Author Archives: pandora

About pandora

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

I Feel Like I’ve Been Here Before

If you haven’t read Kevin Drum’s article, please do.  He puts into words exactly how I feel.

The striking thing to me, though, is how fast the left has turned on him. Conservatives gave Bush five or six years before they really turned on him, and even then they revolted more against the Republican establishment than against Bush himself. But the left? It took about ten months. And the depth of the revolt against Obama has been striking too. As near as I can tell, there’s a small but significant minority who are so enraged that they’d be perfectly happy to see his presidency destroyed as a kind of warning to future Democrats. It’s extraordinarily self-destructive behavior — and typically liberal, unfortunately. Just ask LBJ, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton. And then ask them whether liberal revolt, in the end, strengthened liberalism or conservatism.

The speed the left has turned on him is striking.  And it’s something that has puzzled me.  I remember questioning the speed of the Tea Party rally one month after Obama was sworn in.  I remember thinking that their timing had far more to do with who was in the White House than anything else.  And I’m beginning to feel the same way about the left.

I say this because a lot of what I’m hearing, and reading, is disturbingly familiar.  I’ve heard it all before, specifically during the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary.  The disparaging twists on Obama’s name, the predictable name calling of anyone who supports him, and the never-ending references to Kool-Aid.

It’s almost as if we came together in November 2008 under false pretenses.  It’s as if some on the left were ready and waiting for him to fail, and even eager to pounce on every failure and set back as some sort of proof.  Proof of what, I’m not sure.  What I am sure about is that the level of Obama outrage is over the top given his time in office.  I also don’t believe that this extreme approach (Obama’s a liar, he’s as bad, or worse than Bush, etc.)  moves the Overton Window as much as it makes swing voters swing in the opposite direction.  Bernard Avishai says it best:  “Hell, if his own people think he’s a sell-out and jerk, why should we support this?”

And that’s because there is simply no balance in the left’s criticism.  Obama sucks, he’s a sell-out, he’s a liar is all you read and hear from one side.  There’s never any attempt to say something like, “I hate the HCR bill, but I’m pleased with the way he’s toned down the rhetoric on terrorism, the Lily Ledbetter Act, etc. They simply can’t stand him, and I sense they’ve always felt this way – that their views aren’t driven by disappointment, as much as they are driven by the anticipation of being able to say I told you so.

And while there will be plenty of blame to go around if Coakley loses today, some of that blame will rest on the far left – a fact I’m not sure will bother them, since they seem to be okay with scalp collecting to make their point.  My problem?  I still have no idea what their point is.  Perhaps they want to kill this bill Presidency and start from scratch?

I Might Have To Consider Home Schooling

Especially since I’m already doing it, since my 7th grader just told me her Social Studies teacher told her that Climate Change was nonsense – which is scary, but becoming oh so predictable.  Seriously, can we just pay these people more so we can get rid of the imbeciles?  When my 7th grader questioned her about the polar ice caps and the fact that temperatures globally were rising, there was no answer other than “Look how cold it is outside.”  Simply brilliant, and how sad is it when a twelve year old totally owns a “professional” educator whose only chance of winning an argument with a child is to tell them to sit down and shut up?

Texas in charge of textbooks. I suggest you read this.

Tea Parties Organize To Take Control

The one thing you have to give the Right credit is their ability to play the long game.  They are quite happy to chip away at policy they don’t like and seem to understand that baby steps are still, indeed, steps.

Steve Benen lays it out, and we need to pay attention.

The Tea Party movement ignited a year ago, fueled by anti-establishment anger. Now, Tea Party activists are trying to take over the establishment, ground up.

Across the country, they are signing up to be Republican precinct leaders, a position so low-level that it often remains vacant, but which comes with the ability to vote for the party executives who endorse candidates, approve platforms and decide where the party spends money.

Calls to mind when Conservatives mobilized the take-over of School Boards – another low-level position whose impact wasn’t realized immediately.  And isn’t that going well?

There’s nothing wrong with passionate citizens getting involved in the political process. But the American mainstream may not appreciate the fact that uninformed crazies — who think death panels are real, but global warming isn’t — intend to take over the Republican infrastructure, more than they already have…

…But that’s what makes 2010 dangerous — the mainstream doesn’t realize the radical nature of the Tea Party “movement”; Democratic voters feel underwhelmed by the pace of progress; and the electorate may very well reward radicalization.

The consequences of the rise of nihilists are hard to predict, but the possibilities are chilling.

