Howard County Maryland Blog

Local Politics and Current Events

Teacher Union Endorsements

Posted by David Keelan on Tuesday, May 23, 2006

UPDATE: Finally got to speak with the Association about their endorsements.  Here is where my friends story diverges from the press reports.  As reported in The Sun, these are the Association's endorsements for the "political season".

If any of the Association endorsed candidates are defeated in their primary elections the Association may (or may not) endorse additional candidates for the General election.

Had a good conversation about Mary Kay Sigaty.  The Association pointed out that they were consistent in their endorsement of Feldmark.  They didn't endorse Sigaty for County Council in 2002 either.  They had previously endorse her for the Board of Education where they think she does good work. 

Other than this nuance the Howard County Times report was accurate.


Dave Wissing mentions the teacher's union endorsements announced in the Howard County Times on Thursday.

On Thursday evening a friend of mine told me that after reading the Howard County story he called the Union to inquire why they hadn't endoresed anyone for the Board of Education.  He was told that the Board of Education is a non-partisan election and as such does not have a primary election.  To which my friend said, "Do you mean your recent endorsements were for the primary elections?"  He was told YES.

So here is my question.  If my friend is not mistaken then where are the other GOP endorsements?  No mention of even one GOP candidate (Wayne Livesay doesn't count because he is really a Democrat) in the Howard County Times.

If this was a Primary endorsement we should have seen mentions for the following:

Merdon, Salazar, D'Asto, Ellrich, and Thewes.

I have already asked the Howard County Education Association for a list of all of their primary endorsements.  If my friend is correct? We may have a very misleading story on our hands leading readers to think that the Union passed over the GOP in favor of the Democrats, or very sloppy editing, writing, or just simple bias.

Will report more on this later.

Update: A reader pointed out an article in the Baltimore Sun that says that the Teacher's Association recommendations are not Primary recommendations.  The apparant discrepencies between the Howard County Times story and that relayed by my friend are addressed by the Sun Article (not directly – I don't want anyone to take that literally).  I look forward to the Associations response as well. The bold IFs and MAY are for accent.  Read the comments and you will understand.


11 Responses to “Teacher Union Endorsements”

  1. Hayduke said

    It sounds to me like whoever was talking to your friend didn’t know what they were talking about. Before you jump into the shallow pool of media criticism, think about the education association in general and the type of candidates they would endorse. Looked at that way, it’s not so shocking that they would choose to endorse only one Republican candidate. And, yes, whether you admit it to yourself or not, Livesay’s a Republican. No amount of saying he’s a Democrat will change that, though given his political past, it might come close.

  2. hocomd said

    Hayduke, I completely understand you point about who the Association is likely to endorse and who they aren’t I wrote the post with that in mind.

    As far as Wayne Livesay – I stand by my comments.

  3. knowitall said

    Either your friend or the person he talked to is wrong. Those are the union’s endorsements. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that teacher unions aren’t usually big fans of Republicans.

  4. lol said

    Keelan, the union will endorse school board candidates later in the year. This is the first round of their endorsements.

    The Baltimore Sun followed the Howard County Times story today and provides the same info:,0,5447854.story?coll=bal-local-howard

    If I were you, I’d delete your post because it makes you look like you have no clue what you’re talking about.

  5. hocomd said

    LOL, thanks for the link. If I had the benefit of the article you posted before I posted my message I probably wouldn't have written it.

    Regarding my post. I will not delete the post. It was what I was thinking about at the moment, and based upon information from my friend. Their is no shame in that.

    I pointed out that my friend also stated that the school board endorsements will be forthcoming. So he got half the story correct.

    All my posts show is that I don't always read the Baltimore Sun cover to cover.

  6. lol said

    Fair enough. But I think your post shows the inclination of the uninformed bloggers to criticize the media and accuse journalists of liberal “bias” – when the uninformed bloggers are actually clueless to the facts of the situation. It’s easy to throw stones, but if you want to be taken seriously, I’d try to get the facts right first before accusing people.

    What’s funny is many times the journalists accused by bloggers of having liberal “bias” are consistent Republican voters. It’s just become so old and unoriginal for the right to blame the media when they don’t like the facts of a situation.

