Liberal Seeks To Understand #2: DeVos and the Education Department

[BlackFlag]

Please explain. Does marrying into money count as successful? Does using that money to sway political opinions for years count as a qualification?

Please explain. Does marrying into money count as successful? Does using that money to sway political opinions for years count as a qualification?

No, asshole. I gave some reasons. If you want to pop your had out of your ass for a few minutes and read up on her ...

Betsy DeVos

I've already seen that. And as far as I can tell you only gave one reason. And it's that she agrees with Trump that she should give yours and my money to private schools instead of public schools.

Yep, I gave one reason, didn't go into it to any great detail because no one needs to sell her to you. What you accept or not doesn't change anything for anyone else.

This woman has zero experience in implementing that kind of plan. And she's lived as a billionaire for decades, completely out of touch with most of our population. As far as I can tell, she's where she is thanks to throwing around political donations for the last 40 years. Not encouraging.

That's not what a chairman or CEO does. They put together a team and make decisions based on the accumulated information. But I didn't ever hear one liberal complain about Democrats with no experience getting an office.

Devos is coming in with a scorched earth policy, having never made decisions based on accumulated information about public or private education policy. There are serious concerns here.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Please explain. Does marrying into money count as successful? Does using that money to sway political opinions for years count as a qualification?

Please explain. Does marrying into money count as successful? Does using that money to sway political opinions for years count as a qualification?

No, asshole. I gave some reasons. If you want to pop your had out of your ass for a few minutes and read up on her ...

Betsy DeVos

I've already seen that. And as far as I can tell you only gave one reason. And it's that she agrees with Trump that she should give yours and my money to private schools instead of public schools.

Yep, I gave one reason, didn't go into it to any great detail because no one needs to sell her to you. What you accept or not doesn't change anything for anyone else.

This woman has zero experience in implementing that kind of plan. And she's lived as a billionaire for decades, completely out of touch with most of our population. As far as I can tell, she's where she is thanks to throwing around political donations for the last 40 years. Not encouraging.

That's not what a chairman or CEO does. They put together a team and make decisions based on the accumulated information. But I didn't ever hear one liberal complain about Democrats with no experience getting an office.

Got any examples, IceIce?

here is Obama's first nominee for the position...

Duncan was raised in Hyde Park, a Chicago neighborhood encompassing the University of Chicago. He is the son of Susan Goodrich (née Morton) and Starkey Davis Duncan, Jr. His father was a psychology professor at the university and his mother runs the Sue Duncan Children's Center, an after-school program primarily serving African-American youth in the nearby Kenwood neighborhood.

Duncan attended the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools[6] and later Harvard College, where he played on the basketball team and graduated magna cum laude in 1987 with a bachelor's degree in sociology. His senior thesis, for which he took a year's leave to do research in the Kenwood neighborhood, was entitled "The values, aspirations and opportunities of the urban underclass".[7]..
In 1992, childhood friend and investment banker John W. Rogers, Jr., appointed Duncan director of the Ariel Education Initiative, a program mentoring children at one of the city's worst-performing elementary schools and then assisting them as they proceeded further in the education system.[7] After the school closed in 1996, Duncan and Rogers were instrumental in re-opening it as a charter school, Ariel Community Academy.[8] In 1999, Duncan was appointed Deputy Chief of Staff for former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas.[9]

 

[IcebergSlim]

Please explain. Does marrying into money count as successful? Does using that money to sway political opinions for years count as a qualification?

Please explain. Does marrying into money count as successful? Does using that money to sway political opinions for years count as a qualification?

No, asshole. I gave some reasons. If you want to pop your had out of your ass for a few minutes and read up on her ...

Betsy DeVos

I've already seen that. And as far as I can tell you only gave one reason. And it's that she agrees with Trump that she should give yours and my money to private schools instead of public schools.

Yep, I gave one reason, didn't go into it to any great detail because no one needs to sell her to you. What you accept or not doesn't change anything for anyone else.

