Education Reform, And The Lying Liars That Tell Them!

Representative John Boehner declared recently that he “is in” for the new wave of educational reform in this country, which is being spearheaded by the “National School Choice Week” campaign. In a promotional spot for the campaign last month, Mr. Boehner boldly declared, “Hello, I’m John Boehner.”

I sat down with Boehner at his Ohio home to discuss this radical declaration and his sponsorship of “National School Choice Week.”

“We’re not dumb,” Mr. Boehner stated with strict eloquence while we sat for tea and conversation. “It’s the schools that are dumb. We need to put kids in schools that are not dumb.”

Mr. Boehner stood by his notion of increased parental involvement in our brief encounter, pointing out the long, ubiquitous tradition of parental involvement in the kinds of neighborhoods in which parents arrive home from low-wage jobs at 7:30 p.m. after a 16-hour shift and clearly can’t wait to wash up and make it out to the PTA meeting. You know… The bad neighborhoods.

“We simply need to get rid of the schools that are failing and put our kids in schools that aren’t failing. It’s like when you have a bunch of kids smoking pot in your basement. You can’t just take away the pot. You need to privatize the market and push for government to subsidize the small business owners, (ie. your local dealer), while cutting taxes and limiting government as an incentive to stimulate job creation!”

During my visit with Representative Boehner, it became clear that schools in the U.S. are running rampant with good teachers, excellent administrators, and decent budgets. The problem is clearly, and exclusively, the bad schools. The “National School Choice Week” campaign is advocating the idea that the choice of which school a student should attend in the hands of the parents, a prospect which has been thought possible by giving government subsidies. As such, if we take our students out of bad schools, we’ll do away with the only problem in the educational system, right? Still, I couldn’t understand why schools are so tirelessly nefarious, working day after day on ruining our otherwise excellent system.

I sat down with Governor Rick Scott (R- Fl) to discuss the issue of bad schools. Gov. Scott made headlines with his recent proposal of giving students of low socioeconomic standing “school vouchers” to pay for the different options that would allow parents to make a choice as to what school their child can go to.

“The problem, Ronald, is this notion that we should allow our children to be trapped in bad schools. Those schools are evil and they should be banished for all time to an existence best described as an empty shell of their former selves,” the governor told me during our brief interview.

Gov. Scott’s “educational savings account” idea proposes a fiscal product that would allow eligible parents to obtain “up to 85 percent of the state’s per-pupil funding figure.” When asked about whether federal and state representatives who advocate this plan – (largely conservatives and tea baggers, no affiliation) – planned to enact this change before or after they went through with their promise of cutting all the budgets, education included, Gov. Scott excused himself and proceeded to lock himself in the bathroom for several hours — refusing to come out until I left the premises.

So, logically speaking, what is wrong with the idea of reforming our educational system by keeping the actual system in place and just herding our students off to better schools? Is there nothing to lose with shepherding students through the thoroughfares of a fundamentally flawed system until they’re eventually deposited in the slightly more productive tentacles of a larger, low scoring educational beast which consumes academic integrity like a mystical dark mist shrouding a once small, benevolent, defenseless village?

Admittedly, taking children out of bad schools and putting them in good schools is somewhat productive. Giving parents options in choosing their child’s school is honestly a great idea, as proven by the scholarship program instituted in Washington, D.C. Still, by far the best idea I feel anyone has had is simply the thought that education reform strictly involves getting rid of bad schools, as opposed to fixing a fundamentally flawed system at its core: the bad schools we’re trying to get rid of. So while giving options to parents to choose their own child’s education is honestly a great way to further the cause, the biggest step forward in this move to reform the American educational system has been simply identifying the nemesis.

Now we may enact change because we know that evil schools are the only crumbling part of our money hemorrhaging, low scoring, overcrowded, ill-effective, teacher disdaining, savagely under budgeted, horrifically-administrated and often severely corrupted public education; and that change that will allow us to gracefully herd our kids to the better sites of that same system which has clearly worked for so many in the past.

Republican Fatigue

Democrats recently reported from the partisan trenches of the Senate that they will not have the votes needed to pass the DREAM Act, a piece of legislation that would allow young immigrants a path to citizenship via a college education or military service, amongst many other criteria. Critics against the bill (which passed in the House) are quick to blame Republicans.

