More GOP Child-Bashing
Well, it's come down to this and I think it's a good thing this is out in the open. I hope Democrats trumpet this from now until next November and beyond. Republicans are primarily moralists who believe that no American should be having a family without first securing a well-paying job that offers good health insurance. And they also believe that no employer should be required to offer either good-paying jobs or health insurance.

Yet another working family has come under attack by Republicans, this time a couple with a 2-year-old whose heart problems were addressed thanks to the SCHIP program. Apparently, employees without family health benefits shouldn't be having children. I wonder how many American families this standard would disallow? Is this what they mean by the culture of life?

You see, it's not just the homeless, and those on welfare they will attack as being lazy. In the Republican view, anyone who hasn't had all of the benefits and good fortune that help guarantee entry into the right corporate environment is of poor moral character and deserving of any misfortune life should bring.

Failing Schools
Today's NYTimes offers a No Child Left Behind update, as many states are entering the all-important 5th year of evaluation, when "failing schools" may be labeled "chronically failing" and the law recommends strong measures for fixing them - things like shutting down schools, firing teachers and administrators, having the state take over a school's operation, things like that. So what do you do when your failing schools number more than, say, one or two?

[M]ore than 1,000 of California’s 9,500 schools are branded chronic failures, and the numbers are growing. Barring revisions in the law, state officials predict that all 6,063 public schools serving poor students will be declared in need of restructuring by 2014, when the law requires universal proficiency in math and reading.

And it's not just in Cali:

In Florida, 441 schools could be candidates for closing. In Maryland, some 49 schools in Baltimore alone have fallen short of achievement targets for five years or more. In New York State, 77 schools were candidates for restructuring as of last year.
...
Yet so far, education experts say they are unaware of a single state that has taken over a failing school in response to the law. Instead, most allow school districts to seek other ways to improve.

And why is that? Because the mandate remains unfunded by the federal government and most other remedies have built-in obstacles. You want to fire the crappy teachers? Too bad. Labor agreements have precedent under NCLB. You want to shut down the worst school or 2? Where will you put all the kids? Who will pay for a new school, or wants to argue for overcrowding others? Want to identify which teachers are struggling the most to prepare students for the tests? You can't. Only school-wide results are available for administrative scrutiny.

So, let's review. Schools are teaching to tests that - for many reasons - their students can't pass, so parents and school administrators are forced to choose from a variety of supposed options that aren't realistic possibilities, and aren't funded even if they were. So the school districts - who didn't ask for, and likely don't want, these state-imposed, test-based standards - are required to come up with an acceptable plan - required, that is, by the same federal government whose own suggestions are completely unworkable. Sounds great, huh?

Meanwhile, most public schools continue to serve primarily the poorest and least supported of students. The best-prepared students in the best circumstances to succeed academically continue to attend private schools, or gravitate to magnet and charter schools where they can be conveniently surrounded by other kids with already-sharp minds and involved parents, which is great for them - and an understandable choice I would probably make myself. But what's left for standard community public schools? Just curious - If we distributed *all the kids* from private, magnet, and charter schools among our neighborhood public schools, I wonder how those schools would perform?

Red Sox on Thin Ice
It's not do or die tonight but it's pretty close. Here's the problem: Hitters besides Ortiz, Ramirez and Lowell need to get on track. If the team only is a threat one out of every 3 innings they will have a hard time. With Wakefield pitching for the first time in a while, that makes things even more nervous. They could come back from 3-1, especially with 2 left at home...but let's not let it come to that.

MEDIA MONDAY
What have you been reading, watching, listening to?

Weekend Box Office
1. Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married
2. The Game Plan
3. Michael Clayton
4. We Own the Night
5. The Heartbreak Kid

Reason #674 to Keep a Ready Supply of Frozen Vegetables
Because when you slam your own finger in your car door - somehow - and you have exactly zero ice at home - because you're a lazy moron who never refills the trays - you can use your bags of frozen veggies to keep swelling down. A sadly true story, and your home-based medicine tip of the day.

Gore Derangement Syndrome
Read Paul Krugman

Income Equality
The IRS has released stats for 2005. Of all income earned, the wealthiest 1% raked in 21.2% of it. The 50% of Americans in the lower half pulled in...wait for it...12.8% Yes, that discrepancy is a new record. But really, more tax cuts please for rich people - dividends, capital gains, inheritance... How long until the poorer half of us account for single digits in share of the country's wealth?

