Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Teamster Jeff

(1,598 posts)
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:05 AM Sep 2012

Does anyone believe that Arne Duncan and President Obama were "neutral" on the teachers strike?

As if Race to the Top had nothing to do with the strike? As if Rahm thought up the whole charter school scam himself? I'm voting for Obama but WTF

36 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Does anyone believe that Arne Duncan and President Obama were "neutral" on the teachers strike? (Original Post) Teamster Jeff Sep 2012 OP
It was a local issue that lasted less than a week. tjdee Sep 2012 #1
Wishful thinking tama Sep 2012 #2
A leader of my party better never be neutral Union Scribe Sep 2012 #5
I totally agree with you. "Neutral" on labor issues is unacceptable for a Democratic candidate, Raksha Sep 2012 #19
Right here. Brickbat Sep 2012 #32
I guess they were neutral in that they didn't intercede one way or the other Teamster Jeff Sep 2012 #7
Yes, that's more what I meant.nt tjdee Sep 2012 #28
It's not over yet and it's definitely a national issue. proud2BlibKansan Sep 2012 #10
Not only national tama Sep 2012 #12
They were only neutral becasue of the election and then maybe not so behind the scenes... kickysnana Sep 2012 #17
Whooow! THis is an extremely important national issue. And it is very important rhett o rick Sep 2012 #24
As of today it's still going on. rhett o rick Sep 2012 #35
This is not a weeklong, or as is happening right now, going into a second week, issue sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #36
teachers fighting back makes it harder to privatize & profitize education nt msongs Sep 2012 #3
Of course it does. But should teachers have to fight senseandsensibility Sep 2012 #6
The way you frame it tama Sep 2012 #14
No I don't ibegurpard Sep 2012 #4
At the AFT convention in July, when Joe Biden spoke, proud2BlibKansan Sep 2012 #8
No. Obama's education policy was made in chicago, arne duncan put ren 2010 in place & rahm HiPointDem Sep 2012 #9
I have a slightly different take on it. Starry Messenger Sep 2012 #11
indeed ibegurpard Sep 2012 #13
How and by whom was the "ed reform movement" put on notice? nm rhett o rick Sep 2012 #20
The successful CTU strike. Starry Messenger Sep 2012 #21
I certainly hope you are right. But I think I have good reason to be skeptical over what has rhett o rick Sep 2012 #29
the President is not anti-education or anti-teachers Whisp Sep 2012 #15
I believe that is a logical fallacy. You assume the President is pro-education and pro-teacher rhett o rick Sep 2012 #23
The New Democrats really want to be the New Republicans. Marr Sep 2012 #16
"Neutral" is the wrong position. Deep13 Sep 2012 #18
Someone told Rahmto settle it...one way or the other... joeybee12 Sep 2012 #22
"Neutral"? Certainly not - simply silent. Obama couldn't come out as openly anti-union Edweird Sep 2012 #25
This is a national issue because this "evaluation" system is designed to end free public education Riley18 Sep 2012 #26
Some will say you are looking for a pony. mmonk Sep 2012 #27
What does that mean? Pony Teamster Jeff Sep 2012 #30
A traditionally progressive position. mmonk Sep 2012 #31
Got it. Thank you n/t Teamster Jeff Sep 2012 #33
This lunch is on me, the price you've paid is high enough already kenny blankenship Sep 2012 #34

tjdee

(18,048 posts)
1. It was a local issue that lasted less than a week.
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:07 AM
Sep 2012

So yes they were neutral and yes they should have been.

 

tama

(9,137 posts)
2. Wishful thinking
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:21 AM
Sep 2012

but just not true. It's a national issue of people vs. bipartisan agenda. And of course Obama and whole Dem establishment are on the side of their own (corporate) education policy. It just happens to be election campaign time so Obama cannot publicly attack and bash teacher union fighting back - bash as the Party Convention did.

Union Scribe

(7,099 posts)
5. A leader of my party better never be neutral
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:38 AM
Sep 2012

when it comes to backing unions exercising their rights.

Raksha

(7,167 posts)
19. I totally agree with you. "Neutral" on labor issues is unacceptable for a Democratic candidate,
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 02:53 AM
Sep 2012

and even more so for a Democratic president. "Neutral" means he supports the corporatist education policy, but can't be explicit about it during campaign season.

Teamster Jeff

(1,598 posts)
7. I guess they were neutral in that they didn't intercede one way or the other
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:43 AM
Sep 2012

but over 26,000 teachers were in the street picketing and speaking out against their education policies. I'm guessing in private they were not very neutral at all. It seems to me that there is some denial of this because it is an election year.

proud2BlibKansan

(96,793 posts)
10. It's not over yet and it's definitely a national issue.
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:51 AM
Sep 2012

Many of us are affected by the exact same issues the teachers are striking for in Chicago. They're trying to tie teacher evaluation and pay to test scores all over the country. Schools in my district aren't air conditioned. Class sizes are increasing everywhere. I don't think any districts anywhere have enough social workers or counselors. Chicago's issues are OUR issues all across the country.

 

tama

(9,137 posts)
12. Not only national
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 01:19 AM
Sep 2012

but international issue. Finnish system has been mentioned often in these discussions, and I'm slowly starting to believe that maybe our Finnish teachers are really doing something right in this country - because they are given freedom to teach as they want and know how, and no (or very little) external pressure from non-teachers.