“Son el diablo esos marditos senadores. Lo que me gustaria es meterle la cabeza por el culo, sabes? Darle verdadero sentido a la metaphora,” said Geraldo Cosme, a local Boston gardener, when asked about the Senate’s role in the DREAM Act getting shelved. Formally, the lack of Republican support for the bill stems from Republican promises to not “prioritize any matters above the critical issues of funding the government and preventing a job-killing tax hike,” or so said the formal letter recently issued and signed by the 42 members of the GOP caucus.

In reality, the matters were of a quite different concern. I sat with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConell (R- KY) Saturday at his house in Louisville to discuss the issue.

The day was frigid as a scorned woman, or a light-hearted conversation with Dick Cheney. Like Obama exiting a bipartisan conference, I could see my hot breath clearly in the icy air approaching Senator McConnel’s front door. There he stood, dressed in a traditional Kentucky “Turtle Shell,” the celebratory garb of many a Kentucky man whom a turtle he eerily doth resemble. Much to my surprise, the Minority Leader was bent on having his outside Saturday lemonade, a tradition in the McConnell household involving lemons, water, sugar, a couple pint glasses, and a 17-year-old Hispanic immigrant on all fours being paid what McConnell called “A handsome hourly wage for any table, none the less one without papers.

“The concerns of the ludicrous right…” he said, pausing quickly for a lemonade induced cough. “I mean, the Republican party, has a lot to do with making sure the tax cuts are passed. But if I can keep it real, we’re just kind of tired,” McConnell concluded.

We went on to discuss how much “crap” the Republicans had to deal with the last two years. Though it was difficult at first to keep away the radical idea that McConnell was suggesting laziness as the catalyst for the recent Republican legislative mannerisms, the conversation quickly became reasonable as McConnell made it simple.

“Have you ever had to filibuster like a million things? It’s totally labor intensive,” he said, describing the arduous task of herding often elderly, scared, and confused conservative Senators like John McCain (R-AZ) towards a podium where they must, often incoherently, give somber and illogical reasons why any legislation proposed by their blue-dog counterparts should be quickly destroyed.

“It’s not easy. We need a break from all this overcoming the Democratic agenda. It’s not a personal thing, I mean, we love immigrants at heart! And who doesn’t love and appreciate 9/11 responders suffering from health complications attributed to their heroic actions on that day! It’s just that the Democrats keep proposing and proposing and proposing and…” said the Kentucky Senator as he went into an incoherent rant about Democrats and their chronic need to pass legislation in response to the dire straits of our country. “It’s like it’s all they think about. Give it a well deserved break!” he concluded.

Senator McConnell finally came clean about the real reason for the dismissal of important legislation like the 9/11 Health Care Bill, the DREAM Act, the repealing of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and the highly contested ASSS Bill, (Annual Senatorial Secret Santa Bill), which would place a cap of $20 on all gifts purchased for the ASSS. And I for one was not the least bit shaken. The fact is, Republicans are people too. They need a little R&R, and it’s well deserved after so much work done halting the plethora of progressive legislation put forth by Democrats that would have translated into months or years of work, regulation, and general attentiveness to the plights of Americans across the country. “I just don’t have it in me, Ronald,” said the over-worked McConnell. Placing his drink down onto the back of his table-person, Senator McConnell kneeled in humility and pleaded, “Please. Don’t make me do stuff!!”

I left the McConnell home with a new outlook on Republican strategy in Congress. My sweater was still wet with Kentucky Senator tears as I headed to the house of an old friend, House Majority Leader John Boehner. My intention to fill the void set by questions of why House Republicans were compelled to pass the DREAM Act, despite their sweat shop working conditions, was adequately met within the first minutes of our conversation in the living room of his Ohio home. “It’s simple,” said the Republican powerhouse. “We had a brunch scheduled with the elect House newbies for earlier that day at this new tapas bar down K Street, you know, near the 7-11 and that weird scrotum-shaped culdesac. So it got pretty wild because a lot of the Tea Party newbs had never had sangria,” said the Majority Leader as we sat watching the Scarface Widescreen Two-Disk Anniversary Edition. “By the time we had sobered up enough to realize what we had just voted on, there was no turning back.”

