Activists

[boston bean]

In a Thursday interview, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts: his advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism; his rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown; the rescue of the automobile industry; the fact that the overhaul of health care preserved the private delivery system; the fact that billions in the stimulus package benefited business with lucrative new contracts, and that financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B2F85DDF-18FE-70B2-A835FE1E7FA8D74C">Link

Quite list of Democratic victories there, wouldn't you say???

edit for sp of rahm's name

[Lost4words]

1. Such tripe! nt

[AnArmyVeteran]

269. A system of evil versus more evil. There is no good.

[TheWraith]

272. Nah, just shit from Politico designed to stir up the left. Notice it's THEIR words, not a quote.

They can't actually quote Emanuel saying those things, because they're "rephrasing" them to try and piss off the left at Obama.

Politico is a Republican rag. It's disgusting that people around here don't get that.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

2. "The overhaul of healthcare preserved the private delivery system"

just as it was always intended to do. The whole "public option" presentation during the campaign and the stand against mandates seems like just a cynical ploy, since both stances were reversed when it came time to actually craft reform.

Rahms list of accomplishments just acknowledge what many here see and post - the causes of the corporations, the wealthy and the entrenched have been advanced at every turn. Not to mention the continued support for war everlasting.

[boston bean]

3. Rahm states what many of us have been saying,

I wonder if agreeing with Rahm is inflammatory, or cause for deletion of posts under current rules.

[Enthusiast]

211. Would quoting Rahm

be the same as saying that Obama is acting like a Republican?

[Joe Bacon]

268. Rip Rahm's mask off and you see Hamilton Jordan.

And he moves Obama further and further to the right just as Hamilton Jordan moved Carter further right.

And the sad thing is that this time there is no Ted Kennedy trying to apply the brakes.

[Enthusiast]

270. I'm just about disgusted

with the whole thing.

[blindpig]

13. Not so long ago.....

people here would be outraged at such ruling class chest thumping.

Ain't it something?

The Democratic Party ain't what a lot of people seem to think, but then it never really was.

[fasttense]

222. Yes, it was.

The Democratic party use to be what it claimed to be. Remember JFK, FDR, Johnson, even Cater saw we needed to get off the big oil drug.

Ever since Clinton, the Democratic party has tried to be a party of Pro- Monopolies and corporate favors. But it can't do both. It can't be the party that looks out for corporate and monopoly interests and protect the people. It can't cater to Big Business, ensuring they pay NO taxes, ensuring the uber wealthy pay NO inheritance tax, ensuring tax breaks for shipping jobs out of the country, while fighting for social justice and democracy.

The Democratic party has to make up its mind. Does it want to represent "We The People" or does it want to represent the interests of monopolies and corporations. Obama is trying to do both. That is where he is failing.

[bvar22]

265. The Democratic Party HAS made up its mind...

at least the "Centrist" Democratic Party Leadership has.
"We the People" lost.
The DLC New Team

(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)

[Lorien]

17. Slitting our own throats, and for what?

what do the non uber rich corporate apologists think that they attain from these "deals"?

[Lost4words]

83. same here!

[Cal33]

126. The thought just occurred to me: With the money and power

that Corporate America has at this time, maybe all Obama can do is make do with
half-way measures in order to stay alive. And where there is life, there is hope?

JFK was his own man. Look what happened to him.

[Smashcut]

157. Exactly. "We saved your insurance cartel - now send us $$$"

[Triana]

229. ..at the expense of heatlhcare reform and healthcare

So now, we still don't have healthcare. Or reform.

[underpants]

232. His comments were directed TO the business community

so, of course, he listed it as an accomplishment

[fascisthunter]

235. yup... he stated what we all knew all along

yet got attacked for saying so. Money first, people last.

[Joe Bacon]

262. That's what it was designed to do!

Every pimp who has a finger in the health insurance rackets is crying all the way to the bank! Meanwhile, the pimps are STILL rationing health care, jacking up premiums and skimming as much cash into their pockets as possible.

[Nite Owl]

4. He cares about them:

"Still, the administration has a good deal of work to do to reverse opinion among the corporate elite."

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B2F85DDF-18FE-70B2-A835FE1E7FA8D74C

[boston bean]

5. Social Security "Reform" here we come! nt

[Catshrink]

6. "advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism"

advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism

So Rahm is boast about treating education as a business? In 20 years we'll look back at this and say "Fail." Those of us in the trenches of education are saying it already.

[boston bean]

7. Yes, that and the saving the private business of Health Insurance crooks is outrageous! nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Then I'm 20 years ahead cause I've been saying fail for awhile now

:)

[boston bean]

18. Rahm blows the argument that Charter Schools are Public Schools doesn't he? nt

[MilesColtrane]

28. Oh, he's blowing something all right.

And it's attached to Big Business.

[truedelphi]

196. Given your user Id, I guess you would know about who blows what.

And I agree with your assessment.

[ProSense]

35. No, he doesn't n/t

[Jakes Progress]

198. God, what a hard hitting argument.

Your shrewd grasp of the issues and your detailed analysis just overwhelm us. I guess we can all quit posting in the light of such sagacity.

[AllyCat]

209. This is just her way. Few words to mean...???

[donco6]

239. Gasp! No blue link? n/t

[Jefferson23]

188. Validated I would say, yes. n/t

[donco6]

238. I'd say so - heh!

Right from the horse's mouth.

[NashVegas]

105. I Believe the Decision Has Already Been Made

And now the only thing it's about is pursuing and obtaining the goal.

[laughingliberal]

134. Yes. 20 years from now, we'll be seeing the same problems we see now in health care.

How long before the American people wake up to the fact that Reaganomics has failed and will continue to destroy any system it touches and us along with it?

:nuke:

[bvar22]

147. Thats the problem, Reaganomics has NOT failed.....for the very RICH!

It is working perfectly.

[pattmarty]

206. 20 years? How about in 4 yrs. By 2014 most of the "reform" will...........

..........be realized by us lucky citizens.:sarcasm:

[Triana]

230. 'education reform' = giving it to the corprats instead of it being

public? That isn't reform. That's demolition.

