Unclear on the concept
Wednesday, Nov 16, 2011 - Posted by Rich Miller
* This ever-more-common excuse about how an incredibly offensive comment was only a few seconds out of a longer speech is just bizarre to me…
The president of the Chicago Teachers Union says she isn’t stepping down over an “inappropriate” joke she made about Education Secretary Arne Duncan.
Karen Lewis said Wednesday that while her remarks were insensitive, they were just 120 seconds of her 35-minute speech at a social justice event in Seattle last month.
Lewis said at the event she could tell Duncan “went to a private school, because if he had gone to a public school, he would have had that lisp fixed.”
So, we’re only supposed to be upset if she spent all 35 minutes saying stupid things?
For crying out loud, get a clue and just apologize if you’re sorry and move along. If you’re not sorry, then there is no need for these lame excuses.
Sheesh.
* So, um, I thought the GOP was the states’ rights party these days? Apparently not…
U.S. Rep. Tim Johnson says he’s not done trying to alter federal law to allow Illinoisans to carry concealed firearms.
The Urbana Republican’s bid to attach an amendment bringing Illinois in line with the rest of the nation failed to reach the House floor this week, but a Johnson aide said the congressman is planning to re-introduce the measure in December.
Johnson and four other Illinois Republicans want to allow Illinoisans to be able carry loaded firearms in public if they have a concealed carry permit from another state. […]
Johnson was joined in pushing for the change by U.S. Reps. Bobby Schilling of Colona, Aaron Schock of Peoria, Adam Kinzinger of Manteno and Randy Hultgren of Winfield.
In a statement, Johnson said he believes the federal government should step in and supersede Illinois law.
* The Pro-Life Action League appears to be completely unclear on the concept. This is from a press release about a rape victim who disagrees with Jennie Goodman, who is receiving an award from Gov. Pat Quinn at a Personal PAC event. Goodman cut a TV ad for Personal PAC last year blasting Bill Brady for wanting to outlaw abortions, even in cases of rape and incest..
Mary Higgins is one of many other victims of rape and hopes that her press conference will put a face on the other innocent victims of rape. When Mary was sexually assaulted at age 18, she was faced with the choice that Jennie Goodman never had to make: what to do when she discovered that she had become pregnant with her rapist’s child.
As difficult as her situation was, Mary refused to punish her unborn child for its father’s crime. Mary chose life for her unborn daughter, and placed her for adoption. She says, “It was the best choice I ever made.” [Emphasis added.]
I mean absolutely no disrespect to Ms. Higgins. She obviously endured a terribly traumatic time, and I’m very glad that her choice turned out so well. But pro-choice folks would actually agree with her about her choice to not have an abortion. The operative word here is “choice,” and the Pro-Life Action League is not at all about “choice.”
We can disagree on what we believe on this subject, and I will always respect your position. But the Pro-Life Action League should stop using the word “choice” when want it wants to do is legally prohibit almost all women from ever having an abortion.
- Timmeh - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:27 pm:
I’m confused Rich. The article says, “After the video was widely circulated Monday, Lewis called Duncan to apologize. An education department spokesman says Duncan accepted her apology.” So, she did apologize. The part you quoted just says that she isn’t going to resign over it.
- Esquire - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:29 pm:
What does “State’s rights” have to do with this issue?
The US Supreme Court has held in two recent rulings (the Heller and McDonald cases) that the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution includes the right to firearm ownership for self defense.
How many millions in additional attorney’s fees are the politicians from Chicago and Springfield prepared to spend to block the implementation of this judicial decision in Illinois? Like it or not, Johnson has the court opinions on his side and Quinn, Emanuel, Daley’s successor, and the other politicians are fighting to reverse two recent decisions that are respected in 49 out of 50 states.
Sheesh!
- Ken in Aurora - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:33 pm:
I’m about as 2A as it gets and detest that we don’t have CCW on the books here in IL (yet), but Rep. Johnson’s approach isn’t the way to do it. We need to do this legislatively within our state.
