Memo From the RTC: Raucous (Laugh) Riots Break Out in Rockaway as Toxic Avenger Infection Spreads

One of the funniest, well-acted superbly directed and produced musicals not just at the Rockaway Theatre Company, but anywhere. Only 3 performances left. For my RTC column in The Wave submitted for publication, Nov. 18, 2016. And oh that set which consists of 60 oil barrels.

Memo From the RTC: Raucous (Laugh) Riots Break Out in Rockaway as Toxic Avenger Infection Spreads
By Norm Scott

I didn’t expect to love The Toxic Avenger, the Frank Caiati-directed rock musical currently running at the Rockaway Theatre Company through this weekend (Fri., Sat. at 8PM, Sun at 2PM). I was there to tape on opening night and figured that once would be enough. NOT. I went back last Sunday – and the show was even better and I’m going to every show I can get to this weekend. With word of mouth spreading about one of the funniest shows we’ve seen at the RTC, at a time when many people feel they need a good laugh, seats will be scarce, but make every attempt to see this show.

Musical Director Jeff Arzberger (Junkyard Jeff) has recruited Richie Wretch, Aw-Phi, Atomic Aaron and Twinkling Drew Vanderwinkle for his band, SEWAGE. Frank Caiati has managed to convince five of the top RTC performers in history, all with spectacular singing and acting talents, to give up months of their lives to give our community this wonderful gift of a show. Between them they play 40 different roles.

Having RTC superstar Breezy Point native Catherine Leib back as the Blind Girl after a few years absence would be enough to make this show a must see. But the hits keep coming. Her tour de force performance confirms that she can do anything on stage. I always loved her in the straight dramatic roles she played in the past. This time she affirms what a great comic actress she can be. People were comparing her to Lucille Ball. A smart producer of stage, screen or TV should snap her up.

Chazmond Peacock (playing Black Dude) - one of the great talents not only at the RTC but in the world –just ask anyone who has ever seen him in anything - is back after his shattering performance in La Cage Aux Folles just a few short months ago. How does he have the energy to do these shows back to back?

Chaz is joined as a henchman by the always amazing Broad channel native, Matthew Smilardi (White Dude), who got raves and laughs playing Chaz’ maid in La Cage, joins Chaz on stage playing men, women and everything in between. I’ve never hear Matt sing better and camp his way to some of the biggest laughs of the night. (The 2 of them playing lady hairdressers is worth the price of admission). And wait ‘till you see those body parts fly.

Relative RTC newcomers Rheana Flemons Adelstein (the mayor and mom) and Miguel Angel Sierra (Melvin Ferd The Third) blew the audience away with their giant voices and comic acting talent. I heard Miguel sing at an RAA concert last year and was just waiting to see the RTC find a way to showcase his talents. Rheanna played Audrey in “Little Shop of Horrors” not long ago. Everyone couldn’t stop talking about her performance in Toxic. The power of her voice could knock down walls. But she matches that with a comic, campy performance, playing the evil mayor and Melvin’s mom, sometimes both roles at the same time – watch those magic costume changes.

Frank has updated some of the political material to reflect the times. Don’t be surprised to see photos of Donald Trump and Sarah Palin. We even saw some updating between the Friday and Sunday shows last week and we expect more fun to come this weekend.

If you haven’t called the RTC hotline (718-374-6400) to try to get in on the fun the second you finish reading this don’t be surprised to get a visit from some green guy covered in sludge with one eyeball on his check.

Well Hello Randi: Labor Leaders Deserve Their Share of the Blame for Donald Trump’s Victory

In These Times

Leaked emails showed that AFT's Randi Weingarten promised to act as an attack dog for Hillary Clinton against another union that had endorsed Bernie Sanders in the primary. (STAN HONDA/AFP/Getty Images)  

Thursday, Nov 10, 2016, 5:07 pm

Labor Leaders Deserve Their Share of the Blame for Donald Trump’s Victory

http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/19621/labor_leaders_deserve_their_share_of_the_blame_for_donald_trumps_victory

BY Micah Uetricht

Donald Trump is going to be the next president of the United States. I feel a wild urge to scrub my hands with steel wool and bleach after typing those words—my fingers feel filthy.
If we want to avoid a similar nightmare in the future, we have to parse this election’s lessons and figure out who is to blame—not for cheap point-scoring, but to make sure we don’t make the same mistakes again. That means we have to talk about how American union leaders helped hand this race to Trump.

