Effect of the mayoral race on DCPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the recap. Now could we get a link to an objective source? Sorry, but the tone of piece didn't exactly scream "objectivity."

I don't claim that the unhinged Rhee-haters have no reason, but the lunacy doesn't exactly help your cause.

That actually was a fairly accurate recap, if somewhat sarcastic. If this is the first time you are hearing about all of this, you really should drop words such as "unhinged", "Rhee-haters" and "lunacy" from your vocabulary. You clearly need to be better informed. Perhaps after learning a bit more, you will find yourself being described in such terms.

Fair enough. Just saying, all this stuff about "Rheeform" and little Brechtian absurdist plays aren't an argument, and only serve to alienate folks. I've actually been on the cusp of a toss-up voter between Fenty and Gray, but what I see is, for all Fenty's many flaws, the people he's appointed have--love them or hate them--been serious folks. What I see from Gray's camp is a) ambiguity about who's going to fill positions from the actual campaign; and b) this kind of utter derangement from his supporters.

I'm not saying there's no reason for them to act that way; perhaps there is. But whereas that kind of enthusiasm might be infectious at a DC United game, it has just the opposite effect in this forum. And I can assure you that most folks don't have this total depth of knowledge at their fingertips, and the tone here and on washingtonpost.com just makes Fenty's supporters sound like an army of crazies, ,waiting to take over...

Now you know how we feel about being called lunatics and fans of Marion Barry when we have legitimate criticisms of Rhee and Fenty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Fair enough. Just saying, all this stuff about "Rheeform" and little Brechtian absurdist plays aren't an argument, and only serve to alienate folks. I've actually been on the cusp of a toss-up voter between Fenty and Gray, but what I see is, for all Fenty's many flaws, the people he's appointed have--love them or hate them--been serious folks. What I see from Gray's camp is a) ambiguity about who's going to fill positions from the actual campaign; and b) this kind of utter derangement from his supporters.

What's sad is that you don't know the facts about how Rhee bungled the budget hearings and are dismissing it by using condescending terms like "Brechtian absurdist plays" and "utter derangement."

If Fenty and Rhee ever admitted to having made mistakes (and actually try to learn from them) rather than insisting that their critics don't care about children, then maybe the tone of the debate would be a lot calmer.

[Anonymous]

Sure, but you're not trying to convince Rhee and Fenty. You're trying to convince--I would assume--the great mass of DC voters who think "staying the course" is the safe bet. When you come across as nuts-o, you're not exactly reassuring anyone. Same with blaming everything bad, up to and including the recent heat-wave, on Rhee's intrinsically malignant nature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sure, but you're not trying to convince Rhee and Fenty. You're trying to convince--I would assume--the great mass of DC voters who think "staying the course" is the safe bet. When you come across as nuts-o, you're not exactly reassuring anyone. Same with blaming everything bad, up to and including the recent heat-wave, on Rhee's intrinsically malignant nature.

The problem with your statements is that you don't seem to understand the difference between your own strawmen and people who are much more informed than you on the matter. Your condescending ways (to those of us who are you intellectual superiors in this regard) are, frankly, what is "nuts-o" (which isn't the most educated spelling I've seen of that word, btw). No-one here is blaming everything bad (up to and including the recent heat wave) on Rhee and if you aren't smart enough to know that you're throwing out a strawman, then you can expect those of us who are to point it out to you. Rhee continues to learn on the job and her arrogance is breathtaking. Fenty continues to abuse the public trust to the benefit of his supporters and it's ethically troubling. You don't seem to have an answer for this other than the fact that anyone who points it out is in some way over-zealous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Fair enough. Just saying, all this stuff about "Rheeform" and little Brechtian absurdist plays aren't an argument, and only serve to alienate folks. I've actually been on the cusp of a toss-up voter between Fenty and Gray, but what I see is, for all Fenty's many flaws, the people he's appointed have--love them or hate them--been serious folks. What I see from Gray's camp is a) ambiguity about who's going to fill positions from the actual campaign; and b) this kind of utter derangement from his supporters.