This woman has zero experience in implementing that kind of plan. And she's lived as a billionaire for decades, completely out of touch with most of our population. As far as I can tell, she's where she is thanks to throwing around political donations for the last 40 years. Not encouraging.

That's not what a chairman or CEO does. They put together a team and make decisions based on the accumulated information. But I didn't ever hear one liberal complain about Democrats with no experience getting an office.

"Chairman" and CEO are not the same........

 

[Iceweasel]

No, asshole. I gave some reasons. If you want to pop your had out of your ass for a few minutes and read up on her ...

Betsy DeVos

I've already seen that. And as far as I can tell you only gave one reason. And it's that she agrees with Trump that she should give yours and my money to private schools instead of public schools.

Yep, I gave one reason, didn't go into it to any great detail because no one needs to sell her to you. What you accept or not doesn't change anything for anyone else.

This woman has zero experience in implementing that kind of plan. And she's lived as a billionaire for decades, completely out of touch with most of our population. As far as I can tell, she's where she is thanks to throwing around political donations for the last 40 years. Not encouraging.

That's not what a chairman or CEO does. They put together a team and make decisions based on the accumulated information. But I didn't ever hear one liberal complain about Democrats with no experience getting an office.

Devos is coming in with a scorched earth policy, having never made decisions based on accumulated information about public or private education policy. There are serious concerns here.

So be concerned? I'm not. I think competition is good. If some professional titty suckers lose access to their nipple, too bad.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

No, asshole. I gave some reasons. If you want to pop your had out of your ass for a few minutes and read up on her ...

Betsy DeVos

I've already seen that. And as far as I can tell you only gave one reason. And it's that she agrees with Trump that she should give yours and my money to private schools instead of public schools.

Yep, I gave one reason, didn't go into it to any great detail because no one needs to sell her to you. What you accept or not doesn't change anything for anyone else.

This woman has zero experience in implementing that kind of plan. And she's lived as a billionaire for decades, completely out of touch with most of our population. As far as I can tell, she's where she is thanks to throwing around political donations for the last 40 years. Not encouraging.

That's not what a chairman or CEO does. They put together a team and make decisions based on the accumulated information. But I didn't ever hear one liberal complain about Democrats with no experience getting an office.

Devos is coming in with a scorched earth policy, having never made decisions based on accumulated information about public or private education policy. There are serious concerns here.

yep, the NEA is shaking in their boots.....

the current educational system we have now is not working.....in order to change things the old system must be busted up....

 

[wjmacguffin]

The tone of your post was condescending, you can polish it up all you want but it will be no sale.

It's sad that you see someone reaching out to understand as condescending. It must be cool to be so incredibly bitter. I bet you're fun at parties.

"Hey man, want a beer?"
"STOP BEING CONDESCENDING! DO YOU NEED TO BE BABY WALKED???"

You ignored the point that only 4 out of the 11 had an educators' background and there's no particular qualification for the job. Her goals mirrored Trump so I imagine that factored into the equation. The point was no particular degree was necessary but now all of a sudden liberals are deeply concerned. Maybe you can't see the hypocrisy. So if you need it baby walked, that would be the main point, liberal hypocrisy.

I said "3) You're correct about education degrees and Education Secretaries." You can see it in my post that you quoted. That is LITERALLY AGREEING WITH YOUR POINT ABOUT 4 OUT OF THE 11. Geez, no wonder you want school reform. Yours definitely failed to teach you how to read.

And I'm sorry for being respectful and trying to understand what your rambling, bitter posts were about. I won't make that same mistake again with you.

Hell yes, I'm for competition in schools. Competing makes one hone their skills. The union stranglehold does the opposite.

I'd ask about whether competition brings out cheating or whatnot, but your answer will be reactionary, angry drivel. But thanks for playing!

 

[jc456]

Unlike some liberals, I want to understand instead of judge. That's why I'm asking some questions to conservatives here. I may not agree with you, but I'm hoping to improve my understanding and empathy by seeking first to understand. As usual, respectful answers get respectful replies.