After You Finish Demonstrating and Mourning, Start Reading and Analyzing

There is so much info an election analysis coming in I can't keep up with it or even read it all. A bunch comes from the relentless work of Michael Fiorillo.

There are attacks on people who supported Trump, attacks on the Dems, attacks on Clinton, people who defend the people who did vote for Trump, attacks on those who didn't vote for Clinton but went 3rd party or didn't vote at all, attacks on people who did vote for Clinton (from the left), defenses of some of the ideas Trump put out, and more. So I am compiling stuff for those who want to delve in, with more coming in a follow-up.

I'm trying to find a political path and it often comes down to class vs. identity politics, the latter being used to go after Trump people for being white supremacists and white privileged. My instinct is to build some bridges between the Bernies and the Trumpies for the future. I know people need to vent. The demos do not help build bridges, but so be it for now.

Last night I was hanging with political colleagues since the 70s. One pointed out that even if Bernie was the candidate and lost he would not have spent the campaign attacking Trump but raising issues and he would have left a movement in place. With Hillary we are left with picking up the pieces. All we can do from our perch is keep focusing on the work in the union. Imagine if the UFT/AFT had opened things up for Bernie to get traction. But our union leaders don't want a movement because they are threatened by it and are at base neo-liberals.

The interesting intersection of Trump and Bernie is where they attack the neo-liberal agenda. We need to keep finding these intersections. By the way, most of the Trump disaffected voters (vs the rock-ribbed Republicans) liked Bernie and respected him. A Bernie movement can bring them back but not if they are under constant attack as being ignorant racists.

Here goes. Have fun!

Democrats have occupied the White House for 16 of the last 24 years, and for four of those years had control of both houses of Congress. But in that time they failed to reverse the decline in working-class wages and economic security. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama ardently pushed for free trade agreements without providing millions of blue-collar workers who thereby lost their jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well...

Trump, Empathy and Epistemic Closure | The American Conservative

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/trump-empathy-epistemic-closure/

The Inconvenient Truth Behind Donald Trump’s Victory | RIA

The charts say almost everything about the election...

https://realinvestmentadvice.com/the-inconvenient-truth-behind-donald-trumps-victory/

Very long video clip, but if you just listen to Blyth (who predicted a Trump victory in May) between roughly the 11 and 18 minute marks, you'll hear a very succinct and global explanation for Trump's win...

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/11/mark-blyth-and-wendy-schiller-election-2016-what-happened-and-why.html

Democrats once represented the working class. Not any more | Robert Reich | Opinion | The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/10/democrats-working-class-americans-us-election

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/12/dissecting-a-trump-presidency/

http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/11/12/the-democratic-party-descends-into-civil-war-after-clintons-l/21604579/

How Letting Bankers Off the Hook May Have Tipped the Election - The New York Times

Hillary can thank Obama for this one, though it's doubtful she'd have acted any differently had she been in the White House...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/business/how-letting-bankers-off-the-hook-may-have-tipped-the-election.html

 

MORE Holds ATR Informational Event - Next Saturday, Nov. 19 1-4 PM

Arthur Goldstein suggested MORE hold an event for ATRS where they get to speak and discuss issues of importance to them. He asked an expert on ATRs - blogger Chaz if he would be there to share his knowledge. What will be the outcome? Could be some proposals or just a place where ATRs emerge with more knowledge than they had going in. At the very least some discussion on dealing with gotcha supervisors and protecting themselves.
In addition - there will be some talk about ATRs who have gotten permanent positions and how that occurred - not many but some.

ATR Information Event

Please share with ATRs in your school

History: How the DOE and UFT created this mess starting with the 2005 contract, the 2008 ATR rally, the UFT wine and cheese party, the 2011 deal where ATRS were sacrificed (weekly rotation) for no layoffs,  the 2014 agreement plus recent updates.