Now, I’m not sure what can be done to stop this infestation, and that really is a Republican problem.  What I can do is not take my eye off the ball.  These people truly frighten me, and the idea of them in charge of anything that impacts my life is unacceptable.  And that’s the choice that’s forming, and will continue to form as Tea Party members leave the fringe and infiltrate the mainstream.  So while there are bad Democrats, who we should deal with, it doesn’t make sense to jettison them without a viable alternative to take their place.  And the fact is… replacing bad Dems with Tea Partiers is not an acceptable choice.

And if we go down this path we could find ourselves living in a “Christian” nation and all that that entails.

Santorum Considers Tossing His Hat In The Ring

Via CNN:

In an e-mail and letter to supporters of his Political Action Committee, America’s Foundation, Santorum writes, “After talking it over with my wife Karen and our kids – I am considering putting my name in for the 2012 presidential race.”

“I’m convinced that conservatives need a candidate who will not only stand up for our views, but who can articulate a conservative vision for our country’s future,” Santorum also writes. “And right now, I just don’t see anyone stepping up to the plate.”

“I have no great burning desire to be president, but I have a burning desire to have a different president of the United States,” said Santorum, who lost his re-election bid in 2006 after two terms in the Senate.

Oh please, please make it so, because I do have a great burning desire to watch this campaign.

Cellphones, Texting And Kids

There’s a debate going on in the Pandora household – Is it time to let the kids have cellphones, and if we let them have cellphones should we let them text?

First, is everyone sitting down?  Okay, here it is.  I do not have a cellphone.  Now, everyone take a deep breath and I’ll explain.  There really isn’t a specific reason for my not having a cell phone.  I just never bought one.  And while there have been times having a cellphone would have been handy, those situations were never drastic enough to make me take action.  Also, as a stay-at-home mom my time during the day is spent, well, mostly at home.  Go on, you can laugh now.  (FTR, Mr. Pandora has a work cellphone.)

But now the issue has come up in relation to my 15 and 12 year old – mainly my 12 year old daughter since my 15 year old could care less about talking on a phone or texting.

Everybody still with me, or are you still stuck on the fact that I’m a mutant?

I have several concerns about kids with cellphones.  First, imo, kids should only have cellphones for their parent’s convenience.  What that means is if kids aren’t answering their parent’s calls then the cellphone should be taken away.  It’s a privilege, and should be treated the same way as the keys to the car.  I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve been with parents who are beside themselves because they can’t reach their kids on a device they primarily bought to be able to reach their kids.  Another little wrinkle that I’ve witnessed – many times – is how often  kids have called their parents to tell them where they are only for the parents to discover that their kids were lying.  Yeah, I know this has been going on well before technology, but there’s no denying that cellphones have made the “I’ll tell my parents I’m going to the library, and then meet you at the party” ploy a lot easier.  I even know one parent who went so far as to track their child’s whereabouts via a GPS program on their cellphone .  Not sure how I feel about that, but I’m leaning towards if  you’ve reached the point where you’re tracking your child whereabouts through GPS, perhaps you should consider grounding them.

My second concern is the drama, fighting and bullying taking place through the technology.  And while I may have trouble getting my son to talk, I can’t shut my daughter up.  I’m really not complaining about this, she is a fount of information, most of it harmless, but some of it quite disturbing.  This is the way it seems to go:  Person A has a problem (real or imagined) with person B.  Begin texting.  Person A then recruits others to their side and they join the texting war.  Sometimes person B forms their own posse, but sometimes not.

I realize that these sort of arguments have always taken place, but what concerns me is how they are now taking place silently.  Two kids yelling horrible things at one and other attracts attention.  Saying the same vicious things through texting remains under the radar, and many of these attacks are fueled by kids unknown to the victim.  In many ways texting has become the bully’s new playground.

I witnessed this tactic this past summer.  Two 13 year old girls had an argument.  The texting began, only one of the girls put together a network of support that swamped the other girl.  And what started out as an argument over something stupid, and typically childish, ended with explicitly sexual name calling and rumors which quickly spilled onto FaceBook.  When the adults finally got wind of what was going on one little girl was already devastated.  And while this may be likened to nasty messages written on the bathroom wall, the shear volume of the attack isn’t so easily scrubbed away.

Another little cellphone “game” that disturbs me is the “let’s take an embarrassing picture of someone and post it everywhere.”  Again, most of these pictures are harmless and silly, but some are not.