The question: Why is Betsy DeVos a good choice for Secretary of Education?

What is her appeal to conservatives? From what I've read, she is a wealthy political insider who has no experience in public schools (which she is now in charge of) and doesn't understand public school law. DeVos doesn't appear qualified or experienced (which would not even get you an interview in many professional jobs). Is it just because she advocates for school choice?

FINE PRINT: Let's try to not get mired in the school choice debate. This is just about why conservatives like DeVos.

well it is all about school choice and yet you don't wish to discuss it. why? what is it that you're afraid of by giving low income families a choice for a better education?

 

[PredFan]

Unlike some liberals, I want to understand instead of judge. That's why I'm asking some questions to conservatives here. I may not agree with you, but I'm hoping to improve my understanding and empathy by seeking first to understand. As usual, respectful answers get respectful replies.

The question: Why is Betsy DeVos a good choice for Secretary of Education?

What is her appeal to conservatives? From what I've read, she is a wealthy political insider who has no experience in public schools (which she is now in charge of) and doesn't understand public school law. DeVos doesn't appear qualified or experienced (which would not even get you an interview in many professional jobs). Is it just because she advocates for school choice?

FINE PRINT: Let's try to not get mired in the school choice debate. This is just about why conservatives like DeVos.

She's a smart and successful woman. I'm sure Trump knows a lot more about her than I do but I'm sure she can do better than her predecessors. Why have someone in charge who came from the system? How would that person know how to fix things if they come from the broken system itself? That's what we have had forever and our schools are getting worse and worse. New blood, and new perspective and a new direction.

 

[jc456]

This is typical for liberals. You demand respectful replies but are insulting to the hilt in framing your question. You already reached a decision and pretend to be above it all. I'm sick of it and call libs out when I see it.

First off, she's highly successful. An employer would be a idiot to not hire her. I have no idea how you arrived at her not qualified or experienced enough for even an interview. What are YOUR accomplishments?

Secondly, Jimmy Carter started the Dept. of Education, somehow we managed until then. Out of the 11 that served only 4 have an educator degree. And it was never a problem before now. Ask yourself why, Mr. Honest Liberal.

Betsy DeVos tapped by Donald Trump for education secretary
DeVos' background is a fit for Trump's plans to boost school choice in the U.S., particularly for high-poverty students. She is on the board of directors for the Great Lakes Education Project, which advocates for school choice and charter schools. She also chairs the board of directors of the American Federation for Children, another choice advocacy group.

DeVos and her husband led a failed effort to amend the Michigan constitution to provide vouchers that would allow students to attend private schools at public expense. That's a centerpiece of Trump's education plan. He would invest $20 billion in federal money toward school choice, and expect states to kick in $110 billion of their own money, to provide $12,000 each in school choice funds to the 11 million school-age children living in poverty.

1) I did not demand respect. I said I'd return respect if its given. This isn't my message board, so you can be as rude as you feel the need to be. If you want to call me out, at least call me out on something I actually wrote.

2) Sorry for the miscommunication about qualifications. Let me clarify what I meant. A person with a BA in Chemistry and 20 years' experience as a chemist is very successful -- but if she applied for a Director of Marketing position, her lack of relevant education and experience would mean she'd never get hired. That's how DeVos looks to me, but I could be wrong. If I am, I'd be thankful if you could explain or link to why.

3) You're correct about education degrees and Education Secretaries. Is that why you approve of her nomination, that she doesn't need a degree because others did not? (For the record, I'm not saying she's bad. I'm just trying to understand your perspective.)

4) Yeah, I know about DeVos' commitment to school choice. Is that the big reason for your support? I'm guessing so given the lines you devoted to it, but I don't want to put words in your mouth.

unions destroyed public schools.

 

[jc456]

Unlike some liberals, I want to understand instead of judge. That's why I'm asking some questions to conservatives here. I may not agree with you, but I'm hoping to improve my understanding and empathy by seeking first to understand. As usual, respectful answers get respectful replies.