It all made perfect sense. House Repubs never had an intention to get stuff done! It was all just a simple misunderstanding. I mean, why in turn would they pass the DREAM Act, arguably the most difficult of the bills shelved by congress to put into action. It first requires that you locate immigrants in the U.S. who are under 16 years of age and were brought here by their immigrant parents. Then they’d have to earn a high school diploma/GED, demonstrate “good moral character,” attend two years of college or serve two years of military service, and pass criminal background checks only to receive a six-year conditional status, time in which they must meet other conditions to complete their path to citizenship! Holy cow! Talk about doing stuff! Passing this legislation would put in motion many wheels of government. “Wheels we’re going to need to knock down another two years of progressive and tactful ideas proposed by Democrats,” said Mr. Boehner when asked about the seeming infinite steps immigrants would have to be put through under the DREAM Act. “Who do you think would have to fill out the paperwork while they do all that stuff? The government! And we don’t even get anything out of it! We’re already citizens!”

The sad tale of Republican fatigue is not what rings through the halls of the Hill, nor is it what is being reported by the mass media. These poor Republicans are pleading with the American people, in earnest and dire fashion, for a chance to catch their breath. And though it may seem that Republican legislators are courting the Bush Tax Cuts above any other piece of legislation that would serve the other 98 percent of individuals, their tax cut arguments don’t defend in order to keep their fellow fabulously wealthy folk floating on, it’s important that we keep in mind that it only SEEMS that way.

The matter here has nothing to do with anything other than Republican fatigue drawn from their ‘Get-R-Undone’ mentality. So defend your tired and often cranky Republican leaders, America! For as Mr. Boehner concluded at the end of our interview: “We’re doing the best we can think of. We just hope Americans can actually get a clue and give us a couple of days off soon.”

Dept. Of Homeland Security Releases New Alert Update In Time For The Holidays: 'Four Ways To Know If You're Dating A Terrorist'

Just last Thursday, while the world as we know it (and by the world I mean the U.S.) was celebrating the American yearly ritualistic slaughtering of our would-be national bird, the U.S. Deptartment of Homeland Security finished its touches on its newest security alert update. Produced in conjunction with Costcopolitan Magazine, a magazine born in response to the developing literary movement history is calling the “Movement Of People Who Buy Magazines For The Pretty Pictures, Not All Those Stupid Articles” (MOPWBMFTPPNATSA), the department of the Obama administration has released “Four Ways To Know If You're Dating A Terrorist,” an inoffensive, question-based guide to straying away from the kind of boyfriend who may wage holy war on you.

In accordance with a 2009 bill that forces American publications to print any national security update published by the nice people at Homeland Security, we’ve brought you said update to employ during your usual dating security measures:

1) Does He Only Buy Hideous Shoes?

A Recent poll taken by Princeton University, in conjunction with the Department of Defense's "Fear Your Peers" campaign, shows that 92.6% of terrorists exclusively buy hideous shoes often at lower prices than an aesthetically pleasing pair of shoes. Department officials have commented on the trend, citing the limited amount of time terrorists usually spend with their shoes as the logic behind the terroristic trend. Robert Blacken, spokesman for the "Fear Your Peers" campaign, confirmed it earlier this week on CNN, telling Wolf Blitzer, "I wouldn't waste $60 on shoes if I were going to blow up next week either. It's a good economic move in these rough economic times."

2) Does He Usually Have A Face? If So, Does He Lease Or Own?

Investigations into terrorist organizations across the world have led investigators spanning the length of the international community to note that most terrorist attempts – foiled or otherwise – are enacted by persons who either own or lease a face, the latter being much more prominent. Consuela Bibliotheca, a lead investigator part of the U.S. and Spain’s joint venture "Credit Checks for Cheeks," recently spoke with Bill O'Reilly on the matter of the increasing numbers of the facial leasing markets of the world, focusing exclusively on the billion dollar industry of the American Facial Leasing Market. "From 2000 to 2010, the number of leases signed per year has increased exponentially. It's up 217% from what it was in 2005." Developments in cheek and chin leasing have been responded to with calls from the left to regulate the market, a prospect Republicans and fiscally conservative Democrats oppose altogether. "It's a building crisis," concluded Mrs. Bibliotheca. "Most terrorists have been throwing off authorities by leasing to own, clearly with every intention of breaking their leases."

3) Does He Wear Weird/Unusual Clothes?

