John Kelly, Teacher, Bastard # 20060123.01: Last Wednesday, John Kelly, a teacher in Beaverton, PA, forced Joshua Vannoy, 17, to sit on the ground and forced his classmates to throw wadded paper at him. Furthermore, he forced the student to take the test two days later, on Friday. The student's "offense"? He wore a Broncos # 7 jersey, since he's a fan of the Broncos in general, and John Elway in particular. I realize that he deserved to eat some shit for being a Broncos fan in Pennsylvania, and furthermore, for wearing that shirt when the Steelers were facing the Broncos at Mile High Stadium mere days later for a berth in the Super Bowl. However, that should've been at the hands of the students, and had it gotten out of hand, should have resulted in the disciplining of the students involved. I don't know what should be done about the teacher, but I do know what I would do if I were a parent of any of his students: I'd pull them out, and I'd bloody well scream at the school board until Mr. Kelly received some form of significant discipline, up to and including termination.
Olympic Protestors, Bastard # 20060123.02: I believe this speaks for itself. Protesters grabbed the Olympic torch from a woman who set Italian records at the 1500 meter distance, apparently to protest something no one can quite remember. Way to go, fucknuts. You really grabbed people's attention and made them really think about your cause, whatever it was. The Olympics, in theory, are about peaceful competition amongst the members of the community of nations, and in reality, is one of the biggest business enterprises in the world. Athletes all over the world put forth insane amounts of effort and show inhuman amounts of dedication, not necessarily to make it onto an Olympic platform, but simply to be there as an athlete on opening day, representing their countries, their home towns, and their families and friends. The protesters merely succeeded in showing what kind of donkey-fucking rat bastards they are.
Finally, the Beware of Glass Houses Bastards, Pelosi, Reed, and other ranking Democrats, Bastard # 20060123.03: Admittedly, this link has a strong conservative bias, but just trudge through it, and you'll see that there are significant and accurate points made. If people want to point to corruption, there's more than enough with that taint on both sides of the aisle. I've read commentary about corruption in politics, and it pointed to a glaring problem with both the Democrat and the Republican pseudosolutions: No real accountability. Sure, the words are pretty, but who's the enforcers at the end of the day? The ethics committees of both houses of Congress, and they've both done such bang-up jobs so far. The proposed solution posited by the editorial sections of multiple newspapers was the creation of a truly independent ethics commission, not comprised of members of Congress, whose sole raison d'etre is to catch this sort of thing and bring those responsible to justice. To do less is to use smoke and mirrors yet again, and personally, I'm tired of paying the extra taxes this corruption costs, not to mention the loss of public trust in the government this and myriad other scandals have caused.
10 comments:
Perhaps the Republican 'Contract woth America' that many of these scumbags rode to power on makes them a bit more culpable than scalawag Dems.
The argument that the Dems do it too, doesn't remove the burden of being in power and failing in the public trust.
Why hasn't this teacher been charged with criminal assult?
My argument is that both are guilty, both have a significant amount of power, and while I agree that the Republicans are more culpable simply because more of them were involved by virtue of their control of Congress, I reject your argument that the "Contract With America" gives them added culpability, especially since it turns out that many of the ranking Democrats who are screaming the loudest also have some solid ties to Abramoff. To quote Shakespeare at the end of Romeo and Juliet, "All are punished," or at least, if justice is fair as well as blind. I don't care if the person in question is a Democrat, an Independent, or a Republican, if someone is an elected official, he or she must be held to a higher standard, and if he or she breaches the public trust, then he or she should be punished, up to and including prison time. In recent years, my state has had a Republican governor imprisoned, and my region has had multiple elected officials of both major parties incarcerated or otherwise forced out of office. In each case, if I had a complaint, it was that the punishment wasn't severe enough and that more people weren't convicted.
The first two are reprehensible in my book... of course given my bias toward the left, I have some difficulty with the third one although I'll admit that politics generally seems to include corruption whoever is doing the politicking. The point you make in the third section I agree with most is your mention of the loss of public trust. Lying to the public in various degrees is one thing, but the cumulative effect, much worse in my book, is the betrayal of public trust. That hurts to contemplate.
"ranking Democrats who are screaming the loudest also have some solid ties to Abramoff"
Myth - there are no Democratic ties to Abramoff he's strictly part of the Republican machine.
The contract was run as a promise for a new start to end the corruption and to not be a part of it.
They broke that contract and when they did they became MORE CULPABLE.
Ah, 1138, so you're saying that facts you don't like are "myths". Me? I choose not to bury my head in the sand. I've seen too much of this from both parties to have all that much faith in either.
Give me one fact of a democrat tied to money from Abramoff and I'll grant that it's not a myth.
Me I like facts. Facts with evidence not reports from folks who make alegations without a shred of backup.
I've read something to support part of your assertion, 1138, though not for the reason you chose. The Republicans involved in this scandal are not more culpable because of the Contract With America. They're more culpable, again as stated before, on the basis of numbers, or rather, one number: 2/3, the approximate proportion of Abramoff money given to Republicans.
2/3. Where did the other 1/3 go? 1/3 of $5,000,000 is still a hell of a lot of money, and a hell of a lot of influence to be tossing around.
1138, I see you dodged the issue of corruption and instead went for one specific instance, in this case, the Abramoff issue. After all, Harry Reid has his own significant ethics issues, and I don't see how, short of a House in which the minority is far smaller than it is now, that the House Minority Leader could be considered by any reasonable observer to be a minor player.
Furthermore, I find it very interesting, though entirely unsurprising, that Ms. Pelosi is loathe to name names among her own party, such as Congressman William Jefferson, or make note of the myriad violations of campaign finance laws her party has committed over the last few years.
As for corruption as a whole, I've already put my support behind others' ideas, as stated in this post, and fully support this and any other mess, regardless of party affiliation, being cleaned up. Some additional links: http://www.citizensforethics.org/press/newsrelease.php?view=101
http://www.commoncause.org
I found another, but decided not to use it because of my deep disrespect for Ralph Nader.
"Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."~Lord Acton
I see you still can't name a single democrat tied to Abramoff, even though you still cling to your myth.
Check the pockets of Abramoff and his business associates and don't forget that it costs money to move money and fund.
I didn't dodge any issue of corruption, the party in charge has the power to police itself and the body in general.
That makes them more responsible and was the EXCUSE they used to be elected.
Oh, and 1138, will Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) count?
It costs money to move money? Not to the tune of $1.6-$1.7 million, not even with a wastrel Congress. Furthermore, are you denying either Congressman Jefferson's or Senator Reid's responsibility for their actions?
Post a Comment