Thursday, June 05, 2008


Our Union has had a uncanny history of endorsing losing candidates for political office (remember the last two mayoral elections)...and it continues. In an unprecedented effort to elect Hillary Clinton we may have finally thrown in the towel.

Our losing endorsements continued with the defeat of UFT endorsed Elizabeth Crowley, a candidate in a special election for City Council from the 30th District in Queens. UFTers spent long hours campaigning for her in a losing bid. While the absentee ballots have not been counted yet our UFT candidate has apparently lost to Anthony Como, a republican machine backed candidate.

Here is what Randi wrote to the Chapter Leaders about Clinton and Obama yesterday, including a statement from AFT President McElroy:

As you know, Senator Barack Obama yesterday sealed the Democratic presidential nomination after a final flurry of superdelegate endorsements and returns from the final primaries in Montana and South Dakota. I wanted you to know our union’s response to this latest development and where we go from here. Randi

AFT President Edward J. McElroy’s statement on the Democratic primary:Congratulations to Sen. Barack Obama on becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee for president. He ran an effective, well-organized campaign to win a competitive primary race that included several excellent candidates. We look forward to meeting with him as soon as possible.We also congratulate Sen. Hillary Clinton for her strong performance in the Democratic primaries. The AFT is proud to have supported her through our considerable member education and political mobilization program, and a grass-roots campaign that engaged members across the country. Our members’ votes and activism were crucial in many primary contests. Also, because of the extended primary season, we reached out to members in states that have rarely been in play in the presidential primaries. We will mobilize these members again in the fall, which means we will work even more effectively, and in more states, than in any previous election. The AFT’s endorsement in the primaries came only after a deliberative process that included face-to-face meetings with candidates, conversations with members about the issues that matter most to them, and direct questions to members about which candidate they believed would best address their issues. The AFT now will engage in a process to prepare to make an endorsement for this fall’s general election. The goal of the AFT in November, as in every election, is simple: to elect a candidate who will be a strong advocate for our members, their families and the communities where our members live and serve.


Under Assault said...

Whereas I hated that the UFT endorsed any candidate without polling the membership beforehand, I remember reading things about the position these two took on ed issues and drew the same conclusion — that from an education point of view, Clinton might have had an edge for me in this sphere.

I'm not saying Weingarten didn't make a deal with Clinton for future office in return for her endorsement. I don't know anything about that.

And if I might have preferred Clinton on ed issues, there was a lot of other stuff to consider, which Democrats seem to have done.

Anonymous said...

Yep! Beware their endorsements.
Especially when they don't endorse (on purpose) and a Republican becomes mayor again (on purpose). A lost opportunity for a better contract.

I think Obama may be afraid to get her endorsement since it's the kiss of death.

Hey, Randi gets a DC job w/o Hillary's help.

NYC Educator said...

I also preferred Clinton on education issues, as well as health care. But Obama looks a whole hell of a lot better than John McCain on both. I hope we're all wrong about that kiss of death stuff, because it won't be funny at all if the GOP gets a chance to appoint any more judges, let alone continue to deal with the war and the economy.

Anonymous said...

Another post on this blog which leaves me boggled.

Reading this blog reminds me of one of my students writing abilities. On nearly every assignment, I comment "Very good start, but where is this heading? What's the ultimate point that you are trying to make?"

Seriously, in nearly every post it starts out alright, then there's either a little meat to the body or none whatsoever. And there's never a coherent ending which wraps everything up nicely. What are we supposed to infer? What is the message you are trying to get across?

I'm dumbfounded with this blog.

Anonymous said...

Hillary was the correct endorsement. She has always championed public education. Obama needs to be forcefully against NCLB. I am pretty sure both the AFT and UFT will endorse Senator Obama.

Anonymous said...

Obama is a better pick. He's right on the war. His movement also is from the ground up and not top-down. Where do you think all that money is coming from? Hillary was the champion of teacher competency tests in Arkansas back in the eighties. She will follow whatever way the wind blows.