Know your rights and lack thereof; how to deal with roving supervisors; survival techniques

Fighting back. What do we want? What can we do to pressure UFT and DOE for change?

Experienced ATRs will be on hand to answer questions.  Special guests: blogger Chaz's School Daze, James and Camille Eterno and Ex Bd member Arthur Goldstein.

Saturday, Nov. 19, 1:00 PM-4PM

CUNY Grad Center, 5^th Ave between 34^th and 35^th St. Bring ID.

Room 5414

Sponsored by MORE/UFT and Independent Community of Educators

Bernie Sanders: Not Everyone who voted for Trump is a misogynist who hates women - Greenwald the Election: Democracy Now and The Interercept

Senator Bernie Sanders, who opposed Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary, went on to say, quote, "To the degree that Mr. Trump is serious about pursuing policies that improve the lives of working families in this country, I and other progressives are prepared to work with him. To the degree that he pursues racist, sexist, xenophobic and anti-environment policies, we will vigorously oppose him."  .... Amy Goodman, Democracy Now

Sanders—that statement from Senator Sanders is actually quite remarkable, because he isn’t coming out and saying everybody who voted for Donald Trump is a racist troglodyte. He’s not saying that everyone who voted for Donald Trump is a misogynist who hates women and cast their vote for that reason. He’s saying that there are a huge number of people who voted for Donald Trump, and not for Hillary Clinton, who have very valid grievances. And those grievances are grounded in a system of policies that both political parties have played an equal role in creating.
Look at what he is describing: jobs going overseas, industries being destroyed, Wall Street being protected. You can go back into the '80s, into the era of Reagan and trickle-down economics and the destruction of unions, to find the genesis of it. And then you look into the ’90s, with NAFTA and free trade mania and the liberation of Wall Street from all kinds of constraints, and into the 2000s, when in the post-2008 economic crisis the Obama administration prosecuted not a single Wall Street executive responsible for that crisis, while continuing to build the world's largest penal state, largely for poor people, people with no power. And it’s this inequality, this oppression of huge numbers of people in the name of globalism and free trade, that Bernie Sanders is describing in that statement as why Trump won..... Glenn Greenwald on Democracy Now

Bernie almost always knows how to hit the right note. He is reaching out to some Trumpers - think of the people when Trump doesn't deliver - Bernie thinks bigger than most of the ideologues on the left.

 ....both Brexit and Trumpism are the very, very wrong answers to legitimate questions that urban elites have refused to ask for 30 years.” Bevins went on: “Since the 1980s the elites in rich countries have overplayed their hand, taking all the gains for themselves and just covering their ears when anyone else talks, and now they are watching in horror as voters revolt.”

I've been in a debate with some of my comrades, a number  of whom wouldn't vote for Hillary but now want to march in the streets protesting Trump. As one radio commenter said, they should be marching on the Democratic National Committee for not treating Bernie fairly. I get it - Hillary was a bad choice -- but I also think people needed to bite the bullet and fight her after the election. At the DA the other day I asked people I spoke to whether Hillary should have been making speeches to Wall St over the past 4 years or visiting the very devastated areas that used to vote Democratic? One delegate told me a story about someone who was canvassing in one of these areas and when he knocked on a door a guy told him he was the 17th person to come knocking over the past few weeks - he'd been there for 40 years as things fell apart and no one came knocking - until Trump.

Trump vowed to destroy the system that elites love (for good reason) and the masses hate (for equally good reason), while Clinton vowed to manage it more efficiently.

My argument has been that if we automatically brand the 50,000,000 people who voted for Trump as deplorable and go out marching what happens is that the middle - many people who voted for Hillary - will be asking how we would be reacting if Hillary won and the opposite occurred - Trump's people marching. I also see some charging the system was rigged - exactly what Trump was mocked for claiming.

Clinton suffered her biggest losses in the places where Obama was strongest among white voters. It’s not a simple racism story.

Did you know that 80,000 people in Michigan left the president slot blank while Hillary lost by 12,000 votes?

Two pieces by Greenwald - video on Democracy Now and an article in The Intercept.

