Unethical Quote Of The Month (But Thanks For The Candor, Terry!): Former Va. Governor And Current Gubernatorial Candidate Terry McAuliffe

“I don’t think parents should be telling schools what to teach.”

Terry McAuliffe, Democratic candidate for Governor of Virginia, in  the televised debate with Republican adversary Glenn Youngkin

Every now and then one of the crypto-totalitarian Democrats or progressives slip up and rip his or her mask off, and McAuliffe’s sudden outburst of damning truth was a real Jack Nicholson “You’re damn right I did!” moment. I know virtually nothing about Glenn Youngkin, but I know too much about Clinton bag-man McAuliffe, and if God’s in his heaven and there is justice in the cosmos, this outburst will keep McAuliffe, who is corrupt and almost as slimy as the Clintons, out of the Governor’s mansion. It isn’t the reason I won’t be voting for Terry, who was Bill’s fundraiser, only because it doesn’t have to be. There are so many other reasons, as his Ethics Alarms dossier shows and the alarming essay below from my previous platform, The Ethics Scoreboard, amply demonstrates.

But enough of McAuliffe for now, for this post isn’t really about him as much as it is about his quote and what (and who—Terry was also Chair of the Democratic National Committee) it represents. For it expresses fairly the current attitude of the Left regarding public education. Children are in school for progressives, Democrats, Marxists and anti-American activists to indoctrinate. Gabriel Gipes, the so-called “Antifa Teacher” was an extreme case, but lazy parents and apathetic citizens allowed the Left to take over the educational establishment (as well as other institutions) a long time ago. Now they are shocked—shocked!-–with the advent of critical race theory and the “1619 Project’s” pollution of public school curricula—to find that our children have been and are being programmed to accept progressive cant as truth, and even to oppose the Bill of Rights as well as the foundational culture of the nation itself.

Americans allowed this to happen.

My son is nearing 27 now; his mother and I pulled him out of school for good 13 years ago when he was 14, after four consecutive Virginia schools, two private, one public, and one a Catholic school (though we are not Catholic), betrayed our trust. He was home-schooled thereafter, and he missed a lot. I loved public school, but in Arlington, Massachusetts, when I was growing up, no teacher would be able to get away with, for example, showing Al Gore’s climate change documentary in class as “fact,” one of many episodes that drove us to quit Virginia’s school system.

I’m sure the McAuliffe campaign is trying to “walk” back Terry’s gaffe; I haven’t checked, frankly, because McAuliffe is a proven liar, and it doesn’t matter what he says. I’ve seen what he does. However, his statement stands for his party’s now entrenched belief that the government should decide what children should be taught and how, and parents have no say in the matter, because, as in everything else, our elected officials are our betters, our rulers, and they know best. It isn’t really “We the People,” but “We the Smart People Who Get To Dictate To The Little People Who Are Just Too Stupid, Selfish And Racist To Take Care Of Themselves.”

Education is now treated as a means to ideological ends, with the teaching of skills, tools, and facts taking a back seat to preparing the young to take their places in the ideological battle lines. A poll  released by 2021 College Free Speech Rankings in which 37,000 students at 159 top-ranked U.S. colleges and universities were surveyed found that 66% of college students think shouting down speakers to stop them from speaking is a legitimate form of free speech. Stopping speech is free speech. Where would students ever get that idea? “War is Peace.” (The Left fervently believes what the 66% advocate, as this attack on Prof. Turley by “Above the Law” nicely illustrates.)

And it isn’t only education where we are seeing this attitude take over.

The schools know best. Three California parents filed a lawsuit accusing the California state school curriculum of violating the U.S. Constitution over an Ethnic Studies lesson that asks students to pray and chant to Aztec gods. Sorry, Terry McAuliffe believes that the parents have no standing. Only ignorant parents would object to a curriculum guide that justified the use of Aztec religious proverbs and chants by explaining, “This section includes several ethnic studies-oriented chants, proverbs and affirmations.These can be used as energizers to bring the class together, build unity around ethnic studies principles and values, and to reinvigorate the class following a lesson.”

But using Christian or Jewish proverbs to “build unity” would be illegal.

There are slippery slopes on both sides of the education issue, and we’ve seen how treacherous and destructive both can be. Parents must have a significant role in deciding what is taught and how; the government’s role is to ensure competence and objectivity in the classroom, and to ensure that a curriculum teaches children how to engage in critical thinking while providing them with the skills to be productive and independent-minded citizens. The problem we are seeing now, and McAuliffe’s quote exemplifies it, is a crisis of respect and trust, core ethical values. The so-called “elites” do not respect the public. Meanwhile, the public increasingly does not trust the elites, who have disgraced themselves and betrayed American ideals repeatedly over the past decade. That a Democratic candidate for governor with ties to the Clinton mob would be so confident of government’s right to dictate its agenda to the young that he would declare it on television should be an epiphany for us.