'Open markets" - are meant to drive our wages down even lower. It's what insourcing and outsourcing are for.

[w4rma]

8. Looks like some unreccommenders don't want DUers to read Rahmobama's real agenda. (nt)

[Romulox]

30. I'll own up to an accidental UNREC. Please accept this KICK as an apology! nt

[Catherina]

146. +1 Bury people's head in the sand so they won't know what hit them. n/t

[HillbillyBob]

9. I accidently unrec..i usually and would rec that all read this

so sorry. I was not paying close enough attention it was aimin for rec. It is time to get rid of the corpse hos in OUR government.
Hell I would run for office..but my checkered, sleazy, smeared past would give the idiots too much ammo. Not that I have done much of any thing bad..other than being gay, outspoken, liberal, and short tempered when dealin with nazis, kreestians, bullies etc.

[sce56]

10. Well I rec'ed now it is one!

[boston bean]

19. I'd vote for you in a heartbeat!

:hi:

[Karmadillo]

12. Please stop posting the truth. It interferes with our belief system.

nt

[boston bean]

20. Sorry Karmadillo!

;)

[TheKentuckian]

14. Rahm has been telling the truth on occasion here of late.

[tekisui]

85. I think they think they can build a coalition of centrists and say fuck off

to the liberals.

[TheKentuckian]

181. That's exactly whats going on. When both brands are in the toilet

there will be folks like Bayh, Lieberman, Baucus, Graham, Hunt, Lincoln, Kaine, Grassley, and Crist that they are ready to take the lead with a more socially moderate but pro-defense and "fiscally responsible" post-partisan coalition.

Bayh, Crist, or Powell will probably be the first candidate for President

[Dinger]

139. What's The Occasion?

Is it special?

[TheKentuckian]

182. Some "pragmatic" philosophical holiday, I reckon.

[Lorien]

15. If I were a conservative I would indeed see that as a list of "accomplishments"

but since I'm a traditional Democrat I'm completely disgusted and dismayed.

[boston bean]

16. I think you hit the nail on the head.

What is it the Democrats, as they exist as a political party right now, actually stand for?


edit for grammar.

[Lost4words]

self delete

posted in the wrong spot sorry!

[tom_paine]

143. That was well said. n/t

[Jakes Progress]

199. +100 You have it perfectly. nt

[Hell Hath No Fury]

21. Thanks for this!

The next time any DUer posts that crazy ass list of "accomplishments" that shows up here in defence of O, I will happily post this as a response.

Is it clear yet, folks? have you figured it out yet?

This admnistration is NOT for the American people. It never was and it never will be. And, sadly, much of the modern Democratic Party isn't either.

I will be goddamed if I will help them slit my throat by voting for another one of these corporate ass munchers. :mad:

ENOUGH!

Rahm Emmanuel and his New Dem/Third Way/Neoliberal ilk are death nell of the Democratic Party.

[BootinUp]

22. Every comment negative?

You didn't think the President and his advisers were going to have to campaign on the principle his policies are good for business?

News Flash, if the major CEOs are slamming Obama as anti-business for the next few months it really will be a bad thing come November. We don't need that kind of press.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

29. You cannot serve two masters.

I don't care much what they say -- I care about what they do, and what they have done repeatedly is screw over the American people in favor of the corporate class.

I am done with that.

A butt fucking is still a butt fucking, even though the current Dems are using lube.

[BootinUp]

38. You might want to consider

that your expectations are unrealistic. Just a thought.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

59. It's "unrealistic" to expect --

not to get repeatedly stabbed in the back by the Democratic Party?

Sure. OK.

[BootinUp]

80. We should attempt to explore

why you think that is the case, lol.

[Lost4words]

99. Just a lame thought, you are OK with all this?

reboot if you can!

[BootinUp]

I'm ok with Democrats holding the majorities

in November. Does that help you understand my position?

[Lost4words]

114. But it wont happen because of PEOPLE LIKE YOU!

you status quo types Are THE PROBLEM!

[BootinUp]

121. I'll bet you said similar things in '06 and '08. nt

[Lost4words]

125. so you are more democrat than me, is that what you are spewing now?

you know all dont you, when you have lived through more than I have call me till then we will compair notes.

[BootinUp]

128. More like

lets go with how we won the elections the last 2 times instead of your plan. I'll be around.

[boston bean]

130. I guess you don't remember 1994 or 2000? Were you around then?

[BootinUp]

133. Sure, but I doubt we will agree on much

from those either.

[boston bean]

136. Why would that be?

[Smashcut]

158. WTF difference does it make if they fuck the people on behalf of big business interests anyway?

[BootinUp]

161. America fucks itself

by either not voting or being too stupid to understand how the fucking will occur. The politicians generally follow our wishes.

[IndianaGreen]

227. Why? Does your job depend on who holds the majority?

Will your boss lose the bigger office and the premium parking space if Dems go in the minority? Is this what this is boiling down to?

[Jakes Progress]

200. You might want to consider

that your expectations are an example of why we are in this mess. Just a wake-up call.

[Romulox]

33. Ever hear of "good cop/bad cop"? HINT: They're BOTH really bad cops!

:hi:

[Donnachaidh]

64. and you don't think the corporate dust up might not be more theatrical BS for the masses?

Please -- they got the reform watered down to the point of uselessness. They -got- what they wanted. Now we're headed into a voting period - what better way to pay back the party than to start *grumbling for the photops* in order to fool the masses AGAIN.

Kabuki theatre is a forte of the elites. At least until people stop watching it.

[BootinUp]

86. This is a conspiratorial type of argument

I generally don't go in for all the conspiracy stuff bandied about to support views that cannot be supported with facts.

[Lost4words]

107. You are one day old aren't you! you might catch that turnip truck you just fell off.

[BootinUp]

122. Terribly sorry

if I upset you with that post. There are so many conspiracy theories floating around that are nothing but nonsense and I like to point them out occasionally.

[boston bean]

124. The one conspiracy theory I see being promoted is that

Rahm doesn't mean what he said!

And that Obama isn't privatizing education, and even if he were, well who cares as long as there's a Democratic majority.