The question: Why is Betsy DeVos a good choice for Secretary of Education?

What is her appeal to conservatives? From what I've read, she is a wealthy political insider who has no experience in public schools (which she is now in charge of) and doesn't understand public school law. DeVos doesn't appear qualified or experienced (which would not even get you an interview in many professional jobs). Is it just because she advocates for school choice?

FINE PRINT: Let's try to not get mired in the school choice debate. This is just about why conservatives like DeVos.

She's a smart and successful woman. I'm sure Trump knows a lot more about her than I do but I'm sure she can do better than her predecessors. Why have someone in charge who came from the system? How would that person know how to fix things if they come from the broken system itself? That's what we have had forever and our schools are getting worse and worse. New blood, and new perspective and a new direction.

did you get her resume? she forgot to send it to me.

 

[PredFan]

Unlike some liberals, I want to understand instead of judge. That's why I'm asking some questions to conservatives here. I may not agree with you, but I'm hoping to improve my understanding and empathy by seeking first to understand. As usual, respectful answers get respectful replies.

The question: Why is Betsy DeVos a good choice for Secretary of Education?

What is her appeal to conservatives? From what I've read, she is a wealthy political insider who has no experience in public schools (which she is now in charge of) and doesn't understand public school law. DeVos doesn't appear qualified or experienced (which would not even get you an interview in many professional jobs). Is it just because she advocates for school choice?

FINE PRINT: Let's try to not get mired in the school choice debate. This is just about why conservatives like DeVos.

She's a smart and successful woman. I'm sure Trump knows a lot more about her than I do but I'm sure she can do better than her predecessors. Why have someone in charge who came from the system? How would that person know how to fix things if they come from the broken system itself? That's what we have had forever and our schools are getting worse and worse. New blood, and new perspective and a new direction.

did you get her resume? she forgot to send it to me.

Then you can't criticise.

 

[Iceweasel]

You butchered the post which makes it difficult to respond. I'll put your words in pink, mine in blue.

The tone of your post was condescending, you can polish it up all you want but it will be no sale.


It's sad that you see someone reaching out to understand as condescending. It must be cool to be so incredibly bitter. I bet you're fun at parties.

"Hey man, want a beer?"
"STOP BEING CONDESCENDING! DO YOU NEED TO BE BABY WALKED???"


Exactly what I said starting out. Liberals think they are superior. Talking down to people comes naturally to you.


I said "3) You're correct about education degrees and Education Secretaries." You can see it in my post that you quoted. That is LITERALLY AGREEING WITH YOUR POINT ABOUT 4 OUT OF THE 11. Geez, no wonder you want school reform. Yours definitely failed to teach you how to read.

And I'm sorry for being respectful and trying to understand what your rambling, bitter posts were about. I won't make that same mistake again with you.

I read just fine, you said:

"3) You're correct about education degrees and Education Secretaries. Is that why you approve of her nomination, that she doesn't need a degree because others did not? (For the record, I'm not saying she's bad. I'm just trying to understand your perspective.)

So like ALL libs you simply moved the goal posts and still insulted her background regardless. It isn't a requirement for the job so your analogy is flawed.



Hell yes, I'm for competition in schools. Competing makes one hone their skills. The union stranglehold does the opposite.

I'd ask about whether competition brings out cheating or whatnot, but your answer will be reactionary, angry drivel. But thanks for playing!

You see? You can't help the smug bullshit. I didn't buy your honest lib just asking an honest question schtick for a second. We don't get much bang for our buck and you're worried competition could promote cheating?

The product will be the kids education. If there is cheating we'll know. Actually the parents will know pretty quick and the good schools will get their vouchers.

 

[jc456]

Unlike some liberals, I want to understand instead of judge. That's why I'm asking some questions to conservatives here. I may not agree with you, but I'm hoping to improve my understanding and empathy by seeking first to understand. As usual, respectful answers get respectful replies.