Glenn Greenwald: Bernie Sanders Would Have Been a Stronger Candidate Against Donald Trump

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/11/10/glenn_greenwald_bernie_sanders_would_have

And a fabulous written piece on the election.

Democrats, Trump, and the Ongoing, Dangerous Refusal to Learn the Lesson of Brexit

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/democrats-trump-and-the-ongoing-dangerous-refusal-to-learn-the-lesson-of-brexit/?comments=1#comments

Is This the Death of the Democratic Party? The Death of the Liberal Media? And by the Way, Bernie Would Have Won | Alternet

In 2008, Obama, with control of both houses of Congress, could have immediately resolved the immigration issue once and for all, or alleviated the misery of those burdened by housing and student debt, but he followed a strictly neoliberal governing philosophy, catering only to the banks and big corporations. (In a way, election 2016 is payback from the white working-class for everything Obama failed to pursue as a possibility in his two terms.)...

Essentially, those who chose Hillary over Bernie during the primaries, when we had a clear choice, voted for Trump, since Bernie was always the stronger candidate against Trump or any Republican general election candidate. The polls consistently proved it......

Zizek had it right, Michael Moore had it right, and I had been saying all along that this outcome was inevitable. I wrote back in May that Trump would win by pinning neoliberal failures squarely on Hillary’s shoulders......

The liberal elite, all during this campaign, showed its intolerant colors, mocking anyone who raised questions about Hillary’s background and competence as inherently misogynist, sidelining questions of political economy in favor of preferred identity politics tropes

... Anis Shivani, Alternet

From Michael Fiorillo who keeps coming up with the greatest hits.
By the way - who is Zizek? He is a Marxist who was on the Brian Lehrer show the other day and had a fascinating analysis of neo-liberalism and the left and why he felt Trump was a preferred option to Hillary's neo-liberalism. (Not that I think Trump will actually end up doing much of the non neo-liberal things he said he would do.)

Slavoj Zizek on Trump, Capitalism, and the Left's Global Crisis
on Brian Lehrer show the other day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7Awx0qJM_I


Here is the article that dovetails into the above by Anis Shivani.

Is This the Death of the Democratic Party? The Death of the Liberal Media? And by the Way, Bernie Would Have Won | Alternet
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/death-democratic-party-death-liberal-media-and-way-bernie-would-have-won 

Neoliberalism has gifted us with a serious regression to the past.

By Anis Shivani / AlterNet

November 9, 2016

There have always been two narratives about this election. One predicted what actually happened in the end, while the other missed the boat completely.

Narrative 1. Bernie Sanders represents the unachievable in American politics. Hillary Clinton is the candidate of experience and realism. Donald Trump is a temporary phenomenon, feeding on passions and resentments, not meant to last the duration. Trump’s supporters are more economically privileged than Clinton and Sanders voters, and are motivated by pure racism and misogyny. The election is about the cultural values of tolerance, openness and identity, therefore we must support Hillary. Anyone who doesn’t support Hillary must be suspected of harboring racist and misogynist feelings themselves.

Election Neighborhood Voting Maps for NYC

How Every New York City Neighborhood Voted In The 2016 Presidential Election

By Tanveer Ali | November 9, 2016 | @tanveerali

In the 2016 presidential election, 79 percent of New Yorkers voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton for president, down from 81 percent for Barack Obama in 2012. See how your New York City neighborhood split the vote between Clinton and Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential election.

https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/numbers/clinton-trump-president-vice-president-every-neighborhood-map-election-results-voting-general-primary-nyc?utm_source=The+Rockaways+Breaking+News&utm_campaign=4016910724-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_11_09&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0310415cfd-4016910724-134835177

Parody from Oregon -- The flood of Trump-fearing American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in past weeks

NOTE- I didn't write this piece

This came from my cousin in Israel from a contact of his in Oregon.

The flood of Trump-fearing American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in past weeks.  The visibly failing Hillary Clinton presidential campaign is prompting an exodus of left-leaning Americans, who fear they'll soon be required to own guns, pray, pay taxes and live according to the U.S. Constitution.  Canadian border residents say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, climate change activists, and "green" energy proponents crossing their fields at night. 
 

