1,000 DAYS

Tomorrow night, President Obama will be giving his State of the Union address.  In it, he will doubtless take the opportunity to throw some barbs at the Do Nothing Congress™ he has become so fond of demonizing.  He will push his "We Can't Wait™" schtick, trying to sell the idea that Congress or that pesky Constitution are holding him back from the fundamental change he so desperately wants, in a vain attempt to justify his unconstitutional power grab.

Interestingly enough, tomorrow is also another major milestone for America.  It marks the one thousandth day since the democrat-led Senate last passed a budget.

So who is more do-nothing - the House republicans who have passed nearly thirty jobs bills since they took power a year ago, or the Senate democrats who refuse to bring a single one of them to the floor for a vote in an effort to carry water for President Obama's Do Nothing Congress™ campaign push?

When the president talks about the obstructionist Congress, he's not just whistling Dixie.  But in true democratic fashion, he is projecting the inactivity for which his own party is responsible onto House Republicans, while his lapdog press happily echo it for all it's worth.  He has to run against a Do Nothing Congress™, because the other option is to run on his record, and we all know that's a non-starter.  And if you don't have a Do Nothing Congress™, why, good ol' Harry Reid is there to make sure you do!

It will be interesting to see how his 'free markets are evil' meme goes over, considering polls like this.  According to that, it certainly doesn't seem like pushing a top-down, government managed economy is going to be a big seller in November.  But when you live in a bubble and refuse to give credence to such polls, the most unexpected things happen.

There's another benefit to Senate dems refusing to pass a budget.  One can't help but come to the conclusion that passing a budget that calls for, say, $1.6 trillion in deficit spending would raise a hue and cry and put the excessive federal spending of this administration in the spotlight, as happened with President Obama's (I use the term loosely) "budget".  Passing contentious continuing resolutions instead keeps the spending blurred and harder to keep track of - and offers the additional bonus of a handy bludgeon to go after republicans to make them seem stingy and mean for saying no to the out-of-control spending.  Think about it.  When are you more responsible with your money - when you are trying to keep to a budget or when you just spend as the need (or desire) arises?  It's a no brainer.  Well, except in Washington.

Delusional lefties whine that republicans have kept them from passing a budget with filibusters and other dirty tricks since Obama took office.  Well, as far as the past year goes, that's a stretch considering the House actually passed a budget, the Ryan Plan, which the Senate refused to even acknowledge and a second, President Obama's, that the Senate voted down unanimously - but at least it got a vote.  But what about the other two years of the Obama administration - one of which featured a democratic House majority and Senate super majority, and the other with just  plain old democratic majorities in both houses?  How is it that they were able to pass Obamacare - arguably the most unpopular piece of legislation to be signed into law in recent memory - but they couldn't pass a budget? 

One thousand days of irresponsibility at the hands of Democrats in Washington.  Here's hoping we only have 287 more to go before REAL change comes to town.

Read more...

1,000 DAYS

A SCANDALOUS EDUCATION

There has been a lot of news out of our public schools over the past few months of varying degrees of importance.  From epic fails to blatant corruption, our schools have become less about education and more about social agendas and the illusion of success.
First - and silliest - on the list is the school lunch fiasco out in California.  The Los Angeles Unified School District implemented Michelle Obama's program for healthier school lunches and created a new menu that was apparently taste-tested in the exclusive, vegetarian enclaves of Beverly Hills.  The new, upgraded menu had such teen-friendly gems as quinoa and black-eyed pea salad and black bean burgers.  These exotic offerings have resulted in a record number of students dropping out of the lunch program, opting instead to bring Flamin' Hot Cheetos and sodas from home.  How bad is it?  Well, according to the LA Times, a junk food black market has sprung up in the wake of the new menu:

At many campuses, an underground market for chips, candy, fast-food burgers and other taboo fare is thriving.