Gore Wins
Link

Al Gore has for a long time been one of the world's leading environmentalist politicians. He became aware at an early stage of the climatic challenges the world is facing. His strong commitment, reflected in political activity, lectures, films and books, has strengthened the struggle against climate change. He is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted.

Funny DKos diary title: "BREAKING: SCOTUS Declares Bush the Nobel Peace Prize Winner"

Time Magazine on "The Swift-Boating of Graeme Frost"
Link
That is how they treat the personal face of our public policies: with disdain and contempt, ridicule and harassment. This has really gotten me sick - it's one thing to disagree, but why be such assholes? The Frosts are now public figures because of one radio address? Even a child?

God forbid a kid or a working family ever decides to get involved in the policies of our government. Sometimes our public discourse is a deranged, disgusting, seething, neurotic morass of self-loathing. It's no wonder people don't bother to vote or pay attention. The message of Republicans to the American people couldn't be clearer: This is what advocating will get you.

I've asked the local paper to stop running Malkin's column - which they picked up after outrage forced them to stop running Coulter's. If they don't, I'll cancel my daily subscription, which I should probably do anyway. If you want more of the story, read this. For some typical Malkin hypocrisy, there's this.

Friday's A Big Day
Yeah, the Red Sox start the series with the Indians. It would be great if they won, but it's much less important now that a Yankee victory isn't at stake. No, the big countdown is Al Gore and his shot at the Nobel Peace prize, to be announced on Friday. I'm not sure that I buy that the committee would go this way - picking global climate concern over war and peace issues. Still, I root for Gore to win anything and everything he can. It won't propel him into the presidential race, I'm convinced of that. And it's hard to blame him - who needs the personal attacks and ridicule that he gets. It's one thing to take him on for his votes, and public policy positions of the present and future. But of course, that's not what Republicans want to talk about. They prefer making fun of environmentalism, and a caricature of his persona.

If you get in Al, I'll give you money and my vote and my time. But my advice is to save yourself the grief. Sounds like you're thinking that way too. If I thought Americans were poised to look past - or, indeed punish - all the bullshit, I'd feel differently. But I don't.

Republicans Attack 12-year-old
Every now and then Republicans screw up in a way that makes me think: "this is the end for them. Americans will leave them in droves for this atrocity. There will hardly be any Republicans left." Of course, it never happens that way. And I guess if starting a war with the wrong country won't do it, probably nothing will. Still, here's another one.

MEDIA MONDAY
What have you been watching, listening to, reading?

Today's Scripture Reading
From the Book of Manny:

And the Lord sent a child among us to snatch the ball from a sure out, to keep the Red Sox inning alive and Lo-well delivered to send in the tying run.

And then He did send Manny to just be-eth Manny and pound the game-winner over the Green Monster.

And earlier that night He sent a swarm of small insects to invade the stadium where the Yankees were playing, as the evil empire was leading by a run, and this saddened the Lord greatly. The pests descended upon mighty, young Chamberlain, who handleth not the distraction, and proceedeth to cough up a walk and 2 wild pitches sending the game into extra innings. And the Indians won. And it was good.

Still Have Larry Craig To Kick Around
Republicans are so funny. Remember all that Bill Clinton self-righteousness? Now, admitting to using prostitutes (Vitter), being named in court as a bribe recipient (Stevens), and trying to hide an arrest and guilty plea for lewd behavior (Craig) still leaves them able to to their jobs "effectively." So, no problem. Despite his resignation announcement, wide-stance Larry is sticking around.

Your modern Republican Party.

83,000
If you're like me, you wouldn't be upset if the SCHIP proposal was expanded to reach families of 4 making $83,000. The President often complains that this dollar amount would be covered and amounts to a public subsidy of middle-class families who don't need it. I, of course, think the government should cover everyone so it doesn't scare me one bit. Except that it's not true. The bill wouldn't do that at all. An NPR report yesterday lays out all of the details, and in a refreshing display of honest journalism says quite simply the President is wrong. And not just about that number. (my emphasis)

"I believe in private medicine," Bush told an audience in Lancaster, Penn., on Wednesday morning. "I believe in helping poor people, which was the intent of SCHIP, now being expanded beyond its initial intent. I also believe that the federal government should make it easier for people to afford private insurance. I don't want the federal government making decisions for doctors and customers."

But SCHIP isn't the kind of program where government officials make medical decisions. Under SCHIP, children are enrolled in private health insurance.

"Typically, children have a choice from among competing private health-insurance companies," says Stan Dorn, a senior research associate with the Urban Institute, a Washington-based think tank. "There's no federally specified benefits package. There's no individual entitlement."