"I went out to milk the cows the other morning, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in my barn." said southern Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota.  "He was cold, exhausted, hungry, and begged me for a latte and some free-range chicken.  When I said I didn't have any, he left before I even got a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?"
 

In an effort to stop the flow of these illegal American aliens, Mr. Greenfield erected higher fences, but the north bound liberals scaled them.  He then installed loudspeakers that blared the Rush Limbaugh program across the fields, but they just stuck their fingers in their ears, and kept coming.
 

Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals just south of the border, pack them into electric cars, and drive them across the border, where they are simply left to fend for themselves after the battery dies.  "A lot of these people are not prepared for our rugged conditions." an Alberta border patrolman said.  "I found one carload of illegal American liberals without a single bottle of Perrier water or even any gemelli with shrimp and arugula.  All they had was a nice little Napa Valley Cabernet and some kale chips.  When liberals are caught, they are sent back across the border, often wailing that they fear persecution from Trump supporting normal Americans.
 

Rumors are rife about re-education camps being built across the USA where liberals would be forced to drink domestic beer, study the Constitution and find jobs that actually contribute to the economy.
 

In recent days, liberals have turned to ingenious ways to cross the border.  Some have come disguised as senior citizens on bus trips to buy cheap Canadian prescription drugs.  After catching a half-dozen young vegans in blue-hair wig disguises, Canadian immigration authorities began stopping buses, and quizzing these supposedly senior citizens about Perry Como and Rosemary Clooney to ascertain if they really were alive in the 1950s.  "If they can't identify the accordion player on The Lawrence Welk Show, we become very suspicious about their age." a Canadian immigration official stated.
 

Canadian citizens have complained that the continuing massive influx of illegal American liberals has created an organic-broccoli shortage.  Plus, they are buying up all of the Barbara Streisand CDs, and are overloading the internet while downloading jazzercise apps to their cell phones. 

"I really feel sorry for these illegal American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them all." A Toronto resident said.  "After all, how many Black Lives Matter majors does one country need?”

How the Hillary Clinton campaign deliberately “elevated” Donald Trump with its “pied piper” strategy - Salon.com

Sanders, a self-described Democratic socialist, repeatedly warned in the primary that he would have a greater chance of defeating Trump. Poll after poll showed that he would have beaten Trump in the general election by wide margins. Instead, his candidacy was repressed — and now Clinton has lost to Trump.

Michael Fiorillo: How did they blow this election? Let us count the ways... A highly flawed and weak candidate, carried along by a complacent, self-serving, out-of-touch bunch of "meritocrats", and a media chorus...

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

Election Shock and Awe: Is The Clintonite/Obama, Neo-liberal “New Democrat” Party Dead? Has Our Democracy Died Too?

Schools report teachers and students in tears. Some will be holding counseling sessions this afternoon.

I believe that over the next 4 years the system will be so rigged the Democrats will never get back into power. I'm not sure there is a way to counter that for at least the next decade. Only catastrophic governance leading to chaos - but don't forget the brown shirts and paramilitary police, FBI and veterans who supported Trump - they will never turn over power now that they have it.

While neo-liberalism savaged the working class, no group felt its impact more than teachers under the assault of both parties. You’ll notice that basically the only area that Republicans didn’t attack Obama on was education. Our union – AFT/NYSUT/UFT aided and abetted this assault since it began in the mid-80s – led by the Clintons in Arkansas. The opt-out movement was in its own way similar to the Trump revolt – and note how our union and the DOE disparages and tries to suppress it. Many teachers, reacting to the hurried Hillary endorsement and the disparagement of the Bernie movement could not pull the trigger for Trump. Estimates are that 35% of the teachers were either out and out Trump supporters or could not pull the trigger for Hillary. Given the Trump/Republican ed agenda, which will be even a bigger disaster than ed deform, was sad.

I voted for Hillary because the alt was so bad. Those who couldn't in all conscience vote for Hillary should take a good like down the road over the next 4 years and tell my how your conscience feels.

