home

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 07:51:14 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I'll be sitting in for David Waldman this morning on Daily Kos Radio from 9 to 10 Eastern.

How to Listen to Daily Kos Radio:

Can't see the Flash player? Click here to download the stream directly.

Open Thread.

< Monday Night Open Thread | Brass: Cheney "Offended" By Obama On Intelligence Briefings >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Morning Open Thread | 165 comments (165 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Can we talk about the Chicago (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:16:01 AM EST
     teachers' strike?

    I'm sure the teachers/educators among us are following it, and are likely aware of what the real issues are; for those who aren't, please don't rely on the media to tell you: they've settled on a meme - the greedy, petty, union members who only care about their pay and benefits, and don't care about the children.  Watching NBC last night, that meme was fully on display.

    Too bad the media keeps failing to mention the thousands of parents supporting the strike.

    Yesterday, Romney tried to bait Obama into responding; David Dayen's take on Romney's statement was:

    The problem with this statement is that the preferences of the teachers and the children are in concert. Larger class sizes in schools without air conditioning have led to classes being taught in 96-degree heat. The 20% longer school day and increased class size and workload on teachers, without renumeration (the 16% proposed increase over four years is less than the 20% increase in class time, especially when you account for inflation), does not serve teachers or students who get less one-on-one face time and dedicated learning opportunities. And because of the revamped teacher evaluation system, based largely on standardized testing, the mostly minority students in Chicago will get taught toward a test biased against them and unable to provide them with the skills needed to survive in a 21st-century job market.

    Paul Ryan has now jumped into this, expressing support for Mayor Rahm Emanuel's position on the strike - which should tell you something about Rahm's position, I think.

    Now, reading David Dayen this morning in the post in which the above quote appears, it's all beginning to make sense: this is about privatizing Chicago schools - and killing the teachers' union.

    I think the most important by-product of this strike is that it will show how deeply embedded the Students First/Waiting for Superman frame has become, in the traditional media, in the cultural firmament among elites, and in the Democratic Party. I've heard people on social media wondering what this strike is about. Narrowly speaking, Chicago teachers aren't supposed to be able to strike over anything but pay and benefits. And certainly, they're trying to retain their health care. But it's not that hard to see what this is about. Significant sections of the Chicago Public Schools system are starved for funds. They are putting 40-50 students in classrooms without air conditioning. The kids don't have books or materials weeks into the term. And ultimately, the goal is to make those schools so poorly maintained, staffed and administered that they "fail," allowing Rahm Emanuel and his hedge fund buddies to essentially privatize them:

    ...Rahm Emanuel worked with a tea party group to promote Chicago charter schools and denigrate traditional public school teachers and their unions. Emanuel's political allies have been caught paying protesters to show up at hearings on school closures. Every story you read about the greedy teachers (greedy? does that description fit the teachers you know?) has years of big money anti-teacher campaigning behind it, pushing us to believe that teachers, who bring work home every night and routinely spend their own money on school supplies and even food for their students, are overpaid, selfish, lazy. Now, all those narratives that the right wing has built up--anti-union narratives coming together with pro-privatization narratives--are being used against Chicago's teachers.

    Privatizing the services of public schools, or the entire schools themselves, has become big business. If it takes a standardized test to force that into being, if that becomes the data that "proves" the need for privatization, that's what will get used.

    So, I get that Obama doesn't want to rise to the bait that both Romney and Ryan have thrown out there, but where is Obama on this?  Does he have a position?  

    Yes, corporate privatization (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:25:23 AM EST
    of the school system appears to be the goal of Rahm et. al. and a fight for their profession seems to be the goal of the teachers.  "Reform" of the school system is not the problem as much as it is destruction of the school system "as we know it".

    A real reform would embrace all the stakeholders in  modifications and changes--a case for "evolving" if there ever was one.  But, Rahm is not known for his subtleness and is giving the teachers' union his missing digit (relationships with other unions, such as the taxi drivers are also rocky).  

    It should be noted, too, that attempts were made by voucher school advocates to prevent teacher strikes--SB 7 was passed by the Illinois state legislators so that 75 percent of teachers were required to vote for a strike with absentees counted as no votes.  For this strike, the first in 25 years in Chicago, 90 percent of the teachers voted yes (and if you wanted to exclude absentees, 98 percent).

    A strike is now on, and maybe negotiations will return all to a pathway of reasonable resolution. After all, it is  just day two of the strike--and the stakes are of historic and national proportions.

    Parent

    Of course it's about (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:38:37 AM EST
    privatizing the public schools.  I agree with KeysDan.  
    I also believe that Obama is on board with this, and I've believed so since he appointed Arne Duncan to be his Secretary of Education.

    Parent
    Don't know about Obama's Position (2.33 / 3) (#18)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:03:03 AM EST
    I would think there's a good chance it may mirror that of many Americans who either have kids in large school systems, know someone who does or know of someone that works in said system.

    The teachers have a huge point about class sizes and lack of AC.  Even w/a para in the class, that's a lot of work to handle (grading, lesson plans, etc.) I can't really speak on "teaching to the test," but I know there's questions on how effective it is.  It would be good to get some focus on those issues.  I.e. how many students benefit vs. how many need more flexibility w/the curriculum.  

    Problem is, the ability to focus on those issues gets lost in the noise of a union taking issue w/a 16% raise over 4 years.  That's 4% a year on average.  Who gets a 4% raise nowadays?  Not too many folks from my anecdotal experience.  That's why people give up and go w/the charter school solution - even though in reality they are only doing what public schools could be doing w/adequate funding.

    Hard to make the argument "it's about the kids" when it appears to many it's not.  People wonder why unions have lost some of the public support, I give you exhibit #1.

    Parent

    16% raise... (5.00 / 7) (#20)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:33:14 AM EST
    with a 20% increase in work...that's a pay cut in my book.

    Yeah, it's easy to spin it into a kick the dog grudge match between non-union brokedick private sector workers who haven't seen a raise in years vs. unionized brokedick public sector workers getting raises...I hear it all day long from my co-workers how "unfair" it is.  But we're all barking up the wrong tree...we should be organizing to get the public sector worker deal, not dragging the public sector down to our sorry state of income inequality affairs.

    Parent

    Yes, divide and conquer-- (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:47:09 AM EST
    keep the peasants fighting over the crumbs.

    Parent
    Don't disagree with this (none / 0) (#26)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:48:23 AM EST
    teachers should be getting paid more.  State and local economies can't support that though.  The only way to pay them more, is to pay us less (through higher state and local income taxes), or find greater efficiencies (ergo, layoffs, early retirement) in the school system.

    Parent
    I hear ya... (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:06:45 PM EST
    most every state is in a budget crunch...I think the best route to address it is reprioritized spending.  Lots of sh*t to scrap or cut before going after already overworked underpaid teachers.  And if necessary raise more revenue, preferably through legalized casino gambling, legalized marijuana sales, and tax increases for the wealthiest among us if it comes to that.  

    Seems like the first route during budget trouble is for state and local governments to try and squeeze more blood from public sector worker stones...classic 1%er move if ya ask me.  

    In fairness, some public sector workers may be getting too sweet a deal that we can't afford going forward...but it is impossible to know that for sure until we get serious about prioritizing our spending and get serious about raising more revenue, particularly in creative ways that don't involve income or property tax increases...like the reefer and gambling.  

    Parent

    Sweet deal for some public sector workers (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Dadler on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:46:23 PM EST
    Even at their most sweet, when it gets down to it, public sector pensions are still simply ordinary working people being taken care of after retirement. Not being made millionaires, not being paid enough to go out and buy a yacht or even a new Porsche, but enough not to have to have a heart attack worrying about money as a senior.  That's why I can never get behind the anti-public pension noise, not even when I know the union may have played a little too much hardball.  Americans are a very strange lot in that they much more readily turn their anger on other Americans getting a decent deal than on the power brokers who are really getting away with robbery.  Average working Americans hating on other average working Americans, simply because one group is savvy enough to organize and bargain collectively (just as no company or municipality is going to negotiate with a potential hire by pretending they don't have a massive financial advantage against their employees, i.e. by pretending they are Joe negotiating with Paula).  Don't you love how competition is good UNTIL it offers peones the change to play ball with the bosses on a more level playing field.  Then your average folk should just shut up and take what's offered, no fight, no compete, just roll over. Very American that sentiment, no?

    Uh, no.

    Peace out, my man.

