Joseph Barisonzi wrote:

>Re: [Mpls] Atherton's Mature Response to the Star Tribune

Would you care to explain your choice of titles?  Is it that you
really do think of my response as "mature" or are you following the
Tribune's example of the subtle use of insult and sarcasm?

>  There are several reasons that I will not be voting for Michael
>  Atherton. None of which are because neither the DFL nor the Star Tribune
>  to endorse him. I will share three:
>
>  This first and foremost is that Mr. Atherton is not an advocate for
>  public education. (See post below as yet another example where is
>  criticism of Mr. Shapiro is that Mr. Shapiro "was and is not a critic of
>  public education")

I am not an advocate for public education if being an advocate means
ignoring the failures and faults in the present system.  How can anyone
be an advocate of public education in Minneapolis given the failure rates,
the low tests scores, and the minority dropout rates?  Maybe I should
have rephrased my comment about Mr. Shaprio to state that he has
never acknowledged or proposed plans for dealing with the problems in
the public schools.  If you want a candidate who thinks that there's
nothing wrong with the publics schools, you're right, I'm definitely
not the right candidate for you, but if you want to vote for someone 
who acknowledges the problems in the schools and has proposals for
dealing with each of them then you might want to consider voting
for me.  I have stated repeatedly that I believe that a quality PUBLIC
education is the best option for our country.  However, I just don't 
believe that the schools currently provide a quality education for all 
of their students. If you don't want to vote for me for that reason, 
so be it.  And by the way, I never sought the DFL endorsement and would 
never consider doing so.  But, I had naively thought that the Tribune 
would give me a fair shot, in contrast to what many people told me, 
but they were right and I was wrong.

>  I believe school board member the legal, fiduciary, political, ethical
>  and moral to advocate, promote, boost as well as ensure the quality of
>  our public education system. I want my school board members to have the
>  finesse to be both advocates for improvement while also being boosters
>  for public education.

I won't advocate, promote, or boost a lousy product just to put a
happy face on a marketing campaign.  We often elect politicians who
are critical of the system, Paul Wellstone being just one example.
Why is it that we need school board members who are blind supporters
of the status quo?  How are these candidate going to initiate and implement 
effective reforms?

>  The second reason is that based on Mr. Atherton's posts on this list I
>  feel I have had an opportunity to get to know his perspective on public
>  education and the role of schools in our society. I have read the
>  studies he quotes, and read the studies that make contradictory claims.
>  I have seen the limits of education and child development researches
>  applicability to the school setting.  Mr. Atherton clearly does not
>  share my values about active schools and civic society. While I in no
>  way deny him the right to those opinions -- it doesn't mean I would want
>  to vote to have someone with those opinions be a trustee of arguably the
>  most important public asset in Minneapolis. (Apologies to all the Park
>  Board fans. . . )

Just what do you mean by "active schools and civic society?"  This seems
to be a common way to discredit someone politically.  You ascribe to them
views that they do not necessarily hold, just as Ms. Mickelsen did in implying
that I support busing.  Why don't you define your terms and then maybe
we can have a rational discussion.

>  The third reason is that in a time of budget cuts, and immense
>  challenges because the electorate experimented with a "critic" in our
>  state government -- the personal style has exhibited -- especially since
>  the Star Tribune editorial -- has done more to convince me that the
>  editors may have in fact had an extremely valid point.

Ah, the old guilt by association strategy.  Just because Jesse Ventura
was a government critic then I must share the same personality,
positions, and ineffectual management style as he?  What a ridiculous
implication! By the way, I voted for Humphrey.

If the Star Tribune editorial has done more to convince you that the
editors have a valid point, then I would prefer that you NOT vote for me.
Anyone who cannot see that the Tribune editorial was prejudiced,
manipulative, and patiently unfair is ignoring the obvious.  I've been
through this before in my neigbhorhood where rather than stand up
and voice support for a person's right to be heard, people are willing
to ignore injustice and prejudice in order achieve their own ends.  That's
not how I live my life or how I honor my responsibilities as an
American citizen.

Michael Atherton
http://QualityEd.US
Candidate for Minneapolis School Board
Prospect Park

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prepared and paid for by the Atherton for MPS Committee.
156 Orlin Ave SE, Mpls, MN 55414
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to