Children as Props? Shameful!

So y'all remember Stacey Campfield?  No?

He's that tool from Tennessee, the state representative who came up with the charming idea of tying benefits to poor families to how well their kids did in school.

The one who actually thinks this Dickensian notion might propel him to the White House?

Not whether the kids attended school, mind you.  Whether the kids got As or Bs or Cs.  Your family's level of aid could drop as much as 30% if your kid's math or reading scores were not on grade level, Campfield proposed, though he later amended this to say that the parents could get a waiver to this if they took a "free" parenting class.

I am putting the scare quotes around free because Campfield does not understand, obviously, the life of the working poor.  Free means one thing to Stacey Campfield, who has aides and someone to ferry him about in his SUV.  It means something else entirely to someone who is working two minimum wage jobs, both 30 hours a week, and who depends on the bus to get her there, and who has two kids at home she has to arrange childcare for.

And now a "free" class she has to attend twice a week or lose 30% of the "free" aid she needs to support those kids.

Well, today Campbell's bill got shot down (even his fellow Republicans ran from it) and worse, he had to actually talk to one of the small poor children he had been dissing so gleefully in the media and on his blog -- one of those moochers and takers he kept spitting on.

No shock here, he ran from the eight-year-old like the weasel he is.

And over on his own blog?  He mumbles like a spanked ten year old about who the real bad guys are here.

Anyone notice the parent pulled the child out of school to use her as a prop to fight against parental accountability for their children not being in school?

Yeah: because Stacey Campbell hasn't been using kids as props for, oh, a solid year now?