Month: February 2013

We have a winner in the blame game! Tea Party takes credit for the sequester

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

We have a winner in the blame game! The Tea Party takes credit for the sequester. Tea party claims credit as deep cuts loom:

WreckingCrewSince the day they were swept to power more than two years ago, the
tea party’s legions in Washington have made dramatic federal spending
cuts the centerpiece of an economic message that has dominated the
national debate.

Now they’re about to get what they wanted.

Deep reductions in domestic and defense spending
begin Friday, a process known as sequestration, which will make
progress toward the tea party’s goal of shrinking government. What
unfolds over the following months will be a high-stakes test of whether
significant cuts in spending will help or hurt the economy — and the
Republican Party’s brand.

The cuts, worth $1.2 trillion over 10 years, are to become reality after several years during which the tea party
— a group of Republicans elected in 2010 with the goal of radically
shrinking government — has struggled to have a lasting impact on
Washington.

* * *

[M]any Republicans say the sequester is the moment when the tea party
can claim it has made its mark. Although both Democratic and Republican
leaders are pointing fingers, the tea party and its allies are happily
accepting credit for the cuts.

“This will be the first significant
tea party victory in that we got what we set out to do in changing
Washington,” said Rep. Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, a tea party Republican
elected in 2010.

Imagine charters CEO to schools: We’re still in charge

by

 

by David Safier

North Port, Florida, could prove to be the tipping point for the Imagine Schools chain of charter schools. When the local board of Imagine North Port decided last week to sever ties with Imagine and become an independent charter named Sarasota Preparatory School, it was yet another loss for Imagine, which has been losing schools by the handful over the past few years.

And Imagine isn't taking the defection lying down. It's decided to fight back, hard.

After the Board sent an email to parents describing the break, Imagine Schools "hijacked parent email addresses from our contact lists and sent all of you an email," according to a post on the new school's Facebook page. If the national Imagine doesn't normally have access to parents' email, yet it managed to send a message to parents by hacking into the school's list, that looks a whole lot like an act of desperation.

Imagine claims the Board's actions are illegal and it still runs the school. It has suspended the school's principal and sued the Board for $15,000. There's going to be a court hearing Tuesday. Now it's performing damage control at other schools to make sure this defection doesn't turn into a snowball rolling down Imagine Mountain and carrying other schools away with it. Imagine can't sustain many more school losses and remain viable.

On February 22, Imagine CEO Dennis Bakke sent a letter to the leadership of Imagine Palmer Ranch in Florida which was copied onto the school's parent newsletter. The letter has what I've been told are factual inaccuracies, along with an underlying tone of bullying with a hint of desperation thrown in: You'd better not do anything like North Port tried! Please?

Imagine has a history of demanding absolute loyalty from its staff, especially its administrators. It's been known to fire principals for complaining about not having enough funds to educate their students, then hiring more compliant people to fill their spots. So the folks at  Imagine Palmer Ranch are likely walking on eggshells, fearful of what might happen if they show the slightest support for the the school at North Port.

You can read Bakke's letter below the fold.

Civil Rights legend John Lewis: Why we still need the Voting Rights Act

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Bloody_sundayRep. John Lewis (D-GA), is a legend of the Civil Rights Movement who was almost beaten to death by Alabama state troopers at the Edmund Pettus Bridge on "Bloody Sunday" (March 7, 1965), on the March from Selma to Motgomery, Alabama to secure the right to vote for African-American citizens.

The televised brutality of this attack galvanized the nation and led to the enactment of perhaps the single most historically significant and effective pieces of legislation in U.S. history, the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

This week, the Voting Rights Act is under attack from conservative organizations and Tea-Publican controled states (including an Amicus Brief of Arizona (.pdf) filed 1/2/13 by Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne) under the old battle cry of "state's rights."

These conservative organizations and Tea-Publican controled states are appealing to the conservative activist court of Chief Justice John Roberts to disregard more than 15,000 pages of evidence and congressional testimony and the judgment of Congress, which overwhelming voted to renew the Voting Rights Act in 2006 (the fourth such renewal since 1965), by a margin of 390-22 in the House of Representatives and 98-0 in the Senate. This congressional judgement is entitled to due deference from the Court.

“The Revionaries” (Texas Board of Education) at the Loft Tuesday

by

by David Safier As Texas textbooks go, so go the nation's. That's an exaggeration, but not by much. If Texas won't buy textbooks that present certain historical or scientific facts, or wants conservative-friendly "facts" added, companies have to bow to their will because they hold such a huge market share. And once the textbooks are … Read more

Direct corporate campaign contributions to candidates is a bridge too far for U.S. Supreme Court

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

A petition for certiorari that I have been following is Danielczyk v. United States (12-579):


GavelIssue:
(1) Whether the ban on campaign contributions by corporations in the
Federal Election Campaign Act, 2 U.S.C. §441b, violates the First
Amendment; and (2) whether restrictions or bans on the right to make
campaign contributions should be reviewed under strict scrutiny, as
other restrictions on political expression are, or instead under a less
protective standard.

The U.S. Supreme Court this morning denied certiorari, upholding the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision.