Our # 1 tells us about how in Wisconsin they are removing a requirement for state aid to disadvantaged student that the applicant must be a minority. #2 is an video of Jon Corzine on the Daily Show where he complains about the government not supplying enough oversight on Wall Street. #3 tells us of Ron Paul’s remarks today that he will not make a third party run for the presidency. #4 is an interesting article in which the author takes apart the idea that only a small minority of Occupy Wall Street are violent. To the author dismisses those who say the peaceful demonstrators are victims. He claims they aren’t victims, but enablers of the violence. Finally in #5 we are looking at a vote on restricting public unions right to bargain in Ohio.
1. An Outbreak of Equality in Wisconsin
… a Democrat there has surprised, shocked, and angered her party colleagues by introducing a measure in the legislature to eliminate race or ethnicity as factors in awarding state education grants.
“The bill at the heart of the latest debate,” the Associated Press reported.
Originally made largely technical changes to a $4.4 million program that extends between $600 and $1,800 grants to the most needy and educationally disadvantaged students attending college in Wisconsin. About 4,300 students qualify every year.
APPLICANTS MUST BE POOR AND A NONTRADITIONAL STUDENT. To be a nontraditional student, the applicant must meet one of several criteria including being in prison, a first-generation college attendee or black, Indian, Hispanic or Hmong.
THE AMENDMENT REMOVED BEING A MINORITY AS ONE OF THE QUALIFIERS FOR THE GRANTS. It was adopted on a 57-34 vote with all Democrats voting against it except [the amendment’s author, Milwaukee Rep. Peggy] Krusick.
“The proposal,” the Associated Press article continued, “made around 11 p.m. Tuesday, elicited a furious response from Democratic opponents."
That fury is quite revealing about how most elected Democrats understand (or don’t) equality these days:
• According to Rep. Tamara Grigsby, D-Milwaukee, “WHAT [THE PROPOSAL] IS IS RACISM IN ITS HIGHEST INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL.” Moreover, she charged.“You are making it plain as day that your priority is to get the minorities out of the system.
• Rep. Brett Hulsey, D-Madison, “called the proposal a ‘RACIST RACE TO THE BOTTOM’ that will result in minorities losing access to jobs.”
• Rep. Kelda Helen Roys, another Madison Democrat, pronounced herself “disgusted by what happened in the Assembly….”
… I THINK IT’S QUITE USEFUL AND INSTRUCTIVE TO SEE THE DEPTH OF THE DEMOCRATS’ DEVOTION TO RACIAL PREFERENCES and the anger, bitterness, and sense of betrayal they express when one of their own surprisingly demonstrates a lingering commitment to the principle of colorblind equality…
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2011/11/an_outbreak_of_equality_in_wis.html
It is sad that the left thinks that discrimination in the name of antidiscrimination will actually work.
2. Jon Corzine on the Daily Show
An interesting video clip with Jon Corzine telling Stewart that Wall Street needs more oversight. You can see it at about the five minute mark. Of course with what has happened at MF Global you have more than a touch of irony. Also interesting is what he says we need to do to correct the economy and then endorses BHO as talking about doing the things he says we need to do. Also ironic.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-23-2008/jon-corzine
3. Paul: ‘No Intention to Make Third Party Run
Ron Paul said today he has “no intention” of making a third-party run if he is not the GOP nominee.
“I HAVE NO INTENTION OF DOING THAT,” he said on Fox News Sunday in an interview this morning. Asked why not, Paul said, “BECAUSE I DON’T WANT TO DO IT.”
BUT HE WOULDN’T COMMIT TO SUPPORTING THE GOP NOMINEE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION. “If they believe in expanding the wars, if they don’t believe in looking at the Federal Reserve, if they don’t believe in real cuts, if they don’t believe in deregulations and a better tax system, it would defy everything I believe in [to endorse],” Paul said, noting that he didn’t want his supporters to think that all they had done was “for naught” because he ultimately backed someone who didn’t agree with him on key issues….
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/282371/paul-no-intention-make-third-party-run-katrina-trinko
There goes a hope that the liberal had. Paul might have made a difference for their candidate.
4. Occupy Oakland’s Real Victims
Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente is sick of hearing about how peaceful the majority of protesters were. "THE REASON THE MINORITY'S HERE," HE SPUTTERED, IS "THE MAJORITY'S HERE."
THE MAJORITY OF OCCUPY PROTESTERS AREN'T VICTIMS; THEY'RE ENABLERS.
There was no positive political message. The goal of the general strike was supposed to be to "liberate Oakland and shut down the 1 percent." That's not positive. They want to shut down the city, but they don't want to get anything done. THE STRIKE DIDN'T HURT WALL STREET BANKERS OR OTHER BIG SHOTS AMONG THE TOP 1 PERCENT; IT CUT INTO THE POCKETS OF BARISTAS AND TRUCK DRIVERS.
Free speech does not mean free camping….
….Free speech rights do not include a right to trample the rights of others or keep other people from making a living.
Do not think that this general strike only cut into business activities in Oakland for one day. Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce head Joseph Haraburda has seen the lasting damage these actions have inflicted on Oakland's reputation as a place to do business. HE COUNTS THREE COMMERCIAL TENANT CANCELLATIONS, INCLUDING ONE FOR AN OPERATION THAT WOULD HAVE HIRED 100 EMPLOYEES….
Free speech does not mean you can destroy other’s livelihood, a park, etc. I think the author said it well. The majority of Occupiers aren’t victims, they are enablers.
5. Ohio Referendum on Tuesday
On Tuesday, OHIO VOTERS WILL DECIDE WHETHER TO REPEAL LEGISLATION PASSED BY REPUBLICANS IN MARCH THAT WOULD SEVERELY RESTRICT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS for hundreds of thousands of public employees in the state.
Unlike in Wisconsin, where unions lost a similar battle earlier this year, the fight over Senate Bill 5 in Ohio is unfolding very differently. First, progressive groups forced a referendum on the law with a massive signature drive.
THINGS ARE NOW LOOKING ROSY FOR THE PROGRESSIVE SIDE, despite some lingering concerns among labor strategists. A recent poll showed that the labor side of Issue 2, the ballot measure that would repeal the bill, is up by 25 points. (A “no” vote would repeal the bill.)
http://www.salon.com/2011/11/05/labor_poised_for_big_win_in_ohio/singleton/
I posted this because the article indicates that the Unions are going to win and win big. I’m originally from Ohio, so I don’t know what going on now. But I remember in Colorado when we had a amendment that would have limited the right of gays to be a special protected group. It was looking to head easily to defeat in the polls, but as it turned out it passed easily. Voters lied because they didn’t want to appear “prejudiced.” This is a wait and see election.