A recent interview with controversial terrorist turned activist Kerri Jestwin caught the eye of millions across the country. Sean Hannity sat with Mrs. Jestwin on Oct. 14 to discuss why she left the Hi- Pster terrorist organization (an organization funded exclusively by known terrorist organizations the world over) during her training before she was able to break any laws in the name of the Hi-Pster holy war on the “American Square.” “I cannot do it Sean. I simply will not,” Mrs. Jestwin said to Hannity. "Terrorism, in my experience, Sean, is for those with little to no fashion sense. I don't mean to be offensive, but that's what my experience is saying.” Mr. Hannity proceeded to straighten his tie in response to a suspicious look Mr. Jestwin posed as he signed off.

4) Does He Spend Several Months/Years Planning To Execute A Violent Act With The Intent Of Murdering Innocent Civilian Bystanders?

The latest numbers from studies done at universities across the world, including Harvard, Princeton, University Of Cambridge, Oxford, and Yale, have come to the conclusion that anyone meeting said criteria is a terrorist and should be treated as such. Furthermore, the studies show that there are absolutely no benefits to generalizing the idea of a Middle Eastern Muslim, or a Muslim of any ethnicity for that matter. When asked if profiling would be an effective means of security, Professor of Global Politics Edward Army, a lecturer on the subject of homeland security, was quoted as saying: "You have to be sh***ing me.... The answer is no, please leave my office."

So? How did you fare? Is your boyfriend a terrorist? The Department of Homeland Security asks that you share the questions with your friends and family over a nice fun dinner! Also, please contact the Dept. in the event of large, socially relevant realization at 1-888-NOT-REALLY.

The Home Depot Liberates The US Free Market From The Hands Of Private Enterprise Profit Dependency!

Swaying to the sleepy jazz guitar based sounds of NPR loosing a fight to it's current, and more Tourettes-prone rival, Fox News, I received an email that shocked myself, and the country as a whole. As I rushed immediately out of my bipartisan bed, put on my liberty boxers, and made my way to the freedom thrown where I sat occupied dropping a democracy deuce, I made the call and confirmed what seemed impossible and yet obviously inevitable. Congress had passed legislation that single-handedly allowed 'The Home Depot' to bail out the American free-market system of economics!Now, it's been a long road. For those of you that have suffered through a Fox News-like amnesia, I'll go ahead and stumble through it with you for just a moment.

It all began after the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, or as most of the American populace knows it, the 'Holy Crap Did We Just Spend 700 Billion Dollars To Bail Out A Bunch Of Rich Assholes' Act... of 2008. What this piece of legislation did was appoint the United States Department of the Treasury the authority to establish and manage the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), which in turn led to the US buying up to $700 billion of troubled bank assets to avoid bankrupting the countries biggest financial institutions. Such an event would've crippled the American economy enough to compare it to a kid who can't swim well, has a large rock tied to his ankle, but decides that soggy twinkies floating in the middle of a moldy lake is worth the risk. The legislation itself was born out of response to the 2008 mortgage crisis, where millions of people were hoodwinked into buying homes they couldn't afford by banks that knew they couldn't afford them, but handed out the bad loans to make outstanding profits in the short term. It was at this point where the outcry against large government began. People immediately blamed the new President of the United States, Barack Obama, for the piece of legislation, citing his affiliation with the American Socialist Party as a problem. Still the bigger problem, and thank God for American leaders and citizens alike being intelligent enough to recognize and do something about it in a typical unbiased and productive fashion, was clearly the dependency of the American economy on private bank profits.

Austan Goolsbee, yes the man's name is actually Goolsbee, was taking a lot of heat in that time as he chaired Obama's Council of Economic Advisers. In an interview in May 2009, when asked about the governments plan to address the issue, Mr. Goolsbee replied "We have an idea we're working on that would not detriment the banks, [which we own], and holds the American people's best interest at heart." The genius economic foresight of the Obama administration, as well as the coming together of liberals and conservatives incited by these economic hardships, is arguably the single strongest hand in the power play the federal government would put on the banks that had nearly crippled the United States.

The federal government then went on what history would call the "Ghost Hand" campaign where the government instituted an 'absolute zero' in terms of regulation on the banks who had received $700 billion in relief from the American people. They did this believing that at heart the heads of these institutions were greedy bastards... and they were right. We've all heard of the massive foreclosures that ensued where literally millions of people were put out of their homes. The banks had instituted a robo-sign policy where most of the foreclosure documents were hardly reviewed before being signed off, approving the foreclosures of millions of homes and in turn millions of people were thrown on the street. The Obama plan took like a gull to the wind as our capitalist system worked it's charm. With zen-like wisdom... they did absolutely nothing.