Election Musings

Reality Based Educator:   They'll continue with the elite circle jerk and furiously blame "Bernie Bros" or Greens or "deplorables" instead of looking into the mirror and saying "Why have we embraced neo-liberalism, bringing about the de-industrialization of the country, the financialization of the economy and Trump to the White House?"

Newark teacher under assault, comment on my post declaring I was voting for Clinton (No Third Party Vote for Me)....   I did it. I voted third party. I had never done it before. I couldn't vote for Clinton because I could not sanction another four years of neo-liberal promotion of endless wars, unflinching charter school support and Wall Street coziness. I could not vote for Trump because I am a woman and I would prefer not to end up in a concentration camp. Sorry Norm! I did not have it in me to pull the lever for HRC.....

This was affirmation that Trump could win, which I have been telling people for the past 2 weeks. Even Trump supporters like my brother-in-law was more skeptical than I was. Some estimates are that 35% of teachers broke with their unions to either vote Trump or third party. I voted for Hillary and felt a left movement from Bernie and Warren could move her.

I've heard this sentiment directly from many teachers, most of them women and Bernie supporters. Some were voting for Trump, most 3rd party. My wife and I had lunch last week with 2 old friends, both retired UFTers -- both seemed to be going Trump.  That was certainly an early warning sign. Once again, our union leaders put their money on the wrong horse in the primary where they never gave Bernie a chance - and they are also doing the same in supporting de Blasio who will face an even greater wall of Trumpists in his next election.

The arrogance and slavish support for the Democratic party no matter how much they shit on educators and the mocking of Bernie supporters is coming home to roost.

Maybe we Sanders supporters weren't as crazy as we were told. That's the brightest thought I can muster out of this. Maybe the AFT/ NEA super early endorsement wasn't such a great idea after all.... NYC Educator: http://nyceducator.com/2016/11/holy-fucking-shit.html

I hate Trump and the neo-liberal Democrats. I hate the GOP. The Democrats have mostly abandoned their constituency, which is people who are financially vulnerable, and that includes the middle class, whether you're "white" or not, whether you have education or not.

 . . . email from teacher

Of course our union leaders and the Democrats, instead of blaming themselves, will try to blame people who voted for Jill Stein. Perdido St. School blog touches on that:

Brexit Redux: http://perdidostreetschool.blogspot.com/2016/11/brexit-redux.html

Dem elites and Clinton shills are already taking aim at Sanders people or Greens, blaming Trump's victory on them. As usual with the elites and their functionaries, they miss the truth. And just so we can get the "The Greens did this!" bullshit out of the way: Clinton shills did a lot of mocking this year, first the Sanders people during the primary, then the Trump supporters during the general.
One thing Clinton and her shills never did - try and understand the real pain and terror many in this country feel over their economic futures. A lot of those people sent a big "Fuck You!" to the elites last night, though I think that will come back to bite them in the end.
A Republican president with a Republican Senate and a Republican House is going to do a lot of damage in the short term. Add in all the crazies Trump is sure to bring along - Rudy, Christie, maybe Palin - and it's even worse.
As for the Supreme Court, that strategy Obama pursued doesn't look so hot now either - the chance to transform the Supreme Court is now lost to Dems. Remember that union case that ended up 4-4 after Scalia died? You can bet another case like that one is going to rear sooner rather than later and those automatic dues the union elites lap up will go out the window with Clinton's electoral map to victory.
 

The "Fuck you!" sent last night, as with the one the British sent with Brexit, is going to be a costly one in the end. But I blame Dem elites for this mess - this loss is squarely on HRC and her neoliberal cohorts. This ought to be a wake-up call to Dem elites that neoliberalism must go and the party needs to embrace a true populist agenda.
But I'm under no illusions that Dem elites will learn the correct lessons from this.

This is the chance to remake the Democratic Party into a vision closer to Bernie's but we know that the AFT/UFT leadership will never go along with something too left or progressive. The one good thing about this election is that the Clintons are finally gone from the stage and our leaders will have to find another neo-liberal Democrat to tie itself too.

Cuomo, one of the happiest men in America today, for President in 2020 anyone? Randi and Mulgrew probably already endorsed him behind closed doors.

