The dumbest political campaign of 2012…

The Senate seat of Texas Republican Kay Bailey Hutchinson is becoming open after Hutchinson announced her retirement a while back.  The seat should be considered a safe Republican hold, but if one Republican candidate gets his way, the Democrats would have a great chance to win the seat.

Craig James, an ESPN analyst, has decided to run for the Texas seat as a Republican.  He is a former running back of the famed “Pony Express” at SMU.  He used that experience to land College Football analyst gigs at ABC/ESPN, and at CBS.  On paper, being an analyst would be relatively safe and not be a polarizing position.  However, James has two problems.  First, James spends most of his time during College Football season outside of the state of Texas, and Texans do have a knack of not trusting people who give the perception that they are out of state.  Second, and more importantly, his actions over the last 30 years may have contributed to the demise of 2 big-time College Football Programs in the Lone Star State, a sin that many consider unforgivable in a Football-crazed state.

First, James’ time at SMU was during SMU’s peak.  It was a National Power to the point that they were a National Title threat in the late 1970s and early 1980s.  But there was a lot of seedy things going on under the surface, such as players getting paid, and shortly after James’ left, SMU was given the NCAA “Death Penalty”—a sanction that destroyed the program and has taken many years to recover from (if they ever recover).  Though James was never implicated in any of the underhanded things going on at SMU at the time, he and other members of the Dallas school during that time have been branded as contributors to SMU’s demise.

What he did a few years ago interfering with Texas Tech, however, is well-known.  Mike Leach had taken the Red Raider program from obscurity into a National power, winning 11 games in 2008.  In 2009, Leach was helping Texas Tech to another winning season, when Craig James and his son, Adam (a sophomore at Texas Tech), leveled charges against Leach that Leach mishandled a concussion that Adam had suffered.  Craig used the ESPN brand, along with Spaeth Communications, who had developed the Swift Boat Campaign to derail John Kerry’s 2004 Presidential Bid to smear Mike Leach.  That smear campaign ultimately led to Leach’s firing before the 2009 Alamo Bowl.  Leach is now suing Texas Tech, Craig James, ESPN, and Spaeth Communications, and evidence suggests that Leach has a reasonable chance to win the case.  Craig James’ handling of the situation has made him a target by many in the Texas Tech community, and stirred up the SMU faithful in the process.

So why in the name of God is James running for Senate?  Besides the reasons James says, ego is involved.  James thinks he has vast support in the state; otherwise, we wouldn’t be running in the first place.  However, many Republicans don’t want the headache of dealing with James as a candidate, and are pushing him to drop out.  Many people think this would be a good opportunity for ESPN to fire James considering he has taken a leave of absence to run.  And others think James should just disappear completely.

So, how long will James continue to run given all the headaches he’s going to have to reckon with?  As many as his ego will allow him, I guess.  Sooner or later, though, reality will catch up with him, maybe while he still has a gig left with ESPN to go back to.

The changing dynamics of education…

Recently a cartoon depicting the change of attitudes among parents, students, and teachers has been making the rounds of Facebook. In 1969, the poor grades a student would have was mostly the fault of the student in the eyes of the parents. In 2009, it was the opposite. The poor grades a student would have was mostly the fault of the teacher in the eyes of a parents.

The change of attitudes have coincided with the changing dynamics of the parent-teacher relationships. A long time ago, most parents worked with teachers to help educate their kids. Parents trusted the teachers to provide their kids with the best education possible, and when the kids were not learning properly, they focused their wrath on the kids and would maybe try to work harder with the kids to improve their grades. But there have been changes to that trust. The pressure of gaining scholarships, the increasing revelations of adult relations between kids and teachers (in real life and in Hollywood), the helicoptering parent attitudes around their kids, the pressure schools face in order to not lose government funding, the increase of social issues creeping into schools, and other factors have contributed to such an erosion of trust between parents and teachers that now the parents blame the teachers for the kids poor grades.

Ironically, many of today’s teachers and school administrators were students not that long ago. And let’s be honest: some of those once-students were not the best of the best students. Many of the once-elite students went off to work in Wall Street, at multi-billion dollar companies, become lawyers or politicians that now dictate rules to schools instead of supporting schools, or work for places that would provide more salary to them than teaching. Teachers are over-worked, underpaid, and underappreciated. So why would a once elite student want to go through their adult lives barely living from paycheck to paycheck, deal with regulations that their predecessors did not, and deal with angry students and parents who think they know better than the teachers on what the teachers should teach? Wouldn’t the elite student feel better off going somewhere else making money and not have to deal with hundreds of parents more concerned with their little Johnny or Susie getting an A?

Parents of today also don’t always pay attention to everything going on with their kids. Many parents have two jobs to work in order to afford the best for their kids and can’t always give their kids the love and support they need. They want everything: money, fame, and smart kids who get scholarships. They feel money and things will buy the kids happiness and help them learn to always get A’s. The kids are unhappy and feel they need attention one way or another. So in some situations, the kids invent the issue to help get them attention.

In short, parents and kids contribute to the problems of today. But there are also teachers who cause problems as well. The pressures of being a teacher today (money, hours, support) sometimes get the better of teachers. Some turn to alcoholism, drug use, and, in some cases, having sexual relations with their students. These extreme examples help further erode the trust parents and teachers once have. Even without extreme examples, teachers are human, too. They can possibly show favoritism in some situations to kids of friends, only helping out those who may or may not need the help, while neglecting those who really need help to learn.

So how do we solve the problems? There is no easy answer, unfortunately. It will take years, maybe even generations of hard work to regain that trust, if it can ever be regained. And it has to be hard work on all sides: from parents who take time to help their kids learn, from teachers getting the support from administrators and who avoid the temptations of the world, and from kids willing to do what it takes to become the best they can be. Maybe we never had a perfect world between students and teachers and maybe we never will, but we won’t know if we don’t try.

Is the GOP deliberately trying to lose in 2012?

As we have finished up the last of the pre-Iowa caucus debates which will begin to determine who will face President Obama on the GOP side in the Fall 2012 Presidential election, a disturbing thought has entered my head… is the GOP trying to lose in 2012 to set up regaining the White House in 2016 with a huge majorities in both houses of Congress?  It’s possible, especially when you consider how weak the GOP field is this time around.  Outside of Mitt Romney, it has largely been the C and D-list GOPers who have been vying for the nomination.  Rick Santorum was last seen getting tossed out of the Senate by an alledged pro-life Democrat.  Michelle Bachmann spends more time demanding apologies from late-night band leaders than campaigning.  Rick Perry is making George W. Bush look smart.  Herman Cain was the leading guy for 10 seconds before sexual misconduct allegations ended his run.  Ron Paul is… well, Ron Paul.  John Huntsman could probably beat Obama… if the guy could get just any love from the GOP and Tea Party folks.  And Newt?  He’s got more baggage on him than an airport claim area, and it keeps growing.

Look at who sat out the 2012 GOP Primary.  Sarah Palin, Chris Christie, Mitch Daniels, Rudy Guliani, and Mike Huckabee all decided to take a pass in this year’s primary-all better candidates than most of the current 2012 choices.  And there are other Governors who were just elected on the GOP side who are very green, but who could make a run in 2016.  Perhaps the GOP wants a Tea Party candidate who would fail against Obama to break the strong will of the Tea Party to a point in 2016 where the Tea Party might be more willing to accept a moderated selection.

Meanwhile, if Obama goes on to win re-election next year, the list of Democratic candidates in 2016 will be thin.  Vice President Biden has indicated he would take a run at President, but he will be older than Reagan when Reagan ran in 1980.  Hillary has indicated she is through running for President.  And there aren’t too many other experienced Democrats who could be a worthy successor to President Obama.  Devall Patrick of Massachusetts is a possibility, but Democrats from Massachusetts haven’t done well since Kennedy.  Martin O’ Malley might have the resources to make a run, but would a liberal from Maryland who needs 75% of Democrats in the Legislature to get anything done in Maryland work on the National Level?  Perhaps Andrew Cuomo of New York may be the ideal choice to run on top of the Democrat ticket in 2016, but they may have to deal with an Occupy group that will force the Democrats to be more liberal than they would.

At this point, the GOP seems content to let Obama win re-election so they can strengthen their position for 2016.  With an aging Democratic leadership in Congress, the Republicans knew the list of likely Presidential options will be so thin that they can focus on taking down just a few people to easily win in 2016.  Is it too difficult to imagine such a scenario?