Oh, if only liberals were as good at encouraging the growth of the free market as they are at encouraging the growth of black markets due to their policies....
They are now revamping the menu, hoping to find healthier versions of the foods kids love, such as pizza with a whole wheat crust, reduced fat cheese and reduced sodium sauce.  Might I also suggest baked chicken nuggets instead of fried?  Perhaps a salad bar (maybe with an optional grilled chicken breast) or hamburgers made of a beef/turkey blend to reduce fat but keep flavor on whole wheat buns with lettuce, tomato and reduced fat cheese.  Some kids might still turn their noses up at the food, but there is a better chance of the kids' palates "adjusting" to these changes than vegetable curry and lentil and brown rice cutlets.  One would think that would just be common sense, but, then again, this is California we're talking about.

On a more serious note, there are a few school scandals coming out of the state of Georgia that deserve attention.  The first involves school faculty cheating on tests for their students.  This one engulfed first the Atlanta school system and then the Dougherty county school district a few months later.  While the falsely improved test scores made the schools - and thus the teachers and faculty - look great for a while, the reality is that there are hundreds of students who have been sent out into the world not just unprepared, but actually illiterate:

“The disgraceful situation we found in the Dougherty County School System (DCSS) is a tragedy, sadly illustrated by a comment made by a teacher who said that her fifth-grade students could not read, yet did well on the Criterion-Referenced Competency Tests (CRCT).

Remember when teachers took up their low paying, mostlly thankless careers in hopes of reaching and opening young minds?  It seems that for every dedicated, devoted teacher these days there is one of the new breed, out for tenure and an easy ride, using their classrooms to push political agendas and leveraging themselves in any way possible, even to the detriment of their own students.  Right now, the former outnumber the latter.  But in a system where merit means little and tenure and the unions make it impossible to get rid of bad teachers, that paradigm is destined to shift. 

The cheating scandals are being blamed, in part, on No Child Left Behind.  Yup, it's Bush's fault.  While there is a lot of consternation on the left about "teaching to a test", the reality is, teachers have always been teaching to a test of some major or minor magnitude, from pop quizzes to midterms and finals to the Regents exams I took as a high school student in New York lo those many years ago.  The test is to make sure the kids got the lesson or grasped the overreaching arc of the class.  A standardized test means a standardized curriculum with a (one would hope) balanced, well-rounded approach to education encompassing all the major requirements of a basic education.  Teaching to a test does not make it impossible to produce graduates who can read a job or college application or figure out how much they will owe if they want three pounds of apples at $2.59 per pound.  

In Atlanta, 78 teachers and the principals of 44 out of 56 schools were found to have cheated.  In Dougherty county, 49 teachers and 11 principals have been implicated.  Hundreds, if not thousands of Georgia students have been cheated of an education.  There will probably be lawsuits over this, which means that the taxpayer will be paying the price for these unethical public servants.  What a waste, all the way around.

The second Georgia school scandal is about a little blended-lesson oopsie over at Beaver Ridge elementary school.  Nine third grade teachers, in an attempt to do a "cross-curricular activity" combining a segment on Frederick Douglass with math word problems, sent home work in which some problems referenced slavery:

The first asked, “Each tree had 56 oranges. If eight slaves pick them equally, then how much would each slave pick?” The other said, “If Frederick got two beatings per day, how many beatings did he get in one week?”

The thing about Frederick Douglass was that, while his life in slavery was violent and brutal, he escaped to freedom at the age of twenty and spent the rest of his life as an outspoken abolitionist and suffragist who affected change through his oratory.  His gift for words eventually won him the respect and friendship of none other than Abraham Lincoln, and it isn't hard to imagine that long fireside talks between Lincoln and Douglass helped keep the steel in the president's spine and the fire in his belly.  It is, unfortunately, unsurprising that the teachers at Beaver Ridge chose to focus on the twenty years Douglass was enslaved as opposed to the fifty-seven years he spent crusading for the final fulfillment of the Founders's vision of a truly free people.  Their students would have been better served with questions like, "If Frederick gave four speeches on abolishing slavery and two hundred people came to each one, how many people heard him speak?" or "If Frederick's abolitionist newspaper, The North Star, published twenty-one editions per week, how many editions were printed each day?".   But no, one must push the America-is-a-mean-country meme at every opportunity, mustn't one?  Yes, slavery happened in this country.  Yes, it was a bad thing.  But was his enslavement the point of his life, or was it his breaking of the bonds of slavery and rising from those horrible circumstances to create a bold, outspoken life that lead to enlightenment and, eventually, freedom for all?  Instead of that fine legacy, all those kids will remember is that he was a slave who was supposedly beaten every day and apparently had to pick oranges.  Again - what a shame.

