Any True Christian

You have to have heard about this already, so I'll just pop my bit in here.



Cindy Castano Swannack is a great example of a Shopping-List Christian who thinks Jesus is really just god's customer service rep; somebody you get in touch with whenever you need to put the bite on the almighty for a favor (which is why they all go to god's house on his day off, btw). She's absolutely sure she knows everything about her lord and savior while actually knowing next to nothing.

Knowledge Is For Wimps

“Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.”  --Thomas Jefferson 1789.

Maybe that's why it feels impossible for me to trust most "conservatives" to run this joint.

From "Climate Change is a hoax", to "the federal budget problem is just like balancing my  check book", to "keep your gubmint hands off my Medicare" - these people go with intellect the way fruit bats go with motorcycles.

From boston.com:

Mankind may be crooked timber, as Kant put it, uniquely susceptible to ignorance and misinformation, but it’s an article of faith that knowledge is the best remedy. If people are furnished with the facts, they will be clearer thinkers and better citizens. If they are ignorant, facts will enlighten them. If they are mistaken, facts will set them straight.

In the end, truth will out. Won’t it?

Maybe not. Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

--and--

This effect is only heightened by the information glut, which offers — alongside an unprecedented amount of good information — endless rumors, misinformation, and questionable variations on the truth. In other words, it’s never been easier for people to be wrong, and at the same time feel more certain that they’re right.

hat tip = Democratic Underground

Happy Palindrome Week, Everybody

From April 12 thru April 19, each day (as written here in USAmerica Inc anyway) is a palindrome.  4/12/14, 4/13/14, 4/15/14, etc

I'm sure somebody somewhere thinks that must mean something magical and mystical and ooky-spooky or whatever.  I'm just thinking it's a semi-interesting weirdness and I needed something to stick in the blog, so yeah.

Of course, next year the same thing will happen in May, and then the year after that it'll happen in June, and - aaaaaaaarrgh - we're doomed!

Not Much Has Changed

Your opponents don't stop doing what's working as long as it keeps working, and it keeps working until your side does something to make it stop working.



(from Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story)

The night is filled with terrors.  The darkness holds everything we fear.  There's a dark and dangerous side to populism.  Come to the dark side.  Dark is evil and ugly. White is godly and clean.  Cockroaches flourish in the darkness while flowers thrive in the sunlight.  Black is bad - White is good.

As long as we continue to allow this medieval associative bullshit to persist, we will never be rid of the assholes who manipulate those associations for less than honorable purposes.

Today's KO

The Wonderlic Test is always something of a mystery, inside a riddle, wrapped in an opportunity to poke fun at the NFL bosses who actually think we're going to believe they have any interest in any player's intellect.

Mr Deity And The Psych Exam

And This Is News?

Via Think Progress:

When organized interest groups or economic elites want a particular policy passed, there’s a strong likelihood their wishes will come true. But when average citizens support something, they have next to no influence.

That’s according to a forthcoming article in Perspectives on Politics by Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin I. Page of Northwestern University. The two looked at a data set of 1,779 policy issues between 1981 and 2002 and matched them up against surveys of public opinion broken down by income as well as support from interest groups.

They estimate that the impact of what an average citizen prefers put up against what the elites and interest groups want is next to nothing, or “a non-significant, near-zero level.” They note that their findings show “ordinary citizens…have little or no independent influence on policy at all.” The affluent, on the other hand, have “a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy,” they find, “more so than any other set of actors” that they studied. Organized interest groups similarly fare well, with “a large, positive, highly significant impact on public policy.”

From the report itself:

As to empirical evidence concerning interest groups, it is well established that organized groups regularly lobby and fraternize with public officials; move through revolving doors between public and private employment; provide self-serving information to officials; draft legislation; and spend a great deal of money on election campaigns.21 Moreover, in harmony with theories of biased pluralism, the evidence clearly indicates that most U.S. interest groups and lobbyists represent business firms or professionals. Relatively few represent the poor or even the economic interests of ordinary workers, particularly now that the U.S. labor movement has become so weak.22

