Hero, Villain or Just Luck?

So for a change of pace, the guys at MPP and myself have been discussing causality and correlation.

MPP Dems Learn to Negotiate
MPP A Natural Experiment
G2A Correlation does not imply Causation

In particular, Bill P and I don't necessarily agree regarding who is responsible for the good times we experienced in the 1990's or why Bill Clinton was disapproved of by some folks. Here is Bill P's version of reality.  What do you think?

"No, their problem with Clinton was not with his infidelity and the "cover up." That was a GOP pretense. They didn't have any grounds to object on the basis of "morality" or "covering up:" Gingrich and dozens of other conservative Republicans had done the same or worse as Clinton. 

Gingrich's GOP found they couldn't stop Clinton through regular political channels. They were confronted with the spectacle of a popular liberal president--presiding over a longer period of US economic growth than under Reagan--and the GOP congress wasn't going to get any credit for the success of that economy, because they'd fought Clinton policy every step of the way... 

...so Gingrich and the conservatives rolled the dice one more time, betting on a big fat juicy scandal easy-for-the-media-to-understand sex scandal that just guaranteed to bring down a popular Dem White House and secure a conservative future.

But the voters were smarter than they thought; the voters saw that the whole thing was hypocritical and politically (not morally or legally) motivated--and instead of Clinton, it was Gingrich booted out on his a**. 

And Clinton stuck around to balance that damn budget, to leave office with a high approval rating, and only the Constitution stopping him from being voted in for a third term.

And then that guy all the conservatives promoted and voted for got in. And with the help of the conservative Republican Congress, he ran the country, the economy, and that balanced budget you want so much: right into the s***ter." Bill P.
 _______________________________________

"I think I remember the Republican Congress giving him a hand. And quite a few fits...  

 Entitlement spending has to be brought in line with payroll tax revenues. I just don't think the Democrats are even dealing with that reality.  

Or it becomes another welfare program. Which should have means testing and work requirements."  John (G2A)

Wiki Govt Shutdown
Wiki Clinton Impeachment
Wiki Welfare Reform

I like Bill Clinton, but I think he had a lot of help and good luck.  The Soviet Union was reeling, Saddam was in his No Fly Zone prison, Al-Qaeda hadn't flown jets into US national treasures and killed thousands, etc. The internet, other technologies, and the Y2K scare was driving lots of work. The GOP helped minimize spending increases.

I won't bother defending Bush other than to say that he had lot more problems to deal with.  The tax cut probably should have never happened, especially if he knew the war was coming.  But of course he didn't because the towers had not been blown up yet...  Bummer.

Wiki No Fly Zones
Wiki Terrorist Attacks
Wiki Bush Tax Cut (1st)

Trump vs Clinton Styles

From MP Debate. Constance drew some pretty negative conclusions from "how the candidates chose to prepare for the debate".  Being a person who usually manages problem solving Teams by dragging them all into a room where I help to facilitate them through anger, frustration, confusion, etc to consensus, I offer a different view.

By the way, my style rubs some managers the wrong way.  They like to have lots of "one on one" discussions where they work to try to broker a deal.  Neither is right or wrong.  I like my way because almost never do I have a personal agenda, being an analytical nerd,,,  It is just a problem and other people know more than I do about the possible root causes and solutions, what I add to the process is team tools, data tools, logic, restating / translating, peace making, etc.

My one team was a bunch of Financial Managers and IT people, they looked so disappointed when I said that I knew almost nothing about the issue we were there to address. I thought they were going to revolt and ask for a new 6 Sigma Black Belt. Then I started to explain the roles, process, tools, etc and they figured it out.

"Which one respects the office. 

Many news outlets have commented on how unprepared Trump seemed for this debate, the first one-on-one he's ever had to participate in. He actually criticized Hillary Clinton for "staying home" to prepare for the debate (and she took great advantage of that dumb comment).

What does it mean for our country that Clinton was so well-prepared and Trump so ill-prepared for this debate? It means that she respects the office of President of the United States. He regards the presidency as a vehicle of his self-importance and his power to exact revenge on those who oppose him or contradict him. For Trump, to be president is to be Number One--it's all about him. That's why he hasn't bothered to make and offer plans to us about how he would handle this or that problem. 

For Clinton, the presidency means taking responsibility for the well-being of hundreds of millions of Americans, and of others around the word. Working to improve lives, save lives. It's not all about her. For her, it's all about US." Constance

Really: "For her, it's all about US."

Now please remember that the Clinton's are the couple who went from broke to being worth $100+ million and having a large charity with questionable donors over a ~16 year period. And she maintained a home server so she could control public access to "her" affairs and communications. She is not a Jimmy Carter who seeks to give and help wherever he can.

I offer a different view, she believes that preparing for a debate is the best way for her to attain the power and influence that she has been pursuing for decades. I mean I understand, she is so close to attaining that power and it may be pulled away from her like it was in 2008. That would be terrifying and I would work hard to prepare.

Clinton is more of an analytical introvert and therefore to store up energy and focus she tends to seek privacy. Trump is more of a extroverted collaborator and therefore being with people listening to them is what works for him.

Having worked with both personalities for decades, neither is good or bad... They are just different." G2A

"Planning vs Reality
Since I don't like Clinton or Trump, some of my readers are telling me I should vote for Clinton because she is the safe bet. I mean she has adopted many of the far Left planks from Bernie's Social Democracy platform, and she has spent a lot analytical effort creating detailed plans for how she would do them which scares me to death. However my readers remind me that nothing she is selling will come to pass as long as the GOP controls the House, which is likely to happen.

I mean their reasoning is very logical and practical. It is very likely that a vote for Hillary is a vote for 4 more years of gridlock. Which ironically I am a big fan of. If they would only freeze governmental spending for a couple of years, force the government to become more effective / efficient and let GDP growth raise the tax revenues so we could start paying down the debt... It would be perfect !!!

So I asked the following questions: Why is Hillary making all of these promises that she will not be allowed to implement? Shouldn't she be honest with her voters and explain this reality?

Is it a bad or good thing that Trump does not sell a detailed plan that he knows may not become reality? Remember he is a deal maker so long term detailed plans are pointless to him... He will get between the GOP / DFL and see where they can agree to take things. Thoughts? " G2A

Trump's 5 Assaults on Democracy

Hillary seems pretty accurate in this. USA Today Hillary Clinton charges that President Trump has launched five 'assaults' on democracy

1. Undermining the rule of law. Clinton points to news reports that Trump expected Attorney General Jeff Sessions to protect him from special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, regardless of the law. She also accused Trump of urging the Justice Department to go after his political opponents. Although she didn't mention it in her essay, Clinton is one of the people Trump has publicly asked the department to investigate.
2. Failing to protect the U.S. election system from further attacks from the Russians or other foreign governments. Clinton said Trump and Republicans also are trying to suppress voter participation by putting "onerous – and I believe illegal" – regulations in place.
3. Attacking journalists and "waging war on truth and reason." Clinton talks about Trump's penchant for making false and misleading statements. She says he needs to learn to take criticism from the media and push back without destroying the free press.
4. "Breathtaking corruption." Trump promised to "drain the swamp," but instead, Clinton contends, "It’s amazing how blithely the president and his Cabinet have piled up conflicts of interest, abuses of power, and blatant violations of ethics rules."
5. Weakening national unity. "Trump doesn’t even try to pretend he’s a president for all Americans," Clinton writes. "It’s hard to ignore the racial subtext of virtually everything Trump says."

I mean there is no question about 1, 2, 3 & 5.  Trump does not believe in team building, collaboration, facts and data, encouraging peace, etc.  #4 seems accurate given the number of "Trump's best people" that got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. Not sure if it is breath taking though.

Clinton Enabled Sexual Assault?

Now does Hillary really seem like the "defender of women" after hearing how she terrorized these women who threatened the political futures of Bill and herself.  Now why do Hillary supporters who would usually support sex abuse victims choose to ignore these voices?

CNN Hillary the Enabler
TownHall Trump News Conference

"Sitting at a table with Trump, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick and Kathy Shelton introduced themselves one by one and explained why they are voting for the candidate. As a refresher, Jones accused Clinton of flashing him at the White House. Broaddrick accused Clinton of raping her and Willey accused the former President of aggressively groping her. All of them say Hillary Clinton threatened them after the incidents about remaining quiet and not causing problems.

