Month: February 2011

Angry Birds: The Next Generation:

I earlier referred to data showing an amazingly cushy period for the teachers' unions in Wisconsin. It behooves me to add that this changed in 1993:

As rising health insurance costs have eaten up most of the 3.8% total compensation target, teacher salaries in Wisconsin have stagnated and even declined. As a result, Wisconsin teacher salaries fell 6.8% from 1997-98 to 2007-08, when adjusted for inflation. For 2007-08, Wisconsin's teacher salaries ranked 21th in the nation at $49,051, down from 20th the year before, and below the national average of $52,308.

That's from the teachers' union's website. But they apparently offered the following concessions on flexibility last week:

* Dropping a teacher pay schedule that rewarded longevity and advanced degrees but little else. The union now supports “merit pay” based on performance, national certification, leadership roles, and how teachers handle more difficult assignments such as bilingual or special education, or teaching in under-performing schools.

* Adopting student test results, a peer review panel, mentoring and other factors to root out ineffective teachers.

* Breaking up the state's largest school district, Milwaukee Public Schools, into six smaller units within four years.

In my view, Walker should have taken all these concessions and run with them: big cuts in benefits and openness to merit pay? It's a relief to see David Brooks arrive at roughly the same conclusion. There is such a thing as over-reach.

Perhaps the most disgusting commentary yet uttered about the protests in Madison is a monologue comparing Wisconsin teachers to foreign Islamists:

So we're asking ourselves, "Will the Muslim Brotherhood take over Egypt?" and in America we're asking, "Will the Education Brotherhood take over Wisconsin?"  Check the news, folks, because they're sure trying. The Education Brotherhood, which is a branch of the Government Unions Brotherhood, has already shut down public schools for how many days is it now?  Three days?  Three or four days? No end in sight, and yet all they really care about is "the children."  That's all they care about, children.  They shut down the schools. They are robbing inner-city kids of precious schooldays that would help make America more competitive…

You know, it's hard to tell how much the Muslim Brotherhood frightens liberals, but we know that the Education Brotherhood has scared the heck out of liberal Wisconsin state senators.  We know that for sure.  We know that the Education Brotherhood has got these state senators cowed.  They ran. They fled for the border.

That's Rush Limbaugh, the most popular voice in the conservative movement.

Ezra Klein thinks that the showdown in Wisconsin and the possible shutdown of the federal government are important tests: 

Republicans and Democrats, it seems, govern rather differently. Republicans are proving themselves willing to do what liberals long wanted the Obama administration to do: Play hardball. Refuse compromise. Risk severe consequences that they'll attempt to blame on their opponent. The Obama administration's answer to this was always that it was important to be seen as the reasonable actor in the drama, to occupy some space known as the middle, and to avoid, so much as possible, the appearance of dramatic overreach. This is as close as we're likely to come to a test of that theory. In two cases, Republicans have chosen a hardline and are refusing significant compromise, even at the risk of terrible consequences. Will the public turn on them for overreach? Applaud their strength and conviction? Or not really care one way or the other, at least by the time the next election rolls around?

 

Dan Amira lists the reasons Mike Huckabee might sit 2012 out.

The leaked manuscript for a new book on Sarah Palin, "Blind Allegiance," has made for fascinating reading. There's a useful summary of its contents at the Anchorage Daily News. But there are some revelations that make sense of what previously just seemed bizarre. Take that awful moment in the Couric interview when Palin was asked what periodicals or newspapers or news sources she read and said "All of them." Here's Bailey's account:

Why did Sarah not name anything, when we knew she spent a fair amount of time reading? The answer boils down to image management. Sarah‘s media diet came exclusively from local sources including the Alaska Journal of Commerce, the Alaska Business Monthly, and the Anchorage Daily News. In addition, various administrative assistants put together a compilation of stories from major Alaskan news sites each morning. This document, referred to as Daily Clips, ran in excess of thirty pages and Sarah digested those capsulated reports by 8:00 a.m. each morning. To suggest she didn‘t read is wrong.