But do interest groups actually influence policy? Numerous case studies have detailed instances in which all but the most dedicated skeptic is likely to perceive interest group influence at work. A leading classic remains Schattschneider’s analysis of the 1928 enactment of the Smoot-Hawley tariff, an astounding orgy of pork-barrel politics.23 Still, many quantitatively oriented political scientists seem to ignore or dismiss such non-quantitative evidence. There have also been some efforts (particularly during the Cold War era, when unflattering depictions of U.S. politics may have been thought unpatriotic) to demonstrate that interest groups have no influence on policy at all. Raymond Bauer, Ithiel Pool, and Lewis Anthony Dexter argued that business had little or no effect on the renewal of reciprocal trade authority. Lester Milbrath, having conducted interviews with lobbyists and members of Congress, rated lobbyists’ influence as very low. More recently, Fred McChesney(*) has made the ingenious argument that campaign contributions from interest groups may not represent quid pro quo bribery attempts by groups, but instead result from extortion by politicians who threaten to harm the groups’ interests.24

*McChesney's credibility is suspect because of his close ties to Cash-For-Comments type schemes - one of the more notorious being the Tobacco Lobby efforts to fight tax increases on tobacco products back in the 80s.  But more to the actual point, McChesney gives us a great example of The Turnaround (sales tactic). He's saying, "Oh no - these huge campaign contributions and the corrosiveness of lobbying and regulatory capture and the incest of the revolving door between Gubmint and Bidness - that doesn't really constitute a system of legalized bribery at all - it's those rotten politicians threatening to strangle our noble job creators if they don't pony up vast sums of money..."  It's easy to see it from that angle and I'm not pretending none of that goes on, but to make it out that the whole problem is one of simple extortion?  That sounds just a tiny bit too conveniently consistent with the standard malarkey of "government is all bad, in all things, and in all ways at all times."  And actually, McChesney isn't denying the quid pro quo shittiness anyway - he's acknowledging that people are buying influence and favors - he's just shifting the blame.

Not that any of this is going to make much difference.  This 'revelation' only confirms what we've known for a long time.  And let's remember we've been thru a coupla decades of Rising Idiocracy.  Paul Broun and Louie Gohmert - guys you shouldn't follow into your own fucking house - these are two of the leading lights in "conservative" politics.  Lots and lots of booger-eatin' morons just like them are in power - and will stay in power - because the people who put them in office have a lot more money than you have, and that's about all that's gonna matter for a while.

Today's Pix

Political Blackface

Whenever Ben Shapiro's paymasters get to feelin' under-appreciated, a little public fellatio is in order.

And this is precisely what Colbert does with regard to politics: he engages in Conservativeface. He needs no makeup or bulbous appendage to play a conservative – after all, conservatives come in every shape and size. Instead, he acts as though he is a conservative – an idiotic, racist, sexist, bigoted, brutal conservative. He out-Archie Bunkers Archie Bunker. His audience laughs and scoffs at brutal religious “Colbert” who wishes to persecute gays; they chortle at evil sexist “Colbert” who thinks men are victims of sexism. This is the purpose of Colbert’s routine. His show is about pure hatred for conservatives in the same way that blackface was about pure hatred of blacks. In order to justify their racism, racists had to create a false perception of blacks; in the same way, Colbert and his audience can justify their racism only by creating a false perception of conservatives.

And so, the message here is that "conservatives" are the real victims? Sounds like Shapiro is saying that Colbert's antics are somehow evidence that "conservatives" are being held down and oppressed, and treated unjustly simply for having suffered the great misfortune of being born to privilege? The (mostly) white (mostly) guys in the corner offices who came up thru the hard-knock ranks of prep academies and Ivy League-type business schools; the ones with the trophy (ie: heiress) wives and the obscenely fat bank accounts, and the fashionably skinny mistresses and the interlocking networks of wealth and power - those are the guys who're being mistreated?

What's your next column, Ben - "We are not amused!"?

From the comment thread:

Walkin' On The Sun --Smash Mouth

It ain't no joke I'd like to buy the world a toke
And teach the world to sing in perfect harmony
And teach the world to snuff the fires and the liars
Hey I know it's just a song but it's spice for the recipe
This is a love attack I know it went out but it's back.
It's just like any fad it retracts before impact
And just like fashion it's a passion for the with it and hip
If you got the goods they'll come and buy it just to stay in the clique

So don't delay act now supplies are running out
Allow if you're still alive six to eight years to arrive
And if you follow there may be a tomorrow
But if the offer's shunned you might as well be walkin' on the sun

Twenty-five years ago they spoke out and they broke out
Of recession and oppression and together they toked
And they folked out with guitars around a bonfire
Just singin' and clappin' man what the hell happened
Then some were spellbound some were hellbound
Some they fell down and some got back up and
Fought back 'gainst the melt down
And their kids were hippie chicks all hypocrites
Because fashion is smashin' the true meaning of it

