Agnew Had Pat Buchanan; Who's Writing This Stuff For The Dickster?

The Dickster is moving into Agnew territory ("Nattering Nabobs of Negativism" and "Pusillanimous Pussyfooters") in terms of political ranting. The Trickster's Veep (Spiro T. Agnew, convicted felon) read speeches written by Pat Buchanan in the late '60s and early 70's. Buchanan is an anti-Semitic sleazeball. Who is Buchanan's spiritual successor (and likely anti-Semite) in the early 21st century? (Answer: David Wurmser?) The Dickster is reaching for the same Agnew-like alliterative sneer at the opponents of Dub's "policy" in Iraq. If only history repeated itself: Agnew was forced to resign the Vice Presidency when he was found to be a crook. Agnew managed a plea bargain that kept him out of the slammer. Now, if only The Dickster would suffer the same fate (without the plea bargain). If this is (fair & balanced) sanguinity, so be it.

[x Austin American-Statesman]
Cheney launches nuclear attacks on his foes
by David Sarasohn

In what reporters actually called an easing of the rhetoric on Iraq, Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday called 57 percent of the American people "dishonest and reprehensible."

Speaking to the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute — these days, the president and vice president speak mostly to conservative groups, if they can't find a military base — Cheney attacked claims of manipulation of prewar intelligence as "dishonest and reprehensible," and launched his legendary sneer at the senators who suggested it.

But earlier this month, an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll asked the question, "Do you think President Bush gave the country the most accurate information he had before going to war with Iraq, or do you think President Bush deliberately misled people to make the case for war with Iraq?" Of the sample, 57 percent thought the president misled them.

That's a lot of reprehensibility.

It may be that on Iraq, the vice president needs more than a new American policy. He may need a new American people. And he may have to look hard.

As Cheney also explained, anyone saying that American troops were sent into battle in Iraq on a lie were committing "revisionism of the most corrupt and shameless variety."

But a survey taken in early November by the Pew Research Center asked whether leaders of the United States and Britain claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction "mostly because they were themselves misinformed by bad intelligence, or ... mostly because they lied to find a reason for invading Iraq?"

The survey found 43 percent thinking the U.S. and British leaders lied, and only 41 percent thinking the leaders were just misinformed themselves. If 43 percent of Americans are "corrupt and shameless," Democratic senators may not be Cheney's biggest problem.

Still, the vice president insists that what's really hurting his Iraq policy is politicians not being nice about it.

"The flaws in the intelligence are plain enough," he admitted, "but any suggestion that prewar information was distorted, hyped or fabricated by the leader of the nation is utterly false."

It's a ringing declaration, and an impressive display of Cheney's mastery of the synonyms for dishonesty. But underneath the charges of political conspiracy is a real problem big enough to be picked up by U.N. inspectors, or even by the CIA.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll this month asked, "In making its case for war with Iraq, do you think the Bush administration told the American public what it believed to be true, or intentionally misled the American public?" By a margin of 55 percent to 44 percent, those surveyed went for "intentionally misled."

Whether that 55 percent — the general standard of a political landslide — were "dishonest and reprehensible," or "corrupt and shameless," or maybe all four, was not made clear.

What's clear is that this administration's problems with the American public and Iraq aren't about other politicians. They're about realities that Americans have seen, and discoveries that have led them to their own conclusions.

One of those conclusions seems to be that if you spend a year whipping up support for a war — including the flat statement that the country you want to fight is close to developing nuclear weapons — and that statement turns out to be not at all true, you're not the one who gets to be outraged and indignant afterward.

Also, if you said confidently that U.S. troops would be greeted as liberators, and three years later their casualty rate is still rising and a gathering of your own Iraqi politicians declares that killing U.S. troops is "legitimate resistance," it may not matter how many West Wing speechwriters are busy piling up insulting adjectives.

That seems to be another complication for the vice president. The most recent CNN/USA Today poll found that 36 percent approved of the job he was doing, against 54 percent disapproval. A Harris poll this month discovered just 30 percent thinking Cheney was doing an excellent or pretty good job, against 65 percent thinking his performance was fair or poor.

Even that was better than a recent Newsweek poll result that only 29 percent of Americans consider him honest and ethical.

But the vice president has gotten one big break. So far, no pollster has asked whether Americans consider Cheney "dishonest and reprehensible."

David Sarasohn is an associate editor at The Oregonian of Portland, OR.

Copyright © 2005 Cox Texas Newspapers, L.P. All rights reserved.

Get an RSS (Really Simple Syndication) Reader at no cost from Google at Google Reader.

Bret Chenkin (VT) and Julie Fitzpatrick (WI) , Teachers Of The Year!

Teachers are getting into the act, now. Principals and superintendents in Bennington, VT and Madison, WI are reaching for the antacid tablets. Dumbos in both states are frothing at the mouth and I LOVE IT! If this is (fair & balanced) unbridled joy, so be it.

1.
[x Boston.com]
The Associated Press
Teacher under investigation for alleged liberalism

November 25, 2005

BENNINGTON, Vt. --The school superintendent whose district includes Mount Anthony Union High School has labeled "inappropriate" and "irresponsible" an English teacher's use of liberal statements in a vocabulary quiz.

"I wish Bush would be (coherent, eschewed) for once during a speech, but there are theories that his everyday diction charms the below-average mind, hence insuring him Republican votes," said one question on a quiz written by English and social studies teacher Bret Chenkin.

The question referring to the president asked students to say whether coherent or eschewed was the proper word. The sentence would be more coherent if one eschewed eschewed.

