Democrats split on trigger, teachers

Who speaks for Democrats on education? asks Gadfly. Won’t Back Down, Hollywood’s positive take on the parent trigger movement, was shown at a theater near the convention site with the blessing of the White House, despite opposition by teachers’ union leaders.

DNC delegates who attended passed parents and teachers who picketed outside on their way to listening to uber-reformer Michelle Rhee discuss the movie inside.

. . . As Rhee pointed out, “There is no longer sort of this assumed alliance between the Democratic Party and the teachers unions.”

Democratic Mayor Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s former chief-of-staff, faces a Chicago Teachers Union strike next week.

The alliance between the teachers’ unions and the Democratic Party is “fraying,” opines the LA Times.

About Joanne

Comments

  1. Correction needed: “Won’t Back Down” was not shown at the DNC. It was a private showing at a separate Charlotte location (for a limited audience) presented by Students First. A few parent advocates were flyering outside but were not allowed into the screening despite having received invitations.

    One of those parents has written a blog post about it, but the blog is down right now. I’ll post when it’s back up but wanted to get this factual correction up now.

    (Why did the parents who are critics of education “reform” receive invitations to the private screening? Because of Students’ First’s policy of tricking people into signing what appear to be pro-public-education petitions on change.org and then listing those signers’ names as members.)

  2. Here’s a piece about the same Charlotte moms’ getting shut out of a Democrats for Education Reform event during the DNC, with a description of their previous unsuccessful attempt to see “Won’t Back Down.” This piece doesn’t mention that they had invitations. As you can see, they are terrifying thugs, especially in such a vast army of two. (Full disclosure that Pam Grundy is a fellow founding member of Parents Across America. I don’t know Carol.)

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/06/moms-booted-from-michelle-rhees-film-screening-during-democratic-convention/

    We middle-aged PTA moms are especially prone to boorish, threatening, even violent behavior, if you believe the “reform” accounts. Billionaire-funded “reform” goddess Jeanne Allen has just posted a highly amusing shriek about the pain, the anguish of being Twitter-bombed by us “phony Blob front groups portraying [ourselves] as parent-friendly.”

    Must go and engage in more phony Blob fronting now. It’s a tough job but somebody has to do it.

    • Caroline, can you name one issue on which you and the teachers’ unions disagree? Because your “parents” group sure looks like a union front group from here.

  3. I’m just loving this.

    As much as you anti-education advocates of the district system hate vouchers it’s becoming clear that you hate parental trigger, oh, a bunch more. I can certainly see why.

    Both charters and vouchers are kid-at-a-time threats. The district loses a kid here, a kid there and while vouchers have a more distinct whiff of parental choice about them, being “edu-bucks” that can be redeemed at any participating education establishment.

    Charters, while a departure from the one, true path of the school district, are less threatening. It takes time to form, set up and make a success of a school so the shock of losing a couple of hundred kids per charter is spread out over years.

    But parental trigger? A whole ‘nother animal.

    Putting parents in a position to not only take their own child out of the district but to take a chunk of the district with them changes the mosquito bites of vouchers and charters to a white shark-sized mouthful. It ruptures the sanctity of the school district at the same time it puts ideas into the heads of dissatisfied parents.

    Vouchers. Charters. Parental trigger.

    Oooh, I’m smiling again.

  4. lightly seasoned says:

    Um, these people being given a trigger (interesting imagery) are the same parents being talked about in the thread downstream — the ones whose children are mired in poverty because of their environment, lack of middle class Protestant values, etc. I’m wondering if it is really a good idea to give people who are failing to run their own families the power to run the education of other families’ children.

    • The question wouldn’t have to be asked if those currently in charge – elective officials and administrators – were doing a good job educating those kids instead of a good job coming up with excuses for why they aren’t.

  5. I was thinking the same thing. I think we should throw the parents in jail to remove the inconvenience of having them around. That will make educating the children a lot easier. (Fortunately we only need to throw the mothers in jail; dis-empowered men leave on their own.)

    Reproductive choices, yes; educational choices, hell no!