‘Liberal cancer’ kills U.S.
In fondest memory.
Born: May 25, 1787 in Philadelphia, Pa.
Died: Nov. 6, 2012 somewhere in America.
Cause of death was a severe case of liberal cancer, complicated by extreme socialism.
It had a long and fruitful life. Among its many accomplishments were the establishment of justice, the insurance of domestic tranquility, the provision of the common defense, the promotion of the general welfare, and the securing of the blessings of liberty to the citizens of the United States and their posterity.
In lieu of flowers, all friends should spend a few minutes in quiet introspection thinking deeply about what this great friend has done for them and their nation.
KEN MARSHALL, Meridian
Taxing the rich
I need an enlightened liberal to explain to me how President Obama’s plan to increase taxes on productive high-earning individuals so he can continue to reward the unproductive, non-taxpaying, food stamp, welfare, disability fraud, masses will improve our economy and lead to more jobs? An example of where this system has worked would also be helpful.
Also, when you had two candidates applying for the job of running the largest business on Earth, the U.S. economy, why did you choose a person who has never had to meet a payroll and refuses to show you his college transcript over a man who has successfully run worldwide corporations and turned around failing businesses? The nosedive of the stock market after the president’s re-election shows you what the business world thinks of his economic plan. Thanks for your help.
MICHAEL MILLER, Eagle
Don’t approvemore spending
Congress, do not fund any of the president’s executive orders, signing statements, etc. You must not compromise our Founding Fathers’ beliefs. Do not fund failing businesses, banks, mortgages. Let them fail and reorganize. They will learn by their mistakes.
We do not need to keep escalating the debt, which has doubled recently, putting our children and grandchildren at risk. History shows that unsurmountable debt kills nations.
Stop being wimpy Congress, since you have it in your power to stop the unconscionable spending. Gridlock prevents spending.
JOSEPH W. FELTS, Boise
Liberal solutionsnot the answer
This letter is written in regard to Dr. David Adler’s Reader’s View opinion piece on the Education Proposition 1, dated Sunday, Nov. 11. My letter is related in no way to the proposition per se, but to a statement Dr. Adler makes in his piece. He states “First, there is wide-spread recognition that teachers, not bureaucrats in the Department of Eduction, have a better idea of how to govern ...,” implying a solidarity with most Idahoans in opposition to interventionist government.
Coming from Dr. Adler, this is hilariously laughable. Dr. Adler is a screaming liberal. Probably one of the most liberal people living in Idaho. The definition of a liberal is one who supports large interventionist government. It is just that Dr. Adler only supports government intervention when it comports to the liberal narrative, not when it comports to a conservative narrative. Dr. Adler, please do an opinion piece on Obamacare, the largest example of government intervention in the history of the United States and tell Idahoans you are opposed to that government intervention.
JOHN HATCH, Boise
The power of a wordimpedes progress
All the talk is about the reform of our system of public education. The problem with the reform of anything is the word “reform.” It’s inflammatory, and it can start a war of words. People, generally, aren’t eager to be reformed, especially by “reformers,” who, likely, don’t bear their burdens or praise their successes or share their highest hopes. People are, however, eager to be recognized and valued — and heard.
My suggestion is that we stop using the word “reform.” Stop it once and for all. It would be better if all the stakeholders in public education, beginning with the least heard, the students themselves, were to enter into a two-year long process during which everybody could offer his or her best ideas about the following topic: “What do we all have to do to create the atmosphere and reality of excellence in our schools and for students and teachers and administrators to experience it day by day?” We could all speak, and we could all listen for the “group wisdom.” Idahoans are smart people. Meanwhile, the Legislature can work hard on funding the system adequately.
THE RT. REV. JOHN S. THORNTON, Boise
Idaho’s educationsystem in good shape
No. 1 — Idaho schools aren’t bad. Both my kids thrived in them and graduated from college.
No. 2 — Idaho teachers aren’t bad. I would rate half of the ones I’ve met as excellent. I’d rate 95 percent of them as dedicated. And no, they don’t make too much money.
No. 3 — I was always surprised at the speed our schools adopted technology. Smart boards, instant grading, online courses and college credits.
The way our schools will improve is incrementally, with teachers, students, parents, administrators, and support staff working together to honor each other. Pretty much what they are doing right now. It isn’t easy, and it doesn’t fit on a bumper sticker.
If Tom Luna thinks that the smackdown he just took from the Idaho voters is a “bump in the road” then he needs to stop texting, pull over, get out from behind the wheel, walk back to the election and take a good, long look at what he just ran over. When he’s back on the road he needs to remember to “first, do no harm.”
DANIEL REED, Boise
The Statesman hailsthe worst of reforms
The Statesman editorial board’s endorsement of the Pay for Performance (PFP) part of the Luna laws is mystifying. Of the three proposals, this is without a doubt the worst. As a longtime advocate of high performance team building, pay for performance is what managers do when they don’t know how to manage their staff. If a teacher isn’t meeting expectations either help them meet those expectations or remove them. That is what good managers do. The Luna plan painted in very broad strokes, labeling whole schools and all those that work in them as either good or bad. This is both ridiculous and offensive and lacks any sense of fairness.
Pay for Performance generally does nothing to drive growth, build teamwork or attract talent. Long term, it decreases risk taking, innovation and job satisfaction while increasing levels of mistrust. It does nothing to promote excellence while it fosters cheating and teaching to tests. This plan would have had many negative and unintended consequences. It would have negatively impacted the very people we are told it is designed to help — students and teachers. The Statesman board really got this one wrong.
RICHARD RINGELSTETTER, Boise
Get past the ‘bump’
The biggest benefit to come out of the Luna Laws’ short life is the rediscovered focus on collaboration.
After a pre-election hide the ball, followed by a pure political power play, we have witnessed an overwhelmingly broad based rejection of the plan and what the man stands for. With that, there is only one way we, the people of Idaho, can work together on improving education. Mr. Luna needs to leave (hopefully the elected position, but at least the table). No bigger step can be taken to travel past the “bump in the road” he recently spoke of.
RON TUCKER, Boise
No justice with beating
Someone who would bludgeon to death a caged monkey becomes a whit less unimaginable if we recall, with that most percipient of men, Mark Twain: “In discarding the monkey and substituting man, our Father in Heaven did the monkey an undeserved injustice.”
CORT CONLEY, Boise