Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prize winning Economist took a second look at Obama in an article published in Rolling Stones, and then a follow up with ABC News. His conclusion? Obama is likely to be the most effective, and certainly the most successfulpresident we have ever had.
“Bill Clinton is an incredibly gifted politician,” Krugman told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl. “But, in fact, Bill Clinton was not a consequential president. And Obama, although clearly not the natural politician, is a consequential president.”
With his polls so low right now, it's difficult to get behind this kind of arithmetic, but Krugman shows that the economy is on the rise, unemployment is down, health care has been reformed and significant financial reform is in place. The environmental issues are being addressed. No, he admits, it might not be everything you wanted, but it is more than any president has accomplished in decades.
Reading this, I felt a bit vindicated. Though I would never have claimed Obama was 'the most successful', he was doing much better than his press. What has always bothered me about his press though, was the amount of it, the shear mass of the machine.
You expect Fox News, and some jabs from the main stream editorials. Then there are the web papers on the far-right like Town Hall, National Association of Scholars, the NRA main sight,
The usual suspects. Also, the republicans in congress, just like the democrats with Bush (expected, and accepted). The Koch brothers were more active, not liking things going the way they were, especially with Obama going directly at the environment and health care.
Likely, Obama was the Koch's worst nightmare - between 1998 and now Koch has been an environmental terror (with one of the few companies I have ever heard of being tried and convicted for double homicide). Obama not only wants EPA powers to increase, he was making it happen. It wasn't going to be a few $10 million dollar fines any longer. Likely, shut downs were on the horizon. So, we also expect some flack from that area.
Some flack. Sure. .. but sweet mercy...
The girl friend video coming out of the Koch, from Americans for Shared Prosperity should have been the real clue. That was the point the shadows were pulled back. Whether that was a purposeful move or not, it was the beacon that caught my attention. The ad, which I'm sure you have seen, has a woman who is acting like Obama is an abusive boyfriend -- and is warning us to drop him, not to vote for him again. Again? This was published on Sep 21, 2014.
This is the second term. Right? This is Anti-Obama, like two years
too late. Isn't it?
No. Not at all. They just don't appear to care any more that you notice.
I'm not capable of doing the amount of document research that would be required for a true analysis -- I'm just going to put that up front -- but I believe, just from the amount I've been able to do, that no President has been against the continuous demagoguery Obama has over his two terms. There is the slams and the mud during the election, but then people get down to doing their jobs. The sensationalist go back to writing real news, and waiting for someone, normally a Congressman, to do something extremely silly. But that didn't happen with Obama.
Crowds of mudslingers continued
Torrents of false controversies were created
Demagoguery was shouted at every Presidential move
Congress took on a culture of obstruction
For example -- despite Obama's pre-election release of his official Hawaiian birth certificate in 2008;[1] confirmation, based on the original documents, by the Hawaii Department of Health;[6] the April 2011 release of a certified copy of Obama's original Certificate of Live Birth (or long-form birth certificate); and contemporaneous birth announcements published in two Hawaii newspapers.[7] Polls conducted in 2010 suggested that at least one quarter of adult Americans said that they doubted Obama's U.S. birth,[8][9] while a May 2011 Gallup poll found that 13% of American adults (23% of Republicans) continued to express such doubts. -- Wikipedia
Hundreds of lawsuits, some filed by GOP leaders, some from Congressman, Senators, and Tea Party members. In 2009 and 2010 the numbers in the South and in the Tea Party are so high, that they are seen as useful to many of the GOP. They under mind anything Obama does, inciting angst toward any decision he makes. A few Republicans openly gaff at the claims that Obama's Presidency is not legitimate, but most do not. Colorado GOP Senate candidate Ken Buck is caught on tape complaining about walking the line between openly agreeing with the "Birthers" and denying the legitimacy of their claim to keep them going.
"Will you tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates while I'm on the camera," Buck said to the worker while laughing. "God, what am I supposed to do?"
Republican gubernatorial candidate Doug Ducey suffers from the malady of many wannabe rulers: magical thinking.
Inside his bubble, starving Arizona's schools will somehow help our children achieve at a higher level.
He wants voters to ignore this harsh fact: The Legislature cut $3 billion from our children's schools starting in 2007, a 24 percent reduction — one of the deepest in the nation when Arizona was already almost dead last in per pupil funding.
What did those cuts spawn? Arizona's teacher workforce shortage, super-sized classrooms, lack of state funding to buy basics like textbooks and school buildings falling into serious disrepair.
However, in Ducey's mind, educators have all the funding they need, and he must protect Arizonans from spending even one cent more on children's schools.