The president also complained that the bill would cover too many children who don't need federal help. "This program expands coverage, federal coverage, up to families earning $83,000 a year. That doesn't sound poor to me," the president told the Lancaster audience.

Dorn says that's not exactly right, either. "This bill would actually put new limits in place to keep states from going to very high-income levels. SCHIP money would no longer be available over 300 percent of the federal poverty level, which is about $60,000 for a family of four."

The president gets to make the $83,000 claim because New York had wanted to allow children in families with incomes up to four times the poverty level onto the program. That is, indeed, $82,600. The Department of Health and Human Services rejected New York's plan last month, and under the bill, that denial would stand. White House officials warn, however, that the bill would allow a future administration to grant New York's request.

So, let's review. The bill actually establishes a new lowered cap at 3 times the poverty level. It enrolls children in private health insurance. Bush claims it would be a government run program that would cover children 4 times the poverty level, even though only the White House can authorize that kind of waiver, and they don't. (Why not just say the bill covers up to $166,000?? After all, if the President granted a state a waiver up to 8 times the poverty level, then it would.) But because someday some President might say yes to New York's request *to use their own block grant money to cover some middle-class kids*, that amounts - in the President's mind - to saying the bill would cover them...you know, the bill that, explicitly, does not.

This is Good News
David Obey (D-WI) chairs the House Appropriations Committee. And he says he won't send up a funding bill that lacks a timetable for troop withdrawal. But he has another idea that's long overdue: a war surtax, to ensure that the generation of idiots that brought us this horrendous war is the one that pays the bill for it. Apart from the military, we've been asked to sacrifice zero. It's time that changed, so that the country feels the toll of the decision that was made. Asking my nieces and nephews, and their eventual kids, to pay for this disaster truly does add insult to injury.

Go Sox!
Red Sox start play today - 5:30 central. Plus hockey season gets under way - 2 games on the VS network. Preds open up tomorrow night. Woohoo!

SCHIP Update
In an earlier post I said GOP presidential candidates should be asked if they agree with the President's veto. One has weighed in now. Romney says Bush is right to veto and he'd do the same thing.

How about the others?

MEDIA MONDAY
What have you been reading, listening to, watching?

New Album Marketing Strategy
Radiohead's new album is coming out soon and they have a pretty good idea for selling it:

Radiohead, the respected British rock act, said that the band would sell its new album, at least initially, exclusively as a digital download and allow fans to decide how much to pay for it, if anything. In a statement yesterday, the band said it had begun taking orders for the album, “In Rainbows,” which will be available beginning Oct. 10.
...
In Radiohead’s plan, fans will choose their own price for the digital version of the 10-song “In Rainbows,” which it said would be sold as a download without copy restriction software, known as digital-rights management. In effect, the band is asking fans to establish a monetary value for music, even when widespread piracy means that it would be available free.

Early reaction suggested that listeners would pay, but less than they would for a CD in stores. The blog Idolator.com carried a poll in which the plurality of voters — almost 40 percent — said they would pay from $2.05 to $10.12.

And, hey, why not? You can set the price you are willing to pay here. I'll bet they make tons.


Weekend Box Office
1. The Game Plan
2. The Kingdom
3. Resident Evil
4. Good Luck Chuck
5. 3:10 to Yuma

Polls [UPDATED]
Yes, a new Iowa poll shows Obama leading Clinton among "likely caucus-goers," and Clinton is still leading Obama in NH by quite a bit. This might be a good time to remind ourselves of the state of things at this point in 2003. Things are coming faster this time around, so let's compare to October 15, 2003, when Kos offered these numbers from a Granite State poll.

Dean 30 (16)
Undecided 20 (30)
Kerry 17 (18)
Clark 10 (3)
Lieberman 6 (11)
Edwards 5 (2)
Gephardt 5 (3)
Kucinich 3 (0)
Sharpton 1 (1)
Braun 1 (1)

And these from a poll in Iowa:

Dean 23
Undecided 22
Gephardt 20
Kerry 17
Clark 7

Notice that Edwards didn't even rate a mention in Iowa (he finished a close second, ultimately), and that not only had Kerry not yet made his IA comeback...he hadn't even really gotten to the meat of his freefall yet.

And who was leading the national polls at the time? Wesley Clark.

The first poll that means anything will come in mid-November.

[UPDATE: Via Kos, Rasmussen - right on cue - discusses the state of the Democratic race, comparisons to Dean's lead in 2003 and the ramifications of a Hillary loss in Iowa. The short version: Hillary's nomination is not inevitable, but comparisons to Dean are probably off the mark.]