Wow, now this is a suprise that was never expected. I can’t believe the NEA is endorsing Nixon.

This is about as much a surprise as the Farm Bureau backing a republican. Wow!

What a surprise. NEA has often supported the WRONG candidate. Mind you, I am not a big Baby Blunt fan, but the NEA has consistantly backed and endorsed candidates simply because they were Democrats.

I know of at least three occasions where the NEA, as well as MSTA, failed to back candidates that were…………..TEACHERS! Now would one of you NEA lefties care to explain to me how you could NOT back a candidate with many years of experience in the classroom?

The NEA has a history of endorsing candidates that support their issues. Blunt supports vouchers which would destroy the NEA. I don’t see the logic is saying this is the ‘wrong’ candidate. That makes as much sense of saying Missouri right to life should endorse Nixon.
Just because someone was a teacher at one point doesn’t mean that A: They were a good teacher, or B: That they support public education. Maybe they were private school teachers, or maybe the vast treasury of All Children Matter has purchased their vote. I point to Representative Danni Moore as an example. She used to teach, but I know many of her former coworkers who think she is a bad State Representative and votes the wrong way on education bills.

If only Blunt could do to education what he has done to the state’s medical care and student loan program… then there we wouldn’t have to have pesky teachers in this state anymore!

We are talking about “Guilt by Association” here. I have no idea whether an endorsement by the NEA is a kiss of death in Missouri, or something positive for the Candidate.

Some 15 years ago, a Talk Show Host, Dick Lobdell, KBYR Radio, in Anchorage called me one night about 15 or more years ago and asked me to debate the National President of the NEA. The debate was to be one on one for the first hour, and listeners could call in during the 2nd hour and ask questions.

The National President,(I don’t remember his name) was in Anchorage in suppor of the teachers getting 10 pecent raises in the lst year and 5 percent for the following years on a 4 year contract that was being negotiated. Plus, he was the big gun who came in to support support some candidates for the State Senate.

I agreed to the debate.

Hilarious…I never made a statement in the whole “debate”, I just asked questions. He was so infuriated that he threw a cup, with coffee in it, against the wall 26 minutes later, issued profanities, and left the studio with his entourage of 5 or 6 people with him.

KBYR was the dominant station…well over 70 the total listening audience according to ARBITRON on an ordinary moring.

To make a long story shorter, he turned the voters against the teachers and the candidates. The teachers got NO raise in what became a 3 year contract, and not one of their endorsed candiates was elected.

Am I opposed to Unions? No. Overall, some have contributed much to what has made this country great

As a matter of fact, while I was vacationing in Hawaii one winter I became a close personal friend a school teacher, name Edwina Bright. When she told me how little she was earning, I couldn’t believe it.

I financed creating the HSTA (Hawaii State Teachers Association) They put candidates up against the NEA and won the election) They have represented the teachirs in Hawaii since. Don’t believe what I am telling you? Call her St. Anthony high school. She is the Principal, Her married name is now Edwina Wilson.

Richard’s comparison is way off. The National Right to Life would support Blunt (and any Republican) because Republicans support baby’s rights while Democrats come up with new uses for the discarded carcasses.

The NEA supports Democrats and fails to listen to options presented by Republicans that could greatly benefit their members.

NEA is first, and foremost, a POLITICAL organization. Any idea that they might actually put the education of children first is, quite frankly, a joke.

As to the earlier comment by Richard, one of the candidates of which I speak had been nominated on at least one occasion for “Teacher of the Year.” That award, I think, comes from their colleagues not from a political org. You will also note I put the MSTA in there as well. They have done the same thing as NEA, just on the state level.

I can see the campaign signs now: “Keep our Public Schools in the Toilet - Vote Nixon for Governor” This ad sponsored by the Missouri NEA

The NEA is a labor union, the chief purpose of which is representing teachers in negotiations with school districts. While they have willingly worn (and perhaps created) the halo earned by the labor of their educator members, they are in fact no different than the UAW or the Teamsters. Unfortunately, the voters are suckers, and accept the NEA’s equating of “pro-NEA” with “pro-education.” They are, in fact, two very different things.