We need to keep sight of something -- which has been muddled and twisted. We need to keep sight of the fact that Common Core was sought out to keep Schools open and Teachers from being Fired by the repercussions of ESEA -- also known as Bush's "No Child Left Behind" Act.
In Oklahoma the Governor, Mary Fallin, repealed Common Core. She did this to make herself more popular in the polls and to look better on TV. Why she believed that the repercussions of ESEA would wait to come down on necks of the Schools until after the elections I don't know. But she did, apparently, but they didn't. Now she has lost millions for her school kids and teachers in Federal funds. She also has to spend millions to create Oklahoma's own set of educational standards in weeks, and the required ESEA testing. Also, of course ESEA's "Corrections" from their last testing cycle, need to be applied, which means, many teachers are about to be fired because no school passed the AYP last time. The teachers will likely be fired because of a "Failure to Perform" -- so it is likely that they will not gain unemployment. [UPDATE-- Looks like the ED is going to have nearly a year to get their standards created before any repercussions happen, but they did loose all of their waivers and are operating this year under the full stringent ESEA -- basically, it is middle-ages with ESEA all over again.]
Frederick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute asserts that the experiences of Oklahoma and Washington highlight "what a lawless process" the waiver system has become. "I defy anybody to go through and find any shred of consistency in the decisions that have been made here," he said.
Hess added, "States were ushered into signing up for the Common Core en masse ... and it’s brought us to this predictable place. They’re now stuck in this place where they’re told if you move off the Common Core, you’re supposed to come up with new assessments and standards in a matter of weeks ... it’s a somewhat unreasonable expectation."
According to Fordham Institute President Michael Petrilli, the Department of Education's decision is a "terrible" one and Fallin has grounds for a lawsuit. "Nothing in ESEA gives the secretary of education the authority to push states around when it comes to their standards," Petrilli said.
First, to Petrili, who is usually more on top of things, but is probably having a bad day... ESEA is under the Executive Branch for enforcement.. right? Not only can the Executive Branch do what it is doing, it Must do what it is doing. Yes, it was a law created by Bush, and yes it is killing Public Education, but it is still a law and it must be enforced. -- And .. oh.. The Department of Education is in the Executive Branch. Firmly there in fact. Cabinet position and everything. It has been there since October 19, 1979.
A previous Department of Education was created in 1867 but was soon demoted to an Office in 1868. As an agency not represented in the president's cabinet, it quickly became a relatively minor bureau in the Department of the Interior. In 1939, the bureau was transferred to the Federal Security Agency, where it was renamed the Office of Education. In 1953, the Federal Security Agency was upgraded to cabinet-level status as the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
So, Petrilli is right, technically. There is nothing in the ESEA which gives the Secretary of Education, the authority to enforce Bush's ESEA Act. -- but Duncan doesn't' require it to have any special instructions of authority described either. He has all the authority he requires. Also, Duncan really has very little choice in How the actions are proscribed, or What they require. Unfortunately the ESEA law is articulate as it is tyrannical.
The fix, was Common Core. A "reorganization" which would take the states out of the line of fire for a few years - hoping Congress would finally get around to fixing the ESEA law. Congress is the only one who can do this. However, since 2008 Congress has ignored more than 40 requests from Obama to make these changes and save our schools.
Frederick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute .. is an idiot. Have you ever read any of his books or web pages? The Koch propaganda dipps off them like crude. Hess is a strong proponent of For-Profit education -- citing that Private Corporations would do a much better job than teachers who work for State Department of Education. The fact that declaring Proprietary Methods would shield these corporation from oversight and inspection is only one of the negative points he fails to recognize. Besides, look at how well Privatizing our Prisons has gone (Over population, near zero supervision, zero reform, zero support, return expectancy near 75%). Exactly the kind of outcome we are looking for in education.
I've often wanted to tell him that it is not enough to say the positive points of an idea, while only highlighting the negative aspects of the current situation. But if it doesn't fit into a meme Tweet he doesn't pay much attention to it.
"I defy anybody to go through and find any shred of consistency in the decisions that have been made here," he said.
I believe I already have. The consistency is that this is a police action decreed by a Federal Act that the state of Oklahoma, in purposeful action, has violated. Common Core was not required, and it still isn't. However, following ESEA is required, just as it was before Common Core was shielding her from it.
So kids. What we learned here today is -- if there is a big mean angry dog on the other side of the door... no matter how much you don't like the color of the paint on the door -- don't open it.
Obama has had it with your whining too. So, after you are fired, and unable to qualify for unemployment, think about that, alright? Come back when you can read.