However, in her mind, admitting to this regional-only emphasis would‘ve made her appear less interested in national and international events—which was absolutely the case. Instead of honesty, she panicked and, once again, made matters infinitely worse.

As I sat and watched this salt-in-the-wound interview, I raised my eyes and asked the ceiling, ―Why can‘t she just tell the truth?

The sheer number of unnecessary Palin lies Bailey recounts boggles the mind.

Oh, yes, and then there's the Trig question. You think I wouldn't be curious? Bailey believes it's preposterous that anyone doubts Palin is Trig's biological mom – and because he's so damning about her in so many ways, that's salient. I'll soon be providing his evidence – of the rumors as far back as March 2008, and the Palins' obsessive emails about the contretemps. Bailey, however, remains as befuddled as the Dish has been by Palin's refusal to kill the rumors – as far back as during her pregnancy – by the "simple solution" of releasing medical records. It's some good crack.

Jack Healy and Michael Schmidt preview it:

It is a date being discussed in Iraq’s tea shops, on television and in the streets with varying shades of hope, fear and cynicism. On Friday, thousands of Iraqis are planning to take to the streets for their own “day of rage,” hoping to harness the popular anger that has swept through much of the Middle East but has failed to gain much traction here.

Peter Feaver is against the idea, now being touted by – yes! – Paul Wolfowitz, who also supports "provision of arms to the provisional authorities":

The Obama administration needs to do more, but I would not go as far as some who advocate having U.S. forces impose a no-fly zone. I share their outrage at the way Gaddafi had his Air Force strafe defenseless citizens, but involving the U.S. military in this way would constitute a major escalation, and it would be hard to walk back if the situation further unraveled. What if Gaddafi shifted to tanks? Would we then be obligated to have our planes destroy the tanks? And without U.N. authorization, the United States would be entirely on its own. Not even our European allies, who otherwise would join in condemning the Gaddafi regime, would approve of U.S. military action without U.N. authorization. 

Wolfowitz, to be fair, favors this under UN auspices – and warns of the "terrible reputation the United States is acquiring, by its inaction, among the Libyan people and throughout the region. It will stay with us for a long time." Yes, the man who worked in the administration that authorized torture, and backed intervention in Iraq on false grounds, is now worried about the US's reputation for what it doesn't do, rather than what it does.

One merely wonders where the chutzpah comes from; and when it will ever wane.

Anne Applebaum runs with the 1848 parallel raised here:

Television creates the illusion of a linear narrative and gives events the semblance of a beginning, a middle, and an end. Real life is never like that; 1848 wasn’t like that. It’s useful to ponder the messiness of history from time to time, because it reminds us that the present is really no different.

Yglesias puts this in context:

She’s referring to the fact that most of the 1848 revolutions “failed.” But many of the things failed revolutionaries wanted in Germany wound up happening. By contrast, the 1848 uprisings in France “succeeded,” the July Monarchy was toppled and a Second Republic was established. But the Second Republic actually turned out to be a failure pretty quickly and ended up as a dictatorship/”empire” …

After watching this interview with Andrew Breitbart, conducted by National Review, it's worth asking the editors of that publication to stop for a moment and reflect on what their goals are. Improving the country? Advancing the conservative movement? Highlighting smart commentary for their audience? So why highlight Breitbart in your coverage from Madison, Wisconsin, if your own write-up proceeds as follows:

Turning to the White House, Breitbart calls President Obama's involvement in union activism "deeply un-American." "What you have is the president of the United States organizing anarchists, public-sector unions in order to intimidate Americans," he says.

In the comments at NRO, Steve Snow has this sane reaction:

"Say what? Obama is organizing anarchists? They are intimidating Americans? …Who is this guy and am I supposed to take him seriously? You folks should be ashamed for giving this guy airtime."

And yet they cannot help themselves.