So, I have a dilemma.  In many ways joining the modern world would make my life easier.  In others, I would have to take on more work by keeping a vigilant tab on what’s going on in the silent world of finger tapping.  A part of me knows this is inevitable, and a part of me resents the technology that makes the secretive world of teenagers more secretive.

So… any thoughts, ideas… or recommendations for which cellphone plan I should consider?  Or are you still shaking your head and saying, “Pandora doesn’t own a cell phone?  How is that possible?”

What Sort Of Scum Would Profit Off The Haiti Disaster?

If you answered credit card companies you’d be correct.

As a massive human tragedy unfolds in Haiti, relief organizations are soliciting credit-card donations through their hotlines and websites. About 97 percent of these donations will actually make it to the designated organizations — but the other 3 percent will be skimmed off by banks and credit card companies to cover their “transaction costs.”

Thanks to this hidden fee, American banks and credit card companies are making huge profits — somewhere in the neighborhood of $250 million a year — off of people’s charitable donations, according to a Huffington Post analysis.

They are truly disgusting, and I’m all for regulating them to the point where they can’t use the bathroom without a permission slip from the government.

Add to this that some of  “these fees [for charities] are far greater than the marginal cost of the online transaction.”  No wonder everyone hates them.  That said, I just might have to take Capital One up on one of their never-ending mailers since:

One notable exception to the rule in this country is Capital One bank. Through its “No Hassle Giving Site”, the bank waives transaction costs for holders of its Visa or MasterCard cards, so that 100 percent of people’s donations goes to their chosen charity.

As it should be.

I’m Having Trouble Seeing This Marriage End In Anything Other Than Divorce

Cenk Uygar (the Seminal at Fire Dog Lake) has issued an invitation to tea parties.

I issue a challenge to the tea-party movement. If you’re true to your word, and you believe in protecting the American people and principles, and you think government is too big and hands out money to the wrong people, then join us in fighting against the biggest giveaway to biggest culprits. Fight the power of the banks with us.

Don’t get me wrong, I think creating a majority of Americans fighting against banks is a good idea.  That said, I already think this coalition, while not organized under one name, exists across ideological lines.  I also think pointing out how tea parties are being played by astroturf  organizations is smart.

What I’m not sure is smart is hitching your cart to a group of people who didn’t exist until Barack Obama became President.  So forgive me for questioning the sincerity of tea parties – a group who apparently  didn’t seem to care all that much about deficits and debt during the Bush Administration.  To me their history is questionable, their timing far too obvious to be coincidental, and their sudden concern over spending shallow at best.  Unless… someone here actually believes they would exist if McCain won.  So, color me extremely skeptical.  To me, tea parties have always been far more political than populist.

But there’s another side to this debate, and that’s the movement courting the tea partiers.  From where I’m standing, the only way to bring these two groups together involves compromise  And, let’s face it, the side issuing this invitation, as well as the side being asked to RSVP, aren’t known for compromise. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but I’m having trouble seeing these two groups playing happy family for more than 30 seconds before all hell breaks loose.

But what really bothers me about this post is the use of specific language designed to woo tea partiers.  Take this line for instance:  If you’re true to your word, and you believe in protecting the American people and principles, and you think government is too big and hands out money to the wrong people...  Wrong people?  Government too big?  Hmmm… Think the Tea Partier’s idea of where government needs to shrink and who constitutes the wrong sort of person to hand out money will match up with a Progressive’s idea?  And don’t even get me started on trying to define American “principles.”

I have one last thought, giving the recent split on the left.  Before we start adding additions, perhaps we should get our own house in order.  Unless… I’ve already been divorced and my former partner is moving onto their next relationship?  Say it ain’t so!

Haiti Earthquake – Please Help

As more and more information comes out of Haiti there is no doubt that the scope of this tragedy will be grow.  The Red Cross estimates that 3 million people are affected.  No one is even estimating the death toll.

The pictures/videos coming out of Haiti are heartbreaking, and I simply can’t look at them and not do anything.  So… I’m sending money, which is hardly original or heroic, but it’s what I can do.

If anyone else is interested in donating, this link will direct you to organizations ready to help with this tragedy.

Vigilantism Justified

Since when is killing someone performing a legal procedure justified?

Via Digby:

Before the first juror is selected or witness called, a decision allowing a confessed killer to argue he believes the slaying of one of the nation’s few late-term abortion providers was a justified act aimed at saving unborn children has upended what most expected to be an open-and-shut case.

