While I’ve been away, I (and y’all) missed a lot of opportunities to comment on a lot of topics. Here’s some quick making up for lost time:
CHARTER SCHOOLS AMENDMENT FAILS: Here’s hoping a second effort this week finds success. If not, the agents of the status quo — i.e., the educational establishment trying to protect its turf — may find the next option even less palatable than this one. I’ve been hearing for weeks now that one prominent Plan B involves setting up a state commission to review charter applications in tandem with local school boards; if a local board doesn’t follow that commission’s recommendation, the board could find itself receiving significantly less state education money. It would be wholly constitutional — the Legislature already attaches all sorts of strings to state money, and the final decision on an application on the charter would rest with the local board — and there are Democrats and Republicans alike pitching its merits. Only a simple majority (rather than a two-thirds majority for the amendment) would be necessary for passage. I consider it less attractive than the amendment. I’m guessing the amendment’s opponents will come to the same realization … if perhaps too late.
SANTORUM SWEEPS FEB. 7 CAUCUSES: I’m partial to anything that happens on Feb. 7, but I’m not sure Rick Santorum’s sweep of the caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota and the non-binding primary Missouri means a whole lot. Mitt Romney pulled a similar trick four years ago, and it didn’t blunt John McCain’s momentum. Those states’ delegates to the Republican National Convention this summer are not bound to follow the results of last week’s votes. Still, Romney has been a shaky front-runner throughout this race, as conservative voters have proven desperate for anyone else who’s viable. Santorum led the most recent major national poll of GOP voters; can he now prove that he’s a viable contender against President Obama? If not, Romney is still going to win the nomination.
BIRTH CONTROL MANDATE FLAP: American Catholic bishops were right to reject the “accommodation” offered by the Obama administration regarding the mandate for a broad range of religiously affiliated employers to pay for contraception, abortifacients and sterilization. Either the Obama administration doesn’t really understand how health insurance works — which would explain a lot — or it just doesn’t care. But forcing the insurers of these hospitals, colleges and other organizations to pick up the tab, rather than the organizations themselves, is a distinction without a difference. The insurer is going to make someone pay for that coverage via some type of new charge or increase in premiums. If it’s the employees themselves, they’re no better off. If not, it’s going to be the employers, which brings us back to square one. There’s no such thing as a free lunch, or a free Pill. Obama can’t get off the hook for a major constitutional infringement (remind me what subject he taught at the University of Chicago law school?) this easily.
WHITNEY HOUSTON, R.I.P.: Surprised to see me mention this one? While I’m not a real R&B or pop aficionado, I am a child of the 1980s and ’90s — and Whitney Houston contributed to the soundtrack of that era as much as Michael Jackson, Madonna, Guns N’ Roses, Nirvana or any other performer. (OK, maybe not Michael, at least not on a sustained basis.) If you grew up in those years, it was sad to see Houston — someone who once sang about “learning to love yourself” as the “Greatest Love of All” — spiral into such self-destructive living and destroy a voice that was a gift to so many people. We don’t yet have a cause of death for her. But the first thought I had, and which surely many people had, was that it must have been one of the things that spawned so many demons in her for too many of her 48 years. I’m afraid that says enough to make her a cautionary tale for the children of today. Teach them well, indeed.
– By Kyle Wingfield
163 comments Add your comment
saywhat?
February 13th, 2012
8:13 pm
Ragnar- why does such a hard rightwing “strict constructionist” (and Catholic!!!) like Antonin Scalia disagree with you, and most of the others on this forum, in regard to whether such regulations are constitutional or not?
Perhaps, just maybe, because you are plain dead wrong?
Nahhhhh, that couldn’t be it. (laughing)
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
February 13th, 2012
8:14 pm
Can a pacifist refuse to pay the part of his/her taxes used for war?
————————–
Cowardice is not a religion and is not protected by our Constitution.
saywhat?
February 13th, 2012
8:18 pm
The rights guaranteed to the people in the Constitution aren’t good enough for conservatives. They want their own “special rights”. Too bad, so sad. Luckily for the rest of us, stupidity is not a religion and is not protected by our Constituion.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
February 13th, 2012
8:27 pm
The rights guaranteed to the people in the Constitution aren’t good enough for conservatives.
———————
They’re good enough for me. Let’s hope we get to keep them.
We won’t if Obozo wins. When Obozo wins, Americans lose.
saywhat?
February 13th, 2012
8:34 pm
Keep hoping for your “special rights”. Its never going to happen. I am looking forward to the wailing and gnashing of teeth of the rightwingers come November. Ah the sweet taste of their bitter tears!
Linda
February 13th, 2012
8:43 pm
If Catholic women believe that their religion, their faith & the opinions of their church are Medieval, why are they still Catholic women?
Paying taxes that are used for things certain taxpayers disagree with is in no way comparable with the fed. govt. using coercion to force religious employers to pay for birth control that is totally against their morals, their conscious & their interpretation of the Bible. These employee sponsored health care plans are already set up & the fed. govt. is intruding & jeopardizing these benefits.
By religious employers, I’m referring not only to Catholic universities, hospitals & schools, but also to small businesses owned by Catholics.
Linda
February 13th, 2012
10:15 pm
There are people who are fiscal conservatives & social conservatives.
There are people who are fiscal conservatives & social liberals.
There are no people who are fiscal liberals & social conservatives.
There are people who are fiscal liberals & social liberals. Those are the progressives, the people everyone needs to watch out for, the folks that are hell-bent in destroying America.
getalife
February 13th, 2012
10:34 pm
Enter your comments here
MarkV
February 13th, 2012
11:00 pm
Paying taxes, which are collected by coercion, for something that is totally against one’s morals and conscience, is very much comparable with forcing employers to pay for something that is against their morals.
The Kid
February 13th, 2012
11:09 pm
The Catholic Church is still covering up for perverts and child molesters, but they have the gall to kick about a birth control bill. It really should be a womans’ decision anyway. As to Taliban Rick Santorum; check out his views closely. You will find that much of what he stands for would reverse the gains of minorities, women, and a great many of the civil rights that we now enjoy. This guy is actually more dangerous than Bush and Cheney were.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
February 14th, 2012
8:10 am
Name one Rick Santorum policy proposal that reverses the gains of minorities, women, or civil rights. Besides his opposition to murdering the unborn or his opposition to perverting the institution of marriage.
2012 Tuesday: Are Obama and the left baiting GOP into nominating Santorum? | Kyle Wingfield
February 14th, 2012
1:23 pm
[...] been a couple of weeks since the Obama administration announced it would force religious-affiliated entities such as hospitals and colleges — most notably those tied to the [...]
Reality Check?
February 15th, 2012
10:25 am
First of all, let’s be clear about the facts – there is no budget issue in CCSD due to the Charter School, PERIOD. CCSD is getting full State and Federal funding for every child they educate in the public school system. They also get 100% of all monies collected locally – including monies from parents who send their children to private school or a state run public school, which CCA is, a State Charter. CCSD has NOTHING to do with CCA. If there is a budget issue in CCSD, it is because tax revenues have declined because Home values have declined dramatically – that is how school taxes are collected. Revenues are down because of these reasons. The State and the Federal government have increased the educational spending even in this economy. If there is a budget issue being professed by the BOE, it is because they and Dr. P have created it