COMMON CORE meets EDUCATION REFORM. I love this title.. Sounds fierce doesn't it? Sounds like it is Full of Facts; Hard and Authoritative. However, it completely ignores the fact that Common CoreIS the reform for the law known as ESEA or No Child Left Behnd, imposed by Executive Branch of Federal and State -- which does not, by the way, require your vote or acceptance. CCSS is therefore .. law, for all intents and purpose. (Well done Obama. The hell with those Congress assholes).
That's right. If Obama, Bill Gates, the NGA, CCSSO, David and his crew of Rhode scholars didn't act, starting back in 2009, then last Tuesday, when the ESEA/NCLB came due on it's 12 year mark -- since no school in the whole country passed their AYP -- the action of the law would have fired every teacher in every state, and closed the schools. No school passed. Every school -- Epic Fail Schools then go under private license. Either sold or contracted. If Koch moves as fast as they are able, they'll be sold. Within six months, every teachers union is shattered. Teachers with plastic smiles and empty heads come to babysit children and tell parents what they want to hear. Salaries plumate -- Teachers become nothing more than glorified babysitters. Since the schools are now private corporations, there is no State oversight and Federal can't move in. Federal Government does not act directly with the schools, so even though the Department of Education is in the Executive Branch, Obama can't help you -- It is against federal law for federal involvement in the local schools. Oh? You didn't know that? Yes, all of your paranoia about Obama's federal take over of Education, was for nothing, based on nothing, and impossible for it to occur.
The funny thing is, you think I'm joking. This is all well documented, and that narration above is in the No Child Left Behind law.--
It was obvious, about 14 days ago, that a hell of a lot of money was suddenly injected into the Internet against Common Core. That money is coming from the usual suspects and lighting up the Koch camps a long the rivers near the capital. To see the fringes and the uglier , more rabid fray of the battle, tune into Twitter hashes #CommonCore #CCSS #StandUp4Kids There are a bunch of others, but those three will get you to the front lines.
The meme-pushers showed up in droves, with anti-Common Core jargon. At first it was infantile, and if you really thought about it, -- it was down right insulting that the average American, who could work a computer, was as ignorant as they proposed to be. I didn't make a connection right away. I really didn't believe at that time anyone who was moderately literate would object to Common Core. I was wrong. They were just late, that's all. Higher currents were keeping them back -- but that didn't really matter, they were here now.
Two things are abundantly clear once you are finished. First, there is no Teaching Method, no requirements about how the lesson is to be taught. People telling you that their child's homework is tougher than fighting fires or terrorists, because of the Common Core Math, are obviously lying(, or they might actually be stupid.) Ninety percent of the time, the same methods for teaching used before Common Core are still in place afterward Here, let's look at a Standard for English.
English Language Arts Standards » Writing » Grade 1
Production and Distribution of Writing: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.1.4 - (W.1.4 begins in grade 3)
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.1.5 - With guidance and support from adults, focus on a topic, respond to questions and suggestions from peers, and add details to strengthen writing as needed. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.1.6 - With guidance and support from adults, use a variety of digital tools to produce and publish writing, including in collaboration with peers.
[end of standard]
So this is it. That is Common Core. In the first grade our students need to learn about the Production and Distribution of Writing. Then there are three (actually two since the first has been changed to begin at 3rd grade) skill sets our students need to learn about this subject. Standards are written in Concise Language, so they seem a bit more intense than they really are, but basically little Suzie needs to pick something to write about, "Ponies."
First, off, before we go any further, the Common Core Standards for 4th grade, are right here, on the Common Core web site. These are exactly what your child's teacher will be working off. All the grades are listed there. Every one of them.
She will develop lessons, or they will be supplied to her by your school which will address in an appropriate way, the activities, reading and writing to get those standards met with her lesson.
You'll notice something here with the Real Common Core standards. It never says Fiction or Non fiction must be used, or how often either of those must be used, or that Mythology can not be used or any thing along those lines. I point this out because I run into the declaration that Common Core is going to rid our children of life and imagination That is hogwash. Two of the composers of CCSS wrote and published an article on this topic, which clears all of this up.The Role of Fiction in the High School English Language Arts Classroom
According to an article on Chalk Beat, the topic of the AP History program in Colorado was already discussed by the State Board of Education only a short while ago (Sept 10, 2014) and matter settled. How is it that the Jeffco School Board, and Julie Williams are able to bring this up again? What is the grounds Julie Williams is using to disregard the State Education Board who have already discussed and approved of these lessons, and discuss them again?