Some abortion opponents are pleasantly stunned and eager to watch Scott Roeder tell a jury his slaying of Wichita doctor George Tiller was voluntary manslaughter. Tiller’s colleagues and abortion rights advocates are outraged and fear the court’s actions give a more than tacit approval to further acts of violence.

”This judge has basically announced a death sentence for all of us who help women,” said Dr. Warren Hern of Boulder, Colo., a longtime friend of Tiller who also performs late-term abortions. ”That is the effect of the ruling.”

[…]

Will the judge’s decision embolden militant anti-abortion activists and lead to open season on abortion providers? Does the Justice Department plan to file charges against Roeder under federal statutes guaranteeing access to clinics? And what does it portend for the unfolding case itself and the inevitable legal challenges to the nation’s abortion laws?

Hern, of Boulder, Colo., said it’s irrelevant that Wilbert won’t decide until after the defense presents its evidence whether to allow jurors to actually consider a conviction on the lesser charge.

”The damage is done: The judge has agreed to give him a platform,” Hern said. ”It is an act of incomprehensible stupidity on the part of the judge, but he is carrying out the will of the people of Kansas who are trying to get out of the 19th century.”

The Feminist Majority Foundation also denounced the ruling, saying Wilbert essentially was allowing a justifiable homicide defense. The group, which supports abortion rights, urged the Justice Department to file federal charges under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act.

Justice Department spokesman Alejandro Miyar declined to comment, citing an ongoing […]

A man who runs a Web site supporting violence against abortion providers said in the wake of the judge’s decision that he has changed his mind about attending Roeder’s trial. The Rev. Don Spitz of Chesapeake, Va., said he and other activists from the Army of God plan to observe the court proceedings quietly next week.

”I am flabbergasted, but in a good way,” Spitz said of the judge’s decision.

Spitz acknowledged that the possibility that Wilbert’s decision may influence some people who in the past wouldn’t kill abortion providers because they risked a sentence of death or life imprisonment. ”It may increase the number of people who may be willing to take that risk,” he said.

In Des Moines, Iowa, militant anti-abortion activist Dave Leach agreed the decision opens the door to presenting the same evidence as in a case of justifiable homicide. It was Leach who wrote the 104-page legal brief that Roeder signed and submitted to the court in which he admitted killing Tiller.

”The closer we come to a court actually addressing these issues, the less danger abortionists are going to be in,” Leach said. [emphasis mine and Digby’s]

Talk about a slippery slope and a ready excuse for breaking the law, or as Digby states at the end of the post:   Nice little clinic you have there. Be a shame if anything happened to it…

This is crazy, and so is the judge.  Why not just declare open season on everyone who legally works in an abortion clinic?  If only this judge took this step years ago, Terri Schiavo could still be alive.  Those who were charged with removing her from life support… not so much.  Or… we could take that oh so reliable sex offender registry and start working our way down the list.

Have at it in the comments.  I’m beyond speech.

Intimidation At Its Finest

What would you do if comments like this started arriving in your in-box?

As I talked to Johnson in his office, an alert flashed on one of his two giant computer monitors. An angry screed targeting him on another website concluded: “I think a visit to Mr. Johnson’s home might be warranted. Anybody got his address?”

Would you move to a gated community?  Or, laugh it off because there’s no such thing as a lone wolf?

Charles Johnson is not laughing – he’s moving, or, more accurately, has already moved into a gated community.  And…

The man who once decried vitriol spread on liberal websites now says: “The kinds of hate mail and the kinds of attacks I am getting from the right wing are way beyond anything I got when I was criticizing the left or even radical Islam.”

Read that last part again – way beyond anything I got when I was criticizing the left or even radical Islam. I think Mr. Johnson’s decision to move was a wise one.

Breaking: Joe Biden’s Mother Has Died

I just received a call from LiberalGeek who has informed me (via twitter) that Joe Biden’s mother, Jean Biden, has died. She was 92, so at least we can say she lived a long and eventful life, and saw her son become Vice President of the United States.

Our thoughts are with the Biden family.

Update from Delaware Dem:

The News Journal now has the story. I want to post a quick story from that article that I think perfectly describes Jean Biden:

The young Joe Biden had a stutter that garnered plenty of laughter and teasing nicknames from his peers. He walked out of his seventh grade Catholic school classroom, ashamed after a nun teased him in front of his peers for being unable to clearly read a paragraph. Jean Biden met him at the door of the family home and drove him back to school, where she confronted the teacher.