So don't delay act now supplies are running out
Allow if you're still alive six to eight years to arrive
And if you follow there may be a tomorrow
But if the offer's shunned you might as well be walkin' on the sun

It ain't no joke when a mama's handkerchief is soaked
With her tears because her baby's life has been revoked
The bond is broke up so choke up and focus on the close up
Mr. Wizard can't perform no godlike hocus-pocus
So don't sit back kick back and watch the world get bushwhacked
News at 10:00 your neighborhood is under attack
Put away the crack before the crack puts you away
You need to be there when your baby's old enough to relate

So don't delay act now supplies are running out
Allow if you're still alive six to eight years to arrive
And if you follow there may be a tomorrow
But if the offer's shunned you might as well be walkin' on the sun

You might as well be walkin' on the sun
You might as well be walkin' on the sun
You might as well be walkin' on the sun
You might as well be walkin' on the sun

Friday Briefs

R-O-N-A-L-D = 6

W-I-L-S-O-N = 6

R-E-A-G-A-N = 6

Uh oh.

-----------------------

Wasn't there a good guy with a gun at the high school in Pennsylvania where that bad guy with a knife stabbed 22 kids?

-----------------------

Also too - aren't we wondering just a tiny bit about why nobody's jumping up and down trying to point out that every one of those kids is still alive?  Cuz it was a knife instead of a fucking gun!?!

-----------------------

This Just In

From the fine folks at UC Berkeley (of course - where else, right?). Well, no - it's The Onion actually, but it'll be fun to see if any of the usual knot-heads feel the need to get crazy over it.

But since we know there's a double-digit percentage of mush-brained dopes who'll believe anything you tell 'em, why not go ahead and present this as just something else all them libtards are trying to force us real 'Murcans to take on faith...?  They're not likely to check it out for themselves (these are the geniuses who have access to practically every tiny speck of truth ever discovered, but who still believe in Bigfoot, ChemTrails and FEMA Camps for fuck's sake).  And even if they do check on it, part of their programming is to reject anything they hear that contradicts the crap they're being fed 24/7, because it's further evidence of how vast and pervasive and deep-rooted the lefty conspiracy is.  So yeah - why not just let it play?

Challenging long-held views on the origins of divinity, biologists at the University of California, Berkeley, presented findings Thursday that confirm God, the Almighty Creator of the Universe, evolved from an ancient chimpanzee deity.

The recently discovered sacred ancestor, a divine chimp species scientists have named Pan Sanctorum, reportedly gave rise over millions of years to the Lord Our God, Maker of Heaven and Earth.

“Although perhaps not obvious at first glance, there are actually overwhelming similarities between the Supreme Being of today and this early primate deity who preceded Him,” said Dr. Richard Kamen, a leading biologist who also heads Berkeley’s paleotheology department. “The holy chimp moved around on all fours, but its descendants eventually began walking upright to expend less energy while foraging across the infinite reaches of the universe. This of course led to the bipedalism of modern-day God.”

“In fact, you can see a distinct likeness to God in the chimpanzee deity’s skeletal structures, not to mention its prototypical expressions of vengeance and wrath,” Kamen continued. “The great-ape god was, however, considerably smaller in stature, having not yet developed the capacity to occupy all space and time simultaneously.”

According to experts, divine life began as a single-celled all-powerful organism roughly 3.6 billion years ago, eventually evolving into a multicelled, sponge-like deity that bobbed and floated across the chaos of the early universe. Kamen explained that over hundreds of millions of years, the godlike life form became more complex, with limbs that allowed for locomotion across the endless expanse of the heavens, and sophisticated photoreceptor cells capable of seeing all things.

Based on newly obtained evidence, the Pan sanctorum is thought to have first experimented with creation ex nihilo around 7 million years ago. Kamen noted that the chimpanzee deity made several early attempts to produce rudimentary solar systems, but on each occasion was spooked upon inadvertently creating fire, which is said to have caused it to screech loudly, angrily swat away the newly formed sun, and then scamper across the universe to hide from the flaming sphere.