[Lost4words]

129. You dont upset me, the world is full of you ilk

and it was only Oswald that killed JFK,....

[laughingliberal]

138. It is not a 'conspiracy theory' to say the uber wealthy corporations will do whatever it takes...

to keep everything they have and steal more of the little we have left from us. I'm surprised there's anyone left who would question that. We've given them the big tax breaks for years on the stupid theory that they would then invest their savings and create jobs. These years coincide with the years we saw wages stanating/declining. Business invested and created jobs when their tax rates were high and they had to invest and create jobs to avoid a high tax burden. Rather than return to that, Geithner is assuring business they will keep tax rates low on capital gains and investment income.

Sure. Telling them they will still be able to continue raking in their profits tax free without assuming any responsibility for the good of the country as a whole is guaranteed to work this time. Please.

[BootinUp]

145. You sure took a mole hill

and made a mountain. Around here any expression of support for the admin has become a target for the stupidest attacks. I suggest you re-read the post I replied to that suggested the Obama Administration made some deals and is being stabbed in the back. This is what I suggested was a conspiracy theory.

I agree with your tax rant. Of course major corps are always looking for tax breaks. Until more Americans see past tax policies as destructive (not always pro-growth) the Dem party will continue to run / campaign on and vote as a pro-low tax party and corps and repukes will attack Dems that suggest raising taxes. Thats just the way it is. No secret deals / pay back stories are necessary to explain it.

Obama did campaign on changing tax policy to have some affect on investment dollars going offshore to avoid taxation and on the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy as I recall but nothing really on general corporate tax rates to increase investment. Until those issues are debated in campaigns don't look for any major changes there. Basically the bills policies Rahm is touting are exactly what Obama campaigned on with few changes.

[laughingliberal]

160. Those 'few changes' to what he campaigned on happen to be the changes that favored corporate wealth

& power over us. It is frustrating here. When Obama does something he campaigned on with which one does not agree, we hear, "that's just what he campaigned on. Where were YOU?" When he backs away from a policy he campaigned with which one did agree, we're just mad cause we didn't get our pony.

The bottom line, for me, is what's gone on for 30 years here has not worked for the average American and doing more of it is just going to make it worse.

[BootinUp]

162. 2012 should be more fun, rewarding.

So far its been very damn rough.

[JHB]

94. Speaking of realism...

...the track record is that they'll call any Democrat "anti-business" anyway.

[BootinUp]

98. So does that mean

we just sit back and take it? Sorry, I don't think this is a useful point.

[JHB]

127. It means we don't hand them more things to assauge their fears...

...when other things would make more economic sense. (not to mention more political sense.)

Paul Krugman is on this topic today:

But no. All the buzz lately is that the Obama administration is “antibusiness.” And there are widespread claims that fears about taxes, regulation and budget deficits are holding down business spending and blocking economic recovery.

How much truth is there to these claims? None. Business spending is indeed low, but no lower than one would have expected given widespread overcapacity and weak consumer spending. Business leaders are feeling unloved, but giving them a group hug won’t cure what ails the economy.

Ask the Obama-is-scaring-business crowd for some actual evidence supporting their claim, and they’ll tell you that business spending on plant and equipment is at its lowest level, as a share of G.D.P., in 40 years. What they don’t mention is the fact that business investment always falls sharply when the economy is depressed. After all, why should businesses expand their production capacity when they’re not selling enough to use the capacity they already have? And in case you haven’t noticed, we still have a deeply depressed economy.

***

So why are we hearing so much about the alleged harm being inflicted by an antibusiness climate? For the most part it’s the same old, same old: lobbyists trying to bully Washington into cutting taxes and dismantling regulations, while extracting bigger fees from their clients along the way.

Beyond that, business leaders are, as I said, feeling unloved: the financial crisis, health insurance scandals, and the catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico have taken a toll on their reputation. Somehow, however, rather than blaming their peers for bad behavior, C.E.O.’s blame Mr. Obama for “demonizing” business — by which they apparently mean speaking frankly about the culpability of the guilty parties.

Whole column at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/opinion/09krugman.html?_r=2&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[BootinUp]

132. We seem to be talking past each other

I don't remember proposing any gifts to business lobbyists. I read Krugman already this morning.

[JHB]

166. Fair enough. In that case, what do you propose...

to keep the CEOs from slamming democrats as "anti-business" for the next four months?

[BootinUp]

168. They seem to be on the case.

I still think Obama is the best we got at these things. I have suggested recently he needs to turn up the heat a lot, and I see him moving in that direction.

[laughingliberal]

140. Krugman is spot on, there. Business would not spend right now, regardless.

But they can surely blame their lack of spending on efforts (weak, though they be) to rein them in and blackmail us into letting them continue on their merry way and do whatever they please with no sense of responsibility to the country as a whole. Does anyone think if we didn't do financial reform or raise their taxes they would suddenly create a lot of jobs?

[Catherina]

148. Newsflash. There are only two sides here.

You've made your side clear. Sad.

[BootinUp]

154. My side has won the last two elections

so I am reasonably happy with what has happened. Sure I would have preferred better more liberal bills, more progressive tax policies etc, but to see the raving madness around here when shit goes exactly as expected is just humorous or depressing. More depressing if it hurts us in November.

[Catherina]

167. I see. Your side is personalities. My side's principle's won the last election

but those principles have were brutally betrayed so all you can cling to now is personalities.

Us. Corporations. Forget about it. Your side but not mine.

You just keep on being happy, happy, happy. I'll be in the corner spinning and knitting. Later on, please don't act as surprised as the French aristocracy did. Feigned ignorance is most unbecoming.

[BootinUp]

169. The lines you draw are mostly ficticious.

I suggest you have forgotten what Obama said he was going to do or didn't say.

[Catherina]

170. And I suggest you and your faulty memory wait until election day. n/t

[blindpig]

171. There is only one line.

That between capitalists and workers.

Rahm has made it clear as can be what side he is on, and by extension which side the Administration is on.

Which side are you on?

[BootinUp]

172. This threads been interesting

but I have enough posts explaining my thoughts already here. Please carry on.