Heading to the Delegate Assembly today with a hard copy of ed notes to hand out. More later - if I'm not on the way to Canada.

Exit Poll Data From VICE

When I heard some of this in late afternoon, it felt ominous. Trump got 29% of Latino vote -- higher than Romney did.

Exit poll data

Vice

 Whites vs. nonwhite voters

• Whites made up 70 percent of voters
• 58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
• 21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump

White men

• White men made up 34 percent of voters
• 63 percent of them voted Trump
• 31 percent voted Clinton

White women

• White women made up 37 percent of voters
• 53 percent of them voted Trump
• 43 percent voted Clinton

Young whites (ages 18-29)

• Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
• 48 percent of them voted Trump
• 43 percent voted Clinton
• In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young Latinos voted for Trump.

College-educated whites

• White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
• 49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for Clinton.
• 54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
• 45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51 percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.

Non-college-educated whites

• Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
• 67 percent of them voted for Trump
• Of them, women voted 62 percent for Trump
• And men voted 72 percent for Trump

Donald Trump is moving to the White House, and liberals put him there | Thomas Frank | Opinion | The Guardian

Hillary was anointed by our union and the Democratic Party establishment pretty much the day after the 2012 election. Here is some commentary from Thomas Frank, who predicted a Trump win, at the G

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-white-house-hillary-clinton-liberals

Two to one Loss for Charter Lobby in Mass Charter School Expansion - $23 million down the drain

The woim is toining.

Massachusetts Ballot questions, 2 - Expand Charter Schools 

No

62.4%

1,626,237 votes

Yes

37.6%

981,658 votes

80% reporting

Boston Globe
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/11/08/charter/v34OA3vMI8dRABDsFc4JuM/story.html

Massachusetts voters appeared to reject a major expansion of charter schools Tuesday, brushing aside calls for greater school choice amid concerns about the overall health of public education.
With 50 percent of the vote counted, the opponents were leading 62 percent to 38 percent — a wide enough margin for both sides to acknowledge the outcome. The Associated Press called the race.
The vote, if it holds, would be a major victory for teachers unions and civil rights organizations, which argued that charters are diverting too much money and attention from traditional public schools that serve the overwhelming majority of students.
”We’re claiming victory,” said Steve Crawford, a spokesman for Save Our Public Schools, the opposition group, at an election night party at the Fairmont Copley Plaza in Boston. “It’s substantial, too.”

Voter rejection of Question 2 would be a significant setback for Governor Charlie Baker, who campaigned heavily for the referendum, saying it would provide a vital alternative for families trapped in struggling urban schools.

Voter rejection of Question 2 would be a significant setback for Governor Charlie Baker, who campaigned heavily for the referendum, saying it would provide a vital alternative for families trapped in struggling urban schools.

But the survey, like other polls this fall, showed that the “no” side had made substantial gains nonetheless — winning over more Democrats, independents, and women than they had in the spring.
Christine Fischer-Rothman, 51, a Jamaica Plain lactation consultant with a son at Boston Latin School, said she voted against charter expansion.

“I want to have the money poured into the Boston Public Schools and not out,” she said, adding that it is “not a solution” to shift funding to schools outside the traditional system that “just do independently what they want.”

Research shows that Massachusetts urban charters have made substantial gains with black and Latino students, in some cases out-performing schools in white, wealthy suburbs. That track record attracted heavy interest from national charter advocates, who saw the state as an important testing ground for the movement.
It also made race became a key battleground in the fight over Question 2.

Baker, in a television ad that ran at the close of the campaign, made a direct appeal to the conscience of white, suburban voters. “Massachusetts has many great public schools,” he said, sitting in his Swampscott living room. “And we took it for granted that our kids would go to great public schools. But some kids aren’t so lucky. Where they live, they don’t go to a great school and they have no choice.”

