The quality of teachers and teacher-education continues to be a contentious focus of political debate internationally. Many have identified predominantly negative discursive representations of educators in politics, perpetuating myths of sub-standard teacher and teacher-educator quality. Much research has investigated the incentives and effects of these prevailing political discourses, but less researched is how such discourses operate and the textual features that characterise them. We employ critical discourse analysis (CDA) to explore some specific textual features that construct teacher quality and initial-teacher-education (ITE) quality as a problem in Australian political texts. Through a micro-level analysis of 14 political speeches, media releases, and debates spanning a ten-year period we identify several recurring presuppositions about teacher 'quality'. These problematic assumptions include the belief that teacher quality does not meet public expectations, that ITE is inadequate and fails to appropriately select and prepare graduates, and that there is one universal form of 'best' teacher and best way to prepare them. We also identify and problematise representations of educators as inept, irresolute parties, dependent upon the guidance of the Government, who is positioned as steadfast and proficient, and perfectly placed to solve the 'quality problem'. These discursive constructions perpetuate myths surrounding 'quality' despite counter-evidence with significant implications for teachers, teacher-educators, and public confidence in the profession.