[blindpig]

175. It was a rhetorical question anyhow.

http://www.metrolyrics.com/which-side-are-you-on-lyrics-natalie-merchant.html

[maryf]

180. for those who like to sing along:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeKYVxvzKcU

[Jakes Progress]

257. Translation: I've already

given too much away about myself so I'm out of here.

[Jakes Progress]

201. Last two elections?

You supported george?

[donco6]

254. That wouldn't be surprising.

He probably voted for McCain too, but hit the wrong button, then realized it didn't matter!

[donco6]

253. It seems appeasing business is always at the expense of progressives -

as in each of these statements:

his advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism (read: at the expense of the union);

his rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown (in favor of no-strings cash);

the rescue of the automobile industry (again, at the expense of unions);

the fact that the overhaul of health care preserved the private delivery system (lovely);

the fact that billions in the stimulus package benefited business with lucrative new contracts (even lovelier!),

and that financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus (still out, since bill still pending)


So what's the point of caring about the November campaign?

[madfloridian]

23. Recommending. Rahm bragging about hurting unions.

"education reform open markets despite union skepticism"

I knew when Obama chose Rahm which way we were headed. I was attacked for saying so, but I was still right.

[Lost4words]

111. yes you were!

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

131. boy were you ever!

You have been the most vigilent poster about the assualt on public education.

I do usually know that DLC'er a#%hole Rahm is for it, it's a pretty good bet that I'll be against it.

[laughingliberal]

141. Yep 1000X. eom

[tom_paine]

144. 99 our of 100 DLC Democrats and Republicans agree...

The only thing worse than unions are Liberal Retards (except when the DLCers need us to make their phone calls and canvass for their Corporate Agenda, then,briefly, the DLCers pretend not to agree)

[WillyT]

156. You Do Have That Annoying Habit Of Being ABSOLUTELY CORRECT !!!

:hide::evilgrin::hide:

Keep up the great work!

:hug:

:hi:

[Enthusiast]

212. You were right then

and right now.

[fascisthunter]

236. Yes You Were Right All ALong

A lot of us were... yet we got attacked and even some were baited into being banned from this site.

[donco6]

248. Of course you were. And we'll never hear apologies from those who weren't.

Will we?

[LWolf]

251. +1

[grahamhgreen]

24. Any Republican should be proud of these accomplishments! So they screwed up HCR on purpose

just as we suspected

[Lasher]

220. Yes.

That's why single payer was off the table before they started.

[Edweird]

25. Yep, that about sums it up.

[mmonk]

26. You got me.

:rofl:

I just had to look.

[Xenotime]

27. It's more than Bush could ever claim.

[Forkboy]

34. Figuring out that 2+2=4 is also more than Bush could ever claim.

[Ikonoklast]

31. Ben White from POLITICO.

Republican propaganda.

[boston bean]

36. I suppose Rahm never said such a thing.

[Radical Activist]

44. Every time I read something by him it turns out to be useless bullshit.

[joeybee12]

32. Education Reform?

Certainly this is from The Onion!!!

[Octafish]

135. Union Busting = Education Reform

http://www.nea.org/home/38699.htm

[maryf]

179. You got that right; and the NEA said:

"New Business Item 44
The NEA shall encourage President Obama to replace the Sect. of Educ. Arne Duncan with a person who is aligned with the interests of the NEA, its members, and especially the students it serves. Sect. Duncan's philosophy of applying the business model of competition to education is misguided and deleterious to public education."

One thing, I love the students, the students' learning is the teachers job; the job of the union is to protect the teachers' jobs...glad to see one of my three unions is looking out for the teachers...

[phleshdef]

37. This was in response to whether or not the administation has a policy of being "hostile to business"

The Ben Smith piece that comes from lists all all these other policies that have pissed the business community off. Rahm just pointed out policies that were not hostile to business.

I love how some DUers play the same game Republicans do though. Rahm says "unions were skeptical" about something and people turn that into "Rahm hates unions". This is just like with the whole Rahm calling a commercial "fucking retarded" = Rahm called progressives "fucking retarded" logic. Its "Al Gore says he invented the Internet" bullshit.

I never expected anyone to nationalize the banks.

The rescue of the auto industry was a GOOD thing and it also prevented a complete meltdown of the auto workers union. Our American car companies, from the standpoint of being pro-labor, is something we should have wanted to save as progressives.

I also don't see why anyone should have a problem with the stimulus package benefitting businesses with lucrative contracts, thats what it was suppose to do, it was suppose to get the economy moving again.

And saying "financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus" implies that we will have a certain, stable, unbroken, regulatory apparatus backing up our financial system. Thats bad how?

Not being "hostile" to business, does not make you some anti-progressive corporatist. I'm not saying they are making all the changes we need. But more than half of those items Rahm listed should not be a problem with anyone, progressive, liberal, conservative, moderate... except for maybe the libertarians, they don't wanna do shit about shit.

[boston bean]

40. Speak to the ones you have a problem with.

I would be most interested in what you have to say about them.

[phleshdef]

58. I never cared to preserve private health insurance.

But I never asked for it to be destroyed either. I wanted to see a government alternative competing with it. But votes in the Senate are votes in the Senate and regardless of its downsides, there were too many equally important things in the healthcare bill that needed to happen, with or without it.

[ProSense]

41. Exactly. In fact, this article

destroys the meme that Wall Street and corporate America are happy with the administration.

The White House has launched a coordinated campaign to push back against the perception taking hold in corporate America and on Wall Street that President Barack Obama is promoting an anti-business agenda.

Obama has been happy to be seen by voters as cracking down on Wall Street but those efforts have had an unintended result: feeding a sense that the president and his party are indifferent or even actively hostile toward big business, whether those businesses are Silicon Valley tech companies, Midwestern manufacturers or Main Street small businesses.

[boston bean]

47. It's not his actions they don't like, it's his words. Words that mean nothing.

[ProSense]

49. Right,

they're all up in arms about words and need to be convinced the words mean nothing?

[boston bean]

52. Pretty much, they WANT MORE!

What they got aint good enough and for more votes and $$ they might just get it.

