Betsy DeVos wants to keep grizzlies out of the classroom

She's looked lost during her confirmation hearings but this bit about guns is priceless...if it wasn't so damn scary.

http://www.vox.com/2017/1/17/14305154/betsy-devos-guns-murphy

Her hearing was the most incredible thing I have ever seen (and not in a good way). You'd think she might have brushed up a bit on, oh I don't know, education. How can you not answer most questions and the ones you do are answered with guns/grizzlies or that states should decide on IDEA silliness? Amazing.

This section was even more cringe worthy:

https://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/watch-al-franken-destroys-education-appointee-betsy-devos-over-her-support-for-gay-conversion-therapy/

I have to tell you. She and the other nominees do not care. They have no shame. They think their wealth shields them from criticism or consequences. It is very common (although not universal) for ultra-rich people to sneer at people in such low-paying professions as, ahem, U.S. Senator, school district superintendent, and pediatrician -- especially when those people are having an impact on their lives that they don't like (taxes rising? kid didn't get into an AP class? have to wait too long in the waiting room?) . They do not feel that they have to live by rules that people in lower-paying professions make. I live around this mindset and have observed it first-hand. They will never feel embarrassed by someone who has a much lower net worth than they do.

She donated $200 million to look a fool in front of a national audience. Karma.

Her job is not to run the department, it is to ruin it. She is perfect for it according to his supporters.

FilmCarp said:

Her job is not to run the department, it is to ruin it. She is perfect for it according to his supporters.

This ^^^^^. As it is with all the nominees. The federal government is being remade in the image of Steve Bannon.

FWIW, I think there's an awful lot of Mike Pence in there.

shoshannah said:

FilmCarp said:

Her job is not to run the department, it is to ruin it. She is perfect for it according to his supporters.

This ^^^^^. As it is with all the nominees. The federal government is being remade in the image of Steve Bannon.

But anyway, I surprised there's no Education thread on DeVos. She's the biggest threat to our education system in who knows how long.

"Her job is not to run the department, it is to ruin it."

Literally true, imo. This has been coming for a while, but with these nominations it's hit (I hope) a peak. Vide (from 2009):

https://www.amazon.com/Wrecking-Crew-Conservatives-Government-Themselves/dp/0805090908/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1484781559&sr=1-4&keywords=wrecking+crew

For the record I support keeping grizzlies out of schools. It is one of the great issues of our times.

"I look forward, if confirmed, to working with you... " How many freakin times was that her answer to just about every question.

With all her Billions she couldn't have found some foot soldiers to prepare her for the hearing? She's unequivocally unqualified, I get it but I mean really? Couldn't she have fake prepared? Or did she imagine she could wing it? My focus may be misplaced, but I'm just disappointed that she couldn't pull off even a fraction of crammed knowledge, given her resources.

I'm sure she was told "Don't worry. It's in the bag."

Is there some Republican out there with the spine to vote against her? Nope. Do they all know that the barest percentage of the electorate is even following this particular disaster anyway, so they can display their corruption for all to see? Yup.

ElizMcCord said:

With all her Billions she couldn't have found some foot soldiers to prepare her for the hearing? She's unequivocally unqualified, I get it but I mean really? Couldn't she have fake prepared? Or did she imagine she could wing it? My focus may be misplaced, but I'm just disappointed that she couldn't pull off even a fraction of crammed knowledge, given her resources.

Here's a summary her astonishing performance.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/01/18/six-astonishing-things-betsy-devos-said-and-refused-to-say-at-her-confirmation-hearing/\

Its scary. Literally.

ska said:

For the record I support keeping grizzlies out of schools. It is one of the great issues of our times.

She has no idea how pathetic she looks/sounds.

From the article BG9 posted above (an elaboration on the "IDEA silliness" referenced by a previous poster):

DeVos seemed to have no understanding of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, known as IDEA, which
requires public schools to provide free and appropriate education to all
students with disabilities.
DeVos said that states should have the right to decide whether to enforce IDEA, but
when Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) later told her that IDEA is a federal
civil rights law and asked DeVos if she stood by her statement that it
was up to the states to follow it, DeVos responded, “Federal law must be
followed where federal dollars are in play.” Hassan then asked, “So
were you unaware when I just asked you about the IDEA that it was a
federal law?” DeVos responded, “I may have confused it.” DeVos did not
protest when Hassan said she was upset the nominee didn’t understand the
law and urged her to learn about it.

Looks like she told a big lie.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/18/trump-education-nominee-betsy-devos-lied-to-the-senate/

Is there any recourse here? The Republicans hold the majority. Will it require some Republicans to vote with Democrats to deny her confirmation? It seems so hopeless knowing they can vote in whomever they want with a simple 51 vote majority.