- Meanderthal - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:35 pm:
Esquire is right.
- GoldCoastConservative - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:36 pm:
@Esquire…In the minds of many in this state, the concept of “equal protection” applies to privileges like drivers licences but not to enumerated rights.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:43 pm:
–How many millions in additional attorney’s fees are the politicians from Chicago and Springfield prepared to spend to block the implementation of this judicial decision in Illinois? Like it or not, Johnson has the court opinions on his side and Quinn, Emanuel, Daley’s successor, and the other politicians are fighting to reverse two recent decisions that are respected in 49 out of 50 states. –
Huh? In what venue are Illinois or Chicago spending “millions” fighting Heller and McDonald? You’re reading things into those decisions that are not there.
And out of those “49 of 50 states” that you claim support your view of conceal carry, you clearly count Hawaii, New Jersey, Maryland, New York and California among them.
So if Illinois passes the Hawaii conceal carry law tomorrow, you’re happy? Clerk, call the roll.
- Timmeh - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:43 pm:
@Esquire: What do those rulings have to do with the Concealed Carry bill? Those rulings may guarantee the right to own a firearm, but they don’t guarantee you the right to have it on you in public, even if it is concealed. It is the right of those 49 states to allow CC and the right of Illinois to not allow CC.
- How Ironic - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:49 pm:
@Timmeh-
The right of the 2A is to ‘bear arms’, not ‘bear arms…only at home, not on your person at any time outside of your home’. The founders certainly could have narrowed down the right if they wished too. But they didn’t.
- Dirt Digger - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:50 pm:
If Lewis isnt losing her job over gross incompetence at performing it I fail to see how she is going to lose it over tacky insults at speeches.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:50 pm:
Anon 2:43 is me, sorry.
- TimB - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:52 pm:
States (and governments) don’t have rights. They have powers granted to them by those that they govern. Only citizens have rights. States (and subjects) don’t.
- the Dark Horse - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 2:58 pm:
GOPers only like people to THINK they support states’ rights. When they do not like what the states are doing, however, they will seek to trounce those rights. Examples: defense of marriage act, abortion laws, medical marijuana, assisted suicide, etc. Cafeteria conservatives at work.
- walkinfool - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:01 pm:
Conservatives are all for individual freedom and states’ rights, except when centralized government can be used to force individuals or states to support their position.
- the Dark Horse - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:02 pm:
Esquire, if you were to read the recent SCOTUS rulings, you will see the the court did not declare that the second amendment is absolute, and that the states may continue to regulate firearms. By your logic, the city and states ought to fold up their tents and go hone because there can be no more gun laws.
Sheesh.
- Timmeh - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:03 pm:
@How Ironic: What does “bear arms” mean. Does “bear arms”=”own arms”? If so, then it means you have the right to own it, but no explicit rights about where you can take it and under what circumstances can it be seen. Thus, legislating under what circumstances you can have your firearm would fall under states rights. If you disagree, then conceal a handgun, get arrested for it, and take your case to the Supreme Court.
Look at it this way. Why would 49 states pass concealed carry laws if it “bear arms” meant that they could have their firearm with them anyway?
- wishbone - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:05 pm:
You cannot leave the protection of Constitutionally protected rights up to the local yokels. Be it a woman’s right to chose an abortion in Alabama, or a honest citizen’s right to bear (carry) a weapon in Illinois. We either have a Bill of Rights or we don’t.
- the Dark Horse - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:06 pm:
Walkinfool is correct– the GOP constantly works against individual rights. They would if they could, and in many cases have, regulate(d) what sort of radio and tv shows you can enjoy, who you can sleep with, whether you can buy “marital aids” for use in your private home, whether you can take your own life, what books you can buy, etc. I say if you don’t want an abortion, don’t get one; if you don’t like Howard Stern, don’t listen; and if you don’t support physician-assisted suicide, don’t kill yourself.
