From: Patricia Kilday Hart
To: Greg Curtis, Paul Burka, Evan Smith, Skip Hollandsworth, Joe Nick Patoski, and Pam ColloffPosted Tuesday, March 28, 2000, at 3:15 AM ET
Dear Joe Nick and everyone else--
Thanks to Joe Nick, cranky or not, for reminding us why education is such a great political issue: Everyone has a passionate opinion about it and everyone is an expert for one reason or another. As for myself, I just spent a few months helping my son's fourth-grade class get ready for the writing TAAS (Texas Assessment of Academic Skills). Here's what people who complain about "teaching to the test" don't tell you: The test covers stuff that every fourth-grader should know. So, all the time spent preparing for the test, is, in fact, good education. I haven't seen anything on a TAAS worksheet that I don't think kids need to know. My son was blessed with a teacher who devised very creative writing-practice sessions …
What does this have to do with how I feel about George Bush? It means I fall in with the people who believe that our state's "accountability" system has moved public education forward. Instead of passing kids along with no basic skills, we're finding out who's teaching and who isn't. We're also identifying kids who need extra help, and some schools have done very creative things about it. Witness McCallum High School, here in Austin, where the PTA buys pizza for lunch for kids who participate in lunchtime TAAS study sessions. McCallum's minority students have demonstrated appreciable improvements in their test scores. I happen to believe they are actually learning more because of these tests. Bush and all the other education reformers in Texas deserve credit.
As for Paul's idea that Bush should debate: I'm not sure it's the best political strategy, but it certainly would be a service to voters. We're not learning anything about Bush and how he thinks from the repetitive script and resulting spin from the national press. Last summer, I wrote about Bush's inner circle, and those very best and brightest Republicans convinced me that Bush was passionate about public policy in his private discussions with them. None of them felt he was an empty vessel. Everyone thought he had strong intellectual abilities. People need a demonstration of this to feel comfortable voting for him. On the other hand, he could fall flat on his face. But he should be OK with that. Bush, I'm told, likes to think of himself as Trumanesque. Well, as Harry would say, if he can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen … or at least quit hiding behind cue cards …
Regards,
Patti Kilday Hart
From: Patricia Kilday Hart
To: Greg Curtis, Paul Burka, Evan Smith, Skip Hollandsworth, Joe Nick Patoski, and Pam ColloffPosted Tuesday, March 28, 2000, at 3:15 AM ET How conservative is George W. Bush? How capable? This week, the staff of
Texas Monthly magazine allows
Slate readers to eavesdrop as they discuss what kind of president Bush would make.The participants in this dialogue include
Texas Monthly Editor Greg Curtis, Executive Editor Paul Burka, Deputy Editor Evan Smith, Senior Editors Skip Hollandsworth and Joe Nick Patoski, Associate Editor Pam Colloff, and Contributing Editor Patricia Kilday Hart.
Reader Response from The Fray:
[Note: Should be read after most recent Dialogue entry of the week.]
I find Ms Hart's (perfectly legitimate) complaint [Wednesday] about the "news columns"--ie, that they're showing an abominable if visceral loathing of Mr Bush--quite charming in its innocence. She seems to have somehow managed to avoid realizing that such an attitude has colored reporting of the Clinton administration for years, of Mr Gore, and indeed of just about any gopher who stuck his head up far enough to be hit with a mallet. The sole recent exception---the esteemed Senator from Arizona---avoided this solely by pandering to the reporters' idiot sense of their own moral and intellectual superiority and even he would have been savaged had he had any chance of victory.
I don't particularly like Mr Bush, but he was elected twice by a real state and he did manage to generate an awful lot of money and support among real people. I'm not awfully fond of Mr Gore, but he is pretty smart and well-educated and any sensible analysis of his fundraising activities needs to balanced against a history in which Republicans outspent Democrats dramatically--it's hard not to see Republican complaints about the Clinton/Gore fundraising as analogous to their complaints about many of the administration's policies: how dare they steal our issues/our techniques?
I think they both deserve to be treated seriously, courteously, and dispassionately. The chance of this happening in the current media atmosphere is about equal to the chance I will wake up tall, blonde, and skinny. Why does not a professional journalist realize this as well?
