February 9, 2010
Publius Podcast: Anti-Gun Government Tyranny in Canada
A Canadian columnist has his door practically beaten down by Toronto’s stormtrooping police because he had a 30-year-old bird rifle that he forgot to re-register. America THIS is coming to YOUR door if the left gets its way in banning guns.
Trackback URL
Posted by Warner Todd Huston in 10th Amendment, 2nd Amendment, Activist Judges, Canada, Conservatism, Constitution, Delusional Dupes and DUmmies, Democrats, Fascism, Government corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Government tyranny, Gun Control, Guns, Judicial Tyranny, Liberal World, Nanny State, News, States Rights, Totalitarianism, Video, firearms freedom acts, liberalism at 2:57 pm | Comment (1) | Trackbacks (0) |
How Media Chooses Words Adds to Bias
-By Warner Todd Huston
The Politico had a story about Big Labor penned by Jeanne Cummings, the reporter famed for going after Sarah Palin’s Party purchased wardrobe during the 2008 presidential campaign, that was an abject lesson in Old Media bias. Her piece headlined “Labor helps kill its own top priority” is a great example of using language to subtly shade the arguments, in this case those of Big Labor, to elicit a positive view of the ideology contained in the issue. Her piece very subtly shades the goals of Big Labor in a positive light easily giving the reader a feeling that Big Labor’s goals are good and noble and is a perfect example of how the media creates emotional appeal for the left’s actions.
Because it is such masterfully crafted example of subtle bias, it deserves to be studied closely.
Cummings Begins her propping up of Big Labor by saying that Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts is “bad news for health care” and will mean that Republicans can “block the Employee Free Choice Act,” and so she immediately casts the possible actions of the GOP in a negative light at the outset. “Bad news for health care”? It is said as if the GOP was against “health care.” It isn’t. And of course “block” is certainly a negative action. In any case, she started by shrouding the GOP in negativity right away.
Cummings followed that with a quote by Tom Harkin, a Democrat Senator, saying, “I’ll never give up on it.” Immediately we get a positive emotion score awarded to Democrats in Cumming’s report.
Next Cummings paints Big Labor as a noble actor by saying it made a “bargain” in good faith with Democrats to put their EFCA plans on hold while health care is worked on. Score positive points for Big Labor.
Sadly for clarity’s sake, Cummings fails to mention that Big Labor didn’t have a choice on that noble “bargain.” This was the president’s requirement and a happenstance forced on Big Labor through the sheer politics of the matter. Big Labor wasn’t given a choice to be so noble as to put self-interest on the back burner for the good of the nation. Cummings similarly does not report that the EFCA was floated for a vote several times last summer and was found to have too many Democrat voices against it. This was long before Brown won his new Senate seat. But let’s not go worrying about facts, now. Cummings has a political side to pump up here.
From here Cummings notes that many union folks in Massachusetts voted against the Democrat Party and went for Republican Brown. She points out that sending Scott Brown to Washington makes it less likely that the EFCA will be as easy to pass as it may have been before.
Eventually Cummings gets to a short explanation of what the EFCA was supposed to do and boy does she play it fast and loose with the big picture.
As originally, drafted the bill would allow workers to sign cards to show their desire to unionize rather than going through a formal election process. That plank led to the legislation’s nickname: the card check bill.
Notice how this is written in a positive fashion in favor of unions? The EFCA would “allow” workers to sign a card, the card would “show their desire to unionize,” and the card would let them show this desire “rather than going through a formal election process,” as if that whole democratic election thing was such an annoying, unwanted bother to everyone. The whole explanation belies that there could be anything negative about the EFCA.
The truth of the matter is that the card check part of the legislation is not a positive thing for the workers. It is a positive thing for the unions, no question, but for the worker it takes away the right of a secret vote and opens that worker to systematic intimidation from union operatives because it will be made publicly aware if that employee doesn’t want to be unionized. This elimination of the secret vote will surely cause many workers to vote yes out of fear of becoming known as the anti-union worker and to avoid intimidation from union agitators. On the other hand, it could even open the worker up to intimidation by an employer too! It’s a two edged sword and draws blood from the worker with both edges. But Cummings does not report any of that.
Cummings adds another aspect of the bill to her piece:
The legislation also would beef up penalties for companies that retaliated against workers calling for a union and would force companies to negotiate with newly created unions.
Notice how she left out the worst part of the bill — the forced government arbitration. This bill forces both the union and the employer into a very short timetable to arrive at a contract. If that time limit is passed, the bill provides that the federal government will swoop in and force terms on both sides. This eliminates the power of both the employer and the union to arrive at their own terms. In essence, this part of the bill takes even more power away from the worker but Cummings didn’t mention any of this because it is just what Big Labor wants to have happen. After all, they think they control government and can get government to use their terms as the base for arbitration. But what happens when Republicans take over at some point? Will labor still be able to dictate what the government will do? Workers lose out all the way around with this provision and so do employers, with Big Labor itself putting itself in a possible loser situation. Bad all the way around…. Not that Cummings takes note of it all.
Next Cummings mentions that business and the Republicans are “unified in opposition,” but she never really takes any pains to explain why. She just paints them as opposers. Once again the GOP is clothed in negativity without given the benefit of explanation to the reader.
Cummings gives the final word to AFL-CIO political director Karen Ackerman.
“It’s a critical issue and we intend to keep on fighting for it,” she said. But “I think there has not yet been laid out a clear strategy of how to win on the Employee Free Choice Act.”
As you can see, Cummings ends her piece telling us all that this is a “critical issue” but people are “fighting for it.” She tells us that people are working for a “clear strategy of how to win.” All positively shaded rhetoric meant to convey that the unions are trying hard to help people.
So, to sum up we find a story that uses negatively shaded rhetoric every time Republicans or business is mentioned but positive, happy-talk to drive the discussion every time Big Labor or Democrats are mentioned. The Democrat position is termed “fighting for” things and shows them as looking for a “win,” while the Republicans are “blocking” and creating “bad news for health care.” The EFCA will “allow” workers to do things and helps get them out of that gosh darn complicated and time consuming “formal election process,” while Republicans and business are “unified in opposition.” Cummings uses all positive rhetoric for the Democrats and nothing but negativity for Republicans.
Yes, this is a perfect example of shaded rhetoric meant to shore up good feelings for the left while painting the right as mean and heartless. It is the sort of subtle writing that reveals an underlying support for the left that fills reporting of the “news.” This sort of careful rhetoric doesn’t come right out with an in-your-face support of leftism but leaves the reader with a warm feeling for the reporter’s favorite side and at the same time causes a reader to see the enemy — the right side of the argument — as the meanies, the bad actors, the negative nellies.
Apparently Jeanne Cummings is a master of it.
Trackback URL
Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Anti-Americanism, Anti-Capitalism, Card Check, Congress, Delusional Dupes and DUmmies, Democrats, Economy, Employee Free Choice Act/EFCA, Fiscal Responsibility, Fraud/misrepresentation, Government corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, House, Journalistic Malpractice, Journalistic Prostitution, Journalistic incompetence, Liberal Media/Bias, Liberal World, News, President, Propaganda, Psychology, Senate, Union Mafias/Thugs, liberalism at 1:03 pm | Comment (1) | Trackbacks (0) |
Start Over on Healthcare: Now I Give John Boehner a Pat on the Back
-By Warner Todd Huston
The other day I was slapping Congressman John Boehner (R, OH) around for his absurd claim that there was no difference between the Tea Party movement’s principles and the GOP establishment’s principles (or lack thereof). Well, today I have to give our Congressional Minority Leader a pat on the back for his letter to Obama about healthcare.
For those unaware, Obama has offered to come have another one of his odious “summits” with the GOP. Obama is claiming he wants to “listen” to the Republican’s ideas and that its time to work together. It’s all a sandbag, though. Obama is a liar and doesn’t intend to “listen” to anyone. It’s a move for show, a bright shiny bauble that the Old Media wonder at like the lap dogs they are.
Obama’s played this lie out many, many times in the past. It was his common mantra when he was a State Senator here in Illinois. He’d make all sorts of soothing noises about “listening” to all sides and “working together.” Then he would ignore all offers of collaboration and all ideas offered as he would go on to propose a strictly, down-the-line socialist styled liberal agenda. He’s never once in his life ever included any ideas from the other side in anything he’s ever done in politics. The man is simply a liar. There just isn’t any other way to say it.
Anyway, Leader Boehner and the Republican Whip Representative Eric Cantor (R,VA) has issued a good letter to precede this supposed listening tour that Obama is pretending to launch. In it, the leaders say that they’d love to meet with Obama if he throws out Obamacare and offers to start over with a bipartisan effort.
Both Cantor and Boehner know, of course, that CommieObamie won’t agree to that. In fact, they know that Obama’s lies about “transparency” will also prevent him from agreeing to bills being posted for 72 hours on line, as well. Further Obama’s desire to hide as much of his plans from the American people as possible will prevent him from agreeing to any of the things the GOP is talking for here. So, this letter really highlights Obama’s hypocrisy.
