Author Archives: pandora

About pandora

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Science Takes On A Zombie Outbreak

Given my and DelawareDem’s love of The Walking Dead, I had to post this. This is for you, DD!

A team of Cornell University researchers has determined the best place to hide during a zombie apocalypse.

A graduate statistical mechanics class was inspired by a reading of “World War Z,” a fictional oral history of a zombie war, and decided to explore what might happen in an actual zombie outbreak, reported Phys.org.

[…]

He said most films or books assume that a zombie outbreak would affect all areas at the same time, leaving a small pocket of survivors after a few months.

“But in our attempt to model zombies somewhat realistically, it doesn’t seem like this is how it would actually go down,” Alemi said.

Cities would fall quickly, the researchers found, but it would take weeks or even months for zombies to penetrate less densely populated areas.

“Given the dynamics of the disease, once the zombies invade more sparsely populated areas, the whole outbreak slows down,” Alemi said. “There are fewer humans to bite, so you start creating zombies at a slower rate.”

“I’d love to see a fictional account where most of New York City falls in a day, but upstate New York has a month or so to prepare,” he added.

I’d love to see that fictional account, too! It’s one of the things I think about when watching The Walking Dead – Where should they go? I thought the prison made sense, but, alas, nothing good ever lasts on this show (I knew the farm was toast!). I mentioned yesterday that it’s referred to as <i>Misery Porn</i> and that’s extremely accurate. There must be something wrong with me loving this depressing, gory show – a show that portrays humans as the real threat and zombies as simply an obstacle. What does it say when the rustling in the bushes turns out to be a zombie, instead of a human, and everyone sighs with relief?

Mr. Pandora joined the series late, so we’ve been watching the first two seasons so he can catch up. Wow! Re-watching this series reminded me how far we’ve come. Those hopeful, trusting people no longer exist – actually most of them really no longer exist!

So, where did this study say to go to escape the zombie outbreak? The northern Rocky Mountains – altho, the zombies should get there eventually.

I have a zombie question. Will the zombie outbreak eventually die out due to the zombies’ decomposing bodies? Humor me on this. Thanks.

Using zombies as a way to demonstrate the spread of disease, especially in the age of anti-vaxxers, is quite clever.

“A lot of modern research can be off-putting for people because the techniques are complicated and the systems or models studied lack a strong connection to everyday experiences,” he said. “Not that zombies are an everyday occurrence, but most people can wrap their ‘braains’ around them.”

Which, when you think about it, is a sad statement. People understand zombies, but not measles or polio.

 

 

I Really Didn’t Want To Write About 50 Shades Of Grey

In May of 2012 I wrote a post about 50 Shades of Grey called 50 Shades of Agony. I admit to not finishing the book because, well, I couldn’t stand it. It was, without a doubt, the worst thing I’ve ever read. But I was clear that if the book “worked” for you, then enjoy. That’s the thing about fantasies, they’re personal and usually private.

I haven’t seen the movie, but will probably “hate watch” it once it lands on HBO. There’s simply too much talk for me not to watch it. My curiosity is probably due to the million or so articles written about the movie – and I don’t think that number is too far off the mark.

So what prompted me to finally write about 50 Shades of Grey? It began with a post over at Delaware Politics (Yes. I know.) by David Anderson titled: 50 Shades A Failure of Modern Feminism.

50 Shades just brought to light what in form or another is normal behavior for millions. What is more interesting to me is that it tears to shreds the emasculation of relationships by modern feminism. 50 Shades is not what I would call the road map to healthy relationships, yet it is popular to near record levels not scene since (ironically) the Passion of the Christ.

I found intriguing this article by frequent guest author, Jon Moseley. His premise is that 50 Shades are a perversion of the natural yearning of many women for real men. It speaks to the void in our society created in the last 70 years of the attempt to cleanse society of “a man’s strength and leadership”. He contends that it is a perversion of the healthy original filling the void left by remake of society by the left.

That’s quite a leap, and one not based in reality. And I find it interesting how we don’t apply these leaps to other movies. This is entertainment, fantasy (Hello? Every action/gangster/alien/war movie ever made) – granted, it’s not my idea of amusement, but to each their own. If this rocks your world, I’m A-okay with it. You go, girl/guy!

Before I continue let me share my thoughts on why I think 50 Shades of Grey became so popular. For those of you who don’t know, 50 Shades began as Twilight fan fiction, which means it started with a relatively large audience. (FYI: I didn’t like Twilight either, mainly due to its helpless heroine) Starting with an established readership is every author’s dream.