- How Ironic - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:15 pm:
@Timmeh,
One would assume you would need to ‘own’ a firearm, before one could ‘bear’ one. Also, to ‘bear arms’ implys that the right is not only to own one, but to also have it with you. Back in the day, a journey of more than a mile or so could seriously affect your ability to actually USE your firearm whether the danger be a animal or human.
If the founders felt that firearms should ONLY be kept in the home, they would have written the right much more restricted.
Similarly the 1A isn’t limited to only indoors, at home.
I don’t have an issue with regulation. But in the case of IL, the regulation is essentially a 100% restriction. Not intended under the constitution.
No more than if IL ‘allowed’ free speech…only at home.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:16 pm:
===If the founders felt that firearms should ONLY be kept in the home, they would have written the right much more restricted.===
Dude, read the amendment. It’s not exactly crystal clear to begin with.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:18 pm:
–Be it a woman’s right to chose an abortion in Alabama, or a honest citizen’s right to bear (carry) a weapon in Illinois. –
That’s an interesting connection. There are Constitutional originalists who argue that neither are rights and should not be in the province of the courts but solely the legislatures or by amending the constitution.
Scalia calls himself an originalist when it suits him. Judge Posner likened the Heller decision to Scalia’s Revenge for Roe vs. Wade, and considers both legislating from the bench.
For the record, there have been local and state laws banning the carrying of firearms in public since the country’s founding. If it turns out in the future that the Supremes declare it a constitutional right, it will only have been recently discovered.
- Metropolis - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:24 pm:
1. Karen Lewis already personally called Mr. Duncan and offered an apology, which was accepted by Mr. Duncan. Whether she should resign is a debatable question, but let’s be clear about what actions have already been performed by each party.
2. Although the rights, duties, and responsibilities of both the States and the Federal government can be said to eminate from individuals, our founding documents illuminate an attempt to determine the “rights” that the States hold separate from the Federal government. This is basic federalism; the continuing determination of the correct balance of which rights, duties, and responsibilities are the sole province of the States, and which are more appropriately addresed by a Federal scope. The modern-day GOP party cloak themselves in a federalist ideology (correct or not) that espouses the “right” or authority of the State, not the Federal government, over certain topics. A true federalist would respond to Mr. Johnson that encouraging the Federal government to interfere with a State decision (positive or negative action) is a harmful move and sets a dangerous precedent.
3. The Pro-Life Action League has had the brilliant realization, after extensive polling and reading Ender’s Game, that if you separately appeal to both sides of people on an issue, you can attract 100% of the voters.
- CircularFiringSquad - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:27 pm:
Hopefully CTU members will dig deep for the holidays and buy the Prexy a mirror and maybe a Get Out of Jail Card to give to the Fashion Police
when they come knocking
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:28 pm:
–If the founders felt that firearms should ONLY be kept in the home, they would have written the right much more restricted.–
Yes, because the language of the Second Amendment is clear as a bell, lol.
At the time of adoption of the Constitution, there were no real police forces, local or state, just a sheriff or constable. There was no large standing army. The ability of the states to bring together a militia of citizens in quick order to put down insurrection, mob action, and most importantly, slave revolts, was considered vital.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:29 pm:
Lewis is slowly roasting on a fire built by her own mouth. It would be shocking if a person who has displayed as much callowness as she has, would consider the organization before herself.
Don’t expect anything from her except her own claims of victimhood. She won’t step down regardless of her obvious unprofessionalism.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:30 pm:
Johnson and friends are building a campaign, not a logical execution of Federal Laws.
CCW will occur in due time, if at all. No need to rush if it is the right thing to do.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:35 pm:
Reducing abortion down to a matter of choice robs it of it’s seriousness. Claiming that being pro-choice allows pro-life doesn’t make abortion any less of the taking of human life. Making it an argument over choice is demeaning.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:36 pm:
Has Johnson seen his new district map? I’m not sure college campuses are hotbeds of concealed carry proponents. And ironically, this hurts him with actual conservatives who support states rights too. It’s lose-lose for him.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:44 pm:
I think you have a point there 47th. I’m not pleased with this approach, and I’m certainly not alone.
