"Lomker, Michael" wrote: > I'm not sure if Michael is helping his cause by protesting so much. > Sometimes it is best to hold yourself above your critics > (when the bias is obvious) and stay focused on the issues.
When I decided to run for school board I did so with the self-knowledge that I could not run as a politician. I am not a politician. I don't pick and chose my views based on popular opinion. I don't restrict my statements to innocuous platitudes. I will tell you what I think regardless of how it is likely to affect your opinion of me. I will not have others speak for me to remain above the fray. I believe that in elections voters should be able to evaluate the true positions of candidates and then pick who they feel would best represent them. I want you to vote for me and the issues I support, not some closely managed image of what my campaign staffers think you want to vote for. The fact that many voters are swayed by flashy marketing campaigns and negative advertising is a sad commentary on the state of American politics. I was told by a wise and savvy political advisor that the first thing I should have done in my campaign was to get off the list server, but I'm still here and I will continue to openly debate issues and defend my positions. I know of no other way to respect the intellectual integrity of voters. As a teacher I don't pick and chose students' questions. I take them as them come and I answer as honestly and completely as I can, even questions as to the relevance of the subject matter. I believe that shows respect. Ventura changed the face (or if you prefer the body) of American politics. He showed that it was possible to win being exactly who you are while saying exactly what you thought. Unfortunately, Jesse turned out to be self-centered showboat who couldn't implement the causes he espoused. But he broke ground for other candidates to be honestly who they are. I believe that R.T. is a new type of politician. He often says what he thinks regardless of the political fallout. He is as the old line says, "A man of respect." WizardMarks wrote: > >Michael Atherton wrote: > >Denny Schapiro was not and is not a critic of public education, he is a supporter > >of the status quo. Mr. Schapiro was also endorsed by the Tribune and his chances > > > >were not destroyed prior to the primary by the Tribune editorial board referring to > >him as a, "52 year old failed businessman with narrow personal concerns." I'd > >like to see someone justify the Tribune's lack of endorcement of the only two > >public school critics in a field of 12 canidates. > > > <snip> > > This, Michael, is why I can't vote for you. You're saying, on one hand, > that the Tribune's describing you as a "52 year old graduate student" > hurts your chances of election to the school board and was a hurtful > thing for them to do. Yet you turn around and in the next sentence visit > the same kind of hurtful (and inaccurate) description on Shapiro. You > may not be the Tribune, but there are some 850 people, minimum, who will > have that description of Shapiro to consider when they're cogitating > their vote. It gives me the feeling that you are not a guy I should be > voting for to work in the service of children. It's really hard for me to tell if this is a sincere misinterpretation of my message or a political attack strategy. I always hated the Republicans for what they did to Clinton, that they perpetually tried to ensnare him in conflicts, hearings, and prosecutions. At least the Democrats don't seem to use this strategy as often in national politics, or maybe it's just because Bush has kept them off balance with his emphasis on foreign threats so they'd look bad trying to ensnare him. I was simply just trying to show by analogy what it would have been like if the Tribune had done something similar to Mr. Schapiro as they did to me. Of course the description of Mr. Schapiro is inaccurate, it's intended to be to make the point. I couldn't have made the point with a positive description. If anyone is influenced by this description in the 2004 election then they'd better be careful what bridges they buy between now and then. I voted for Mr. Schapiro because he is knowledgeable and sincerely interested in education, I just think he's a little misguided. Jim Mork wrote: > Mr. Atherton: > > In your web page, you make the following claim: > > "If you take all of the research on class size as > a whole, there is little evidence that reducing > class sizes has a significant effect on > achievement for the majority of students. " > > Since you don't really try to footnote "all the > research on class size" (how could you?), how do > we know it says what you say it says. I don't > think a statement like this would fly in a class > paper. Why should you get away with it on the > website. You often make the claim "I understand > the research". But your website seems to > contradict that claim. My campaign website is what it is, a campaign website not a class syllabus and bibliography. I think that I have clearly stated my positions on the issues, I don't think that it's also necessary to provide details to support them. I did provide links for additional information on a number of topics so that voters could find more information, not necessarily to bolster my positions. If you go to www.whitehouse.gov I don't think you'll find an essay on the history and effectiveness of military interventions. As I've suggested, it might be helpful if you'd like to discuss the validity of my position on class sizes that you read a little something. Below are two links to reputable sources. Even if you don't read these I'd be happy to debate the class size issue with you, if you will address a specific point or ask a specific question. Ehrenberg, R. G., Brewer, D. J., Gamoran, A. & Willms, J. D. (2001). Does class size matter? Scientific American, 285(5), 79-85. http://www.psychologicalscience.org/newsresearch/publications/journals/pspi2_2_text.html A study by the Rand Coorperation: http://www.rand.org/publications/RGSD/RGSD156/ Steve Cross wrote: > Over three YEARS ago, Michael was on the losing end of a proposal to add > pedestrian-level lights to his neighborhood and mine. The more distant > that dispute gets, he seems to see higher levels of malevolence that > caused the loss. Now he says that we "ignore injustice and prejucice." > Just for the record, the acceptance of "injustice and prejudice" is not > the way this neighborhood works, Michael's opinion to the contrary not > withstanding. Actually to be semantically correct Mr. Cross should say that I was on the losing end of a movement to prevent the replacement of an existing lighting system with pedestrian-level lights, not that I was on the losing end of a proposal to add pedestrain-level lights. And least you get the impression that I was some individual wacko, our opposition to ornamental street lights generated more letters to the city council than opposition to the Target Center. More than 230 people signed a petition asking that the city to review the amount of actual support for the lighting proposal and then more than 120 of my neighbors filed a lawsuit costing tens of thousands of dollars against the city (a lawsuit I was not a party to because I did not believe it could be successful and ultimately it was not). As to this event taking place "YEARS" ago, the intervening time between injustice and its occurrence should not be taken as a measure of its degree. Should we consider Slavery to be any less unjust because it occurred two centuries ago? Should we consider the Holocaust less of a crime against humanity because it occurred sixty years ago? Without a doubt it can be said that my ethical values are different than those of Mr. Cross. And I would take exception to Mr. Cross' claim that "injustice and prejudice" is not the way our neighborhood works. Both Mr. Cross and the previous PPERRIA president could have urged a fair settlement by actually doing an unbiased assessment of the amount of support for new streetlights. The fact is that they steadfastly refused. I believe that this is because they knew that the amount of support they claimed never existed. Thus, the imposition of a monetary assessment on every property owner was unjust. If the members of PPERRIA didn't like my interpretation of these events they shouldn't have elected me to the board of directors and are welcome to vote me off the next time I come up on the ballot. 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
