Who is Dan Mansell?

I realize that any press is good press, so therefore, I should just completely ignore those who are running against our incumbents. But, I was passing through Barry Welsh's 50 state page and came across Dan Mansell, Republican candidate for the NC-02. I thought it would be fun to highlight his policies and where they differ from Progressive policies.

Education and School Choice
Now more than ever, education is vital to success in life. As our economy is constantly growing and changing, we must provide our children with the education necessary to succeed.

No difference with the Progressive agenda here.

The federal government can play a role in education, but schools should be controlled to the greatest degree possible on the local level. Dan believes that children should have the ability to escape failing schools and supports ideas such as charter schools and vouchers.

Parents should have the ability to move their child from an under performing school to the educational institution of their choosing that will best facilitate their child’s learning needs.

Ah, Dan. That kind of cut-and-run strategy just won't suit us Progressives. We are at war with illiteracy! What was it your ideological sister said, "Marines never cut and run, cowards do." Don't give up the fight for equal education Dan because this isn't about black and white, it is about rich and poor. The Republican position favors the wealthy over the working class.

Gas Prices and Energy Policy
The United States depends too heavily on foreign resources. It is time that the United States puts together a comprehensive energy plan that focuses on supply, demand, capacity, and alternative sources.

Amen, brother! Preach it!

Capacity remains to be a lingering problem for U.S. oil production. The United States has not built an oil refinery in nearly three decades! With current refineries working at nearly 100% capacity, any unexpected maintenance will directly affect our nations supply and cause gas prices to continue to grow.

Oh, you moronic twit. Capacity is a ruse, a mirage cooked up by the petroleum industry to keep prices high while supplies dwindle.

While addressing capacity and supply, we must also increase research and development into newer technologies and alternative energy sources that reduce consumption and pollution. The United States should lead the world in next generation technology that can provide for a cleaner environment, reduced reliance on foreign energy sources, and new industries that will provide thousands of jobs to future workers.

....that actually sounds reasonable. Kind of like the "Clean Air Initiative" that puts lots more pollution in the air, I suspect the facts of Dan's position would be dirty.

Healthcare
After serving for 2 years on the Johnston Memorial Hospital Board, Dan has seen first hand how important Healthcare can be on a day to day basis.

Access to new drugs must be improved. In order to control skyrocketing healthcare prices, we must cut the red-tape and undue bureaucracy within the FDA so that the approval process for new and potentially lifesaving drugs can be accelerated without sacrificing safety.

Dan also believes that small business who would not otherwise be able to afford healthcare should be able to band with other small businesses to purchase such coverage as a group so that more working Americans will have access to the healthcare coverage that they need.

Dan, the FDA isn't the problem, spending by pharmaceutical companies on advertising (33% of their budget including R&D) is the problem. Get Pharm companies out of the drug pushing business and into the drug designing business.

Veterans’ Affairs
Serving 16 years in the Armed Services, Dan fully understands the sacrifice and hard work put forth by those who served to make the United States the greatest nation in the world. North Carolina is one of America’s leading military states. That is why our congressional delegation must continue to stand firm in our support for our troops and our veterans. Dan will insist that our troops are paid the good salary they deserve and have the supplies and training they need to effectively defend our nation. We must continue to work hard to maintain quality healthcare for vets, and find ways we can modernize an often inefficient VA bureaucracy, to make sure those who wore the uniform receive first rate benefits.

It's always the bureaucracy isn't it Dan? It couldn't be the massive cuts in spending by the Bush administration during a time of war could it? Here are a couple questions to pose for Dan.
1. When will Republicans support good body armor for all our troops?
2. When will Republicans give full healthcare to all of our veterans and stop cutting benefits?
3. When will Republicans stop sending the same soldiers back to Iraq and Afghanistan over and over and draw on new soldiers?
4. If not ever, why?
5. Why is the U.S. building four permanent bases in Iraq if the President claims we will have full withdrawal of our soldiers?
6. When will Republicans make Support our Troops more than a bumper sticker, but instead a fact of life?