[ProSense]

60. "What they got aint good enough "

Oh brother.

That's the point.

:rofl:

[boston bean]

68. Oh brother

It's not enough, ProSense.

they want more, as I said.

[ProSense]

72. It's reform,

enough would have been the status quo. You are arguing that the business community is up in arms because reform didn't please them.

[boston bean]

79. Oh no, that is not my argument. That is your argument.

nice try though....

I believe Rahm when he states how great Obama has been for them.

[ProSense]

88. You: "What they got aint good enough "

Enough what? Reform?

[boston bean]

92. I suppose you missed this opener to my reply: "Pretty much, they WANT MORE!"

yet, you continue to distort my words.

[ProSense]

100. They want more what?

Weaker reform? If you're arguing that they didn't get what they wanted, that the bill isn't weak enough for them, you are basically proving that they are not happy with the bill.

They are not grumbling because they are happy.

Period.

[boston bean]

102. They want more of what Obama has already handed to them on a silver platter.

They want more of what Rahm boasts of.

[donco6]

255. More of this:

greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism;

rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown;

the rescue of the automobile industry (through free money);

preservation of the private health insurance delivery system;

lucrative new contracts,



As business leaders, who wouldn't? But Obama will never be able to satisfy them, no matter how many times he bludgeons progressives.

[Hydra]

191. Funny you mention that

“Rather than respond to atmospherics, they should look at policies where we have been supportive,” Emanuel said.

Rahm himself says "Look at all we've done for you. Sure, we have to pretend to be against you, but that's because we still need these stupid people's votes (for now)."

[laughingliberal]

142. Wall Street and Corporate America will not be happy until the American people have been stripped...

of every last cent and forced to work for third world wages. And, even then, they'd bitch about something. I don't think we should be putting our kneepads for them every time they start whining.

[Enrique]

39. why did he leave out offshore drilling?

Obama proved with that decision that he's willing to embrace every "pro-business" position, no matter how stupid and wrong.

[IndianaGreen]

224. Obama's greatest contribution to raping the environment was his energy policy

that he announced with much fanfare on March 31st: more offshore drilling, new nuke plants, and "Clean Coal."

[Radical Activist]

42. GE CEO: “business did not like the U.S. president and the president did not like business,”

Bean, you should really put the quotes in proper context, as the linked article does. The comments were a defense against business leaders who believe Obama is regulating them too much and is anti-business. Apparently, CEO's don't believe that recent reform measures are as corporate-friendly as many at DU think.

Verizon Communications Chief Executive Ivan Seidenberg, head of the influential Business Roundtable, slammed the administration in a recent speech in Washington.

The Business Roundtable, which includes CEOs of the biggest companies in the U.S., has had ongoing contact with the White House, and Seidenberg’s comments were widely interpreted as indicating a major schism between corporate America and the West Wing.

You wouldn't hear this kind of opposition if the Wall Street, credit card and banking regulation were the total corporate sell-outs that some people portray them to be.

During Obama’s trip to Missouri, White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton defended Obama’s record, saying the White House would not relent on its agenda on financial reform, ending corporate tax “loopholes” and other issues the business community might not like.

“Are we going to agree with the business community on every single issue? No,” Burton said. “But the president came into office saying that he was going to do some very specific things, like financial regulatory reform, which he talked about repeatedly on the campaign trail. He said he was going to close loopholes for overseas investments."

[boston bean]

45. I did put it in context:

"In a Thursday interview, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts"

please respond to Rahms point that Obama has been good for business, re healthcare, privatizing schools. Do you have any problem with that?

That is the point of the OP.

[Radical Activist]

50. You're right, Obama isn't a socialist. You proved it.

He's going to rebuild the economy through reform measures that are meant to create a stable market and curb the worst corporate abuses. That's the most we can realistically expect from any Democrat.

The proper context you're disingenuously ignoring is that CEO's are angry about Obama pursing a progressive, regulatory agenda. I take it as a good sign that the recent bills have something worthwhile in them.

Maybe next time Rahm will name the much longer list of accomplishments liberals should like. I'm sure you'll post and celebrate that too, right?

[BootinUp]

51. So it would be better if Obama was bad for business?

please answer yes or no. Don't wait for the translation.

[boston bean]

53. If bad for business means good for people, yes.

Do you think anything that is good for business is good for people?

[BootinUp]

54. Well, I don't accept that they are mutually exclusive. nt

[phleshdef]

61. they aren't mutually exclusive, unless you are anti-capitalism in every single way.

Some people can't get the difference between good, regulated, society productive capitalism and bad, unregulated, unbridled, society destructive capitalism. You either hate the idea of nongovernment owned business or you aren't a "progressive".

[boston bean]

66. How do you get that from what I've written.

You are putting words in my mouth. I haven't said anyone is not a progressive.

yet, you take my words and twist them. It's a great tactic, but you are only fooling yourself.

[phleshdef]

101. My, don't we feel so self important.

That wasn't a reply to your post, it was a reply to a reply to your post and I didn't list any specific posters that it was aimed at.

[boston bean]

106. I got the gist of your posts.

Why deny you didn't mean me??

[phleshdef]

I mean anyone that attacks any and all pro-business policy as "nonprogressive".

You can decide whether or not that means you.

[boston bean]

113. I do not do that, and that was the response to your reply.

Yet you deny you were speaking of me.

your sooooo cute, and I'm not dumb.

[phleshdef]

116. I AM pretty cute.

[Catherina]

150. Sorry, you're not.

Sniff your butt as much as you want but it doesn't make you cute.

[phleshdef]

110. I mean anyone that attacks any and all pro-business policy as "nonprogressive".

You can decide whether or not that means you.

[Radical Activist]

67. I just wish people would honestly advocate that view

instead of disingenuously dismissing every reform as worthless without informing everyone that they believe ALL reform is worthless unless its a total takeover of the capitalist economy. I'm glad to hear people argue a socialist viewpoint but its the cynical dishonesty of pretending any reform bill could ever be good enough for them that annoys me.