"The greatest asset of the free market is that people have always and will always decide what's important to the market.", said Austan Goolsbee when asked his take on strengths of the market in a press conference this afternoon, after 'The Home Depot Bailout' was signed into law by President Obama. "Americans did what we've always done. We chose what was important in our market."

And that we did! As families by the millions were thrown onto the street by a rigged bank-profit based system, people took to their local Home Depots and incited what is now being called 'The Brown Box Hike'. As I'm sure you already know, Home Depot sells Large Moving Boxes (LMB's) measuring 4.5 Cubic Ft. for $1.37 each. At those prices, homeless Americans took to their local Home Depots and purchased LBMs by the millions, building shanty towns all over the country with them. The Home Depot in turn saw a rise in revenue approximated around $178 billion in the first six months of the 'robo-sign foreclosures'. In turn the Home Depot stock, (HD), soared from it's tenure at $31.40 a share up 2,140 points to $2171.40 a share. The Home Depot, in order to capitalize on this new instant demand, built and opened new sites in record time and hired three-quarters of the countries unemployed workers in 2010, dropping the national unemployment rate from 9.6% to under 3%! Still, there was a stir amongst officials about Americans being back at work. Fearful lawmakers cringed at the idea of the new work force inciting a perpetual drop and rise of the markets as they followed their materialistic American dream back to the mortgages they'd been forced out of. But Goolsbee held tight to his plan despite panic in the ranks, for he had prepared for the raw power of a previously ill-equipped weapon in American economics. The power of the American trend!

Despite people being able, via HD employment, to afford their mortgages, shanty towns had become the new substitute for city life! A more compact, reasonably spacious, and yet decently accommodating LMB from Home Depot was just as good as a flat in New York City ever was! I wouldn't have to tell you the perks, but here's a couple pleasant reminders! Less traffic, not a single person had bought a car in almost a year, (not much need for one in such tight quarters.) And the conservative battle cry rang more than ever as the people literally "LIVED WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THEIR MEANS!" People were excited to work again and no one wanted to return to the old tales of high rises and big city flats. People were all about the shanty! Here Goolsbee instituted the final part of his plan.

The banks, by September 2010, had thrown everyone out of their homes so they can resell and not loose money from defaulted mortgage payments. But now that no one wanted a mortgage, the banks were useless and broke, as were the bank's new owners the American government. So Goolsbee swept to quick action and propositioned that The Home Depot buy the American government's assets and bail out the American free market system of economics! Today, they did just that! We are no longer dependent on those greedy bankers! We can now depend on the nice orange aprons at The Home Depot! And as I awoke in my bipartisan bed of plastic Home Depot bags, and made my way to my freedom thrown, (a Medium Moving Box (MMB) measuring 3 cubic feet, (only $.47 with the employee discount!)),I did so in my liberty boxers made from white colored HD plastic bags to drop my democratic deuce when the call was made and it was confirmed. The American dream was back on track, and America can prosper as it's now rid of it's dependency on profiting private enterprises! And in every 4.5 cubic feet of moving box across the country, a truly free market and an American dream lives on!

This truth that our free market can now operate truly as a free market, where every American can fail or succeed equally depending on their private assets and talents, unlimited by a rigged system made to benefit those who can never fail, that brings us today's Less Than Modest Proposal.

There Ain't No Party Like A T Party 'Cause A T Party Don't Stop!

If you live in Boston, around the Boston area, or have ever taken a single step in the New England region, you probably have a very close connection to the movement that is sweeping the nation currently. Yes you've probably heard all the crazy stories from the base ball bat cleaning practices to the rampant witchcraft being performed, but all of it is made possible only by America's new darling, a party we here in Boston know and love the most, the T Party! The events orchestrated by this concentration of mental and often unintelligible people that society has coined "T Baggers", are equally as bizarre as the T Baggers themselves. Now, everyone knows where the name comes from, especially if you take up residence here in Boston, and you frequent the harbor where "Tea Bagging" was first conceived! But this movement is taking across to cities and metro systems all over the country! Yes, the T party has been seeing it's rhetoric coming almost systematically in and out of the mouths of American political pundits and news casters since it's inception, when a bunch of displeased Americans were "sick of the same old practices and looking for a new way to please themselves."