Of course, I’d prefer that the GOP refuse to work with Obama on anything at this point. The man has made himself quite clear. He wants the U.S. economy laid low, he wants U.S. power dispersed, he wants unions to eliminate private industry, and he wants the U.S. Constitution thrown in the trash can. Any working with Obama is assistance with his destructive agenda.
Before I get to the letter here, I have one question: Obama wants to hear the GOP’s ideas now, does he? I thought he and his perverted party have been saying that the GOP doesn’t have any to hear (a knowing lie)? Gosh, if the GOP doesn’t have any ideas, what does Obama think he’s asking to hear?
Here’s the letter (bold in the original):
Read more
Trackback URL
Posted by Warner Todd Huston in 10th Amendment, Bald-face lies, Barack Obama, Congress, Conservatism, Conservatives, Delusional Dupes and DUmmies, Democrats, Economy, Fraud/misrepresentation, GOP, Government corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Healthcare, House, Hypocrisy/Situational Ethics, Journalistic Malpractice, Journalistic Prostitution, Liberal Media/Bias, Liberal World, Nanny State, News, Politics As Usual, President, Representative Government, Republicans, Socialism, States Rights, Unconstitutional, liberalism, transparency/accountability at 1:02 pm | Comment (1) | Trackbacks (0) |
The Intellectuals What Ain’t
-By Warner Todd Huston
There is no better example of how low intellectuals have fallen than the case of Bernard-Henri Lévy, intellectual, provocateur, member of the well-regarded French nouveaux philosophes and, it seems, all around gullible fool.
Bernard-Henri Lévy, better known to those in the know as BHL, has become a laughing stock of modern inteleckshoouls everywhere with the publication of his much anticipated book on philosopher Immanuel Kant.
Oh, there’s sharp criticism in Lévy’s new Kantallope, there’s bomb thrown name calling, and nose-up-turning galore. Kant, according to Lévy, is a “raving lunatic” and a “fake.” And to prove his case Lévy uses the anti-Kanti words of the famous 20th-century philosopher Jean-Baptiste Botul — known as the father of the philosophical school of Botulism.
Yeah. Big problem for BHL, though. Jean-Baptiste Botul is a fictional character made up as a joke in 1999 by a journalist. I mean, come on, if you didn’t see the joke in “the school of Botulism” what sort of bat do you need upside your head to see the truth?
But this is what I mean, here. This guy, this Bernard-Henri Lévy, is supposed to be the top of the intellectual food chain in France. Yet he was such a dunce that he built a historical case on the opprobrium of a fake philosopher? It’s bad enough that this supposed smartie was so gullible as to be taken in by a fake philosopher, but the error was compounded by the editors and publishers that also missed this easily discovered faux pas.
Even Wikiepedia (French version translated) has it right for a change, and we know how bad Wikiepdia is!
Of course, Bernard-Henri Lévy has been accused of “cutting corners” and intellectual laziness before, but still his fame and fortune shows that intellectual rigor is not a prized commodity in the realm of the intellectual. It shows that these guys are not as smart as advertised.
It’s been like this for a long time, sadly. Starting with Karl Marx, or folks like Charles Beard and John Dewey, all the way to poseurs like Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal, we’ve had empty suits promulgating nonsense and proffering contemporary political ideology as straight science, unbiased philosophy, historical investigation or high thinking.
The fact is our intellectuals are lazy leftists that aren’t worthy of the adulation they receive by the elites in academe. Solid research, learned, hard fought knowledge is not prized in the circles of our acclaimed intellectuals. Only a kitschy adherence to left-wing [political ideology is prized by these folks. Sadly, real intellect does not interest these people.
The simple fact is that today’s intellectuals only value newsearch and not research. These stuffed shirts only value “newsness,” and not well argued, researched truth.
Trackback URL
Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Delusional Dupes and DUmmies, Democrats, Education, Europe, France, Liberal World, liberalism at 1:00 pm | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
Some Letters Beating Me Up Over My Tea Party Articles
-By Warner Todd Huston
Well I’ve now written six — this makes seven — articles criticizing certain failures of the Tea Party movement thus far. They are all meant to be constructive criticisms, though, not dismissive nor derogatory of them. It’s measured introspection I employ in each of these articles. No name calling, no laughing, no hate. There is just no logical way to construe what I’ve written thus far as hate against the Tea Party movement. But this whole Tea Party thing reveals several things to me. First of all it shows that there is still a lot of passion for them and that is a very good thing. I want the Tea Party groups to succeed and I want them to become a force that can teach the GOP a lesson. The other main thing it shows me is that too many people can’t read for comprehension these days.
The sad thing is that these days even the slightest criticism of a thing is seen by too many as outright hostility. Everyone is so hypersensitive that even a mild criticism meant as an exercise in introspection is seen as an over-the-top attack. It doesn’t just happen on the right, either. Look at what happened to all those Hillary Clinton supporters during the run up to the 2008 presidential elections. The constructive criticism that Hillary fans offered the Democrats was pounded down so hard by the left that many Hillary supporters found themselves aligned — and some permanently — with the side they thought they opposed; the Republicans.
Naturally there’s the name callers and nay sayers always floating around out there. I had one guy, for instance, say, “who asked you for your opinion” of the Tea Parties? This same guy then went on to give me HIS opinion of them evoking the obvious rejoinder of just who the hell asked him for his opinion, anyway? Obviously he wasn’t bright enough to “get” that concept!
Speaking of “getting” things, there were plenty of folks absolutely sure I wasn’t “getting” what the Tea Parties were all about. Naturally, they all went on to make assumptions about my points based on the “thought” coming out of their rear-ends, not based on anything I wrote. Such as the many that think I am saying that the GOP should co-opt the TP movement and the others, just as wrong, that say I am advocating for a third party. Neither of these concepts did I utter a word about, though.
There was also quite a few brain-dead comments claiming I was really just a guy “shilling” for the Republican Party. I was “sold out,” and I was a “stout apologist” for the GOP. Gosh. I am so glad these illiterate fools were able to tell me that I am a GOP insider, or else I’d have never known it. Of course, that would be news to the party I wrote THIS letter to way back in 2006 when I told them I was no longer part of their party! That would be news to the Tea Party folks I stood next to last year as we protested government overreach, too.
Read more
Trackback URL
Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Anti-Capitalism, Conservatism, Conservatives, Economy, Government corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Journalistic Malpractice, Journalistic incompetence, Liberal World, Tea Parties, Tea Party/Protests, liberalism at 12:58 pm | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
Reuters: An Obama lapdog?
On 3rd., I wrote (scroll down) of “A Reuters journalist who will be looking for a new job soon”. Guess what?
“Journalist Whose Article Was Retracted Leaves Reuters
The journalist who wrote an article on Monday that turned into an embarrassment for Reuters and a cause for some conservatives has left the wire service, the company said Friday. A Reuters spokeswoman declined to say whether the journalist, Terri Cullen, left voluntarily, or why. “I can’t really go into any detail,” said the spokeswoman, Courtney Dolan.
Ms. Cullen stepped down less than a month after being hired for the newly created position of wealth management editor. She had worked for more than a decade for The Wall Street Journal Online.
Her article said that President Obama’s budget amounted to a backdoor tax increase for middle-income and even lower-income people, based largely on the scheduled expiration of income tax cuts passed in 2001. But the president had actually proposed keeping those cuts in place for all but high-income families.
After a complaint from the White House, Reuters withdrew the article, stating that it was inaccurate.
Whether the article was inaccurate or not is not what interests me here. What I would like to know is how many articles Reuters withdrew in response to requests from the Bush White House? Should ANY White House be pressing news organizations to withdraw articles? What happened in this instance sounds to me very much like censorship, albeit censorship with a willing accomplice.
You can read the censored article here. A blogger caught it before it disappeared.
Posted by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.). For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. To keep up with attacks on free speech see TONGUE-TIED. Also, don’t forget your daily roundup of pro-environment but anti-Greenie news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH . Email me here
Trackback URL
Posted by JonJayRay in Uncategorized at 10:34 am | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
Note to “EYE ON BRITAIN” readers
I have been trying to find a Wordpress template (theme) for that blog which I like — without much success. A couple of themes that I rather liked looked good in Firefox but were a mess using IE8 or Google Chrome! Amazing. The Wordpress people must use Firefox only. I have now reverted to what I think is the most legible theme and will stick with that for the foreseeable future. It’s pretty plain but at least it seems to be fine regardless of which browser you use.
For users of non-Windows operating systems (such as the various versions of Linux), however, it’s a different ball-game. If Linux users have any difficulty, they should probably try different browsers until they find one that works (or maybe use Debian instead of Fedora etc.).
Posted by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.). See EYE ON BRITAIN
Trackback URL
Posted by JonJayRay in Internet at 10:30 am | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
Planned Parenthood Pushes Sexualization of Ten-Year-Olds
One indication that moonbattery is not just misguided but evil is that progressives have an obsession with corrupting children. This is why, under our Hopey Changey regime of pure moonbattery, our federal “Safe Schools Czar” is a militant pervert associated with NAMBLA. It’s also the reason for this:
A new report by the International Planned Parenthood Federation is advocating that children as young as 10 be given extensive sex education, including an awareness of sex’s pleasures.