    Parent

    Agree totally... (none / 0) (#79)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:14:49 PM EST
    the only deal that gets my goat is the deal for coppers...the NYPD is 20 and out at 3/4ths pay if I'm not mistaken...which means you've got dudes retiring at 41 collecting till they're 60, 70, 80....that's a bit much even by my staunchly pro-labor standards.  I'm all for a proper well-funded retirement but 20 and out is ridiculous in this day and age...30 and out sounds much more reasonable, they'd still be hanging up the pistol and handcuffs at 50.  

    The firemen deserve it, all they do is save lives and property...but not the f*ckin' cops who destroy as many or more lives as they save, plus spreading untold misery.  

    Personal Prejudice Alert! ;)

    Parent

    I'm with you, but with a caveat (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Dadler on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:55:36 PM EST
    And this comes from a guy who, at 13, and basically because I was a longhair wearing a Led Zeppelin that afternoon, was mistaken for a liquor store robbery suspect and forced to the pavement face down with a cop's shotgun on my back.  Never mind new hire dude had accidentally tripped the silent alarm when I was paying, or that copper never said sorry to the little kid who literally, pissed his pants on the pavement, but I'm not averse to paying Police "combat" bonus money, simply because this is such a heavily armed society...BUT I would require a massive retraining of Police and reformed drug laws, etc., to go with it.  So in Dadlerland, it would happen, in reality not so much.  Bah!

    Parent
    wearing a Led Zeppelin SHIRT, that is (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Dadler on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:56:44 PM EST
    proofreading es tu amiga.

    Parent
    I figured that out (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by sj on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:10:31 PM EST
    But I admit to flashing an image of a young long haired boy sporting a little Robert Plant or Jimmy Page around his neck like a scarf.

    Parent
    That would be somthing to see... (none / 0) (#33)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:28:46 PM EST
    ...legalizing MJ on the premise that MJ taxes will fund our children's schools...

    Parent
    Worked for the NY Lottery Commission... (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:43:07 PM EST
    the deal was the "sin" of legalized gambling would fund something good for society, education.  

    Granted, legalized reefer may be a tougher sell than the legalized daily number...but I think the majority of the people are ready, despite a squeaky wheel minority...its the government and special interests that are not.

    Parent

    Or simply create more money SPECIFICALLY... (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Dadler on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:28:28 PM EST
    ...to pay for teachers. The money supply is the biggest clusterphuck mystery in all the Federal Reserve, or scam I should say (as we found out when, voila, they could create trillions to supposedly "save" the economy), but, luckily, since money is a fake and artificial thing with zero value in and of itself, we CAN create it any time we want to use for anything we want provided what we are using it for genuinely benefits people who need the benefit.  If it's just printed and thrown to the wind, then of course its value plummets. The bigger problem is, other American citizens from our upppercrust thieving classes, being the greedy thoughtless sociopaths they are, will go about trying to undermine that newly spread wealth by hoarding an even BIGGER chunk of that supply, which they see as their mission as free American capitalists, and which they are allowed to do because we force everyone to play a rigged game with inequitable rules that are barely enforced against those who need to be proscribed most.

    In short, as a nation, when it comes to our fiat currency -- that glorified toilet paper and those electronic blips we trade in (no offense to toilet paper, it actually has another useful purpose) -- we can do whatever we want to, absolutely anything, if we really care to help each other in doing so.  Now if we traded in seeds or pelts or whatever other natural thing, THEN money becomes a real headache because it is finite.  But our only headaches are humans being selfish and inexcusably dumb.  

    Money doesn't grow on trees?  Pfft, it doesn't even need to.  We grow it out of thin air in seconds whenever we please.

    Absurdity reigns.

    Parent

    The feds can do whatever they want, (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:46:43 PM EST
    but state and local governments are a whole other matter; so, yes, the feds could completely fund schools, fire and police, but what are the chances control of those entities would remain with the local governments?

    Not great.

    Face it, Dadler - the truth about money wouldn't serve the interests that benefit from all the Henny-Penny, Chicken-Little deficit hysteria, and that's why almost no one in the general public understands how badly we are being bamboozled, and why no effort's being made to stop it.

    Parent

    Obama's daughters (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:35:56 AM EST
    attend Sidwell Friends School, a private, Quaker-run school in the District.  How would his position on public schools mirror that of Americans who actually have kids in public schools?  His kids don't go to one.

    Parent
    Most parents (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:43:17 PM EST
    want their kids to go to a good school, regardless of the income levels of the parents.  My understanding is his children went to that school for security reasons (among other considerations I'm sure).  You can't really expect the president to send his kids to an uncontrolled environment like a public school.

    I think your thinking is wrong on this, we shouldn't be trying to look for reasons to alientate the "other" side on this issue.  We shouldn't assume support for alternative learning environments <> support for public education.  These politicians are responding to the needs of their consitituents, the fundamental role of a Pol.  Would you have your own kid suffer in a bad school if a better one was available?  

    The problems teachers must contend with are societal (e.g. under-educated, over-worked, English as a Second Language or otherwise unavailable parents) and cannot be solved w/o both gov't and teachers (and their unions) working together.  In the meantime however, children still need to be taught.

    Parent

    From the union's report: (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:11:45 PM EST
    CPS schools across the district have been begging for basic repairs and fundamentally urgent repairs for decades while the city builds brand-new, state-of-the-art facilities elsewhere. While CPS claims to use a facility repair rating system to help it prioritize the facility needs of the nearly 700 buildings it owns, students, teachers, principals and parents know all too well that their needs -- some involving dangerous health hazards -- get ignored year after year.

    This practice has been solidified with the new CPS administration. Chief Operating Officer Tim Cawley stated twice -- once at a Facilities Task Force hearing and once to the press -- that CPS will not invest in schools it expects to close in 5 or 10 years

    Link
    (pdf)

    Rick Perlstein (I cleaned up the profanity):

    Since Rahm Emanuel's election in the spring of 2011, Chicago's teachers have been asked to eat sh!t by a mayor obsessed with displaying to the universe his "toughness" -- toughness with the working-class people that make the city tick; toughness with the protesters standing up to say "no"; but never, ever toughness with the vested interests, including anti-union charter school advocates, who poured $12 million into his coffers to elect him mayor (his closet competitor raised $2.5 million). The roots of the strike began when Emanuel announced his signature education initiative: extending Chicago's school day. Overwhelmingly, Chicago's teachers support lengthening the day, which is the shortest of any major district in the country. Just not the way Rahm wanted to ram it down their throats: 20 percent more work; 2 percent more pay.

    He had already canceled a previously negotiated 4 percent cost-of-living raise, and accused teachers who balked of not caring about their students. The teachers' response to this abuse is something all of us should be paying attention to. [snip]

    Teachers trust their leadership. They don't trust the mayor -- who the union's feisty president, Karen Lewis, claims told her at a social outing at the ballet shortly after his election "that 25 percent of the students in this city are never going to be anything, never going to amount to anything and he was never going to throw money at them." The exchange points to a key hinge in the story: Who in the dispute, the teachers' union or the mayor, most earnestly has the interests of "the children" at heart?

    Ever heard of tax increment financing?  Time to learn something about it, and how the current mayor is doling it out, and on what.
     

    Parent

    Chicago teachers (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:43:50 PM EST
    have not been happy since Arne Duncan was head of Chicago schools (for which I don't blame them), and it has gotten worse under "Rahmbo."
    It has always been about privatizing the public schools, or at the very least converting most of them to charter schools, some of which are run by by private corporations (which is allowed in some areas).  And we all know, don't we, that private corporations can do a "better job" with absolutely everything (discounting the fact that they exist to make money, not to actually help people, if that is non-profitable).
    I'm not saying that the public schools in Chicago, or in most major cities, are great, and I'm also not saying that there are not terrible teachers with tenure in many public schools.  This system definitely has to change.  
    But having kids attend crumbling, falling-apart schools, with too many kids in each classroom, no air-conditioning, not enough books or other supplies for the kids, no support by the community to help the parents of these kids do their own jobs, and then blaming the teachers for all the faults of the failing schools and the failing kids, is not the way to go.
    Oh, and add to that the mandated tests that the kids have to pass so that the teachers are forced to "teach to the test," which means, in way too many school districts, the elimination of things like PE, recess, art, music.....there you have a recipe for disaster, because many kids simply cannot sit in their seats 6 hours a day, with few breaks for physical activity, and no other outlets for kids who "learn differently" and need either some activity, or some creative outlet other than memorizing and regurgitating sh!t that will help them pass "the tests."
    Pardon me for the rant, but this is definitely one of my "hot button" issues.  I need to go lie down and do some yoga breathing before my blood pressure goes through the roof.