I caught up with a spokesman for the original T Party here in Boston, Rudey Beaver, at the Semi-Outdoor Boston Jockstrap Rally (SOB JR) last Thursday at the Hynes Convention Center to discuss the T Party movement and it's almost perpetually progressing influence. "We're a people brought together by the ideals of the original 'T Baggers', men like Jefferson, Washington, and Adams", said Mr. Beaver. "Bottom line, we stand for less government. We don't want to be restricted by administrations that have lost touch with the American people." And most of the American populace would agree, restriction is definitely not on the tea bagging docket. But what exactly is the T Party? What do they do? What do they stand for and how do they manifest their opinions? Mr. Beaver had some food for thought on the lot of inquiry. "The T Party is a movement named and recognized for it's iconic events. These events, here in Boston, usually take place on the T where T Baggers, after long hours of pre-assembly, convene on the T and exercise their American right to free speech and assembly." When asked what other criticisms of the current local, state, and federal government the T Party may have, Mr. Beaver seemed a tad ill at ease with the line of questioning. "The T Party is concerned with American freedom, sir", he said when I asked what makes up the party's political platform. "We are fiscal and social conservatives gathered to make a stand for what we believe in. Any question anyone may ask about our core beliefs can be answered with a quick glance at our 'Contract By America'." The 'Contract By America' is a document quite few people have seen really. Written in half red pen, half 'Mac-and-cheese' colored pencil, it outlines the beliefs of the T Party down to 10 simple agenda items the T Party demands all representatives of government at any level follow. Unfortunately the bright yellowish nature of most of the document's font, coupled with a large coffee stain at the upper third of the document, deemed it illegible for my purposes of examination.

Though Mr. Beaver was short for time to elaborate on these issues, I was able to schedule a meeting with T Party head political strategist Clara DeTurtoga. When asked about the fiscal legislations supported by the T Party, Mrs. DeTurtoga replied "Our organization supports fiscal conservatism. That means less spending which in turns means permanent and increasing tax cuts." When asked about the obvious effects lowering taxes would have on increased government borrowing, Mrs. DeTurtoga replied "Well if we just stopped spending so much, we wouldn't have to borrow." When asked about the services that would be affected by the loss of funds and how the failing of the banking system without the bail-out would have meant the failing of the American economic system altogether, Mrs. DeTurtoga seemed confused and began to speak to her assistants in pig-latin before she excused herself from the meeting citing a scheduling conflict. While I was unable to seek out conference with any other T Party representatives, I was still able to meet with a couple T Baggers themselves!

Stacy and Owen Park are a married couple native to the Boston area and currently residing in Back Bay. I was able to ask them about their political views outside of a T stop where a T Party demonstration would be taking place later that night. "The current President and his entire administration along with the elites of the democratic party is what's wrong with the American system of governance today.", said Mr. Park as he held close to his scarlet foam 'T' finger. "This 'T' finger and this movement is a living statement saying 'We're here and we have a voice, and you can't stop us... until 12:30am when the T closes down... But that's ok because we'll be here tomorrow... maybe... if we can get a sitter.." Mrs. Park had equally strong sentiments on the T Party events. "I feel these events best explain what we're going for in a political sense. Freedom. Freedom is the be all end all for us. And if we can't have it, then we're going to party on the T until we can have it." Still it's these events along with their awkward political ideals that put this movement in jeopardy of loosing the quick relevance it's received in the American socio-political scene. There seems to be a big disconnect with the ideals being preached by the T Party and the T Parties themselves. "It is our right granted to us by the greatest men in our country's history.", said Mrs. Park before her and her husband made their way underground. "The right to speak our minds in assembly!"

And assemble they do! Anyone who has ever been caught trying to get home after a long friday night or tuesday night or sometimes even monday night will probably encounter the T Party on their way home. It may be a less than quaint and inescapable bout of words where the sober individual will not understand what the party stands for, or maybe just a T Bagger regurgitating his or her 'political ideals' all over your shoes. Here in Boston, the locals have coined a term to describe the encounters with the T Bagging populace. "Scrotumnizing", said Boston native and Suffolk Prof. of Sociology Dr. Ezra Brooks when asked about the term, "Is the act of coming across a T Bagger and finding his or her inability to communicate their political agenda to be the most potent asset to the interaction as a whole." Mr. Brooks, who claims to be amongst the casualties of last Tuesday's October 19th T Party, had this to say on the encounter: "It was horrible. I've never been so thoroughly confused. It was like they were angry drunk children who had no understandable point to make and yet felt the need to voice a loud and unintelligent opinion rather than propose an idea that makes any kind of sense. I exited the train 12 stops early and had to walk home for about an hour in the cold just to get away from it, but I couldn't escape the smell of sweaty... Well.. You know... The air was filled with the musky smell from sweaty T Party-ers, so much so that I could taste it in my mouth.. The..You know.."

