Astroturf Hedge Hogs Toss $$$$ into Massachusetts Charter School Expansion Ballot Issue - UPDATED

Irlande Plancher, 51, a Haitian immigrant in Hyde Park who sent three children to district schools and one to a charter, is voting no.
Ms. Plancher, a registered nurse, was glad her youngest child had the charter option. But with four charter schools in her area, she has seen two public schools close. She said she worried that adding more charters would further crimp the traditional schools.
“I think whatever we have is enough,” she said. “We cannot pick and choose which kids we educate and leave the rest out.”... NY Times, Trump-Clinton? Charter Schools Are the Big Issue on Massachusetts’ Ballot -- Nov. 6, 2016

The hedge hogs have tossed $23 million (so far) into the campaign, forcing the forces of good to come up with a little more than half that - a perfect example of misreporting was Mike Antonucci's report listing only the mostly $13 million in union money, Unions Account for 99.4% of Contributions to Keep Massachusetts Charter Cap but ignoring the massive $22 million coming from mostly outside orgs. I usually respect Mike's work even though coming from the right, but not this time.

Diane Ravitch summarizes the latest Mass. poll, which is worth taking a look at - scroll to page 11.  Diane Ravitch's blog
Latest Poll on Question 2 in Massachusettshttp://www1.wne.edu/news/2016/11/z-polling_tables_FINAL_11_04_16.pdf

Diane reports:

Question 2 is losing in every demographic category except older Republicans.

Whites and blacks oppose Question 2 by similar proportions.

Younger voters (ages 18-39) overwhelmingly oppose it, by 71-21.

If the trends hold, this will be a massive and humiliating defeat for the corporate reformers, who have spent more on this election (at least $22 million) than on any education referendum anywhere. They won't miss the $22 million, but they will have sustained a major setback in their plans for privatization.

Let's hope the polls hold up.

NY Times' Dave Leonhardt backed Question 2:  Schools That Work.  I read somewhere a piece that took him to task but can't remember where -- let me know if you find it so I can update.****

*****Response from Pete Farrugio:

You mention the NY Times’ op-ed writer in this piece on Massachusetts’ pro-charter Question 2, apropos of his pro-charter column in Sunday’s paper

http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2016/11/astroturf-hedge-hogs-toss-into.html

(You have a link to his op-ed in the piece)

You ask for a reference to when somebody took him to task. I found this article about his faux-economist credentials and his consistent support for the right wing austerity hawks. Although it’s not specifically about education, it does reveal him to be another camouflaged neoliberal, like the creeps in Dems for Education Reform (DFER)
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2015/01/david-leonhardt-uses-new-york-times-spread-pete-petersons-debt-hysteria.html

The timing of his Boston referenced op-ed just before election day is an example of the NYT’s pro-DFER bias (usually spearheaded by Brent Staples)

As you say, Jersey Jazzman is the only one with a good criticism of Boston charters available online just now

http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2016/11/thoughts-on-question-2-and-charter.html

The point in Leonhardt’s propaganda piece that gets me most annoyed is his contention that the MIT study on Boston charters “proves” that the successful charters (test scores) don’t cream for more competent students, they take everybody. Minorities, English Learners, special ed, etc. We’ve seen this claim so many times in defense of charters around the US, and it’s bullcrap. Jersey Jazzman can’t seem to find the data on this because it’s restricted to insiders; BUT,  he does make the bigger point that the struggle to get kids admitted in a lottery situation is a de facto selection mechanism for students with highly involved parents, a BIG motivational factor

Hope this helps

Mass Gov Chalie Baker supports charter expansion and came to the Manhattan Institute here in NYC a few weeks ago to push his agenda. Leonie and crew were outside to protest:

I protested with AQE and the Hedge Clippers folks, outside an event at the Harvard Club, where Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker was speaking about the referendum to raise the cap on charter schools in his state called Question 2.

This effort has been funded with millions of dollars in "dark money," and we were there to make them feel uncomfortable.  Jeremiah Kittredge of Families for Excellent Schools walked into the building while we were chanting, "Governor Baker epic fail! Our public schools are not for sale!"  FES has poured at least $13.5 million into this election -- without disclosing its donors, although one can assume the money comes mostly from the usual suspects -- Walton family members and NYC hedge fund operators.

After the meeting, Baker was scheduled to meet with Bloomberg, trolling for even more bucks -- after Bloomberg had already given $240,000 to the effort.  Meanwhile, all over the country, from California to New York, Washington to Georgia, billionaires are trying to buy  school board races, judgeship elections, referendums, and control of the NY State Senate - all with the same nationwide goal of privatizing public schools, and wresting them from democratic control. 

Boston Mayor Martin Walsh, a charter supporter, has taken a stand against in one of the best pieces I've seen: Vote ‘no’ on Question 2.

While the charter lobby has tried to manipulate the black community, there has been pushback:

While the Urban League and many black educators support the ballot measure, the N.A.A.C.P. opposes it and has called for a moratorium on charters, saying they worsen segregation. Black Lives Matter in Cambridge has also come out against the measure.

Finally, Bernie takes a stand on charters:

Bernie Sanders claims charters let Wall Street ‘hijack’ education -- .......Boston Globe.

And  Jersey Jazzman 

• Thoughts On Question 2 and Charter School Expansion

• More About Attrition Rates in Boston Charter Schools

 And more

Other money comes from wealthy individuals from out-of-state. Arkansas' Alice Walton, who runs a family foundation funded by the proceeds from Wal-Mart, donated $710,000, while her brother Jim Walton gave $1.1 million. Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg contributed $490,000....
A lot of the money comes from individuals in the financial industry, generally working in Boston. The investigative news outlet International Business Times reported that financial executives who manage money for Massachusetts state pension funds contributed $778,000 to groups backing Question 2.
There are also outside education reform groups who have contributed huge sums of money to the campaign. Most notably, the New York-based Families for Excellent Schools gave $15.6 million.
Groups like Families for Excellent Schools are nonprofits that do not have to disclose their donors.
"This is a truly unprecedented financial push by the charter school industry and their billionaire backers to buy our election with untraceable money whose source we will never know," said Juan Cofield, president of the New England Area Conference of the NAACP and chairman of the No on Question 2 campaign, in a statement.

Does Green Party Deserve Our Vote? Conservative Case for Clinton vs. Left Case for Stein

I left this comment at

gadflyonthewallblog

Voting Third Party is Not a Wasted Vote – Voting First Party Is

If the Green Party which has been around for a while actually did any real grassroots organizing and showed some promise of building roots as a 3rd party. But what has happened since Nader in 2000? No movement at all. So your argument is a pipe dream. Yes it will never end - 2020 we will face the same thing. But the Bernie movement offers something different. Can we build grassroots progressivism in the Democratic Party? Probably not. But unless there is a massive breakaway party from the Dems after this election voting Green (where is Jill Stein between elections?) is even more wasteful than voting for Hillary.

