Unionized teachers pay $100 a head to get shat on & laid off

TEACHERS UNIONS IN FIVE STATES SPENT MORE THAN $100 PER TEACHER ON POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS

Cambridge, MA — A first-ever national analysis of state spending per teacher on political advocacy by the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) released today found that the national teachers unions and their state affiliates spent more than $100 per teacher in five states, with Oregon at the top of the list at $360 per teacher during the 2007-08 election cycle. The report, authored by Mike Antonucci, director of the Education Intelligence Agency, and available on the web at www.educationnext.org, also found that political spending from teachers union dues topped $1 million during the 2007-08 period in 14 states, with California on top at $12.6 million.

http://normsnotes2.blogspot.com/2010/07/education-next-news.html






'There's a lot you don't know about this administration,' Obey said.... Obama and his White House staff view teacher bashing, privatization and union busting, as a political tactic that will pay off


Almost two years ago (precisely), at the national convention of the American Federation of Teachers at Chicago's Navy Pier in July 2008, then Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama lied to America's teachers by telling them that he was busy and couldn't attend their national convention in his home town, while he found the time, the night before his appearance by remote, to attend a fund-raising event for rich people at the Hyatt Hotel in Chicago where many of the AFT delegates were staying.

Although Barack Obama claimed he was scheduled elsewhere and had to speak to the 2008 Chicago convention of the American Federation of Teachers, in fact he was in the hotel that housed many of the convention delegates the night before he delivered his speech by satellite (above). Observed by a Substance reporter at the hotel — while he had told AFT officials he couldn't spend time with the teachers — Obama's AFT speech was delivered from San Diego. Those who knew Obama from Chicago and Illinois politics were not surprised. After a brief attempt to claim that they didn't know Obama had actually been in the same hotel as the convention delegates, the AFT leadership tried to simply ignore the slap in the face from the man who was to become President of the United States six months later. Obama's November 2008 election was in part because of the massive support of America's unions, and in particular America's unionized teachers (both AFT and NEA).

The AFT was not the only teacher union he snubbed in July 2008. Earlier in the month, Obama had also avoided the National Education Association (NEA) convention. Obama's snub of the AFT in Chicago in 2008 was a bold move...

http://www.substancenews.net/articles.php?page=1535§ion=Article

I'll never vote for him again.

Damn. Won't make that mistake again.

I did.

There's proof.

Thanks for letting me know.

eom

A clear conscious for me.

This swindle with Education made me switch my registration entirely. I was an indie before 2004 and now I'm back to that. I bought the argument that the Dems could undo the harm from the Bush years if they had control, but obviously I was stupid. They never had any intention of undoing the harm.

We at least have a Dem state rep. He was elected in 08 after years of bad repukes. BUT he voted the wrong way on an abortion bill. And his constituent services leave a bit to be desired. We're having trouble deciding if we even want to vote for him again.

The abortion bill was horrible. It was aimed at late term abortions. But the only doctor in the state who performed them was murdered last year. So the law was a needless Na Na Boo Boo from our state wing nuts. And a few dipshit Dems voted for it. Fortunately the governor vetoed it. But we expect it to be brought up again next session and if Brownback becomes governor he won't veto it.

So I'm pretty much screwed at both the state and federal levels.

My congresswoman. It's so frustrating. Even in a blue state it seems like many Dems will just swing more conservative if there is a vacuum at that end of the political spectrum. I don't know what the answer is either. Maybe a credible third party threat will at least give them food for thought.

While it looked much better in 2008, I consider it the lesser of two evils at point. While the current administration is far from what the teacher unions wanted, it is still far better than the alternative.

At this point I see many unions working for alternative candidates other than Obama, should he choose to run again. If he does win renomination, how much union support he gets will be driven by his opponents.

My vote doesn't matter anyway. I live in a solid red state that has voted GOP for prez since 1968. I'm voting my conscience in 2012.

I won't yell "liar" as some have, but I am not particularly surprised either. I fully expect to see a strong challenge to Obama inside the party. A more liberal and progressive candidate needs to emerge.

Test case: If its between Obama and Palin in the general election, are you still sure you would not go to the polls?

I'll vote 3rd party before I stay home and not vote at all.