Our public schools are rotting from the inside out.  The widespread corruption and lack of ethics, combined with the complete disregard for the harm they are doing to the students in their care is breathtaking.  What makes it worse is that these cases in Georgia are just the tip of the iceberg.  In the past three years, FairTest (the National Center for Fair and Open Testing) has documented confirmed cases of test cheating in thirty states, as well as the District of Columbia. 

Many parents feel as though they are hostage to the school in whose district they live.  While they desperately wish there was another alternative, for most families private and parochial schools are out of reach.  While there are some great charter schools out there, there are also some really, really bad ones, too and it's pretty much a crap shoot on what might pop up in your neighborhood.  So what's a parent to do? 

Get involved.

Let's face it.  Parents who are involved in their child's education are going to realize that little Timmy, while in 6th grade, is reading at a first grade level.  Involved parents will hold teachers and schools accountable.  Widespread corruption resulting in hundreds of kids falling through the cracks can only happen when people aren't paying attention.  Not only have we gotten used to the idea that our schools are solely responsible for teaching our children everything they need to know about life from mathematics to birth control, but we apparently don't even feel the need to make sure they're competent at it.

What a shame.

Read more...

A SCANDALOUS EDUCATION

FOUR REASONS Updated

There has been a lot of talk in both the media and the republican establishment about Mitt Romney being the only truly electable GOP candidate.  It is common opinion amongst the pundits that Romney is the best person to go up against President Obama and win and polling seems to support this theory.  The problem is, many conservative voters just aren't buying what they are selling.  His inability to garner more than twenty-five percent support, spun in the press as consistent front-runner status, was more about the other seventy-five percent looking for someone else.  He ran in 2008; we know who he is and what he's done and we see some major problems with his candidacy.  The pundits are happy to write it off as tea partiers being too stupid to know what's good for them, but when you look at the facts, their spin just doesn't add up.

As a little reminder, these are the same group of people who sold us Sen. John McCain as the only reasonable, electable, moderate candidate, blah, blah, blah.  The problem isn't that the Tea Party is too conservative.  The problem is that the country has been dragged so far to the left by the rise of Obama, Pelosi and their radical progressive ilk that anything not progressive or borderline socialist seems excessively conservative by comparison.  Let's not forget, too, that Romney's electability is a bit of a myth in that the man has run for senate, governor and president in the past with only one resulting win, his single term of office as Governor of Massachusetts.  If being 1-3 is a winning record, then my Eagles aren't doing nearly as bad as I thought!
That aside, there are four main reasons why Tea Party conservatives tend to want anyone but Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee:

1) Romneycare.  This is a no brainer, and the biggest hurdle he faces.  Romneycare knocks out one of the biggest political bones of contention - Obamacare - thus neutralizing that line of attack.  Mitt can talk about the difference between state mandates and federal mandates until he's blue in the face, but for many in the electorate, a mandate is a mandate.  If he felt able to mandate once before, who's to say he won't mandate again?  After all, even Obama himself on the campaign trail in 2008 reassured Americans that he would not sign any bill that had an individual mandate.

2) Job Growth.  I won't call it 'job creation' because, as we all know, government doesn't create private sector jobs, it only creates the environment for job creation.  Anyhoo.  Romney's record on job growth in his years as Governor of Massachussetts is pretty dismal.  Forty-seventh out of fifty isn't very good, no matter how you slice it.  In addition, the state's unemployment ranking went from twenty-ninth to seventeenth after three years of Romney's stewardship.  Considering jobs are second only to the economy at large for voters, this record can hardly be seen as a recommendation.

