Betsy DeVos
-
So.... Has anyone actually said why she's a good pick yet?
I'm just reading a bunch of "Well Clinton picked unqualified people too!"
So.... Has anyone actually said why she's a good pick yet?
I'm just reading a bunch of "Well Clinton picked unqualified people too!"
There's not any reason why she's a good pick. People can be good at things they're not supposedly qualified for. Steve Jobs was not a tech guy. He was not an engineer and he was a douche yet he built the single most towering technology company in the country. That's not comparing Betsy DeVos to Steve Jobs, since you've shown the innate inability to not see the forest for the trees in the past, but only to point out that all the education and qualifications in the world can't make somebody good at a job. Only being good at the job can do that.
-
So.... Has anyone actually said why she's a good pick yet?
I'm just reading a bunch of "Well Clinton picked unqualified people too!"
There's not any reason why she's a good pick. People can be good at things they're not supposedly qualified for. Steve Jobs was not a tech guy. He was not an engineer and he was a douche yet he built the single most towering technology company in the country. That's not comparing Betsy DeVos to Steve Jobs, since you've shown the innate inability to not see the forest for the trees in the past, but only to point out that all the education and qualifications in the world can't make somebody good at a job. Only being good at the job can do that.
since you've shown the innate inability to not see the forest for the trees in the past
when?
-
It's really hard to choose, but Devos' combination of a lack of experience and purely ideological driven agenda puts her near the bottom of pile/ top of the list of objectionable cabinet nominees.
We do not have to judge her in a vacuum. She has a track record in Michigan.
Betsy DeVos and the twilight of public education
In Detroit, parents of school-age children have plenty of choices, thanks to the nation's largest urban network of charter schools.
What remains in short supply is quality.
In Brightmoor, the only high school left is Detroit Community Schools, a charter boasting more than a decade of abysmal test scores and, until recently, a superintendent who earned $130,000 a year despite a dearth of educational experience or credentials.
On the west side, another charter school, Hope Academy, has been serving the community around Grand River and Livernois for 20 years. Its test scores have been among the lowest in the state throughout those two decades; in 2013 the school ranked in the first percentile, the absolute bottom for academic performance. Two years later, its charter was renewed.
Or if you live downtown, you could try Woodward Academy, a charter that has limped along near the bottom of school achievement since 1998, while its operator has been allowed to expand into other communities.
-
Of course it's only the angle of the ideology that bothers the Democrats. Not that she's an idealogue.
WSS
-
Of course it's only the angle of the ideology that bothers the Democrats. Not that she's an idealogue.
WSS
Of course it's only the angle of the ideology that bothers the Democrats. Not that she's an idealogue.
WSS
Well no fucking shit, Charlene?
-
Of course it's only the angle of the ideology that bothers the Democrats. Not that she's an idealogue.
WSS
Well no fucking shit, Charlene?
-
So, why is she a good choice again? I've been through four pages and there's been a load of back and forth about "the left only hates her because..." "trump can do what he likes" etc
But nothing actually addressing the original question of her fitness for the role.
-
Pretty much my thoughts. I support school choice and I realized that it's the boogeyman for the teachers union.
I don't think the teachers union has been particularly beneficial to what should be the end goal which is educating people.
WSS
-
"Betsy DeVos Is Qualified Because She Is Not Part of the Education Establishment" - does that make you and me qualified also?
Also, school choice? Assuming you mean the following (from wikipedia):
School choice is a term for K–12 public education options in the United States, describing a wide array of programs offering students and their families alternatives to publicly provided schools, to which students are generally assigned by the location of their family residence.
I don't really have a problem with that in essence. I can see that it could lead to a gradation of quality of education, as some school gets ahead and then the better teachers want to go there, and so the parents want the kids to go there too etc but by and large it shouldn't be an issue. I lived in a village of not many people, maybe about a thousand high school kids total (age 13-18 because my county does three tier schooling unlike most of the country), and had a choice of three state schools (equivalent of public schools) and then of course any private/public school (private school = pay and qualify to get in; public school = future politician; yes, the naming conventions are weird).
So I'm not sure school choice is such a bad thing. But again, is supporting it in itself sufficient to qualify you to hold the post of education secretary? Because so far the two criteria you've mentioned would qualify both of us, and I dare say neither of us would be particularly good at that role.