However, perhaps it solidifies some kind of support for them, according to some campaign gurus. They might get some money for that view.
- Ray del Camino - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:45 pm:
How come everybody (except Word) seems to forget the opening words of the Second Amendment: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state . . .” So if you want to walk around with a pistol in your pocket to protect you from the bad guys (just like you see on TV, Gee!) then join a well-regulated militia.
- Timmeh - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:46 pm:
I don’t think that these comments are enough to make her lose her job. She’s already apologized. If you don’t think she should step down, then what more can she do?
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:46 pm:
But I think this tactic of Johnson’s is a stretch for everyone. I don’t like things done that way.
- ZC - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:49 pm:
Holy cow, Rich, you created a discussion thread that included gun control AND abortion AND Karen Lewis / CTU?
Were you -trying- to incite the flames?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:50 pm:
===Were you -trying- to incite the flames? ===
Blatant comment bait on a lazy afternoon.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:53 pm:
…and I’m home with an ill VanillaKid so I can participate.
OK - here goes -
Using the pro-choice view on the issue of abortion is like using it on the issue of slavery - “If you don’t like slavery, don’t buy a slave!”
The pro-choice argument is specious and doesn’t deal with the real issue regarding the unalienable rights of a human life in the US.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 3:55 pm:
C’Mon people!
- mokenavince - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 4:04 pm:
Lewis should follow her calling and get into stand
up comedy. Short of that I’m sorry would do.
- soccermom - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 4:08 pm:
Geez. I thought the whole point of an apology was that you were sorry. that you regretted your actions. that if you had the chance, you wouldn’t do it again. Not, “I’m sorry you are so sensitive that a few seconds out of my tirade hurt your feelings. Big lispy baby.”
- Demoralized - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 4:10 pm:
VMan:
How do you reconcile which life must be saved if the mother’s life is at stake? Do you think it is for teh government to decide who must live and who must die?
- jaranath - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 4:30 pm:
Try not to be too frustrated, Vanilla…sometimes people are tired of the game. But I’ll play a little, if you’d like: I think you run the risk of dismissing the importance of a woman’s right to self-determination, at least the way you’ve currently been framing it. That said, I also agree the larger issue is still the question of what IS a fetus, at any given stage of development. And since there’s a spectrum of variation (from one day to nine months) built in, and a ton of different ways to approach the question, we’re doomed to argue about it for centuries yet to come.
As for some conservatives’ relationship with States’ rights (and other things) there’s a song for that, but I’m afraid I’m having trouble finding a link. Ah well.
- cards fan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 4:41 pm:
Will outlawing abortion, stop abortions?
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 5:06 pm:
Well, now Johnson can run on his signature accomplishment.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-pn-house-guns-vote-20111116,0,310362.story
- Wensicia - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 5:10 pm:
Zorn thinks Lewis should resign. I don’t think anyone outside of the CPS teachers has the right to make that call. She’s their chosen representative.
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2011/11/time-to-step-aside-karen-lewis.html
- TTWSYF - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 5:28 pm:
===So, um, I thought the GOP was the states’ rights party these days?===
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus has made it clear that any states that wish to execute their right to have early primaries will lose half their delegates.
So the choice is ‘rights’ or ‘representation’.
- titan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 5:34 pm:
Wensicia - Isn’t resigning (or getting fired) the new standard for saying bad things about protected classes? It shouldn’t only apply to those on the Right, should it?
- amalia - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 5:39 pm:
and, as evidenced by the recent vote in Mississippi, the anti choicer crowd has a position that threatens the use of IVF and birth control pills, an even wider approach to give women no choice in reproductive decisions. it lost, in the South! note to anti choicers, we get that you are about stopping all sorts of reproductive choices that women may make and we are making sure that people know that.
- Skeeter - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 5:52 pm:
“One would assume you would need to ‘own’ a firearm, before one could ‘bear’ one.”
