Your Daily Dose of leftist Tolerance

Teachers Union VP Gun rights supporters are going to to Hell

Leaders of the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers are among those leftists who were hoping for strong new anti-firearm legislation from Washington, D.C.

And the very much hate the National Rifle Association, the group that keeps fighting off such measures.

NEA Vice President Lily Eskelsen Garcia even believes she looked into their souls and determined that NRA leaders and supporters “are going to hell.”

“I’m not an ordained minister, I’m not a theologian, but these guys are going to hell,” she said at the annual Netroots Nation conference last week, according to Mercury News.

“We have to make those senators as frightened of us as they are of the gun lobby,” she reportedly said. “Shame on us if we give one inch to the gun lobby. They got where they are because they never give up. … Now the movement is us; we are the ones we were waiting for.”

The Left does not grasp that the NRA is millions of Americans who care about their right to self-defense. The Left sees only their totalitarian designs


Teachers Unions outraged at thought of arming teachers

The Communist influence in the Teachers Unions is showing Zip at Weasel Zippers notes that a Gallup poll shows a majority of Americans support the idea of armed teachers

Nobody is proposing every teacher carry a loaded gun on a holster, they recommend several people working at a school have access to a firearm in case some lunatic starts shooting. Seems reasonable to me and according to Gallup, 64% of Americans agree with the idea.

Via WaTi:

..the nation’s two biggest teachers unions warned Thursday that would be a disastrous idea that sends the wrong message to children.

“Some are actually proposing bringing more guns in, turning our educators into objects of fear and increasing the danger in our schools. Guns have no place in our schools. Period,” reads a rare joint statement from the presidents of the National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers.

In their letter, Dennis Van Roekel of the NEA and Randi Weingarten of the AFT called the idea of arming teachers “astounding and disturbing,” saying it runs counter to educators’ vow to provide safe and secure public schools.

In the days following the tragic massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., several high-profile political figures — including Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and Rep. Louie Gohmert, Texas Republican — have suggested that instructors or principals be given firearms. They would kept in secure locations and available only to school leaders, who would use them in the event a gunman enters the building or in the case of some other extreme threat to students.

Former Education Secretary Bill Bennett has also voiced support for the idea.

“Suppose the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary who was killed lunging at the gunman was instead holding a firearm and was well-trained to use it. Would the result have been different? Or suppose you had been in that school when the killer entered, would you have preferred to be armed?” Mr. Bennett wrote in a recent column for “Evidence and common sense suggest yes.”

So, these unions, who I bet do not speak for many of the teachers they claim to represent, would prefer that teachers not be given an option to protect themselves and their students? Apparently so. Evidence shows, overwhelmingly, that Americans with concealed carry permits are incredibly responsible and safe, but the unions, being Leftist are vehemently opposed to allowing such people to help secure our schools. this is sad, but not surprising. Unions like the NEA and AFT have become servants of Leftist ideology rather than teachers. And Leftist ideology loathes armed citizens, and ultimately, individuals being responsible for their own protection. The Left being the Collectivists they are, believe that we ought to be reliant upon government for everything. Gun ownership challenges that, and the Left cannot stand that.

Figures, NY Slimes bashes Texas for, wait for it, creating jobs!

Oh my Goodness! How dare Texas Governor Rick Perry create a climate friendly to businesses. That is the basic message in this screed from the NY Times. Here is the key part to me. Note the business vs people nonsense the Times tries to play up.

Under Mr. Perry, Texas gives out more of the incentives than any other state, around $19 billion a year, an examination by The New York Times has found. Texas justifies its largess by pointing out that it is home to half of all the private sector jobs created over the last decade nationwide. As the invitation to the fund-raiser boasted: “Texas leads the nation in job creation.”

Yet the raw numbers mask a more complicated reality behind the flood of incentives, the examination shows, and raise questions about who benefits more, the businesses or the people of Texas.

Along with the huge job growth, the state has the third-highest proportion of hourly jobs paying at or below minimum wage. And despite its low level of unemployment, Texas has the 11th-highest poverty rate among states.

“While economic development is the mantra of most officials, there’s a question of when does economic development end and corporate welfare begin,” said Dale Craymer, the president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, a group supported by business that favors incentives programs.

Those EVIL companies! Coming to Texas, employing thousands of people! How dare they? Those people would be better off depending on the government than their own labor! One might imagine the author of this piece might understand that companies coming in, hiring Texans, Texans who then buy goods and services helps Texas. But sadly, no.  I suppose California is more the model that the Times would support? You know a state flat broke, taxing the Hell out of its residents, driving businesses and jobs away with high taxes and regulations. But I guess that is OK because California is still spending money it does not have right? That is the Liberal way.

By the way, as you read the article, you find a common theme, that Texas is robing from schools to pay these businesses to come here. Here are the fact about what the State is spending in this fiscal year 34% of spending is on education. More than a third. California? They spend 24 % Note, this includes state and local spending. The state of Texas spends 24 % of its spending on education, California 17%

We might also note that the unemployment rate in Texas is, as of October this year 6.6%. California? 10.1%. And as long as we are talking about education spending, we must take careful notice that Liberals ALWAYS equate more spending with better education. Yet, in this country, we spend more, and more, and more, and get less and less, and less for our money spent. The Dallas Morning News did a story in January of last year on what Texas spent on education per student for fiscal year 2009-2010. Forget the rhetoric, and the Liberal gnashing of teeth, note the money PER student spent. 

Texas has dropped sharply below the national average in per-pupil spending over the past decade, a new comparison shows, and could plummet further as lawmakers consider changes that would deprive schools of up to $5 billion a year.

The comparison by the National Education Association, a teachers group — based on figures furnished by state education agencies — indicated that in the 2009-10 school year, Texas spent $9,227 per student, a figure that’s $1,359 below the national average.

That places Texas 37th in spending among the states and the District of Columbia. Ten years ago, Texas ranked 25th and was $281 below the national average.

Over $9,000 PER student? And this is not enough?