This latest push to sexualize 10-year-olds provides yet another opportunity for moonbats to open fire on Christianity, which they once again equate with Islam. Complains the federally funded abortion mill’s report (PDF):
Young people’s sexuality is still contentious for many religious institutions. Fundamentalist and other religious groups the — Catholic Church and madrasas (Islamic schools) for example — have imposed tremendous barriers that prevent young people, particularly, from obtaining information and services related to sex and reproduction. Currently, many religious teachings deny the pleasurable and positive aspects of sex and limited guidelines for sexual education often focus on abstinence before marriage…
Understandably, since abstinence does not produce costumers, Planned Parenthood disapproves of it — even among children.
According to PP, their 10-year-old potential customers are “sexual beings” in need of “comprehensive sexuality education.” Therefore sex ed should present sexuality as a “positive force for change and development, as a source of pleasure, an embodiment of human rights and an expression of self.”
Michelle Turner, president of the Maryland-based Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, notes that once again progressives are trying to shove parents out of the picture, the better to impose their social engineering. Ed Mechmann, spokesman for New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, observes that PP is attempting to undermine traditional values — and that PP makes money selling contraception and abortion.
Remember when moonbats launched a jihad against Joe Camel for allegedly tempting children to become smokers? Maybe old Joe should be brought back to advance a cause liberals seem to believe in — indiscriminate premature sex. The sooner kids get started, the more abortions they can have — and that means more profit for Planned Parenthood.
On a tip from Mega. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.
Trackback URL
Posted by Van Helsing in 2nd Amendment, Abortion, Anti-Americanism, Child Exploitation, Child molestation, Christianity, Communism, Crime, Culture of Death, Democrats, Dept. of Education, Domestic Enemies, Education, Fox News, Government corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Government tyranny, Homeschooling, Homosexual Agenda, Hypocrisy/Situational Ethics, Illegal Activities, Indoctrination, Moral Relativism, N.E.A., Nanny State, News, Parenting, Planned Parenthood, Political terrorism, Propaganda, Psychology, Secular Humanism, Sex Offenders, Social Engineering, Taxes, Unhinged, liberalism, lobbyists, religion at 10:25 am | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
State Of Emergency In North Carolina? No Guns For You
A bit of a kerfuffle going on in ye olde home state
Residents in King were fumed over the weekend after a state of emergency declaration restricted the sale of alcohol and the carrying of firearms in vehicles.
King Police Chief Paula May said she’s received hundreds of threats related to the restrictions, which banned driving from 12 a.m. Sunday to 5 a.m.
The state of emergency for King was declared by members of the City Council after Stokes County authorities also declared a state of emergency.
Under North Carolina law, May said, when a state of emergency is put into place that includes a ban on driving, the carrying of firearms in vehicles is also banned. The King city curfew banned the sale of alcohol.
Actually, it is a bit more than that
“I think there’s been some misinterpretation that I personally have declared martial law and taken away people’s right to bear arms and that’s erroneous,” May told WXII reporter Jermont Terry. “By law, statute 14-288.7 automatically went into effect. And that law which goes into effect when there’s a state of emergency prohibits the transportation, purchase sale and possession of firearms other than on one’s own premises.”
Obviously, the people who wrote that law never actually read that wonderful document, The Bill Of Rights. By all means, they can ban driving. That is a privilege, not a Right. The sale of alcohol is a bit trickier, at least from private businesses that sell beer and wine (hard liquor is sold only at government run stores in North Carolina). However, restricting the purchase and possession of firearms except at your own home? Yes, that would be unconstitutional, pure and simple, which begs the question “will the ACLU get involved?” Will they stand up for the Rights granted in the Constitution, or, just the ones they happen to agree with? After all, the main point of the 2nd Amendment was not so that people could have guns for the heck of it, but, for the ability to protect themselves from a repressive government.
Trackback URL
Posted by William Teach in 2nd Amendment, ACLU, Bill Of Rights, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Government tyranny, Gun Control, News, Property Rights, State Government, U.S. Constitution, Unconstitutional, Where's the ACLU, firearms freedom acts at 10:19 am | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
Billboard Asks “Miss Me Yet?”
George W. Bush may not have been the perfect Conservative….let’s face it, he was more in line domestically with moderate Democrats….but, after watching the deficit balloon, spending increase beyond all belief, having a Congress and President who pay absolutely no attention to what The People actually want, and a president who spent years campaigning for a job but is only capable of blaming others, instead of actually leading, yeah, we miss him
Internet chatter had led to speculation that it might be an urban myth — nothing more than clever digital trickery spreading via the Web.
