Of some interest is the fact that Mr Jobs met with President Obama and offered to help with the 2012 campaign, but he told the President that he was probably a one termer and that teachers unions were killing school reform. From the article:
"You're headed for a one-term presidency," he told Obama at the start of their meeting, insisting that the administration needed to be more business-friendly. As an example, Jobs described the ease with which companies can build factories in China compared to the United States, where "regulations and unnecessary costs" make it difficult for them.Both the Jobs comments on jobs and the Jobs comments on schools ring true to me.
Jobs also criticized America's education system, saying it was "crippled by union work rules," noted Isaacson. "Until the teachers' unions were broken, there was almost no hope for education reform." Jobs proposed allowing principals to hire and fire teachers based on merit, that schools stay open until 6 p.m. and that they be open 11 months a year.
Hat tip to the Instapundit, via the Althouse blog.
Regards — Cliff
Well....Jobs is/was absolutely correct. This one is worse than the last one and the only hope we have is to at least not repeat our past mistake of giving the incumbent a second term.
ReplyDeleteBut the real villian in this ugly story called Postmodern America is the Congress. Never in human history has their been assembled in one function such a DYSFUNCTIONAL and self absorbed bunch of people. It is difficult if not impossible to find one single member of Congress whose intentions and practices are pure and for the good only of the nation. Personal aggrandizement and partisanship are the two dominant bedfellows behind every Congressional member.
I suspect that in the end, the true guilt lies with a silent majority....that nation of sheep.....who want merely to be tended to without any overt responsibility other than managing their own personal life functions.
It is axiomatic, particularly today, that voters vote how they feel at the moment they make their marks or pull the handle. Their choice for local, state, and national representation is based on their emotion at the moment and not on some well thought out, informed, intellectual outcome. When one listens to peanut gallery comments about the debates, the dominant responses are all in the affective domain...."I LIKE him," "She seems too pushy," "I don't know, he seems wishy washy." You very rarely hear any evidence of rational thought about what these prancing princes and princesses are actually advocating in exchange for the public blessing of being elected.
The American citizen ALWAYS gets a result that is in direct proportion to the amount of personal investment made in its outcome. You get what you pay for. If you want premium oats to feed the horse, you must pay a premium price and take the effort to locate those oats. If on the other hand, you are willing to settle for oats that have been processed by the horse....those are considerably cheaper.