"L.A. Unified's grim financial outlook"

Maybe reality is dripping in. This editorial is not by a member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy but by the L. A. Times.

The district’s single biggest expense is teachers — as it should be — and if significant sums have to be trimmed, it’s unlikely that can be done without some kind of hit on teachers.

Related: "Why L.A. Unified may face financial crisis even with a giant surplus this year".


MoDo's latest

Maureen Dowd, from her platform at The New York Times, provides us with another look at what Liberals have in store for us if they can just get enough votes.

She's slamming Slick Willie again because he's become quite inconvenient now for Liberals. While referring to the Monica episode, she asserts this:

The power differential between a 22-year-old intern and a 49-year-old boss makes any sexual interaction wrong. 

"[A]ny"? Really?? Can you imagine a future in which all couples seeking a marriage license will have to pass muster with a Department of Power Differentials?  Suppose she's the CEO of a major company and he's just a low-level manager for a medium size manufacturing company? Does that pass muster? No? Drat.How about she's the second-ranked women's tennis player, one of the five best of all time, and he's ranked 300-something on the men's tour? Is that O.K.? No? Double drat.

Etc. 

And since when you give liberals an inch, they demand a yard, it won't stop with "sexual interaction". What about friendship? What about conversation?? "I'm sorry, sir, but your power differential with this woman means you must not speak to her."

And, finally, Maureen disapproves of what Slick Willie did because of the power differential, and secondarily because he lied about it and induced others to lie about it, but you won't find even a tiny, perfunctory mention of another reason: it was wrong because he was married

Sheesh.


"A New NAFTA Can Help Reform the Administrative State"

Interesting idea.

But in the case of regulatory and infrastructure reform, the man in the best position to remove the filibuster as an obstacle to legislation is the president himself. How? By including regulatory and infrastructure provisions in the next version of NAFTA, triggering the Trade Promotion Authority’s filibuster-free process for enacting legislation to implement the treaty’s broad requirements.