Standby ...

I moved to South Carolina three years ago and I have learned something remarkable about Republicans. First of all they are not as conservative as Democrats believe. Sure there are about 25% to 35% of them that can be considered Christian conservative or hard right. But for the most part they're closer to moderate to liberal when it comes to privacy issues. The mistake that the media has made is accepting and promoting by default, the hard right's position on abortion and family planning as the Republican established position. But it's in their platform, you say. Sure that's because of their political vigilance. But most of the Republican women I've met said that they are able to separate the politics of campaigning from what their constitutional rights are. In short, they don't care about the hard right's political fervor. No one is going to tell them what to do with their bodies. They are just not going to shout from the top of the roof that they are choosing other options regarding their pregnancy. So now that Sarah Palin has caught fire, for her personality or the 'she's like me' affect, Dems don't know how to respond. It's simple, stop proselytizing and start campaigning. Win the hearts of Americans and leave our minds alone. Dems intellectualize too much and they have to realize we live in an American Idol society and the presidential election has become a popularity contest, not a political one. Trust me; I'm saddened by it too.

Sent by Wadell | 10:08 AM | 9-9-2008

Michel,
I saw you on "Tavis" on Friday and as usual, you were on-point. Great point about hoe Joe Biden will have to step light at the VP debates because of the possible perception that he's beating up on "the woman". An overall very good panel discussion.
(And the hair was tight as well)

Sent by JR in Cincinnati | 10:32 AM | 9-9-2008

Everyone needs a break sometime. And this will help me catch up on the great NPR podcasts I download and never have time to listen to.

Keep up the good work and enjoy the break!

Sent by Houstonmacbro | 3:38 PM | 9-9-2008

I had a question about your guest today the president from Spelman college. She wrote a book that I believe might help some people in this country, but my concern was that there are colleges that are all "black". Now I know that it's hard to get the same educational benefits in the big university being a minority but I got through 4 years of college w/o bills. So why is it that it is okay to have all black colleges but not all white, indian or asian colleges? How is it that this guest can talk about teaching the kids of our community about diversity but then have all black colleges? Is that there isn't enough diversity in what we learn in high school or college, b/c I have say being an immigrant I learned very quickly about all the races and all the diversity. It's not hard to learn if you want to learn it. I learned about the black, white, asian and everything in b/w in the university I attended. So I hope you can shed some light on my concern about all black college and magazine and tv shows, but no all other race anything unless you want to pay extra to your satelite companies.

Sent by Mauli patel | 7:22 PM | 9-9-2008

What was with the comment today from a Mocha Mom about "white trash"? There was a linkage to Sarah Palin, which was not explained. This was a highly inappropriate comment to let go by without some explanation; and one which the person receiving it, in Britain, apparently, feels unable to refute. Would she be so reluctant if one used a "welfare queen" analogy? Any use of such a term about a woman who is the daughter of two teachers, a college graduate, and a governor, seems grossly inappropriate and should be refuted by any thinking person.

Sent by shelly | 9:30 PM | 9-9-2008

I applaud Michelle Rhee for her vigor in reforming the public schools and advocating for the kids. Although I do not know all of the ins and outs of her education reform plan, I do agree with the idea of providing children incentives for attending school and performing well.

The purpose of school is to prepare children for the post-secondary job world. As adults, we do not work for the "love of working." Why would we expect our children to attend school only for the "love of learning." We work to make money to pay our bills and buy things we want and need. If we show up to work daily, we accure vacation time, retirement and benefits. If we work everyday, we get paid for showing up to work and may get positive work evaluation (report cards). We get performance bonuses for extra work (we call that extra credit). We also earn retirement for working a long time and investing our earnings (graduation).

I have 3 sons, and my husband and I preach that grades are their paychecks. We expect our children to work hard to earn the best grades they can. We want them to see how hard work in school as a child can lead to wonderful job and career opportunities as adults.

Tell me what's wrong with that? Go Michelle Rhee!

Sent by Adiaha Franklin, MD, MPH, FAAP | 11:28 AM | 9-10-2008

Michel,
I loved the piece on the great things that Darrell Watson is doing with the kids in the Marching band at Ballou High School, and the documentary that was put together. However, I did not appreciate your comment about "don't embarrass DC". Trust me, after attending many Rose Parades I can assure you that the Tournament Of Roses Committee selects only the "best of the best". I am confident that the Ballou High School Marching Band will be outstanding.

Sent by Gene | 12:51 PM | 9-10-2008