Ravitch and Obama.
The e-mails have been flying since Friday when Diane Ravitch posted an internet article describing the Obama Department of Education as George Bush’s third term.
In defending this nonsense, some have used Linda Darling-Hammond’s return to Stanford (actually, she never left) as evidence that something evil was going on in the USDE.
Darling-Hammond has distanced herself from this line of thinking and urges optimism and support for the changes in the USDE.
Whatever one’s disagreements are about particular statements coming out of the USDE, or about certain appointments, the very idea that there is equivelency between the “starve the beast”* ideology of the Bush administration and the still-developing Obama Education Department is rancid and dangerous.
It grossly underestimates what the Bush USDE was up to, what their ultimate intent was: They were out to dismantle public education and destroy teacher unions along he way. This wasn’t just about testing, charters or merit pay.
What would be the agenda of those who would argue that this is Obama’s intentions?
*Coined by anti-tax, right-wing adviser to Bush, Grover Norquist. “Starve the beast,” meant cutting taxes to the point where public financial support for social services like education would dry up causing those programs to collapse and be taken over by the private sector.
