Why D.C.'s Next Mayor Ought to Keep Michelle Rhee (Who Doesn't Love My Husband)

I think this is a great article that is well summed up by the last paragraph. The truth is that DC has to keep Rhee. Because it one thing for politicians to make false promises about education reform, and it is another thing to give up on them before they have a chance to reach their full potential. Don't even focus on her being the 4th chancellor in the last decade, 3 years probably beats out any chancellor DC has had in the last 25 years. That is for two reasons every chancellor in DC either gets discouraged or burned on a stake for lack of progress. One thing we all know that Rhee is not going to get discouraged. However if she leaves or is fired, we are back to square one, the same square DC and most of this country for that matter can never seem to get past when it comes to education reform.

Please keep Michelle Rhee in Washington, D.C. She has worked for excellence and opportunity for all students. Her work shows courage and a willingness to fight for what she knows is the right way to provide an optimal learning environment for students.

the best argument there is for school leaders to be granted contracts which do not coincide with the political terms of their sponsors. If Ms Rhee had been granted a 6 or 8 year contract the new mayor would have to honor it and try to work with the chancellor for the good of the school system and the children it serves.

Welcome to the new world. In DC, you have signs in Chinatown saying Rhee is racist and hates black people. There was a guy on Friday handing out flyers near the Gray campain office (I don't think he was affiliated with Gray) saying the ice queen should take her racist, slated eyes back to Korea or Sacramento. A Korean woman who is married to a black man is a racist. The national discussion on race needs to include everybody. Racisim is not longer the only issue for the white man.

It would be an opportunity, should it come, for Mr. Gray to exhbit a profile in courage. Thanks, Melinda, for a thoughtful, challenging piece.

This is an interesting article for a variety of reasons. One of the amazing things happening in DC now is the decision of the voters to eschew a focus on results in favor of a focus on process and personality. Process and results do not necessarily need to be mutually exclusive and Mayor Fenty has done himself no favors by not better engaging the community. But the fact that people are explicitly stating that they take their mayor's interpersonal style so personally that they will vote against the man who they also say has improved the city is mind boggling. Now here is a writer who is endorsing Michelle Rhee while very actively and openly not taking her style personally. This is especially remarkable because compared to the vast majority of DC residents this writer would have a very personal reason (the open conflict between her husband and Michelle Rhee) to take Michelle Rhee's style personally. This sentiment seems to echo comments by Jim Graham, the ward 1 council member, who said he supported Michelle Rhee even though he doesn't like her personally because of the results she has produced. So the question is...where is that line where people are willing to dislike someone personally while supporting them due to results? And is it possible to drive for those results without alienating all the people who prefer the feeling of being included to the positive results that sometimes only come about precisely because they weren't included? I feel like this is the issue facing American Democracy today and there are definitely strong parallels between Fenty and Obama, two men who are accomplishing essentially exactly what they said they were going to do. Apologies for the long post.

Ms. Hennenberger, It is a pleasure to read your stuff. You are smart, articulate and have a sense of humor- hich, of course, all married folk know is essential. Carol Ziegler