[boston bean]

70. Speak to the issue. Give me some examples of how great all those things were that you listed

that helped someone like me, or like you?

You again, make it personal.

[Radical Activist]

77. I already responded to your last request for specifics.

Your reply was silliness like "huh?" and dismissing accomplishments you clearly don't understand. I have no reason to believe that starting another list will make you any less evasive.

[boston bean]

84. I don't want a list. You provide lists with no substance. I want you

to defend privatizing public schooling.

I want you to defend Health Insurance Reform.

I want you to make Rahm out to be a liar.

[phleshdef]

103. "You provide lists with no substance. I want you" - I'm gonna imagine thats the entire post.

[Radical Activist]

108. lol

Good idea.

[boston bean]

112. yeah, belittle, try to embarass, that always works.

:eyes:

[phleshdef]

115. Lighten the fuck up.

[Radical Activist]

117. It's usually best when it becomes clear someone isn't interested in honest, serious discussion.

[boston bean]

118. yes, and you have proven that. nt

[Radical Activist]

82. Who said my statement was about you?

If you took it personally then I think you just did a good job of self-identifying.

[boston bean]

87. When you are responding to me and making generalizations about what annoys

you, for some reason I thought I might have been part of the generalization.

[blindpig]

151. Well, that's because there is no difference.

'Regulated Capitalism' is a chimera, Capitalism cannot help but throw off regulation or otherwise compromise it in order to maximize profits. It is their writ, their duty to investors.

Kill Capitalism

[harun]

43. Their model clearly is....

To say to the right, "Look we aren't doing what the Left wants".
To say to the left, "Look at how bad things would be if the Right got what it wants".

Meanwhile saying to the Corporations, "Look, we have done everything you want, pay up!".

[Radical Activist]

46. That's not what the article suggests at all.

If you read the article, the comments are a reaction to CEO's who are angry that Obama has been doing many things they don't want.

[boston bean]

48. May be doing this or that or what? Look at what he has done.

Do you have nothing to say to that?

They don't like his words about BP. So WHAT? What about his actions, as Rahm so ingeniously points out.

[Radical Activist]

55. His actions.

During Obama’s trip to Missouri, White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton defended Obama’s record, saying the White House would not relent on its agenda on financial reform, ending corporate tax “loopholes” and other issues the business community might not like.

“Are we going to agree with the business community on every single issue? No,” Burton said. “But the president came into office saying that he was going to do some very specific things, like financial regulatory reform, which he talked about repeatedly on the campaign trail. He said he was going to close loopholes for overseas investments."

Wall Street reform
Banking reform
Mortgage industry regulation
Credit card regulation
Expansion of health care
Taking student loans away from banks
Creating an independent agency to oversee the lending industry
Stronger EPA regulation
Forcing GM to produce more fuel efficient cars

I could go on. The list of accomplishments that business don't like, and liberals can praise, is much longer than what Rahm mentioned.

[boston bean]

57. Wall Street Reform = bailouts and barely regulation

Banking Reform = huh?

Mortgage industry regulation = huh?

Credit Card Regulation, giving banks a year to jack up interst rates and reduce credit, great!

Expansion of Health Care = Expansion of Healthcare Insurance, doesn't matter if you can afford the care, just pay the premiums.

Taking student loans from the banks= good

Creating an indpendent agency to oversee the lending industry = Yeah right!

Stronger EPA = don't use corexit, ok, don't listen to us

Forcing GM to produce more fuel efficient cars = while bailing out the banks and screwing union workers.

I don't think I can praise much of it. Of course you don't offer specifics as to why a liberal should praise them.

[Radical Activist]

62. Yeah, the usual cynical, defeatist dismissals used by people who believe everything they read.

It's very easy to convince gullible people like yourself that any reform is worthless by pointing out a few flaws and compromises. There are always a lot of articles like that going around. But Wall Street regulation and other reforms have measures that Ralph Nader and other consumer advocates have been demanding for 20 years or more.

Progress is progress even if we don't get everything we want. Your denunciations of each bill have no substance or meaning. The corporate CEO's quoted in your linked article don't like these reforms as much as you pretend they do.

[boston bean]

65. You point me to the great deal the people have gotten from it. Please do?

You want to make it personal. Numero Uno hint that youy have lost.

[ProSense]

69. Why,

so you can label it irrelevant or propaganda?

[boston bean]

71. Why don't you believe Rahm? He is the President Chief of Staff after all. nt

[ProSense]

74. This is the point where you divert. The information at the link has nothing to do with Rahm. n/t

[boston bean]

76. Oh really? I divert? Rahm said it. Talk about diverting....

LOL

[ProSense]

91. What does Rahm have to do with the link at the comment you responded to?

What?

[boston bean]

95. My post was about Rahm. And my response to your links were, so you don't believe Rahm

When he states how wonderful O has been for business.

Lordy!

[Radical Activist]

75. You responded with meaningless dismissals that have no substance.

I called you out on it. Obama has progressive accomplishments. Deal with it.

Why don't you make an honest response to post #37 instead of ducking the question. Which of the items in that list do you have a specific problem with and why?

[saracat]

192. Do you consider what Rahm listed "progressive " reform? really?

[BootinUp]

96. A simple way of putting it

when something is passed by one party with no bipartisan support its a sign that its the best bill we can get. And every piece of legislation mentioned by the previous poster had some shit in it that the other side didn't want and our side did.

Another way to analyze it is to compare these efforts to Obamas and the other Democrats campaign planks in '08. Generally you will find that Obama is having significant success in upholding his promises so far.

[boston bean]

97. Really, if we passed some bill with no bipartisan support, why couldn't it have

been balls to the wall, a great bill?

[BootinUp]

104. All the Reps and Senators don't belong

to one State / district and vote the same way regardless of the legislation. If you watched the process of legislating these bills it should be apparent to you.

[boston bean]

109. I watched it and it could have been much better.

Ben Nelson and a bunch of other fucks got what they wanted with nothing in return!

[BootinUp]

119. I don't know how to respond

to drivel like that.

[boston bean]

120. Yes, I just drivel away. You don't have much to say, you must admit. nt

[ProSense]

63. Despite

the criticisms, the bill does include significant reforms.