“I could see my mother pull herself up to her full height, 5 foot 1.” Joe wrote in his 2007 autobiography, “Promises to Keep.” “My mother, who was so timid, so respectful of the church, stood up, walked over in front of the nun and said, ‘If you ever speak to my son like that again, I’ll come back and rip that bonnet off your head.”

Her point made, Jean Biden then ordered her son to get back to class.

Now go give God a good talking to, Mrs. Biden.

Exceptional Teachers

I must be a glutton for punishment, but I can’t ignore this article Cassandra linked to last night.

Go read the whole thing.  Here is what jumped out at me.

As Teach for America began to identify exceptional teachers using this data, Farr began to watch them. He observed their classes, read their lesson plans, and talked to them about their teaching methods and beliefs. He and his colleagues surveyed Teach for America teachers at least four times a year to find out what they were doing and what kinds of training had helped them the most.

Right away, certain patterns emerged. First, great teachers tended to set big goals for their students. They were also perpetually looking for ways to improve their effectiveness. For example, when Farr called up teachers who were making remarkable gains and asked to visit their classrooms, he noticed he’d get a similar response from all of them: “They’d say, ‘You’re welcome to come, but I have to warn you—I am in the middle of just blowing up my classroom structure and changing my reading workshop because I think it’s not working as well as it could.’ When you hear that over and over, and you don’t hear that from other teachers, you start to form a hypothesis.” Great teachers, he concluded, constantly reevaluate what they are doing.

Superstar teachers had four other tendencies in common: they avidly recruited students and their families into the process; they maintained focus, ensuring that everything they did contributed to student learning; they planned exhaustively and purposefully—for the next day or the year ahead—by working backward from the desired outcome; and they worked relentlessly, refusing to surrender to the combined menaces of poverty, bureaucracy, and budgetary shortfalls.

I have met these teachers.  They exist in almost every school, public and private.  What’s more… there existence isn’t a secret.  Everyone knows who they are, and the parent grapevine is ripe with information.  It is a common practice for the parent of a child entering 8th grade to offer advice to the parent of an incoming 7th grader.  (BTW, this conversation happens at every grade level)  And one of the first questions asked is:  Who is their teacher?

The answer to that question releases a boatload of information.  And while some of the information given may be faulty, one thing is clear.  The consensus on who is a good teacher is practically unshakable, and many parents will fight tooth and nail to get their child into that teacher’s classroom.

What is taking place inside those classrooms that’s so different from neighboring classrooms?  I don’t have a scientific answer to that question.  I can only draw on my experience as a parent of a 10th grader and a 7th grader.  I can tell you that my children have attend public and private schools and that exceptional teachers are found in both environments.  And you have every right to question my qualifications on deciding who’s an exceptional teacher and who is not.  Bear with me, and I’ll try and explain.

First, let me say, that when it comes to judging teachers, personality plays a very, very minor role.  I have encountered great teachers who turn their classrooms into a stage and ones who are extremely traditional.  In fact, when my son or daughter have complained about a teacher’s style (as kids always do) my response has been that they had better learn to handle different style types and personalities if they want to succeed in life.

Second, I’m not basing my assessment on test scores, although a teacher’s response to test scores does play a part in my formula.  I’ll delve more into that later, but for now let’s just say that my child acing tests in a class does not equate to an exceptional teacher in my book.

So if I’m not judging on personality and test scores, then what am I judging on?

That answer lies with my children, who are a fount of information.  And not all of it reliable, since a good deal of it is personality driven.  They may like a teacher for a variety of reasons.  They may like the teacher because their personalities mesh, or because the class is easy/difficult, or because the teacher is exceptional, or not.  On the flip side, they may dislike a teacher for the exact same reasons.

Confusing?  Sure it is, but keep listening to your kids and certain patterns begin to emerge.  The first thing I tend to notice with my children is a desire to succeed in a specific classroom.  In addition to hearing a certain teacher’s name more than other’s, I start hearing a lot about what’s taking place inside the classroom.  This year, my 10th grade son talks practically non-stop about his AP Biology teacher and what they are learning.  And it’s the combination of teacher and subject that caught my attention.  This enthusiasm to discuss and share new knowledge is a good indicator, to me, that my son – who at 15 isn’t particularly chatty, and prefers to speak in grunts – is most likely being taught by an excellent teacher.  There’s a sort of energy.

