In her latest collection of lies and distortions known loosely as a Washington Post "column," Melanie Scarborough - the same woman who wrote "The Hyping of Heterosexual AIDS" for Moonie journal "The World and I" - essentially tells us that the sun revolves around the earth, and that it's flat to boot. Oh yeah, and evolution is a myth, fluoride in drinking water is a communist plot, and the Apollo lunar landing was staged in a Hollywood studio.Seriously, though, what on earth is Ms. Scarborough talking about in her latest screed, "Richmond's Tax-and-Spend Republican?" And why did the supposedly "liberal" Wahington Post print it? For instance, Scarborough talksa bout a "record tax increase?" Is she referring, perhaps, to the bipartisan and wildly popular package of tax cuts (to 65% of Virginians) and tax increases (to the remaining 35%) which: a) saved our state from fiscal insolvency; b) restored our AAA bond rating; c) helped make us the "best managed state in the country;" and d) allowed us to keep our commitments in education, health, transportation? Horrible, ain't it?
And what's the deal with Scarborough talking down Virginia's super-popular governor, Mark Warner, as "having won only one election and achieved only one significant legislative victory?" The first comment is utterly bizarre. Would Scarborough prefer a career politician to someone who spent most of the 1980s and 1990s building a wildly successful business (Nextel)? Is she saying that Mark Warner shouldn't be proud of the fact that he came within 120,000 votes (out of 2.4 million cast) of defeating Sen. John Warner in his first run for public offfice? Is she seriously trying to argue that Mark Warner would not have won reelection overwhelmingly as Virginia governor this past year if he had been constitutionally permitted to run? Huh?
On the second comment, is Scarborough seriously arguing that Mark Warner only achieved one thing as Governor? Is she seriously saying that Virginia is not better off, thanks to Mark Warner's leadership, on education, health care, the environment, and so many other areas? If so, she is wildly out of touch with reality, as well as with the vast majority of Virginians who know better (and who remember the mess Warner had to clean up from our last REPUBLICAN governor, Jim Gilmore).
Having attempted - but failed, miserably - to tarnish Mark Warner, Scarborough then takes on Tim Kaine, soon to be inaugurated Governor after winning a convincing, 6-point victory over Jerry Kilgore just two months ago. Her big beef with Kaine? That he "will try to saddle taxpayers with the cost of kindergarten for all 4-year-olds." According to Scarborough, "[n]othing justifies such a plan." Oh really? Is that why the non-partisan Rand Corporation did a study on this issue and found the following benefits to universal pre-school education:
? Reduced reliance on social welfare programs by the families of preschool children and by the preschool participants when they reach adulthood.
? Improved labor market outcomes for parents of preschool children and their employers.
? Enhanced educational and social experiences for peers of preschool children through effects on classrooms and neighborhoods.
? Improved health outcomes for preschool participants across life course and subsequent gains in health status for their children.
? Higher educational attainment for the children of preschool participants and related gains in well-being (e.g., health status, earnings, and so on).
? Better consumer choices and life course decisions (e.g., fertility timing and spacing) by preschool participants in adulthood.
? Higher rates of economic growth and improved competitiveness in global markets as the result of a more educated future workforce.
? Reductions in income disparities, poverty rates, and economic and social gaps across racial and ethnic groups because of improved educational attainment for preschool participants.
? Lower intangible losses from averted juvenile and adult crimes of preschool participants and reduced intangible losses from averted abuse and neglect of preschool participants.
Anyway...
Scarborough's last point, that the issue of "sprawl" (yes, she puts it in quotes to indicate her utter disdain) is not a real one, barely merits the time and effort required to debunk. Frankly, it's THAT stupid. Luckily, Waldo Jaquith has already deconstructed Scarborough on that one, so I don't have to waste my time. As Waldo writes:
Scarborough makes no effort to describe how she?d solve the sprawl problem. I can only assume that, to her mind, sprawl doesn?t exist. Hers must be a happy world.
Yes, a happy world indeed. Blissful, even. But only in the sense that "ignorance is bliss."