Copyright © 2010 Frank Lynch.
Copyright © 2010 Frank Lynch.
Me: Frank Lynch Home These are my mundane daily ramblings.
Email:
|
Texas textbooks. You're probably aware of the arguments with respect to textbooks for Texas, and how the centralized state school board wants the publishers to bow to the board's perceptions of culture and history. I wasn't very alarmed by the reports I'd read until yesterday: newspaper articles talk about "greater emphasis" of conservative surgence, etc., but unless you know how the pages are expected to shift you shouldn't get alarmed. But on a train back from DC yesterday, I read that the shift also included eliminating Abigail Adams and her assertiveness about the role of women. We have been told that with new technologies - - digital printing, and all that - - that the impact of Texas's text book requirements no longer need to impact us all the same way. So very good: print the text books for the other 49 states as planned; and if Texas wants their own text books, let them pay for their own customization. States' rights and all that, right? Go for it, Texas. Don't make us subsidize your textbooks. Was it something that somebody said? An imploding public school system. In Kansas City (MO), only about a third of the shool age kids attend public schools, going to private and charter schools instead. They haven't been able to pass a school bond since 1969, and now they're closing half their campuses.
Talk about your slippery slope; but I don't want anyone to try and tell me that people in the midwest have a strong sense of community when they don't support their public schools even in funding. Health Care Reform has a certain pro-life aspect to it. With health insurance, the cost differential between abortion and delivery is minimized. I am not, of course, suggesting that this is the sole factor in anyone's decision to carry a pregnancy to term. But currently the cost of an abortion is dwarfed by the costs of uninsured doctors' visits and delivery. 
AND it cuts the deficit. I frankly never understood Obama's insistence that HCR not add to the deficit; at least, I never agreed with it. The country has pursued huge initiatives before without thatr equirement, why burden HCR? After all, who's going to say that saving the lives of 45,000 people annually is a bad thing? Who? The Republicans may say HCR is a bad thing, or that (shudder) "Obamacare" is a bad thing, but they know better than to say saving 45,000 lives, annually, is a bad thing. Obama's political rationale is clear: give the Republicans as few things to complain about as possible. But at the end of the day, since none of the Republicans are going to vote for it, why limit HCR to accommodate Republicans? All to the better, or course, when the CBO released its score of the House bill, showing that it the House plan actually lowers the deficit while expanding health care. And the Republican reaction? Well, there's Mike Pence, who is of small mind and can't conceive how a big plan actually saves money. (It has nothing to do with Milo Minderbender dealing in volume, Mike. It has to do with details. Read the bill.) Bravo, a good first step. Looking forward to Sunday.
Irish-Americans against McCarthyism. Being against Joe McCarthy, and McCarthyism, isn't a bad thing. Lots of people are against it, and should be. Here, here for all those against McCarthyism! Now get this: in the spirit of St. Patrick' Day, William Gavin (over at NRO's Corner), wants us to stop calling McCarthyism "McCarthyism." You see, "McCarthy" is an Irish surname! And calling McCarthy's abominable behavior "McCarthyism" is, by generalization, a slap to all the Irish. That's what he wrote. If he's being sarcastic, I can't tell; I don't hear the same notes of irony you'd hear in Swift. I really do think he's serious.
It's like double secret probation, or something. Lindsay Graham warned that if health care reform goes through, Republicans might, you know, be even less cooperative than zero cooperative. Woudn't want to make them angry, now, would we? Just imagine if they turn up the heat. It's not enough that real legislation is constantly being blocked, but they're going to block resolutions like statements that mothers are good!
Falling idol? It's amazing: Charlie Crist shows evidence that he might not be an extreme right winger, and shows intelligent gratitude to Obama for the stimulus. Never mind the fact that Florida's economy, so tied to housing and construction, was in the toilet; never mind that Obama was visiting Fort Pierce, an area where massive numbers of people were defaulting on their mortgages, under water, and weighing the pluses and minuses of declaring bankruptcy. You'd have thought that Marco Rubio had rolled away some stone, or something, the way that conservatives in the GOP were flocking to him. And all of a sudden, Crist could do no right: everything he did, they found fault with. And Rubio was some shining beacon, and now is trouncing Crist in the polls. And now it's turning out that Rubio has all sorts of problems with coloring within the lines when it comes to spending, separating spending on himself from the money that belonged to his party. Will it stick? I hope so. As much as I'd like to see the seat go to a Democrat, seeing it go to a papier maché candidate like Rubio would be the worst.