    Parent
    The Obama girls have always attended (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by caseyOR on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:15:30 PM EST
    private school. When they were living in Chicago, the girls attended the Lab School at the University of Chicago.

    And Obama himself is a product of an elite private school education. He attended the Punahou School, an elite prep school in Honolulu. He then went to Occidental College a private school, and transferred to the Ivy League's Columbia University.

    Michelle Obama attended Chicago public schools. However, she did not go to a neighborhood school. Michelle attended what are showcase public schools in Chicago. She is a graduate of Whitney Young magnet High School, an award-winning, academically rigorous school that sees the majority of its graduates go on to college. Michelle then went to Princeton and Harvard Law.

    There is nothing wrong with any of this. It does, however, sometimes make me wonder just how in touch with the average public school the Obamas are. And it is not just the Obamas. Do any of the political leaders in D.C. send their kids to public school? Do any of our so-called journalists send their kids to public school? I suspect very few, if any, do.

    Parent

    "Average public school" (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:27:00 PM EST
    is key, also.  It would surprise me if any of our Beltway journos and many of our politicians sent their kids to average public schools, you know, not top 100 in the nation kind of schools in largely affluent areas, just an average public school.

    Parent
    Here's the problem with the reported (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:41:42 AM EST
    offer of 16% over four years: those numbers are also wrong.

    From Corey Robin (bold is mine):

    First, the Times piece doesn't say the teachers were offered a 19 percent raise. It says:

    Late Sunday, Mr. Emanuel told reporters that school district officials had presented a strong offer to the union, including what some officials described as what would amount to a 16 percent raise for many teachers over four years.

    I'm not sure how Moran went from 16 to 19. Perhaps he read this tweet last night from Bloomberg journalist and self-described "coastal elitist" Josh Barro, which was making the rounds, and mistook management for the union. Barro, like Moran, was also operating on the wrong information, and later had to walk back the claim.

    In any event, a 16 percent raise over 4 years works out, at best, to a four percent annual raise.

    Except that...

    Second, as Doug Henwood points out, Chicago is also asking the teachers for a 20 percent longer school day.  Once you take that and inflation into account, the four percent annual raise works out to be a cut, not a raise.

    Third, according to the Chicago affiliate of ABC News--Moran's network--David Vitale, head of the Chicago School District, says that the city is offering a 3 percent raise the first year, and 2 percent raises for the remaining three years of the contract. That hardly works out to a 16 percent raise. 9 percent at best. As Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, a Chicago resident and history grad student at Northwestern, explains to me, the city hasn't revealed how it came up with that 16 percent figure, but the best guess is that it includes other things like step increases, which are based on seniority. Contrary to what Moran suggests, it is in no way is an increase in base pay.

    But don't take Corey Robin's word for it, or mine - run the numbers yourself.  See what happens when you take your own salary, bump it up by 4%, and then increase your weekly hours by 20%.  Remember, there is no overtime in this scenario - you're a salaried employee and you make what you make no matter how many hours over 40 you work.

    In the teachers' case, they are looking at a raise that isn't a raise, in classrooms that have more students, not fewer, in conditions that are not conducive to learning, where their jobs depend on how well the students test.  To me, that sounds like the city creating the conditions for failure, not success - and that could have something to do with the support the teachers are getting from parents - who understand that it isn't the teachers who are victimizing the children, it's the city.

    Now do you get it?

    Parent

    Condescension not necessary (2.00 / 1) (#29)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:58:19 AM EST
    I've "gotten" it for years.  My ex-wife works in the public school system.  I have a child in the public school system (and expect to have two more attending in the near future).  I am a product of the public school system.

    That does not change the fact that many in the private sector are salaried and work many many hours beyond the standard 40.  Welcome to the realities of the 21st century global economy.  It's not as though these state and local gov'ts are hoarding money somewhere.   Better that unions recognize this if they want to get more public buy-in.  Not saying I agree w/it, but it is the reality.

    We have on the Dem/Progressive side have our own dreams of "Leave it to Beaver" days of long ago.  The days of higher funding are gone (for now at least).  We have to address the short term needs now w/an eye toward fixing structural issues w/the economy to enable greater tax revenues to allow for addt'l funding.  It's not going to happen overnight, everything cannot be fixed at once.

    Parent

    Is it reality though? (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:12:19 PM EST
    or a faux 21st century global economy "reality" foisted on us by the Mitt Romney's of the world who wanna see capital gains taxes reduced to zero and the entire f8ckin' burden foisted on the 99%.

    Lets see CEO's start accepting 15 times the pay of a their secretaries again, lets address the income disparity nightmare in this country...then we'll see what the 21st century reality really is.

    Parent

    More info on the strike: (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:00:19 PM EST
    Here

    and

    Here (pdf)

    I know it's easy to blame the unions, and by extension, the teachers, but I think it's important to understand the forces at work here, what the endgame may be, and who's really looking out for students.  

    Parent

    Maybe they weren't renumerated... (none / 0) (#27)
    by unitron on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:51:26 AM EST
    ...because they were enumerated properly the first time.

    Their remuneration, is, of course, a separate issue.

    Parent

    A little OT, but I have a copy of my kids' (none / 0) (#34)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:34:12 PM EST
    school district payroll by employee.

    We have some teachers making over $9,000/month. All of our principals are too. And, of course, full retirement bennies.

    Again, OT w/regards to Chicago, I don't know what the Chicago salaries are...

    Parent

    Doesn't sound unreasonable... (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:50:43 PM EST
    on its face...9 grand a month to educate 20-30 little buggers, 300-450 bucks a student, cheaper than a babysitter.

    Now compared to what I make with no pension, it sounds like a fortune!  But that's my fault, and my f*ckin' problem;)

    Parent

    If your kids had had some of these teachers, (none / 0) (#38)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:04:06 PM EST
    like mine did, you might have a different opinion...

    Parent
    One instance... (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:10:31 PM EST
    where I part with the unions is the "job for life" stuff...it should be relatively simple to fire sh*tty teachers.  Not to be confused with teachers in sh*tty sircumstances set up to fail, but sh*tty teachers.

    Parent
    Nice district (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:07:50 PM EST
    Hardly representative of teachers as a whole, though.

    I live in NJ, one of the highest-paying states for teachers.  Median pay for teachers here is @ $57K.  Sure, there are some teachers making close to $100K, after working for 25-30+ years and assuming they have a Masters/PhD degree.  Less than 2% make over $100K.  This is in a state with a very high cost-of-living, where salaries in almost every field are higher than the national average.

    Principals/superintendents do better, but the vast majority of them have been in education for decades and Superintendents have PhDs and run districts with dozens/hundreds of employees.

    Parent

    I live in SoCal, though grew up in NJ (none / 0) (#44)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:24:44 PM EST
    where most of my fam lives.

    Median pay in my school district is 68K.

    Parent

    I grew up in So Cal (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by shoephone on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:02:13 PM EST
    which is exponentially more expensive now than it was then. Average apartment rents in LA are $1552 per month. And it's more than that for a teacher renting a place with at least one of his/her own children. Also consider how expensive gasoline and utilities are in Cal... I'd say that $68,000 for someone who's been teaching a long time isn't outrageous at all, epsecially when these people are working many more than 40 hours per week to teach your kids, plan their lessons, grade their homework, attend endless parent-teacher conferences, all while pulling money out of their own checking accounts to pay for supplies every year.

    And all their get for their hard work is being maligned by private school and charter school zealots.

    Parent

    Fair point about the COL. (1.00 / 1) (#99)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:12:52 PM EST
    68K is median, "someone who's been teaching a long time" is making quite a bit more than that, in our district anyway...

    Parent
    Actually, to be clear, (none / 0) (#52)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:40:04 PM EST
    68K is the median salary of our teachers alone. This does not appear to include principals, psychologists, office staff, maintenance, etc.

    Lotsa debate about the Chicago teachers median salary, but the WaPo puts it at $71-77K.