--Alan Kornheiser
(To reply, click here.)
(3/31)
I'm not surprised Governor Bush could impress the Texas Monthly writers with his policy expertise in a friendly, sympathetic small-group discussion. Most journalists hardly study policy at all; very little expertise is required to impress them. And, there isn't a politician alive who does not look more impressive talking to a sympathetic small group than he does to a large audience.
I didn't see any recognition in their discussion that a Governor's education policy, however successful, might not be terribly relevant to the conduct of foreign relations and management of the Pentagon. Yet the next President is very likely going to spend much more time in each of these areas that in education, all campaign rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.
Finally, I had to laugh at the comment that a dropped "g" at the end of the word "asking" identifies Bush as a Texan. Here in Wisconsin we have a very successful Governor who uses only two "g's", the one in "Governor" and his middle initial. I promise you that no one will ever mistake Tommy Thompson for a Texan.
--Joseph E Britt
(To reply, click here.)
Uh, who the hell is Joe Nick? And what is he so cranky about? Am I missing something?
--Paul
(To reply, click here.)
[Yes you were. Joe Nick Patoski replied here, filling in with the missing entry that made everyone else think he was cranky.]
(3/28)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
What Obama Meant—and Didn't Mean—About "Beginning" To Withdraw in July 2011
49 Million Americans Are Hungry. What Can You Do To Help? 
Admit It, Dems: These Reform Bills Won't Control Health Care Costs
Parks and Recreation Is Now Better Than 30 Rock and The Office
Lithwick: The Supreme Court's Best Beach-House Case Ever
The Economic Reports About Christmas Shopping Are Confusing, Contradictory, and Useless
Reader Response from The Fray:
[Note: Should be read after most recent Dialogue entry of the week.]
I find Ms Hart's (perfectly legitimate) complaint [Wednesday] about the "news columns"--ie, that they're showing an abominable if visceral loathing of Mr Bush--quite charming in its innocence. She seems to have somehow managed to avoid realizing that such an attitude has colored reporting of the Clinton administration for years, of Mr Gore, and indeed of just about any gopher who stuck his head up far enough to be hit with a mallet. The sole recent exception---the esteemed Senator from Arizona---avoided this solely by pandering to the reporters' idiot sense of their own moral and intellectual superiority and even he would have been savaged had he had any chance of victory.
I don't particularly like Mr Bush, but he was elected twice by a real state and he did manage to generate an awful lot of money and support among real people. I'm not awfully fond of Mr Gore, but he is pretty smart and well-educated and any sensible analysis of his fundraising activities needs to balanced against a history in which Republicans outspent Democrats dramatically--it's hard not to see Republican complaints about the Clinton/Gore fundraising as analogous to their complaints about many of the administration's policies: how dare they steal our issues/our techniques?
I think they both deserve to be treated seriously, courteously, and dispassionately. The chance of this happening in the current media atmosphere is about equal to the chance I will wake up tall, blonde, and skinny. Why does not a professional journalist realize this as well?
--Alan Kornheiser
(To reply, click here.)
(3/31)
I'm not surprised Governor Bush could impress the Texas Monthly writers with his policy expertise in a friendly, sympathetic small-group discussion. Most journalists hardly study policy at all; very little expertise is required to impress them. And, there isn't a politician alive who does not look more impressive talking to a sympathetic small group than he does to a large audience.
I didn't see any recognition in their discussion that a Governor's education policy, however successful, might not be terribly relevant to the conduct of foreign relations and management of the Pentagon. Yet the next President is very likely going to spend much more time in each of these areas that in education, all campaign rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.
Finally, I had to laugh at the comment that a dropped "g" at the end of the word "asking" identifies Bush as a Texan. Here in Wisconsin we have a very successful Governor who uses only two "g's", the one in "Governor" and his middle initial. I promise you that no one will ever mistake Tommy Thompson for a Texan.
--Joseph E Britt
(To reply, click here.)
Uh, who the hell is Joe Nick? And what is he so cranky about? Am I missing something?
--Paul
(To reply, click here.)
[Yes you were. Joe Nick Patoski replied here, filling in with the missing entry that made everyone else think he was cranky.]
(3/28)