"Mr. Trump may have said some bad words, but Bill Clinton raped me and Hillary Clinton threatened me. I don't think there's anything worse," Broaddrick said. "

Benghazi Hearing

After reading these, I am guessing the Left will still see her as innocent and the Right will still see her guilty or incompetent.  Now there was a waste of 11 Hours...

CNN 11 Take Aways
Fox News Benghazi
Politco 13 Top Moments
ABC Benghazi

From the ABC link, these are the facts/comments that still have me on the fence. Thoughts?

Some of the strongest testimony so far, most likely to be seized upon by critics of Clinton, was the exchange with Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. Jordan pointed to two emails -- the first was a note providing a readout of a call between Clinton and the Egyptian prime minister sent on Sept. 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attack. The email quotes Clinton as having said, “We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack -- not a protest.” 

Clinton had a clear response: “When I was speaking to the Egyptian prime minister or in the other two examples you showed, we had been told by Ansar al-Sharia [a militia group] that they took credit for it. It wasn't until about 24 more hours later that they retracted taking credit for it," she said. 

Clinton also defended herself by saying she was sorry her version of events didn’t "fit your narrative." 

"Why didn't you just speak plain to the American people?" Jordan asked.
"I did," Clinton replied. "If you look at my statement, as opposed to what I was saying to the Egyptian prime minister, I did state clearly. I said it again in more detail the next morning, as did the president."

The Farmer in DFL?

Doug wrote an interesting piece here.  It seems farmers like Trump more than Clinton... From my recent visits out West, that certainly is the case. MP: WTF: Where’s The ‘Farmer’ in DFL?

"Please remember: A vote for Clinton is likely actually a Vote against Trump... and A vote for Trump is likely a vote against Clinton...

Most of my farming family and friends see Clinton as everything that is wrong with the US government... (ie life long self serving politicians padding their wallets at the expense of us citizens) Therefore all the "Hillary for Prison" signs in rural MN.

And the ever increasing number of land use regulations sure isn't helping their opinion." G2A

"I can't argue with that first sentence, which is too bad. I can't remember even a single presidential candidate, much less a pair of them, with so many negatives, whether real or perceived.

Unfortunately, your farming family and friends, like mine, are not looking beyond the immediate. "…Everything that is wrong with the US government…" is a criticism more accurately aimed at BOTH political parties, not just the DFL. Self-serving politicians, lining their pockets at the expense of the rest of us, serve as purported representatives of the population under the aegis of both Republican and DFL parties. If Hillary deserves prison, so did/does George Bush, but not only do I not see "The Shrub for Prison" signs now in rural areas, nor did I see them in rural areas during the Bush administration. "Cheney for Prison" is also richly deserved, but I don't, and didn't, see those signs, either.

I don't think Ms. Clinton should have been paid $200,000+ to give a speech of any kind, to any audience, but doing so is perfectly legal, and more importantly, Ms. Clinton did not make those speeches while working for the United States government. She made those speeches as a private citizen, and isn't even a little bit unique in doing so, nor was her fee among the highest paid for that sort of speech. Dozens of wealthy businessmen have been paid that much and more to give similar speeches to similar audiences.

Why should farmers, being citizens of the same society as the rest of us, and being subsidized to some degree by the rest of us, be exempt from land-use regulations that the rest of us are expected to pay attention to, especially those regulations that affect the health and safety of their fellow-citizens?" Ray

"I often find it amusing when city folks talk about "farm subsidies" like the farmers are getting them for free and that they are the only folks who benefit from them. The government uses them to incent private property owners to behave in a certain way and to stabilize the US agricultural system. I think all of us citizens can appreciate that, especially those who struggle to pay their grocery bills.

Increasing the buffer strip requirement from 16 feet to 50 feet was pointless and just frustrated many farmers even more. It would have been much more effective to just enforce the 16 foot buffer. Most farmers are great stewards of their land and want to keep the good top soil / fertilizer in their fields where it can earn them a profit.