[Hannah Bell]

56. because we desperately needed "education reform open markets"? wtf?

[tekisui]

73. The elites continue to strengthen themselves. And, Rahm is proud of it.

[Lost4words]

78. Aint that the truth!

[Vinca]

81. " . . . overhaul of health care preserved the private delivery system;"

Ah, it warms the heart.:sarcasm:

[JHB]

89. I hope you're missing a sarcasm tag...

...since listing the administrations "pro-business" positions to assauge crybaby CEOs and Wall Streeters isn't anything "activists" would be cheering about.


I do note that Rahm doesn't tell the "pro-business" (read as "pro-business-owners-screw-everyone-else) community that their fears were "fucking idiotic."

[PufPuf23]

90. Rahm clarifies reality for DU and

denial rains in the swamp.

What a waste of political capital.

Neo-liberals are the Good Cops to the Neo-conservative Bad Cops and most of us are collateral damage.

[IndianaGreen]

225. We are Obama's collateral damage

Nothing like a DLC Administration to finish the job begun by Bush.

[Starry Messenger]

93. Gee, I always wanted to live in a neo-liberal paradise.

Maybe in a few years if we're really lucky, they'll be selling us air tickets for breathing.

[Kalyke]

123. Achievements? I thought this was a list of his failures.

[Name removed]

137. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[grahamhgreen]

149. We need a primary challenger.

[slay]

165. YES we do!

Badly. I couldn't be more disappointed in Obama and his administration. :(

[LTMidnight]

186. Kiss the black and latino vote goodbye if you do.....

....please don't be stupid enough to say you can without it.

[Bluebear]

189. The Latino vote??? After the inaction on immigration reform? Hokay.

[LTMidnight]

193. 68% job approval rate by Latinos

..... may have something to do with the whole First Latina Supreme Court Justice thing.

[Bluebear]

194. Turnout will be the proof of the pudding, not a "poll number"

[grahamhgreen]

197. Please don't be so close minded to think that the challenger will not be black or Latino.

[Bluebear]

202. Well, that threw a fly in THAT ointment :)

[Name removed]

208. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MessiahRp]

214. Anyone order a Pizza??

......

[Forkboy]

215. We love you too.

:hug:

[uponit7771]

217. Name one with the respect of Obama or Powell that couldn't look like a crab?

If you don't know what a crab is then you should grab a black friend and ask them how repulsed by them the community is.

[uponit7771]

218. ....said the people who brought America RayGun. No Thanks! I'm don't want to repeat the BAD

...parts of history

[fascisthunter]

237. Yes We Do and Yes We Can

[Sebastian Doyle]

152. I see only ONE positive on that entire list (saving the auto industry)

Only a right wing idiot like Rahm Emanuel could see any of the others as a "good thing" much less something that a Democratic president should brag about.

Fuck the windmills.... let's just plug a turbine into FDR's grave. He's got to be spinning so fast he could probably power everything east of the Mississippi all by himself.

[TBF]

176. By "saving the auto industry" he means they broke the union.

It wasn't positive.

[happy_liberal]

153. This sounds like a speech to the Bilderbergers

n/t

[bvar22]

155. THIS is what the "Centrists" Democrats are listing as "accomplishments"?

What ever happened to

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world."--FDR

Where is THAT "Democratic" Party? :shrug:

[DirkGently]

159. Wow. They're worried about being perceived as too "anti"???

business? Corporations aren't the consituency, fellas. Consider the possiblity that Main Street takes precedence over Wall Street when the two are in conflict.

Think about appeasing the people, rather than the money, maybe?

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

163. Au contraire. Rahm is making it clear that corporations ARE the constituency.

There's little if any doubt remaining.

[DirkGently]

177. Oui!

[slay]

164. It's funny ya know, what Rahm calls victories, I call losses

What a corporate asshole. Destroys our first real chance at change for what - to suck up to BIG BUSINESS. Thanks for showing once again Rahm where your, and the Obama administration's, priorities lie. As usual, it's NOT with the people. :mad:

[girl gone mad]

173. Too bad Obama didn't take a cue from FDR and welcome their hatred instead..

because the masters of the universe will continue to loathe him, no matter how much ass kissing he does.

[TBF]

174. Translation

Open Markets = On with capitalism!
Education reform = Champion charter schools and to hell with the public schools
Refusal to nationalize bank = bonuses for bankers
Rescue of the automobile industry = broke the union
Preservation of private delivery system = status quo for insurers and pharmaceutical companies, the rest of us will pay and/or die
New government contracts = yippee, more war!
Financial Regulation = first they took our 401K's, next is Social Security

Who needs republicans when you have friends like this...

[inna]

178. wow. nice.

[Danger Mouse]

183. education reform open markets despite union skepticism

My response to this would probably get me in trouble, so I'll put it in the most polite way possible.

Mister Emanuel, I disagree with you in the strongest possible terms.

[Dinger]

184. How Would A Mod "Get In Trouble"?

I think I know what you mean, but I can't help but be a bit surprised at your reply. Thank you for being honest, and brave.

[Danger Mouse]

185. lol i'm just kidding around.

:hi:

it's perfectly fine for me to express how disappointed i am.

it wouldn't be okay for me to post something ridiculous, though. :hi:

[Jefferson23]

187. Oh I am sure business leaders are grateful for education reform

open markets despite union skepticism, his rejection of calls from some to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown, the fact that the
overhaul of health care PRESERVED THE PRIVATE DELIVERY SYSTEM, and that financial reform that will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-cash regulatory apparatus....good God!

This is too sad for words, this group is grateful for what they paid for but will never be satisfied, the beast always wants more.

As long as these players have the power to influence, the majority of Americans will continue to be disenfranchised. But keep trying to tell them to be satisfied Rahm, good luck with that.



And then we have Geithner, drive that stake in good their buddy boy, "Geithner stressed on Kudlow that the administration hopes to keep the top tax rate on capital gains and dividends at 20 percent and said that the White House is generally pro-business and does not believe the government can drive the economy."


Boot lickers.

