The State is an Ass

The most narrow-minded bigot could not possibly be more hypocritical than the mental midgets running The State newspaper.

Last spring, when they were busy crucifying Put Parents in Charge because it dared to (a) tear down a precious bureaucracy and (b) let poor kids have an education as good as rich ones, they went after one part of the proposal with special abandon: scholarships for poor kids.

One can never be sure when examining the mind of the The State—it takes advanced nanotechnology and powerful microscopes to deal with these sorts of brains—but it seemed as if the problem with the scholarships for poor kid were that they were paid for by TAX CUTS.

(How do you pay for something with a tax cut, one might ask? Simple, you let people, charities, or businesses pay for item X rather than paying for taxes. In this case, any contribution to a scholarship fund was money that you or the Elks or BMW didn't have to pay in taxes.)

But The State's religion is that no tax cut is ever any good at any time (unless it's offset by another tax hike.) Here's the secret about The State (and, sadly, our state). They want you to have less money so that they can have more. If they could double your taxes tomorrow, they'd do it. The more money in state coffers, the more money that powerful people—and the people at The State editorial board ARE POWERFUL—have to play with.

Simply put, they would like to reach into your back pocket, grab your wallet, pluck out every last bill and credit card, spend it on things they think you should have (after they take a healthy cut) and then expect you to thank them for it. The common thief is nice enough not to expect your thanks nor harangue you when you fail to offer it.

Back to schools. Here's the deal. The people who are fighting to get our schools out of 50th place are determined. They seem to have all the tact of a bull in a china shop while also possessing that bullheaded stubbornness you need to deal with bureaucratic bull—well, BS.

So they went back to the drawing board, improved Put Parents in Charge, and dared the legislature to vote against children for a second time. (Politicians can be so silly sometimes.)

Predictably, The State went bonkers. (What? No more delusions of grandeur for pompous Editorial Board Editors? No more grand plans for school reform? Just parents—on their own—making their own choices? This shall not stand.)

So they went after Rep. Tracy Edge's legislation.

One small problem: Edge's legislation wasn't the right version. The mix-up was due to a simple error in submission process..

Now they've got an editorial trail that proves that they'll oppose parental choice no matter how it's designed. If the proposal has a scholarship component, it's bad; if it doesn't, that's also bad.

What could be clearer proof of The State's anti-parent bias?

But do they print a retraction? An admission of error? A profession of shame? An apology?

Nah.

Comments: Post a Comment