3) Bain Capital.  Obama and his DNC operatives have been working overtime on ginning up some good old-fashioned class warfare, and a Romney candidacy  might be at the heart of it.  This picture sure doesn't help.  It will be easy for Obama and democrats to tie Romney in with the Wall Street crowd.  Plus, Bain was all about buying failing companies and dismantling them - thus putting lots of people out of work.  Bain + Romney = Rethuglican Meaniehead.

4) The Cool Factor.  President Obama and Mitt Romney have something other than Obamneycare in common - their cool quotient.  And I don't mean 'cool' like James Dean Cool (sorry, Obots).  I mean cool like cold fish, unapproachable, chilly.  The reason conservatives haven't warmed up to Romney is because he's just not, well...warm.  Herman Cain made it to the top tier, even with his abysmal foreign policy chops, because he's a genuine, likeable guy.  He is also someone who sees life the way a majority of Americans do; not from a lifetime of privilege and politics, but as someone who worked his way to prosperity against the odds.  His enthusiasm for and love of country was also a winning combination for patriotic Americans tired of being told to be ashamed of their country.

The American people have been through a lot over the past ten years or so.  When Barack Obama was elected into office, we thought we were getting a charismatic, empathetic young dreamer who wanted to unite this country and move it forward into the new century.  Instead we got an arrogant man whose ideology is a throwback to 1933; someone who has spent most of his term of office attempting to gin up disagreements between various and sundry factions in America. 

Right now, most of us just want someone to tell us it's going to be okay, that the future will bring a return to the heights we once enjoyed; that we will some day be the shining city on the hill once more.  Instead we get an absentee president who is too busy vacationing, fundraising or trash talking us to spend any time on the myriad crises we face here at home - one of which is a crisis of confidence.  It is this crisis that many Americans have a hard time seeing Mitt Romney ease.  His aloofness and untouchable, Candidate Ken™-like quality is off-putting.   He will be easily depicted as an elite, upper crust persona, reinforcing the idea of a ruling class and an inability to empathize with average Americans.   Obama, on the other hand, the beneficent redistributer of all things welfare, will be painted as the saint of the working class in contrast by his lapdog press.

The complicit media is certainly doing their part to steer the masses towards Romney, and it's not hard to see why.  Ultimately, people aren't warming up to Mitt and probably won't. It will once again be an election where people hold their noses and vote for the lesser evil. The saving grace in the general election is the enormous enthusiasm gap between conservatives and liberals, but having to rely heavily on the electorate's dislike of Obama instead of enthusiasm for their candidate to turn out voters is a risky chance against an opponent who is as well funded and organized as the president. 

The 2012 election isn't going to be just about getting rid of Obama (although that alone would do an awful lot to restore confidence), it's also about what his successor will do when he/she take office.  If we have learned anything from the election of Barack Obama it is that a) we need to thoroughly vet candidates and b) we need more than 'hope and change' as a platform.  For many independents, there won't a lot of daylight between Obama and Romney.  Quite often, when you put people in a position where they must choose either the devil they know or the devil they don't, they will either vote for the status quo or abstain altogether.

There's a good chance that whoever the republicans nominate will win over President Obama.  After all, the man has ushered in an age of food stamps, persistently high unemployment, over-regulation and out-of-control spending.  Even the worst RINO would be hard pressed to match his record.  But the American people are tired of choosing the lesser of two evils.  We want someone who will give us a different choice, and Romney just doesn't seem to be the guy for that.  

Let's face it.  If Romney wins the nomination, tea partiers will vote for him.  To stay home would be to give their vote to Obama, and that is something no self-respecting tea partier will  do.  But nominating Romney will keep the GOP on the ropes in the general election by taking away all the major points of attack. It's bad strategy, pure and simple.  Independents who haven't been paying attention are an unknown quantity and the target of persuasion in a general election, so a strong case based on the issues must be made against Obama to combat the mud, smoke and mirrors sure to be on the offing from the DNC. 