These movements, whether you agree or disagree with them in any way, are a clear and present response to the lack of satisfaction with our current and past governance. While it is always an act of patriotism to respect and defend the rights of others and to use your rights to voice your own worries and concerns, it is also a civic responsibility to do so responsibly and to fully understand what it is that we are saying in the event that we do say it. It is this desperate attempt to relinquish our anger with our governance, albeit in the form of angry belligerent protesters with insane claims, or in the form of crazy blame games and unmindful political movements birthed strictly from the lack of reason afforded to anger that brings us today's Less Than Modest Proposal.

How Punching Massachusettes Children Can Save You Hundreds Of Dollars At Cash Registers Statewide!

On November 2nd, all registered Mass voters have a civil responsibility to hit the ballot boxes and vote not only for the men and women who have invested several weeks and millions of dollars in America's most reliable and glorified name calling contest, but also for state statutes that will line the public policies of our state. One statute specifically has pressed plenty of reasonable dissent in the usual 'monkeys-throwing-shit-at-each-other' traditions that make up our election seasons. You may have heard of it. It may have showered itself into conversations on the T, or in the university halls much like pinata candy green cards at an anchor babies' birthday party. But if you're like millions of voters across the country, odds are you don't give a damn, and you still can't believe House is playing grab ass with Cuddy, that lucky pimp-limping bastard! Regardless, the fajita hot statute this Mass autumn is the highly contested Question 3 AKA the 3% Sales Tax Relief Act AKA the Initiative to Roll Back Sales Tax AKA the Take A Child's Lunch Money Right Now Act. The proposed law, supported by almost Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Christy Mihos and sponsored by The Alliance To Roll Back Taxes, offers an amendment to the state sales tax currently at 6.25% down to 3% in the event that Mass voters rally in it's favor.

It's difficult to deny an effort to pay less cash registers statewide. So why would anyone offer anything but appraisal to such a proposition? Why would anyone, in their own Right mind, offer anything but support for a state statute that would clearly put money back in the pockets of millions of Mass residents and visitors alike? Why would anyone, anyone at all, maybe even... I don't know.. a small child.. maybe even specifically a small child.. Maybe some kind of genetic issues... Maybe his dad was kinda small too, and he doesn't get much in terms of first pick in the after school dodgeball game.. Maybe people call him short and poke him in his little tiny-person face, and he's decided he's going to study his physiologically underprivileged ass off, (be damned that flawed educational system that will make him pay tens of thousands dollars to do so!!), to get back at all of those tall good looking kids all the popular girls in the fifth grade have crushes on.. Yeah.. Why would the wimp kid slump into Napoleonic fetal position under his nuclear winter fearing desk at the idea of such a law?! Could it be, as the Gates Foundation warns on their article: 'Top Ten Fast Facts About Post-Secondary Education', conveniently located on their website, (www.gatesfoundation.org), because "The average cost of tuition and fees at a public four-year college in 2009-10 was $7,020 – a 235-percent increase since 1980-81.", (numbers which many studies strongly suggest are not in line with inflation)?Or could it be that the current cost of post-secondary schooling in conjunction with the fiscal effects officials say the ratification of the 'Question 3' law would impose on elementary and secondary school budgets would mean that tiny Johnny boy better get real used to rejection? I wouldn't know personally, because I'm attractive. Still, for some hardly intelligible reason, plenty of people across the state, especially teachers and public education officials, are standing up against the proposition in an effort to stop a supposed $2.5 billion reduction in local aid for the state.

Critics of the proposed law argue that the kind of loss observed by a "yes" vote would deplete all public services enough to give us nightmares of FEMA showing up fashionably late to our "Oh Lord Please Help Us We're In Dire Need!" Mardi Gras party . The indiscernible verbal ass kickings on the subject appear to come down to a fundamental disagreement in the country, radiating in every election this fall. Taxes. In Massachusetts, a historical reference is never lost during these debates, as proved by the vice president of the Massachusetts Package Store Association Ron Maloney when claiming that the recent tax on alcohol in the state has already contributed to a large drop in his store's sales, suggesting that without implementing the law Question 3 proposes, the situation may become dire. "Forty to nearly fifty percent of what you pay for a bottle of alcohol is tax. I remember some guys throwing some tea into the harbor over just such an issue", said the gentleman in an interview with Metro West Daily News Correspondent Brittany Danielson. And he's damned right! I too remember some guys who threw some tea into the harbor over not being able to get shit-faced at tax free prices! Who wants to think about paying taxes to big government when they're out getting plastered and trolling for BU undergrads who may be confused and intrigued by the thought of experimentation?!