-
Being someone who the president of the United States has confidence in to help him formulate his position is what counts. I'm not stupid enough to think that school choice is going to make kids in the Innercity or the trailer park Rhodes Scholars. Or that the teachers union opposes school choice on the basis of what's best for the kids.
And I'd say, like has happened before, 90% of the opposition to any of the appointees is Trump derangement syndrome.
WSS
-
So, because Trump chose her, she's qualified?
If the opposition were, as you say, "Trump derangement syndrome" then surely every single one of the appointees would be scrutinised as much? I know plenty are, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be, while not all are being scrutinised. Sure, Sessions, Tillerson and Pruitt are, but Matthis, Lighthizer and Coats are not. Even Ben Carson is getting a kind of pass. So, to suggest that people are applying scrutiny based purely on Trump being the selector is just erroneous.
-
He's picking a group of advisors, so yes. Sorry 'if' she doesn't meet with your approval or Woody's approval or Chuck Schumer's approval or Al Franken's approval.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
So the Trump derangement syndrome gang likes one of the appointees and that makes them open-minded? There's probably something Cal can find about Obama that he doesn't hate.
WSS
-
And any related example John McCain going off the deep end now about the Russians. If that were Donald Trump the left would be shitting their pants that he's a warmonger. And let's not pretend that McCain's main reasons are the fake Maverick act which gets his mug on MSNBC and the fact that he's pissed about the war hero bit.
WSS
-
He's picking a group of advisors, so yes. Sorry 'if' she doesn't meet with your approval or Woody's approval or Chuck Schumer's approval or Al Franken's approval.
WSS
He's picking a group of advisors, so yes. Sorry 'if' she doesn't meet with your approval or Woody's approval or Chuck Schumer's approval or Al Franken's approval.
WSS
OK, so you literally can't point to a single tangible thing she has done in her life to make her a worthwhile candidate, and we're supposed to not care about it because Trump is so amazing?
-
He's picking a group of advisors, so yes. Sorry 'if' she doesn't meet with your approval or Woody's approval or Chuck Schumer's approval or Al Franken's approval.
WSS
OK, so you literally can't point to a single tangible thing she has done in her life to make her a worthwhile candidate, and we're supposed to not care about it because Trump is so amazing?
-
But I guess that's right. For that matter I can't think of a single qualification it would make Al Franken a good United States Senator.
Or any number of u.s. Senators for that matter. Or congressman or even presidents.
Like I said if she were a union flack an appointed by a Democrat I'm sure you guys would have a different View.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
But I guess that's right. For that matter I can't think of a single qualification it would make Al Franken a good United States Senator.
Or any number of u.s. Senators for that matter. Or congressman or even presidents.
Like I said if she were a union flack an appointed by a Democrat I'm sure you guys would have a different View.
WSS
But I guess that's right. For that matter I can't think of a single qualification it would make Al Franken a good United States Senator.
Or any number of u.s. Senators for that matter. Or congressman or even presidents.
Like I said if she were a union flack an appointed by a Democrat I'm sure you guys would have a different View.
WSS
Well first, I wasn't being hyperbolic, I was being factual. And that's actually factual, not 'alternative' factual.
Does this mean we're back to 'but the democrats!' again? Can we close this thread with the answer "she is not qualified for this role in any way" and move on?
-
But I guess that's right. For that matter I can't think of a single qualification it would make Al Franken a good United States Senator.
Or any number of u.s. Senators for that matter. Or congressman or even presidents.
Like I said if she were a union flack an appointed by a Democrat I'm sure you guys would have a different View.
WSS
Well first, I wasn't being hyperbolic, I was being factual. And that's actually factual, not 'alternative' factual.
Does this mean we're back to 'but the democrats!' again? Can we close this thread with the answer "she is not qualified for this role in any way" and move on?
Well first, I wasn't being hyperbolic, I was being factual. And that's actually factual, not 'alternative' factual.
Does this mean we're back to 'but the democrats!' again? Can we close this thread with the answer "she is not qualified for this role in any way" and move on?
If you want to. And may I add that neither you nor Woody or Chuck Schumer are qualified to even comment on the situation in any way. Do we agree on that?
WSS
-
Allowed to comment on the situation? Why not? I mean, I wouldn't recommend anybody here for the main 'interrogator' in the hearing, but we can talk about it all day.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login