Jeb Bush, Florida Chamber partner on robo-call to overhaul teacher salaries

This cancer keeps coming back.



Credit: Getty Images




Jeb Bush, Florida Chamber partner on robo-call to overhaul teacher salaries


by Michael C. Bender | April 7th, 2010






Bush plugs Crist for backing teacher tenure bill. Oops.

Posted by Josh Hafenbrack on April 7, 2010 04:40 PM





More for Florida educators to be angry about

By Valerie Strauss | April 6, 2010; 4:37 PM ET






This next snippet I found very interesting. No surprise here:






(bold type added)



Yep. We saw that when it happened:



FL legislation proposes teacher tenure begins after 5 years (Steered by Jeb Bush's Foundation), April 15, 2009




More from Valerie Strauss:






Just ran across this piece of news today:


Remember this little bit of Jeb's handiwork from 2008?

Jeb Bush's attempt to obliterate FL's church-state separation in November has national ramifications, June 3, 2008




He's now spearheading a new effort via his puppets (John Thrasher in particular) in Florida's legislature for the same egregious constitutional-gutting rampage again this year, to tear down the wall between church and state.


Senate panel pushes vote to drop ban on state funds for religious institutions

By Cristina Silva, Times/Herald Tallahassee Bureau
April 6, 2010







And we know that Jeb Bush will never take NO for an answer. He is hell bent on turning Florida into a fanatical Christian theocracy.





This malignant Republican-controlled Legislature, choreographed by Jeb Bush and his battering ram John Thrasher, has so polluted the lives of everyday Floridians that the immediate future remains stark.

That whole Bush family entitlement mentality again.

And I betcha he will run for president in 2012

If you're ever in doubt about who to vote for, find out who the "Chamber" is endorsing....and then vote for the other person.

"You want me to get any questions right on the test Ms. Crabaple? Show me the money?"

"I'll settle for pizza..."

"Pizza- and beer!"

Teacher says no, and teacher finds no check in the mail... because the test scores don't merit any pay.

Hell- I had a student refuse to take a statewide standardized test entirely, just because he was in a bad mood, and he didn't give a shit. If my pay depended on that test?...

The battle of wits and imaginations will consume a generation of students and teachers... and some students might not make it out alive, or teachers un-locked-up.

Absolutely brilliant. Will the payscale just keep rising and rising as the students score ever-better? A little pizza party, while the teacher enlists some trusted students to help answer all the questions him/herself... teaching might become lucrative indeed... and soon even fourth graders will be able to compose a 20 page paper on the subtle and varied uses of the word horse, as verb; as metaphor; as adjective; as noun; etc. in the Shakespeare's Twelfth Night. Wow, our kids is will be geniusii.

Oh ye politicians of such feeble imaginations...

and mediocre or poor teachers will be the ones who stay and they will design their whole curriculum around the one test. No creativity and no innovation.

Let the politicians teach. With Merit Based Pay, politicians all being geniuses, they should all make a killing... right?

What could go wrong?...

Give all the worst people in the world all the money.

Then say for anyone to get money, you have to do what they say.

What direction would society go if people cared most about money?


Now I am not saying the worst people have money, but when money is made without some baseline rules, then the worst actions do make the most money, and who does the worst things, the worst people.


So when I think on the topic you post, if people with money do not think what a person does is right, then that person might be doing it right. That teacher that is not getting big money to reward them is actual proof that the teacher is doing right, and it also proves that big money has no claim to control by things like money.

And since those with money are not in the right, their power through money must be removed, either by legislation creating moderation, or the removal of money and current status of presumed ownership.

It is an equation that is not that complicated.



Here is the funny part, there are people that have said if you don't like it leave it. Some people have even fallen into despair and left the worst of ways. I don't think of it that way. This is how I think on it, I don't accept the lack of justice, and it will change, and I would be willing to have all existence around me, but not me, end before accepting such a lack of justice or two tiered system. And those that think it is a game or they have the right to control, guess what they would rather see everything end then give up their control. Hence the conflict, with comfort in sameness.

But the point is as far as I am concerned it will change or things that will not change should cease to exist. Why, because if it is wrong, then you can not accept its existence if it refuses to change after being shown that it is wrong. While the other point of view says if it was wrong it would not exist in that fashion now, but that would mean that all things should be the way they are, and that says nothing that ever changed should have changed, and that argument is broken on many points.

But I understand their argument, they say they have something therefore they must be correct. I say what they have means nothing, and why it has to be proved they have nothing, by making what they do have, worth nothing, hence why it has to all fall down if it is not made better by things like legislation and enforcement.

My point is what money you have, especially considering the ways people can make money, means very little, and may need to mean nothing. They might say, ideas or thoughts mean nothing, and only their claim of ownership means something. Hence the battle lines and the conflict.


Edit: Seeing a Bush try and set social policy brings back that old conflict, money by any means, or what you think is best for the most people. Hence repeating that old thought from so many years ago. Note that it is a philosophical thought on direction. At some point there is a feeling that some just wont get it, although it is unfair for me to judge Bush, the actions as reported of those years showed a lack of caring for many people. This thought is the only way I can rationalize what then becomes a two tiered system of heaven and hell and find much duality in that, since to stop a two tier system without any moral base to it, a two tier system is created, hence the comment on sameness, and why I find the thought so interesting. Note it is only a thought and not a claim to be able to judge, but I always found it an interesting thought.

What a family of mobsters the Bush family is.

You can bet that anything this family puts their hands on will soon turn to shit.