Home | About | Donate

Clinton's Pro-Charter School Comments Draw Boos from Teachers Union



I think we can expect a lot of these "reversals" during a Clinton administration. When she does the Democratic establishment will praise her pragmatism, moxy, and ability to work with republicans to adopt their positions.


None of this matters. I don't care that about her personal behaviors in private. What I have found with right wingers is that they have common areas of agreement with many Dem policies, so they have to make up phony issues or just remain silent. For example, Obama gave banksters a get-out-jail pass. Neither the gop nor Dem establishment said jack. Why? because the gop agrees with what Obama did. The gop is not against war, just who is running it so you get the obsession of Benghazi, instead of the issue of sending arms to Syrian jihadist crazies ripping Syria apart. Why? because the gop has no problems sending arms to jihadist crazies.


"Education is not a damn marketplace," he said. "We ought to learn this pretty soon."



As a former public school teacher, I've never had much faith in either of the teacher unions to actually take a hard stand, when it really counts, on behalf of teachers and students, but to endorse Clinton so early on is low even by that miserable standard.

As for Clinton, I think she's make a great V.P. for Donald Trump. That would at least end the sham of two separate major parties and put all the filth in one dumpster.


Their leaders endorsed HRC, not the rank and file.


It figures that Clinton would praise for-profit "Charter schools" funded and backed by hedge-funds and their managers! "Just follow the money" Her daughter Chelsea married hedge fund founder and manager Marc Mezvinsky.

"For years hedge funds have enjoyed a carried interest tax advantage, which caps tax rates on hedge fund profits at 20%. To most observers, including the 2016 presidential candidates, it is a gimmick that allows them to avoid the much higher ordinary income tax rates that would apply to any other citizen. The tax break that applies to Charter Schools may not be a gimmick, but it is extremely lucrative. It is the New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC), established by President Bill Clinton in 2000"

Clintons daughter married hedge-fund founder and manager and HRC would attempt to increase their (and her own) wealth - Chelsea's wedding was $3 to $5 million estimated, and their new NYC apartment was $10.5 million - clearly not part of the 99%!




For the Hill it is not about education or children it is about corporate control, privatization and selling off the public commons, in you heart you know she is a neoliberal neocon.


The NEA deserves every slap in the face it gets because it rushed to endorse Clinton when Bernie would have been a much better choice. Buyer's remorse?


And how much did GS and other hedge fund firms invest in the Charter School Growth Fund? HRC just can't pull herself away from the money pot regardless of how many potential voters (NEA is a very large, vocal, powerful group) she ignores. Her golden child certainly did not attend public schools and HRC went to Wellesley and Yale - private, high cost universities. Guess she (nor her campaign staff) have not bothered to read any of the studies of charter schools done by the likes of Stanford University or read about all the charter schools in Missouri that were shut down due to financial malfeasance and questionable academics. Does she believe that giving PUBLIC funds to PRIVATE (Charter) schools improves the access to quality education by children of the 99%? Or, does she even give a damn.


Let's forget ideology, and get some right wing legislation...I mean some pragmatic progressivism done!


Hillary is a predator oligarch through and through. Charter schools should be outlawed...just like prisons for profit. Neither are in the interests of society...but then that was never the Republican plan was it?


Its bad enough that the Republican Party exists. Its worse that the Democrats keep trying to out-Republican the Republicans. Seeing how we don't need TWO Republican Parties its time to dissolve the Democratic Party.


We already have what you're talking about. Money determines where you can afford to live and therefore how good your schools are. NY has the greatest per student funding discrepancy between affluent and indigent students, and we also have the most segregated schools. The results are in and this market-based system is only working for the rich.


MORE TO THE STORY: Shortly after Hillary's charter school comments, a bunch of teachers began chanting over her speech, saying "No Arne Duncan, no charter schools". It was caught on this brief clip, but also online are accounts of protesters being removed and Bernie signs being confiscated.


I think if you knew a few more public school teachers, you'd know better than to call them a special interest.


The goal is universal education not some private corporation winning or losing.. You are confused over free markets. Free markets don't produce the best of anything--they produce winners and losers according to profits and monetary gains. That in no way implies that winners produce superior products. HIgh tech is littered with examples of inferior products and technologies winning the market place. At the end of the day, a school/corporation will not be judged superior in its results (highly educated kids), but in its profit margins.


"Free to Choose" :grin:

Hey Folks!

Landed another Troll!


You have utopian libertarian ideas about markets. Companies and individuals attempt to pervert markets to their own ends. Microsoft does not produce the best products yet they have in essence become a monopoly by doing such things forcing Dell to drop superior Linux machines or they would not let them OEM Windows. Apple was superior to IBM machines. Many processors were superior to what Intel produced. Lexus gained market share not by producing a better car than BMW or Mercedes but by selling less than the cost of materials. They took a loss to gain market share originally with rebuilt Camrys.

Again as a society we have agreed on universal education of all citizens. Markets will not produce a winner in that regard, ever. Again it is naive to think that if schools could, they would produce poor results if it meant higher profits.


Thanks for the visual cookie, Cookies.