A little something for your Sunday. Memphis Slim.
If this is his idea of "being funny"... What a complete neanderthal. North Carolina State Representative
It didn't help that he mistakenly clicked "reply to all" (sending it to all the members of the North Carolina House), nor that the woman who sent out the email is an African-American. What adds to the fire is his non-apology: "I was just trying to be funny, if you really want to know the truth... I'm a little weary about all the division in this country about race and gender. I'm tired of hearing it and I'm tired of seeing it. We need to be working together as Americans." What better way to build bridges than indicate that celebrating diversity means creating division. More class from Powerline. In knee jerk fashion, John Hinderaker features a cartoon which describes the Democrat's push to healthcare reform as "suicide." But not just any kind of suicide, Democrats are now equated with terrorist suicide bombers. For added punch, Hinderaker is revolted by the concept of backroom deals to achieve a House majority... But as I've said before, there are plenty of Republicans who can block those backroom deals by abandoning party and just voting for the damned bill. America knows what's wrong with health care, and when they hear what's in the bill, they like it. Missing the analysis... A few days ago, Rasmussen's Daily Presidential Approval Index was a -21. That is, 43% strongly disapproved of Obama's job performance, while 22% strongly approved; 22 - 43 equals -21. Rasmussen noted that the rating was as bad as Obama had seen (it was the same in late February). Rasmussen's index uses a three-day rolling average, and three-day rolling averages help to smooth out odd fluxes in the data. Today, however, the index is at -14: 41% strongly disapprove, and 27% strongly approve. The sample in today's measure doesn't overlap at all with the one from three days ago. (Trend here.) Going from -21 to -14 is a huge swing; you would think it would merit some sort of comment or attempt to explain. At the very least an acknowledgement that the swing occurred. Otherwise the figures start to look like a windsock worth disregarding. And I am not talking about a daily difference, I'm talking about two completely different samples of 1500 likely voters. But no, not even an acknowledgment of a rebound from three days ago. DISCLOSURE: I work for Abt SRBI. My company does polling. My comments should not be construed as representing those of my employer. Robert Reich is not impressed with the "recovery." Thinks it's a sham. There are minor points for those who want to take his argument down a peg or two (for instance, if Wellpoint raises its premiums, is it a dollar-for-dollar increase in GDP? the dollars for those increased premiums have to come from somewhere, likely other consumer spending). But all in all, he makes some good points, and discounts the importance of GDP as a measure for health. (I'm reading ECONned right now, and there's a similar point made in an early chapter about the limits of GDP as a measure. If health care spending is reduced because a cure for cancer is developed, GDP might go down, but that wouldn't be a bad thing.) What I'm not sure about is the initial premise of Reich's piece: how many people have really been hooting about a recovery? We've had an increase in GDP, but in terms of jobs, although the second derivative is positive (rate of decrease has decreased), the first is not (we're still shedding jobs). And it's not enough just to add jobs, you have to add enough jobs in order to keep pace with population growth.
Call me biased, but I love reading a good take-down of Andy McCarthy. He provides lots of opportunities, and never responds to emailed challenges to back up his Corner posts, but when I have the time to write one up myself I do, and have. This one is over McCarthy defending the Cheney-Kristol attack on Guantanamo lawyers. (In a better world The Corner would open its hit-and-run posters up to comments, but that wouldn't fit their agenda.)
For a sign-off, it sure beats the one Ernie Anastos came up with. Glenn Beck's show with Eric Massa is just going to be one of those recurring jokes. Too. Damn. Bad. Here's Jon Stewart...
Liberal pragmatism. Over at The Nation, John Nichols say that 83% of MoveOn Members Back Obama on Health Reform. That's a pretty stunning figure, if you think about it; it's kind of surprising that the leaders of MoveOn aren't on the news shows more often, as they, too, support the bill. Last night Ed Schultz interviewed a young woman, all of age 24, who owes $280,000 in medical bills. Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy Now, don't get me wrong, I think Jane Hamsher and FDL are an important, valuable force, but Yglesias asked it well the other day: "How many divisions has Jane Hamsher?"
|
|||||||||||||||
|