I hope it is.

***

And now for your enjoyment and edification, here is my Ethics Scoreboard post from 2009 on the ethics of Once and maybe Future Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, written the first time he ran:

“Terry McAuliffe, former Clinton ally, former DNC Chair, political fundraiser extraordinaire and all-round wheeler-dealer, ran to fill the vacated Governor’s chair in Virginia. Out of the blue, Ralph Nader suddenly reappeared and revealed that McAuliffe, when he was Chairman of the Democratic National Committee in 2004, offered him an undisclosed amount of money to pull out of 19 battleground states in the Presidential election, so that he wouldn’’t pull crucial votes from Senator John Kerry. The story actually had been told before, in a post-election book by a Nader staffer. McAuliffe’s camp’s immediate reaction was to brush aside the accusation as old news, much the way ex-slugger Mark McGwire kept telling Congress that he “didn’t want to talk about the past” when he was asked if he had used steroids. Later, a spokesman said that McAuliffe never offered Nader “any money” to “drop out of the race,” which, coming from a Clintonite, could easily mean that he did offer money to Nader’s campaign to leave the race in certain states. Since Nader, for all his faults, delusions and excesses, has never lacked for integrity, and since Nader’s description of McAuliffe as “slipperier than an eel in olive oil” would be probably be endorsed as accurate even by McAuliffe’s best friends, the Scoreboard would tend strongly to believe Nader.

“Assuming that the story is true (and we will probably never know), let us do a little ethical inventory:

  • Is such an offer illegal? Almost certainly not: federal election laws permit parties almost unlimited discretion in using campaign funds. Is it unethical? Of course, just like paying your daughter’s sweetheart, whom you regard as beneath her, a large sum to move to France so she’ll marry the son of the tycoon next door is unethical. Voters have a right to have options, and the big parties shouldn’’t be using their superior wealth to buy off the competition rather so they won’t have to subject themselves to democracy. If it would be all right for the Democratic Party to pay to have Ralph Nader not run, why wouldn’’t it be just as legitimate for the GOP to pay Barrack Obama not to run?

  • Does this incident tell Virginians anything important about Terry McAuliffe? Sure. It tells us that he’s a committed utilitarian, who will violate basic principles of openness, process, citizenship and fairness to achieve objectives he thinks are important. The password is “ruthless.” Does it tell them anything new? No.

  • Does McAuliffe think paying a candidate not to run is a legitimate political tactic? Because he can figure out that it wouldn’’t be a popular tactic, I doubt that McAuliffe would give a straight answer to that question. Someone should ask him, though.

  • Was Nader being ethical by revealing this now? Tough question. Nader felt that the Democrats did him dirt in 2004 by trying to keep him off some state ballots and clearly holds McAuliffe responsible, so his revelation carries the odor of vengeance about it. And if this bribe attempt happened, why didn’’t Nader reveal it immediately?

  • Is this just politics as usual? Sadly, the answer is probably “yes”. Rod Blagojevich claimed that his attempted auctioning of the Illinois Senate seat was only unseemly because it ended up on tape, that what he did was just old-fashioned political horse-trading and that his critics were doing impressions of Claude Rains in “Casablanca” (as in, “I’m shocked! Shocked!!”) Maybe. Even probably. There are some political junkies who think voter fraud and collecting votes from the cemeteries are part of a grand old tradition too, but wrong is still wrong. When someone with a lot of money tries to use it to limit my voting options without my knowledge, that is ethically indefensible, and constitutes an attempt to apply the methods of totalitarianism to democracy.

Politicians like Terry McAuliffe—and they include the Clintons, Tom DeLay, Nancy Pelosi and many others in both political camps—really don’t think in terms of ethical or unethical. Their entire orientation is acquiring and wielding power: what works, and doesn’’t send you to jail, is good. What doesn’t, or breaks the law, is bad. Whether you think such people make trustworthy public servants or not is up to you, as it is currently up to Virginians whether they want someone of this orientation as their governor.

I do not.

14 thoughts on “Unethical Quote Of The Month (But Thanks For The Candor, Terry!): Former Va. Governor And Current Gubernatorial Candidate Terry McAuliffe

  1. A week ago, I finished the “Summer for the Gods” book you recommended about the Scopes trial.

    One paragraph stood out to me regarding the issue of academic freedom in universities which is equally applicable to public schools and other institutions:

    The American Philosophical Association and the American Psychological Association formed a committee to look into the dismissal of a professor of Philosophy named John Mecklin from Lafayette College who was fired because he taught that social evolution, not revealed truth, shaped the development of religious ideas. The committee determined that the College had the right to fire Mecklin, however, they warned that “American colleges and universities fall into two classes” Either they guaranteed academic freedom or they “served as institutions of denominational or political propaganda”.(pg 77)

  2. “This section includes several ethnic studies-oriented chants, proverbs and affirmations. These can be used as energizers to bring the class together, build unity around ethnic studies principles and values, and to reinvigorate the class following a lesson.”