  7. hocomd said

    LOL. I think you need to read the post again. No where did I accuse the Howard County Times of bias. I reported the content of a conversation a friend of mine relayed to me. Based upon the content of my friends conversation with the Association I stated very carefully that we may have a problem.

    I think your jumping the gun and being accusatory. "Uninformed" "Criticisize" "Accuse" "Clueless" "throw stones" "be taken seriously" "get the facts right" Those are all terms and adjectives used by you, and used pointedly.  You will not find any terms such as those in the post you reference. 

    As I stated "If this was a Primary endorsement (which is dependent upon the content of my friends conversation thus conveying the meaning if my friend's story is correct) we should have seen mentions for the following…"  As such I admited in the same sentence through the word IF that my friend might be mistaken.

    Given the reliability of my friend I felt comfortable relaying the conversation.  At the same time, and as I said,if my friends story is true we may have an issue. Additionally, as I stated I called the association for carlification.

    "Glass Windows" is another term you may be familiar with.

  8. lol said

    Fine. I was just trying to give you some constructive criticism. It helps to get your facts right before you post, because it makes you look uniformed. That’s all. Sorry you took offense.

  9. hocomd said

    No offense taken. As you may be able to tell from reading through the comments section, I get a lot of criticism (constructive or otherwise). If I may offer some constructive criticism of my own. I would recommend that in the future you may want to read posts more carefully.

  10. lol said

    Oh, I don’t think I misread anything. You’re just being stubborn and can’t admit you’re wrong.

    You wrote in your original post: “We may have a very misleading story on our hands leading readers to think that the Union passed over the GOP in favor of the Democrats, or very sloppy editing, writing, or just simple bias.”

    That reads pretty clear to me.

    What is misleading about the story? Name one single sentence. Where is the sloppy writing? The sloppy editing? The simple bias? It’s no where.

    In fact, the Howard County Times story answers your questions for you, by saying that the teachers union will endorse school board candidates in the future. It’s spelled out in plain English in the story.

    It’s becoming more and more clear that have no idea what you’re talking about. These are the union’s edorsements, accurately reported. You were wrong. Admit it. At least be a man and admit you’re wrong when it’s so painfully obvious.

  11. hocomd said

    I think you are obsessed and trying to cause a provocation. 

    What is my basis for that claim?

    What is the operative word in the sentence you quote?  MAY.  May is not a definitive term.  If I had said "We clearly and without question have a case of outrageous media bais…" – I would understand you point – and your obsession.  That is not what I said, and if I thought it was settled I would not have contacted the association for clarification.

    Back to you dear writer.  As soon as I saw your fake email address (LOL@AOL.COM), which is by itself provacative, made me wonder and question your motives.  Sorry if I got defensive for that I am sure you didn't mean anything by it.  Additionally, by inititially providing a fake email address (LOL@AOL.COM) means that when you sent your first comment and every follow up comment you were lying, which stretches the credibility of your entire string of comments as well as your sincerity. 

    *** ATTENTION ***

    Your e-mail is being returned to you because there was a problem with its delivery.  The address which was undeliverable is listed in the section labeled: "—– The following addresses had permanent fatal errors —–".

    The reason your mail is being returned to you is listed in the section labeled: "—– Transcript of Session Follows —–".

    The line beginning with "<<<" describes the specific reason your e-mail could not be delivered.  The next line contains a second error message which is a general translation for other e-mail servers.

    Please direct further questions regarding this message to your e-mail administrator.

    –AOL Postmaster

    —– The following addresses had permanent fatal errors —–

    —– Transcript of session follows —–
    … while talking to
    >>> RCPT To:<>
    550 <>… User unknown

    Next time try or something less provocative than LOL.

    Additionally, you were too quick to escallate the rhetoric in you second post, and at the same time you raised the tone to a very high pitch which leads me to believe that you were looking for a confrontation.

    Yet here they are, all of your posts, right here for everyone to see (as well as my responses), "constructive criticisms", fake email address, tone, motive, and all.

    For a lesson in "constructive criticism" take a look at the very first comment on this post from Hayduke.  You might learn something.  Hayduke, that was sincere.

    Comments on this obscure piece of news are now closed.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: