Teachers’ Association President proves a point.

California Teachers Association president David A. Sanchez makes the strongest case he can for Tom Torlakson in the race for Superintendent of Public Instruction. Draw your own conclusions.

California Teachers Association president David A. Sanchez makes the strongest case he can in less than a minute for supporting Tom Torlakson for Superintendent of Public Instruction in today’s California primary election.

If you find this compelling, vote for Torlakson. If not, there is an alternative.

This isn’t likely to become moot after today: there will probably be a runoff for this nonpartisan office in November.

Author: Andrew Sabl

Andrew Sabl, a political theorist, is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Toronto. He is the author of Ruling Passions: Political Offices and Democratic Ethics and Hume’s Politics: Coordination and Crisis in the History of England, both from Princeton University Press. His research interests include political ethics, liberal and democratic theory, toleration, the work of David Hume, and the realist school of contemporary political thought. He is currently finishing a book for Harvard University Press titled The Uses of Hypocrisy: An Essay on Toleration. He divides his time between Toronto and Brooklyn.

3 thoughts on “Teachers’ Association President proves a point.”

  1. Andy, You have got to be kidding me. You thought that was a strong and compelling case for Torlakson? He strings along words with positive connotations, says he his pro Public education and concludes that is Torklakson's M.O?

    Makes me want to vote for Sen. Romero.

  2. The LA Weekly article about Romero you link to was a lot less than compelling itself. Who bothers to read that rag anymore? I mean, unless you're looking for a good time.

    I sort of have a good impression of Romero because as I recall, she may have at some point been in favor of reforming our state gulags. (Now *that* takes real guts. In comparison, bashing teachers is easy and convenient. Right away, you look like a bold, new kind of Dem. Of course, what *have* the New Dems done for anyone?)

    Isn't she something of a latecomer to ed policy?

    I am not against charters per se, but Duncan strikes me as a bit of a lightweight. Why should we just jump on his bandwagon? Are we really that desperate for money, and what does it say about the Obama Administration that they would use that?

    It would be nice if we could have a real debate now, but don't hold your breath.

  3. I lot of nice sounding cliches. I did not hear anything about being able to fire bad teachers.

Comments are closed.