I have a friend who is on one of the watershed boards, he is always fascinated at how high the allowed run off is in the cities as compared to in the rural areas. Please remember that most of the run off from fields flows through the soil into perforated tile and them into the water stream. (ie filtered) And most of the stalks and grain are harvested or plowed under... Unlike all the fertilizer, salt, oil and grass clippings that are washed off our asphalt / concrete roads into our local water shed." G2A

Silly Clinton

CNN Clinton Blames Comey  She runs on a platform that is further Left than any modern candidate except Bernie...  She is a secretive uptight introvert who never was open, approachable and honest with the public.  She fails to energize the Democratic base, especially the young folks.

Now she is surprised that she lost and looking for a "scape goat".  What a silly Clinton...

MP Romney vs Trump in MN  I mean Trump only got ~3,000 more votes than Romney.  So MN must have only been close because the Democrats did not come out for her.  This probably is why we have a GOP MN Senate and House now.

" On Tuesday, he was the 11th consecutive Republican nominee to lose the state’s electoral votes. But he finished just 1.5 percentage points behind Democrat Hillary Clinton, which is a very slim margin compared to President Barack Obama’s nearly 8 point margin in 2012 and more than 10 point margin in 2008. 

Trump and Mitt Romney, the Republican who failed to defeat Obama here, and ultimately, in 2012, got about the same share of Minnesotans’ votes for president — just shy of 45 percent. In terms of total votes, the counts were similar, too: Romney’s final vote count was within 3,000 of Trump’s 1,322,892 in Minnesota on Tuesday, according to the most recently available election results from the Minnesota Secretary of State."

Stuck in the Middle with You...

Here is what Laurie thinks Moderates should do.

"I think that a true middle or moderate view in this election is a person who strongly dislikes both candidates but is firmly in the never Trump camp. I think they would grudgingly vote for Hillary."

And she may be correct?  However I think that a true moderate should look both the policies and character of these poor candidates and make their own decision.

In the comments at MP Lonliness, Rachel made the following argument.

"I'm sorry that Ms. Carnahan is lonely. But, if she's really running on the idea that she can be someone that goes beyond politics, then she should have the courage to say who she is voting for for president. Quite frankly, it will probably say everything her potential constituents need to know about her. If she's voting Trump, the liberals won't vote for her because of what he stands for and they know that she's ok with what he stands for. If she's voting for Clinton, the Republicans won't vote for her because Hillary (she's an old school Republican, so it's not what she stands for that's distasteful). Personally, I couldn't vote for Ms. Carnahan because I believe that anyone who hasn't made up their mind on the presidential race has some significant problems." Rachel

"Do you really believe this? "she's an old school Republican, so it's not what she stands for that's distasteful"  Have you looked at her Web site's issues page? She was Left of center initially and went only further Left to placate Bernie's supporters. I can't think of any Republican who supported higher taxes, tax payer funded college, tax payer funded healthcare for working age adults, nominating Liberal Justices, etc, etc, etc. Not to mention her questionable character.
And yes Trump's character is also questionable... That I do not deny." G2A

"Yes, Really. Remember Reagan? If she ran on the same platform as Reagan (and she's not that far off already, honestly), the GOP would still hate her because Hillary. Put another way, the GOP would hate Reagan if his name was Hillary Clinton, because quite frankly, the policies, including the "liberal justices" are not terribly different. Let's face it, though, Ronald Reagan is the GOP Jesus--more of a legend than a role model." Rachel

"Facts and Data. I think they are pretty far apart. At least based on this policy document.1980 GOP / Presidential Platform"

"Really. I must be reading the wrong document. Got a different link?" Rachel

"Funny. In that document they promote: Lower taxes, Reducing government spending, Supply side economics, Reduction of welfare, etc. 

All the normal GOP stuff that looks nothing like Hillary's platform which promotes: Higher taxes, Public investment in technology / companies, Increase in free college, free healthcare, etc, etc 

Yep. They are pretty different, or do have a source to help me understand your view?" G2A

I guess my point is that people who are still undecided need to ignore all the emotional vilifying that both parties are doing and get back to basics.  And if anyone says that Hilary is an "Republican" from any era, just say NO...  As GovTrack shows, she was a moderate Liberal as a Senator and has only gone Left from there to chase the Bernie supporters.
On the Issues Clinton
Clinton GovTrack

With Trump it is a bit more challenging since he bounces around...  But if you really don't want Hillary and her policies to be the way we head.  Then he may be worth taking a chance.

