Monday, November 01, 2004


I think that's what they call it:

A part-time college instructor has apologized for kicking a student wearing a Republican sweatshirt in an off-campus incident. Fort Lewis College student Mark O'Donnell said he was showing people his College Republicans sweatshirt, which said "Work for us now ... or work for us later," when Maria Spero kicked him. After kicking him, Spero said "she should have kicked me harder and higher," said O'Donnell. In a police report, O'Donnell said Spero kicked him in the right calf.

Durango Police Sgt. Mitch Higgins said Saturday that O'Donnell wanted to press charges against Spero and a misdemeanor summons would be issued. "To physically take that out on someone because you disagree with them, that is completely wrong," said O'Donnell.

David Eppich, assistant to the president of the college, said the college has formally apologized for the incident. He said an investigation indicated Spero, a visiting instructor of modern languages, did not know O'Donnell was a student and she has apologized. "I acted entirely inappropriately by kicking you, giving vent to a thoughtless knee-jerk political reaction that should never have happened. I apologize for my untoward comments. Before the incident, I did not know you and that you are a Fort Lewis student. I am entirely sorry. I am ashamed of my behavior, and I hope you will accept my apology," Spero said in a letter to O'Donnell dated Oct. 29.

O'Donnell said the apology wasn't enough, and he planned to file a complaint with the college. "I just think that students are held accountable for how they act and what they do in town. They can have actions brought against them. It is imperative that professors should be held accountable for their actions in town and on campus," he said.


NEA Gave Over A Million To Kerry, Faces IRS Audit

(Post lifted from Captain's Quarters)

The National Education Association has been busy this election cycle, the Washington Times reports. The teachers union has spent over a million dollars in direct support for John Kerry and $2.78 million supporting Democrats overall, prompting the IRS to investigate its tax-exempt status:

The National Education Association (NEA) pumped more than $1 million into 67 mailings for the Kerry-Edwards presidential ticket and against President Bush in the past four months, Federal Election Commission reports show.

Twenty-one NEA mailings in behalf of the Kerry campaign, produced by an Arlington firm whose clients include the Democratic Party, went out to hundreds of thousands of public school employees across the country this month at a cost of $468,333. The union paid for all the mailings from its general operating budget, not its political action committee, the reports show.

Now that presents two problems. First, using the same production firm as the DNC indicates possible collusion (termed "illegal coordination" by McCain-Feingold) in advocacy efforts. Second and more to the point for the IRS, spending the money out of the NEA's general budget instead of its political-action committee violates campaign-finance regulating the influence of corporations and unions, I believe. Conservative teachers have called for reform of the union's political activities as well:

In a July interview, NEA President Reg Weaver said about one-third of the union's 2.7 million dues-paying members are Democrats, one-third are Republicans and one-third are independents.

FEC reports show that only four Republican congressional candidates received money from the NEA's political action committee from April through July - Sens. Olympia J. Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Reps. C.W. Bill Young of Florida and Jim Kolbe of Arizona. ...

"We need to look toward spending political action committee funds more equitably between the political parties," said Diane Lenning, an English teacher from California and past chairman of the NEA Republican Educators Caucus. "The NEA's teachers speak of fairness, diversity and free speech. Therefore, we need to look toward equal representation of funds spent among candidates across the country from local to national levels," Mrs. Lenning said.

The NEA's almost-complete Democratic support comes as no surprise, and its motivations are easily understood. The efforts at educational reform have unnerved union leaders due to the administration's determination to hold schools responsible for their performance -- a philosophy that threatens to undermine the ridiculous "tenure" model that makes removal of ineffective teachers an almost impossible task.

But what they truly fear is an effort to implement a school-voucher plan that would for the first time create a competitive market for educating the children of working families instead of just the richest families in America. Competition would either force public schools to reform themselves and their evaluation processes or face obsolescence. Good teachers, of course, could find work in a boom of private-school openings that vouchers would create or negotiate better conditions for themselves at the public schools that would want to hang onto them. The effect of the NEA's opposition to change is to protect the least competent among them, a fact not lost on several teachers I know personally.

The NEA has gone all out to prevent any meaningful reform of our public education system, and they have done so by overwhelmingly supporting John Kerry and other Democrats. That should tell you all you need to know about which party can be trusted to bring change and improvement to the education of our children.


For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL schools should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the poor and minimal regulation.

Comments? Email me here. For times when is playing up, there is a mirror of this site (viewable even in China!) here


No comments: