David Yassky

The Times endorsed Yassky yesterday. The endorsement is pretty compelling:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/opinion/30wed2.html

escap wrote: I wanted to bring this discussion back to the issue of pol's kids going to public schools. I always thought this was a bit of a strange issue so I just wanted to hear some clarification.

Is it wrong for anyone at all to send their kids to private schools, or just politicians? Or any public employee? What's the rule exactly? What about if you were a pol who was pushing to radically increase public school spending and clearly put public schools as a priority in all of your policies, but you still believed that your child could get a better education as a matter of fact from private schools? Could you send your kid to private school then?

Also, is it really "supporting" public schools to send your kids there? After all, you don't contribute any money to the school by sending your kid to it--in fact, you deplete it of resources. Financially, at least, you support public schools the most by NOT sending your kids there, since you still pay the school but leave its resources available to others.

Anyone want to take this one up??

This is something I feel strongly about. When it comes to your kid you want the best so I cannot fault a parent if their reasoning for sending their child to a private school (not including religiously run schools) is just that - but there are some who do it just to show their "status". My son goes to public school. We started him out in private school and found that it was not the atmosphere I wanted him in. I personally believe that children should go to public schools. In order to make these schools better we (society as a whole not just parents) need to be more involved in public eductation. We are still fighting with ALbany to get the $ the NYC public schools were awarded in the court and yet only parents of public school children are fighting for this. This is something that benefits the future generation and all citizens should be outraged at this.

We now send my son to PS 9 and I am so glad he is there. I think it is up to parents to be involved in the education of your child. Brandon was able to participate in many programs that were funded specifically for public schools (i.e., spending a week in a CSI lab at Union Hall College, free piano, violin, tennis and golf lessons, numerous productions at BAM as well as visisting choreographers and dancers teaching classes at the school, the Shadowbox Theater at the YWCA and many, many more). PS 9 had a push the last couple years in getting parents active with the school and the scores as well as the school has improved dramatically and I belive that is one of the reasons why if we had the whole community behind us we would be unstoppable.

Finally, the NY Times endorsed Yassky. It took them long enough.

Here's what they say:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 30, 2006
Editorial
For Congress in Brooklyn
Brooklyn’s 11th Congressional District has had black representation since a court-ordered reapportionment in the 1960’s. Shirley Chisholm represented the area when she became the first black woman ever elected to Congress. So it was not surprising that black leaders reacted with some pain when a white city councilman, David Yassky, announced he was moving a few blocks to establish a home in the district and run for the seat.

Mr. Yassky is pitted against three black candidates in a Democratic primary that is the equivalent of election in their highly Democratic district. While we agree that having good minority representation in Congress is critical to a healthy democracy, the political organization of Brooklyn has miserably failed the goals of the voting rights law by treating the district as a fiefdom. Instead of leadership, the machine has cranked out corruption.

The incumbent, Representative Major Owens, is retiring and wants to hand the seat to his son, Chris, a former health-care administrator and community organizer. The idea of handing political office down the family tree like an antique watch has become something of a tradition in Brooklyn, and not a good one. The younger Mr. Owens is extremely well-educated and likable, but he seems to have neither the political base nor the passion to become the kind of congressman the district needs.

Carl Andrews, a state senator, owes his job and lucrative patronage work to Clarence Norman, the former party boss convicted of corruption. That relationship raises serious concerns, as does Mr. Andrews’s lack of transparency over estate work given to him in the Surrogate Court by a judge who was forced to resign amid scandal. The last thing needed on Capitol Hill is a franchise of the Norman way of doing business.

Yvette Clarke has tried to link herself to Ms. Chisholm, but aside from Caribbean West Indian roots, there is no comparison. Another political heiress, Ms. Clarke faces term limits on the City Council seat she won when her mother vacated it. Her lack of attention to important details borders on alarming. A challenge to Representative Owens in 2004 was marred by poorly answered financial issues. This time she falsely claimed to have graduated from college and then pleaded memory loss.

Ms. Clarke has been among the most vocal critics of Mr. Yassky, whose entry in the race she ascribed to some sort of anti-black motive rather than what was clearly the attraction of a rare open seat. Representative Owens also set a mean tone early on, calling Mr. Yassky a “colonizer.”

Mr. Yassky is undoubtedly an opportunist, as are most politicians and certainly all those in this race. But far more important is his stellar record on the Council, leading groundbreaking work on gun control, affordable housing, the environment and jobs creation — all important to the 11th District.

There are many, many intelligent, hard-working and high-achieving young African-Americans in central Brooklyn who once considered careers in politics and then moved on when the party machine proved unenthusiastic or downright antagonistic. That failure of leadership is reflected in the current race. The residents of the 11th District deserve the best representation possible. In this race, that is David Yassky, who gets our endorsement.

Carnivore wrote: [quote=greg]Finally, the NY Times endorsed Yassky. It took them long enough.

I hadn't been sure which way I was going to vote but this editorial definitely won me over.

P.S. Look 4 posts above yours.

yeah. I think I'm going to vote for him but I wish he were a little more hardcore anti-AY.

Subject: Hooray For Davis

Hey not a Geoffrey Davis fan
Question 1. What were you doing that close to Davis to smell his breath? 2. How do you know how he treats his mother?
3. Did you ever hold any type of protest against violence, Hip Hop, Public Schools, or run for any type of office?
And lastly from your post I bet you were trying to get up close and personel with both Davis'.
Geoff Davis is a winner in our eyes. My family will support his family for ever.. If David Yasskass looses than Geoff Davis will get all the credit (TRUST)

I'm voting for Chris Owens. Yassky has sent me a piece of mail a day asking for my vote. That's just too much mail.

I pretty much agree with every one of Owens' positions. I didn't buy the NYTimes dismissal of him as lacking "political base and passion." I've heard others criticize his idealism.

Jeez, have we come so far that we'll only elect people with pre-existing political connections and a lack of idealism?

Owens has lived in this neighborhood all his life and is part of the community. I think the people of Prospect Heights and Crown Heights would miss an opportunity if they did not to vote for him.