Many years ago, I had a front row seat in observing the dynamics of a father and son that made me cringe on a regular basis. The identity of this toxic duo will not be shared with the readers, but let’s just say that the father regularly made parental decisions that I found appalling. His son was a sacred cow that I was never allowed to criticize without unpleasant consequences. Each time I pushed the envelope of free speech, I would be on the receiving end of some snarky comment like “the most important thing is that my kids know they are loved and that they can love back.” Training the kids in important things like personal responsibility, be darned! Tough love was out of the question.
Over those years, there were many calls from the son asking the dad to put out fires from some crisis created by bad decisions. “Dad, I got arrested(for an ordinary status offense),” and “Dad, I got this monster bill(for using a high-interest debit card),” and “Dad, my car was towed(for parking in a restricted area)” were just a few examples of this late teen-early 20s product of his parenting style. It was always some form of “Dad, I made a bad decision, and I need you to come get me out of trouble” that was always obliged rather than taking the tough love route.
Claremont is that son, and our legislature is the father, but Ruth Ward is being that THAT father. To the rest of the senate, I say, “Be better than THAT.” By now, most readers and long-time Granite Staters know about the reputation Claremont has created for itself over the decades. Now we have confusion being created, so voters will have difficulty paying attention to important details of the truth. I have great respect for 603 Iron Marshal (IM), but I’m going to have to be like Mr Lumbergh and disagree with IM’s editorial in support of the Ruth Ward amendment.
Formella (or his front man, the prosecutor) told the media that the Sky Meadow shooter shouted Palestine crap to create confusion. Whether or not you want to believe Formella or if he is indeed correct in saying what was said, confusion does exist. Now take your attention about 100 miles from Sky Meadow back to Claremont.
There has been some confusion about the Ruth Ward amendment, stemming from the use of the word “bailout,” and it is unclear whether this confusion was intentional. The Iron Marshall and Ian Underwood have both stated that Ruth is not making an appropriation (also known as a gift of free money) to Claremont, but rather an arrangement.
Mike Remski, in the comments to IM’s editorial, used the words “payday loan.” I agree with Remski, but I will defend the use of the word “bailout” in the sense that Ruth is the parent receiving “that phone call” from the arrested son (Claremont) and she’s serving (some of)her constituents by putting out their fire(getting the son out of jail on recognizance).
What kind of example does the Ruth Ward amendment set for other mismanaged school districts?
Let’s be clear that Claremont is NOT the responsible son saying, “Dad, you know I’ve been saving my allowance for (insert big ticket item here) and it’s on sale this week, and I would like you to advance me next week’s allowance so I can make the purchase before the sale ends.” No! Claremont is the polar opposite of that kind of thoughtful responsibility, and it’s time for the rest of the state government to stop reinforcing bad behavior. BF Skinner wouldn’t care which branch of government it is when talking about how behaviorism works, and neither should you.