Still the opposition stands stronger than the hold Rush Limbaugh's ass has on Michael Steele's pursing lips. While the concern is entirely composed of the depletion of all state funded public services, the greatest concern on the side of the naysayers seems to be the proposition's effect on the public school systems of Mass. It is specifically this argument that I find as difficult to keep down as a drunken late night menu order after a trip to the Allston bar scene and a night with a Craigslist "masseuse".

Strong and true patriotic Americans, such as the Boston Herald Editorial Staff in their October 7th Editorial 'Yes on Question 3', are standing up in defense of this proposition saying: "Sometimes a proposition is known by the enemies it makes - and lining up against the tax rollback are all the usual suspects." God bless them for standing up against the radical left wing elementary, middle, and high school students who want to kick-start their American dream with a valid and adequately funded public education system! These parasitic little mini-persons hardly understand the real America composed of what patriots like Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck have so rightly named 'The Folks'! Seriously.. They actually hardly understand 'The Folks'... In their ill deserved defense, a lot of them just got over their object permanence dilemma. And in all fairness.. 'The Folks' hardly understand 'The Folks'... 'The Folks' seem harder to recognize and locate than diversity in the history of US presidents... Though there is that one guy... But he's a socialist.... Regardless, the Boston Herald Editorial Staff is making a strong patriotic point! As such, you know the radical left wing media is going to claim their 'disconnect' from the American voter. So let's go straight to the source and access the thoughts of voting supporters for some feedback!

Reporter and editor Nancy Reardon, in an article made available on Wickedlocal.com entitled 'Sales Tax Cut Ballot Question Is Causing A Stir', spoke to Sandra Plasical, 18, a student at Quincy College and a supporter of the law Question 3 proposes. She was quoted on the policy as saying, "It benefits people who aren't financially stable and people who are financially stable probably don't care." And she's right. The most financially stable people in this country are elementary and secondary school pupils! For the most part they don't even pay taxes! They can't even reach the counter where the registers are! Why would they care about a tax decrease, (other thanall the points previously outlined)? Even further in the same article, Reardon questioned Quincy resident Dan Cotter, 30. The sir had this to say on the matter: ""It's a tough economy, and I think that Massachusetts already has a pretty high sales tax". And that's a damned good point Mr. Cotter! Massachusetts, with a 6.25% sales tax, as Reardon adequately points out, "Falls in the middle nationwide". It is in this regard that we as Bay State citizens need to heed the wise words of Lil Jon & The Eastside Boyz and "Get Low", (feel free to disregard their slightly less relevant policies on "Windows","Walls", and the target route of "sweat").

Yes the consensus seems to be that we should "Get Low"-er, as Question 3 proposes, than the state of Alabama which currently employs a 4% sales tax, (though the state also employs additional local taxes which can "Get Low" to the tune of a combined total sales tax of 12%, (as provided by the Alabama Department of Revenue)). Or maybe we should try and compete with the lowest state taxes in the country, states like Alaska, Montana, New Hampshire, Oregon, and O'Donnell's seemingly 'wicked' Delaware, all of which employ a 0% state sales tax! Further research revealed small discrepancies to the argument unfortunately as Alaska, Oregon, and New Hampshire municipalities often levy up to 7.5%, 8%, and 9% sales taxes respectively. But don't let the facts stand in your way! Fox News doesn't, and they make a killing!

The most important fact is that the passing of Question 3 will put on average $688 a year back into the pocket of every Massachusetts resident, according to www.Bollotpedia.org. So what's the big deal? Who cares if we have to cut school programs and maybe even close a couple dozen schools to get our thousands of tiny increments that, though worthless in and of themselves, will amount to about $700 dollars at the end of the year? It's these tough decisions that are testing the values of our country's ill informed and yet highly entertained voters. And it's this argument on the effects of the proposition on public school funds that brings us to todays Less Than Modest Proposal.