Granted, in the above scenario, everything came together to form a perfect environment for my son.  So, in the name of fairness, let me give you another example.

My 7th grade daughter struggles with math, and this year has been her most daunting.  She was put into the gifted program and the beginning of the year was full of tears when it came to math.  (Note:  My daughter takes her grades very seriously, perhaps too seriously, and up until this year was a straight A student.  So a C average in math was the equivalent to the end of the world.) I knew her math teacher’s name, heard it in my sleep, by the end of the first week of school – and she wasn’t very complimentary.  But in between all the I hate math and I don’t like Mr. X, etc., etc., another word emerged:  Expects.  As in, he expects me to learn this, he expects too much from me, and… he expects me to come to his afternoon tutoring class.

Hmmm… So I asked if the tutoring class was mandatory.  To which she replied, no, but he (said with a sneer only a 12 year old can deliver) expects me to show up.  Meanwhile, behind the scenes, her math teacher had contacted me.  The conversation was amazing, mainly because he didn’t focus on what my daughter could do to improve.  He wanted to know what he could do to help her improve.  Geez, talk about a dog with a bone.  This guy was persistent and unbelievably pro-active.  Needless to say she attended tutoring classes, no longer sneers when she refers to him – which is still quite often – and, as I write this post, she is two points away from an A… and, most importantly, loves math.

Now, I realize my two examples are personal and not every kid in those classes may be having the same experience, but I did have a heads up.  Which brings us back to the parent grapevine.  I had already heard, from several parents, about how fantastic my son’s AP Bio teacher was before the first day of school.  Likewise, last year the grapevine had warned me that his last year algebra teacher wasn’t so hot.  That didn’t really concern me because my son is freakishly good at math.  My bad.  Six weeks into school last year and my son suddenly announces he hates math.  Whoa!  This resulted in my contacting the teacher, and let’s just say that that phone call bore no resemblance to the one I had with my daughter’s math teacher.  In fact, I barely got a word in edgewise.  When I finally did, here is what I said,  “I’m sorry, do you think I’m accusing you of something?”  Which only triggered another monologue about these kids.  I hung up frustrated and sympathetic to my son.  Not, that I shared my thoughts with my son.  I instructed him to muddle through, explained that it was normal not to get along with everyone, and I still expected him to do well in the class – which he did, but, even after a year, he still announces how much he hates algebra, a class he aced by the way.  But, in the end, that didn’t matter.  What mattered to my son was what went on inside the classroom.

Does this mean my son’s algebra teacher wasn’t exceptional.  Not necessarily, but there’s no denying that a consensus has formed about this teacher, and I know that if someone asked me about him I’d groan and relate my experience – which may or may not be fair.

I guess what I’m saying is that there are a lot of indicators out there into what makes an excellent teacher, and while we, as a group of teachers, parents and children, might not know the formula for creating an exceptional teacher, we, as a group of teachers, parents and children, do know who is exceptional.  They simply stand out, and it’s in our interest to find out what makes them tick.

Obligatory disclaimer on this topic:  I am not attacking teachers.  I am not saying that Teach for America teachers are better or worse than other teachers.  I am not advocating for any thing other than educating children.  And I’d really like the comments in this thread to focus on improving education rather than on finger pointing and educational politics.

“They” Are Coming After “Us”

I realize, given the build up to the Exorcist-like music, that I’m supposed to take this video very, very seriously.  So why can’t I stop laughing?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZs8k4pJcyk[/youtube]

Oh, the drama!  Oh, the horror!  And… Oh, the typical threatening language and name calling.

These constant Armageddon scenarios are beginning to remind me of the crazy guy in New York standing on the street corner shouting that the end is near.   I’m also not sure how this “we are doomed” strategy translates into a Republican/Conservative victory.  The message seems to be… Be afraid, be very afraid.  Which is a predictable tactic from the right , but I’m not sure it’s effective – especially since, yet again, it’s presented without a single solution.

How long can Republicans/Conservatives run on the sky is falling without offering a way to keep it from crashing down on our heads?   And if they don’t come up with a detailed plan, aren’t they basically running on the platform that the Bush years were okay, that health care is great the way it is, that Iraq and Afghanistan were rolling along just fine, and that we should have left the economy alone?  As they mock “change” without offering an alternative plan, aren’t they running on “no change?”

And if they don’t develop a platform that consists of something more than Obama is the devil and Democrats are his handmaidens then the debates preceding the 2010 elections should be interesting.