    Parent

    why shouldnt teachers be paid well? (5.00 / 6) (#74)
    by CST on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:48:56 PM EST
    This from someone who has argued 250,000 in income isn't "that much" due to high cost of living etc... For taxes. You sure have turned around quick when it comes to teachers and admins.  If the issue is quality make that your issue.  But I can think of some terrible private sector employees who make a lot more.  I think too many people don't consider teaching or running a school to be a valuable profession.  I disagree.  Its a challenging job and should be compensated accordingly.  If 250,000 isn't that much, 70,000 really isn't.  Why shouldn't they have a good standard of living?

    Parent
    Wow apples and oranges and strawmen (none / 0) (#78)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:05:14 PM EST
    all in one paragraph!

    These are public employees, I think it is reasonable that their salaries are open for public discussion, at the very least.

    Parent

    Oh come on (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:15:02 PM EST
    you started this particular subthread with an admittedly OT comment about the $108,000 salaries teachers receive in SoCal and then questioned whether that was deserved.  CST is just criticizing your position as it has been laid out in this thread.  The discussion is open.  

    Parent
    OK, I'll play. (2.00 / 1) (#85)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:41:40 PM EST
    I think the public employee teachers at my school district make too much money. The district budget has been battling a large budget shortfall for the past 4 years due, of course, to the economy. Everything, every expenditure, w/in the school district has been cut, except the salaries. We parents volunteer double or triple the hours we used to, we donate double or more of the amount of money to the school's PFC's that we used to, many/most of us are privately employed and, like the rest of the country, many/most are making less than we used to, and our property taxes have been raised. Our district's public employee teachers median salary is now 50% above what the inflation-adjusted median salary would be from when the district was established in 94/95. and their salaries were pretty darn attractive back then, too.


    Parent
    Easy Solution... (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:57:54 PM EST
    ...stop voting for republicans and then you won't have to blame 'overpaid' teachers because the republicans nearly sent us into a depression.

    You are on here all day long promoting the party that has put your and many other districts in these horrible jams.  And instead of directing your anger at the party who enabled these messes, or at the very least holding them accountable, you direct it at unions which are ensuring people have an actual living wage.  And in the teachers case, ensuring the are paid, and only guessing, around 75% of private sector employes with the same education/experience.  And they are doing a vastly more important job.

    Stop blaming the unions for the economic shortfalls of your party and start voting for the people who won't put schools districts and your kids in these kinds of positions.

    Parent

    rotflmao (none / 0) (#97)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:01:25 PM EST


    Parent
    I figured that was your position (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:17:50 PM EST
    from your previous comments.

    Based on what you said, regarding your district, I don't really have any comment, as I only have the info you've given me to work with.  Have the teachers been working extra hours, have their class sizes increased (and thus their workload)?  Etc. etc.

    I see value in having steady salaries for teachers, generally.  Their salaries are never going to rise as high as private wages can rise in good times.  You need there to be some consistency to the profession so that the educational system can offer something consistent.  Why would parents put their kids into a public system that's a high turnover crapshoot?

    In terms of inflation, does that really account for the increase in all possible expenses since 1994/95?  You mention increased property taxes, for ex., and I am sure there have been other changes in the cost of living, etc.

    Parent

    Do you think that a less consistent(ly upwards) (none / 0) (#107)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:35:17 PM EST
    salary proposition would necessarily lead to a "high turnover crapshoot?" I generally don't see that happening in private industry in which the salaries are at a similar level but less consistent. And I think in schools, just like in private industry, some turnover, at least, can be very beneficial...

    Parent
    Oh yeah, I didn't do the statistical analysis (none / 0) (#108)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:36:39 PM EST
    myself, I'm not THAT deep into the whole thing...

    Parent
    People always think others ... (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:34:32 PM EST
    ... are overpaid.  Maybe we should ask the teachers whether your salary is justified.

    Our district's public employee teachers median salary is now 50% above what the inflation-adjusted median salary would be from when the district was established in 94/95. and their salaries were pretty darn attractive back then, too.

    Southern California is one of the most expensive places to live in the country.  If you want to attract decent teachers, you have to offer decent salaries that will (of course) be significantly above the national average.  The median salaries are probably significantly higher because you have a staff of teachers with 10-20+ years of experience now, compared to when your district was formed.

    Teacher's give up the opportunity for higher salaries (particularly in the first 10 years) in exchange for (relatively) more secure jobs and benefits.  Did you ever notice how the same people who complain about how good the teachers have it never went into teaching?  You would think that, given good benefits, job security and "overpaid" salaries, they'd be beating down the doors.

    Parent

    Ya, if I had known then what I know now (2.00 / 2) (#109)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:42:21 PM EST
    I may have made some very different choices in my life!

    fwiw, when I graduated in Engineering and took my first job, part of my explanation for getting a raise after my year was that Tucson school district was paying first year teachers more than I was making. I'm not sure the "teachers get paid dirt in the first 10 years" argument is the best one to make...

    Parent

    My heart bleeds for you (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:04:49 PM EST
    When I was teaching in San Francisco, the garbage men were making more than I was.  Not that they didn't deserve it, because they were doing a nasty but necessary job.  I had a master's degree, however, and if I had gotten that master's degree in business, I would have made a whole he!! of a lot more.  But I chose to teach.
    And your point is????

    Parent
    My point is that in my school district, (1.00 / 2) (#118)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:11:34 PM EST
    considering the troubles we are having in keeping it funded, the public employees are the only ones w/in the system who have not tightened their belts at all, and I think they should.

    Parent
    I invite you (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:46:31 PM EST
    to spend a week, or even a day, with the students I had to deal with when I was teaching (I was a special educator).  
    Self abusive (hitting and biting themselves and banging their heads on the furniture to the point of drawing blood, if you didn't stop them), physically aggressive (also to the point of drawing our blood, if you couldn't stop them), severely autistic, severely emotionally disturbed, you name it, I taught them.  I suspect that most engineers did not have to deal with this in their daily jobs.  I had to deal with it every single day.  
    And I did it because, godd@mnit, I loved those kids, and I wanted to make a difference in their lives, and I did make a difference in their lives.  I had parents who came to me in tears, thanking me for what I did for their kids.  But I f*cking well deserved more money than what I was making, because most people would not have done the job I was doing for any money in the world.  I did it anyway.

    Parent
    Cool, you did good in a difficult situation. (1.00 / 3) (#127)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:18:16 PM EST
    Nothing I have ever done will ever even come close to equaling your labors. You win. Huge. Of course, that really has nothing to do with my point, pretty well summed up in the comment that you responded to...

    Parent
    Really? (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:17:49 PM EST
    Because you took a job that didn't pay well for a year?  If you want to use that metric, how about we look at what your pay was like for the first 10 years and compare it to your first 10.

    Ya, if I had known then what I know now I may have made some very different choices in my life!

    Not sure what that means.  You mean you would have taken a job as a Tuscon teacher (averaging $40K/year) as opposed to your current job?

    Parent

    Had I known that I would be making (1.00 / 2) (#121)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:24:08 PM EST
    9K/mo with great bennies, every holiday off, solid pension, every summer off, yeah, I might have gone into teaching. As it is I spend 10 months/year volunteering with our local youths from about 5 to 30 hours/week, depending on the week. Getting paid well for working with these great kids does not sound like too bad a gig at all...

    Parent
    Very lucky to get into a school (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:36:03 PM EST
    with such angelic kids.  Your school district is obviously an outlier in terms of national statistics too, so you would have had to know ahead of time you were going to land there, as well.

    Parent
    Yup, as I said, If I knew then what I know now. (none / 0) (#128)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:19:10 PM EST


    Parent
    Your bad, I guess (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:23:12 PM EST
    Although, now you're back to comparing the high end of the salary range to your own salary.  So you think you might have gone in to teaching ... if you knew you could have gotten hired at one of the highest paying districts in the country, and if you could be paid (for only a few years) what a very few of the highest paid teachers make after 25 or 30 years+ teaching (with advanced degrees).

    BTW - Unless you're 25-30 years out of college with a graduate degree, you wouldn't be paid that much, even in your district

    As it is I spend 10 months/year volunteering with our local youths from about 5 to 30 hours/week, depending on the week. Getting paid well for working with these great kids does not sound like too bad a gig at all...

    BS - Your claims of your volunteer time sound an awful lot like a backhanded (and cowardly) way of suggesting that teachers only work part-time - maybe up to your "30 hours a week".  

    That would be even more ridiculous than some of your other claims.

    No small feat.

    BTW - Teaching isn't remotely anything like coaching a pee-wee soccer team or volunteering for some kid's sport/activity.  But maybe you find a teacher who likes to doodle on paper and would be happy to switch to your better-paying job.