But our friend Bob Collins at Minnesota Public Radio assures us he’s seen it with his own eyes:
There is a billboard along I-35 near Wyoming, Minn., with a huge photo of former president George W. Bush and this question: “Miss Me Yet?”
Now, the push is on to find out who paid to have it put up.
Crossed at Pirate’s Cove
Trackback URL
Posted by William Teach in 1st Amendment, Barack Obama, Democrat Lite, Humor, News, Republicans, Video at 10:01 am | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
February 8, 2010
John Murtha Has Passed Away
Via Breitbart, the breaking news is that John Murtha (D-Pa) has passed away at the age of 77. RIP, and God speed, John.
Trackback URL
Posted by William Teach in Congress, Democrats, News at 3:01 pm | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
Why Unions Are Dangerous in Education
-By Warner Todd Huston
One would think that a teacher that had 30 some years ago allegedly impregnated a 16-year-old student, a few years later sexually accosted two 12-year-old students, and was accused of molesting yet another student four years after that, would be out on his ear never to teach or be allowed around children again.
But the New York teachers union would beg to differ.
In fact, the union has differed so much that troubled teacher Francisco Olivares has been continually paid his $94,154 a year salary even though he’s been kept from the classroom for the last seven years.
So, who cares what the union says about this guy? Unfortunately, the union’s resistance to getting rid of him is enshrined in state law. The school can’t get rid of this dead weight either.
As a result, because the school can’t fire him and the union won’t let them, Olivares sits day in and day out in what is called a “rubber room” getting paid his full salary. That is getting paid his fall salary courtesy of the taxpayers of New York.
Olivares isn’t the only one, either. The New York Daily News chronicles many more teachers in this situation. But New York isn’t the only place this is happening. Last year the L.A. Times had a similar tale to tell about its schools and unions.
It all goes to show that teachers unions don’t care if kids learn very much or if teachers they represent are worthy of the job. But, let’s face it, who can blame the unions for this? After all, no union has every cared about quality of work or the effectiveness of its members. A union has no interest in any of that. All a union cares about is getting the most it can for its membership. The quality of the product those members produce is way down on the list of importance.
Recently the Atlantic’s Megan McArdle had a great piece pinpointing exactly why unions don’t work, especially for education. Her piece headlined “How Unions Work,” really brings it home why unions are bad for education. In her case she was discussing why can’t even agree to merit pay for teachers.
McArdle’s post was prompted by a piece by left-winger Matthew Yglesias whose post isn’t worth going much into here. But it did spur some good points by McArdle. Suffice to say that what Yglesias said was that he thought unions could come to like merit pay but that the discussion is messy because people “have ideological opinions about unions in general.” In other words, Yglesias thinks it’s everyone else’s fault, not the union’s fault.
Yglesias is fooling only himself.
McArdle, however, is dead on in her retort to this absurd Yglesias argument. She says that unions can’t agree to merit pay because fighting merit pay in any situation is inherent in the way a union, any union, works.
Unions are set up to minimize frictions and maximize benefits for the bottom 55%. That’s how they work everywhere–in schools, and out. That’s how they have to work. No amount of cajoling, no number of white papers, is going to change that.
This is beyond question. Teachers unions don’t care if kids learn, they don’t care if schools have the best curriculum, they couldn’t care less if their teachers are the worst of the worst, and they certainly don’t give a darn if the tax money spent on education is spent wisely. The goal of unions, all unions, is to get the most for the most. Merit, capability, ability, expertise…. none of this matters to a union.
In fact, working for the best is antithetical to a union. This is because only the top tier of any workforce, the best of any field, is the smallest number. Unions are only interested in what they can do for the majority and the majority are not the best.
With the examples in L.A. and New York, we can see even another example of McArdle’s point being proven out. Unions are bad for excellence and being bad for excellence is bad for our kids.
Trackback URL
Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Anti-Americanism, Anti-Capitalism, Child Exploitation, Child molestation, Delusional Dupes and DUmmies, Democrats, Education, Government corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, News, Sex Offenders, State Government, Union Mafias/Thugs at 1:19 pm | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
Marvel Comics: Captain America Says Tea Parties Are Dangerous and Racist
-By Warner Todd Huston
Marvel Comic’s Captain America is the mightiest soldier with the super powerful secret soldier formula that makes him a super man. Sadly, this muscle bound hero that took on the whole Nazi army during WWII seems to be afraid of those American people who’ve joined the Tea Party movement. Not only is Cappy quaking in his little red booties, but he’s sure that the Tea Party folks are dangerous racists, too.
Isn’t it wonderful that a decades old American comic book hero is now being used to turn readers against our very political system, being used to slander folks that are standing up for real American principles in real life — and one called “Captain America” at that?
