PAWaterCooler.com

I had some teachers who protested their contracts once. But they didn’t protest during school hours. They did it in the morning before school started, and when the bell rang, they were in their rooms doing their jobs.

Not so in the case of the Penn Hills School District:

Talks are due to resume between the school board and the teacher’s union in the Penn Hills school district on Friday night.

But students remain out of class for a second day, after more than 400 teachers headed out to the picket lines Thursday morning.

…

The school district released a written statement saying that schools will be closed Thursday and Friday, and parents will be notified of any future closures once administrators know how long the strike will continue.

I’m glad they’re looking out for “the children” that teachers claim to care so much about. One of them is holding a sign which reads, “If you can read this thank a teacher not an attorney.” I would tell that person that it wasn’t a teacher who taught me how to read – it was my mother. And she never went on strike, either.

The Trib quotes a parent who supports the strike despite the fact that it is causing him a lot of trouble:

James Craig knows it will be tough arranging child care while Penn Hills teachers walk the picket lines.

But the father of six — five of whom are school-age — believes the personal difficulties a strike places on his family are less important than the need for the district’s 415 teachers to exercise their right to fight for a fair labor contract.

“We’re two working parents who will have to ask relatives to help watch our children, or take vacation days to stay home with them,” said Craig, 40, a 1988 Penn Hills graduate. “But I completely support the teachers in this strike. They have a very difficult and stressful job.”

Right, as if they are the only ones with difficult and stressful jobs. I know a lot of people who have difficult and stressful jobs who would be fired immediately if they decided to just stop working. I have always found it ridiculous that we are willing to give teachers, the little Mussolinis in the classroom, more leeway than people in other fields of employment.

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...

Back in October, I applauded the decision that allowed Temple University Purpose to bring Geert Wilders to Temple to speak to students as a victory for the first amendment.  Today, a rather ugly new development has surfaced. Mike Adams:

Geert Wilders came to Temple University on October 20, 2009. Wilders was invited in the wake of a controversy surrounding his film “Fitna” which was released in 2008. The film was controversial because it features passages of the Koran interspersed with scenes of violence on the part of Muslims. The movie was shown during the presentation at Temple. Extra security was provided and there was no disturbance.

On December 3, Temple University Purpose (TUP) – the group that hosted Wilders -was surprised with a bill from Temple for $800 for a “Security Officer.” This came with the explanation that the charge was for the costs “to secure the room and building.”

TUP Interim President Brittany Walsh pointed out that Temple had said – prior to the event – the university would pay any extra security costs. But, after repeated emails, she has received no substantive reply.

I had really hoped to find that this was a simple billing mistake on the part of the University administration, so I spoke to friend of the ‘Cooler, Jack Posobiec, who has contacts down at Temple and has been working with Brittany Walsh on this issue. He put me in touch with her. Brittany confirmed that the University has indeed billed Temple University Purpose for the “extra security” which, as organizer of the event, Brittany says she never authorized. TUP had already paid a $576 fee to the University as part of their contract with the University back in September of last year. Therefore, the balance the University says is now owed is $244–for the “extra security” neede for the Geert Wilders event in October. It is a balance that the University says they will waive if the TUP claims financial hardship, but a balance that TUP will not pay because it is an infringement of their first amendment rights. Mike Adams speculates that:

[T]his group is being punished financially because it hosted a speaker likely to offend a particularly volatile segment of the population. As a consequence, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has written to the president of Temple. In that letter, FIRE cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement (1992), which says, “Speech cannot be financially burdened, any more than it can be punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob.”

Temple is a public university and is bound by the Supreme Court’s decisions. If they are smart, they will go the way of four other public universities—the University of Colorado at Boulder; University of Massachusetts Amherst; University of California, Berkeley; and University of Arizona—and abandon such security fees before they get sued.

Two years ago, Temple’s speech code was struck down by the Third Circuit. That lawsuit was handled by my friends at the Alliance Defense Fund. If the university does not begin to respect the First Amendment, additional humiliation and litigation are certain to follow.

Brittany says that Temple President Ann Weaver Hart has been supportive of TUP and Brittany has contacted her in hopes that President Hart’s involvement in this matter will clear up the dispute between TUP and Student Activities before litigation proceeds.

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

Sen. Anthony Williams’ Racist Remarks Are Disgraceful

By CHRIS FREIND

If you’re wondering why race relations in America haven’t improved at all, look no farther than the recent comments of state Senator Anthony Williams’ concerning the current field of Democratic gubernatorial candidates.

Fueling speculation that Williams, who is black, might throw his hat into the race, the senator ranted that none of the four Democrats was giving any attention to the black community and the issues faced by that constituency.

In other words, since they are all white, they were just catering to Whitey and ignoring everyone else.

Gee, and I thought campaigns were supposed to be color-blind.
Williams is correct that none of the Democrats has workable solutions to the monumental problems we face —black or otherwise. Ironically, it is the Republican platform that holds the key to success for Williams’ people.

But here’s the bigger irony: so-called black leaders like Sen. Williams’ do more to harm their “own people” than any white politician ever could. Despite the majority of black Americans holding Republican, and in many cases conservative, values, their black “leadership” sells them out time and time again by perpetuating policies destined to fail.

A look at Williams’ hometown of Philadelphia gives a startling example.

The city has been under Democratic leadership for sixty years — one-Party rule with no competition. And how has that bastion of leadership fared?

Philadelphia has the nation’s highest rates of murder, violence and poverty. Its educational system is abysmal, with many of the public schools being deathtraps, totally devoid of all learning and where survival is the first—and only— order of the day.

But that’s just the beginning.

The city’s pensions are insolvent. The business climate continues to decline due to the brain drain of our best and brightest. The tax system is so onerous that it ranks as worst in the nation. Its court system has completely imploded. People and businesses continue to flee to more fertile areas.

And the city’s reputation for corruption and pay-to-play is legendary.
So what do people like Sen. Williams do to address these problems? And, by the way, since the city’s population is majority black, these would be the problems facing “his” people.

Here’s the cruel joke. Williams’ actions, not those of The White Man, keep his constituents down and out, ripping hope away from the very people who most need help.

Williams’ solution to the terrible business climate? Raise the city portion of the sales tax by 100 percent and make no payments to the pension plan for two years. Brilliant Anthony! Penalize those who can least afford it (it is undisputed that a sales tax is the most regressive tax) and renege on the promises made to retired workers.

And what about education? Throw huge money at the schools, appease the powerful teachers’ unions, look the other way, and pretend that the results will somehow change. It hasn’t worked in decades, and it never will.