Not even close. There are a lot of things that I use but now own. Given the wording of the 2A, it is extremely possible that the intent was to allow people to carry weapons owned by the militia. To get from “bear” to “own”, you need to use a penumbra, and we know what the right thinks of penumbras.
- A Citizen - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 6:20 pm:
I,ve already got a lot of guns, but where do Iget a Penumbras and what does it look like?
- A Citizen - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 6:25 pm:
Or is it a concealed carry thingy for a woman?
- Responsa - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 7:38 pm:
With respect to the comments left here of: well, she called him to apologize, and Arne accepted— may I ask what the heck else he could have done? In his current position did he really have the option of saying “actually Karen, no I won’t accept your apology for that ugly, unprofessional, and highly personal remark”? Of course he didn’t.
It’s up to the membership, not us, to decide her fate. But an “accepted apology” defense hardly closes the matter. Nor does it cleanse the air of either the foul stench of the remark itself– or the hurt it must have caused Mr. Duncan.
- Lakeview - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 7:51 pm:
I’m a CPS parent and Chicago taxpayer who is in favor of a longer school day, a longer school year, and merit pay for good teachers. Hence, I think Karen Lewis is just dandy, because her incompetence makes it more likely that CPS will end up with exactly I want.
- Chicago J - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 8:58 pm:
I had assumed that CPS didn’t employ any speech pathologists because I’ve met lots of CPL students who talk like they’ve got a mouth full of mush.
- Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 9:22 pm:
I wonder why Johnson doesn’t lay out a bill allowing concealed carry in the Capitol Building. I wonder why he doesn’t, it would make Congress much safer, right?
- Fed Up - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 9:33 pm:
Maybe Johnson feels that if the Obama administration isnt going to allow the states the right to make their own laws stricter than federal laws IE immigration in Az and Al then why should Illinois be allowed to have stricter laws when it comes to gun control.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 10:36 pm:
Abortion is a medical procedure that ends a human life. We should as a society regulate it and treat it with as much respect as we do capital punishment.
We can determine when it is medically appropriate to take the life of a child to save a mother’s life.
We can determine when it is appropiate to end a life if it has been determined that the child is greviously misformed.
We can determine that it is appropriate to take a life if that life was conceived after a criminal act against the woman.
What we do now is in most cases completely immoral.
It is not an issue of choice - it is an issue of doing what is the moral thing to do, not take a human life.
We know too much today in science to continue denying the facts in order to accommodate our conveniences.
We need to reign in this horrible, yet occassionally necessary, medical procedure.
- Lefty Lefty - Wednesday, Nov 16, 11 @ 11:12 pm:
Vanillaman has succinctly stated what most in the pro-life movement would consider the beliefs of a baby killer.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Nov 17, 11 @ 8:37 am:
–The two decisions upheld the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. –
You read what want into them. You live in a fantasy world that ignores the country’s history of regulating, to the point of banning, carrying firearms in the public square.
If Heller and McDonald said what you claim they say, the NRA would have been in the Dirksen Building and the Illinois Supreme Court the next day demanding that Illinois’ gun laws be tossed.
They didn’t do that. And give them credit, they are very good at what they do.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, Nov 17, 11 @ 11:21 pm:
There are pro-lifers who wish to err on the side of life at all times. I can respect that.
There are pro-choicers who do not recognize the moral dilemna of having human life taken like they are getting their hair cut.
Rowe V. Wade is forty years old, and forty years out of touch with science and medicine. We know that we are taking a human life with each abortion. We know what is going on in a womb. We
cannot claim ignorance or confusion.
The time has come to have an moral adult conversation about this in the 21st Century. We cannot keep claiming to have a heart while stopping hearts when we are inconvenienced.
We are a loving society. There is room in it for the people whose lives are being taken because someone is afraid of what someone else is going to say if they find out that they, or their daughter, or their granddaughter, or someone else in their family got pregnant when they shouldn’t have.
Embarrassment shouldn’t kill people.