But opponents like Juan Cofield, president of the New England Area Council of the NAACP, warned that charters were creating a two-tiered system, draining money from the traditional public schools that serve the bulk of black and Latino students.
“As Brown vs. the Board of Education taught us,” he said at the “No on 2” campaign kickoff, invoking the landmark school desegregation case, “a dual school system is inherently unequal.”
The most important existing state cap on charter growth limits how much money charter schools can divert from individual school districts. In most districts, it’s 9 percent of “net school spending,” which includes many, but not all spending categories. In the lowest-performing districts, it’s 18 percent.

Cities like Boston that are bumping up against the cap would not be able to add many charter seats in the short run if Question 2 failed. But that would not spell the end of the movement. Over time, as Boston’s school budget naturally grows, there should be more money available to ship to charters — opening up an estimated 4,000 charter seats between 2018 and 2028, according to a city analysis.

Teachers Unite Meeting THIS SATURDAY (Learn about SLTs, Community Organizing & more)

Great work that Teachers Unite is doing a session on SLTs which are the fault lines of principal control and Farina wants to keep these meetings closed to the public while the UFT sits on the sideline allowing her to do what she wants. Leonie Haimson and others filed suit and won and Farina ignores it. Why? Michael Fiorillo hit the nail on the head -- they are hiding that the SLTs are totally controlled by the principals.

See ed notes articles on this issue:

• On SLTs: UFT/Unity Back Farina Over Rank and File ...
• Why Does DOE Fight Open Meetings? What is Farina Hiding?

Saturday, November 12, 2016 | 2 - 4 p.m.James Baldwin High School (351 West 18th St, New York, NY 10011 Room 313)

Members and anyone interested in learning about Teachers Unite's work is invited to join us this Saturday for our November monthly membership meeting: 

• School Leadership Teams: What are they and how can we work with them?
• Community Organizing: How do we define this and what does it look like?
• Teachers Unite's 2017 Direction: Given our history and the type of work needed to create social change within the education system, where do we hope to put our energy for this upcoming year?

Light snacks will be provided. Can't wait to see you there!

School Scope: No Third Party Vote for Me - Norm in The Wave

Submitted for publication Friday Nov. 11, which I may be reading from Canada. This article is fueled by my increasing annoyance with the often clueless far left, some of whom have suggested that a Trump Presidency would galvanize the left - one of the biggest laughs I had throughout the endless election season. The 2020 campaign starts on Nov. 9. There are about 30 top Republicans praying for a Trump loss so they can begin running.


-->

School Scope: No Third Party Vote for Me

By Norm Scott

Monday, Nov. 7, 2016

I’m writing this on election day eve. I wanted to get this done before I leave right after I vote tomorrow for my new residence in Canada – just in case. But I will be back on Wednesday if a certain candidate loses. You know what they say: if you want to avoid talking about a contentious election talk about sports or the weather. Nice day! And how about dem Cubs? I was rooting for Cleveland because lifelong Indians fan and WFAN caller “Bruce from Bayside”, a retired NYC teacher, died just a few weeks before the Series. I was getting sick of Cub Mania and if they went another 108 years without winning a World Series I wouldn’t have been unhappy.  As one of the few people who root for both Yanks and Mets, I’m looking forward to the Hot Stove League. OK, enough sports. As a despiser of Trump and skeptical of Clinton, I need to decide how I’m going to vote.

I’ve been a 3^rd party voter more than half the time in presidential elections:  1996, 2000, 2004 and 2012. Not this time. I hear the Greens calling for Jill Stein and I know many people in my leftist circles who are going Green. Does the Green Party deserve our vote?

the Times should change its motto from “All the News That’s Fit to Print” to “We Shill for Charter Schools" - Alan Singer

In an opinion essay on Sunday, New York Times columnist David Leonhardt continued the newspaper’s campaign “shilling“ for charter schools. Leonhardt, is certainly not an expert on public education. As a boy he attended the prestigious and expensive Horace Mann School in Riverdale, New York and then went to Yale. The article, which pretended to be a scientific report based on the latest data, was bad reporting and an embarrassment for both the author and the newspaper. Unfortunately, the Times, which is constantly shilling for charter schools, does not seem to care.... Alan Singer

Good piece taking Leonhardt apart --  HuffPo- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/shilling-for-charter-scho_b_12838762.html

Read as an adjunct to my post yesterday -

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

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