There is far too much riding on the outcome of the 2012 elections to allow a Romney nomination to take such vital weapons out of the quiver.

UPDATE:  ABC's Jake Tapper has three reasons why Mitt Romney shouldn't be the conservative frontrunner.

Read more...

FOUR REASONS Updated

PUTTING TWO AND TWO TOGETHER

My last post poked a little fun at the Occupy movement.  What can I say?  I just can't resist such low hanging fruit!  Seriously though, aside from hygiene and a disturbing number of anarchists, anti-semites and commies, at the heart of it, it could be argued that Occupy is sort of following in the Tea Party's footsteps.  Both want to end the FED, both are vehemently against bank bailouts, and both see crony capitalism as the disease that is crippling this great nation.  Unfortunately, the most glaring difference between the two groups is that the Tea Party holds government responsible, and Occupiers think government is the solution.

At least, until now.

In an interesting series of events, it came to light that the Mayor of Richmond, apparently an Occupy sympathizer, has been passing on the costs of the occupation to the taxpayer, instead of requiring the Occupiers to foot the bill as the Tea Party was.  Over the past three years, the local Tea Party chapter has held Tax Day rallies and were required to pay for permits and other fees, to the tune of about $8,500.  When the Tea Party realized the Occupiers were getting a free ride, they submitted an invoice to City Hall for reimbursement of the fees they have paid, citing fair treatment under the law.

The city's response?  Why, an audit, of course.

The Tea Party isn't going down fighting, and is preparing a lawsuit.  What is really surprising is the group that is standing with the Tea Party against the democrat-led City Hall.  This weekend Occupy Richmond voiced their solidarity (via Fox News):

“Occupy Richmond believes in absolute free speech, including the right to criticize the government without fear of retribution," Occupy Richmond said in a statement posted Thursday on its website. "Given the duplicitous and violent manner in which the city government chose to raid our peaceful occupation, it would not surprise us if the recently announced city audit of the Richmond Tea Party were retaliation for their criticism of the mayor.”

The statement also called audits "bureaucratic harassment" and "one weapon oppressive regimes use to silence dissent."

"Not only do we call on the city to drop the audit, but we also demand the immediate refund of any money paid specifically to secure the Tea Party's free speech and assembly privileges,” the Occupiers said.

 
Okay, so there's still a little room for improvement.  Apparently the Occupy spokesperson doesn't understand that the charges don't just disappear.  Those fees cover the cost of cleanup or damage to facilities incurred during the exercise of free speech.  The magical creatures who pick up the tab for the mess are not social justice fairies flitting from camp to camp, happy to spend their stardust for the cause.  In reality, the people who pay are fellow Americans who have been busy working, not camping, and will see their taxes go up as a result of the shenanigans in cities across the land.  Tea Party spokeswoman Colleen Owens was happy to have the moral support, but commented that they don't  want the taxpayer to foot the bill - that isn't the point of the suit:
 

“But this has never been about the money. It was about the principal," Owens said. "A public official should not be able to pick and choose which groups are charged."

It is a refreshing change to see the Occupiers starting to identify the government - and not just republicans, but majority party democrats, too - as a major player in the ills of the day.  It was almost heartwarming to see them actually protesting President Obama on one of his many, many, many trips to Wall Street for fundraising cash.  They grow up so fast, don't they?  Gee, perhaps if the Occupiers went home and sat down and talked to their Tea Party parents, maybe common ground could be established.  And maybe, after that, common sense. 

Two things to remember about these angry, disillusioned kids:  First, as Churchill said, show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.  Second, sometimes a conservative is just a liberal who was mugged by reality.  There has been a mass mugging (sometimes literally) in parks and plazas across the country over the past few months as those who were once embraced and celebrated became those who were being either co-opted or ignored (Tea Partiers can definitely empathize with that).  Some poor souls have even been traumatized by it all.

