On New Years Eve, just days before the Iowa primary, Milwaukee Journal columnist, Patrick McIlheran , ridiculed the New York Times editorial board while alleging that Bush administration critics were utterly alienated from the country.
The record number of Democrats who turned out to caucus in Iowa— more than 239,000, compared with fewer than 125,000 in 2004 — and the surprising easy victory of Barack Obama was a stinging rebuke of the Bush administration and Mr. McIlheran's slander of the administration's critics.
The huge Democratic turn-out — by contrast, 108,000 Republicans caucused on Thursday — demonstrated the extent to which opposition to President Bush has energized the American people.
More than half of those who attended the Democratic caucuses (57%) were new participants.
Obama's victory over Hilliary Clinton, who entered Iowa as the Democratic front runner, also illustrates that voters are far more interested in a candidate promising change — as Mr. Obama was — than one citing experience, the heart of Mrs. Clinton’s appeal. Half of the record number of Democrats said their top factor in choosing a candidate was someone who could bring about change. Just 20 percent said the right experience, Mrs. Clinton’s key argument, was the main factor.
These results reflect the reality, despite Mr. McIlheran's silly protestations, that the Republican Party is more unpopular than at any point in the past 40 years.
Currently, Democrats have a 50 to 36 party identification advantage, the widest in a generation.
Even an ideologue like Mr. McIlheran should know that the public prefers "alienated" Democratic approaches on health care, corruption, the economy and Iraq by double-digit margins.
Republicans’ losses have come across the board, but the G.O.P. has been hemorrhaging support among independent voters who made up 20% of Iowa's Democratic caucus participants..
The turn-out in Iowa and surveys from the Pew Research Center, The Washington Post, Kaiser Foundation and Harvard University show that independents are moving away from the G.O.P. on social issues, globalization and the roles of religion and government.
Even before Iowa, Mr. McIlheran's "utterly alienated" critics had won control of the United States Senate and House of Representatives in 2006 elections by criticising the Bush administration's foreign and domestic policies?
Critics of the Bush administration are not alienated from their fellow citizens or their country.
Rather they are increasingly dissatisfied, as the New York Times editorial so eloquently put it, with what a reckless, handful of extreme neoconservative ideologues have done to our country and its principles. It is "..impossible to see the founding principles of the greatest democracy in the contempt these men (President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and their neocon crowd) ... showed for the Constitution, the rule of law and human decency...lawless behavior (by the United States government) has become standard practice since Sept. 11, 2001."
The record turn-out in Iowa and Mr Obama's victory are additional evidence that the American people are alienated from the Bush administration, its policies and apologists, like Mr. McIlheran, not their country.
Showing posts with label McIlheran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McIlheran. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Monday, July 2, 2007
Basta!! Patrick McIlheran
Basta!! Patrick McIlheran!
In his latest "Quick Hit"Patrick McIlheran implies that the very foundations of American civilization are threatened by Spanish speaking residents refusing to learn English.
Of course, nothing could be further from the truth!
Spanish speaking immigrants and their progeny are learning English. They must to survive in the United States.
It is true that adult immigrants often struggle with learning a new language, just as earlier generations of non-English speaking immigrants did. Adult brains simply aren’t as adaptive as those of younger people.
The children and grandchildren of today’s Spanish speaking immigrants, like the children of previous generations of immigrants from Europe and elsewhere, adopt the language of their new country. Travel anywhere in the world and you will see people of African decent speaking French, German, and Italian, Iranians speaking Swedish, Norwegian and Spanish and Latinos speaking English!
Second generation Latinos speak English, most as their first language. They may also continue to speak their native language, just as German, Polish, Italian and Jewish immigrants before them. This enables them to communicate with and assist their parents and grandparents who often lack English proficiency. It also allows them to serve as a bridge between the United States and our southern neighbors who are almost all Spanish speaking.
My Minsk born grandmother spoke very little English. But she successfully raised eight children all of whom spoke English as their first language, even those not born in the US. One, a Harvard educated physicist wrote IBM’s first programs. Three others took the truck their father used to transport eggs and turned it into a regional trucking business. Another became a photographer who took the earliest photographs of Rosa Parks before she refused to move to the back of the bus. Three were WWII veterans including the youngest son who was wounded at Normandy. One was my mother. All retained Yiddish so they could communicate with their parents and other older relatives, assisting their transition to this new and very different world. All I know of Yiddish are the few words that all Americans have adopted! The transition took all of three generations!
Earlier generations of immigrants didn’t have television shows in their first language. They didn’t even have television for that matter! But they did have newspapers, radio shows and even public schools in their native language. Milwaukee had Polish and German language public schools and papers. The UP had a Finish radio program until a few years ago! None of these institutions prevented these immigrants or their children from learning English and becoming productive members of society. Nor did they undermine the foundations of western civilization! They actually helped smooth the transition by teaching immigrants about the institutions and practices of their new homeland just as Spanish language TV does today!
Senor McIlheran swung and missed with his "Quick Hit." What will he propose next? Banning guacamole and margaritas?
In his latest "Quick Hit"Patrick McIlheran implies that the very foundations of American civilization are threatened by Spanish speaking residents refusing to learn English.
Of course, nothing could be further from the truth!
Spanish speaking immigrants and their progeny are learning English. They must to survive in the United States.
It is true that adult immigrants often struggle with learning a new language, just as earlier generations of non-English speaking immigrants did. Adult brains simply aren’t as adaptive as those of younger people.
The children and grandchildren of today’s Spanish speaking immigrants, like the children of previous generations of immigrants from Europe and elsewhere, adopt the language of their new country. Travel anywhere in the world and you will see people of African decent speaking French, German, and Italian, Iranians speaking Swedish, Norwegian and Spanish and Latinos speaking English!