“Natural selection played a huge role in the evolution of divinity, and in this regard, the adaptive value of Pan sanctorum’s immortality proved critical to its survival,” said Kamen, adding that with its opposable thumbs, the divine ancestor was eventually able to fashion primitive tools for creating crude oceans and basic mountain ranges. “Today’s Lord Almighty actually still has a small bony protuberance in the small of His back, the vestigial remains of a tail we believe was used by an even older, monkey-like god to facilitate climbing, allowing it to escape into the heavens when faced with danger.”
“That potential for threats made it an evolutionary imperative for the primate god to develop omnipotence,” Kamen continued. “As well as sharp claws and pointed incisors.”

Though its smaller brain limited its cognitive abilities, the chimpanzee deity is believed to have possessed not only self-awareness, but also spatial intelligence, object permanence, and a rudimentary capacity for knowing all that is, all that has been, and all that ever will be.

However, it was only relatively recently that the heavenly species developed the intellectual capacity for higher reasoning, critical thinking, and infinite wisdom, according to Kamen. For Pan sanctorum, he noted, the passage of divine judgment was “purely a matter of primal instinct.”

“While complex speech would not emerge until the evolution of the Cro-Magnon god from Pan Sanctorum, the chimpanzee deity was capable of using grunts and hand gestures to convey basic emotions such as happiness, anger, or the forgiveness of sin,” Kamen said. “However, it appears that the chimp deity often exhibited extremely aggressive behavior, in some cases unleashing its divine wrath with little if any provocation toward the mortal chimps it created in its own image.”

He added, “It is our understanding that these creatures lived in a kind of jungle-like forerunner to the Garden of Eden, until a day came when their enraged creator cast them out, flinging feces at them as they fled.”

Ending On A Happy Note

- not.  Sorry, but here's the bad news from those thousands of lying bastards who do all that stoopid science stuff that makes it hard to relax and enjoy my motor sports on TV - and they're gonna completely ruin it for everybody if they don't stop this left-wing conspiracy-ing which is really all about forcing us to drive little girlie cars and ride bicycles like a buncha those faggy French guys and we're not even gonna think about taking the bus cuz that's just icky, and they're all so nerdy and mean about it I could just spit:

"No one on this planet will be untouched by climate change," IPCC Chair Rajendra Pachauri announced. The report warned that climate impacts are already "severe, pervasive, and irreversible."

The IPCC report was one of many released in recent weeks, and all of them bring dire predictions of what is coming. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) issued a report warning that "the rate of climate change now may be as fast as any extended warming period over the past 65 million years, and it is projected to accelerate in the coming decades." The report went on to warn of the risk "of abrupt, unpredictable, and potentially irreversible changes in the Earth's climate system with massively disruptive impacts," including the possible "large scale collapse of the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets, collapse of part of the Gulf Stream, loss of the Amazon rain forest, die-off of coral reefs, and mass extinctions."

 --and--

NASA released the results of a study showing that long-term planetary warming is continuing along the higher end of many projections. "All the evidence now agrees that future warming is likely to be towards the high end of our estimates, so it's more clear than ever that we need large, rapid emissions reductions to avoid the worst damages from climate change," lead author and NASA climatologist Drew Shindell said. If he sounds alarmist, it's because he is, and with good reason. The NASA study shows a global increase in temperatures of nine degrees by the end of the century.

This is consistent with a January Nature study on climate sensitivity, which found we are headed toward a "most-likely warming of roughly 5C (9 F) above current temperatures, which is 6C (11 F) above preindustrial" temperatures by 2100. Bear in mind that humans have never lived on a planet at temperatures 3.5C above our preindustrial baseline.

Charlene Dill

A 32-year-old woman with 3 kids has died in Florida because she couldn't afford the medication for her heart condition.

She had 3 jobs at the time of her death - somehow scraping by on $9000 a year - and she died in the middle of demonstrating a vacuum cleaner in somebody's home, trying to make a few bucks.  So let's not pretend she was just another loser, looking for taxpayer freebies because she was too lazy to work.

From Orlando Weekly, via Wonkette:

Dill, who was estranged from her husband and raising three children aged 3, 7 and 9 by herself, had picked up yet another odd job. She was selling vacuums on a commission basis for Rainbow Vacuums. On that day, in order to make enough money to survive, she made two last-minute appointments. At one of those appointments, in Kissimmee, she collapsed and died on a stranger’s floor.