The question: Why is Betsy DeVos a good choice for Secretary of Education?

What is her appeal to conservatives? From what I've read, she is a wealthy political insider who has no experience in public schools (which she is now in charge of) and doesn't understand public school law. DeVos doesn't appear qualified or experienced (which would not even get you an interview in many professional jobs). Is it just because she advocates for school choice?

FINE PRINT: Let's try to not get mired in the school choice debate. This is just about why conservatives like DeVos.

She's a smart and successful woman. I'm sure Trump knows a lot more about her than I do but I'm sure she can do better than her predecessors. Why have someone in charge who came from the system? How would that person know how to fix things if they come from the broken system itself? That's what we have had forever and our schools are getting worse and worse. New blood, and new perspective and a new direction.

did you get her resume? she forgot to send it to me.

Then you can't criticise.

ahhh I see.

 

[jc456]

You butchered the post which makes it difficult to respond. I'll put your words in pink, mine in blue.

The tone of your post was condescending, you can polish it up all you want but it will be no sale.


It's sad that you see someone reaching out to understand as condescending. It must be cool to be so incredibly bitter. I bet you're fun at parties.

"Hey man, want a beer?"
"STOP BEING CONDESCENDING! DO YOU NEED TO BE BABY WALKED???"


Exactly what I said starting out. Liberals think they are superior. Talking down to people comes naturally to you.


I said "3) You're correct about education degrees and Education Secretaries." You can see it in my post that you quoted. That is LITERALLY AGREEING WITH YOUR POINT ABOUT 4 OUT OF THE 11. Geez, no wonder you want school reform. Yours definitely failed to teach you how to read.

And I'm sorry for being respectful and trying to understand what your rambling, bitter posts were about. I won't make that same mistake again with you.

I read just fine, you said:

"3) You're correct about education degrees and Education Secretaries. Is that why you approve of her nomination, that she doesn't need a degree because others did not? (For the record, I'm not saying she's bad. I'm just trying to understand your perspective.)

So like ALL libs you simply moved the goal posts and still insulted her background regardless. It isn't a requirement for the job so your analogy is flawed.



Hell yes, I'm for competition in schools. Competing makes one hone their skills. The union stranglehold does the opposite.

I'd ask about whether competition brings out cheating or whatnot, but your answer will be reactionary, angry drivel. But thanks for playing!

You see? You can't help the smug bullshit. I didn't buy your honest lib just asking an honest question schtick for a second. We don't get much bang for our buck and you're worried competition could promote cheating?

The product will be the kids education. If there is cheating we'll know. Actually the parents will know pretty quick and the good schools will get their vouchers.

It's their ploy. Ask George Herbert W. Bush.

 

[wjmacguffin]

This will be my last response to you since from the start you weren't interested in having a civil debate.

Exactly what I said starting out. Liberals think they are superior. Talking down to people comes naturally to you.

Let's see. I start out polite, you reply with rudeness, I counter with a polite response, you reply with rudeness, I answer you with snark, and sudden;y *I'm* the one who talks down to others. Right.

If you had started by saying something like, "Hey, your post sounds condescending to me, is that what you meant?" we might have had a decent discourse. Instead, you assumed and refused to deviate from that preconception. Nice.

So like ALL libs you simply moved the goal posts and still insulted her background regardless. It isn't a requirement for the job so your analogy is flawed.

Didn't move any goalposts. They're still set at "Why do conservatives like DeVos when liberals think she's unqualified?" You accused me of ignoring your point about 4 out of 11 previous Education Secretaries not having an education degree. I proved that I agreed with you on that point. Your response was to ... get angry with me? For agreeing with you?

Also, you need to understand that questioning is not the same as insulting. But I get it. Your paradigm of "all liberals are eeeeeeevil" requires you to filter everything liberals say as something wrong, insulting, or flawed. It's sad that you can't look at people objectively, but hey, it's a free country.

You see? You can't help the smug bullshit. I didn't buy your honest lib just asking an honest question schtick for a second. We don't get much bang for our buck and you're worried competition could promote cheating?