I wish you luck on coming to a final decision, and encourage you to make your vote count by...

• Voting for Trump / Against Hillary
• Voting for Hillary / Against Trump

Because doing anything else means you have wasted your vote in our 2 party system.

Trump Jr's Problems

We have discussed this elsewhere... But I thought you would like a actual related post.

FOX News Trump Jr Emails
CNN Trump... "I Know Nothing!!!  Channeling Sgt Schultz...
VOX We Are Beyond Innocent Explanations

Here are the last 2 comments from "elsewhere".

"It definitely does sound like juicy political intrigue, I wonder if any of it was illegal? I guess we will see what Mueller's investigation determines.

Kind of like we did when Clinton purposefully kept her business emails off the business server for questionable reasons.

I keep thinking I will be reusing the old Clinton post title with a new set of names...

"Trump Etal is Irresponsible / Negligent, Not Criminal"

I agree that the Trump etal folks are worse than Clinton, I just don't where illegal starts for Private citizens meeting with foreign parties." G2A

Campaign finance law prohibits the soliciting, accepting, or receiving contributions or donations -- which include in-kind contributions such as research -- from a foreign national.

If there's more where this came from, there could also be (at minimum) a conspiracy case related to election fraud. " Sean

 

Clinton and Dayton: Really...

I thought these topics and surreal comments were interesting.

CNN Clinton on Hobby Lobby Ruling
MPR Dayton on IL Union Ruling

It seems that Clinton believes government should be able to force people/businesses to pay for what they believe is murder, and Dayton believes that government should be able to force private daycare providers to pay Union fees.

I will never understand these big government folks.  I mean if a person wants an IUD or morning after pill, work for a company that finds these acceptable or pay for them yourself.  And the idea that government can pressure people to pay Union fees seems oh so wrong to me. The Union should attract members by adding value, just like other businesses and groups do.

Thoughts?

G2A Is Pregnancy a Disease?
G2A Childcare Union Dues

Castro, M Obama and Clinton

Castro and Clinton probably will keep the factchecker folks busy for a few days, however Michelle rocked.

I really appreciated the commentator that noted that both Mitt and Obama "married up" when they were lucky enough to marry these supportive, intelligent and capable wives.

Thoughts?

DNC 2012 Julian Castro Speech
DNC2012 Michelle Obama Speech
DNC 2012 Bill Clinton Speech

Should Have Charged Clinton?

This is an interesting twist. Laurie said she thought people were losing interest in in Clinton's email.  I am not so sure...


CNN Majority Believe Clinton Should Have Been Charged

Trump - Clinton Plans

Based on the plans Clinton discussed last week, I am moving back towards preferring Trump.  She definitely is pandering towards the Sanders far Left crowd...


NPR Plans
FOX Plans
CNN Money Fact Check
CNN Money Clinton Plan Creates Jobs
CNN Family Plan

It is a Mad Mad World

Sometimes my conservative FB Friends, however this one seems pretty much delusional.

Impeachment..... Each and every one of you should be ashamed and pray that this doesn’t happen....and, I’ll tell you why.....

• For 8 years, we sat silent, while Obama divided our nation. 
• He used identity politics, race warfare, and class warfare to divide us all. 
• Obama thrust universal healthcare upon us and we sat silent, 
• Obama and his administration removed monuments, statues and plaques....our past, our heritage from parks and plazas in cities and small towns around the nation, and we sat silent....
• In the meantime, Hillary and Obama let 4 Americans die in Benghazi, while they watched on closed circuit TV..... Again, we were silent. 
• We watched Hillary Clinton and Donna Brazil rig a primary against Bernie Sanders. 
• We saw Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch (Attorney General at the time) sit on a flight line, only to find that Hilary was exonerated for any crime; regarding her acid washed/bleach bit server and 33,000 deleted emails. Again, we were silent....
• We have watched our duly elected president harassed each and every day, for 3 years; even though he has put millions back to work, brought jobs back to America, stood up to our adversaries, and fought like hell to protect our borders, and yet he and his family and staff are ridiculed and dismissed, and we sat silent...
• Now, we see Joe Biden leveraging $1 Billion American dollars for his son. 
• However, the Democrats and the media only care about impeaching Trump! 

So, I can tell you with the utmost certainty, if you are successful in your witch-hunt, we will NOT be silent!!!

Tread lightly...... Years ago the Japanese leaders said, “I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant.” The silent majority are pissed!!!😡

I mean who is author kidding... "We sat silent..."  Maybe he lived an alternate reality? :-) I mean:

• I don't remember Obama ever calling people who were different from him names or vilifying them like Trump does regularly.  Remember Trump calling Mexicans / Hispanics murderers and rapists.  Or his implying that Muslims are terrorists, while calling White Supremacists good people.
• I don't remember anyone passing Universal Healthcare, there was the Affordable Healthcare Act where people were required to buy good quality health insurance or they would need to pay extra taxes.  Just as we require drivers to carry quality liability insurance so the tax payers and victims don't get stuck paying their bills.  I have never understood the resistance against making people carry good quality health insurance, I mean do they prefer paying for their emergency care through our taxes, higher fees at the hospital, bankruptcy costs that we all absorb?  And again...  Who sat silent?  I have been hearing Conservatives whine about ACA since before it was passed. :-)
• And silent regarding Benghazi, give me a break.  The GOP Congress spent tons of money on investigations that came up with SQUAT...  And Hillary at least had the balls to show up and testify before Congress unlike our current spineless President. (Note: He is a civil servant, when an investigation is being held his people should answer questions under oath. Just think of squawking would would have heard from the right if Obama had said... We in the Executive Office do not need to answer to the GOP House of Representatives)
• Emails: please remember that again. Hillary produced a LOT of data, worked with FBI, testified in Congress, etc.  Unlike you know who.
• Now I voted for Trump and like some of his actions, but how can anyone respect a man who lies, name calls, etc regularly.  If you disagree, please tell me where.
• As for accomplishments: the biggest are Conservatives Judges and an unnecessary tax cut that has spiked the deficit and national debt and mortgaged our children for generations.  More info here.
• Regarding Biden...  He was just one of many who knew the individual had to go and it was done out in the public via official channels.  Please do you research.  Whereas Trump did it on the down low via his personal lawyer and the EU Ambassador who normally would not even be working in Ukraine.

Now we have a Senator who is supposed to be the jury foreman colluding with the defendant, and a President who aggressively refused to cooperate with a very legal investigation.  And a bunch of supposed law and order Republicans who are cheering on this refusal to answer simple questions under oath.  

As I say...  Would you have supported Clinton stone walling Congress?

Bengazhi and Hillary Part 2

Those very puzzling moderators are at it again... MinnPost Bengazhi

"Why didn't Cheney and "Scooter" and their ilk use the standard email system? Conservatives sometimes have short memories." Phil

"Emails, really ??? What is this really about then--is this the "House Committee to investigate email procedures of Hillary Clinton"? What about all of the other departments and department heads who followed similar wmails procedures? What about security at Benghazi? Nope, emails, emails, emails. Keep beating dead horses--they can't get away." Neal 

"Curious where is the partiality from the writer? What additional analysis/perspective was missed? Or did we see an early agreement that the 8th time around was similar to the last 7? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is akin to insanity. Should the arriving at the insanity part required additional analysis?" Dennis W.

My points in response seemed pretty tame to me, however 3 different wordings were REJECTED...

• It is likely that Liberals found the behavior of Cheney and Scooter questionable and suspicious. Why doesn't Hillary's poor choices seem poor too Liberals?  Does the fact that another politician did something questionable set the new standard lower for future politicians?
• Labels and tone matter. I would not expect to see a professional political analysis saying this. "The day was driven by the Obama/Clinton Derangement Syndrome afflicting the Republicans on the committee. "
• There has been a big change since the previous investigations.  Hillary had for some reason neglected to turn over all of the related emails immediately during the previous investigations. The big question is why didn't she turn over her server when the first investigation opened?  Instead it took years for her to make her public governmental emails available to the proper authorities. 

How to Help Poor Kids Learn?

NPR Supreme Court Could be Headed to a Major Unraveling of Public School Funding

A FB Friend posted the above link with the comment. "The attempt to theocratize America continues." And the first commenter wrote. "So sick of religious zealots stealing from the public to fund their indoctrination centers. People want to segregate their children from poor people let them pay to do that."