    Practically the same thing, right?

    Parent

    That's what you got from my comment? (1.00 / 1) (#134)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:52:04 PM EST
    Your claims of your volunteer time sound an awful lot like a backhanded (and cowardly) way of suggesting that teachers only work part-time - maybe up to your "30 hours a week".
    You are trying waaay too hard...

    If you're calling BS to my "5 to 30 hours/week," well, you're just exposing your ignorance, that's all.

    Parent

    Not trying in the least (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 07:22:01 PM EST
    It's what you wrote.

    BTW - I'm calling BS to all of it.

    Parent

    Well, that sure settles it. (none / 0) (#154)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:56:22 PM EST


    Parent
    So to clarify, ... (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 07:25:17 PM EST
    ... you weren't claiming that teachers only work part-time, despite the fact that your volunteer time (10 months) matches the school year?

    How many hours do you think teachers work in a week?

    Parent

    Indeed, I was not. Didn't even cross my mind (none / 0) (#153)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:55:35 PM EST
    until your liberal imagination created it.

    Parent
    No ... not at all (none / 0) (#158)
    by Yman on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 06:20:48 AM EST
    Of course not ...

    Parent
    BTW - You never answered (none / 0) (#160)
    by Yman on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 06:33:28 AM EST
    Rather than a single year right after college, let's use your original metric - 10 years.  The average Tuscon teacher currently makes $40K year.  How much did you average your first 10 years?

    Actually, that's the current average for all Tuscon teachers, so even that's not accurate.  To be closer, let's compare the past 10 years to be closer and then tell us how you might have become a teacher.  Tell us how the teachers need to tighten their belts now (since many others are) despite the fact that they're paid much less for the first 20+ years of their profession.

    (Cue crickets chirping ...)

    Parent

    So to summarize ... (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:49:39 PM EST
    You think that (regardless of any need for "belt-tightening") teachers in general are overpaid for a part-time job where all they have to do is hang out with kids, like a youth volunteer, based on your sample of a few of the highest paid teachers from one of the highest paid districts in one of the most expensive areas of the country.

    Guess that old idiom about "Give a man enough rope..." does hold true.

    Parent

    Gosh, I thought my own summary would suffice. (1.00 / 2) (#135)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:53:13 PM EST
    My point is that in my school district, (1.00 / 2) (#118)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:11:34 PM PST
    considering the troubles we are having in keeping it funded, the public employees are the only ones w/in the system who have not tightened their belts at all, and I think they should.


    Parent
    Not really (5.00 / 2) (#139)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 07:20:37 PM EST
    The sum total of all your comments on this thread give a more accurate picture.

    You think teachers are comparable to part-time youth volunteers who get paid too much in order to just hang out with kids 10 months a year.  You think $250K/year isn't very much in many areas (like SoCal) when it comes to income taxes, but $110K/year is a lot when it comes to someone who holds advanced degrees and has been working in a profession for 25-30+ years.

    Thank G0d you didn't go in to education.

    Not that you'd be able to cut it for 25-30 years anyway ...

    Parent

    You are ridiculous. (none / 0) (#152)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:54:40 PM EST


    Parent
    What's ridiculous ... (none / 0) (#159)
    by Yman on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 06:22:10 AM EST
    ... is your opinion of teachers.

    Parent
    Teachers v. other professions (none / 0) (#112)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:54:57 PM EST
    EPI report:

    An analysis of trends in weekly earnings shows that public school teachers in 2006 earned 15% lower weekly earnings than comparable workers, a gap 1 percentage point larger than that reported for 2003 in our original study. The teacher disadvantage in weekly earnings relative to comparable workers grew by 13.4 percentage points between 1979 and 2006, with most of the erosion (9.0 percentage points) occurring in the last 10 years (between 1996 and 2006).

    * Recent trends represent only a small part of a long-run decline in the relative pay of teachers. Using U.S. Census data we show that the pay gap between female public school teachers and comparably educated women--for whom the labor market dramatically changed over the 1960-2000 period--grew by nearly 28 percentage points, from a relative wage advantage of 14.7% in 1960, to a pay disadvantage of 13.2% in 2000. Among all public school teachers the relative wage disadvantage grew almost 20 percentage points over the 1960-2000 period.



    Parent
    http://www.teacherportal.com/salary (2.00 / 1) (#113)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:56:56 PM EST
    Teaching has traditionally been seen as a career that is not financially lucrative. When you look at the facts about teacher pay, however, you will see that teachers around the country are making a good living doing something they love. Add in great state benefits and teacher pensions and you have a secure career with a secure retirement that is not dependent on social security.


    Parent
    Next to that blurb (none / 0) (#115)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:03:28 PM EST
    after 15 years teachers can expect 56,300 per year.

    According to CNN on expected starting salaries for 2011 grads:

    According to the NACE survey, the following are the highest anticipated payouts:
    1. Chemical engineering -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $66,886
    2. Computer science -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $63,017
    3. Mechanical engineering -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $60,739
    4. Electrical/electronics and communications engineering -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $60,646
    5. Computer engineering -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $60,112
    6. Industrial/manufacturing engineering -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $58,549
    7. Systems engineering -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $57,497
    8. Engineering technology -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $57,176
    9. Information sciences & systems -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $56,868
    10. Business systems networking/ telecommunications -- Average annual salary offer to 2011 grads: $56,808

    2007-8 is a little outdated compared to that, but I doubt it's that much outdated.

    Parent

    We could go back and forth all day like this. (1.00 / 2) (#120)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:18:47 PM EST
    Your quote is for the
    the highest anticipated payouts
    vs median teacher salaries. Also, all of your quoted college majors are much more difficult, generally, than education major curricula and are also much more competitive majors for HS grads to matriculate into.

    We COULD go back and forth all day like this, but I do have to leave now...

    Parent

    Gah (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:33:06 PM EST
    since you seem determined to ignore the broadly true fact that teachers are paid less than other professions, here is another article from CNN:

    Engineering jobs pay the most -- with this year's graduates starting at a median salary of $58,581, which is relatively unchanged from last year.

    Still more than the number your post quoted for a teacher with 15 years experience.  And the same CNN article quotes the median teacher starting salary as $37,423.  Obviously your experience in Tucson was an outlier.  Teacher salaries start lower and grow slower.

    You can compare teaching against other professions here.  Compare them to a market research analyst, for example.

    There are advantages to being a teacher, but there are disadvantages also.  It would be different if teachers all had a path to the Principal's office but obviously they do not.

    If you can provide some non-anecdotal evidence that proves teaching is the world's greatest profession please do.  But I think the case is pretty clear.

    Parent

    If you can provide some non-anecdotal evidence (none / 0) (#132)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:47:28 PM EST
    proves teaching is the world's worst profession please do.  But I think the case is pretty clear...that social services, the arts, etc., pay less.


    Parent
    What a childish retort (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:36:44 PM EST
    I am referring to the fact that your weighing in on the teacher's strike in Chicago has been mostly anecdotal, including a story about a raise in Tucson and a blurb of a reply to the statistics I provided about teacher pay gaps vis a vis other professions.  And actually, to use your favorite evidential technique, I know people who have made 60K in the social service field*.  So with that example of your dispatched, we are left with the arts, which in America, hahaha, yeah no kidding it's not lucrative.

    *I happen to think they deserve it considering the sh*t they see day to day.  Perhaps my benefits are not as great, but at least I don't have to deal with abused children, as social workers, and sometimes teachers, are obliged to do professionally.

    Parent

    They're your own silly words. Yes, they (1.00 / 2) (#148)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:37:56 PM EST
    are childish.

    Parent
    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:42:09 PM EST
    I bow to your far superior "one time in Tucson" arguing techniques.

    Parent
    How could your property taxes be going up (none / 0) (#156)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:30:05 PM EST
    post Prop. 13 and declining property values?

    Parent
    Voted indebtedness. (none / 0) (#164)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 08:37:00 AM EST
    Not taxes, per se, but paid in the same bill.

    Parent
    of course it is up for discussio. (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by CST on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:24:06 PM EST
    That's what we are doing right here.  Maybe I'm reading your posts wrong, but it would appear that you seem to think they are overpaid.  Again, I disagree.  And I would ask what you think a teacher, or someone running a school should make?  I bring up the tax issue because I find it a relevant barometer of what someone might consider a lot of money that can afford a very high standard of living - and can also afford to give something extra back to society.  And I find it relevant as a point that if you don't think it stretches very far in some areas - teachers etc... are living in the same area, with similar expenses, and making much less than that.