When was the last time you saw a candidate announce a cabinet before an election?

How many of Fenty's agency heads have been replaced, fired, quit since January of 1997? In other words, no one ever annouces a cabinet and even if tehy do, things change.

Can you confirm that Rhee will stick around for 4 more years if Fenty wins? She hasn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: No-one here is blaming everything bad (up to and including the recent heat wave) on Rhee and if you aren't smart enough to know that you're throwing out a strawman, then you can expect those of us who are to point it out to you.

Bravo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure, but you're not trying to convince Rhee and Fenty. You're trying to convince--I would assume--the great mass of DC voters who think "staying the course" is the safe bet. When you come across as nuts-o, you're not exactly reassuring anyone. Same with blaming everything bad, up to and including the recent heat-wave, on Rhee's intrinsically malignant nature.

The problem with your statements is that you don't seem to understand the difference between your own strawmen and people who are much more informed than you on the matter.

I mean this with all possible sensitivity, but if you think that even 10% of DC voters are "informed" on this matter in any significant sense, you're more nuts-o than I thought. There may be one neighbor in 100 who's read about this stuff. It's a classic political fallacy.

[Anonymous]

Look at the history here. Fenty flipflops on DC control of schools the day after he wins the primary in 2006. He hires Rhee but does not, as the law requires, inform the city council. He tells the Washington Post before the notifies the council. Rhee has led by slash and burn. She mocked her daughters OWN TEACHERS in a TIME Magazine cover story. She mocks parents and teachers behind their backs. Students read. She fires principals and teachers in ways that do not make sense and disturb the communities. In my view she has no heart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure, but you're not trying to convince Rhee and Fenty. You're trying to convince--I would assume--the great mass of DC voters who think "staying the course" is the safe bet. When you come across as nuts-o, you're not exactly reassuring anyone. Same with blaming everything bad, up to and including the recent heat-wave, on Rhee's intrinsically malignant nature.

The problem with your statements is that you don't seem to understand the difference between your own strawmen and people who are much more informed than you on the matter.

I mean this with all possible sensitivity, but if you think that even 10% of DC voters are "informed" on this matter in any significant sense, you're more nuts-o than I thought. There may be one neighbor in 100 who's read about this stuff. It's a classic political fallacy.

Sad, but I have to agree with you. It doesn't particularly bother me that we don't have voting representation in Congress for just that reason. Instead of a representation fix to "No taxation without representation" I'd be in favor of eliminating the federal income tax in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure, but you're not trying to convince Rhee and Fenty. You're trying to convince--I would assume--the great mass of DC voters who think "staying the course" is the safe bet. When you come across as nuts-o, you're not exactly reassuring anyone. Same with blaming everything bad, up to and including the recent heat-wave, on Rhee's intrinsically malignant nature.

The problem with your statements is that you don't seem to understand the difference between your own strawmen and people who are much more informed than you on the matter.

I mean this with all possible sensitivity, but if you think that even 10% of DC voters are "informed" on this matter in any significant sense, you're more nuts-o than I thought. There may be one neighbor in 100 who's read about this stuff. It's a classic political fallacy.

Sad, but I have to agree with you. It doesn't particularly bother me that we don't have voting representation in Congress for just that reason. Instead of a representation fix to "No taxation without representation" I'd be in favor of eliminating the federal income tax in DC.

You talk about this as though the residents of DC are some kind of anomaly among democratic constituencies. In fact, they're probably better informed than most. It's just that this deep level of involvement just doesn't exist--anywhere.

Sorry to disillusion you.

[Anonymous]

I agree with what was stated earlier.

Children that have been stuck in terrible schools for decades, on the other is grown-ups who are getting their feathers ruffled. I don't want someone is office (Gray) who is going to spend a lot of time placating adults at the expense of children. The schools need to be fixed now.