The new AP “framework” for U.S. history has become a cause celebre among some conservative critics, who claim it presents a slanted and negative view of American history...
Board chair Paul Lundeen, a Republican from Monument, last month proposed a resolution criticizing the AP framework and urging the College Board, which runs the AP tests, to delay the new program for a year. (See this Chalkbeat Colorado story for background.)....
...Democrat Elaine Gantz Berman of Denver said, “People are always going to be dissatisfied” with presentations of U.S. history. And after a bit more back and forth between Krieger and Fischer, the board moved on to the next agenda item.
Done. Over. No more Discussion. The matter was settled long before Julie Williams brought this back up. What is the point of the State Education Board settling a matter if the lesser boards are going to continue to ignore the finding, and bicker among themselves?
damage the good reputation of (someone); slander or libel.
By Krieger's own admission, there is nothing false or misleading or untrue inside the AP material. So,like the rest of the article -- his Title is designed to create an insult where none exists, and then fan the flames. If you read his article, you will find that he often incites hatred and division without cause or actual fact. His rhetoric is confused, and misleading -- with all the dazzle of a con-man. But we need to keep in mind that Larry Krieger owns InsiderPrep, which is a business that creates and sells books and materials to help a student prep for the AP classes and tests. -- Well, it did. See, Larry's Prep course is based on the old study methods, where memorizing is more important than critical thinking. The AP History program has changed drastically, in that it is only a Framework now, not a full course like it was in the past. So, there is no ...series of chronological chapters that match the sequence of topics in the College Board’s official APUSH Course Description booklet. Which is how Larry Krieger's program is developed. No. Now it is a comprehensive, adaptable Framework.
The Course and Exam Description (.pdf/1.81MB) includes the concept outline, curriculum framework, and sample exam questions. These resources, alongside state and local requirements for American history courses, help teachers build their syllabi.
A new Curriculum Framework Evidence Planner helps teachers customize the framework by specifying the historical content selected for student focus. It can also be provided to students to track the historical evidence examined for each concept and as review for the AP Exam.
Schools and teachers develop their own curriculum for AP courses. Submitting a syllabus to the AP Course Audit ensures teachers have a thorough understanding of AP U.S. History course requirements and are authorized to teach AP.
Oops! Since Every school, indeed every teacher can create her own syllabi, paying attention to areas and focuses of history which are most in line with the state and local focus-- Larry Krieger's chapter by chapter Insider program, is no longer useful. So Larry has nothing to sell and his publications are no longer marketable. -- Unless he talks you into believing that the new AP Framework design is somehow bad. This is very difficult to do, because there is nothing false, misleading or wrong with the facts or the framework. So, he has to go after something with a lot of emotion behind it, something that will cut through logic and the extra cost of putting together their own AP classes.
Thus begins Larry's impassioned campaign against AP History, where he takes out the examples of the New AP, twists some things up, reads a little too much into what is not really there -- since none of it has to be there, it is all up to the teacher and the school what to build with the Framework -- and begins screaming Leftist Democrats!
To Larry Krieger and Jane Robbins,
After reading your article New College Board US History Framework Defames America, I'm appalled by your actions and your rhetoric. If the student doesn't already know and understand the points of history that you keep harping on, she's not going to be in an AP class, is she? Is there any way -- using any stretch of the imagination -- that a student who is ready for Advance Placement isn't going to know who George Washington was and what he was to our country? Or about the soldiers in WWII? Or about Martin Luther King Jr.? Your arguments are blatant falsehoods.
It is, however, very likely that she will have not been introduced to the full scope of slavery, or to the existence of the Black Panthers. Or to the fact that American citizens who were Japanese were put into camps during WWII, and all of their businesses and lands seized.
Advanced Placement (AP) is a program in the United States and Canada, created by the College Board, which offers college-level curricula and examinations to high school students. American colleges and universities often grant placement and course credit to students who obtain high scores on the examinations.
The College Board collected criteria from 3000+ colleges and universities. Using those combined criteria they created a test. Passing that test fulfills what the 3000+ universities and colleges expected a student to know. Who gave them the authority? That question can only be to incite fear, doubt and distrust. It's dishonesty is bitter.
The College Board is a mission-driven not-for-profit organization that connects students to college success and opportunity.
Founded in 1900, the College Board was created to expand access to higher education. Today, the membership association is made up of over 6,000 of the world’s leading educational institutions and is dedicated to promoting excellence and equity in education.
Each year, the College Board helps more than seven million students prepare for a successful transition to college through programs and services in college readiness and college success — including the SAT and the Advanced Placement Program. The organization also serves the education community through research and advocacy on behalf of students, educators and schools.