Another example said, "It is frightening the way the extreme right has (balled, arrogated) aspects of the Constitution and warped them for their own agenda." Arrogated would be the proper word there.

Chenkin, 36 and a teacher for seven years, said the quizzes are being taken out of context.

"The kids know it's hyperbolic, so-to-speak," he said. "They know it's tongue in cheek. They know where I stand."

He said he isn't shy about sharing his liberal views with students, but invites vigorous debate in the classroom.

"Never once have I said, 'OK, you're wrong,'" he said. "Instead, it's, 'OK, let's open this up. Let's see where this can go.'"

Southwest Vermont Supervisory Union Superintendent Wesley Knapp said he would not want his children subjected to such teaching.

"It's absolutely unacceptable," he said. "They (teachers) don't have a license to hold forth on a particular standpoint."

Knapp said he was recently informed of the situation and that it was a personnel issue that he took seriously.

Principal Sue Maguire said she hoped to speak to whoever complained about the quiz and any students who might be concerned. She said she also would talk with Chenkin about the context of the quiz.

"I feel like this needs to be investigated," she said.

Information from: Bennington Banner
© Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

2.
[x Wisconsin State Journal]
School's anti-war assignment canceled
by Sandy Cullen

A letter-writing campaign by third-graders at Allis Elementary School encouraging an end to the war in Iraq was canceled because it violates School Board policy, district officials said Tuesday.

Julie Fitzpatrick, a member of the 10-teacher team that developed the project for the school's 90 third-grade students in five classes, said the assignment was intended to demonstrate citizen action, one of the district's standards in social studies.

"We saw peace as a common good," Fitzpatrick said. "We were just advocating that people keep working toward peace."

But Robin Reynolds, an Army veteran whose 8-year-old grandson is in Fitzpatrick's class, said she regards the assignment as a form of "anti-war protesting" that "is not suitable for elementary students."

"They're supposed to teach the facts and not opinions," she said. "That's brainwashing."

"It was certainly an unfortunate thing to have happen," Superintendent Art Rainwater said. "It's a direct violation of our board policy.

Madison School Board policy prohibits teachers "from exploiting the institutional privileges of their professional positions to promote candidates or parties and activities."

"We don't want our staff ever using our students in a political activity, which this obviously was," Rainwater said. "I think the district would apologize to anyone who was offended. It should not have happened."

Allis Principal Chris Hodge said a letter was sent to parents Tuesday apologizing to anyone who was offended and informing them that the project was rescinded.

Reynolds, who served as a personnel assistant at Fort McClellan in Alabama during the Vietnam War and has three family members serving in Iraq, said she "blew up" last Friday when her grandson brought home a letter informing parents about the campaign, in which students were to write a letter every day for 12 days.

Letters were to go to other students, the state's U.S. senators and representatives, President Bush, and the secretary of the United Nations urging them to "join our press for peace." If the war were not over in 12 days, the sequence would be repeated.

Reynolds said her grandson was upset by the assignment. "He knows he's got an uncle and cousins over there."

Fitzpatrick and Hodge, said a misunderstanding resulted in the initial letter going out to parents.

"I left with the impression we could go with it," Fitzpatrick said.

But Hodge said she had wanted to find out what the School Board's policy was before the letter was sent home.

"I thought it was an inappropriate assignment," Hodge said, adding she felt the topic of war was "too vast" for third-graders to understand. "I just think it was too much to ask of a third- grader."

Hodge said she had only heard from one parent who also was concerned that the project was beyond a third- grader's level of understanding.

School Board President Carol Carstensen said board policy and the district's teachers contract also require teachers to withhold the expression of personal opinion unless asked a direct question when dealing with controversial issues.

While it would be appropriate for students to decide to write letters expressing their own views, Cartsensen said, "It isn't appropriate to mandate it."

U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R- Green Bay, who is seeking Republican nomination for governor in 2006, on Tuesday faxed Hodge a letter calling for the assignment to be rescinded.

Hodge said she had received Green's fax but had not had time to read it.

"We're really stunned by the reception," Fitzpatrick said. "In hindsight, I guess we should have anticipated it. It's kind of sad when peace causes a furor."

Fitzpatrick said many parents had sent envelopes and stamps as requested in the initial letter they received.

Sharon Johnson, co- president of the Allis's Parent Teacher Organization, and Toni Kress-Russick, both of whom have children in Fitzpatrick's class, said they were supportive of the project.

Kress-Russick, a special education teacher at Memorial High School, said it taught social responsibility and demonstrated to students that "people can make a difference" and that "just one little third-grader can matter."

"I thought it was a great assignment," Johnson said. "People just tend to blow things out of proportion all the time. I think this is one of them."

Susan Abplanalp, assistant superintendent for elementary and secondary schools, said she does not believe the teachers involved viewed the assignment as a political activity.

"They really looked at this as a peace project," Abplanalp said. "I don't think that the intent was to make this a political statement."

The assignment The letter sent home to parents last Friday said third-graders at Allis Elementary School would be "writing letters to encourage an end to the war in Iraq. The letter writing will teach civic responsibility, a social studies standard, while providing an authentic opportunity to improve composition skills and handwriting."

Students were to write a letter a day for 12 days to other students, the state's U.S. senators and representatives, the president of the United States, and the secretary of the United Nations "urging them to press for peace," as well as to the media.

If the war did not end in 12 days, the sequence would be repeated.

Parents were asked to provide 10 postage stamps and 12 envelopes.

An alternative assignment was to be provided for students whose parents did not want them to participate.

Copyright © 2005, Capital Newspapers. All rights reserved.

Get an RSS (Really Simple Syndication) Reader at no cost from Google at Google Reader.