Then I added the following and we were off to the races... "As for segregating their children, millions of very Liberal people do that daily by "moving to better neighborhood", enrolling in a magnet / charter school, open enrolling to a different district, etc. Why should Christians who pay a LOT of these taxes be forced to pay even more to attend a school that is aligned with their beliefs? Especially since many of the public schools have been forced to become so sterile / no religion / fewer parties / events? Why again should all of our tax payer dollars only go to support a near monopolistic system that refuses to measure, change and improve?

Well I never did get very much for answers, but the original poster did take the time to write a lot regarding his perspective... And I am curious what you think?

In 1991 I was a college graduate. Stung by the poor job outlook in 1991, I looked into going to work for the Federal Government. They had a program called the Outstanding Scholar program for college grads who met certain criteria, and it put you on a fast track to move up the first few paygrades in federal employment. Shortly after graduation, I was offered a position supporting the CFO for the US Department of Education (ED) In Washington, DC. At the time, I was a young moderate to conservative Republican who thought I knew everything (as is typical for the age) and I was excited to work in and around all the action in DC.  

About that same time, Governor Lamar Alexander, of Tennessee, was appointed Education Secretary by then president George H.W. Bush. After a history of conservatives bashing ED and wanting to shut it down (think William Bennett), Bush and Alexander believed that education is a priority and that the Federal Government did have a role in influencing education to make it competitive with the rest of the world.  

Around that same time, ED adopted "America 2000", a set of education goals developed in a joint, bipartisan effort including the President and all of the nation's governors. It included six education goals. I do recall a couple of them: All students start school ready to learn, and a graduation rate of 90%. These were goals that the Government wanted to help the nation accomplish by the year 2000. We were all very excited about these goals, and the bipartisan way in which they came to be. And state and local schools would get funding from the Federal Government tied to adopting America 2000 and putting together plans to meet the goals. It seemed like a win-win proposition for everyone.  

In 1992, Bill Clinton won the presidency and appointed Richard Riley as the Education secretary. I didn't know what to expect because I had really only known Republican administrations in my lifetime at that point, and I did not vote for Bill Clint on in 1992, nor did I vote for Mike Dukakis in 1988. As it turned out, it was a lot of the same. Bill Clinton had been one of the governors who had developed the national education goals, so they repackaged America 2000 and called it Goals 2000. They were largely the same with some changes.  

Over the next several years I got the opportunity to interact with some of the education gurus who came in to help promote the national education agenda, including Diane Ravitch (who was so well respected she was appointed under both administrations), who was appointed by Secretary Riley to serve as a member of the National Assessment Governing Board, which supervises the National Assessment of Educational Progress. She was also an early proponent of "No Child Left Behind", which was the repackaging of America 2000 and Goals 2000 by the new George W. Bush Administration in 2002.  

What happened from there, however, is really where problems began to develop. School districts became so focused on achieving the benchmarks dictated by the goals, in order to get the Federal money, that it changed teaching. I had left the Federal Government by then and had moved into working for Federal contractors in various roles. But I knew A LOT of teachers and I was married to one. They made up the vast majority of our social circle and many, many family members and extended family members as well. The joy and passion of teaching became harder for them to find. What they had been educated and trained to do, to inspire students to learn, became less important than meeting test score targets. There was pressure to not fail students who were poor performers because of graduation targets. Teachers, talented and passionate about education and learning and seeing their students succeed (not about pay), began to leave teaching.  

Charter schools started to become a big thing, utilizing public education money to, in essence, create private schools where they could admit only the top performers and keep out poor performers. Then they started showing better test results (shocking). So they gained more traction.  

Now what do we have? Schools still failing, still too may children being left behind. National standards that have bastardized and corrupted real education, the politicizing of education funds by far right interests who believe in this farce of "liberal indoctrination" (I can assure you that if it's not tied to the national education standards, it's not being taught).  

And, if you take the time to read any of Diane Ravitch's retrospective (she has written and blogged a lot on this subject) on the national goals and standardized testing she helped create and promote, you will see that she now regrets it. She regrets what it has become, and regrets school choice, too. All things she promoted and was considered instrumental in starting at the federal level. She recognizes now that the best predictor of poor school performance is poverty. She now focuses her efforts on addressing poverty and racial segregation.  

The attacks on teachers, teacher unions, etc. that you have bought into John, are all done for political gain. The real "fix" is all about having schools where all children have the same opportunity to learn, regardless of their socioeconomic status or their race. The national standards have failed to address those fundamental causes of poor achievement. Attacking teacher unions doesn't address those either.  

Addressing the causes of poverty and racial inequality are likely going to gain the best traction toward improving educational achievement. If you want to really "Give to attain", John, then work toward influencing people to take up the cause of poverty and racial disparity in our country. Vote for the candidates who have plans to do this. Look for constructive solutions instead of looking to blame those who are in the trenches fighting the good fight every day. Vote for politicians and support organizations who are most committed to addressing poverty and racial inequality.

 

Here were my initial thoughts in response:

As for brief immediate answers... You now have stepped into the chicken vs egg problem because correlation does not mean causation... Poverty in and of itself does not cause failure in school, therefore giving people more money will not necessarily yield better results... It is the things that cause poverty that often drive poor academic results. Un / undereducated parent(s), irresponsible / neglectful parent(s), single parent, high crime neighborhoods, cultures that do not value education, addicted parent(s), racism, etc.  

I know many low income folk who's kids did great in school, but that was because they had 2 parents who were serious about their child learning. (much like my friends in China and South Korea)  

The US Education system was created to lift people out of poverty. To say that we must eliminate poverty to make it work is very counter-intuitive and counter-productive.  

As for "the teachers are stressed" because their kids must learn... Halleulia !!! I am stressed because I must deliver everyday or my bosses will give me the boot. That does not mean that I hold it against my bosses that performance is why I am paid each month. It is nice to enjoy one's job, but it is also healthy to be pushed to learn and perform even better!!! Don't the kids deserve to learn each day and to be ready at 18 to be independent capable citizens?

In summary, the folks commenting in opposition to me believed the answer to closing the achievement gap was to go back to 1990, stop the testing, give the Publics Schools ever more money, get rid of the public charters and stay out their education system. In fact, I was in essence berated for even weighing in on the topic since I am not a teacher.  Here was the list from one of them.

 

If you want to build a better education system in this country. 

• pay teachers better and support them 100% 
• hire people that actually have experience in education that make policy for education. 
• treat every school equal, and give every student the same opportunities.
• poor people vote to. Stop making policy that rewards the rich families.

To that my response and questions were.  In MN we do not treat every school equally. The schools that get the most money by far are the schools with the most challenging student demographics. It may still not be enough but it exceeds $20,000 per student. And they still have the worst academic results.

1. So how much should we raise that amount to?
2. How much will the achievement increase?
3. What should happen if the money is spent and things do not change substantially?
4. Do we just keep increasing the funding or do we promote competition?

Thoughts on this chaotic long piece?


Here are some of the many links from these and other parts of the exchange.

Politico History of NCLB
NEA's Response to Race to the Top
G2A Blame vs Contributions
G2A Why are Poor People Poor?
MW Definition of Teach
BTA Economists Ate My School
G2A How to Win the War on Poverty
G2A AYP, NCLB, PDCA
MinnPost MPLS Data Teacher Equity by School
Wiki Public Employee Union History
VOX SCOTUS on School Funding
CSM SCOTUS on School Funding
Diana Ravitch Blog
Forbes Texas vs California

Different Clinton Emails

MSN Clinton Speech Emails

I can't wait to see if this goes anywhere...

Clinton is Irresponsible / Negligent, Not Criminal

I think the FBI Guy said it very well.  Thoughts?


CNN Why Comey Stands Alone
CNN Clinton Trust Problem

No Particular Place to Go

This is shaping up to be a long repetitive 6 months.

CNN Clinton regarding Trump
CNN Trump regarding  Judge
CNN Democrats regarding Sanders
CNN Obama regarding Drug Offenders
Forbes regarding Clinton Emails and Biden

Any new thoughts regarding these on going wranglings?

Why Clinton Lost?

Well here is a new analysis.  MSN Why Clinton Lost

This leaves me wondering what Urban Dems will do differently to attract rural and suburban working class voters?  Or if they will continue to double down on trying to win the votes of the poor, minorities, LGBT, urbanites, environmentalists, etc by buying them and/or scaring them into it.