Dill’s death was not unpredictable, nor was it unpreventable. She had a documented heart condition for which she took medication. But she also happened to be one of the people who fall within the gap created by the 2012 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that allowed states to opt out of Medicaid expansion, which was a key part of the Affordable Care Act’s intention to make health care available to everyone. In the ensuing two years, 23 states have refused to expand Medicaid, including Florida, which rejected $51 billion from the federal government over the period of a decade to overhaul its Medicaid program to include people like Dill and Woolrich – people who work, but do not make enough money to qualify for the Affordable Care Act’s subsidies. They, like many, are victims of a political war – one that puts the lives and health of up to 17,000 U.S. residents and 2,000 Floridians annually in jeopardy, all in the name of rebelling against President Barack Obama’s health care plan.

And from an Op-Ed piece in Roanoke Times, here's Andy Schmookler:

Imagine that the American people elect as president someone promising to institute an important reform to address an obviously major problem - a problem that every year costs the nation a trillion dollars and tens of thousands of lives.

Imagine further that, once elected, the president tries to fulfill his promise with a moderate solution based on ideas from the other party - more moderate than the policies of all the other major democracies on the same matter.

How do you think our nation's Founders would feel about an opposition party that responds to all this by going all-out to block enactment of these reforms, making the reform worse, trying to overturn the reform even before it's tried and hindering its proper implementation?

I think our Founders would be outraged. They'd say that once the people make a fundamental choice, the question then is what is the best way to implement what the people have chosen?

Our Founders gave us a system combining two important virtues: giving the people ultimate power to make fundamental decisions about what kind of society we'll be and providing for thoughtful deliberation on the best way to realize the people's goals. That's representative democracy.

Let's also not pretend that the stupid political games being played in state capitals and Washington DC had nothing to do with the death of Charlene Dill.  It seems important to me that 3 kids in Orlando have lost their mom because politicians in Tallahassee were busy scoring points by blocking everything that could've prevented it.

So it comes down to this: Some of us are trying to do something to keep Ms Dill and her  kids from having to go through that kinda shit, while some of us are doing exactly the opposite.

Logical Fallacy #9 - Special Pleading

Wikipedia: Special pleading (also known as stacking the deck, ignoring the counterevidence, slanting, and one-sided assessment[1]) is a form of spurious argument where a position in a dispute introduces favourable details or excludes unfavourable details by alleging a need to apply additional considerations without proper criticism of these considerations. Essentially, this involves someone attempting to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception.[2]

The lack of criticism may be a simple oversight (e.g., a reference to common sense) or an application of a double standard.

A more difficult case is when a possible criticism is made relatively immune to investigation. This immunity may take the forms of:
--unexplained claims of exemption from principles commonly thought relevant to the subject matter. Example: I'm not relying on faith in small probabilities here. These are slot machines, not roulette wheels. They are different.
--claims to data that are inherently unverifiable, perhaps because too remote or impossible to define clearly. Example: Cocaine use should be legal. Like all drugs, it does have some adverse health effects, but cocaine is different from other drugs. Many have benefited from the effects of cocaine.

In the classic distinction among informal (material), psychological, and formal (logical) fallacies, special pleading most likely falls within the category of psychological fallacy, as it would seem to relate to "lip service", rationalization and diversion (abandonment of discussion). Special pleading also often resembles the "appeal to" logical fallacies.[3]

In medieval philosophy, it was not assumed that wherever a distinction is claimed, a relevant basis for the distinction should exist and be substantiated. Special pleading subverts an assumption of existential import.

Today's Quote

“The organization of American society is an interlocking system of semi-monopolies notoriously venal, an electorate notoriously unenlightened, misled by a mass media notoriously phony” --Paul Goodman (American writer, activist 1911-1972)

A Quick Check

As of this morning, there are 18 states in the US where it's legal (in one way or another) to marry someone of your own gender:
CA, CT, DE, DC, HI, IL, IA, ME, MD, MA, MN, NH, NJ, NM, NY, RI, VT, WA

There are also 8 aboriginal tribes in the US who say it's alright.

And, here's a list of other countries and/or cities with some kinda of accommodation for Marriage Equality:

Argentina
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
Denmark

England
France
Iceland
Mexico - Quintana Roo and Mexico City
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal

Scotland
South Africa
Spain
Sweden

Uruguay

Wales

I like to go back and check on certain things - particularly things that politicians say when they peer into the mists of the future and make bold predictions of outcomes and consequences when they're either in favor of or opposed to the enactment of policy.

So I did a cursory search, and I've found a coupla things I think are worth noting.