    Parent
    As I said upthread, (none / 0) (#89)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:52:36 PM EST
    we all are being forced to tighten our belts, it does not seem unfair to me for our public employees to do the same.

    Parent
    Completely disagree (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by sj on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:25:17 PM EST
    we all are being forced to tighten our belts, it does not seem unfair to me for our public employees to do the same.
    We should be grateful to them for keeping the belt notch the same as a basis for comparison so that we can see what we're missing.

    We should be taking a lesson about what union organizing can do to uplift us all.  

    We should be on our knees in thanks that some one is holding the line that people have literally died for to have good and safe working conditions and a living wage.

    Instead you want to roll over for the oligarchy.

    Parent

    Yes, we do completely disagree. (1.00 / 1) (#136)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:55:31 PM EST


    Parent
    More & more, sarcastic unnamed one (5.00 / 2) (#161)
    by christinep on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 07:21:04 AM EST
    It  reads as if you are  a foremost example of one who allows himself to be divided & conquered.  So much of your commentary here shouts resentment...screams a kind of " If I'm hurting/" If I've been slammed in a work situation, then I resent others in the middle who haven't been hurt too" OR " Since we in the middle don't want to knock the $$$ d that we long to be, let's knock our neighbor instead.". Is it all "What about me?"

    Parent
    Ya, right. (none / 0) (#163)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 08:35:37 AM EST


    Parent
    Public employees entrusted with the (5.00 / 3) (#82)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:29:44 PM EST
    education of any and every child who walks through the front doors.  

    Public employees coping with underfunded systems and spending their own money on supplies to make sure the kids have the tools they need.  

    Public employees who, every time they turn around, are being told they have to prepare their students for yet another standardized test and are boxed into a curriculum that doesn't lend itself to education, just more memorization.  

    Public employees who deal with children who don't have enough to eat, children whose parents don't give a flying fig how their child does in school, children who miss a lot of school because they have no support system at home.

    These aren't public employees who fill potholes, or push paper around at the DMV or process permits and applications - not that those things aren't of value - these are public employees your child spends at least 6 hours a day with, 5 days a week.  They are role models whether you want them to be or not.

    They are the people your child may develop a love for history or art or politics or language or math from.  I still remember the fourth-grade teacher who sparked my life-long interest in reading - that was 50 years ago. What do I think someone who could do that for a child should be paid?

    How much is your child worth?


    Parent

    Cool, you think there is no maximum salary (1.00 / 2) (#88)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:50:22 PM EST
    limit for teachers. Thanks for your input.

    Parent
    Yeah, that's what I said...sure. (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:55:49 PM EST
    Just like you said that there was no minimum teachers should be paid, right?

    Gosh, I'm glad we settled that one.

    Parent

    Ya, you throw your BS in, and I'll do the same. (1.00 / 3) (#96)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:00:13 PM EST
    Why didn't you just write "What about the children?" - it would have saved you a lot of time and gotten your point across better...

    Parent
    Oh BROTHER (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by sj on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 06:29:01 PM EST
    It really IS what about the children?  We're not talking about protecting "the children" from the X-rated store with the covered windows, or from medical marijuana.

    Teachers are about "the children".  This is likely one of the more BS comments you have ever made.  Ever.

    Like ever.

    Parent

    What is Your Point ? (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:03:42 PM EST
    We should be enraged because some public employees make $100k ?

    What is the most a teacher should make in your mind ?  It would also help to know where you are.

    Where I grew up they published all the teachers salaries every year and people were always out raged, most of whom made more.  

    It's like there's this train of thought that people babysitting and teaching their kids for 8 hours a day shouldn't make much more than a kid out of college.  It's mind boggling low when you start comparing their salaries to other people with the same education levels and experience.

    But lets keep this war on education up, it's surely not going to ever effect us.  Let's ensure anyone who wants to earn a living wage is steered far and clear of education, then we can complain on a blog just how inadequate our kid's teachers are.  

    No correlation what-sop-ever.

    Parent

    Thanks, it sounds like you have some issues (2.00 / 1) (#67)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:12:39 PM EST
    on this topic.

    Parent
    That's Funny... (5.00 / 3) (#83)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:36:37 PM EST
    ...the person with kids thinks the teachers are over paid, presumably a direct beneficiary of a better paid teaching force.

    I am willing to pay more property taxes to increase teachers salaries, and it doesn't benefit me directly.  But it does benefit society and I am willing to fund that.  And trust me, Texas had high property taxes rates already.

    It's so odd to me for a person with kids in school to side against teachers; truly mind boggling.

    But I forget, who's got the issues ?

    Parent

    I think it reasonable that the public sector (1.50 / 2) (#92)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:55:57 PM EST
    do their best to help in what is a difficult economic situation for many/most by tightening their belts the same way the many/most are.

    Parent
    tightening the belt (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by CST on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:17:58 PM EST
    I think its reasonable to ask those who can afford it the most to tighten the belt and pay a slightly higher tax rate on income over 250,000 so that teachers, etc... can continue making a livable wage.  

    Parent
    Property taxes fund our public schools. (none / 0) (#104)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:28:17 PM EST


    Parent
    Here in Oregon, public employees have done (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by caseyOR on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:33:24 PM EST
    quite a bit to help out in these difficult times.

    Twice in the past few years, Portland Public School teachers have agreed to work some days for free so that the schools would not have to close a week or two early because the money had run out. Like public school teachers all over the country, our teachers routinely spend their own money to buy needed school supplies for the classroom and supplies for individual students. They also buy food for hungry students. And they pay to give some of their students items like toothbrushes and soap.

    Oregon state employees have been and continue to take unpaid furlough days. And the only time since the economy crashed that state unionized employees kicked up a fuss about pay increases was after they learned that while they had agreed to hold the line, supervisors had been granted substantial raises. The union was understandably pissed, and made that known.

    Public employees all over the country are making sacrifices. Some are losing their jobs. Others are essentially giving back gains they made in prior years through increases in their share of health care costs or cuts to pensions.

    The only making it in this economy are the ones who always make it, and often they are the very ones who crashed the economy in the first place.

    Parent

    Sounds like your Portland teachers (1.50 / 2) (#111)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:46:09 PM EST
    are a great example of what could be done. Sincere kudos to them.

    Parent
    Actually, I disagree. (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by caseyOR on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:01:19 PM EST
    Not about our great teachers.

    I disagree that working for free is setting a great example. NO one should be expected to work at their job for FREE. NO ONE.

    Your employer would be totally out of line, and breaking the law, if she demanded that you work for free. And you would be well within your rights to refuse.

    We have wage and hour laws for a very good reason. Employers will, if given an inch, take mile. We know this because before we had wage and hour laws, employees were treated like dirt, sometimes not even as nicely as dirt.

    And even with these laws, workers have seen their compensation consistently fall. American workers now make less than the did 30 years ago, adjusted for inflation of course. Americans work longer and harder for less. How is that a good thing?

    Parent

    It is weird, when I've been an exempt (1.00 / 1) (#117)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:08:28 PM EST
    salaried employee, I always put in the extra hours necessary to 1) do the job and 2) keep my job.

    When I was a salary + commission employee I always worked way more hours than I did as an exempt salary employee.

    (Now that I'm self-employed, I work just about every day of the year. But that is a different convo altogether.)

    You didn't explain in your first post that it was demanded that the teachers work for free.

    Parent

    Teacher Bashing (5.00 / 3) (#137)
    by MKS on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 07:02:33 PM EST
    Bashing teachers really mystifies me.   They are middle class professionals with college degrees.

      If we want good teachers, we should pay them well.

    All the huge sums that the moneychangers on Wall Street make, that corporate raiders make, that CEOs make.....

    And teachers are the ones at fault?

    That is indeed a different set of values.

    Parent

    Really, this is "bashing teachers?" (1.00 / 1) (#138)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 07:04:03 PM EST
    Really? Who knew?

    Parent
    The discussion of how (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by MKS on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 07:34:54 PM EST
    unworthy of pay increase, they are.

    The resentment of middle class people getting a pay raise; it looks pretty ugly to me.

    I would pay more attention to the fiscal concerns if they first raised taxes on the Mitt Romneys, and that didn't work.

    Parent

    You must be identifying someone else's comments (none / 0) (#151)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:53:16 PM EST
    as bashing teachers as I've been talking about my own teachers, who are not looking for a pay raise, and not Chicago's, who are...

