NEA President Dennis Van Roekel lauded the victories. "NEA members played a vital role in critical congressional races across the country that helped expand margins in the House and Senate for pro-public education allies," he said in a press statement. "As a bipartisan organization, the National Education Association was pleased to return many friends from both sides of the aisle to Congress and elect new ones as a part of a growing Democratic majority."
Aside: If you parse that last sentence, you get NEA "as a bipartisan organization" being pleased about "a growing Democratic majority."
I might be able to have the slightest respect for them if they could be honest once in awhile.
4 comments:
The NEA is sorta bipartisan. According to this:
http://www.eiaonline.com/intercepts/2008/10/01/the-payoff-for-being-an-nea-republican/
"In the 2008 campaign, NEA is supporting 31 Senate candidates, all Democrats, and 314 House candidates, 20 of whom are Republicans. Of the 20 House Republican candidates, 18 are incumbents, one is running for an open seat (the Ray LaHood GOP seat in Illinois), and only one is a challenger. But the challenger is Jim Burkee in Wisconsin’s 5th District, who is running against incumbent Republican Jim Sensenbrenner in a race with no Democratic candidate."
So it isn't like they *always* support Democrats. One race in 17, they'll support a Republican.
-Mark Roulo
Of course the NEA is bipartisan: the proletariat and the nomenklatura.
Meanwhile, the Obamas are shopping around for the best local private school to send their daughters to:
http://detentionslip.org/2008/11/michelle-obama-visits-washington.html
Hey, "bipartisanship" is everybody having to do what the NEA says. It can be Democratic or Republican. They're open-minded that way.
Post a Comment