Author Archives: pandora

About pandora

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

Just For Fun

In Brit Hume’s latest attempt to justify his proselytizing, replace the word Christian with Muslim and Jesus Christ with Allah.

And my sense of that Tiger is that he needs something that Christianity, especially provides and gives and offers and that is redemption and forgiveness and I was really meaning to say in those comments yesterday more about Christianity than I was about anything else. I mentioned the Buddhism only because his mother is a Buddhist and he has apparently said that he is a Buddhist. I’m not sure how seriously he practices that. But I think… I think that Jesus Christ offers Tiger Woods something that Tiger Woods apparently needs.

Wasn’t that fun?

FOX News Has Reached Televangelist Status

Not that anyone with a brain didn’t see this coming.

Via Balloon Juice:

Brit Hume had some advice for Tiger Woods during this week’s “Fox News Sunday.” Woods will recover as a golfer, Hume says, but it remains to be seen whether he will recover as a person.

“He’s said to be a Buddhist,” Hume said. “I don’t think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. … Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery.”  [emphasis mine]

There simply is no line FOX won’t cross, but, then again, these are the same people screaming about upholding the Constitution while in the same breath demanding we profile all Muslims.  And why does this statement strike me as a cheap get out of jail free card?  A sort of, if you play for our team you’ll be forgiven.  If you don’t… well, then damn you to Hell.   I swear we’re headed for the next Crusade.

Substitute Teachers Can’t Substitute For The Real Thing

The New York Times has an interesting Op-Ed concerning substitute teachers, which, I admit, is something I had never really thought about before.  And I probably should have since it seems at least one of my two children have a substitute teacher almost every week.   In fact, the words I hear most from my kids, after complaining about homework, is “Oh, we had a sub today.”  And it never even registered to me.

As much as I became frustrated by the lack of training and support, I was most angered by how many days teachers were out of their classrooms. Nationwide, 5.2 percent of teachers are absent on any given day, a rate three times as high as that of professionals outside teaching and more than one and a half times as high as that of teachers in Britain. Teachers in America are most likely to be absent on Fridays, followed by Mondays.

This means that children have substitute teachers for nearly a year of their kindergarten-through-12th-grade education. Taxpayers shell out $4 billion a year for subs.

5.2 percent?  Houston, we have a problem.  Actually, we have two problems.  Too many teachers absent, and too many untrained substitutes.  Both issues must be addressed.  First, why are so many teachers absent?  Some, like my daughter’s Language Arts teacher have good reason.  This teacher was diagnosed with cancer and had to have emergency surgery.  And, I’d guess that a good many teachers have valid excuses (and a good many are rarely absent).  But not all, given the fact that teachers in America are most likely to be absent on Fridays, followed by Mondays.

And, yes, I’m bracing myself for the teacher attack, even though I’ve been careful not to lump all teachers together.  For some reason it’s almost impossible to criticize certain teachers’ behavior without offending the entire profession.  I don’t really understand this since we have no problem separating the good apples from the bad in other professions.  So, yeah, I’m ready to duck.

As far as substitutes… I can’t think of a more harrowing job.  That said, given the amount of days we rely on them, there really needs to be standards.  Again, I’m certain there are some excellent substitutes, but it can’t be easy to receive a call at 6 am and be ready to step into an unknown classroom by 7:15.  But a lot of substitutes aren’t qualified, and either we have to up the standards required to substitute teach, or we have to reduce the number of days teachers are absent.

Sometimes it seems that the only people we hold accountable, and who face consequences, are the kids.

Administration plays a big role as well.  It seems some (again, not all) administrators feel that once they call in a substitute their job is done.  This couldn’t be further from the truth.  They should be monitoring and helping the substitute teacher every step of the way.

Overall, I have been thrilled with 90% of my children’s teachers.  The remaining 10% need to find another line of work.  And I’d bet that if you complied a list of those 5.2% absent the majority would be repeat offenders.

Rachel Maddow Calls Out “Chatty Cathy” Cheney And The Parroting Press

If you haven’t watched the video below, please do so.  Rachel Maddow, calmly and professionally, dismantles every bit of garbage spewing out of our former Vice President’s mouth.  And, isn’t it ironic that a man who spent the majority of the last eight years in an undisclosed location is now seeking the spotlight with a fervor that makes Lindsay Lohan appear shy and reticent.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfXajmZiG8Y[/youtube]

Dick Cheney’s lies are simply breathtaking, but as Rachel points out (at the end of the video) he gets away with this crap because the Press allows him.  That may be changing, however.  In a column today, Eugene Robinson uses the “L” word.

Dick Cheney’s lies about President Obama

That’s quite a headline, and hopefully it will catch on.  Look, Cheney’s not stupid.  He knows he’s lying.  The question is why would he blatantly say things that can be so easily disproved?  Well… why wouldn’t he when he knows the press will simply repeat his claims verbatim.  It’s the equivalent of  a boss instructing his secretary to “Take a letter.”  Cheney speaks, the press copies down what he says, and then… that’s it.

I understand that Republicans/Conservatives view fear and terror as their path to victory, but there’s something undeniably creepy about their reaction to the underwear bomber; a sort of glee that I find disconcerting.

And while they may revel, and fundraise, over an averted tragedy to score political points, the press shouldn’t be their cheerleaders.  Now, don’t get me wrong, the press isn’t really picking sides.  Their role has been that of the crowd sceaming “Fight!  Fight!” from the sidelines.  They are the equivalent of a high school note-passer who enflames an argument by leaving out vital information.  Cheney and Republicans count on this behavior.  They are quite confident that they can keep ramping up the rhetoric with no fear of being called out and facing embarrassment.  The stenographers press have no real incentive to set the record straight (other than professional integrity – I crack myself up!) because, if they did, they’d kill the story they are creating, and might actually have to do some real reporting.  But I guess it’s just easier to say, “Psst… did you hear what he called you?”  And when the other party responds… well, that’s tomorrow’s story.

Let Me Be The First To Say… This Will Fail

Tucker Carlson is planning to start a blog to rival Huffington Post.  And, right away, he tells us what to expect.

He said that he wants to emphasize original reporting. “We don’t simply want to be parasites of other news sites,” he said. “We want to be creators of news,” though he added, “We’re not in it to beat anybody.”

Hmmm… Creators of news?  Well, at least he’s honest, even though I keep envisioning endless Balloon Boy stories.  Conservatives are simply incapable of grassroots efforts.  Liberals might be a little too good at them!  And that, my contrary friends, is the difference between Democrats and Republicans.

The Next Battle – Cap and Trade

This isn’t looking good.

Via Matt Yglesias:

Lisa Lerer’s Politico piece on how moderate Senate Democrats don’t want to do a cap-and-trade bill is extremely frustrating. Neither Mary Landrieu nor Ben Nelson nor Evan Bayh nor Kent Conrad nor Mark Pryor seems to want to say that they don’t think climate change is real. Nor do they want to say that they don’t think it’s a problem. Nor do they want to say that they don’t think it’s a problem caused by emissions of greenhouse gases. Nor do they want to deny that legally binding caps on greenhouse gas emissions are the only reliable way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

But it’s also clear that none of them want to say something like “voting for legally binding caps on greenhouse gas emissions would be the right thing to do, but for selfish reasons I choose not to.”

It’s a great piece – go read all of it.  Now, before this battle begins – technically, given the quotes in the article, it’s already begun – can we try and map out a strategy that doesn’t involve pitting progressive against progressive.  Yglesias sums it up perfectly.

It is difficult to deal with and passage of an economywide cap does seem unlikely. But, again, it’s only difficult because Senators are making it difficult. It’s only unlikely because Senators are making it unlikely. If these guys don’t want to vote yes on a clean energy bill, then they should say what their reasons are, not engage in this kind of odd prognostication as if they’re detached observers of the scene.

So… if anyone has a way to make Mary Landrieu, Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, Kent Conrad and Mark Pryor change their stance, speak now.  Sadly, I’m not seeing it.