Ironically, this is happening at time where the need to expand education could not be more crucial.

nan said:

Looks like she told a big lie.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/18/trump-education-nominee-betsy-devos-lied-to-the-senate/

shoshannah said:

I have to tell you. She and the other nominees do not care. They have no shame. They think their wealth shields them from criticism or consequences. It is very common (although not universal) for ultra-rich people to sneer at people in such low-paying professions as, ahem, U.S. Senator, school district superintendent, and pediatrician -- especially when those people are having an impact on their lives that they don't like (taxes rising? kid didn't get into an AP class? have to wait too long in the waiting room?) . They do not feel that they have to live by rules that people in lower-paying professions make. I live around this mindset and have observed it first-hand. They will never feel embarrassed by someone who has a much lower net worth than they do.

I used to work with a group of Black Card holders, generations of passed down money, Wharton grads back in Boston so I feel your pain and know what this environment is like. When they'd discuss how poorly the Boston public schools were, I'd shudder. None of these "scholars" offered to help fix the schools or use their brains and money to figure out where the weak links were, and there were many, starting with the Boston Public School Committee. All they did was chide the schools, snub the teachers and look down at the entire public school process. Easy to do when you've attended Milton Academy {many of the Milton boys were very sweet and not as "bubbled" as those from Avon Old Farms, et. al. - just saying} or Groton. All of this snideness done while working with the Teacher's Union to buff up their portfolio's.

It's not an "embarrassment" to them. It's a "I made it and I don't understand why you can't make it in this country too" thought process. Never taking into account, even with partial grades, they got into top schools based on legacy. Never taking into account that the money they earn is "play money" as I used to call it because they have "family" money to sustain them for a lifetime. They may not know how to pronounce the name of a public school kid with an "ethnic" name but can surely roll Egon Muller-Scharzhof Scharzhofberger Riesling Trockenbeerenauslese off the tongue very easily.

Darned libs! It's all fun and games until you find a grizzly in the cafeteria line.

GL2 said:

Darned libs! It's all fun and games until you find a grizzly in the cafeteria line.

Unless, of course, that's the name of your basketball team...

Betsy DeVos bought the position. She said so. Why did the senators who questioned her not ask her about her direct statement? Don't the people deserve to hear exactly what DeVos has intended to do? I think the senators were too kind to her.

In a New Yorker piece from November 23, 2016:

Trump may have run against big money in politics, but his choice for Education Secretary has made no apologies about her family’s political spending. Betsy DeVos has been a major financial backer of legal efforts to overturn campaign-spending limits. In 1997, she brashly explained her opposition to campaign-finance-reform measures that were aimed at cleaning up so-called “soft money,” a predecessor to today’s unlimited “dark money” election spending. “My family is the biggest contributor of soft money to the Republican National Committee,” she wrote in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. “I have decided to stop taking offense,” she wrote, “at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now I simply concede the point. They are right. We do expect something in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment.”

Just saw posted that Sen. Menendez is on the fence.

His number is: 973-645-3030 & (202) 224-4744

Morganna said:

Just saw posted that Sen. Menendez is on the fence.

His number is: 973-645-3030 & (202) 224-4744

How can this be?? How can he defend her?

I may have read that the Senators were only allowed one round of questions, which is unprecedented but would explain that. I'll post a link if I can find it.

Tom_Reingold said:

Betsy DeVos bought the position. She said so. Why did the senators who questioned her not ask her about her direct statement? Don't the people deserve to hear exactly what DeVos has intended to do? I think the senators were too kind to her.

In a New Yorker piece from November 23, 2016:

Trump may have run against big money in politics, but his choice for Education Secretary has made no apologies about her family’s political spending. Betsy DeVos has been a major financial backer of legal efforts to overturn campaign-spending limits. In 1997, she brashly explained her opposition to campaign-finance-reform measures that were aimed at cleaning up so-called “soft money,” a predecessor to today’s unlimited “dark money” election spending. “My family is the biggest contributor of soft money to the Republican National Committee,” she wrote in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. “I have decided to stop taking offense,” she wrote, “at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now I simply concede the point. They are right. We do expect something in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment.”

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/us/politics/betsy-devos-education-senate-hearing.html

ElizMcCord said:

I may have read that the Senators were only allowed one round of questions, which is unprecedented but would explain that. I'll post a link if I can find it.

Tom_Reingold said:

Betsy DeVos bought the position. She said so. Why did the senators who questioned her not ask her about her direct statement? Don't the people deserve to hear exactly what DeVos has intended to do? I think the senators were too kind to her.

In a New Yorker piece from November 23, 2016:

Trump may have run against big money in politics, but his choice for Education Secretary has made no apologies about her family’s political spending. Betsy DeVos has been a major financial backer of legal efforts to overturn campaign-spending limits. In 1997, she brashly explained her opposition to campaign-finance-reform measures that were aimed at cleaning up so-called “soft money,” a predecessor to today’s unlimited “dark money” election spending. “My family is the biggest contributor of soft money to the Republican National Committee,” she wrote in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. “I have decided to stop taking offense,” she wrote, “at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now I simply concede the point. They are right. We do expect something in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment.”

Yup. Repbubs are doing everything they can to limit speech and inquiry.