The product will be the kids education. If there is cheating we'll know. Actually the parents will know pretty quick and the good schools will get their vouchers.

Sorry, don't feed the trolls.

As I said, I return respect with respect. From the start, you have been a petty, bitter troll. You showed nothing but disrespect, and like all snowflakes, you can't handle being called out on it. So very sad.

 

[Iceweasel]

This will be my last response to you since from the start you weren't interested in having a civil debate.

Exactly what I said starting out. Liberals think they are superior. Talking down to people comes naturally to you.

Let's see. I start out polite, you reply with rudeness, I counter with a polite response, you reply with rudeness, I answer you with snark, and sudden;y *I'm* the one who talks down to others. Right.

If you had started by saying something like, "Hey, your post sounds condescending to me, is that what you meant?" we might have had a decent discourse. Instead, you assumed and refused to deviate from that preconception. Nice.

So like ALL libs you simply moved the goal posts and still insulted her background regardless. It isn't a requirement for the job so your analogy is flawed.

Didn't move any goalposts. They're still set at "Why do conservatives like DeVos when liberals think she's unqualified?" You accused me of ignoring your point about 4 out of 11 previous Education Secretaries not having an education degree. I proved that I agreed with you on that point. Your response was to ... get angry with me? For agreeing with you?

Also, you need to understand that questioning is not the same as insulting. But I get it. Your paradigm of "all liberals are eeeeeeevil" requires you to filter everything liberals say as something wrong, insulting, or flawed. It's sad that you can't look at people objectively, but hey, it's a free country.

You see? You can't help the smug bullshit. I didn't buy your honest lib just asking an honest question schtick for a second. We don't get much bang for our buck and you're worried competition could promote cheating?

The product will be the kids education. If there is cheating we'll know. Actually the parents will know pretty quick and the good schools will get their vouchers.

Sorry, don't feed the trolls.

As I said, I return respect with respect. From the start, you have been a petty, bitter troll. You showed nothing but disrespect, and like all snowflakes, you can't handle being called out on it. So very sad.

You started out smug and condescending now act like a prepubescent school girl. Which is why you started our the way you did, you just couldn't hide it like you thought you could.

Why come back to just snivel some more? The point, Sheila, is that there are no particular qualifications for the job, which is why I mentioned only 4 of the 11 even had education backgrounds, so that should have ended it.

What you are doing is belaboring the fact that liberals don't know what they are talking about when they claim she isn't qualified. Sniveling about conservatives doesn't help you.

 

[wjmacguffin]

well it is all about school choice and yet you don't wish to discuss it. why? what is it that you're afraid of by giving low income families a choice for a better education?

LOL, no. I didn't want to discuss it because I'm only trying to understand why conservatives like DeVos. I run in liberal circles, so I know my side is biased. I'm hoping to better understand why y'all like her. (Assuming you do, don't want to put words in your mouth.)

In other words, I don't need to know whether school choice is good to understand that's why conservatives support her nomination.

That said, here are my thoughts on school choice. Note: I'm biased because I've worked 15 years in the Catholic school system.

• If school choice lets parents avoid horrible public schools, I'm all for it. I'm a fan of public education, but I agree that many public schools are failing children.
• Private schools are not automatically more successful. I've seen many do worse than local public schools. I've also seen private schools do better. I just think it's important to accept this is a gamble, not a guarantee.
• I'm on the fence about vouchers. While I agree with them in theory (because parents *should* have more choices), I haven't seen any data showing vouchers improve academic success for children.

In addition, I think school choice has two big problems that need to be clearly addressed in any law allowing it:

1. Can the private school be religiously neutral as the 1st Amendment has been interpreted to require? (Many private schools are religious, and it's illegal to fund one group's interpretation on God over another's.)
   
2. Will the private school be held accountable and transparent about student achievement? I've seen private schools hide testing data, teacher credentials, etc. to make their school look better. Public schools are not able to do that.