There are 2 pieces worth reading below and surprisingly Frum, the conservative makes more sense than Singer from the left's argument for 3rd party - which by the way, I've voted for in most presidential elections, including for Nader in 2000.

But not this time.

What message are we sending to vote 3rd party? What message did Ross Perot send with the largest 3rd party vote in a long time? Or Nader? Actually the Bush presidency has killed the 3rd party option.

It is not just about keeping Trump out of office but also about why should I back the Green Party and Jill Stein given their inability to have any impact over so many years? If they had shown they could make even a tiny dent I would help build them up -- but things start at the grassroots level - I will vote Green for any down party candidates.

Is the struggle right now an attempt to change the Democratic party - or organize inside for a split? 3rd parties just don't seem to get any traction.

But yes there is a Trump factor. And if David Frum can make a case for voting for Hillary despite enormous disagreements, people on the left can also make a similar case. Yes we don't trust her, etc. But we also have the remnant of the Bernie movement - if Obama had taken a strong left stand he wouldn't have been vilified any less than taking the center neo-liberal stand. As the 2018 midterm elections and the 2020 elections are in the cards and the Republicans block everything, the Bernie people must press that only a progressive left agenda even if just from the bully pulpit, would have a chance of salvaging anything other than a disaster in the coming years. That this election is so close means that next time there is little chance Hillary would win with a slick right winger running. So maybe the goal is the make her a one term president if she wins and find a viable candidate next time.

Maybe it is time for the left/progressive to pile into their local Democratic Party machines and raise some hell.

Voting Third Party is Not a Wasted Vote – Voting First Party Is

https://gadflyonthewallblog.wordpress.com/2016/11/04/voting-third-party-is-not-a-wasted-vote-voting-first-party-is/comment-page-1/#comment-5659

The Conservative Case for Voting for Clinton

Why support a candidate who rejects your preferences and offends your opinions? Don’t do it for her—do it for the republic, and the Constitution.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/dont-gamble-on-trump/506207/

Exploring Post Nov. 8 Landscape and Threats: Trump Attracts Veterans and Some Former Obama Supportors

Can military vets who support Trump end up as a closet private army? Will be get a home-grown version of Germany's Brown shirts? Will vets and right wing extremists become a post-election para-military force? Police and FBI hate Hillary. We know in other countries the police forces often become the leaders of these type of forces.

That was my thought when I read a piece in today's Times:

Veterans, Feeling Abandoned, Stand by Donald Trump

This is a follow-up to my earlier post today on the impact of the defense budget on our economy and our lives - Massive Defense Spending or Why We Have Lousy Infrastructure Compared to Other Nations.

I neglected to include that what I mean by infrastructure includes social and safety net infrastructure which comes under attack by right and also came under attack by the Clinton centrist Democrats.
Looking backward, the era of building a safety net ended with Lyndon Johnson and was ruined by the Vietnam War.

Thinking post election: If Clinton gets in she continues the same tone-deaf aggressive American presence world-wide. Trump, though not coherent, does offer some possibility of the first change in policy since WWII - though of course I don't believe him. But others do - The vets make some important points - how Trump has touched on issues ignored by both parties. How they don't feel comfortable in the left anti-war movements which they may feel disparages their efforts and calls them war criminals. Trump, as I pointed out this morning, has been willing to blame George Bush and Republicans for the disaster in Iraq.

And then there is this piece in today's Times:

Some Who Saw Change in Obama Find It Now in Donald Trump

New York Times‎ - 

Mr. Trump has even attracted some black voters who were inspired by Mr. Obama's ... the headline: Some Voters Attracted to Obama's Call for Change Find It Now in Trump.http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/03/us/politics/obama-donald-trump-voting.html

Do not disparage the type of appeals that work for Trump - and especially people on the left. Bernie touched on some of the same issues. If a coalition could be build outside both party structures we may be on to something, though the chances of that are almost nil -- but in today's world I'll take "almost nil."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/03/us/politics/donald-trump-veterans.html?_r=0

Where Have You Gone Franklin Roosevelt (and Bernie Sanders), Our Nation Turns Its Lonely Eyes to You (all)

Ahhh, I remember those primary days when Bernie people were vilified and mocked for supporting a "can't win" candidate by Hillary people. That we are sweating it out so close to the election shows that Hillary's flaws were way worse than Bernie. I know, he would have come under severe attack but he knows how to handle and deflect such attacks by focusing on policy and pointing the way to a better future. All we get from Hillary are desperate attacks on Trump. In discussion with people on the election I can give better responses to questions than Hillary ever gives. Somone said to me last weekend, "Why doesn't she say that?" Duh!

Here is the column I submitted to the Wave this week though they were short on space so it may not go. We need a New Deal.

Where Have You Gone Franklin Roosevelt (and Bernie Sanders), Our Nation Turns Its Lonely Eyes to You (all)
By Norm Scott

Nov. 1, 2016
I am writing this on a Tuesday, one week before the election but due to space limitations in the Nov. 4 edition of The Wave you may be reading this a week later. No matter who wins or loses our troubles are just beginning. As I head towards my 72nd birthday, it’s going to be touch and go as to whether the world as we know it comes to an end before I do.

But look on the bright side. Can it be worse today than it was in the years after the 1929 stock market crash on October 29 – Black Tuesday (ironically “Sandy Storm Day” 4 years ago)? Will Nov. 8 be know as “Black Tuesday II”? For half the nation it will.

Are we in that bad a shape considering the current 5% unemployment rate? Since so many conspiracy theorists don’t believe anything the gomint says, double that to 10%. In the years after 1929 we reached 30% unemployment and a catastrophic depression that lasted a decade until Hitler’s “Make Germany Great Again” campaign led to WWII in 1939, resulting in 60 million dead, roughly 3% of the world’s population. That’ll break the back of a depression. Hitler was also quite ingenious in cutting Germany’s unemployment rate. He began by ordering all women to stop working. Neat. Maybe with the war on women going on in political campaigns today we can revisit that and watch the economy boom.

In 1932, FDR was elected to the first of his 4 terms and due to the blame Republicans incurred for the depression – a whole lot of Democrats were swept into office with him, thus giving him years to work some Keynesian economics magic that put people to work (Civil Conservation Corps to deal with infrastructure) while also establishing a safety net (social security, support for unions) that is the basis of what we have today. FDR even tried to establish a health care system but as opposition from the Republican right grew he gave up. He was branded a communist when in fact he saved the nation for capitalism – New Deal regulated capitalism.

Bernie Sanders offered an expanded version of the New Deal and if he were out there as a choice today there would be entirely different discussions taking place. After the election, no matter who wins, the left must take Bernieism and reinvent FDR’s New Deal.

There is good news for supporters of one of the candidates. The Crusader, a prominent newspaper of the Ku Klux Klan, under the banner “Make America Great Again,” endorsed a candidate for president.