There is more on Dan's homepage, which I won't give him the courtesy of a link, but it amounts to the same thing we always hear from Republicans. Well-phrased platitudes backed up by policies that are failures. Republicans have had two chances to run our country unopposed and in both cases, their policies have proven to be failures.

Comments

Lance

That is good customer service, right there.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Good parse of Mansell's spin

Let's tweeze Dan's resume out a little more ...

Dan is the current Chair of the second District GOP. He's real cozy with the Johnston GOP millionaires' guild.

Dan believes that public schools should promote religion. Not all religions, mind you -- just the religion of the majority of Johnston residents -- which of course, looks very much like HIS flavor of religion. You see, as long as Dan is in the majority, Dan believes in "majority rules, minority can go jump in the lake" democracy.

Dan believes that the gas tax should be repealed and the state should keep up the highway system with ... well, Dan hasn't thought this far ahead. He just knows that he likes the way it sounds when he says he wants the gas tax repealed. Consequences are for other people to deal with.

Funny. All of that sounds exactly like any number of the current bunch of GOP f-ups in the Congress right now, doesn't it?

I reckon, if you like the idea of keeping gov't up to it's eyeballs in debt so it can't respond well to emergencies or to unforseen expenses or help out when folks need a leg up every now & then, you might like the way Dan would help the GOP mishandle more of your money in DC. Can't say as I've met many people like that, though.

Congressman Bobby Etheridge, our current Representative from NC-02, is a good old fashioned moderate southern Democrat. He works for the regular folks. He's not a developer or a lawyer. He's an educator. He's pro-military and anti- "government-in-your-personal-business". He wants to give the President the power necessary to do his job, but he gets mad as a hornet when the gov't fails in it's duty to her citizens, or the people's trust gets misused and abused. Congressman Etheridge is what he is, and I and Democrats all over Johnston County thank God every day that he is representing the Second Congressional District in NC.

"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum Then they charged the people a dollar 'n a half just to see 'em. Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone? They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."

egg-celent

My mom's family was from Benson and Johnston County, I spent a lot of summer's down there and if there is one thing they y'all don't tolerate, it's a fool.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

The Real Dan Mansell

If You want the real story about Dan Mansell's life, please make sure you e me! I can tell you what is Bull *hit & what is not! How You might want to know? Because i have know him ALL his life!!!

Excellent truth-ectomy

It takes some work to sift through this kind of bullshit. Thanks for doing it . . . and for not including a link.

:)

Why are Progressives opposed to Public Charter Schools?

Why are Progressives opposed to Public Charter Schools?

They do not take money “away” from the public schools, because they are PUBLIC schools. They do have the advantage of being free of most, but not all, traditional public school regulation. The children of the “wealthy” have no more chance of being admitted to the charter schools than the “poor.” Many charter schools were started by and serve low income communities and disadvantaged children. People, poor, middle class, and rich, are lined up to get their children into charter schools, but the Democratic Party establishment and North Carolina Association of Educators refuse to remove the cap.

So other than the NCAE opposing them, why do Progressives oppose Public Charter Schools?

Lie within a lie.

Progressives don't oppose charter schools, at least not all of them. I've seen a few good ones that serve lower-income areas and some that serve rural areas. The other side of that coin is vouchers, which leads to no good.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

I can't speak for anyone else

and I've never heard that Progressives as a group are against charter schools.

I do, however, have experience with Charter schools here in Charlotte and it's not a pretty picture. Performance is very low, there have been significant financial difficulties resulting in things like loss of hot lunch program, and there seems to be a problem keeping teachers because of salary issues.

One rightwinger makes two wrongs?

For a minute there I thought Oggie was back. Maybe you've had one too many Kamikazes over at the Hemlock Foundation, or not enough.

NCAE is not opposed to charter schools though it has strong opinions about them.

The fact that JLF supports charter and private schools and JLF is opposed to NCAE may provide enough evidence for a Pope's bishop to use Aristotelian logic to make such a sweeping statement but certainly not for the Socratic method.

