Famously opposed educators come together:
"Our macro-level differences do not interfere with our mutual respect for each other’s work.
That itself is something we hope our schools can help teach young people.
Our differences helped us consider ways to rethink our ideas and find places where those holding different views might compromise, and perhaps learn to live under one umbrella.
What we hope to model is the idea of democratic engagement, the notion that citizens need to think about and debate their beliefs and values with others who do not necessarily share all of them.
We want the issues connected to schooling to be a matter for discussion among all people who care.
We don’t have it in our power to solve the problems that confront American education—not those that take place within the schoolhouse, much less those that have a direct impact on children’s ability to learn, such as their unequal access to health care, housing, and myriad other life necessities.
But we hope that we have it in our power to provoke the thinking that must precede, accompany, and follow any attempt to reform—perhaps, even better, to transform—our schools."
Well...
Honestly, what I wrote is accurate. Maybe "blotchy" lacked substance and I will accept rebuke for that. But the rest I can back up and any brief exploration of these people will back up all the accusations. Anti-semetic in particular has solid meaning and is not mere name calling. I didn't even get into O'Reilly's calls for terrorist attacks on American cities. I chose my words carefully and, with the already noted use of "blotchy," I stand by those words as appropriate and accurate.