Norm blogs at ednotesonline.com

Massive Defense Spending or Why We Have Lousy Infrastructure Compared to Other Nations

The cost of running these military operations and the wars they support is extraordinary, around $900 billion per year, or 5 percent of US national income, when one adds the budgets of the Pentagon, the intelligence agencies, homeland security, nuclear weapons programs in the Department of Energy, and veterans benefits. The $900 billion in annual spending is roughly one-quarter of all federal government outlays....The Fatal Expense of American Imperialism, Boston Globe

Another gem discovered by Michael Fiorillo.

As the Cold War was ending, the United States was beginning a new era of wars, this time in the Middle East. The United States would sweep away the Soviet-backed regimes in the Middle East and establish unrivalled US political dominance. Or at least that was the plan.

.  .  .

THE QUARTER CENTURY since 1991 has therefore been marked by a perpetual US war in the Middle East, one that has destabilized the region, massively diverted resources away from civilian needs toward the military, and helped to create mass budget deficits and the buildup of public debt.

Both Dems and Republicans have been in agreement on massive defense spending which few seem to disagree with.  Both parties just gave Israel $37 billion for the next 10 years. When my right wing cousin living in Jerusulem tells me how great it is there I reply it's partly on our backs since that is $37 billion they don't have to spend.

And we give at least a billion to Egypt and loads of money to many other countries. There is some irony in that Trump has drifted somewhat from both parties' program, though as expected, incoherently. Since Kennedy Democrats have feared being labeled soft on defense - he ran criticizing Eisenhower for letting defenses lapse - and then dragged us into Vietnam because he didn't want to seem soft on communism.

There is no way these numbers move under a Hillary admin. Under Trump, just chaos. Republicans will never let him touch this even if he wanted to. And he may well double down. Either way, bridges will be falling down.

The Fatal Expense of American Imperialism

Published on

Monday, October 31, 2016

by

The Boston Globe

by

Jeffrey D. Sachs

23 Comments

The scale of US military operations is remarkable. And deplorable.

The single most important issue in allocating national resources is war versus peace, or as macroeconomists put it, “guns versus butter.” The United States is getting this choice profoundly wrong, squandering vast sums and undermining national security. In economic and geopolitical terms, America suffers from what Yale historian Paul Kennedy calls “imperial overreach.” If our next president remains trapped in expensive Middle East wars, the budgetary costs alone could derail any hopes for solving our vast domestic problems.

The Hidden Cost of Race - Tne New Yorker

I've had this powerful article on hold for a few weeks. With all the catering to the white class Trump people, here is a piece that drills down on race and economics. If you have even a fleeting thought that the victim is to blame, examine your inner (or outer) racism.

The Widening Racial Wealth Divide

It would take black Americans two hundred and twenty-eight years to have as much wealth as white Americans have today.

By James Surowiecki

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/the-widening-racial-wealth-divide

“Race still determines too much,” Hillary Clinton said, in last week’s debate with Donald Trump. It “often determines where people live, determines what kind of education in their public schools they can get, and, yes, it determines how they’re treated in the criminal-justice system.” She could have added that it has a profound effect on how much money Americans have. Our racial wealth divide, as it’s often called, is enormous, and, fifty years after the civil-rights movement, the gap is growing.

Everyone knows that wealth is unequally distributed. The work of Thomas Piketty has made this a mainstream concern. But the magnitude of the gap between white and black Americans is on a different scale. According to a recent report from two progressive think tanks, CFED and the Institute for Policy Studies, white households own, on average, seven times as much wealth as African-American households (and six times as much as Latino ones). The Forbes 100 billionaires are collectively as rich as all black Americans combined. At current growth rates, it would take black Americans two hundred and twenty-eight years to have as much wealth as white Americans have today.

Some of the reasons are clear: the unemployment rate among black Americans is roughly twice that of whites, and black people earn, on average, between twelve and twenty-two per cent less than white people with similar education and experience. But the wealth gap between black and white Americans is much bigger than the income gap, thanks to a toxic combination of institutionalized discrimination, persistent racism, and policies that amplify inequality. As Thomas Shapiro, a sociologist at Brandeis and the co-author of the seminal book “Black Wealth/White Wealth,” told me, “History and legacy created the racial gap. Policies have maintained it.” Together, they contribute to what he’s called “the hidden cost of being African-American.”

Start with history. Beginning in the New Deal and on into the postwar years, the federal government invested heavily to help ordinary Americans buy homes and go to school, via programs like the Federal Housing Administration and the G.I. Bill. That fuelled an economic boom and fostered the growth of a prosperous middle class. But black Americans received little of this assistance. 

Redlining by banks and by government agencies prevented black families from buying homes in white neighborhoods; in a thirty-year period, just two per cent of F.H.A. loans went to families of color. G.I. Bill benefits went disproportionately to white veterans. Black agricultural and domestic workers were excluded from Social Security until the fifties. As Dedrick Asante-Muhammad, the co-author of the CFED/I.P.S. report, told me, “Massive government investment helped create an American middle class. But it was a white American middle class.”

The effects of this history are still with us, because wealth, unlike income, accumulates and can be passed down from generation to generation. If you have less wealth to start with, you’ll likely spend any added income on bills or paying down debt rather than saving or investing it. A 2013 study co-authored by Shapiro found that for white families every dollar increase in income yields an increase of $5.19 in wealth; for black households the figure is just sixty-nine cents.

More important, discrimination, though no longer legal, is still pervasive. It holds down black incomes and has a huge impact on homeownership—which Shapiro identifies as “the largest driver of the racial wealth gap.” Only forty-one per cent of black Americans own their homes, compared with seventy-one per cent of whites, and black homeowners earn a much smaller return on their property. Because they are less likely to inherit money or get family help buying a home, they make smaller down payments and, on average, buy houses eight years later in life, leaving less time for the investment to appreciate. House prices in majority-black neighborhoods have also risen less than those in comparable majority-white ones. As Asante-Muhammad told me, “White people still do not generally want to live in a neighborhood that’s more than twenty to twenty-five per cent black.” That means fewer buyers, which holds house prices down. Shapiro has found that housing segregation costs black families tens of thousands of dollars in home equity.

Government policies also widen the gap. The most important of these are the mortgage-interest and other real-estate tax deductions, which save you more the bigger your mortgage and the higher your income-tax rate. They cost the government north of a hundred and thirty billion dollars a year, more than seventy per cent of which goes to the richest twenty per cent of Americans. Money that could fund affordable housing, income subsidies, and allowances for first-time homeowners instead just helps rich people pay for their houses.

Closing the racial wealth gap would require radical measures, like reparations, which few politicians will discuss. But what’s really dismal is that even reforms that could keep the gap from getting wider—ending the mortgage-interest deduction, challenging residential segregation—are politically toxic. The attention now being paid to the racial wealth divide is a sign that some things have changed. The absence of the topic from the political conversation shows that most things haven’t. ♦

School Scope: How Democrats and Republicans Lost the Working Class Leading to Trumpism

I had two pieces in The Wave this week.

Norm in The Wave
http://www.rockawave.com/node/235427?pk_campaign=Newsletter

-->

School Scope: How Democrats and Republicans Lost the Working Class Leading to Trumpism

By Norm Scott

A number of articles have been published on the Trump appeal to the white working class which used to be solidly Democratic and often pro-union. There is no way I can fully cover this issue in a short column but I want to touch on a few points and include links for those readers who want to delve deeper. Both parties bear responsibility which is why Trump supporters reject the traditional Republican Party which has been pro-free trade and anti-union. The Dems have been ostensibly pro-union but in reality have done little for unions since they came under attack in the first days of Ronald Regan in the early 1980s. (I’ll explore how the Dem betrayal, especially regarding their support of the union busting charter schools, undermined teacher unions in a future post.)

Let’s look at free trade. It was the left and some unions that rose up in November1999 to protest globalization, leading to 40,000 people protesting and riots in Seattle at the WTO conference. (Wiki at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Seattle_WTO_protests). China’s admission to the WTO at the end of 2001 (under the Bush administration) basically led to the wipe out of the American steel (and coal) industry since China could make steel much cheaper and efficiently (the American steel industry had not upgraded for decades). A lot of Trump support comes from the areas where people were affected. Cheap Chinese furniture also wiped out the entire North Carolina furniture industry along with others.

NAFTA, which was pushed hard by the Clintons and the Republicans, led to the movement of industry to Mexico with no penalty on the corporations. There are estimates that at least 3 million jobs were lost. On the other hand, free trade has allowed the American consumer to buy cheap at the cost of American jobs. So there is a yin-yang. Now this is not the first time that our industries have been savaged. Both my parents were garment workers and my father (a presser) was still doing some work into the early 1970s as that industry was on life-support. Some industries are gone due to technology (printing). With 80% of our jobs being service, Trump’s promise to bring back dead or dying manufacturing is a myth.  The coming threat is that service jobs are being savaged by robots and technology. The largest growth of jobs currently are low wage home health care workers. As I reach my dotage I expect to be taken care of by a home health care robot, a long-term threat to even these jobs.

The failure of both parties is evident in both NAFTA and the WTO, both of which have their merits in lowering consumer costs and keeping inflation down, but in not taking good care of the massive number of workers affected by increasing the safety net. European workers have also been negatively affected but they have a much stronger safety net. Strong unions are a reason and since they have been weakened by Republican attacks and Democratic inaction, the safety net here is weak and left millions of people vulnerable. That was why Bernie Sanders, who offered coherent programs, was also so popular in areas where Trump is also strong.

Even though I find Donald Trump abhorrent, some of the points he raises are very valid and resonate with the non-deplorable segment of his supporters. We were at a family wedding this past weekend with some Trump supporters and did get to hear their reasoning, in one case due to how negatively they were affected by Obamacare, a very legitimate point. My relative recently reached 65 and is now on Medicare which he loves. My response was that even though a flawed plan – we agreed that the insurance companies basically wrote the bill in a way to maximize their profits – I did try to point out that if  the Republicans had tried to fix what was wrong instead of spending 6 years trying to kill Obamacare things might be working a little better. He pointed out that Obama was so desperate to get something passed he was willing to accept any piece of crap and is defending that piece of crap for his “legacy.” But I don’t really want to defend Obama care since I’m for a single payer system – Medicare for all – and Obama pretty much gave up that ghost from day 1 because the insurance companies would have lobbied that to death.

Now there is no little irony in that my relative loves single payer and I believe the entire nation would love single payer if it were gradually extended. (There are ways to pay for it and remember that every advanced Western nation has such a system – and rumors that people die under it because of long waits is belied by examining the death rates of these countries.) Remember, most people are insured by their employer, not Obama care. More irony is that early assaults on Hillary Clinton began when she was assigned the job under her husband of shepherding in a health care system in the early 90s and was savaged for urging that it be single payer. She has apparently learned her lesson and came off to the right of Bernie Sanders on this issue.

If interested in exploring some ideas raised, here are some links.

A left-leaning current NYC teacher and former West Point grad who served in Iraq writes:

Obama's (and Hillary's) Capital "P" Pragmatists --  http://provocationsblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/obamas-and-hillarys-capital-p.html?m=1.

IN THE HEART OF TRUMP COUNTRY

West Virginia used to vote solidly Democratic. Now it belongs to Trump. What happened?

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/in-the-heart-of-trump-country

Trump: Tribune Of Poor White People | The American Conservative

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/trump-us-politics-poor-whites/

Check out this hot book: J.D. Vance - 'Hillbilly Elegy,' a Tough Love Analysis of the Poor Who Back Trump and "Deer Hunting With Jesus" by Joe Bageant about the southern white working class.

Norm blogs at ednotesonline.com

CB 14 Education Committee Meets

http://www.rockawave.com/news/2016-10-28/Community/CB_14_Education_Committee_Meets.html

 

By Norm Scott

Community Board 14’s Education Committee and School District 27’s Community Education Council (the successor to the pre-Bloomberg local school boards) have initiated a series of meetings aimed to attract parents from every Rockaway school where they get an opportunity to share issues of concern regarding their schools.

The joint committees will follow up with politicians and Department of Education officials as an advocate for the schools. One common theme that emerged is the school safety issue around the schools -- from broken sidewalks to unsafe traffic patterns. Some schools don’t have an after school program. Another has seen a major spike in children from Central America with little or no English in the home yet have not received the services needed to address this issue. Another issue that emerged was the question of how many homeless children from shelters attend Rockaway schools, as these children often need a high degree of services and schools with high numbers are under resourced. While the numbers of shelter children are not high, it was pointed out that there are a high number recently of shelter students who have moved into housing in Rockaway, a sign that schools with these children may need some extra support in assisting with the transition.

CB14, whose members are appointed by elected officials, addresses a wide variety of concerns related to Rockaway and education is often left on the margins. The activation of the education sub-committee in reaching out to CEC 27 should bring more focus on the schools.

On SLTs: UFT/Unity Back Farina Over Rank and File and Leonie

UFT bear in hibernation on SLTs

Theoretically, School Leadership Teams had the potential to curb the power of principals. In reality, SLTs enhance their power and the UFT in its zeal to back the Farina admin, after supporting a parent lawsuit under BloomKlein, have gone dormant on the issue.

In a recent post I asked: Why Does DOE Fight Open Meetings? What is Farina Hiding?

