A Perfectly Cromulent Blog

Thinking of the children

I'd have posted about the prime-time RNC speeches earlier, but I just stopped coughing up blood. First we had Giuliani, bringing up 9-11 a mere half a dozen times while standing in front of a stirring NYC skyline in a speech Molly Ivins probably would've found better in the original German. Then came Alaska governor Sarah Palin.

It wasn't enough that she lied about her resistance to Ted Stevens' "Bridge to Nowhere," about raising taxes, and about "standing up to the oil companies" while governor - though I enjoyed the fact that both Giuliani's new wife and Cindy McCain both rose to applaud when she pointed out to the family values crowd that she was still married to her high school sweetheart. No, the best joke of the night was this line:

To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters. I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House.

Ladies and gentlemen, there you have it: Sarah Palin is going to single-handedly roll back decades of Republican disregard for child welfare and education. She's going to buck her party and urge insurance companies to increase - or even offer - coverage for speech, occupational, and autism therapies (all of which are valid treatments for those with "special needs"). She's going to tell the Republican leadership they've been wrong all these years in eroding aid to poor families and providing taxpayer money to "faith-based" organizations that won't offer their services without attempting to convert the who receive them.

Even better, she's apparently going to - wait for it - reverse her own position she held as Governor, when she slashed funding for special needs schools by 62%.

As a parent of a "special needs" child who has spent the last (almost) three years dealing with the legacy of the Republican party's utter failure to provide for the children of this state, I look forward to this 180 degree reversal in her party's doctrine, and eagerly await the arrival of this sincere, well-qualified candidate to the second-highest office in the land.

And if you believe that, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you. In Ketchikan, Alaska.

EDIT: I hadn't seen the Washington Monthly retraction noting the 62% reduction was incorrect, so while there's still plenty to get on her case about, her eucation budget isn't one of them.