Until we get serious about providing a quality education in a safe learning environment, our students —our future— will continue to be thrown into the world as functional illiterates. And after the last flame of hope is extinguished for these children, they resort to violent crime because they have nothing left to lose.

The cycle simply perpetuates itself. Over and over again.

It is clear that the Democratic Party doesn’t have the answers, because nothing it has tried has worked. The GOP, on the other hand, has the solutions. It just needs a powerful and courageous leader to articulate the message. But leaders in the Republican Party are in short supply.

Up until the 1930’s, the vast majority of blacks were Republican, members of the Party of Lincoln. Why the Party and one of its natural constituencies parted ways is for another column, but there’s no reason that separation has to continue.

Consider:

Who wants and needs school choice more than the black community — people who, more than anyone else, have no choice in their children’s education?

Who advocates tough-on-crime legislation and gun ownership so that neighborhoods can start to thrive again, where children don’t have to sleep on the floor to avoid bullets?

Who is hurt the most by ever-increasing taxes, fees and regulations, and who needs a healthy business climate to attract and keep the good jobs necessary to provide opportunities and sustain families?

What ethnic group more than any other opposes gay marriage?

The answer to these questions is that all Pennsylvanians benefit from these common-sense, free-market answers to our toughest problems. But for those among us who are suffering the most, these Republican-oriented ideas are more than just workable and proven solutions. They are the difference between hope and despair— life and death.

So let me shout it to those in the cheap seats one more time (that’s you, Sen. Williams): quit the race-baiting game and stop being part of the problem. If you truly want to do something for your “people,” then embrace the solutions that will get the job done.

Anything less is just….racism.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter whose news site, The Artorius News Bureau, is slated to launch in mid-February. Readers of “Freindly Fire” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on a Philadelphia-area talk radio show, and makes numerous other television and radio appearances. He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Join the other 2 commenters or Share This...

Epic.

I am so glad to report that Michael Mann – creator of the incredible Hockey Stick curve and one of the scientists most heavily implicated in the Climategate scandal – is about to get a very nasty shock. When he turns up to work on Monday, he’ll find that all 27 of his colleagues at the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University have received a rather tempting email inviting them to blow the whistle on anyone they know who may have been fraudulently misusing federal grant funds for climate research.

Under US law, regardless of whether or not a prosecution results, the whistleblower stands to make very large sums of money: it is based on a percentage of the total government funds which have been misused, in this case perhaps as much as $50 million.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Friends,

I am pleased to inform you that Philadelphia has been selected to host a monthly Center-Right Coalition meeting, following the hugely-successful model of Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR). We will be one of the few non-state capital cities to have such a gathering.

The kick-off meeting, which I will be hosting, will be Thursday, November 12 at the Union League in Philadelphia, with Mr. Norquist in attendance. Light refreshments will be served at 7:00 AM, with the program going from 7:30 to 9:00. The Union League is located at 140 S. Broad Street, just two blocks south of City Hall.

In Grover’s words, the objective is “to get everybody who is center-right to tell each other what they are doing, to share technology and tactics, and to tell stories” regarding issues facing Pennsylvania and the nation.

One key function, according to ATR, is to facilitate collaborative activities of coalition members, many of whom may have not previously known one another, and foster the potential for mutual cooperation.

The rules are simple: Anyone who so desires may speak for three minutes on current initiatives, answer questions, and pass the microphone to the next speaker.

The only prohibition is whining. It is a positive meeting, one that will unify southeastern Pennsylvania.

Attendees will typically include influential political, business, policy and grassroots leaders.

If anyone who would like several minutes on the agenda, please let me know.

You are encouraged to bring any literature for distribution.

I hope to see you next Thursday.

For future reference, the monthly meetings will be held on the FIRST THURSDAY of each month at the Union League, with the same time format as above.

Feel free to invite colleagues and associates. All meetings are off the record.

Steadfast,

Christopher Freind
“Freindly Fire”
Audaces fortuna iuvat
610-659-0098
christopherfreind@hotmail.com (E before I in Freind)
CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

This from What’s the 422 caught my attention because it’s the school district in which I live.

The superintendent of the Spring-Ford Area School District takes issue with federal and state requirements for the testing of students with learning disabilities.

Marsha Hurda said during Monday’s school board meeting that requiring juniors to take the 11th grade test when they read at the eighth grade level is “crazy.” Students with IEPs, or individual education plans, may learn on a different instructional level than their actual grade level.

“You’re leaving students behind,” Hurda said.

So requiring students that have advanced to the eleventh grade to actually read at an eleventh grade level is not only “crazy” but “leaving them behind”.

However, promoting those students throughout the school system and eventually graduating them out into society with substandard reading skills is…what exactly?

Given all of our school districts’ propensity to find “learning disabilities” in more and more students to gain that precious federal grant money, I’m just wondering if we’re giving up too soon on the abilities of students who may be a little more difficult to educate for the sake of a few federal dollars.

It seems to me that a school district should test their students according to standards, not a moving scale that will mean nothing to these kids in a practical way once they have graduated out of the fluffy self-esteem factories that our public schools have become. Furthermore, if a school district has a disproportionate number of “special ed” students, somebody needs to be looking at exactly why that is.

As the stepparent of two children who were “diagnosed” with “learning disabilities,” I can tell you that in both cases, it was probably a mis-diagnosis and the resulting IEP (Individualized Ediucation Program) that each received did more harm than good. Their experience was the primary reason we put our youngest in private school.

Email LisaMossie, Join the other 2 commenters or Share This...

Hands down, the most ridiculous statement in this entire clip is this do-gooder who says:

“The Muslim students of Temple University have had a feeling of fear and hatred being thrown towards them for the past week and that is not ok.”

What makes it ridiculous is that just before it, Eyewitness News airs a clip of the Muslim girl, who is clearly more tolerant of another point of view than this Suburban whitebread liberal jackass. What also makes it ridiculous is the overt displays of hate and fear directed at Mr. Wilders and those sponsoring the event while Muslims sit peacefully in the audience.

What’s funny–not funny “ha ha” but funny sad, is how so many of these socially conscious protestors against “hate speech” missed the point entirely: Wilders was there to speak about freedom and how Islam, particularly radical Islam, hinders it. How do you think our little societal scold would feel if she was forced to dress like this:

Or this:

Does it not occur to dumb college broads like this that it is well documented that Islam oppresses the rights of women? Can they not see this from what they are forced to wear, for the sake of a religion that demands “modesty” of their women but makes no such demands of their men? And that’s to say nothing of the barbaric practice of honor killings, stonings and genital mutilation that still goes on in some of these countries. Women are forced to be second class citizens in Islamic ruled countries. It is beyond a tragedy that almost all of our so-called women’s rights groups ignore the plight of Islamic women; it is obscene that there are those who will fight for that right of one people to to continue to oppress another based on religion and gender in the name of political correctness. Tolerance of intolerance indeed.

We fritter away our freedom in the name of political correctness, and our youth, once the rebels that broke new ground and pushed the envelope into new ways of thinking, happily marches along to the PC tune like sheep to the slaughter. A true tragedy indeed.

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

For those of you who may not remember, Geert Wilders is the Dutch politician who gained worldwide noteriety after producing the anti-Islamic film “Fitna”. You may recall that nobody wanted to touch “Fitna” with a ten foot pole, so Mr. Wilders posted it on YouTube. If you were quick enough, as I was, you were able to view this thought provoking film before the cowards at YouTube yanked it off several days after it’s original posting. In February this year, he was blocked from entering the UK to show this film:

He had tried to visit the UK in February 2009 to show his controversial film Fitna – roughly translated as “strife” in Arabic – which links the Koran to terrorism, but was turned back at Heathrow airport.

No TV company would broadcast the 17-minute film, which some Dutch politicians tried to ban before Mr Wilders posted it on the internet in March 2008.

Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen complained the furore over Fitna could endanger Dutch companies, soldiers and residents abroad.

That followed Denmark’s experience in 2006, when the publication of Danish cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad sparked protests across the Muslim world.

A student group called Temple University Purpose extended the invitation to Wilders to speak today; Temple is the first university in the United States that has allowed Wilders to address students.

As you can well imagine, this has caused all of the predicitable huffing and puffing from the university drones who have embraced political correctness at the cost of sacrificing free speech. Here are a few of such hyperventilations, courtesy the Phila Daily News:

Student Senate President Jeff Dempsey said he couldn’t support the decision to invite Wilders and hoped that the university would pull the plug on the program at the last minute.

“I’ve never been ashamed to be a Temple student,” Dempsey said, adding that university-sponsored dollars were not used to fund the event. “Our proud embrace of diversity and inclusion is tarnished by this man’s provocation of hate.”

Wilders was invited to speak by a new group on campus called Temple University Purpose.

Before the meeting, about a dozen students held signs with phrases including “Temple U. Does Not Condone Hate” and “Hate Speech [does not equal] Free Speech.”

Among the demonstrators was Megan Chialastri, vice president of All Sides, an organization that seeks to promote peace between Israel and Palestine.

“We feel student groups should not bring people on campus that jeopardize the safety, or just the way people feel on this campus,” she said.

In a letter issued last week, Monira Gamal-Eldin, president of the Muslim Students Association, criticized the university for being the first in the United States to allow Wilders to address students.

“The Muslim population at Temple feels attacked, threatened and ultimately unsafe that Mr. Wilders has been invited to voice his hate-driven opinions,” she wrote.

“The decision to allow Mr. Wilders to share his viewpoints is a danger not only for the public safety of Muslims and the honor of the core principle of Islam, but also for academic integrity and objectivity on campus.”

Would these groups have the safety concerns or this level of outrage if an anti-semitic or anti-Christian speaker were engaged? Nevermind–that’s a silly question. Hate speech only applies to protected groups, and in our world it is not only ok to be critical of Judeo-Christian ideals, it is actually encouraged, especially on our campuses.

These student groups who are so aggreived at the mere presence of a man who holds controversial ideas should ask themselves what it is they are afraid of. Labelling something “hate speech” is just another way of silencing dissent and stifling debate. It is the surest way to close a mind, which is the last thing university students should be encouraging. As Wilders himself has stated:

“I believe we have been too tolerant of the intolerant. We should learn to become intolerant of the intolerant,” he said.

And as far as safety concerns go, these same outraged Temple students who fear their safety has been “jeopardized” should ask themselves why it is Mr. Wilders who now requires a 24/7 bodyguard.

He lives under police protection because of earlier death threats, and has told the BBC his intention has only ever been “to have a debate about freedom of speech and the threat of Islamisation of our Western societies”.

“It’s not my intention to have anything at all to do with violence. On the contrary, I despise violence – I just want a debate.”

Temple University should be applauded for their courage in allowing Mr. Wilders to speak to students.

And those who think about it hard enough will wonder why any Unversity would need to exercise courage to invite him in the first place.

Email LisaMossie, Join the discussion or Share This...

Santorum’s part starts at 4:52 in the video:

It’s unrelated, but don’t you think Shannon Bream is extremely qualified to be President of the United States? Just watch her read off the teleprompter! I wonder if she was ever a community organizer?

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...

Obama’s speech to public school students seems to be drawing mixed reactions; there are those who find it an incredibly creepy intrusion of the State and are responding with with threats to take their children out of school and there are those who can’t quite grasp what the big deal is and tend to think that those in the former camp are over-reacting. After all, if the address is not being introduced by Miley Cyrus or the Jonas Brothers, are the kids really going to pay attention anyway?

The latter view, I think, dismisses the intent behind the event in the first place. And what exactly is it that Obama wants to tell our children? In his own words (emphasis mine):

“I’m going to be making a big speech to young people all across the country about the importance of education; about the importance of staying in school; how we want to improve our education system and why it’s so important for the country. So I hope everybody tunes in.”

So, it’s a policy speech aimed at children? What could possibly be the point? What could possibly be the harm? Will children even pay attention?

That brings me to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an education foundation that Obama led from 1995-99 and brainchild of Weather Underground radical, Bill Ayers. From Stanley Kurtz’s September 23, 2008 WSJ Article:

One unsettled question is how Mr. Obama, a former community organizer fresh out of law school, could vault to the top of a new foundation? In response to my questions, the Obama campaign issued a statement saying that Mr. Ayers had nothing to do with Obama’s “recruitment” to the board. The statement says Deborah Leff and Patricia Albjerg Graham (presidents of other foundations) recruited him. Yet the archives show that, along with Ms. Leff and Ms. Graham, Mr. Ayers was one of a working group of five who assembled the initial board in 1994. Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval.

The CAC’s agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers’s educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism. In the mid-1960s, Mr. Ayers taught at a radical alternative school, and served as a community organizer in Cleveland’s ghetto.

In works like “City Kids, City Teachers” and “Teaching the Personal and the Political,” Mr. Ayers wrote that teachers should be community organizers dedicated to provoking resistance to American racism and oppression. His preferred alternative? “I’m a radical, Leftist, small ‘c’ communist,” Mr. Ayers said in an interview in Ron Chepesiuk’s, “Sixties Radicals,” at about the same time Mr. Ayers was forming CAC.

Nope. Nothing to see here.