    Parent
    It wasn't demanded that the teachers work free. (none / 0) (#124)
    by caseyOR on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:37:03 PM EST
    Well, not by any thinking person. There were the usual blowhards who insisted the teachers were overpaid slackers who should be glad for the chance to work for free.

    The teachers, in collaboration with the school district and the city council, came up with a plan to keep schools open for the full year. The teachers agreed to work some days for free, the city agreed to kick in some $$ from surplus city funds, the school district agreed that administrators and other exempt staff would take a small pay cut.

    The schools stayed open.

    Parent

    why don't you become a teacher to get those (5.00 / 2) (#145)
    by DFLer on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:53:11 PM EST
    big bucks. then?

    Parent
    Well, he would (none / 0) (#149)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:40:13 PM EST
    if it were guaranteed that he would be a schoolteacher in an affluent area of Southern California.  Because that happens to tons of schoolteachers.

    When public schoolteachers hit the lottery, they barely make 6 figures.  When people in the private sector hit the lottery, who knows how high their salaries can go.  7, 8, even 9 figures.  Is missing out on that really a risk you want to take?

    The other thing I don't understand is that school systems that compensate teachers well and value their work perform better than ours.  McKinsey study here.  I didn't think these problems were unknown.  9k a month for teaching does not necessarily seem absurd, esp. in Southern California and at a public school that is probably higher performing than most in the nation.  Guess what kids that graduate from schools like that do so at a higher rate than many other public schools and go on to have generally more successful lives than students that don't.  The teachers have nothing to do with that?

    Parent

    I not going to re-do the hours of research (none / 0) (#155)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:12:50 PM EST
    that I did several years ago for a similar thread here on TL, but the studies show that higher paid teachers automatically = better educated students. I'm surprised you're not aware of them.

    Parent
    How did you get your hands (none / 0) (#41)
    by sj on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:15:25 PM EST
    on such information?  Does it have names?  And, if so, are you entitled to have that data?

    Parent
    Funny (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:43:40 PM EST
    such an appetite for information on our public servants, but much less interest in transparency on the part of those bidding to become our public servants...

    Parent
    Hmm, entitled, you mean as a legal right? (none / 0) (#47)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:31:27 PM EST
    Or as a just claim?

    Anyway, regardless, yes it has names.

    And, while I got it from a friend, who got it from a friend, etc., I just googled "[my school district] median salary" and there is at least one website with all this info on it, including names...

    Parent

    I agree, it's pretty easy to find, (none / 0) (#56)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:48:06 PM EST
    wherever people live. It's not exactly as though it's classified information- they're public employees.
    Google is our friend.    ;-)

    Parent
    Seriously? (none / 0) (#61)
    by sj on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:59:17 PM EST
    That just seems wrong to me.  I realize that they are public employees (as Zorba notes below) but they are also private citizens.

    Oh, and yes.  I meant as in a legal right.

    Parent

    It would be wrong... (none / 0) (#62)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:03:02 PM EST
    to keep public employee salaries confidential...I mean we the taxpayers are the boss, we have a right to know.

    That being said, I have no issue with redacting the actual names in the name of employee privacy, just make the position and compensation available for public review.

    Parent

    I get that (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by sj on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:30:26 PM EST
    Tying that information to positions makes sense.  Tying to it names just seems wrong to me. But then I take my personal privacy very seriously.

    I guess I'd never quite thought about it this way before.

    Parent

    Me too... (none / 0) (#77)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:57:55 PM EST
    I cherish my privacy and have no patience for petty rules...which is why I never went to the government looking for work.  

    The high cost of decent public sector wages and bennies, if you will.

    Parent

    Well, according to the website, (none / 0) (#65)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:10:37 PM EST
    the info they present was provided to them by the school district, all the owners of the website did was ask for it.

    Parent
    I Mentioned Above... (none / 0) (#84)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:38:10 PM EST
    ...in the small town I grew up in they printed them in the local paper.

    Parent
    i understand the parochial (none / 0) (#36)
    by the capstan on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:43:44 PM EST
    schools are largely gone?  This lil ole suthron girl attended Chicago's St. Jerome back in second and third grade (also St. Agnes in Cleveland for the end of third)..  The sisters (yes, it was that long ago, before WWII) saved me from early opprobrium of public school teachers who declared I was incapable of learning to read.  Well, yes, I was pretty reluctant to take my turn reading out loud in the 'reading circle' since I had a pretty bad speech defect.

    I spent my school years going back and forth between public and private schools.  And the state university I finally graduated from (and worked for later) was one of only two public schools I thought was really outstanding.  OTH, the one private school my youngest attended could not hold a candle to the college-town public school--which at least 'got out of the way' so he could excel nationally, as in Science Fair and the Talent Search.

    Parent

    We need a new Blog (none / 0) (#165)
    by NYShooter on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 06:49:01 AM EST
    You remember back in the early 90's, when the internet was just coming into its own, AOL was booming, and a nation of (horny) insomniacs was created? Where would I have been without all those great "Such & such for Dummies, This and that for Dummies, etc?"

    Well, my thought is that we need something like that today: In other words, "Issues that matter to YOU, Dummie!" Things are moving so fast, nobody can keep up. Like, "What's the big deal with all this ECB, Euro, Merkel, Crap?" I mean, it's only our livlihoods at stake, and 99% of the people don't know what the eff is going on. "Why Europe Matters....Dummie."

    You get my drift. All the crisis in the world can be brought down to a half dozen key points. As it is now, all the chatter on the "news" programs is just Hieroglyphics to most people."

    Why does gold matter, the dollar, what's QE3? and, on and on. I know a little bit about many of those issues, but I'd sure like to know a lot more, and without spending the rest of my life Googling.

    Is it a good idea? or, is there something like that already out there?

     

    Parent

    Florida illegal voter investigation finds (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:26:12 AM EST
    ... one illegal voter out of the original 180,000 people flagged, a Canadian.

    One.

    He claimed citizenship to vote illegally in 2004 and 2008, get a concealed carry permit and buy guns four times.

    OMG, OMG! (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:51:54 PM EST
    We simply must prevent this rampant voter fraud by all those illegal Canadians sneaking across our borders!  By making it much more difficult for the people who actually, you know, are citizens and have lived here for many, many years, and have voted in many elections previously, to vote henceforth.
    {{Sigh}}


    Parent
    Awwwww how sweet (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:31:18 PM EST
    Mittens remembers soldiers and guardsmen in Reno.  He remembers well where he was on 9/11.  He was saving the Olympics

    Oh God don't (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:35:15 PM EST
    He smelled burning fuel and concrete that day, it was the smell of war.  He never dreamed he'd smell that smell in America.  Now, calm down Hoss.  You haven't smelled war yet obviously because you forgot the stink of death and the dead dummy.

    Parent
    Don't try to get him (none / 0) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:37:01 PM EST
    He's ending the war in Afghanistan in 2014.

    Parent
    Should we believe him? (none / 0) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:38:25 PM EST
    He promised to not campaign today

    Parent
    I'm sure he thinks that we're all (none / 0) (#57)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:50:58 PM EST
    on the edges of our seats, holidng our collective breath waiting for him to share his deeply personal memories...because he's so special, you know?

    Hey, I saw a Guard convoy go past us on the highway once...I can still remember the smell of exhaust coming in the window and my dad complaining that the cold air was hitting him on the back of his neck.  Oh...I am nearly overcome with emotion.  

    Ugh...more likely that it's that Romney's promise to himself to try to be more human trumped any promises he made not to campaign today.

    Good Lord, I can't stand these people; I just want them to go away.  Far away.

    Parent

    55 More days (none / 0) (#157)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 03:27:44 AM EST
    With a spot of luck, barring the stock market imploding, 55 more days.

    Parent
    That is my mantra... (none / 0) (#162)
    by lilburro on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 08:08:21 AM EST
    X more days, X more days...

    Parent
    Rupert Murdoch tweets (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:51:38 PM EST
    that Romney should move to the center.  

    Election: To win Romney must open big tent to sympathetic  families.  Stop fearing far right which has nowhere else to go. Otherwise no hope
    -- @rupertmurdoch via Twitter for iPad

    What a horrible little man.

    Sympathetic families (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:04:38 PM EST
    As opposed to the unsympathic families of the far right?  Wow.

    Sure hope they get that message.

    Parent

    Guess the "nowhere else to go" (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:15:33 PM EST
    philosophy isn't the sole domain of the Democratic party...golly, who'd a thunk it?

    Parent
    Man... (none / 0) (#1)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:52:30 AM EST
    ...this 9/11 stuff is so depressing.  Same pics/video every year and every year I just want to forget all of it.

    So, there is going to be (none / 0) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:56:25 AM EST
    no evidence of what you did to David's show :)

    Heh (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:04:04 AM EST


    Parent
    Any chance of you guys creating a daily podcast (none / 0) (#19)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:07:19 AM EST
    of the show? Or do you already do that....

    Parent
    It's not going to be archived? (none / 0) (#16)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:34:27 AM EST
    I would like to hear some poll talk.  The numbers have been reassuring me but we're still pretty far out.  I would like to relieve as much election related stress from the next 55 or so days as possible...

    Parent
    And thank you for talking polls (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:57:43 AM EST
    I don't know how any of you decipher polls or get much meaningful from all the polls.

    Actually I was thinking of you (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:07:10 AM EST
    when I discussed the Seal team stories.

    Did you hear it? And what did you think?

    Parent

    Damn it (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:56:52 AM EST
    I missed it.  I was working on getting an audio book of the Eichenwald book.  Waking up to that really threw us this morning.  It is very disturbing, and we watch Morning Joe every morning and they were freaking out.  Scarborough kept saying over and over again that somehow the Obama administration and the Bush administration are inextricably linked. I'm yelling at the television NO NO NO.  When Obama went into Afghanistan my husband had to write his job description and the documents of the operations when his replacement arrived because prior to President Obama his position in Afghanistan and his mission in Afghanistan did not exist.  When they first blew in there, the troops there were having to use crap equipment, complete crap.  Obama committed to finding our real enemy.  He hired all the right Generals even if some of them had a charred past.  He demanded mission success, not bang bang shoot em up Cowboys.  They fought but HE WAS THE DECIDER.  In the end Osama is dead because of real intel.  The SEALs left the Bin Laden compound with so much intel stuffed in trash bags they looked like Santa.  Al Qaeda has been decimated since then.  This was all Obama and his troops, this was not Bush and his design for his troops and it never ever was.

    Parent
    Yep (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:27:01 AM EST
    Anyway, I was great . . .

    Parent
    yeah, I missed it too (none / 0) (#17)
    by fishcamp on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:37:03 AM EST
    and I was driving then and could have listened to it on XM 142 I think.  When you're not speaking it goes to Jimmy Buffett music.  Now, at home, I'm listening to others on the click here button in your blog.  Then I went to Netroots Radio's page and they are way out of date with their program listings.  Like June 12th.  What's up with that?  

    Parent
    We're all sure (none / 0) (#23)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:40:41 AM EST
    that you were.  Don't hide your light under a bushel, BTD.   ;-)

    Parent
    I'm very shy and humble . . . (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:53:46 AM EST


    Parent
    Re-open 9/11 Investigation? (none / 0) (#7)
    by RickyJim on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:24:42 AM EST
    Former Senator Bob Graham wants to do just that.  He alleges that there was high level Saudi support that has been covered up.  Here is his case.

    High level Pakistani support (none / 0) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:30:17 AM EST
    seems more likely to me.

    Parent
    Gator fans... (none / 0) (#10)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:34:47 AM EST
    go to College Station.  Is that you Tent?

    /Yee Haw!

    Heh (none / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:56:09 AM EST


    Parent
    Post 9/11 Amerika (none / 0) (#13)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:57:17 AM EST
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9KabOkc8hXw

    Nate Silver (none / 0) (#42)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:17:35 PM EST
    suggests the Obama bounce may have peaked.  Meanwhile, Obama hits 50 in Gallup among registered voters.  

    J...E...T...S.... (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:24:31 PM EST
    Juggernaut! Juggernaut! Juggernaut!

    The Jet offense needs preseason like Allen Iverson needs practice...unless the Bills defense is just that god-awful.  Either way a most promising start...on to Pittsburgh!

    Teeeebooowww!!! (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:27:45 PM EST
    Oh wait . .

    Parent
    Deeeecoooooyyy!!! (none / 0) (#48)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:32:40 PM EST
    I'm sure his 100 yard rushing day will come...good to see him lined up in the slot a little bit, I think he could be very effective catching some bubble screens and sh*t like that, not just running the read option for a handful of plays.

    Parent
    Spit-take (none / 0) (#60)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:54:08 PM EST
    Thanks, BTD, you owe me a new keyboard!

    Parent
    Since it's Pittsburgh, I will set aside my (none / 0) (#53)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:41:19 PM EST
    usual dislike for the Jets and give them permission to put the Steelers in a 2-game hole.

    I say that knowing that the Ravens, who have won a lot of Week 1 games, also have lost the Week Two game in each of the John Harbaugh years.

    That being said, the letdown that comes after beating the Bengals may not be of the same magnitude as it was last year after we thumped Pittsburgh.

    If Flacco can continue to sparkle in the no-huddle, and keep clicking like he did last night, I think this could be quite a remarkable season - but - the Ravens have a pretty strong schedule, and it's not going to be easy.

    Might be just my imagination, or my bias, but in the post-game, the Joe Flacco who spoke to the media was a different one than we - the fans - have seen before.  Maybe it's the birth of his son, maybe it's Jim Caldwell, maybe it's the leash finally coming off - whatever, I like it.

    More like last night, please!

    Parent

    Flacco looked... (none / 0) (#55)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:46:29 PM EST
    very sharp for the parts of the game I saw.  He needs to make the leap to elite this year.

    But it is Rutgers own Ray Rice who makes the Ravens offense go...best back in the league, imo, wish the Jets had him.

    Parent

    Kinda the opposite ... (none / 0) (#76)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:54:35 PM EST
    ... of my Eagles, who had a great pre-season and looked like cr@p against the Browns last week.  Vick better get it together pretty quick - Reid/Mornhinweg, too, with the horrible play selection.

    Sanchez, OTOH, looked great after a pre-season that had my brother-in-law ready to jump off the nearest bridge.  Good luck with Pittsburgh.  I've a feeling the Ravens are gonna own the eagles, next week.

    Parent

    Ssshh!! (none / 0) (#87)
    by lilburro on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:47:34 PM EST
    Don't say such things!  I didn't watch the whole game but the Bengals could run on the Ravens a little bit.  Hopefully Reid will let McCoy run.

    Yeah the game against the Browns was a disaster.  I knew this would happen - I was so looking forward to football being back but then as soon as it was back, I was MISERABLE!  But a W is a W.

    You might enjoy this Twitter profile.  FakeWIPCaller.  Sample:  "Fourth quarter comeback! Another reason to not miss Donovan"

    Parent

    Can a stopped clock b right more than twice a day? (none / 0) (#73)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:46:47 PM EST
    i.e. Geithner, et al.

    Plot Twist in the A.I.G. Bailout: It Actually Worked

    At the time, the Treasury Department said that it was likely to lose only about $5 billion on the bailout. Mr. Barofsky declared that the number was "manipulated" as part of a "publicity campaign touting the positive aspects of TARP" ahead of the midterm elections.

    Fast forward to this week. The Treasury Department announced it planned to sell $18 billion of its A.I.G. stake, putting it on a path to actually turn a profit. It was a remarkable feat and one that nobody -- including Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner -- anticipated four years ago at the peak of the crisis during the $180 billion bailout of the company.
    Another anniversary (none / 0) (#95)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:58:34 PM EST
    of the Bush administration is the stock market collapse that started with Lehman Brothers this week 4 years ago when the Bush Cheney fiscal house of cards came tumbling down. From the time Bush (the MBA president) took office to the time he left the Dow fell 25%.

    All these Bush/Cheney anniversaries are depressing.

    Parent

    Ryan hedging his bets (none / 0) (#75)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 02:54:00 PM EST
    Paul Ryan...beginning this week, voters in Wisconsin's 1st district will see a new TV ad aimed at getting him reelected to Congress.

    Hedging or... (none / 0) (#86)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:43:48 PM EST
    ...seeing the writing on the wall ?

    I wonder how his campaign separates Congressional funds from VP funds.  He can't use money from Ohio to keep his seat can he ?

    Parent

    Can he be on the ballot for both offices in WI? (none / 0) (#146)
    by DFLer on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:55:43 PM EST


    Parent
    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:15:25 PM EST


    Parent
    Tuesday Morning Open Thread | 165 comments (165 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment