Life under the Regency category archive

The Commander Guy explains.

Last year, it was discovered that a history text book used in Virginia schools was riddled with egregious errors.

Now it has resurfaced, with some of the potholes filled, but the roadbed still seems defective:

“Our Virginia” sparked controversy last fall when Carol Sheriff, a parent and College of William and Mary history professor, disputed a sentence found in the book. It read: “Thousands of Southern blacks fought in the Confederate ranks, including two black battalions under the command of Stonewall Jackson.”

Sheriff, a teacher of the Civil War, reviewed the second edition of the “Our Virginia” chapter dealing with that subject. While pleased to see many errors had been corrected, Sheriff wrote in an email that some misleading characterizations remain.

“For example,” she said, “the book might lead children to believe that slavery did not exist in the Union itself; that the North and South were entirely different from one another; or that white Northerners immediately and universally greeted the Union’s black soldiers as heroes.”

One reviewer cited in the story made a list of factual and textual errors that was over four pages long.

Now comes the state board of propaganda education wanting to let this turkey back in the schools.

It would seem to me that the publisher of this text book is more concerned with sales than with students.

Eric Cantor’s constituent disservice: RSVP Town Hall.

See The Richmonder for details.

Also, letting ’em rot.

Andy Borowitz reports:

Seismologists said today that a 5.8 magnitude earthquake centered in Virginia did less damage to Washington, D.C. than House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, also centered in Virginia.

“The earthquake and Eric Cantor originate from almost the identical point,” said Dr. Davis Logsdon of the University of Minnesota’s Seismology Institute. “But while the earthquake caused some minor shaking, there’s only one word for Eric Cantor’s impact: devastation.”

Scott Lehigh of the Boston Globe reviews documents that Eric Cantor claims support his budgetary positions and finds out that–surprise–they do not.

The principal document Cantor’s office produced to backstop his cuts-only approach actually calls for more revenues.

It doesn’t get much more revealing than that.

Follow the link for the evidence.

Beat down. Jeff Shapiro in the Richmond Times Dispatch, the most conservative newspaper of influence in Virginia (emphasis added):

Eric Cantor this past week had an opportunity to define himself for an audience beyond the Beltway as more than a rigid conservative with one word in his vocabulary: no. Instead, the U.S. House majority leader, seen as a deal breaker rather than a deal maker, may have only trivialized himself.

Having walked out of Joe Biden-led budget-and-deficit talks; undercut John Boehner on a big fix and engaged Barack Obama in verbal fisticuffs over the fine print of a possible deal, Cantor looked more the insipid pill than the professional politician. It was, David Weigel wrote for the online publication Slate, the “official Newt-ification of Eric Cantor.”

Couldn’t happen to a more deserving chap.

(Link fixed.)

See Article XI for details.

Bob Cesca asks

. . . why hasn’t anyone pressed Eric Cantor about shorting the U.S. Treasury while also refusing to vote for raising the debt ceiling?

Via BartBlog.

It’s not just a vest.

It’s not just an interest.

It is a combination thereof. See the Richmonder for more.

Funny to watch Republicans get all hissy like when they can’t get some of that guvmint money that they decry so much.

Double standards. Nay, triple even.

IOKIYAR.

Via Bob Cesca.

The Regent’s policy on women:

Keep ’em ignorant and preggers.

More here.

The email to the television station inadvertently included notes on how to spin the contents of said email. The good stuff starts about two minutes in.

(When I was testing this post yesterday, the video did not want to load. If it doesn’t load for you, go to the VBProgressives link at the bottom and watch it there.)

Via VBProgressives.

Bob Cesca comments on Eric Cantor’s casual dismissal of the soon-to-be-unemployed so I don’t have to:

Is Eric Cantor saying that it’s not his job, to create jobs? Didn’t the Republicans all run on a platform of job creation during the 2010 campaign? Isn’t repealing healthcare reform, cutting spending, defunding Planned Parenthood, and policing women’s internal organs all part of the plan to create jobs?

Afterthought:

Recent history shows that Republicans will say whatever they think voters want to hear, then go back to doing just what they were doing before: Making the rich richer and the poor poorer.