Progressive are not opposed to charter schools. Was there really a question in there?

Narrow down the differnces.

I asked the question to try and narrow down the differences. Mansell web site said he “supports ideas such as charter schools and vouchers.” The criticism of that was “That kind of cut-and-run strategy just won't suit us Progressives.” The answers is that it just the voucher part you guys oppose, not the charter school part.

I would still ask that if the NCAE does not oppose charter schools, and Progressive Democrats support charter schools, and Republicans support charter schools, then how come it is impossible to get the 100 school cap lifted?

Cap

I think you know the answer to that question. It's not impossible and, it's not political, even though Art Pope's Americans for Prosperity is trying to make it so.

Despite some obvious successes there have been deficiencies and mis-management. To my knowledge a true accounting of the academic performance and financial management of the 100 has not been made to justify expanding an ongoing experiment.

Are you asking for swift action in NC?

I think that we can both agree that asking for swift action in NC on any issue is a tough sell. Take the lottery, we were the 48th state or so to approve one. Or Tax Increment Financing (49th state I think). Or...

NC has a lot of things. Innovation is not one of them.

First Fully Fund the Schools

Then we'll talk about vouchers and other whatnot. Competition could be good for schools if they begin from a level playing field. However, when we have schools that suffer from inadequate funding and poorly paid teachers (how can we expect the best and brightest when the salaries remain uncompetitive?), then we will perpetually be leaving someone behind.

I believe it's the responsibility of government to provide complete funding for our schools. Once they're funded, then we can experiment with Charters, Vouchers, and whatever else you've got on your mind.

Scrutiny Hooligans - http://www.scrutinyhooligans.us

Well, there you go again ...

using that "responsibility" word in the same sentence with that "government" word. I think GOPer's have a hard time with any concept, idea or sentence that combines "responsibility" and "government".

But seriously, it is, indeed, the responsibility of good government to put it's entire weight behind giving all of it's citizens the opportunity for a good education. Democrats believe this and progressives (of all flavors) believe this and are willing to act upon that belief.

I have often wondered ... sometimes out loud ... how it makes any economic sense at all to not invest everything and anything in schools that serve children from low income homes. Logic would tell us that a mindless carrot/stick system of testing which removes ever more resources from struggling schools only makes the schools' ability to perform up to standards more difficult.

It seems the last thing fiscally conservative Americans should accept is an educational system that appears to purposefully keep the poorest students from getting an excellent education -- the very thing required if we truly want folks to move themselves out of poverty.

"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum Then they charged the people a dollar 'n a half just to see 'em. Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone? They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."

The irony is that is exactly what conservatives would say

“It seems the last thing fiscally conservative Americans should accept is an educational system that appears to purposefully keep the poorest students from getting an excellent education -- the very thing required if we truly want folks to move themselves out of poverty.”

The irony is that the above is exactly what conservatives would say about liberals and progressives, that it is the liberal and progressives who support the CURRENT STATUS QUO “educational system that appears to purposefully keep the poorest students from getting an excellent education.”

Most all conservatives do fully support the public education. Some conservatives see choice, as in vouchers or tuition grants for private schools, as a component of educational reform, but not as a replacement of public education. (A few pure libertarian types actually support a concept of “separation of school and state,” with no public funding through either vouchers or direct public expenditure.)

But, I do not intend to get in a debate on vouchers. That issue is obviously divisive at the K through 12 level, but okay with you guys at the college level (Pell Grants, Legislative Tuition grants) or preschool level (Smart Start, Moore at Four)? My point is that there is common ground on the need to improve public education, even though there are going to be differences on HOW to improve public education.

Ah, but at what cost?

"Most all conservatives do fully support the public education."

I find this statement to be laughable, dear S'GOP.

How, pray tell, does one "fully support ... public education" when one makes a habit of cutting public education budgets every chance one gets?

"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum Then they charged the people a dollar 'n a half just to see 'em. Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone? They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."

Don't let the facts ge in the way, but document a single cut

Don't let the facts get in the way, but please document a single time that conservatives and/or Republicans have cut a public education budget, or even proposed to do so?

