Molly Ivins has been yelling about this stuff for years. I wish people had listened to her in 2000. Now we will pay.

This was also covered in the Washington Post about a month ago.

"So much for using education in those Bush commercials next year."
Wishful thinking. Rove'll still use it, and he'll get away with it unless the Dem nominee calls him on it every damn time, day after day. The Wurlitzer won't bother picking this info up, and the sheeple, well, it takes a lot to penetrate their consciousness. Hell, if people bothered to really think about the state of things and what Bushco hath wrought, his approval numbers would already be well below 50.
GWB. RIH.

Joe Trippi will figure out a way to get around the media lying with real Americans telling the truth.

Watch us. No way in hell are they ever going to get away with using education as a plus for that lying thieving murderer we call a president.

Of course, this would have been great info. in 2000, but for 2004, failure as governor in the '90s is probably not going to as effective as other issues.

This is just another example of a larger pattern of Bush's fudging of numbers (i.e. you're no longer officially unemployed if you give up looking for a job)...

CapD is right......who cares if it is truth or lies, that is hardly an issue for Rove. As a matter of fact, the bigger the lie the better. The GOP Media Tool will simply report it as true and call anyone who challenges it a traitor.

I agree with Paradox that Trippi will make sure the truth gets out.

Even though this bit about Governor Bush is "old" news, I can imagine a scenario where Trippi could get real clever and stitch it into an overall attack against Bush's record. But, it may not be do-able. Think about it. If you hear a charge against Bush's record as Governor, wouldn't you think someone is stretching a bit?

nevsky42-

That has always been a part of the unemployment numbers. It's a real problem, but hard to solve. The problem is they didn't want to count housewives (and others) as unemployed because they weren't looking for a job and including them would make the numbers kinda meaningless. So, if you're not looking for a job, you don't count, even if you want one.

It's a well-established fact that the unemployment numbers understate the problem. I'd like to be able to blame this on W, but we just can't.

But...
this is the choir, remember?

There is NOTHING that can be stricken from their list.

The good old public already bought the marketing slogan "Leave no child behind". Just ask my wife the special ed teacher how nicely that fiasco is working.

Today they are signing the "healthy forest" initiative. Re-read your Orwell. We have to bring this stuff out every day. We have to bring the fight to them. We must never apologize. Never. They wouldn't.

Back in September, 2001 I spent a pleasant day with my cousin, a first grade teacher in Huntsville, TX, helping her and her daughter color pictures to make reading pamphlets for her class. She then laminated the pages and bound them herself. This lady has three school age kids of her own and a husband in grad school and was still forced to buy school supplies for her students.

"Texas Education Miracle?" Give me a break.

I'm glad NYT got that article out. Both LAT and WaPo seem to be spinning NCLB in weird ways (check out Mark Kleiman on the WaPo article
here:
Can't figure out LAT's take on NCLB, however.