You know these facts, and that is the damming part of everything. It is obvious that your intention is not what is best for the students, or the country. Your primary purpose is to cause dissent. You are inciting parents and school boards with meaningless verbiage. City upon the hill?
(1) Diversity among people allows for a variety of ways in which God may be honored. (2) Acts of kindness by the rich toward the poor - and a spirit of obedience by the poor toward the rich - further manifest the spirit of ideal public life. (3) Common need among individuals with different qualities is necessary to society.
...soe the way to drawe men to the workes of mercy is not by force of Argument from the goodness or necessity of the worke for though this course may enforce a rationall minde to some present Act of mercy as is frequent in experience, yet it cannot worke such a habit in a Soule as shall make it prompt upon all occasions to produce the same effect but by frameing these affeccions of love in the hearte which will as naturally bring forthe the other, as any cause doth produce the effect.
"History will not judge our endeavors—and a government cannot be selected—merely on the basis of color or creed or even party affiliation. Neither will competence and loyalty and stature, while essential to the utmost, suffice in times such as these. For of those to whom much is given, much is required... " -- JFK
I read your examples in the News Week. It was like listening to con-man, or a fortune teller. as you stretched your illogical explanations to fit across the test questions and 'wrong answers' to make a drum to beat on. You are not a teacher. Teachers care about their student's future. You only care about your past. You offer only a scam, and you are spreading fear and intolerance where none exists.
This part really gave me a laugh:
To his continued horror, Manifest Destiny suffered the same fate as the Founders. An idea Krieger taught for years as “the belief that America had a mission to spread democracy and new technology across the continent” was described in the framework as “built on a belief in white racial superiority and a sense of American cultural superiority.”
Which from the outset Manifest Destiny—vast in program, in its sense of continentalism—was slight in support. It lacked national, sectional, or party following commensurate with its magnitude. The reason was it did not reflect the national spirit. The thesis that it embodied nationalism, found in much historical writing, is backed by little real supporting evidence In 1845 John L. O'Sullivan coined the term "manifest destiny" in reference to a growing conviction that the United States was preordained by God to expand throughout North America and exercise hegemony over its neighbors. In the United States Magazine and Democratic Review (July–August 1845, p. 5) he argued for "the fulfillment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions.
O'Sullivan's original conception of manifest destiny was not a call for territorial expansion by force. He believed that the expansion of U.S.-style democracy was inevitable, and would happen without military involvement as whites (or "Anglo-Saxons") emigrated to new regions. O'Sullivan described the agency of Manifest Destiny as a "irresistible army of Anglo-Saxon emigration," supported the Confederacy and the idea that slavery was the only way for whites and blacks to live together. I'd say the current AP characterization is pretty accurate.
So.. what part of "built on a belief in white racial superiority and a sense of American cultural superiority" is mis-represented? It sounds more like you have been teaching this wrong to hundreds of students for your whole career, and now you wish to compound that misguided definition even further.
They also disagreed with the College Board over how children should learn, with Krieger and his allies preferring a curriculum based on memorizing facts to one based on critical thinking.
I'm not going to even try to make that statement anything other than it is -- robot non-thinkers are your goal. But I forget. You aren't a historian, you are a high school teacher. You are not an expert in education, or someone qualified to actually judge a full curriculum. You are only qualified to follow one, and from all that you have said, you aren't very good at that either.
Your partner, Jane Robbins, has used this statement several times:
Except she's lying. Flat out lying, like she does many times in her writing. "What's wrong with a leftist slant" is never said by the College Board. The Framework can just as easily be used to create a Far Right Conservative course. Again,your statement is only there to incite, to cause anger about something that doesn't exist. Also, just because you don't like the answer "teachers will have flexibility" does not make it invalid or unacceptable, and having you say this over and over, doesn't make it any more valid.
Heartland Institute is the hand puppets of the Koch brothers. That's all this is -- another Koch brother propaganda machine. Their goal, which they have stated proudly, several times, is the removal of the Department of Education, and to push publish schools out of existence. More here. This alteration you are promoting is designed to diminish the ability of public schools so that they become ineffectual.
You are making this a political agenda, when it has nothing to do with politics. The College Board is not a government agency. They are a business. A business which is offering students a step up into college. They are professionals who gathered the criteria and made the program to fit that criteria.
History will remember this: the propaganda, the Koch brothers, you and the false front businesses and groups you have created. That list of people you have in this article? I've researched them all. I'm amazed they haven't run you out of the state.
The students will remember this, and they will not remember you kindly, when they achieve no credit, no placement and arrive to college unprepared.
