Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by JamesDPS, Feb 27, 2004.
At least you know who Bush's next target will be. How very very sad, just shows the word is very over-used. Rolls off the toungue a little too easily for some.
Are they going for broke?
TEACHERS ARE NOT TERORISTS!! I'm so pissed off that Rod Paige would even BEGIN to compare teachers to terrorists. Let's compare, my way: Giving students knowledge vs. killing people ... interesting comparison.
Now I've tried to stay as FAR AWAY as I want from any political news related to Bush, since I don't care too much about the news... But after reading that, I swear, somebody other than monkey-face better have the office after 2004.
I think that if the citizens of the US vote in Dubya for another turn, I will willingly give up my US citizenship and move elsewhere. I am not one to argue politics nor pay much attention to it but enough is enough. We are now the laughing stock of Earth due to the actions of one man and his cabinet.
just the kind of over-the-top, slanderous rhetoric i would expect from this administration. Bush can't find a solution to a problem, so he places the blame. I think blaming teachers is going to cost him dearly; their union is a strong one, and they're going to be mobilized during this election.
I don't think we have to worry about Bush being reelected again, because he seems determined to piss off all but the 4 million ultraconservative voters that he thinks almost lost him the election last time (by not voting)... he apparently forgot that he has to keep at least the same voters as last time, and by various means, he's lost a huge chunk of them...
Not to personally insult you, but if that's what you'll do, then good for you. Running away from the issues is a great way to deal with them.
Of course, if you're willing to accept all of this spoon-fed liberal media, then you might be better off somewhere else where communism still exists...
And who spoon fed you the idea that the media is liberal?
As a citizen of Texas I don't think you have the right to comment on events of the United States.
If you think Paige was referring to "all teachers" in his comments, you're right to be upset. Were he primarily referring to the upper administrative echelons of the NEA, I don't really blame him for his attitude.
Like many unions who've "matured" over time, the folks on top use the voting strength for political power. Their views often don't reflect the views of the rank and file--who must join through lack of choice.
At one time the NEA tried to amalgamate with the Texas State Teacher's Association. The rank and file of the TSTA voted no.
I don't remember the specifics, but my grandfather was some sort of wheel in the NEA in the 1930s. As a kid, I'd sometimes read their journals, on through the War years. I've vaguely kept track of their political maneuverings during these last few decades, and they've certainly changed from being a traditional "better pay and better working conditions" into a group with a very liberal political agenda. Again, I'm limiting my comments to the upper echelon folks in the NEA, not "all" teachers. Teachers are like any other group; mostly good folks, a few idjits...
i'm disinclined to believe the "liberal media" label. can you present a reputable study that demonstrates how liberal mainstream media actually is?
its treatment of bush and clinton are of particular interest.
Let's assume you're right.
Please tell us how this situation makes the NEA "terrorist" in any way by any definition of the word.
Just the last straw that this administration likes to label something has Great, the Next Best thing, or 'The Best thing ever'... and yet it fails horribly.
Many Senators never looked at the No Child Left behind Act...
But it really Leaves children behind, not helps them.
I didn't like this act and I have their view that Teachers, the people who educate, the people who care for children are Terrorists.
How could you... why would cause you to say... WHY?
As long as we're playing our favorite game of second-guessing, "What did he mean?", .
I imagine he was expressing frustration in dealing with the demands of the NEA on some issue or another. Dealing with any special-interest group can easily be frustrating. So, in the context of today's world he ill-advisedly spoke in terms of the frustrations of dealing with terrorists.
As usual, everybody goes bat-guano and gets all excited and searches for deep meanings that aren't there and uses up a lot of bandwidth on websites.
I dunno 'Rat, would you be as complacent if a top Clinton official had called the NRA a bunch of terrorists? Or would that have raised your hackles a bit?
I don't think you have to search very far to make the connection to which Mr. Paige was alluding. In fact, the only "bat guano" I see on this website is you trying to justify his statement.
To most people, a terrorist someone who murders or harms innocent people with surprise, violent attacks.
Since Mr. Paige is Sec. of Education, he should have no idea how "frustrating" it is to deal with real terrorists and was unqualified to make a legitimate comparison.