All we can hope is that the rest open their ears (and minds) and start thinking.  Many of our centers for higher education, where we send our children to learn how to think, have become indoctrination centers where they are taught what to think.  Perhaps the disillusionment of their failed experiment in commune-ism will get them thinking.  If Richmond is any indication, the worm may be turning. 

Could it be that the spring might bring a new crop of protests featuring not just Occupiers, but Tea Partiers, too, standing together as one against the banks and politicians?  Now there's a thought.

And if that doesn't work?  Well, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em!  (or become a competitor!)

Read more...

PUTTING TWO AND TWO TOGETHER

MY OBAMAVILLE

MY OBAMAVILLE
(sung to Jimmy Buffet's Margaritaville)

Nibblin' on soy cake
Man, I am so baked
All of those hippies covered with paint
Bangin' my drum kit
I bet you hate it
The smell might make you want to faint

(Chorus)

Wasted today again in my Obamaville
Lookin' for my last baggie of pot
Some people say that it's just Wall Street to blame
All I know is it's not government's fault

I don't know the reason
Private property seizing
Nothin' to show but some lice and some fleas
But I got of easy
I'm not that sleazy
So at least I don't have STD's

(Chorus)

Wasted today again in my Obamaville
Lookin' for my last baggie of pot
Some people say that it's just Wall Street to blame
Now I think
It might be government's fault

Government fat cats
Gettin' their kickbacks
I'll wash yours if you wash mine
How can this not be
Laundering money
Robbin' the taxpayers blind

(Chorus)

Wasted today again in my Obamaville
Lookin' for my last baggie of pot
Some people say that it's just Wall Street to blame
Now I know it's crony government's fault
Some people say that it's just Wall Street to blame
But I know it's crony government's fault

Cross Posted at The Ripley Report

Read more...

MY OBAMAVILLE

THE PALINIZATION OF CAIN Updated

Politico and the liberal media in general are in the process of "Palinizing" Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain.  The anonymous, vague allegations of gestures and comments that might make some people  "uncomfortable" are the thinnest of gruel, but Politico has managed to squeeze not one or two, but over ninety stories out of the "scandal".   When shock jock Howard Stern opined that it's nothing more than a smear campaign, sidekick Robyn rebutted that 'that's what politicians do'.  This is par-for-the-course liberal equivocating, but the fact is that this wasn't done by a politician, it was done by an alleged news publication - an entity that, if nothing else, opens itself up to litigation when it resorts to peddling fact-less innuendo.  It seems the future of journalism is distortion and allusion - turning allegations into convictions - and the future is now.  Don't forget to stir the coals and implicate more republican candidates report on speculation over where the leak is coming from (when you already know damn well)! 

When Sarah Palin emerged on the national stage, she was immediately perceived as a threat to the democratic ideal that minorities -women included - are strictly democratic voters.  Well, the ones not suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, that is.  They managed to bring her down with an overwhelming number of legal challenges to her in her capacity as governor.  These bogus suits were costly not just in terms of dollars, but also in terms of the time spent dealing with them instead of the business of the state (which she was then criticized for neglecting).  The fact that none of the suits had any merit and cost the Alaskan taxpayer millions means nothing.  The ends justified the means. 

Herman Cain poses an existential threat to the locked-in democratic votes of the black community.  There is a possibility that a choice between a black democrat and a black republican might cause some to reassess their true political leanings, rejecting the traditional knee-jerk liberalism.  This cannot be allowed to happen.

And so the palinization of Cain has begun. 

His portrayal of himself as a non-political everyman has encouraged a perception of him as having an aura of decency and strong personal ethics. He comes across as a man of integrity - plain-spoken, patriotic and honest.  These are all things sorely lacking in the current occupant of the White House.  This is NOT a comparison democratic operatives want the public making in the general election.  Since it is impossible to attempt to recast Obama as a man of integrity, patriotism and a champion of personal responsibility, it is necessary to instead bring Cain down. They simply had to drop his credibility level.