In issue number 602 of Captain America, a new story line has begun called “Two Americas.” In it the current Captain (there have been a few of them, apparently) is on the trail of a faux Captain America that is mentally deranged and getting chummy with some white supremacist, anti-government, survivalists types going by the name of “the Watchdogs.” While investigating this subversive group, Captain America and his partner The Falcon — a black super hero — have decided to try and infiltrate the secretive organization.
In preparation for the infiltration, Marvel Comics depicts the two super heroes out of costume and observing from a rooftop a street filled with what can only be described as a Tea Party protest. The scene shows crowds of people in city streets carrying signs that say, “stop the socialists,” “tea bag libs before they tea bag you,” and “no to new taxes.” Naturally, the people in these crowds are depicted as being filled with nothing but white folks.
(Click to see larger image)
The black character asks the out of costume Captain, “What the hell is this?” And follows that with, “looks like some kind of anti-tax protest.” The Falcon character then snidely tells his partner the Captain, “So I guess this whole ‘hate the government’ vibe around here isn’t limited to the Watchdogs.”
The two then discuss their plan to infiltrate the subversive group that Marvel comics seems to be linking to the Tea Party movement. This discussion culminates in The Falcon wondering how a black man would do such a thing. “I don’t exactly see a black man from Harlem fitting in with a bunch of angry white folks,” he tells the incognito Captain America.
The Captain tells him, “no it’s perfect… this all fits right into my plan.” After this we find that the Captain’s plan is to send the black man into a redneck bar to pretend to be a black man working for the IRS and to get everyone all mad… because… well, you know that every white person is a racist that hates black civil servants, right?
So, there you have it, America. Tea Party protesters just “hate the government,” they are racists, they are all white folks, they are angry, and they associate with secretive white supremacist groups that want to over throw the U.S. government.
Bet you didn’t know that when you were indulging your right as a citizen to protest your government that you were a dangerous white supremacist that wants to destroy the country, did you? Bet you didn’t realize that your reverence for the U.S. Constitution was a subversive thing to do, did you? And I’ll also bet that you never imagined that you’d scare the little blue panties off of Captain America!
Nice going Marvel Comics. Thanks for making patriotic Americans into your newest super villains.
Trackback URL
Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Anti-Americanism, Anti-Capitalism, Bald-face lies, Child Exploitation, Communism, Delusional Dupes and DUmmies, Democrats, Heroes, Indoctrination, Journalistic Malpractice, Journalistic incompetence, Liberal Media/Bias, Liberal World, News, Propaganda, Revisionism, Social Engineering, Tea Parties, Tea Party/Protests, liberalism at 1:16 pm | Comments (3) | Trackback (1) |
- » Links To Visit – 02/09/10 NoisyRoom.net: Where liberty dwells, there is my country… pinged this post.
AGW Today: Add Wavegate And Africagate To The IPCC Hit List
Seriously, how can anyone even pretend to support the UN IPCC anymore? The feckless response from the climate alarmists has become tedious, repetitious, and absurd as the days go by and yet more incompetence from the IPCC, dare I say reckless, deceptive, deceitful, misleading, and blatantly untruthful (with forethought), continues to see the light of day.
First up, the UK Telegraph exposes Wavegate
The publication of inaccurate data on the potential of wave power to produce electricity around the world, which was wrongly attributed to the website of a commercial wave-energy company. (snip)
…..a diagram used to demonstrate the potential for generating electricity from wave power has been found to contain numerous errors.
The source of information for the diagram was cited as the website of UK-based wave-energy company Wavegen. Yet the diagram on Wavegen’s website contains dramatically different figures for energy potential off Britain and Alaska and in the Bering Sea.
When contacted by The Sunday Telegraph, Wavegen insisted that the diagram on its website had not been changed. It added that it was not the original source of the data and had simply reproduced it on its website.
The diagram is widely cited in other literature as having come from a paper on wave energy produced by the Institute of Mechanical Engineering in 1991 along with data from the European Directory of Renewable Energy.
Experts claim that, had the IPCC checked the citation properly, it would have spotted the discrepancies.
In other words, the UN IPCC included a changed version of the graph which was meant to support their climate alarmist ideas.
On to Africagate
Following an investigation by this blog (and with the story also told in The Sunday Times), another major “mistake” in the IPCC’s benchmark Fourth Assessment Report has emerged.
Similar in effect to the erroneous “2035″ claim – the year the IPCC claimed that Himalayan glaciers were going to melt – in this instance we find that the IPCC has wrongly claimed that in some African countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50 percent by 2020.
