Wed AM

Wed is a great day for the newspaper puzzles!

The op-ed pages were, ahem, "interesting" this AM, too. First, the head of the UAW thinks we need more taxes on the wealthy and on businesses. Hmmm.... Fine, let's tax the bejabbers out of, say, the auto companies. That ought to lead to more jobs and higher pay for autoworkers--NOT! I guess I don't quite understand some things. Don't autoworkers know that healthy auto companies mean higher pay and more jobs? Of course they do. I think it's the leadership knows, too, but is too wrapped up in, well, being at the top than in representing the best interests of its members. The same thing happens with teachers' unions, likely many, if not most, of them. Maybe the autoworkers ought to think about some new "leadership."

A letter writer says, "Taxes are not evil." No, I suppose not. But our current situation of constant tax and spend, spend and tax is evil. C'mon, even this guy must realize that Congress has behaved very irresponsibly, that it wastes money because it's not theirs, and that its solution to practically everything is raising taxes. Maybe he doesn't, esp if he's one of the 47% who pays no taxes or even the 28% who get a net payment from the gov't.

Chas. Krauthammer has a good column today. He cites the President's reliance on the old "bad luck" excuse to explain why his policies haven't worked. CK refutes them all. In fact, he cites a number of things I've noted in the past. The hypocrisy of the left and Dems. The fallback on calling names when arguments are pathetic, specious, or just plain stupid. As CK rightly notes, name-calling "den[ies] the legitimacy to those on the other side.... [It] is the ultimate political ad hominem. It obviates argument, fact, logic, history." Yep. I wonder if there's a connection between these Dems/libs and those running the schools. They employ the same tactics, namely "name-calling" and bullying. I think there is.

So, why are all Detroit public school kids getting free lunches? I don't have a problem with feeding kids who are really in need of food. I do have a problem with gov't determining who is really needy. I do have a problem with taking other people's money to fund this. I do have a problem with yet another gov't policy/program that rewards bad behavior (parents having kids when they can't afford them, the epidemic of fatherless households, etc.), esp at the expense of the successful, those who play by the rules.

A nice letter about the obsession politicians and school leaders have with test scores. It's as if they are addicts! The author calls the rationales behind the need for higher test scores, "to prepare [students] to compete in a global market and that all our students should be college- and career-ready," "nice sound bites." But, of course, who will listen? What school administrators are courageous enough to stand up and say, "No!"? We all know the answer.

A not-so-good letter takes aim at "fast food." It is blame for "the increase in obesity rates." Look Lady, leave me alone. Let me make my own choices concerning "fast food." In fact, she contradicts her own argument in the first sentence, noting "families choosing...." That's the key, choice. She or the gov't acting as her surrogate shouldn't be allowed to make my choices for me. I will agree about "lowering...the cost of health care." Yep, not eating so much fast food will do that. And, to encourage that insurance companies should be allowed to charge higher rates for obese and even overweight people. Why should people who are in shape subsidize health insurance for those who aren't? Oh, that's discrimination? Hooey!

Well, it's Wed and still no comment from the LameStreams and the President about Hoffa's comments. Oh, it was all over talk radio yesterday, but we all know that talk radio is populated by "terrorists," "bigots," "racists," and "barbarians." Name-calling...it's so much easier than reasoned dialogue and debate.