It's the new red baiting.
mac, comments from some of Clinton's people whom I observed on some of the Sunday morning talk shows did everything but call us terrorists. When various politicos, whether from the White House or Congress go to yawping about how the NRA wants everybody to run amuck in the streets with AK 47s, it seems to me that's pretty close. Sure, it's resented. That's why I made the comment about "ill-advised".
pseudobrit, I gotta disagree with your assessment about Paige and terrorists. You don't have to have experience dealing with terrorists to understand the frustration of those who do. When you deal with any special interest group making strong demands, there is always frustration. It doesn't matter whether it's the NRA, the Catholic Church, the NEA or the Sierra Club. Or the AMA, ABA or NOW, for that matter. The degree of frustration is a function of the "non-negotiability" of the demands. Have you ever tried to deal with a valued employee who doesn't yet deserve another raise, but strongly believes he deserves one? Same sort of deal. It's only a matter of degree, not of kind.
It's less that I want to defend folks like Paige than it is that I don't automatically assume the worst possible interpretation of what's said or done. I'm not always successful, but I try to avoid preconceived notions. I've had many opportunities to take surficial knowledge of statements and blast the bejeezus out of such as Kerry or Dean. I'd rather wait and be a bit more sure before I spout off.
All I have to say is that I have a brother, a sister, an ex-wife, numerous cousins, and countless friends who are teachers. I worked in a union for 15 years that worked hand in glove with NEA affiliates. In all that time not one of those people ever invited me to engage in any terrorism. So what's wrong with me that I got left out?
P.S. - Sec. Paige is an idiot, just as his "No Child Left Behind" program is idiotic. Can anyone really take him seriously now?
We should actually be grateful for Paige's intemperate remark. Every so often, the door on this administration cracks open a bit, and we get a fleeting glimpse of its inner workings. I have little doubt that the White House views unionized Americans as the enemy. Paige has simply confirmed it.
And did that irritate you? Make you mad? Make you want to set the record straight that the NRA is emphatically AGAINST terrorism?
'Ill-advised' is a pretty weak condemnation. Seems like you share Paige's view that unionized teachers are a short hop away from terrorists. Or maybe communists, take your pick.
But you DON'T call them terrorists. However frustrated you are at dealing with their hardball tactics (gee, who else engages in hardball politics that we know of?) calling someone a terrorist is a blatant attempt to marginalize them, and assert that your position is moral and decent and theirs is not. If you can't refrain from invoking the term terrorist in public against your (most decidedly un-terroristic) opponents, then you shouldn't take a job in public service where you are likely to get that flustered. By your 'non-negotiable demands' theory Bush is a terrorist for not negotiating with Saddam, Safeway Inc. is a terrorist organization for playing hardball with the strikers here in SoCal along with the workers who played hardball back. The list of terrorists would also include major business figures who wouldn't take no for an answer, an any advocacy group that holds strong positions. I'm sure that's not what you meant when you said that the tactics of the teachers union are akin to those of terrorists.
No, it's that you want to defend Paige. Your condemnation of Paige is a weak as it was for Scalia when that story broke. Only after months of more damaging reports did you finally acknowledge that there was the appearance of improporiety surrounding what Scalia did. I suppose in a few months you'll be ready to admit that calling people terrorists out of frustration isn't ok, but by then who's gonna care?
I would also argue that this isn't superficial. This was nothing short of an in-your-face insult to the nations teachers. I assume you are refering to Kerry's alleged affair, and his supposed votes against all kinds of major weapons systems? Dean's sealed records and purported 'leftist' agenda?
But why would you make such a statement? Why would you make such a connection?
I've never thought to myself while embroiled in a conflict at work that "I'm so frustrated -- this is worse than dealing with al Qaeda!"
You know why? Because I've never been bombed at work. Because being frustrated with terrorists is not like being frustrated with normal workaday things.
Paige was trying to imply such a connection. But if you want to continue apologise for his stupid, glib, arrogant, divisive and derisive stance, go right ahead.
Beats me. I'm still trying to figure out the Ralph Nader - David Duke comparison.
Maybe my schools angry shot gun wielding teacher faculty room will fill up and go off on a crusade!
This administration is completely out of touch with the American Public.
This is ***** crazy. Most of my teachers are scared to death to speak out against Bush policies, I think about 75% claim to support him- they don't want to be seen as Anti-American- as the so called "left-wing media" has portrayed those who don't support the war on terrorism.