After Rosi promoted the post to the front page, a very interesting discussion ensued. Some highlights:
This is the ineptitude I'm talking about. Personally, I think the NJEA needs to be involved in the ME battle, because they have plenty of GLBT members, and standing up for their civil rights is part of what they should do.
But, OK, maybe you make a political calculation to stay out; I don't like it, but fine. But how do you get justify getting involved with domestic partnership in 2004 but not ME in 2009? Don't you know that's going to piss off people who should be your political allies - people who are on your side of the aisle?
So, the NJEA stick their noses into the LGBT law without consulting the folks who are shepherding it through, and then they beg off the ME fight. How does that make any sense?
The NJEA has been meeting this week to plot political strategy. I should have gone; I'm really having some serious doubts about the political abilities of our union leaders. They have been blindsided since day one of the Christie reign, and they are constantly either blundering or getting mowed over. There's a whole lot more to politics than throwing money at candidates; NJEA had better learn that fast, or...
One other interesting thread at Blue Jersey:
I think princetonblue's right about that. Teachers are at the front line in maintaining the societal order; we are charged with turning children into responsible citizens. That's a fundamentally "conservative" position. Most teachers are not looking to upend the system; they are incrementalists.
But I do think teachers become teachers because they believe they can affect positive change in the world through their actions, which is a core "liberal" value.