    This passage immediately rang a bell…

    • I saw that when I was a teenager in the 1980s. I was creeped out by it, it helped propel my fascination with the origins of the Third Reich and was the first thing I ever saw actor Bruce Davison in.

  3. Ugh. Terry McAuliffe. My recollection is he got his start by being a run of the mill D.C. lawyer who made about ten million dollars flipping cell phone licenses when they were “auctioned off” by the Feds. There are evidently a number of people who pulled the same scam and immediately became Democrat Party insiders and influence peddlers. Talk about crony capitalists. Despicable.

  4. Something I find interesting about a portion of the left in this country is how religiously they feel about public schools. If you criticize the quality of teaching or the influence of less than stellar peers, suddenly you are against education. If you home school your kids, you are the worst type of anti-intellectual, even if you are an educated person yourself!

    Yet, we are told over and over that public schools are “neutral.” They allegedly don’t push any agenda or indoctrinate students into any particular ideology. Instead, students are just learning “information.” If public schools really are so neutral, the left wouldn’t freak out so much over them because the loss of a student wouldn’t be as great. Deep down, the left knows that public schools are teaching a particular way of thinking, even if not outright. People who go to public schools and are influenced by their peers end up liberal, and the trend accelerates in college. When I see how liberal teachers have become, it’s not really a surprise. Education is only as good as the people teaching.

    What really seems to motivate this portion of the left is the fear that they don’t get to control the education of children and therefore indoctrinate them into leftist ideology. This guy’s statement wasn’t an accident.

  5. “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what to teach.”
    Terry McAuliffe

    That statement and what sooner8728 wrote above that…

    “Deep down, the left knows that public schools are teaching a particular way of thinking, even if not outright. People who go to public schools and are influenced by their peers end up liberal, and the trend accelerates in college. When I see how liberal teachers have become, it’s not really a surprise.”

    Got me thinking about Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt’s interviews about her book Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, it seems that there are some similarities to what’s happed in our schools and what Iserbyt was claiming would happen in our schools.

    “If you can indoctrinate then when they’re children, you’ll have them forever.”
    Adolf Hitler and Others

    • Everyone can make up their own minds about Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt based on her own words.

      Here is a LINK to a video interview of Iserbyt, I think the interview was in 2006.  The video is in seven segments (the 8th is excerpts) and it automatically moves from one segment to the next. I copied the link so it skips the introduction portion of the initial video segment, if the link doesn’t do that then go to 5:42 on the video slider to skip the introduction. Total time of the video is around 75 minutes.

      There’s certainly some correlation = causation arguments in the interview that are really “out there”, make up your own minds about her opinions.

      A couple of interesting segments…

      At 5:43 in the second segment of the video Iserbyt says something that rings true about how the hive mind (as I call it) we’re facing today deals with people that question them “…if you get really close to the truth, you’re called a kook…”.

      The overall discussion of “change agents” throughout the interview is interesting and relatable to today.

      In the 5th video segment at 8:38 Iserbyt starts talking about the 5 prongs of the 100 year plan and there are certainly some things that are relatable to today.
      1.Gradualism 2.The Dialectic 3.Semantic Deception 4.Big Bucks/Fiat Currency 5.The Media

      The underlying theme that may not be as noticeable unless you’re really paying attention is that regardless of the political party in power, the power of the government over the people is growing and the power of the people is decreasing. This is a one-to-one inversely proportional relationship, as you allow the government (whether it is local, state or federal) to gain power incrementally it shifts everything towards a centralized government control, the people always lose their power over the government when they relinquish power to the government until their power is virtually gone.

  6. Perhaps when politicians running for office claim they will support educational funding (which they all do) we have to question them about having the dollars follow the child rather than simply boosting the budgets of local school districts that use the funding to increase salaries or hire new program – read social services – directors.
    I have watched educational budgets grow without any improvements in outcomes so why throw money at a system that has a poor track record for achievement.

  7. Is this just politics as usual? Sadly, the answer is probably “yes”. Rod Blagojevich claimed that his attempted auctioning of the Illinois Senate seat was only unseemly because it ended up on tape, that what he did was just old-fashioned political horse-trading and that his critics were doing impressions of Claude Rains in “Casablanca” (as in, “I’m shocked! Shocked!!”) Maybe. Even probably. There are some political junkies who think voter fraud and collecting votes from the cemeteries are part of a grand old tradition too, but wrong is still wrong…

    I remember an old hand once saying, I think in an Irish context, “it was bad enough when they were just voting dead men, but when they started voting our dead men!”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.