Don't forget that this was also attempted in 2008 against Senator John McCain after he won the primary.  Allegations of an affair between McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman were dismissed rather quickly.  The New York Times - purveyor of the smear - ended up settling the dispute with a retraction in January of 2011 (one of several the NYT has had to print in recent months in regards to smearing conservatives).

The media meme of "where there's smoke, there's fire" is quite convenient for palinization, considering as many anonymous accusers as necessary can be ginned up to smear Cain and plant the seed of doubt about his ethics without any need for pesky things like facts or corroboration.  The best part is, instead of having to file costly lawsuits like the antics in Alaska, all that's required are barrels of ink and reams of paper.  So much cheaper!  This new trend towards "take my word for it, it's bad" journalism is quite a change from the traditional standard of verifiable sources and hard evidence.

Apparently there is no need to discover if allegations are true nowadays.  Just the fact that someone has been accused by anonymous sources is enough to convict - at least in the press.  So much for innocent until proven guilty.  Proof of a settlement is no proof at all, particularly when it comes to sexual harassment allegations.  It is routine for large companies to pay off on claims like this as it is far cheaper (even at $45,000) than investigating and defending a suit.  Ultimately, a southern man - particularly of a certain age - calling someone 'darling' is as much sexual harassment as Brigadier General Michael Walsh's calling Senator Barbara Boxer 'ma'am' was an attempt to somehow demean her.  Ridiculous.

That Cain has enjoyed a bump in not just contributions but polling, too, shows that the public just doesn't seem to be buying what Politico is selling.  The question is, has it cast at least a shadow of a doubt on his character?  The media are certainly trying to imply that, but his support seems to be as strong as ever, even after a week-long journalistic full court press.  NRA's consent for the non-disclosure agreement to be lifted should put an end to the matter once and for all.  At this point, the accuser restricted by the agreement is unwilling to go public, and none of the others seem too keen to step forward either. 

The big question is, will this palinization work? 

So far, it hasn't.  In fact, his less than stellar handling of the situation might do more to damage his prospects than the initial allegations themselves.  There is also the possiblity of another accuser stepping forward, but if her accusations are as flimsy and vague as the other three, it's more likely the public will take it with a boulder of salt, roll their eyes and move on.  Don't get me wrong - if Cain has skeletons in his closet they must, by all means, be brought to light.  It's called vetting.  If the media had done half as good a job vetting candidate Obama, we'd be talking about running against incumbent President Rodham-Clinton today - you know, the one who wasn't hanging out with Ayers, Wright, and Rezko. 

But that would be to imply that those associations carried just as much political import as those of Jane Doe numbers One, Two and Three. 

How silly.

UPDATE:  Herman Cain has suspended his campaign after a woman named Ginger White stepped forward and claimed a thirteen year affair with the candidate.  It seems that this particular bit of smoke had some fire behind it.  Cain blames the media for his sinking polls and thus the suspension of his campaign, but it would be more likely that his poor performance in interviews and debates - particularly on foreign affairs - did him in.  If allegations of affairs with presidential candidates were disqualifiers, Bill Clinton would never have been elected.  But the Lothario-in-Chief got into the Oval Office because his responses and debate performances were as strong and rock-solid as his libido.   In my opinion, Herman Cain's campaign was over with that infamous question on Libya.  It's painful to watch.  I'm with S.E. Cupp.  He just wasn't up to the task and it was only a matter of time before it became obvious.

Read more...

THE PALINIZATION OF CAIN Updated

THE FALL OF FUN

John F. Kennedy Elementary School principal Ann Foley sent out an email to her teachers last week informing them that she was banning all fall holidays, claiming they are "insensitive".  The teachers at the Somerfield, MA school had already been instructed to tell their students that there would be no dressing in costume on Halloween, which falls on a Monday this year.  In the email she stated (via Fox News):

"When we were young we might have been able to claim ignorance of the atrocities that Christopher Columbus committed against the indigenous peoples," Kennedy School Principal Anne Foley wrote.
"We can no longer do so. For many of us and our students celebrating this particular person is an insult and a slight to the people he annihilated. On the same lines, we need to be careful around the Thanksgiving Day time as well."