Anonymous said...

Dear MoveOn member,
Last night Senator Obama locked up the nomination.


After years of DC insiders running the show, a progressive candidate who started in politics through community organizing, who unequivocally opposed the war in Iraq, who isn't afraid to stand up to the politics of fear, an African-American, became the Democratic nominee for president.

What does that mean? The change we all want, the things we petition and hold vigils and make phone calls and rally for—things like universal health care, social justice, and an end to the war—these things are really truly possible, if we believe in them and if we're willing to fight for them.

Now comes the hardest part, though: Winning back the White House and defeating John McCain.

We need to send Obama into the general election with the strongest hand possible. He'll need to ramp up his campaign and that's going to take money—fast. We can all help. Click below to contribute:

Anonymous said...

"I'm not saying Weingarten didn't make a deal with Clinton for future office in return for her endorsement. I don't know anything about that." -woodlass, June 05, 2008 6:00:00 PM

More ICE conspiracies...not grounded in proof...sigh, that's ICE for you.

Anonymous said...

Your post fails to mention the fine Governors' endorsements the UFT made in 2002 and 2006. Both George Pataki and Elliot Spitzer were fine choices.

You see how well Pataki helped education when he fought the Campaign for Fiscal Equity suit for all those years, instead of providing the funding for city schools. Who needs funding? Pataki had the educational awareness to support a view that a grade 8 education was sufficient.

Oh, and Spitzer, he signed 27-55 so new teachers can pay pension contributions for 27 years instead of 10. Besides, Elliot had more important issues on his mind than the schools. You do remember Client 9.

Also, Pataki was so good for education he won a UFT John Dewey Award.

UFT endorsement a Kiss of death? No, the UFT has endorsed some fine winners! Could we please show just a little more gratitude please?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Unity slug from June 07, 2008 2:17:00 PM, you say no proof regarding woodlass' comment? I'm sure Norman Scott has proof. It wll eventually be posted on Ed notes. You'll see you Unity hack.

Anonymous said...

Wow, I would be really interested in seeing that proof. How did Norman Scott get it?

ed notes online said...

I have rejected all attempts to brand Randi as endorsing Hillary in exchange for political office. As someone else commented, the UFT/AFT alliance with the Clintons goes way back to Shanker in the early 80's. And, yes, Hillary was for testing vet teachers and Shanker had her argue that position against Linda Darling-Hammond (now an Obama ed advisor) at the 1985 AFT convention.

And because Hillary says she is now against NCLB - the forerunner of which was designed in the Clinton admin, give me a break. Who isn't critical of NCLB now? Sandy and Randi were all for it and Ed Notes was very critical of the fact the AFT joined in the cheerleading at the time. Watch what they do, not what they say. If the AFT and NEA had thrown their muscle against it at the time it could have been stopped. But the AFT always wants to be seen as a co-agent of the bullshit reforms. No guts, no glory! The performance of the UFT/AFT has been shameful.

On Obama and change: do you really believe the enormous amount of money he has raised comes from nickel and dimes? His policies are basically conservative - as are the Clinton just about right wing democrats. So don't expect all that much change other than cosmetic.

From Ednotes online June 7:

Sent to ICE-mail:
I heard Randi is looking very glum these days because of Hillary's defeat. I guess her political future is finished. Will Randi gain anything if Hillary is VP?

This is barking up the wrong tree. People who think Randi was in this for a cabinet position are way off base - those are at most a few years and out and she would have lost the power base she has.

Randi's future is and always has been to move up in the labor movement. Her political future on the national stage is just beginning. The next step is to unify the NEA and AFT which would give her a massive base. That is how she is much more useful to the Clintons in a 2012 campaign.

The Clintons have been open about the fact that they think Obama can't win - and they have played a not small role in that - and in essence declared McCain the winner. They will play the support Obama game to the end. My view is that for them and Randi, the 2012 campaign begins the day after the election. And Randi will be perfectly positioned as AFT president to use that platform for Hillary.

Don't get me wrong, this is not a one way street and Randi's career exists outside the life of the Clintons. Reaching the status of an Albert Shanker for her would not be a bad achievement. I hope she doesn't get ahold of the bomb. But then again, can you imagine Woody Allen using that line about Randi?

Anonymous said...

No comments yet on the fine Pataki endorsement. You ungrateful teachers.

Anonymous said...

Norm is wrong about one thing: Obama is getting a ton of money from small contributors. He's tapped into that market the same way Howard Dean did before the scream in 2004. Yes he has big donors too but don't underestimate the movement that is with him.

Anonymous said...

Randi and the bomb is crazy. Clyde Haberman once made the comparison between Shanker and Randi and said that nobody would ever accuse Randi of going nuclear. A pop gun maybe was his line.

Anonymous said...

So does or doesn't ICE have proof of Randi making underhanded deals with Hillary Clinton?

And if so, what is it and when will we find out?

Anonymous said...

She did make a deal with George Pataki. The Dewey Award, the endorsement, Mayoral control in exchange for a few bucks that we paid for with an extended day and now an extended year. Are you going to deny this?

Anonymous said...

Wonderful ICEsickles, you have proof that Randi made deals with Hiallry Clinton and George Pataki, right? I'll believe you when hell freezes over. You have no proof, there were no deals, this is just more typical ICE conspiracy talk.

This blog is so full of it, why are people still reading?

Anonymous said...

Then why did she endorse George Pataki? His record on the CFE suit and education?

Anonymous said...

The Unity guy acts like someone who belongs to a cult. He needs to see someone who specializes in showing people how to unscramble their brainwashed minds. I know it will be hard but someone can get out of a cult. We're here to help.

Anonymous said...

The Unity hack needs to go!

Why is it so hard to understand that ICE has found definitive proof that Randi has made deals for a position in Washington.

Will you still be such a slug if we choose to share it at the next DA?

Anonymous said...


Because there is no proof, all of this is just speculation. ICE has no proof, this is just another example of exactly what this blog does best, makes stuff up under the pretense of it being fact.

Don't hold your breath for ICE's smoking gun, it doesn't exist. The Randi hatred on this blog is almost humorous when members here start this nonsense.

Stick to the facts!

Anonymous said...

The fact is that under Randi we have been working under the worst contrat. ATRs are not being placed. LIFs are growing. Loss of grievance rights and seniority transfer. Rubber rooms are used for any excuse. Longer school day and year. SBO hiring team no longer exists. More paperwork, less teaching and more test prep.

Anonymous said...

The fact is that under Randi we have been working under the worst contrat. ATRs are not being placed. LIFs are growing. Loss of grievance rights and seniority transfer. Rubber rooms are used for any excuse. Longer school day and year. SBO hiring team no longer exists. More paperwork, less teaching and more test prep.

Anonymous said...

Hey Anonymous Sunday, June 08, 2008 11:42:00 PM & 11:44:00 PM, I thought this blog was about Randi's role in endorsing politicians?

The sky is blue, it has nothing to do with this blog.

Anonymous said...

Randi endorsed George Pataki and gave him the John Dewey award. That's no conspiracy theory; it's a fact.

Anonymous said...

But did she know that he would fight against the CFE (I know you ICEsickles are going to say yes, you'll say anything if it portrays Randi in a negative light) or was she hoping that the gesture being one of good faith might persuade him to back it?

Anonymous said...

Check Pataki's record before the endorsement and you don't have to be a genius to know he wasn't going to back CFE.

Anonymous said...

Randi didn't endorse Kit Wainer. Heh.

Anonymous said...

Kit might have received no votes if Randi had endorsed him.

Anonymous said...

Didn't he receive no votes anyway?

Anonymous said...

Randi the great labor leader:

Afraid to speak/debate with Kit.