[Bluebear]

190. Yay! Union-busting and private delivery systems!

WTF party is this again?

[nightrain]

210. that it! If tea-baggerism has taken over the Repub party, we've got the New Dems and DLCers....

[fascisthunter]

241. maybe the DLC should be labeled D-Baggers

[nightrain]

266. yep. good one. LOL!!

[Bluebear]

267. +

[myrna minx]

195. K&R n/t

[Jakes Progress]

203. rahm presages the death of the Democratic party.

At least the party that I grew up with and worked for for forty some years.

I don't think I can support a president who doesn't call this man into his office and make him resign after he admits publicly that he was full of shit and talking without the president's permission.

[Jakes Progress]

245. Edit: Misplaced post.

[Catherina]

204. This is a national nightmare made worse by the death of the Gulf.

And there's no sign of it letting up.

[pattmarty]

205. Well that's just great for a Republican President.

[Joe Bacon]

207. This is 1978 all over again

Just as Carter moved further and further to the right after he was elected, Obama is doing the same thing.

What a disappointment he is.

I never thought I would go through the letdown of 1978 again, but here it is again and just as 1978 heralded the emergence of the New Right so 2010 is showing the emergence of the teabaggers.

[Hannah Bell]

213. that's an interesting thought.

[uponit7771]

219. ....said the people who brought America RayGun. No Thanks! I'm don't want to repeat the BAD parts of

...history

[peace frog]

246. Argh, I think you're right about that

painful as it is to admit. I don't pray, but may God help us all.

[uponit7771]

216. I dont trust Rahm

[old mark]

221. Wow! Good thing Obama's not a republican....Business would take over the whole

country!

:eyes:

Thanks, Rahm for clarifying this administration's main concerns... and standing up to those pesky Unions, too-so brave, so Democratic!

Rec.
mark

[Hubert Flottz]

223. Rahm is a scab at heart IMHO...

He's looking for the chamber of commerce's campaign funding to replace the union's support. How can you create jobs in America when you are all for shipping everything in the country offshore. Who is going to have money to buy the cheap imports when nobody has a job?

[limit18]

226. Add this to the "victory list"

Barack Obama has the worst budget record of any president in American history.The amount of debt owned by foreign countries is increasing, confidence in the dollar is dropping, gold prices are soaring, energy costs are rising, the trade deficit is widening and Mr. Obama's first year Gallup approval rating has fallen faster than any president since records have been kept. Connect the dots.

[mochajava666]

228. Obama has dissappointed once again and is bragging about it

If you don't like a right-wing presidency, you are a "fucking retard".

Rahm, you are one slimy prick. Go Fuck Yourself.

[Metta]

231. Slight, of hand. Sounds like an apology. Who's he kidding?

He's part of the problem. They're giving away the store.

[Bluenorthwest]

233. He makes no bones about it, does he?

And there you go.

[Bluenorthwest]

234. Mudd

edit for sp of rahm's name.

[bonnieS]

240. education reform

open markets? despite union skepicism? That is an achievement??????? What are they doing--selling children to the highest bidder in fresh air markets?

[fascisthunter]

242. D-Baggers

the DLC and Rahm have earned the title.

[AnneD]

243. Well excuse the F#@K out of me....

who the hell is Obama and the DEMS working for? Rahm's first quote answers what we have all expected "Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts."

I knew it when he chose Tim Geithner as Treasury Sec. The DEMS have forgotten to dance with those who brought you to the dance. They deserve to be dumped, the leadership anyway. I vote and give to candidates on a case by case bases these days. They better pass a liberal DEM standard-no DINOS.

[flyarm]

244. Yeah and Rahm called us fucing retards..I personally dont give a rats ass what he says!

other than..He has been fired!

I won't read his "fucking retarded" talking points!

[peace frog]

247. Rahm is unfortunately staying right where he is

and he doesn't give a rat's ass what we say about him. We've been HAD, and soundly too.

[flyarm]

252. whippeee..and while he is there..I will no longer do another thing for the Dem party nor give a damn

dime of my money!

This "retard" is done! over and out!

[Jakes Progress]

249. Accomplishments bush one could only dream of. nt

[donco6]

250. Well, I guess business leaders should be happy.

But they're not, of course. Like the greedy pigs they are, they will only grunt for MORE MORE MORE. And while the progressives get the boot in the face they've been getting since the beginning, Rahm gets to thumb his nose at us in public.

Pathetic.

[harmonicon]

256. umm... most of those are BAD things. nt

[Jakes Progress]

258. We all owe some gratitude to rahm.

Not only has he made perfectly clear what the goals of this administration are, he has also helped us see the differences here on DU. Some here actually think the things rahm lists are positive and even liberal accomplishments. Most of DU sees them for what they are. Conservative Lite vs Old LIne Liberal is probably the divide working now . (Other than the whole dreamy thing of course.)

[donco6]

260. I agree, except -

- except for the word "Lite."

[Jakes Progress]

261. I can go with that.

I was just using the terms the way they have come about. I think there are still liberals, conservatives, wild-eyed lefties, and bat-shit righties. But the leaders of the Democratic party are taking the positions that we used to ascribe to the main stream republicans, the ones that called themselves conservative. Now those people are called center left and the term conservative belongs to the bat-shit crazies. God help us but there are walking creatures who fall even to the right of those.

[Jakes Progress]

263. Edit. self delete

[donco6]

259. kick

[Jakes Progress]

264. I guess if we are into the whole "hope" thing again,

we could hope that the administration is telling the corporations one thing and then planning on doing another. I mean look at what he said during the campaign and look at what we got. Now he can to it to them. How's that for hope?

[suffragette]

271. Rahm's being refreshingly upfront about action, impact

and intent of policy here.

"advocacy of ... education reform open markets despite union skepticism"

Because open markets really are at the center of how to fix public education. That "fix" is apparently in, with public money being paid to private companies to purchase tests and tell schools how they should be run more like business. Then that can all get traded on the stock market, boosting those companies profits. Nice access to previously dedicated public funds ad a double bonus there.

And never mind what those pesky unions have to say. What would the people who are actually in the classroom know about the best practices for education, anyway?