Also see Leonie Haimson's blog:

A busy day: Protesting billionaires pushing charter schools & then winning our lawsuit vs the DOE on School Leadership Team meetings

Michael Fiorillo had the answer:

The DOE fought this because it doesn't want the public to see that SLT meetings are a sham, a way for the Principal to work her/his will on the school, with the ostensible (but largely meaningless) participation of parents, students and teachers.

And James Eterno ties the UFT eternal support for whatever Carmen wants Carmen gets:

The UFT, in its recent "We don't publicly take on de Blasio-Farina-CSA" incarnation, did not join the parents in the 2014 lawsuit. However, the Union should now use its resources to teach parents and teachers on SLT's how to use their authority as part of the governance structure of schools.

Good luck with that.

James continued:

As for the city-DOE, they can appeal again but their chances of prevailing cannot be that great now that five judges have ruled against them. We'll let Leonie have the last word:

"The law is crystal clear that School Leadership Teams are public bodies, with an important governmental role to play. Parents and the public have a crucial stake in SLT decisions, when it comes to class size, the use of technology, or any other school-based policies. Both the Supreme Court and now the Appellate Court have ruled that these meetings must be open to the community at large. Any attmpt by the DOE or principals to ignore this decision, subvert it or appeal it to a higher court would be unwise, would further delay the public interest and would waste precious taxpayer funds that are far better used in improving our schools," concluded Leonie Haimson, Executive Director of Class Size Matters.

I'm waiting for the day when Leonie has had enough of the UFT bullshit and slams them publicly.

Randi, the Fairest (Labor leader) of them all --WikiLeaks on Hillary Campaign and Randi

“This might annoy Trumka and Lily,” Budzinski wrote. “But honestly, Randi’s early endorsement deserves a lot of credit.” A staffer responded, “We will really upset folks if this feels contrived as part of a big plan that is taking on Trumka.” 

What The Clinton Campaign Talks About When It Talks About Labor: Emails show what the left can expect from a Clinton presidency....  Based on the hacked emails released by WikiLeaks so far, here’s a breakdown of the informal pecking order, from the bottom of the pile — those organizing hourly workers at Walmart and fast-food chains — to the top, where major union presidents get plenty of time at the candidate’s ear.... Buzzfeed on wikileaks report

The coziness between Weingarten and the Clinton camp even led to worries over the appearance of favoring her over other labor heavyweights, like the leaders of the AFL-CIO union federation and National Education Association, another teachers’ union.
In July 2015, Budzinski exchanged emails with the campaign on the optics of having Weingarten introduce Clinton at an upcoming labor reception, worrying that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and NEA President Lily Eskelsen García might feel upstaged.
“This might annoy Trumka and Lily,” Budzinski wrote. “But honestly, Randi’s early endorsement deserves a lot of credit.” A staffer responded, “We will really upset folks if this feels contrived as part of a big plan that is taking on Trumka.”
Podesta concurred: “I think this is actually a problem. More natural if she takes a couple questions and Randi is recognized in that setting. If we want to avoid that, ie questions, I think best to just to recognize her. Otherwise, very hard not to piss people off.”
Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook agreed, writing, “it’s going to create tension if Randi gets special attention.” Ultimately, Weingarten did not end up introducing Clinton, who instead gave the union chief a shout-out in her speech.
Tuesday, Weingarten told BuzzFeed News, “You see the kind of bumping and grinding in these emails that you would normally see in a race.”
“Frankly, people were really really spirited,” she said. “Both the Hillary and Bernie supporters. And I’m really grateful that most of us have come together, including Bernie. We were very proud of what we did in July, we’re really proud of Hillary, and we’re proud of what’s going on now.”

 https://www.buzzfeed.com/coralewis/what-the-clinton-campaign-talks-about-when-it-talks-about-la?utm_term=.ylkb2Gkj2#.ju3NQ4AdQ

Mike keeps the goodies coming.

Why Does DOE Fight Open Meetings? What is Farina Hiding?

Holy charter school-like secrecy!

Leonie Haimson and others have led the fight to open up school leadership team meetings to public scrutiny. Yet despite losing in court - twice- the de Blasio and Farina admin continues to fight the open meeting law. Why? What could possibly be discussed as SLT meetings that would be of concern?

Leonie proclaims: Victory at last! NY Appellate Court Affirms School Leadership Team Meetings are Open to the Public 

Some people say that the DOE under deB and Farina is little changed from the way it operated under Bloomberg. Our UFT leaders may beg to differ since they think Farina and deB are just hunky dory.

More details at Leonie's blog.

Jeff Bryant: What New Challenges To The Charter School Industry Reveal

“Not only have charters consistently overpromised on the academic deliverables, but they have also introduced a business model into a noncommercial public arena that encourages nepotism, self-dealing, and self-enrichment based on diverting taxpayer funds and government-backed revenues,” the report concludes. “Americans are beginning to catch on,” the report suggests. So should the charter school industry.... Who controls our schools?

Take a look at this pdf and read an excerpt below by Jeff Bryant.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.alternet.org/images/Who_Controls_Our_Schools_PDF_Ebook_1_1.pdf

What New Challenges To The Charter School Industry Reveal

OCTOBER 20, 2016

Jeff Bryant

Marking a 25th anniversary, charter schools and the industry that’s become synonymous with these schools expected big things in 2016, with the help of continued growth and funding, recent legislation lifting regulations and opening up new markets, and a mostly favorable regard for these schools among the public.

Making America Great Again – For White Supremacists: Norm in The Wave

I've been reading too much right wing crap in the Wave, our local

Rockaway paper,  that doesn't get responded to. People are pushing local Republican candidates who must be held accountable for the fundamental beliefs of the party they are representing. No worries, Democrats also have to be held accountable for abandoning unions and the working class. Maybe this week's edition.

Published in The Wave, October 21, 2016

Making America Great Again – For White Supremacists

School Scope

By Norm Scott

I’ve always been bothered by the fact that there was never a mainstream presidential candidate that neo-Nazi, anti-Semitic, white supremacist, racist, misogynists could feel comfortable supporting. Now, with Donald Trump as the Republican nominee, finally, our long national nightmare is over.

Now this is not to say that the majority of the 40 percent of the American public that still supports Trump are any of these things, but if I were a Trump supporter I would certainly think about what attracts people who wear white sheets and hoods when they go out to dinner to the candidate they support.

Since the Trump kitty-cat tape was released we have seen some Republican leaders abandoning Trump. I find that funny, given all the other negatives attached to Trump. I mean what’s grabbing a crotch or two - or 10 when you put everything in context? They bring up the past. Didn’t Bill Clinton do a lot of grabbing? They tied up the entire country for a year over impeachment over the blue dress. And they bring up all those Clinton women and how Hillary attacked their credibility. But when women come out of the woodwork Republicans tell us how they are either not credible or “why bring up the past” when they feel perfectly comfortable bringing up 30 years of the Clintons’ past with every single conspiracy “believable.” Hillary murdered people you know. And ate babies. And probably assassinated JFK when she was in high school.

When Hillary’s 30,000 email deletions are brought up we often bring up the millions of emails the Bush administration deleted to cover their war crimes. My Republican friends reply, “Why do you always bring up Bush” who drove this country into the biggest depression since the ‘30s with lies about weapons of mass destruction. Republican “values.”

You see, this is not just about the values, or lack thereof that Trump brings to the table but the general view of people who decide to attach themselves to the Republican Party, which is as far from Abraham Lincoln as we can get. Trump said he would like a Supreme Court judge like the late Antonin Scalia, known as someone who adhered to the original constitution. Remember Hillary’s somewhat dubious claim at the debate that she was referring to Lincoln’s public and private actions in getting the 13th amendment banning slavery enacted? Prior to that the constitution so revered by Scalia counted every black slave as 3/5 of a person for purposes of taxes and representation. Our white supremacist Trump supporters must be hoping for a return to the good old days when America was great and we had a fugitive slave act. The Republican dominated Supreme Court has already weakened the voting rights amendment until a right wing Republican court takes them away.

Republicans generally value the life of an unborn fetus - until the day it is born and then it’s “go screw yourself” especially if you are poor or Black. Read some of the letters in The Wave or other right wing articles. Let’s go back to the good old days where women used coat hangers to abort a fetus. "The poor live off us while the corporate welfare and enormous costs of defense and corporate welfare are good uses of our money." Republican “values.”

Republicans don’t like big government – or any government, especially when it comes to helping the poor. Unless they need the government to bail them out. Let’s get government out of our lives – unless it means taking away a woman’s right to choose or stopping gay marriage. Remember the good old days not all that long ago where it was illegal in many states for a black and white person to get married. Make America great again.

I have a relative who says we have to cut government, clearly thinking of that welfare queen with three kids living high off the land in the projects. When I point out that he works for a defense department major contractor that is almost solely funded by the government he goes silent. Republican “values.”

Republicans like war but not taxes that might pay for the wars they like – or even for keeping the trains running or bridges from falling down. Super Trump supporter, New Jersey governor Chris Christie, a paragon of Republicanism, a Mussolini wannabee, couldn’t keep the Jersey trains running on time. Starve the NJ transportation system while keeping the NJ gas tax 30 cents lower than the rest of the nation so he could say he didn’t raise taxes. It took a woman dying in the recent Hoboken train accident to shake this guy loose and pass a gas tax.

Republicans think global warming is a hoax. Gurgle, gurgle as sea levels rise and we set new heat index records every year. Republican “values.”

Trump humps coal, the dirtiest fuel that polluted so many cities for a century and killed thousands of miners with black lung disease. Hey, let every Republican Trump supporter replace the burner in their basements with a coal burning one as a way of showing support for the coal industry.

Trumpism seeps into the pores of American society. According to Slate.com, The Southern Poverty Law Center released a survey of 2,000 K–12 teachers. More than half of them responded “yes” when asked whether they had heard “an increase in uncivil political discourse at [their] school since the 2016 presidential campaign began.” Two-thirds of the surveyed teachers agreed with the statement, “My students have expressed concern about what might happen to them or their families after the election.” One-third observed an increase in anti-Muslim or anti-immigrant sentiment…

As a Bernie Sanders Social Democrat (SD) I am not a big fan of the other party or of their presidential candidate. (By the way, an SD like Bernie is not a communist but a believer in multi-party highly regulated capitalist system with a high degree of government services like the opportunity for free college tuition, which I and my generation enjoyed at Brooklyn College in the ‘60s. But most of us were white.) I was going to vote third party, then moved to “hold my nose and vote for Hillary” and increasingly pro- Hillary as I watch Trumpism and Republican “values” in action. With all her faults, Trump and Republicans are making a candidate with massive faults look like Joan of Arc.

They say all politics is local. I wonder where our Rockaway Republicans stand on Trump and all the related issues to Republican “values.” If you see one of them around ask them.  

Norm blogs about politics and education and whatever weird thoughts come into his head at ednotesonline.com

 http://www.rockawave.com/news/2016-10-21/School_News/Making_America_Great_Again__For_White_Supremacists.html

Veteran Newark Teacher's Descent into "The Tyranny of Sight Words"

My sight words for the upcoming week are "is, this, no" for my kindergarten ESL unit on transportation... Abigail Shure, Newark teacher 

There is no need to create works of fiction related to the particular hell so many teachers are subjected to in the world of Aggressive Monitoring by clueless supervisors. It seems the more experience a teacher has the more aggressive the monitoring, inversely related to the amount of actual teaching experience the monitor has.

You see, these supervisors really don't need to interact with children, since they see teachers as children, the more experienced these teachers are, the more they are treated as infants.

Our Newark teacher correspondent comes up with yet another tour de force.

The Tyranny of Sight Words

On Friday, I met with my vice principal for the umpteenth critique of my lesson plans. The slow learner child buried deep inside of me can never seem to get it right. The focus of the latest iteration of lesson plan torture is sight words. 

I can hear you all saying, "What? Really? She doesn't know what sight words are? How long has she been teaching?" 

You may breathe a collective sigh of relief. I do know what sight words are. I merely did not understand their centrality in the nightmare of lesson planning. I am now cognizant of the fact that sight words must last for the duration of one week and the presence of those particular sight words is required in all intentional read alouds for that particular week. My sight words for the upcoming week are "is, this, no" for my kindergarten ESL unit on transportation. The words were conveniently gleaned from the confluence of the book Is This the Bus for Us? and the list of 114 sight words. 

A problem emerged, however, when I naively attempted to add Iggy Iguana's Trip to the reading list. I favor Iggy's trip because he flew in an airplane. Unfortunately for my charges and me, "is, this, no" make no appearance in this sacred text and the book has been relegated to the maybe read later pile. Due to my ineptitude in locating enough books with the week's sight words, I am scheduling the hideous practice of repeating a read aloud of Is This the Bus for Us? albeit with a new focus of instruction. I managed to squeeze in Curious George because that classic contained "is, this, no" and George traveled by car, row boat, ship and balloons.

As part of my district's wise initiative of Aggressive Monitoring, I am expected to assess my children three times each net forty minute period. It was suggested by my administrator that I vary the assessments to include word writing, arranging magnetic letters, labeling and circling the correct word type activities. I spent five and a half hours yesterday devising two weeks worth of sight word central lesson plans for my kindergarten and first grade charges. Did I mention that I already have 49 students? I live in terror that my top favorite books will not be replete with the appropriate weekly vocabulary as I enter the realm of the Tyranny of Sight Words.

Abigail Shure

Next week's sight words for Abbie's principal of vice: are, you, an, asshole.
 

Education Notes: Art & Design HS Staff in Revolt, Unity Tables Reso on Abusive Principals, Schirtzer on Ex Bd Experience and more

The October 2016 edition of Ed Notes, downloadable for any readers wanting to share with colleagues, was distributed at the Delegate Assembly on Weds and they were going like hot cakes.

The most pressing issue to me is the situation with bully principals. People have been coming to me for advice. The striking thing is that many of these vet UFT members who have often dealt with principals are shocked when they get one who had an agenda of wiping out the staff in a coordinated assault. They have been totally unprepared by the UFT to respond. The union doesn't look at this as a conspiracy and views each school and individual action on teachers by themselves. Last month I featured a school where this has happened with a 90% staff turnover in 2 years without a peep from the UFT. You can download the Sept. issue here.

I believe if there was a coordinated response and the UFT leadership made it clear to Farina and the CSA that they were in for a war at every school where the principal engages in these actions, much of it would stop or be curtailed. In the meantime entire careers are being destroyed, often senior teachers or untenured, and chapter leaders. 

This is the situation going on at Art and Design HS - a CTE school in Manhattan where the new principal who came in in January caused 16 people to leave the school by June. That is the focus of this edition of Ed Notes.

People seemed more receptive than when I hand out MORE lit. Interesting. I think that some people don't want to read something clearly labeled as opposition lit. I also brought back the jokes which used to be so popular. Thanks to the delegate who I didn't know who told me she was a regular reader of this blog.

I decided to republish Education Notes a couple of times this year at the UFT Delegate Assembly after a decade of absence. Why? I feel there needs to be a targeted newsletter addressing certain issues in greater depth than is done in MORE lit, which in going through a vetting process of a committee loses some style and substance. The current MORE newsletter is basically devoid of information, with a full-page ad about the upcoming social justice curriculum fair next week. With so many issues on the minds of UFT members, I felt using 50% of the ability to communicate with people for the ad was a bad decision and left the newsletter scanty (there could have been a quarter page or even a separate flyer for the conference). One MORE member on the way in offered to help me hand out Ed Notes. When I suggested handing out the MORE newsletter, the response was "It doesn't say anything."

I too felt it was just not something I felt like spending time handing out. If I am going to schlep in to the DA I want to hand out something that says something to the delegates or else it isn't worth going. I want the freedom to be critical of MORE, if necessary. At my age I'm too ornery with a libertarian tendency to get locked in to "caucus think" - loyalty to a caucus over everything which is an unofficial loyalty oath.

You can view or download the October 2016 edition here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4zyl-rfcGZaTlpRNnRpUWp3Wmc/view?usp=sharing

While NYC Charter Teachers are Forced to Rally Today, Chicago Charter School Teachers Threaten to Strike

Chicago has been a hotbed for charter organizing. The Chicago Alliance of Charter Teachers and Staff (Chicago ACTS), an affiliate of the AFT that launched in 2009, now represents 32 charter schools, about one-fifth of the city’s total.

How many charters has the UFT organized here in NYC?

Today NYC charter school teachers are going to rally for doubling the number of charter school students to 200,000, thus disenfranchising and disenunionizing another batch of teachers.

Some of them will be there willingly and many will not but are forced to attend. Charters close their schools on Wed. afternoons so they will be on the job. But the rally, backed by astroturf groups will be sold as genuine. If the press were legit it would ask these teachers if they would want to be unionized - and watch their faces as they respond or refuse to.

I would go over there but nearby will be the UFT Delegate Assembly, where instead of listening to Mulgrew bloviate for an hour, the entire place should go over to the charter teacher rally and show them what union unity is all about instead of the every man and woman for themselves.

In the meantime, in Chicago, where the union has done a much better job of organizing charters than the UFT, teachers at a 14 school charter chain are threatening to go on strike.

If charters ever get massively unionized, watch the ed deformers cool on the charter alternative and shift to something else that will not include unions.

Here is a piece from In These Times.

In a Nightmare for Neoliberal Ed Reformers, Chicago Charter School Teachers May Strike This Week

When the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) struck in 2012, then-CEO of the United Neighborhood Organization (UNO) Juan Rangel took the opportunity to sing the praises of the city’s charter schools, which remained open as CTU members walked the picket lines.

"I think parents are going to be frustrated when they see 50,000 kids (charter students) having an education, going to school without interruption and their kids” are not, Rangel told the Chicago Tribune.

Four years later, the tables have turned. An eleventh-hour agreement between the CTU and the school district headed off a second strike in Chicago Public Schools (CPS) last week. But there’s another teacher walkout still brewing—this time, at the UNO Charter School Network (UCSN), a group of 15 publicly-funded, privately-managed schools established by Rangel’s organization, from which he resigned in 2013. For the past seven months, UCSN teachers have been in a tough contract fight with management. If no agreement is reached this week, teachers plan to strike starting this Wednesday.

A walkout by charter teachers would not be totally unprecedented. Former American Federation of Teachers (AFT) organizer Shaun Richman notes in Jacobin that teachers at a Philadelphia charter school engaged in a “sick-out” during contract negotiations in 2011. But disruptive labor actions are a rare sight in the traditionally union-free charter industry, and UCSN teachers’ overwhelming vote this month to authorize a network-wide strike breaks new ground.

As education reformers have aggressively pushed the nationwide expansion of charter schools in recent years, teachers unions have fought back on two fronts. In addition to opposing continued charter growth, they have poured resources into unionizing existing charters in order to thwart what many believed was the central rationale of charter schools: chipping away at unions and driving down wages and working conditions in the industry.
“The city thought they were going to use charters to break the unions,” says Erica Stewart, a 5th-grade teacher at UNO’s Sandra Cisneros elementary school. “It didn’t work.” Stewart, who has taught within UCSN for six years after being laid off by CPS, helped bring a union into the network in 2013 and now serves on the bargaining committee. 

Chicago has been a hotbed for charter organizing. The Chicago Alliance of Charter Teachers and Staff (Chicago ACTS), an affiliate of the AFT that launched in 2009, now represents 32 charter schools, about one-fifth of the city’s total. Chicago ACTS’s numbers and leverage got a major boost when UCSN’s campuses voted to unionize in 2013. Though Chicago ACTS isn’t part of the CTU—under state law, charter and public school teachers can’t be part of the same unit or collectively bargain together—the two groups have a “service agreement” through which the latter provides bargaining and grievance representation for unionized charter teachers.

This fall, charter and non-charter teachers have also rallied support for each other’s contract fights. In preparation for a possible strike, dozens of UCSN teachers, parents and supporters from the CTU and other unions picketed in front of the charter network’s swanky downtown headquarters last week. The building’s $250,000-a-year rent is a sore point for the union, United Educators at UNO (UEU), which says it suggested relocating to a less expensive space and reducing administrative staff as alternatives to classroom cuts this year. In August, UCSN laid off dozens of teachers and support staff, citing budget constraints

“I want to point out these beautiful offices,” said Stewart. “The money being spent on offices and administrators needs to trickle down to education for our kids.” UCSN schools serve about 8,000 students, who are predominantly low-income and Latino. The union represents 532 teachers and support staff.

Among those laid off were Jorge Cisneros, who taught technology classes at the network’s Esmeralda Santiago campus. He picketed along with his daughter, Marisa, who is in 6th grade at the Daniel Zizumbo campus in Archer Heights. Cisneros has since found another position teaching 1st-grade at a different UCSN school, but he worries that the elimination of technology teachers network-wide will impact students’ education. Indeed, says Marisa, many students in her school have struggled to learn basic typing this year, even though they will soon have to take standardized tests that are administered on the computer.

While the schools pride themselves on making technology available to every student, Cisneros notes, “If there are no technology teachers, what good is it?”

The layoffs also removed graduate support advisors, who help guide prospective UCSN students through the complicated selective enrollment process and aid graduates in applying for college. The union is demanding that the layoffs be reversed, and is resisting attempts by UCSN to remove a cap on class sizes and to shift additional pension and healthcare costs onto teachers—issues that also surfaced during the CTU’s contract battle.
In a statement released following last week’s protest at its headquarters, UNSC management said the network’s finances necessitated these cutbacks. “Unlike CPS, UCSN does not have access to TIF (tax increment financing) funds for additional revenue, so any agreement we reach has to be cognizant of our financial constraints.”

Among them is the financial fallout from a messy divorce with the scandal-plagued UNO, the Latino community group that was founded more than a decade before it began establishing charters in 1998. Until last year, UNO directly managed the schools and the bulk of the $80 million allocated annually to UNSC by CPS. But the two entities cut ties following a series of revelations about UNO’s misuse of public funding, including a $98 million state grant to build schools that the organization channeled, in part, to companies led by political allies. After years of dizzying success in promoting the charter-school model, this saga resulted in Rangel’s forced departure as CEO, as well as eventual fraud charges that he paid $10,000 to settle with the Securities and Exchange Commission this year.

Also this year, Chicago Sun-Times reporter Dan Mihalopoulos revealed that UNO officials, including Rangel, had spent public money on lavish meals and travel. In a September letter to teachers and staff, the UCSN board said that it would operate as a “lean organization” going forward, but that as part of the split with UNO, the schools had incurred more than $1 million in legal fees and transition costs, in addition to $7.8 million paid to UNO for the final year of its management contract. System-wide budget cuts this year also resulted in a $5.7 million reduction in CPS funding, according to the board.

Meanwhile, the union suspects that the network is “broke on purpose.”  UEU says it is still waiting for the full picture to emerge, and that UCSN has not yet produced relevant financial information. In the meantime, bargaining will continue down to the wire on Tuesday night.

“The ball is in management’s court,” says Stewart, the 5th-grade teacher. “Either they’re going to get serious about supporting the employees they claim to value and the students whose educations are in their hands, or they’re going to force us to strike to protect the quality of education in our classrooms.”

 

Ivana Trump Divorce Deposition Chronicles Trump Rape But $14 Million Bought Her Silence

For his 1993 book, “The Lost Tycoon,” Harry Hurt III acquired Ivana’s divorce deposition, in which she stated that Trump raped her.

The part of the book that caused the most controversy concerns Trump’s divorce from his first wife, Ivana. Hurt obtained a copy of her sworn divorce deposition, from 1990, in which she stated that, the previous year, her husband had raped her in a fit of rage. In Hurt’s account, Trump was furious that a “scalp reduction” operation he’d undergone to eliminate a bald spot had been unexpectedly painful. Ivana had recommended the plastic surgeon. In retaliation, Hurt wrote, Trump yanked out a handful of his wife’s hair, and then forced himself on her sexually. Afterward, according to the book, she spent the night locked in a bedroom, crying; in the morning, Trump asked her, “with menacing casualness, ‘Does it hurt?’” Trump has denied both the rape allegation and the suggestion that he had a scalp-reduction procedure. Hurt said that the incident, which is detailed in Ivana’s deposition, was confirmed by two of her friends.

Full story at The New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/24/documenting-trumps-abuse-of-women?mbid=nl_161017_Daily&CNDID=24481169&spMailingID=9705474&spUserID=MTMzMTgyNTI1MzgxS0&spJobID=1021344324&spReportId=MTAyMTM0NDMyNAS2

Matt Taibbi: The Fury and Failure of Donald Trump

Maybe we've reached the point where Trump opens the debate by going for Hillary's crotch. Or maybe she does a reversal and goes for Trump's crotch. Matt Taibbi doesn't go that far - but the illustration from Rolling Stone leads my twisted mind to come up with this one. Taibbi's point about looking at Hillary as a way to preserve the status quo as the alternative to lunacy has been operating on even major critics of Hillary, as evidenced by this meme we picked up on our trip to the finger lakes.







Great piece by Taibbi in Rolling Stone.

A few excerpts:

Trump's shocking rise and spectacular fall have been a singular disaster for U.S. politics. Built up in the press as the American Hitler, he was unmasked in the end as a pathetic little prankster who ruined himself, his family and half of America's two-party political system for what was probably a half-assed ego trip all along, adventure tourism for the idiot rich.

That such a small man would have such an awesome impact on our nation's history is terrible, but it makes sense if you believe in the essential ridiculousness of the human experience. Trump picked exactly the wrong time to launch his mirror-gazing rampage to nowhere. He ran at a time when Americans on both sides of the aisle were experiencing a deep sense of betrayal by the political class, anger that was finally ready to express itself at the ballot box.

The only thing that could get in the way of real change – if not now, then surely very soon – was a rebellion so maladroit, ill-conceived and irresponsible that even the severest critics of the system would become zealots for the status quo.

Lie No. 1 is that there are only two political ideas in the world, Republican and Democrat. Lie No. 2 is that the parties are violent ideological opposites, and that during campaign season we can only speak about the areas where they differ (abortion, guns, etc.) and never the areas where there's typically consensus (defense spending, surveillance, torture, trade, and so on). Lie No. 3, a corollary to No. 2, is that all problems are the fault of one party or the other, and never both. Assuming you watch the right channels, everything is always someone else's fault. Lie No. 4, the reason America in campaign seasons looks like a place where everyone has great teeth and $1,000 haircuts, is that elections are about political personalities, not voters.

The only thing that could get in the way of real change – if not now, then surely very soon – was a rebellion so maladroit, ill-conceived and irresponsible that even the severest critics of the system would become zealots for the status quo.

In the absolute best-case scenario, the one in which he loses, this is what Trump's run accomplished. He ran as an outsider antidote to a corrupt two-party system, and instead will leave that system more entrenched than ever. If he goes on to lose, he will be our Bonaparte, the monster who will continue to terrify us even in exile, reinforcing the authority of kings.

 Read it all: 
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-fury-and-failure-of-donald-trump-w444943