Teacher's Unions Earn "F" for Wisconsin Recall Abuse
By Michelle Malkin
They really outdid themselves. In Wisconsin and across the nation, public school employee unions spared no kiddie human shields in their battle against GOP Gov. Scott Walker's budget and pension reforms. Students were the first and last casualties of the ruthless Big Labor war against fiscal discipline.
To kick off the yearlong protest festivities, the Wisconsin Education Association Council led a massive "sickout" of educators and other government school personnel. The coordinated truancy action -- tantamount to an illegal strike -- cost taxpayers an estimated $6 million. Left-wing doctors assisted the campaign by supplying fake medical excuse notes to teachers who ditched their public school classrooms to protest Walker's modest package of belt-tightening measures.
When they weren't ditching their students, radical teachers steeped in the social justice ethos of National Education Association-approved community organizer Saul Alinsky were shamelessly using other people's children as their own political junior lobbyists and pawns. A Milwaukee Fox News affiliate caught one fourth-grade teacher dragging his students on a "field trip" to demonstrate against Walker at the state Capitol building.
The pupils clapped along with a group of "solidarity singers" as they warbled: "Scott Walker will never push us out, this house was made for you and me."
Hundreds of high school students from Madison were dragooned into marches. When asked on camera why they had skipped school, one told a reporter from the Wisconsin-based MacIver Institute: "I don't know. I guess we're protesting today." Happy for the supply of warm young bodies, AFSCME Local 2412 President Gary Mitchell gloated: "The students have been so energized."
"Energized"? How about educated, enlightened and intellectually stimulated? Silly parents. Remember: "A" isn't for academics. It's for "agitation" and "advocacy." Former National Education Association official John Lloyd's words must not be forgotten: "You cannot possibly understand NEA without understanding Saul Alinsky. If you want to understand NEA, go to the library and get 'Rules for Radicals.'"
Publicado: 06-06-2012 01:48 PM
"The Ohio Education Association made a $58,000 in-kind contribution May 30, followed a day later by a $21,000 contribution from the Pennsylvania State Education Association. New York State United Teachers gave $23,000 on June 1, the Massachusetts Education Association gave $17,000 on May 31, and a group of unions based in Washington, D.C., poured in $922,000 during the past week." Even the Alaska NEA affiliate pitched in $4,000.
Back in the Badger State, the Education Action Group Foundation caught Milwaukee teacher's union head Bob Peterson on tape this week bragging about how his school district organized bus runs and stuffed flyers into every K-8 student's backpack urging them to vote in the recall election. No, this wasn't a civic, nonpartisan get-out-the-vote effort. It was a purely partisan self-preservation campaign. Peterson preaches that educators must be "teachers of unionism. We need to create a generation of students who support teachers and the movement for workers rights, oppressed peoples' rights." Because, you know, asking teachers to contribute more to their pension plans is just like the crushing of freedom fighters in Iran, Egypt and China.
The progressives' blatant exploitation of bureaucratic authority over the nation's schoolchildren -- at the expense of classroom achievement and fiscal sanity -- isn't sitting well with the public. A new Marquette University Law School poll released on the eve of the Wisconsin recall election showed that "only 40 percent of those surveyed said they had a favorable view of public-sector unions, while 45 percent viewed them unfavorably." In addition, "three-quarters of respondents said they approved of the law Walker signed requiring public employees to contribute to their own pensions and pay more for health insurance, while 55 percent approved of the new limits on collective bargaining for state employees that Walker signed into law."
Uncertainty reigned over Wisconsin as both sides braced for a possible recount on Tuesday night. But from their first unhinged salvos 16 months ago in the state Capitol and right up until Election Day, the union bosses have made one thing clear as a playground whistle: It's not about the children. It's never about the children. It's about protecting the power, perks and profligacy of public employee union monopolies.
Publicado: 06-06-2012 01:48 PM
Watergate at 40: Obama is the Democrats’ Nixon
By John Ransom
The national nightmare that has been Obama was brought into sharper contrast last weekend for me as I read stories about the 40th anniversary of Watergate.
In governing sstyle, not necessarily substance, there are certainly parallels between Obama and Nixon.
In can be argued that both men derived their aggressiveness from feelings of inadequacy they endured as children. Both brought these feelings of adequacy in the form of personal demons into the White House; demons that gave them plastic personalities that never really took shape. Both let their demons dictate how they governed- rudderless, compass-less but always needy- to the great detriment of the nation.
Both men only had to face those demons to achieve great things.
In this, both men failed.
To some extent Nixon and Obama were trapped by impulses beyond their control- or it least by impulses they wished not to control.
“Nixon had a troubled childhood. Raised by a sometimes abusive father and a controlling mother,” says Notable Biographies, “Nixon adopted parts of both his parents' personalities. Some historians have believed that, as a result of his childhood, Nixon had a drive to succeed and felt he had to pretend to be ‘good’ while using any tactics necessary to achieve his goals.”
Obama too had what can only be termed as an unhappy childhood. It has left him, like Nixon, ambivalent about the space that he occupies in the world.
Yes, he’s part white; and yes he’s part black.
But he seems uncomfortable with both races. Even more than just uncomfortable: He is actually hostile to both (all?) races, yet still race-conscious.
Yes, he’s an avowed Christian.
But it’s a strange Christianity that tries to disavow his chosen religion while embracing other religions in a way that appears to many as an endorsement of those religions as superior in some way.
Think of this: Of all the places Obama chose to have a political career he picked Chicago, Illinois. He then wrapped himself in the flag of “reform,” “different,” “better.”
There’s no better place than Chicago to adopt the Nixonian tactic of pretending to be “good” while using any tactics necessary to achieve your goals.
But making a decision to transplant to Chicago for politics- a place that has such obvious contrasts between good and bad- can leave one with serious root burn on the soul.
That root burn can often manifest itself in a sense of entitlement that puts one above the rules, where ends only matter, not means in order to justify the double lie.
While many of us labored under the impression that the presidency elevated men, in the case of Nixon and Obama, it instead exposed their flaws.
"Nixon believed that you use the presidency as an instrument of personal avenge or reward," says Watergate reporter Bob Woodward, as reported in the Orlando Sun Sentinel.
There’s no better way to describe Chicago political way and the personal **noallow** of governing that Obama has brought to the White House.
From the crony capitalism practiced by Obama, to his enemies lists, to the pork-barrel highway contracts let out by his mob-connected Secretary of Transport, GOP Illinois combine product Ray Lahood -complete with signs: “Your stimulus dollars at work”- Obama’s made shifting the levers of federal power if not an art form, at least a compulsion that makes governing difficult.
Corruption in government spending and power however wasn’t invented by Obama or Nixon.
Where their personal flaws are really obvious is their insistence on getting credit even for things that had no real moment.
"It was always about Nixon and the real tragedy about all of this probably crimes, abuse, but the smallness of it,” continued Woodward, “and Nixon failed to realize that particularly when he took over as president in '69 in the early months that the country felt even Democrats, good will- we want our president to succeed.”
It’s hard to not apply the same argument to Obama as well.
While certainly professional pols had real policy issues with Obama, in the winter of 2009, I would venture that most Americans were scared enough of the financial crisis that that they too wanted Obama to succeed.
I can remember talking with political professionals from the right who took a great deal of comfort from the fact that Obama’s economic team contained some key Clinton alumni. One told me that if Obama followed the fiscal plan that Clinton executed that the country wouldn’t be as bad off as we thought.
But it was soon apparent that more important than governing well for Obama was advancing the story of Obama the Invincible, the One. Everything was subsumed to evening the Q score for the Obama brand worldwide even to the extent of deliberately insulting the Queen of England, the figurehead of our most important ally, trade partner and our largest direct investor.
Yes. Despite what Obama would have us believe, our most important partner is not China. It’s the U.K.
According to the Congressional Research Service report of May 2012, the U.K. accounts for the largest direct investment in the U.S., almost doubling the next nearest rival, Japan.
But those petty slights delivered to our key ally are nothing compared to Obama’s deliberate misuse of the military and intelligence communities to advance the idea of Obama the Strongman.
From the killing of Osama bin Laden to the war in Libya to the New York Times intelligence leaks, Obama has so needed the spotlight to remain on him that he deliberately endangered our troops and brave men and women- many of them not even Americans- who have risked all to keep the country **noallow**.
“This has to stop,” said Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California according to FoxNews. “When people say they don't want to work with the United States because they can't trust us to keep a secret, that's serious.”
Doubtless Obama supporters would disagree with my assessment. But I don’t really care about their opinion.
Because while the parallels are there, most notable and instructive for the country are the places where the Nixon and Obama stories diverge.
“He immediately launched the campaign of let's spy on people,” said Woodward of Nixon, “let's do something dirty and there was never that sense of let's harmonize and solve the big problems. It was always let's screw somebody, let's get the IRS on them, let's get the FBI on them."
And so it goes with Obama.
While we were all shocked and angered at the revelation of Nixon’s abuses, today the same abuses are not only ignored but tolerated- even encouraged- by the Left.
I never thought I would see a time when the U.S. government would deliberately sell guns to Mexican drug cartels just to advance a petty policy argument about gun control, while the press stood by with not a word or reproach. Or allow the Black Panthers to practice the worst type of racism abetted by the highest law enforcement officer in the land, while the press applauded.
Because the key in allowing such abuses are the folks in the Fourth Estate who are supposed to protect us from power grabs by government and their key allies on the Left or Right.
Nixon lost his soul. And to save the country he had to go.
This time, key parts of the country have sold their soul to a man who is, like Nixon, soul-sick.
But today, whether that man stays or goes doesn’t matter.
It only matters that we reclaim our own soul.
Salvation for our country can only come one soul at a time, because that is how we sold it: one soul at a time.
Publicado: 06-11-2012 11:41 AM