Calculating Subsidies In Health Care

To see if you’d receive subsidies from HCR, check out this interesting little calculator from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

This tool illustrates premiums and government assistance under the types of reform proposals being considered in Congress for people under age 65 who purchase coverage on their own in an Exchange and are not covered through their employer, Medicare or Medicaid. While the proposals considered would not take effect for several years (2013 in the House and 2014 in the Senate), the results are presented in terms of 2009 premium and income levels to enable better comparisons to current circumstances. The tool allows the user to start with the provisions from one of several proposals and examine the impact at different income levels. Advanced settings allow users to change assumptions to show the effect of different policy choices.

I’m a sucker for tools like this, mainly because I like it when someone does the work for me.  And, like most people, I need to see the actual dollar amounts.

Looking For Some Good News?

As a person who’s been held hostage and treated like cargo by the airlines, I’m thrilled with this new law.

Via Think Progress:

Responding to horror stories of stranded travelers, the Obama administration ordered airlines today to allow passengers to disembark from planes that have been stuck on the tarmac for more than three hours. With the move, the Obama administration is “sending an unequivocal message to airlines that it won’t tolerate” excessive delays:

Airlines will be required to provide food and water for passengers within two hours of a plane being delayed on a tarmac, and to maintain operable lavatories. They must also provide passengers with medical attention when necessary. […]

“Airline passengers have rights, and these new rules will require airlines to live up to their obligation to treat their customers fairly,” Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a statement.

I’m lovin’ it.

FYI: The Gift Kids Really Wanted

Brandywine, Christina, Red Clay and Appoquinimink School Districts have canceled classes for the rest of the week.

Winter break begins NOW!

According to my kids:  BEST.  GIFT.  EVER.

UPDATE: As of now, Christina School District is closed today (12/22) but is scheduled to be open tomorrow.

The New “Super Majority” Problem

Despite all our differences on Health Care, the real problem is the new 60 vote or nothing framework.  This new Super Majority or nothing dilemma must be addressed if we ever want to govern.  Needing 60 votes to do anything is impossible mainly because it results in only two outcomes:

1. It stops legislation.
2. It only allows weakened legislation to pass.

Basically, it gives us two choice – Dead or neutered.  Krugman lays it out, complete with history lesson.

After all, Democrats won big last year, running on a platform that put health reform front and center. In any other advanced democracy this would have given them the mandate and the ability to make major changes. But the need for 60 votes to cut off Senate debate and end a filibuster — a requirement that appears nowhere in the Constitution, but is simply a self-imposed rule — turned what should have been a straightforward piece of legislating into a nail-biter. And it gave a handful of wavering senators extraordinary power to shape the bill.

Talk about power in the hands of the few.  Power that’s being abused by both sides of the aisle.

Some people will say that it has always been this way, and that we’ve managed so far. But it wasn’t always like this. Yes, there were filibusters in the past — most notably by segregationists trying to block civil rights legislation. But the modern system, in which the minority party uses the threat of a filibuster to block every bill it doesn’t like, is a recent creation.

The political scientist Barbara Sinclair has done the math. In the 1960s, she finds, “extended-debate-related problems” — threatened or actual filibusters — affected only 8 percent of major legislation. By the 1980s, that had risen to 27 percent. But after Democrats retook control of Congress in 2006 and Republicans found themselves in the minority, it soared to 70 percent.

70 percent.  That’s incredible.  It’s also what the Republicans now call governing, and, given their agenda, it’s highly effective.  Then again, Republicans have always loved the word “no.”  Just say no – to drugs, to sex… to any and all things proposed by the Democrats.  And this tactic serves them well by raising the bar to the fictional “must have” number of 60.  And it’s frustrating how every talking head drones on for hours about the need for 60 votes while ignoring the reason for that need.

I have mixed emotions when it comes to the filibuster, but something needs to change.  70 percent of threatened or actual filibusters is abusive.  It’s also a highly effective tool for the minority party to turn losing into winning – no matter what the majority of Amercans voted for.  Basically, it overturns an election.

Question

If you believe that Congress cannot, and will not, improve the Health Care Bill if passed, then why would you believe killing the bill and starting over is possible with this Congress?