I have some friends who support Hillary. Passionately. In fact, some of them support her so passionately that they cannot bear to hear that some of us will not vote for her. The biggest argument is Supreme Court nominees. Evidently, if we don't support Hillary Clinton, Scalia will be infinitely cloned and SCOTUS will continue to make insane, anti-democratic rulings.
Of course I'm just as unhappy as they are with that prospect, and there's no way I'm gonna vote for Donald Trump or any of the GOP gang. But I've pretty much had it with Democrats who don't support working people. Obama enabled the very worst education policies I've ever seen, managing to outdo GW Bush. He failed to enact card check for unions or find the comfortable shoes he said he needed to walk with us. His shoes were so uncomfortable he never set foot in Wisconsin as Walker decimated union.
So I'm understandably wary of Clinton, who seems more of the same. As if that weren't enough, she blurted out the idiotic notion of closing all schools that weren't above average. That means closing half of all schools all the time. She then said we would never, ever get single payer. More recently, she advocated longer hours and school days, emphasizing quantity over quality. If kids aren't happy now, or even if we judge schools via reformy test scores, more of the same isn't gonna make anything better.
Now I read that Obama is considering GOP Governor Brian Sandoval for SCOTUS. Evidently he's aligned on certain issues with the President. However, he's known as anti-labor. Were he to be confirmed, what would that mean for the Friedrichs case? Is President Obama ready to sell public unions down the river in order to confirm a nominee? Or is he just trying to embarrass the Republicans by demonstrating they'd reject one of their own simply to avoid cooperating with him?
Either way, were Obama to nominate someone like this, it means he didn't deserve our votes. This whole triangulation strategy was created by Bill Clinton, and Obama seems to be following in his footsteps. The prime mode of following appears to be throwing teachers and public unions under the bus. I, for one, have had it with this nonsense. I declined to vote for Obama during his second term, and I'm not voting for Hillary this time around. If she beats Bernie I'll probably vote for the Green candidate, or find some other third party candidate who appears not to be insane.
It appears that Obama, who we supported twice, may not even meet the low standard of appointing a Supreme Court justice who shares our values. If that's the case, I expect Hillary is ready to follow in his footsteps, even as she criticizes Bernie Sanders for failing to sufficiently embrace Obama. For the life of me, I can't figure why our leadership supports people who are so eager to stab us in the back. I can't understand why we endorse without asking for anything in return.
But this teacher no longer votes for people who don't support public education. It's time for union leadership to wake up or get out of the way.
Views expressed herein are solely those of the author or authors, and do not reflect views of my employers, the United Federation of Teachers, the MORE Caucus or any other union caucus.
Stories herein containing unnamed or invented characters are works of fiction. Names, characters, businesses, places, events and incidents are either the products of the author’s imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.