At best, this is a wild exaggeration, unsupported by any scientific research, referenced only to a report produced by a Canadian advocacy group, written by an obscure Moroccan academic who specialises in carbon trading, citing references which do not support his claims.
This claim was included in the IPCC’s Synthesis report, considered to be the most important part of the IPCC report, and was the personal responsibility of Dr R K Pachauri, the chair of the UN IPCC, who also seems to have a *surprise!* financial stake in pushing climate alarmism.
We’ve seen the IPCC use student dissertations (some unpublished), flagrantly false studies, changed data, newspaper and press releases, and reports from environmental pressure groups, among others. They make claims that it is hotter than ever, but won’t let anyone check the data. Yet, we are supposed to listen to people who are involved in fantasy, rather than science? People who have a financial stake in making sure that people believe in the worst case.
Come on, climate alarmists, step away from Jim Jones, and come back to the place where real science is done.
Trackback URL
Posted by William Teach in AGW hyposterics, Agenda based science, Bald-face lies, Energy, Europe, Fraud/misrepresentation, Global Warming, Government corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, IPCC, News, Propaganda, Research/surveys, Science/pseudo-science, UN, chicanery, environmental activists/terrorists, man-made science at 10:00 am | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
Obama Getting Desperate On Health Legislation, Convening Summit
In a sign that smacks of incredible desperation regarding his signature, and outsourced legislation – and also shows that he still does not comprehend that the economy and jobs are the top issues facing this country – Obama made a big announcement during his little interview with Katie Couric, a time period in which most football fans probably switched the channel to the Puppy Bowl rather than listen to this drivel
President Obama said Sunday that he would convene a half-day bipartisan health care session at the White House to be televised live this month, a high-profile gambit that will allow Americans to watch as Democrats and Republicans try to break their political impasse.
In other words, another forum for Obama to push his stale, tired, and unpopular ideas and plans. We will be treated, not that many people will watch, to a long winded teleprompter speech, a cute grandstanding event. Hey, whatever happened with that jobs summit Obama convened back in December?
Mr. Obama made the announcement in an interview on CBS during the Super Bowl pre-game show, capitalizing on a vast television audience. He set out a plan that would put Republicans on the spot to offer their own ideas on health care and show whether both sides are willing to work together.
I’ll be interested to see what the TV ratings are for the time period when Obama came on the tube.
“I want to come back and have a large meeting, Republicans and Democrats, to go through systematically all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward,” Mr. Obama said in the interview from the White House Library.
Mr. Obama challenged Republicans to attend the meeting with their plans for lowering the cost of health insurance and expanding coverage to more than 30 million uninsured Americans. Republican leaders said they welcomed the opportunity and called on Democrats to start the debate from scratch, which the president said he would not do.
This begs the question, will Obama listen to the Republican proposals? Even more important, will Nancy Pelosi and/or Harry Reid? Will any of them act on the proposals? Pass the bottle of Doubtful. This is pure desperation, a bit of smoke and mirrors, and will be a tag teamed heavily partisan event, devoid of listening from Obama, Reid, and Pelosi, and simply a method in which to make it appear as if Republicans are being listened to, when they are actually being lectured and beaten around the ears. Then they will attempt to smash the same old unpopular health system legislation through Congress.
“How do you guys want to lower costs? How do you guys intend to reform the insurance market so that people with pre-existing conditions, for example, can get health care?” he said. “How do you want to make sure that the 30 million people who don’t have health insurance can get it? What are your ideas specifically?”
In fact, the only thing on that list that the Dem plans do is mandate that people cannot be denied coverage. And whatever happened to the 45 million uninsured claim? Where did that disappear to? For an answer, I would suggest that Obama take a look at the ideas Whole Foods’ CEO John Mackey introduced, ideas in which all Obama’s little left wing nuts failed to engage in debate on. Instead, they called for a boycott.
Daniel Foster at National Review discusses this dog and pony show, and says “told ya so!”
Meanwhile, I wonder what is happening with the socialized health system in Hawaii. They’re out of money and not paying providers for their Quest program, which is for folks 65 and older with disabilities, which could mean reduced services? Goodness!
Crossed at Pirate’s Cove
Trackback URL
Posted by William Teach in 10th Amendment, Anti-Americanism, Anti-Capitalism, Bald-face lies, Barack Obama, Congress, Democrats, Dems In Charge: Now What?, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Government tyranny, Healthcare, Journalistic Malpractice, Journalistic Prostitution, Liberal Media/Bias, Nancy Pelosi, Nanny State, News, Politics As Usual, Senate, Taxes, Totalitarianism, U.S. Constitution, Unconstitutional, government media, harry reid at 8:00 am | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) |