The Cato Institute responds:

It’s one thing for a president to encourage all kids to work hard and stay in school – that’s a reasonable use of the bully pulpit. It’s another thing entirely, however, to have the U.S. Department of Education send detailed instructions to public schools nationwide on how to glorify the president and the presidency, and push them to drive social change. Frighteningly, this is what President Obama has done.

In anticipation of the president’s planned September 8 address to students nationwide, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan sent a letter and detailed “classroom activities” to schools with all sorts of troubling buzzwords and guidance. In his letter, Duncan asserts that the work of educators is “critical to…our social progress.” It’s a statement that strongly suggests – as many educators have held and continue to hold – that it is the job of public schools to impose values, often collectivist, on students.

The fear that this might be the case is reinforced by classroom activities for pre-K-6 students that encourages children to make posters setting out “community and country” goals. Perhaps even more frightening is the lesson schools are pushed to teach that it is important to listen to “the President and other elected officials.” Possibly most distressing of all, though, is guidance that appears explicitly designed to glorify both the presidency and President Obama himself, encouraging schools to prepare for the speech “by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama.” And schools are told to ask students how president Obama will “inspire” them in his speech before he gives it, and how they were inspired after Obama has spoken.

And Jim Greer, chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, says:

“The address scheduled for September 8, 2009, does not allow for healthy debate on the President’s agenda, but rather obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our President’s initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates.”

I think I understand the motivation of teachers who believe that this is a good thing; they see first hand a lot of the effects of bad parenting. As parents abdicate more and more of their traditional roles to the public schools, teachers are called upon to step in where a parent normally would have. Though we can debate the causes and effects of an “it takes a village” mentality on the general populace, an unarguable result is that people invariably begin looking toward the government instead of themselves to solve their problems. Teachers, who bear the brunt of this phenomenom on the front lines, undoubtedly welcome a “stay in school and do your homework” speech from a man who commands cult like reverence from his supporters, particularly the youth of America whom he successfully mobilized to win the election.

We can also debate the merits of the expansion of the State’s power over a public that is increasingly unwilling to accept personal responsibility, and indeed, that is a post for another time. For now, though, I don’t think it is even a little bit of an over-reaction to protest Obama’s speech to children, nor to opt your children out of it. I think it is nothing less than a stand for independence and freedom.

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

Having spent the better part of last week arguing with State Senator Daylin Leach over the morality of raising taxes, the perils of public dependency on poorly provided government services and the amount of wasted taxpayer dollars, it appears I’m about to eat my words.

Kind of.

As the parent of a Temple University sophomore, I received an urgent email in my inbox yesterday from Temple stating that funding in the amount of $175 million was going to be withheld by the state legislature, which, if it happened, would necessitate a rise in tuition of $5,000 per year or 45%.

As I did not have all of the facts at my disposal, I naturally assumed that this was part of the PA Budget cuts I argued for so forcefully last week with Daylin Leach. I asked my co-worker whose daughter is starting at Pitt in a few weeks if she received a similar email, becuase I was aware that the “state affiliated” schools–Temple, Pitt, Lincoln and Penn State—had been targeted for budget cuts, but because I had just paid my daughter’s tuition bill for the fall semester, I had seen that in spite of those cuts that the University had been successfulll in holding down costs and was only implementing a 2.5% increase in tuition for the 2009-10 year. Was this something new, I wondered, and was it another budget cut that was going to affect the other state-affiliated schools?

Indeed, upon researching the matter I found that Rendell had implemented funding cuts of $21 Million for this year, which, obviously, the University was unhappy about, but made the necessary adjustments to their budget. The June 30, 2009 press release from Temple’s web site:

Temple University, with the other state-related universities, received bad news last week. Gov. Ed Rendell announced his intent to cut the Commonwealth’s appropriation to the four state-related universities for the coming fiscal year by 12.8 percent, and declared that Temple, Penn State, Pitt, and Lincoln universities were being cut out of federal stimulus funding. For Temple University, this would mean an appropriation cut of more than $21 million in addition to the loss of $10.5 million in expected stimulus funding.

Rendell made the announcement on Friday, as part of a sweeping series of budget cuts designed to help balance the 2009-2010 state budget, as required by the state Constitution.

(…)

While the four state-related universities were hit with the 12.8 percent appropriation reduction in the Governor’s proposal, the colleges and universities that are part of the State System of Higher Education and the community colleges were not subject to the same cuts because of requirements for the state to receive federal stimulus funding.

The Governor declared the state-related schools were “not public” because they are not under his “complete control,” and therefore could be excluded from the requirements for federal stimulus funding.

“The Governor’s position flies in the face of the Temple University-Commonwealth Act that made Temple an instrumentality of the Commonwealth and an integral part of the state’s system of higher education in 1965,” said George Moore, senior vice president and university counsel. “It also appears to contradict the terms and intent of the federal stimulus bill.

“The state of Pennsylvania has benefitted greatly from its state-related schools,” Moore added. The Governor’s position will not only do great harm to the state-related schools, but will adversely impact the many Pennsylvania students and their families who depend on us for their futures.”

I can live with the belt tightening. Indeed, I applaud it. I’m not happy about perpetual tuition increases, and, though I am very happy withthe quality of education my daughter is getting at Temple, I think that a college education in general is already overpriced, but I am willing to suck up the cost of incremental cuts if they are fiscally necessary.

This $175 million cut is something else, however. This is political payback from a local politician who is miffed at Temple for closing a hospital in his district that was on track to lose some $15 million last year:

Hundreds of Temple University students were on red alert yesterday when they learned of a legislative effort to deprive the college of $175 million in state and federal funds.

Temple officials said that the loss in funding would lead to a $5,000 increase in tuition for undergraduates, sending students into a tizzy on Facebook and Twitter.

Many were unaware that state Rep. John Taylor and other lawmakers had taken steps to make good on a pledge made several months ago, during an ill-fated battle to save Northeastern Hospital, to withhold the funds.

Temple University Health System closed the longtime Port Richmond hospital on June 30 because of financial losses.

Taylor told the Daily News on Tuesday that a bill that would provide Temple with the $175 million through a nondeferred appropriation was pulled from the House of Representatives. Bills regarding other state universities were allowed to move to the next step.

The Temple bill was scheduled to be reintroduced yesterday, but “we got it delayed again,” Taylor said.

House members won’t vote on appropriations for Temple and other universities until after the state budget is settled.

Two-thirds of the House must vote in favor of each school’s appropriation for it to pass. Taylor said he believes that he’s convinced lawmakers to vote against awarding Temple any funds.

“I think I had a lot of those votes secured way back,” he said. “Once members make commitments to other members, it’s hard to change that.”