Look at the budgets proposed by Republican Governor Jim Martin, or enacted by the Republican House majority from 1995 to 1999. Look at any of the proposed budgets by Republicans.

To save time, are you arguing that every time a liberal Democrat says increase education spending 10%, and a conservative Republican says increase spending 6%, that is the same as a 4% cut?

No one in the real world thinks that an increase of “only” six percent is a cut, because someone else proposed an even bigger increase.

National Level

It was an ostensibly conservative administration that decided to place a national mandate on public schools and then fractionally fund it.

It is the current crop

of GOP that we need to be discussing, not that which existed ten years ago. That GOP is wounded and bleeding thanks to the rightwingers you've got busting down your doors.

And this crop of GOP laizze-faire free market fanatics honestly thinks that moving money from the public education model to a government funded private education model is the way to go. They have no interest in fixing poorly performing schools. They wish to eliminate them and replace them with private schools.

And yes, if funding for education (including teacher pay) has not gone up in recent years due to heavy budget constraints and one party wants to make the previous years' shortfalls up, but the other party would rather cut some more corporate taxes or the taxes that build our roads than catch the education budget up to where it ought to be, the latter party is not as pro-education as the first. That's pretty simple and clear.

"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum Then they charged the people a dollar 'n a half just to see 'em. Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone? They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."

Local Level

I taught high school for three years, and while I was there, I spent a lot of time talking to teachers and administrators at my school and others about what's wrong with public education and how it can be fixed. I'll admit that I left with views even less clear on the subject than when I went in.

But here's something I learned: people are not inclined to trust teachers. Even in a wonderful education environment, there's something that would make a person uneasy about sending his kid behind effectively closed doors to have some other people put their fingers in said child's brain for 6 hours a day. Parents are primed to accept a narrative in which educators are incompetent or in bad faith, whether it's true or not.

This isn't to say that some educators aren't bad or stupid, or that there aren't problems with American public education. My point is that when I've heard people on the local level taking advantage of this predilection to steer a the community away from giving public schools what they need to do their jobs, the demagogues are conservatives, Republicans. When local pols prey on the irrational component of parents' fears to require meaningless milestones or yet another standardized test, it ain't Democrats wearing the boogieman suit.

Not that that's surprising. Free public education for all is an obvious target for the free market über alles crowd. How annoying for them that efficiency and profit should take a backseat to the public good once in a while.

The facts and real policy debate, versus hysterical propaganda

Thank you, I’ll take a win on that round. No one gave a single example of where Republicans enacted or proposed a budget that reduced spending on public education. Lance’s best shot was a slight variation of the argument I anticipated. Lance conceded that Bush INCREASED spending on education, but said it was not enought as the mandate. Only on a left-wing liberal progressive Democrat blog would Bush and a Republican Congress increasing Federal spending on education from $34.9 Billion in FY 2001 to $63.7 Billion in FY2005, be considered the equivalent of a cut!

Now Lance and the rest of you guys can make the sophisticated argument that Democrats are always willing to spend more money on public education than Republicans, and therefore Democrats are for education and Republicans are against education.

Of course you can argue that government needs to spend more money in all areas, health care, environment, public safety and justice, roads, cultural resources, etc.

Then we get to real public policy issues and debate. Given all the needs, what will bring the best benefit for each dollar spent? It is not realistic to say spend more money on everything. (For any economics majors, including Kenysians, out there, remember such concepts as diminishing returns and marginal utility?) And there are limits on the burden of taxation and public expenditure. At a certain level the economy will start shrinking, and you will be fighting over dividing up a smaller and smaller pie, while overall everyone will be worse off.

You do not have to be a philosophical, limited government, conservative, to consider the difficult question of what mix of a private economy and government expenditure will result in the greatest good for the greatest numbers. (Yes, see utilitarianism, and I prefer the John Stuart Mill version).

On the other hand, you guys seem to find it easier to just raise the level of hysterical propaganda than engage in serious debate. Lance came back with the brilliant policy statement “Free public education for all is an obvious target for the free market über alles crowd.” .

Okay, to keep it simple, I will again challenge your rhetoric. Please give a single actual example where a North Carolina Republican candidate or office holder opposed or targeted “free public education.” Heck, show me one quote where your favorite nemesis, the John Locke Foudation, targeted free public education.

Pth! Bleh!

Don't put words in my mouth. I wasn't offering an answer to your question, but sharing my own experience in education. I don't really expect you to value that, but don't try to twist it into something else.

If you worked for me and I tripled your work load while only doubling your pay, what would you call it?

Finally, let me suggest a reason why you're not getting an answer to your question. The public isn't interested in killing off free public education. A political party that is, then, would need alternative language to describe their goal. I recommend you at this point to Anglico's recent reading of the NCGOP platform on education.

I'll turn the question around, since I imagine you to be a member of the free market über alles crowd: should the state be in the business of running schools where any citizen can obtain a free and sound basic education up to the high school level? If you don't have a one word answer (that doesn't require a "but" or an "if"), then I'll agree that us liberals owe you an answer to your question.

JLF education budget cut proposals

Freedom Budget 2006
John Locke Foundation Alternative Spending Priorities

Education: Total Savings
Learn and Earn $13,013,174
Small Specialty High School $5,914,527
Disadvantage Students Supplemental Funding (DSSF) $49,197,440
Literacy Coaches and Training $6,667,400
School-based ABC Bonuses $90,000,000
National Board (NBPTS) Certification $3,274,500 $0
Mentor Teachers $8,100,140
Increased Nursing Program Funds $2,050,000
Area Health Education Centers $2,300,000
Translational Medicine $2,500,000
Kannapolis Research Campus $9,445,000
Other Biotech (BRITE-NC Central, BTEC-NC State) $4,500,000
Institute of Medicine and Hunt Institute $1,000,000
2+2 E-Learning $1,000,000
NC Military Business Center $1,000,000
Family House @ UNC Hospitals $1,000,000
Teacher Scholarship Loan $1,000,000
Center for Public Television $11,488,459
Minority student set-aside funds $2,506,825
Center for School Leadership (MTEC, PEP, etc) $15,726,376
Redirect Research Overhead $62,800,000
Industry Training $14,198,556
7.5% Less Non-Teaching Position Funds $60,760,384
25% Less Assistant Principal Funds $25,849,903
Redirect 35% of Teaching Assistant Funds to Teachers $143,398,976
Faculty and Administration 5% pay raises $121,125,000
Education Total $659,816,660

You reckon that's enough

to keep ol' GOPSocs busy for a few minutes?

Nice, gregflynn. :) I like your style.

"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum Then they charged the people a dollar 'n a half just to see 'em. Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone? They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."

End of Argument

Disadvantage Students Supplemental Funding (DSSF) $49,197,440

M-Oral.

The Republican Party is Immoral. End of Argument.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

A story for JLF.

When my son was born he ended up in the ICN. He was in and out with no problem, but the boy next to him was really premature and was in the ICN for 8 WEEKS. His lower-income family (I got to meet them) had to drive from WILMINGTON to see him. The mom and dad were still working and taking care of their other kids and could not afford to stay in a hotel. Their child was in the ICN for 8 weeks and they could not afford to visit him. Which is why, moral leaders came up with the following.

Family House at UNC Hospitals will provide an affordable, nurturing “home away from home” to critical care patients, their family members and caregivers who travel a considerable distance for evaluation or treatment.

* 60% of UNC Hospitals’ patients travel more than one hour to receive care.
* The average length of stay for a critical care patient is eight weeks.
* The average cost of a hotel room near UNC Hospitals is $70 per night, the equivalent of $3,920 for an 8-week stay.

JLF. You want to cut funding for that? You are, with no doubt, the most immoral and evil people I have ever heard from. Yes, evil. If you believe in God, Jesus, and good my friends here at BlueNC, then you have to believe in Hell, Satan, and evil on earth. There is evil and one of its hydra-heads is the JLF and its immoral policies.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me