Second generation Latinos speak English, most as their first language. They may also continue to speak their native language, just as German, Polish, Italian and Jewish immigrants before them. This enables them to communicate with and assist their parents and grandparents who often lack English proficiency. It also allows them to serve as a bridge between the United States and our southern neighbors who are almost all Spanish speaking.
My Minsk born grandmother spoke very little English. But she successfully raised eight children all of whom spoke English as their first language, even those not born in the US. One, a Harvard educated physicist wrote IBM’s first programs. Three others took the truck their father used to transport eggs and turned it into a regional trucking business. Another became a photographer who took the earliest photographs of Rosa Parks before she refused to move to the back of the bus. Three were WWII veterans including the youngest son who was wounded at Normandy. One was my mother. All retained Yiddish so they could communicate with their parents and other older relatives, assisting their transition to this new and very different world. All I know of Yiddish are the few words that all Americans have adopted! The transition took all of three generations!
Earlier generations of immigrants didn’t have television shows in their first language. They didn’t even have television for that matter! But they did have newspapers, radio shows and even public schools in their native language. Milwaukee had Polish and German language public schools and papers. The UP had a Finish radio program until a few years ago! None of these institutions prevented these immigrants or their children from learning English and becoming productive members of society. Nor did they undermine the foundations of western civilization! They actually helped smooth the transition by teaching immigrants about the institutions and practices of their new homeland just as Spanish language TV does today!
Senor McIlheran swung and missed with his "Quick Hit." What will he propose next? Banning guacamole and margaritas?
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Patrick McIlheran Strikes Out on Wisconsin's Teachers
Patrick McIlheran would fail an elementary statistics class if he submitted his latest hit, rather “quick hit,” on Wisconsin’s teachers.
The piece is a classic illustration of the statistical fallacy of data manipulation- presentation of data in a misleading way to support a hypothesis which is without merit.
McIlheran notes that Wisconsin’s public schools spend 26% of their budgets on benefits and suggests that it is teachers with their ”mutant sized health care package” who are responsible for cuts in art and music classes. That’s like blaming Wisconsin’s drivers for the increase in gas prices!
What McIlheran fails to note is that health care costs in southeastern Wisconsin are between 31% (2004) and 26.5% (2006) higher than the rest of the country.
A 2004 study by the non-partisan, United States General Accountability Office found that hospital inpatient charges are 63% higher in the Milwaukee area than the national average. The same report also documented that physicians' prices were 33% higher than the average of 331 metro areas.
Overall, Milwaukee-area hospitals ranked fifth in price and area physician fees rank 16th.
So, of course, health care costs will be higher for Wisconsin’s teachers and the school districts that employ them than their counterparts in other states where health care costs are significantly lower!
Health care costs as a percentage of employee compensation, the statistic McIlheran conveniently cherry picks, is higher in Wisconsin because our teachers’ compensation is capped by the Qualified Economic Offer (QEOs) law. As health care costs increase, salary increases are held down. In some districts they have actually been frozen. As a result, health care costs as a percentage of compensation increase!
Here's are some additional salient facts that McIlheran ignores: while health care costs increased at more than three times the rate of inflation from 1994-95 to 2004-2005, Wisconsin's teachers' salaries fell 9.6% when adjusted for inflation. In 2004-05 Wisconsin's average teacher salary was 7.1% below the national average teacher salary.
But we hear nary a word from McIlheran about the Wisconsin’s soaring health care costs, the market dominance of Wisconsin’s health care providers that allows them to charge monopoly prices and secure monopoly profits or declining teachers' pay.
Satirist Mark Twain must have had writers like McIlheran in mind when he sarcastically urged: “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.”
The piece is a classic illustration of the statistical fallacy of data manipulation- presentation of data in a misleading way to support a hypothesis which is without merit.
McIlheran notes that Wisconsin’s public schools spend 26% of their budgets on benefits and suggests that it is teachers with their ”mutant sized health care package” who are responsible for cuts in art and music classes. That’s like blaming Wisconsin’s drivers for the increase in gas prices!
What McIlheran fails to note is that health care costs in southeastern Wisconsin are between 31% (2004) and 26.5% (2006) higher than the rest of the country.
A 2004 study by the non-partisan, United States General Accountability Office found that hospital inpatient charges are 63% higher in the Milwaukee area than the national average. The same report also documented that physicians' prices were 33% higher than the average of 331 metro areas.
Overall, Milwaukee-area hospitals ranked fifth in price and area physician fees rank 16th.
So, of course, health care costs will be higher for Wisconsin’s teachers and the school districts that employ them than their counterparts in other states where health care costs are significantly lower!
Health care costs as a percentage of employee compensation, the statistic McIlheran conveniently cherry picks, is higher in Wisconsin because our teachers’ compensation is capped by the Qualified Economic Offer (QEOs) law. As health care costs increase, salary increases are held down. In some districts they have actually been frozen. As a result, health care costs as a percentage of compensation increase!
Here's are some additional salient facts that McIlheran ignores: while health care costs increased at more than three times the rate of inflation from 1994-95 to 2004-2005, Wisconsin's teachers' salaries fell 9.6% when adjusted for inflation. In 2004-05 Wisconsin's average teacher salary was 7.1% below the national average teacher salary.
But we hear nary a word from McIlheran about the Wisconsin’s soaring health care costs, the market dominance of Wisconsin’s health care providers that allows them to charge monopoly prices and secure monopoly profits or declining teachers' pay.
Satirist Mark Twain must have had writers like McIlheran in mind when he sarcastically urged: “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)