While I still feel like I’m compromising my principles somewhat by contacting my congressmen in support of Temple, this is not a budget issue; it’s political blackmail between this congressman’s ego and the University with the parents and students caught in the middle; it’s not like witholding this funding is going to bring back Northeastern Hospital. But like many legislators who let their egos get in the way of their constituencies, Rep. John Taylor is only concerned with making the University sweat by withholding money that belongs to the taxpayers. He is not punishing Temple, he’s punishing the students, and Temple, apparently, is well aware of that, hence the outreach to parents, student and alumni.

We budgeted my daughter’s college savings payments based upon our estimates of what Temple’s tuition would be. Effectively doubling that tuition will make continuing her education there impossible. This situation applies to all of Temples 27,000 students as well.

Here is Temple’s new release about the witholding of funds. Temple is a great school and I urge readers to contact their representatives in support of Temple University.

Email LisaMossie, Join the other 4 commenters or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

I’ve had the pleasure of talking politics with lots of people over the past few weeks. My attendance at last week’s Jefferson Township Fair along with the time that I spent in Farrell at the Slovak and Italian Homes Ethnic Food Festival gave me an opportunity to discuss important and pressing issues with local taxpayers. I’d like to share some of the issues that were discussed and debated.

The Status of the Pennsylvania State Budget

While there were many topics that were on the table, the one issue that remains on the tip of everyone’s tongue is the State budget. There were many local folks that were confused to see State Legislators at the weekend events. Most people expected that our lawmakers would still be in Harrisburg working to come to some sort of compromise on the budget. Instead, they were back home in Mercer County enjoying summer festivities. I realized that the budget was out of the control of the House, but it was my understanding the Senate leaders were to be working over the weekend to move the budget process further. I thought I should do a little research in order to clarify the questions.

When I last addressed the issue of the budget, the House had rejected the State Senate’s last draft of a budget and it was being sent back to the Senate. The plan was that a bipartisan Conference Committee would be assigned on Monday to tackle the project. Governor Rendell, however, stated last week that he felt that work could be done over the weekend before the Committee was even assigned. It seems that the Governor was mistaken. According to KYW News Radio 1060 (read HERE),

“Last Thursday, Governor Rendell expressed optimism that negotiations could produce a budget agreement even before the conference committee met. But later that same day, the majority leader of the GOP-controlled Senate said there was no rational basis for such optimism. And in fact, the majority leader’s spokesman says while there were some informal budget discussions over the weekend, there were no breakthroughs. “

It seems that the optimism that was painted on this part of the budget process was simply like ‘putting lipstick on a pig’. The establishment of a Conference Committee may move the budget process forward, but it will not be moving with any particular amount of speed . . . and that is unfortunate.

State Employees Remain Unpaid During Impasse

Another topic that almost everyone agrees on is that shameful use of State Workers as a pawn in budget negotiations. State Employees are currently continuing to work, but they will not receive their paychecks until a budget is passed. The Governor has been using the workers as a threat during budget talks, but no move was ever made through the Governer’s office to insure that workers would continue to get paid. I reported back in mid-May about legislation that was on the table to prevent this exact problem (read HERE). Specifically, House Bill 913 was submitted in March of this year as an effort to insure that State Workers would continue to be paid during a budget impasse. Two State Representatives from Mercer County (Representative Dick Stevenson and Representative Michele Brooks) were part of the group that introduced the bill on March 12. Unfortunately, the bill has been sitting in committee ever since.

Now that State Employees are officially not receiving paychecks, the real problems for the State are just around the corner. According to the Associated Press (read HERE),

“On Friday, the U.S. Department of Labor said it had begun investigating whether Pennsylvania has violated its employees’ rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act by ordering them to work without regular pay. The department received more than 1,500 calls, a spokeswoman said.”

The threat of a Federal Labor Department investigation now has the Governor squirming. So much so, that the Governor is now looking for a ‘quick fix’ like an ‘interim budget’ that would fill the gap until final budget negotiations are completed. According to the same article by the Associated Press,

“Gov. Ed Rendell said Monday that he will look for a way to speed money to pay for Pennsylvania’s state government operations so that tens of thousands of employees don’t miss more paydays during an entrenched budget impasse. Rendell said he decided to pursue an interim budget that is whittled down to the essentials after informal talks over the weekend with Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware, made it clear that any agreement on an approximately $28 billion budget still is far away. “

It seems like the Governor should have focused on this potential problem months ago, but, instead, he was holding on to his big bargaining chip. Again, this is an unfortunate situation no matter how you look at it.

Keystone Exams

Another issue on people’s lists of concerns are the Keystone Exams. Governor Rendell has been trying to push through these graduation exams since the end of the fiscal year, but concerned and responsible lawmakers have been trying to put a stop to it. The exams are EXTREMELY expensive (a seven-year contract totaling $201 MILLION), and their effectiveness is questionable. Senator Jane Orie authored Senate Bill 281 that was designed to STOP the Keystone Exams, and it was referred to the House Education Committee in June . . . where it stalled.

It seems that a bipartisan group of lawmakers are going to attempt to drag the legislation out of committee this week through a Discharge Resolution. A Discharge Resolution is a tool that can be used by the House to force legislation out of committee. We last saw it used in mid-June in an effort to move the Budget forward (read HERE for details). A Discharge Resolution requires 25 signatures from House Members, and I suspect the list of names may be similar to those that signed onto DR1 and DR2 in June (read the list HERE).

With the current state of the economy, local taxpayers are concerned about projects with large price tags, and the Keystone Exams qualify in that regard. Taxpayers simply aren’t willing to pay.

Health Care Reform

Another important issue of discussion last week was that of Health Care Reform. While the President is currently pushing for some sort of “Universal” plan that would cover all Americans, people are discussing the various possibilities amongst themselves, and it is a rather ‘healthy debate’ (no pun intended).

The majority of people that I talked to agree that SOMETHING needs to be done to provide health insurance for those that don’t have it. Unfortunately, no one is exactly sure what the best solution would be. Surprisingly enough, this is the same problem that lawmakers in Washington are running into. The problem is SO big, that a quick fix doesn’t seem possible. For that reason, most people that I talked to simply felt that this was an issue that deserved more time and debate. Rather than pushing through some sort of legislation now, most taxpayers feel that more time should be taken to hammer out the details and examine the big picture.

The President has hopes of passing something through sooner, but I think that most Americans would prefer to take our time to do this right. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Gun Rights: Concealed Weapons Amendment

The final issue that was brought up numerous times last week was the recent amendment that was voted on in the U.S. Senate regarding the Concealed Weapons Law (specifically referred to as Senate Amendment 1618 to Senate Bill 1390). The amendment would have required each of the 48 states that currently allow concealed firearms to honor permits issued in other states. The issue was overwhelming supported by those of us that firmly support the Second Amendment, but it was hotly debated by those that wish to limit gun rights.

The issue was brought to vote on Wednesday, July 22, 2009. It needed 60 votes to pass the Senate. It only received 58 votes (with a final vote count of 58 to 39). Three Senators did not vote (Byrd, Kennedy, and Mikulski). Pennsylvania Senators Casey and Spector split their votes (Casey was FOR the amendment, and Spector was AGAINST it).

The issue of Gun Rights is an important one in Mercer County. With a strong base of sportsmen in the area, the issue was supported by Republicans and Democrats alike.

In Closing . . .

While I had the opportunity to discuss MANY issues with local taxpayers, these were the ones that were brought up most often. I wanted to share the details with all of you so that you, too, have a sense of the conversations that are going on. I thank all of the folks that took the time to talk to me. I thoroughly enjoyed our conversations, and I look forward to many more opportunities in the coming weeks and months.

.

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

CNBC aggregated 40 public data points to score Pennsylvania 33rd most business friendly state, which is down from 23rd last year.

Perhaps most interesting is that PA ranked high on “education” (6th), but dismally low on “workforce” (43rd).

Consider that again: Education ≠ Workforce

Here’s the description for “workforce” (bold added):

Many states point with great pride to the quality and availability of their workers, as well as government-sponsored programs to train them. We rated states based on the education level of their workforce, as well as the numbers of available workers. We also considered union membership. While organized labor contends that a union workforce is a quality workforce, that argument, more often than not, doesn’t resonate with business. We also looked at the relative success of each state’s worker training programs in placing their participants in jobs.

This should come as no surprise to anybody who has been paying attention.  This is all the more troubling considering that the education component of “workforce” actually brought the number up.

Email Joe Collins, Join the discussion or Share This...

Hello everyone. Long time…no see. I’ve been laying low over the last few weeks and enjoying a new job and the first couple of weeks of a very lovely and comfortable summer so far. Unfortunately, not everyone feels that these mild and gentle summer days are real and decided to send me an email, and about 100 of his closest friends, and lay out the facts on “Human made Global Climate Change” and the moral and religious necessity in addressing the issue.

The following was our exchange on the matter of the Earth and its temperatures ebb and flow. I have not changed any of the text from its original format, grammatical and spelling errors to make sure that the integrity of this communication remains intact.

First I will let you read his statement to everyone he emailed.

Subject: RE: Senate Alert !!
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 11:49:27 -0400

Climate change is a moral and religious issue, not just a policy issue.  Whatever the merits of any particular bill, we all need to recognize:

1. Human-caused climate change is already adversely affecting people, especially poor people. 

2. Continued growth in global greenhouse gas concentrations will increase these adverse effects.

3. The longer we wait before addressing climate change, the greater the costs of addressing it will become.

4. Our children and our grandchildren will overwhelmingly bear the brunt of climate change if we don’t take serious action.

Cheers.

The following was my response to his lecturing of all the other recipients and myself.

John:
 
Nonsense. Prove that humans are causing it and then we’ll talk. Most scientists can’t agree on the subject, let alone the average citizen. There is no such thing as “scientific Consensus” in science. All of science is based on proveable facts, not a vote. It is or it isn’t. Not “50.01% of us” think so. That’s not science at all, that’s politics and I thought that scientists worked in fact, not opinion.
 
And as a side note, I thought these same scientists said when I was a little kid that we were going through “Global Coolilng” and if we didn’t do something right now we were going to be in another ice age. All this does is prove to me that scientists are either too stupid to know when they don’t know something or too arrogant to admit when they were wrong. Furthermore it shows that it was never true in the first place since the concept being pushed in either case is still that we must control what you and I do “For the Planets Sake.” 

If you wish to be intellectually honest on the subject, this has nothing to do with the environment but about control. Its about how to get government intervention into every facet of all of our lives and remove our personal freedom to choose what’s best for ourselves. Its also about how to seperate you and I from our God given right to choose our own path and to keep what we earn through our own hard work. Politicians see this as a huge cash cow and they hear the “Moo” in the field.
 
Furthermore this about how to get a Socialist agenda point of “Equalling the playing field” and making the world more “Fair.” Translating that from Socialist to English means taking from me to give to someone else.
 
As if there is another country in the world that is more safe in its use of energy and more environmentally concious than the United States already. This is not to help “the Planet” but to help political parties gain and maintain power. Just like most Americans, I don’t waste where I can possibly avoid it for 2 main reasons, (1) I have limited resources and don’t wish to waste the resources I have available to me and (2) I was taught to be a good steward to that which I was entrusted with, whether it is the raising of my children to be good people or to leave my world a better place for my children when I’m gone. The main connecting thought you need to remember between both of these things is this…It is because I choose so, not because a government told me I had too.
 
So please don’t try to talk about all of the environmental claptrap or my responsibility to future generations. As a father and an American I know what my responsibilities are in life…and the last time I checked it was my right to decide what that was for myself.

Now, those of you that know me or have read my material in the past know that I’m not the kind of man to kiss and tell, but this gentleman kind of pushed my buttons and since by his addition of all of his contact information in an email sent to well over 100 more individuals gives me the impression is that this person has no problem announcing to the world who he is, so therefore I have no problem either. If you feel so inclined please feel free to contact him to relay your thoughts and feelings on the “Global Climate Change” hokum since he seems to be more than happy to receive emails on this matter.

John C. Dernbach
Distinguished Professor of Law

Widener University Law School
3800 Vartan Way
Harrisburg, PA  17106-9382
(717) 541-1933

(717) 541-3966 (fax)

http://ssrn.com/author=411559 (SSRN)

http://johndernbach.com/ (web site) 

I hope everyone appreciates this conversation as much as I did and I wish everyone enjoys our sunny and mild summer.

Email Ian Hayes, Start the discussion or Share This...

But only when conservatives do it. Inky:

The “affirmative-action bake sale,” at which the Bucknell University Conservatives Club charged different prices depending on a customer’s race, was shut down by the administration in April. But it didn’t end there.

Bucknell president Brian C. Mitchell has received about 100 letters, e-mails, and phone calls protesting the administration’s response.

A Philadelphia-based national free-speech group this month blasted the school in a news release that began, “Student rights are under assault at Bucknell University. …”

And a fledgling group of alumni and other interested parties issued a statement of concern last week.

The controversy at Bucknell – a 3,500-student liberal arts university in Lewisburg, Pa., about 75 minutes north of the state capital – is not unique.

College campuses across the country frequently must deal with delicate issues of free speech, political posturing, and race relations.

“Delicate issues” of free speech? Free speech has only become a “delicate issue” because of the left’s continuing attempts to silence free speech through political correctness.

In March, the [Bucknell Conservative] club complained that the administration shut down another of its activities – passing out anti-stimulus handbills that blared “The Socialist State of America” on the front with President Obama’s face. On the back, the fake dollar bills read: “Obama’s stimulus plan makes your money as worthless as Monopoly money.”

That incident and the bake sale prompted the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) to get involved.

“We want everyone around Bucknell to know that Bucknell is not a place that respects students’ rights,” said FIRE’s Adam Kissel.

FIRE has successfully defended student groups at the College of William and Mary, Northeastern Illinois and DePaul Universities, the University of California, Irvine, and the University of Colorado at Boulder when those schools attempted to stop bake sales, Kissel said. The group, which was co-founded by University of Pennsylvania history professor and free-speech advocate Alan Charles Kors in 1999, takes on cases of free speech at the nation’s colleges and universities. Its Web site is www.thefire.org

Bucknell officials said that the school’s reactions to the bake sale and the handbill handouts were not an issue of free speech, but rather of campus “safety and fairness.”

Ahh, yes. Break out the old “student safety” trope when any group of students deigns to stop marching lockstep with the University’s agenda of politcal correctness. What’s left unspoken is why there would be any danger or “safety” issues resulting from a bake sale. I wish the University would elaborate on that.

Students did not have the required prior permission to hand out the handbills at the cafeteria entrance, the school said. Permission is required to prevent cross-scheduling and allow management to prepare for “possible reactions” to the events, “including for the safety of those involved,” Bucknell’s general counsel, Wayne Bromfield, wrote in a response to FIRE dated June 11.

And the bake sale was “discriminatory,” Bromfield wrote.

“If students wish to engage other students in related discussions, there are opportunities for doing so that do not require us to sanction disparate treatment of our students, faculty, staff or visitors based on ethnic, racial, gender, religious, or other demographic distinctions,” he wrote.

So the University squashed the free speech demomstration based on the premise that an “affirmative action” bake sale was “discriminatory.”

Of course affirmative action is discriminatory; that’s the point of it–to promote one group of people over another based upon the color of their skin. The Bucknell Conservative Club’s crime was speaking that out loud.

But as I said, it’s only offensive when conservatives do it. When women’s groups do it, they are sparking important and critical dialog:

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

Notre Dame’s loss was clearly Wake Forest’s gain. Joe Biden hopped the Amtrak and delivered what had to be the most…puzzling…commencement speech ever. Here’s a taste:

I believe so strongly, as you may recall when I was here in October, not in you particularly but your generation, that I don’t have a single doubt in my mind we’re on the cusp not only of a new century but a new day for this country and the world.

Mmmmmm MMM! Isn’t that sentiment about as tasty as a slice of apple pie at Katie’s Diner? As a group, you guys are great, but as individuals, meh. Not so much. As Mark Hemingway on The Corner puts it:

With all the hullabaloo over the Notre Dame speech this weekend, no one seemed to much notice Joe Biden gave the commencement address at Wake Forest yesterday. You can read the transcript here, but as to be expected, you could probably give yourself a pre-frontal lobotomy with a screwdriver that’s accidentally been dropped in the toilet and come off more coherent than Joe Biden. What’s going on here? Even with speechwriters, the Great Commuter is still a verbal train wreck

It’s been quite a week for Ole Joe. Read all of the glorious goodness here.

Oh, and the Wake Forest speech is here.

H/T Drew M at AOSHQ

Cross posted at Bluftooni

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

            I don’t know what has caught me off guard more, this past week’s announcement that our nation’s budget will run a deficit of around $89 Billion more than previously expected, placing our budget deficit at a mind-numbing $1.8 Trillion for just the 2009 fiscal year, and yes I did say Trillion, or that our Commander-In-Chief actually had the audacity to then say in the same week that “we cannot continue to borrow money from China to fund our unsustainable budget.”

            Did I fall through a wormhole when I wasn’t looking? Is this “Opposite Day”?

            Mr. President, we are in the position of borrowing 50 Cents for every 1 Dollar we are spending because of your administrations’ desire to have the government pay for and provide every service in America. Education, health care, the banking industry, the car industry, the credit industry, the real estate industry, etc., etc., etc. He says that America needs to stop spending when it’s he, his administration, the previous administration and the addicts in Congress that don’t know how to stop and put us here in the first place.

            It is the height of hubris and hypocrisy to have someone that obviously does not even know how to balance a simple checkbook to tell someone else to stop spending more than they make. The American people figured this fact out a while ago that living above our means would destroy our lives. Apparently this message never made it to Washington. Perhaps it was lost in the mail. Maybe they deleted the email. Whatever happened though, if the government doesn’t get the message soon and stop spending my money, your money, our kids and grandkids money, then there won’t be any America left to fight for. We will just end up as the largest province of the Chinese Empire.

            We have heard several times over the last few weeks that what the governments’ doing to our future children’s future is “Generational theft.” I believe this phrasing is inaccurate and far too weak to really place what we are doing in perspective. Theft implies that it was done when someone wasn’t paying attention and had not said or done anything to prevent it. If we truly wanted to be accurate then what we should be saying is that what our government is doing to our future children is molesting them.

Yes, I did say that. Our government, in our names, is financially molesting our children and grandchildren. Let me see if I can describe this in the proper light.

            Our government is like the kindly Uncle that mom and dad let in the house, a friend of the family and thought of by many to be a good and kindly soul just trying to help everyone he sets his eyes upon. What mom and dad don’t realize though is that the man they just let in was really just a thief that wants to take everything that he can lay his grubby fingers on and then put his hands deep into their young daughter’s pockets when mom and dad walk into the other room.

            When mom and dad walk back in though they see the tragedy unfolding before them and tell that nasty Uncle Sam to stop what he’s doing right now and get the hell out, that filthy old Uncle Sam just stands there and says “You know, people shouldn’t do this to children but we both know it’s to save her future!” Then he just shoves his hands deeper into her pockets. There is a special place in hell for child molesters and if government was a real person then I’m sure it would be well on its way there.

            There is going to come a day sometime in the not too distant future when American’s are going to have had enough of being pushed around, ignored, abused, taken advantage of and being treated like children. That will be the day will be the day that those in Congress and the White House will look out their windows one warm and sunny morning and find themselves looking upon a Sea of American Humanity all around them, as far as the eye can see in every direction they gaze, staring back at them…and they won’t look happy! That will be the day that those politicians will say to themselves “The party’s over. They figured us out.” Because that will be the moment that we all finally realize the inescapable, American truth.

            They work for us…and We Surround Them!

Email Ian Hayes, Start the discussion or Share This...

My very dear friend got her MBA yesterday from St. Joe’s and I went to her commencement ceremony, where the themes for all of the speakers were social justice and inclusion. That the three graduate speakers talked about embracing the liberal ideals and made a point of connecting with the Jesuit tradition of the university comes as no surprise to me. Indeed, Catholicism preaches tolerance and inclusion; where it has been perverted is in the manner in which these values are told to be practiced by the people. Tolerance is pushed at the expense of morality; inclusion is pushed to the point of excluding others, social justice is obtained not by lifting up the “oppressed”, but by oppressing another segment of the population. Several times the point was made that gays, lesbians, people of color and the poor cannot be ignored or be treated as “invisible” any more, which is funny since in order to actually be “visible” anymore, one must be a member of such an “oppressed” group. If you are a white, middle-class employed individual, you are probably part of the problem, unless you are actively promoting one or all of these groups. If not, you are probably harboring some form of prejudice “under the surface” which needs to be eradicated.

Which all goes to the larger point that our Universities are not promoting free thinking any more as much as they are promoting lockstep conformity with liberal dogma.

By far the most offensive speech of the day belonged to the gentleman the University saw fit to bestow an honorary doctorate upon: Cornell West. Prior to attending the ceremony, Mr. West’s name was familiar to me but that was about it. I was unfamiliar with his philosophy and work prior to yesterday. From the citation awarding his doctorate delived by an Associate Professor of Education, Raymond Horn:

Dr. West’s desire to promote social justice, self understanding, and a love for all humanity has resulted in an interdisciplinarity that includes the written word and the spoke word, the academic world and the lived world, and individuals of all races and ethnicities. The essence of his interdisciplinary activism, which resounds with the Jesuit values of Sait Joseph’s University, is best expressed through his own words. Dr. West has stated:

So if I were to give the world knowledge, it would be knowledge couched in a larger wisdom, a wisdom rooted in a love of and compassion driven by a fight for justice for others. A fight for justice for the poor, for working people, for women, for people of color, for gay brothers, for lesbian sisters, for physically challenged persons, the elderly -all those who are so readily rendered invisible in the world in which we live.

I found much to be offended by in Dr. West’s address, not the least of which was his non-inclusionary ideal of “inclusion” which I elaborated upon above and which for him, was cause for celebration by all of “this great new era of Obama” (a comment that was greeted with thunderous applause by about half the audience and stony silence by the other half — so much for “inclusion”).

No, the part of his speech I found so offensive on a couple of different levels was this (and since I’m going from memory, I may be paraphrasing here, but not by much):

“Y’all better not ever forget where each and every one of you came from: a hole between urine and feces.”

How is this repugnant statement in any way a remotely appropriate thought for a graduation ceremony? But far more egregious than that is this: If Catholicism celebrates the spark of divinity in each human being, who was made in the image of God, how does this statement “resound with the Jesuit values of Saint Joseph’s University”? The answer is, it doesn’t. What this statement resounds with is the values of liberalism which devalues all human life through their twin tennats of abortion and environmentalism.

When the Saint Joe’s University official followed up this slop with “Wasn’t he just terrific?” I almost threw up. These academics are almost universally so smarmliy self-congratualtory on their openminded liberalness, they can’t smell shit when it’s smeared all over their stage.

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

When did we get to this upside down world? Did we do what Bugs Bunny said at the beginning of many of his adventures when he popped out of the ground confused about where he was? “I knew I shoulda taken a left turn at Albuquerque!” This is the phrase I’ve had to ask myself lately. I know I heard Bug’s voice in my head the other day when I listened to Mayor Bloomberg of New York City discussing the incredibly short sighted and boneheaded tower buzzing of the Air Force One through Downtown New York. During his press conference he railed on about the insensitivity of the Jumbo Jet flyby and the panic it caused to the citizens of New York and how he wants answers as to why this happened. Then in the same breath, without even missing a beat, he then said “in the end though, it’s the federal government, and they will do whatever they want to.” Huh…excuse me? Since when was this how our country functioned?

And then it occurred to me. This is the problem, and I don’t mean the federal government. I mean us, you and I. We are the problem. When an official of the government, the highest ranking official of one of the nation’s largest and most powerful cities in the country can make a blanket statement like this and it doesn’t even make a blip on the news and not a single dissenting voice in the media or by any other elected officials then it just proves to me that we as a people have forgotten who we are and where we came from. If an elected official had said such a thing in the days of the Founders, he would have found himself run right out of office if not the town itself. How far we have fallen from our beginnings.

What Mr. Bloomberg doesn’t realize is the fact that our nation and its founding documents expressly state that the power of the government rests in the hands of those it governs, not the other way around. It was placed even in our founding documents that the power of the government is derived from God to the people and then Lent to the government to serve us and ensure our Lives Liberties and Pursuit of Happiness. It further says “That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these end it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it and institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its power is such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” This is a direct quote from our Declaration of Independence, something that apparently not too many people, and obviously not Mr. Bloomberg, have read lately if ever at all. One of our greatest founding fathers, John Adams, had this to say about freedom and democracy: “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” Is that the path we’ve chosen? Do we need to put America on Suicide Watch? Not if I can help it.

This has brought me to one crystal clear conclusion. We have forgotten the face of our fathers. We have forgotten what it really means to be Americans. To be American is not the stuff we buy or the things our government says we can do. It is living a principled life understanding that, just like our Founder’s, that there is a God, that we derive our freedoms and liberty’s from God and that we lend government the power it yields. It is also remembering that as being the source of power, it is our God-given right and Duty to starve off and choke that which forgets that government doesn’t give us our rights but that they come from God first and that government has No Power other than that which we give it. It is time to stop letting them have the power they feel they are entitled to and that it is our duty to do as they say. How wrong they really are. It is time that we taught them that lesson.

It is time that we remembered the Face of Our Fathers again.

Email Ian Hayes, Start the discussion or Share This...

Alex pointed out this shocking “instructional” video made by Penn State, which seeks to help educators deal with “worrisome” students. I think it needs to be highlighted here:

So according to Penn State, it’s a typical scenario for professors and TAs (the woman in the video certainly doesn’t look like any professor I’ve ever had) to be threatened by their right-wing Iraq/Afghanistan War veteran students who are brainless thugs. Is that about right? Not surprisingly, Penn State seems to have removed this video from their website.

Be sure to forward this along to anyone who is considering sending their kid to Penn State.

Email John Lewandowski, Join the discussion or Share This...