And now I realize that the Charter system your politicians and business leaders means going back to where Finland was 40 years ago, absolute opposite of learning anything from Finnish example and what makes it work.

kickysnana

(3,908 posts)
17. They were only neutral becasue of the election and then maybe not so behind the scenes...
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 02:48 AM
Sep 2012

That is Obama and his values.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
24. Whooow! THis is an extremely important national issue. And it is very important
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 07:54 AM
Sep 2012

how the President stands. The protests are still going on and have sympathetic protests IN OTHER STATES. Also, this is one of many of these confrontations. This is just the first with a Democratic(?) mayor.

An extremely important test. Can the oligarchs prevail via the Democratic Party or will the Party side with labor?

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
36. This is not a weeklong, or as is happening right now, going into a second week, issue
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 08:19 PM
Sep 2012

As anyone who knows what the issues are, knows, this is not going to stop until the Corporations are kicked out of our Public Schools. This is about the War on the Public Schools and Teachers and if you think it is just a 'week's distraction', I think you're in for a big shock.

Not only that, it was a War on Unions. And all over the country this week, people came out in solidarity with the CTU and more every day. Even as far away as Canada. Because is about finally standing up against the Corporatization of America part of which requires the crushing of Unions and the flat-lining or worse, cut backs in American Workers' salaries to make them more in line with Third World countries, for the benefit of the Corps bottom line.

This is bigger than just the Teachers and the Public Schools, this a Labor issue and the more they try to bully Workers, they more opposition they are going to get from now on.

They nearly got away with it, but now the people are finally waking up and standing up.

Across the Globe.

 

tama

(9,137 posts)
14. The way you frame it
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 01:26 AM
Sep 2012

of course they shouldn't. Or any other president. They shouldn't need to fight at all but left in peace and allowed to teach as they want and can.

The sad fact should not be denied that it is also the Democratic president who is fighting against teachers, and therefor against children and the whole community. He just can't fight so well during campaign time. Best we can hope is that teachers have taught him and others a good lesson and that they stop picking fights, and continue to learn.

proud2BlibKansan

(96,793 posts)
8. At the AFT convention in July, when Joe Biden spoke,
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:48 AM
Sep 2012

the Chicago teachers stood up and held signs that said STOP RACE TO THE TOP. Union leadership had asked all of the delegates to wear blue Obama Biden shirts they had handed out the day before. But the Chicago teachers were wearing their red shirts. The visual of 100s of delegates in red shirts standing up and holding those signs was striking.

So yes, I believe the president understands what led to the strike. I'm also glad he stayed out of it. Not all teachers agree with me, but I want to see Rahm fail without being rescued by Obama.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
9. No. Obama's education policy was made in chicago, arne duncan put ren 2010 in place & rahm
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:50 AM
Sep 2012

was following the plan.

The strike was against bush/obama education deregulation and privatization.

Starry Messenger

(32,342 posts)
11. I have a slightly different take on it.
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:56 AM
Sep 2012

I think the whole ed reform movement was just put on notice, no matter what party the person comes from who espouses it.

The results of this successful labor action will have far-reaching effects...I think the President was probably watchful, he didn't come out and support Rahm publicly either, which is also a meaningful silence. Rahm had the shittiest and most pallid speech at an otherwise pretty 99% oriented DNC. His political miscalculation with taking on members of one of the top 10 biggest unions in the US in an election year is probably creating some interesting meetings in the White House.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
29. I certainly hope you are right. But I think I have good reason to be skeptical over what has
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 10:39 AM
Sep 2012

happened to unions over the last 30 years. And now labor is being attacked by a Democratic mayor that is very close to our Democratic president. The oligarchs have a lot of control.

 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
15. the President is not anti-education or anti-teachers
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 01:40 AM
Sep 2012

work back from that, or something because it smells like Obama wanted to cut Medicare like Lyan Ryan says. and that was a LIE. A lie some people here said in the words of Ryan

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
23. I believe that is a logical fallacy. You assume the President is pro-education and pro-teacher
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 07:50 AM
Sep 2012

and then tell us to rationalize and justify from there. Whould it be more logical to determine how the President stands based on his actions? Besides every politician claims to be pro-education. Some just think it would be better to privatize.

And what was that business about people here using the words of Ryan. What does that have to do with this issue?

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
16. The New Democrats really want to be the New Republicans.
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 02:27 AM
Sep 2012

One of their main goals, which they state openly, is to move the Democratic Party away from it's traditional constituencies, and appeal more to business. Neutering or destroying unions is a means of accomplishing that goal.

 

joeybee12

(56,177 posts)
22. Someone told Rahmto settle it...one way or the other...
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 07:49 AM
Sep 2012

It would have been a distraction in an election year...the outcome didn't reveal anyone's true cards...they just didn't want it to be a topic in November.

 

Edweird

(8,570 posts)
25. "Neutral"? Certainly not - simply silent. Obama couldn't come out as openly anti-union
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 07:57 AM
Sep 2012

like he did in Central Falls during an election.

Riley18

(1,127 posts)
26. This is a national issue because this "evaluation" system is designed to end free public education
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 08:15 AM
Sep 2012

I am voting Obama as well, WTF is right!

kenny blankenship

(15,689 posts)
34. This lunch is on me, the price you've paid is high enough already
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 01:45 PM
Sep 2012

"But it's not going to stop 'til you wise up."
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Does anyone believe that ...