1) In places where Marriage Equality is the rule, more people are getting married, and the Marriage Failure Rate is unchanged. "Gay Marriage" is not destroying anybody's marriage or anybody's family.  Families and marriages are in fact being destroyed - by unemployment, PTSD, Wall Street leeches and phony foreclosures, boredom, doctor bill bankruptcies, infidelity (whatever the fuck that even means), etc - but people getting married to people they love?  That one just ain't on the list.

2) There has been no increase in the reporting of "Criminal Bestiality" - which happens to remain a legal activity in 12 states btw - so there's been none of the dread Man On Dog Sexual Perversions that all the "conservatives" knew had to follow closely on the heels of any and all attempts to pull the ginormous Religiosity Stick out of Rick Santorum's ass.

Can we get on to the important shit now, please?

Today's Quote

There is no peace, sir, in this land. Can peace exist with injustice, licentiousness, insecurity, and oppression? These considerations, independent of many others which I have not yet enumerated, would be a sufficient reason for the adoption of this Constitution, because it secures the liberty of the citizen, his person and property, and will invigorate and restore commerce and industry. An additional reason to induce us to adopt it is that excessive licentiousness which has resulted from the relaxation of our laws, and which will be checked by this government.  

-- James Madison, Speech To The Virginia Ratification Convention, June 6, 1788.

hat tip = Charlie Pierce

Econ 101

Hidden Costs - that's always one of the big bugaboos when somebody's trying to teach you about how to run a business.

What about the hidden costs to taxpayers, and the corrosive effects of so many tax dollars finding their way into the offshore accounts of people who run very big, very profitable companies?  We don't hear that one mentioned very often - mostly what we get is that crap about Welfare Cadillacs and Food Stamp Lobsters.

hat tip = HuffPo

Spending puts money into circulation, which creates demand, which causes prices to go up, which makes it profitable to hire more workers, which creates supply, which requires spending, which puts money into circulation...

Ya gotta be careful with sustainability - nothing can expand forever - but without some kind of growth, there is no life.  So ya still gotta make that big ol' wheel go 'round.

Also too - ya gotta be a little careful and at least not completely fucking stoopid when it comes to how you spend all those bucks.

Wal-Mart is a fair example of a company just pretending to be all about the free market, while actually being a multi-billion-dollar leech.

And speaking of leeches:  Kinda related, here's a quick look at the empty promises (and outright fallacy) of another type of outfit turning nice fat profits (mostly) by trying to shoehorn something into Free Market Principles that won't fit and doesn't belong there in the first place:

However, operating non-profit charter schools can be very profitable for charter school executives like Eva Moskowitz. Moskowitz earns close to a half a million dollars a year ($485,000) for overseeing school programs that serve 6,700 children, which is over $72 per student.

--and--

The head of the Bronx Preparatory School earns $338,000 to manage schools with 651 students or over $500 per student.

--and--

The head of the Our World Charterearns $200,000 to manage schools with a total of 738 students or $271 per student.

--and--

The local head of the KIPP Charter Network earns $235,000 to manage schools with 2,796 or $84 per student.

--and--

By comparison, the chief educational officer of Texas is paid $214,999 to manage a system with almost 5 million public school students(*).

 (* = less than 5¢ per student.  A little arithmetic reveals that if the guy in Texas was being paid half of what Eva Moskowitz averages per student, he'd be pulling down $180 Million a year)

So, the only way you're gonna get the top talent is to throw fuckloads of money at people; but that only works in the "private sector" (and it seems to apply only to upper management, and not to the people who're doing the actual work at places like Wal-Mart); and throwing fuckloads of money works in the "private sector" when it comes to "educating" kids in Charter Schools, but you can't possibly expect the same results in Public Schools, cuz hey - we already tried throwing fuckloads of money at public schools and it didn't work, so the only thing that makes any sense at all is to throw fuckloads of money at private schools, where I'm sure doing exactly the same thing will in fact achieve a different result.

This isn't about Free Enterprise or Entrepreneurial Spirit or any of that Harvard Business School bullshit - the whole point of the exercise is to figure out how to funnel tax dollars into your own pockets.  Oorah - git some.

We are so fucked.

Rain

It started raining very early this morning.  And from what I understand, it's raining all over the place.

It's raining on very rich people, and it's raining on very poor people, and it's raining on everybody in between.

How long must we endure the monstrous  tyranny of this evil socialist rain!?!