Okay, get a grip. 

Look, to be honest, I always thought it was sort of silly celebrating Columbus Day, considering the man never actually set foot on American soil.  But honestly, couldn't this have been handled a little better?  Just a hint to Principal Foley - use of the word 'atrocities' in an elementary school memo about holiday parties is a bit excessive. Perhaps raising the possibility that Leif Ericsson (or Polynesia or China) was the first to discover America  might have been a better, less explosive angle.  As for parents going to the school superintendent to get the ban lifted, they are probably in for a long slog:

Superintendant Tony Pierantozzi told The Herald that Halloween is “problematic” because of connections to witchcraft.

Yes, the roots of Halloween go back to paganism, but Celtic pagans were not witches.  For them, Samhain (also known as the Winter Solstice) was a mystical night.  It was the Celtic New Year's Eve - the end of the harvest, the end of the year.  The work was done - crops harvested, herds culled, land fallow, flora and fauna easing into winter sleep.  They believed that on that night, the wall between this world and the next came down and the souls of the dead roamed the earth.  The Celts would leave offerings and say prayers for those lost over the preceding year and indulge in a little ancestor worship on the Solstice - a tradition adopted by the Romans when they conquered Celtic lands and, eventually, the Catholic Church, who changed the name to All Hallow's Eve.

Taking away the Halloween and Thanksgiving parties for elementary school children is just ridiculous. It's a real shame that the kids can't dress up.  It is, after all, elementary school.  My girls really looked forward to the annual Halloween parade at school, followed by a little "Monster Mash", cupcakes and juice in the classroom.  It was, if nothing else, an hour-long oasis of fun from the monotony of the daily routine.

As for Thanksgiving, perhaps Principal Foley should google the origins of the holiday.  According to Thanksgiving-day.org (emphasis mine):

In the summer of 1621, owing to severe drought, pilgrims called for a day of fasting and prayer to please God and ask for a bountiful harvest in the coming season. God answered their prayers and it rained at the end of the day. It saved the corn crops.

It is said that Pilgrims learnt to grow corn, beans and pumpkins from the Indians, which helped all of them survive . In the autumn of 1621, they held a grand celebration where 90 people were invited including Indians. The grand feast was organized to thank god for his favors. This communal dinner is popularly known as “The first thanksgiving feast”. There is however, no evidence to prove if the dinner actually took place.

How atrocious.  The Indians saved the pilgrims and the pilgrims repaid them by sharing the bounty.  The horror. 

On a side note, am I the only one who feels a little sad for her that, instead of seeing a beautiful moment of outreach, peace and harmony between two very different peoples, she sees atrocities and insults?   It must be stressful carrying around all of that anger and hate.  Sounds like somebody needs a hug.

There will surely be a new memo circulating soon, detailing how Principal Foley is going to suck the fun out of the Winter Holidays, too (better not call it Christmas - her head might explode).  Considering there are more religions observed in this country than just Christianity and some religions celebrate a special event - such as Hanukkah - in December, if schools want to call it a Holiday Party instead of a Christmas party, that's just fine.  But let the kids have their parties, whatever PC name you pin to it! 

They're kids - they don't care about the impact of Columbus' exploitation of the indigenous population of San Salvador, the religious puritanism at the root of the Salem Witch Trials or the separation of church and state issues that some use to attack Christmas celebrations.  All they care about is that they get out of classwork, they get to eat cupcakes and maybe - just maybe - they get to play a few games and have some fun.  At Halloween, they look forward to showing off their costumes to their friends, not recruiting a coven and practicing black mass.  It's a break from the routine, a way to cut loose.  Since many schools no longer offer music or art programs, recess or gym, these parties are some of the only outlets for fun left to them during school hours. 

So Principal Foley, how about we keep the politics out of it and let the kids be kids and have some fun?

Read more...

THE FALL OF FUN