Since the book was released I’ve been in many (unexpected) conversations about it and the one thing that keeps coming up is that 50 Shades of Grey was most peoples first encounter with erotica. They simply didn’t know the genre existed. They know now. Add to that the ease of downloading books to your Kindle (and skipping the judgement and embarrassment of not purchasing “literature” in a very public bookstore) and you’ll understand why erotica is more popular than ever. In fact, after the release of 50 Shades sales of erotic novels increased by 30%. A 30% increase is the sound of discovery.

So… those are the reasons I think 50 Shades of Grey became so popular. True confession: I have turned many readers of 50 Shades of Grey onto better and more titillating erotica. Don’t judge me!

Now, let’s move onto how certain people have twisted fantasy into feminism’s failure.  I’d venture to say that if David Anderson was asked to name feminists he would name me -which then makes me wonder why he would ignore my take on this book?  He also ignored other feminists’ views. Here’s the deal with feminists and this book and movie. The majority of them think it’s a terrible book/movie, but won’t pass judgement on women who like it.

I’ll have to quote from the piece David Anderson links to. Brace yourselves for none other than Jonathon Moseley (yes, I say his name more than 3 times in this post, so brace yourselves!) and his titled post: 50 Shades of Wimpy Men Leave Women Longing

The feminists seeking to tear down traditional society by blaming all men for a mythical “rape culture” are now silent while Hollywood liberals simultaneously work hard to create one.

Love the word mythical and rape culture  – put in scare quotes, btw. Had to include that quote because it’s so precious and tells you exactly what we’re in for. And here’s another man who hasn’t read feminist’s writings. The mocking of 50 Shades of Grey in feminists places has been deafening.

More importantly, in regards to the genre, someone (Jonathon Moseley) hasn’t been paying attention. In his attempt to explain the romance genre he links to a post on “bodice rippers” as a way to explain the formula  But here’s the thing. He couldn’t have read the post he linked to. Hell, he couldn’t have even read the title, which is: Beyond Bodice-Rippers: How Romance Novels Came to Embrace Feminism.

If he had read his linked to article he would have read one of the most important statements, imo, regarding the appeal of romance novels: “romance is one of the few places where a woman is a subject in sex, rather than an object.” That is a powerful statement. I have watched porn, but be warned, I tend to ruin the experience (Don’t believe me? Ask Mr. Pandora!). I’m always asking him, “Why?” Why are they having sex? He just walked into the room and they started going at it? What is her motivation? She was just doing laundry, for god’s sake!  He may as well be using a blow up doll, because there’s no way that woman is enjoying this. Yes, I’m missing the point of porn – which is, for the most part, about women being the object (vessel?) of sex. And if that’s your fantasy, have at it, because that’s the flippin’ point of fantasies.

I have to get back to Jonathon Moseley’s article. I’m not happy about that, but…

Well, what are women longing for? Are women fed up with modern men with the texture of boiled cauliflower? Do modern, feminized, metro-sexual wimps leave women hungering for something more? Would women be just as happy with a man’s man chopping firewood in a lumberjack shirt, who isn’t afraid to speak his mind even if he ticks people off, even if he doesn’t own any handcuffs?

First… LOL! Lumberjack shirt? I’m dying here. Personally, I find Mr. Moseley’s definition of masculinity rather limiting. He simply doesn’t see an equal partnership between the sexes. Don’t believe me? Read on.

There is an authentic original of which BSDM is a corrupt variation. There is the proper role of a strong but kind masculine man. And then there is the perversion. In order for one thing to be “twisted,” there must have been an original that was straight and true. A man’s strength and leadership is something for a woman to trust in and lean on. The perversion caused by sin turns what God created into male chauvinists degrading women as second class.

Power to the fallen mind is mean and demeaning. Fallen men seek power to be superior over others. To God, power is kind. Power shelters and protects, and even gently corrects. The proper role of strength is not to seek one’s own interests, at least not exclusively. A strong gentleman becomes twisted into a male chauvinistic pig through the sins of selfishness and pride, a cold heart, and an inability to empathize with others and care about them as real people.

See? To him people that engage in BSDM (or as most people refer to it, BDSM, but I’ll use his version because it’s the least of his problems – along with the fact that, I’d guess, he hasn’t read the book or seen the movie) are corrupt and perverted. There’s something wrong with these BSDM people! Me? I think it would take an enormous amount of trust between BDSM partners.

And notice how he states that male strength is something women should trust and lean on. What about a man leaning on a woman for support? I have been with my husband for 25 years. There have been plenty of times each of us has leaned on the other for strength and support. Is Mr. Moseley married or in a long term relationship? I ask because I can’t imagine a man in a long term, committed relationship painting the sexes in such a stereotypical fashion. Also, his repeated use of the term male chauvinist/male chauvinist pig is so… dated. This is a man who hasn’t left the 70’s.

But his main point seems to be… women like 50 Shades of Grey because they want to be dominated by men, and feminism has erased the manly-man from existence. That’s a very convenient spin for a misogynist. It’s an excuse for bad behavior. Sorta like Robin Thicke… “Hey, you know you want it.”

There are many problems with Mr. Moseley’s post, but the idea that women have defaulted to BDSM because of the emasculation of men is ridiculous, and, like I said, convenient because it justifies bad behavior. It’s like women’s choices are 1) being submissive and deferring to men to take care of them, lest we mess with god’s natural order and burn in hell, or 2) handcuffs. There doesn’t appear to be any middle ground in Mr. Moseley’s world view. In his world, if a woman is better at handling a crisis situation she should step back and let the man handle it – even if he messes it up. This is so about stroking the male ego for Mr. Moseley.

I’ll move onto this bit of silliness from Mr. Moseley:

Women love to go dancing much more than do men. Yet when a man and a woman go ballroom dancing, the man takes complete and total control. Every split second, the man decides what will happen, which way they will turn, and what the next dance step will be. But no one in their right mind would imagine that ballroom dancing is a man being inconsiderate to a woman. On the contrary, having a man lead allows the two to get closer to each other and to move as one. Nearly always the man is ballroom dancing to please the woman who likes dancing more than he does.

First, not all women love dancing.

Second, not all men dislike dancing.

Third, ballroom dancing doesn’t exist on a man’s whim. There are actual steps that a man follows. Yep, he’s taking direction. He doesn’t simply pull a women into his arms and wing it. So the man is not taking “complete control” he’s following orders.

Fourth, I know five couples who took ballroom dancing lessons. Three of those were initiated by the men.

We’ll end with his closing statement:

The more an anti-God feminism attacks and tears down God’s patterns in male-female relationships, the more the fallen human heart invents twisted alternatives to try to fill in the gaping hole. Women instinctively want a strong man. And some of them can even grow hungry enough to accept a perverted version of masculinity if they cannot find the authentic original of a kind but strong gentleman as God intended.

Anti-God? What he’s saying is that strong women in equal relationships go against god’s will. Or, more simply… Jonathon Moseley doesn’t seem to understand male/female relationships. He’s all, “God says so, so submit, women.” Trotting out god to get your way, your dominance and superiority, is lazy. It requires no thought, and it sure as hell doesn’t involve women being partners in a relationship. He basically claims that women into BDSM aren’t there because they like it. They are there because there are no lumberjack shirt wearing men, so they have to settle for whips and chains. In Mr. Moseley’s world women are still objects. Sex happens to them, not with them. That’s sad.

As to his claim that “Women instinctively want a strong man” I don’t disagree. Men instinctively want a strong women. I leaned heavily on my husband when my best friend was dying of cancer. I completely fell apart. For those of you not familiar, I wrote about my experience here. He was amazing, but not in Mr. Mosely’s way. My husband stepped up. He took care of our children (feeding, grocery shopping, pick ups and drop offs, cleaning, laundry etc. – you know, women’s work and hardly “masculine” endeavors) and took care of me. When my husband’s father fell and ended up in the hospital for weeks and had to eventually go into a nursing home, I lived at the hospital and met with doctors and social workers and called every nursing home in the area until I found a place we were comfortable with. I took care of my father-in-law’s belongings and handled the movers and hired the cleaning company so we could move him. That is what a marriage/committed relationship looks like. It’s about never letting your partner drown.

In closing, if you have to pimp out your god to make your case for superiority then you, and your god, are pretty weak… men.

 

DDOE Tells Christina To Close Or Restructure (Charter/Privatize) Its Priority Schools

There are actually three choices on the table: Closure, Charter Conversion/Privatization… and handing all 5 of Christina’s city schools to Red Clay. No matter what, Christina loses these schools.

The Christina school board must choose by Feb. 27 whether to close its three Priority Schools or hand them over to charter schools or other education management organizations, the Department of Education said in a letter to district staff Tuesday.

The letter leaves one possible alternative: If Christina works with the state on the possibility of redistricting schools so that it no longer operates city schools, it could be removed from the Priority Schools saga altogether.

The Delaware Department of Education (DDOE) is very good at closing down schools. Go speak with anyone at these six Priority Schools and ask them when DDOE showed up to “help” them. Surely DDOE has been in these schools for years – since these six schools have been struggling for a long, long time? Surely, DDOE can point to all the support they’ve given these schools over the years? I hear that DDOE didn’t step foot in these schools or offer assistance prior to Governor Markell’s Priority School announcement last fall. But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe DDOE has been working with the six priority schools for years and drastic action was needed because they exhausted all other options?

I’ve always been neutral on the State and Federal Department of Education, but I’m changing my mind. They really do more harm than good. It would be one thing if these DOEs actually supported and worked with the schools they oversee, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. Instead, it appears they sit in their offices and issue edicts from on high while rarely, if ever, stepping foot into the schools they are in charge. Perhaps it’s time for DDOE to have a small Dover Office while relocating its other offices inside public schools? That way every public school would have at least one DDOE employee in their school on a daily basis. And in the technological age, this is not only possible, it’s easy.

Please don’t forget that these six schools were designated Priority Schools by the DDOE based on a test that the DDOE scrapped because it wasn’t good enough to base results on. Also keep in mind, despite claims last fall, these schools were not the lowest scoring.

My youngest graduates this year. She took the Smarter Balanced test last year (her school was a pilot school) and said it was a confusing mess. Don’t believe her? Take the test. Kavips has them. My husband and I looked at the beginning of the 5th grade reading test and the 3rd and 5th grade math test. It’s really quite poorly written and almost deliberately confusing. We found ourselves rereading questions several times to determine their meaning – and even then we got answers wrong. My husband argued for his (wrong) answers, explaining why – given the question – he was right. (FYI, he’s an engineer with an engineering graduate degree. His main complaint with the test was that it was so poorly written that its scores couldn’t be used to judge student subject knowledge.) I agree with him, and am still bracing myself for the parent explosion when these test scores are released. Get ready for more Priority Schools, because these scores are going to be bad.

Moving on… Let’s take a look at the 3rd option:

The letter leaves one possible alternative: If Christina works with the state on the possibility of redistricting schools so that it no longer operates city schools, it could be removed from the Priority Schools saga altogether.

[…]

If the advisory council’s recommendations are implemented, Red Clay would get Christina’s city schools, including the three Priority Schools. That district has already struck a deal with the state on its three Priority Schools.

Hear the applause? That’s the entire Christina suburban community clapping. But what about the Red Clay (RCCD) community? I honestly don’t know what their reaction to this plan is. If this redistricting plan goes through then RCCD would be adding 3 more Priority Schools (Stubbs Elementary, Bancroft Elementary and Bayard Middle School) to its plate, plus 2 additional Christina elementary schools (Palmer and Pulaski). That’s over 1800 (as of today) new children, most of which are high needs, moving through Red Clay’s elementary, middle and high schools. Can Red Clay’s middle and high school buildings handle the additional population? I’m not sure.

Will RCCD receive additional funding? It should. Or will the standard of the “money following the student” only apply? What are the capacity numbers at RCCD’s middle and high schools? Will RCCD receive support, not only financial, when its 3 Priority Schools turns into 6? I have questions. That doesn’t mean I’m against this plan, I’m just curious as to why RCCD would agree to a plan that would increase its high poverty/high needs population. After all, RCCD hasn’t done so well with its existing high poverty schools and I’m having trouble seeing the RCCD non-city residents being okay with this plan – especially given the Cooke Elementary freak out over including a Lancaster Court Apartments (low income students) into their attendance zone. Something tells me the RCCD suburban community isn’t going to be happy with this idea.

And what about the Christina teachers? What happens to them if the schools close (not going to happen) or convert to charter/privatize? What happens to them if RCCD takes over Christina? Questions, questions, questions. Hopefully, our readers have some answers.

 

Legal Representation For Fetus Of Brain-Dead Women, Or The Next Step In “Personhood”

We’ll begin this post with a quick definition of Personhood Laws. (I’m sure there are better definitions, but we’ll go with this one.)

Personhood laws are laws designed to extend the legal concept of “personhood” to pre-born humans. Specifically, these laws give legal status as a person to any fertilized human egg, from conception until birth. This includes the zygote before it has implanted, and according to medical science, implantation is the beginning of a pregnancy.

BTW, I’m not comfortable with the term pre-born, but if you are then why not use the term pre-dead for the rest of us? Although that could make murder cases tricky. Hey, the victim was going to be dead in the future!

We’ve seen Personhood on the ballot, and we’ve seen it fail in some pretty conservative states. That doesn’t mean it’s going away. It just means the pro-Personhood contingent has switched tactics. They will chip away at the fringes of legalized abortion and they will use the most vulnerable among us.

The proposal by Rep. Matt Krause, R-Fort Worth, would appoint a representative to speak on behalf of the fetus if a pregnant woman is declared brain-dead or otherwise permanently incapacitated. Krause is working with legislative bill-drafters and has yet to introduce a specific measure in the House.

“You’ll hear what the family wants, and you’ll also give the pre-born child a chance to have a voice in court at that same time,” Krause said. “The judge weighs everything and he or she makes their decision based on that.”

Please notice how the pregnant, brain-dead and/or permanently incapacitated woman’s wishes aren’t considered. Know what else isn’t considered? Who picks up the bill for a brain-dead pregnant woman. Bobby Jindal has signed into law a similar bill where those closest to the heartbreaking situation lose their voice.

Gov. Bobby Jindal has signed legislation directing doctors in Louisiana to keep alive pregnant women who are incapacitated if it’s determined the fetus they’re carrying has a viable chance at life.

Some state lawmakers fought during the recent legislative session to change the proposal so family members have more say regarding decisions about administering life-sustaining procedures to their loved ones. That concession was scrapped, though, at the bill sponsor’s request. The version that made it to Jindal’s desk directs doctors to make the call, erring on the side of protecting the fetus, in the event that there’s any legal ambiguity.

The sponsor of the legislation, Austin Badon, D-New Orleans, defined legal ambiguity as any situation except one in which a woman’s living will specified an order of “do not resuscitate while pregnant.”

Yeah, they include a living will exemption, but that’s not really a concern since most young people don’t have living wills and they only need to rely on those who don’t have living wills to advance their agenda. We didn’t have a will until the birth of our first child – but I’ll advise/help my children to get one ASAP. If something had happened to me during that pregnancy, I shudder to think what my husband could have dealt with. Should people have a living will? Absolutely. Do they? Many do not – which is where the family should come in, no?

And, make no mistake, the case Rep. Krause is basing his proposal on has more in common with a horror film.

A blood clot caused Muñoz, 33, to collapse at her Haltom City home in November 2013. Two scans taken at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth revealed that she was brain-dead. Her family immediately asked the hospital to remove her from life support, as her husband said she would have wanted. Doctors refused, saying that because she was 14 weeks pregnant, state law compelled them to keep her alive.

[…]

The family said Muñoz told them she wouldn’t want to be sustained by life support before she died. John Peter Smith officials argued that the Texas Advance Directives Act applied to the case. It states that “a person may not withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment” from a pregnant patient.

[…]

Machado said after about a month, the smell of her daughter’s deteriorating body made it difficult to visit. Physically, stiffness had set in, and her fingers broke when her mother tried to hold her hand.

Doctors detected physical disfigurements and suspected brain damage in the fetus. Muñoz was given injections to restart her heart after it repeatedly stopped, and Machado said the combination of chemicals and a lack of oxygen after her collapse probably doomed the fetus to abnormalities it could not survive.
(emphasis mine because this needs to be emphasized)

There was a similar case in Ireland. I’ll let the Irish specialist sum up this ghoulish situation:

Earlier, a specialist in intensive care, Dr Brian Marsh, said the view of medical science was that the woman was now a “corpse”.

The reality of these situations (decomposing dead bodies?) is gruesome. It’s also what actually happens. The image of a serene “sleeping” woman with a rounded belly isn’t the truth. The truth is ghastly. So, if you want to argue for keeping pregnant, brain-dead woman alive, you had better address what that entails.

But the point of this proposal isn’t really about brain-dead, pregnant women. It’s about establishing the fetus as a person with legal rights. And it’s no coincidence that they’ve targeted a women who can’t speak for themselves, or removed the voices of those closest to them. Anti-abortionists see this as a “gray” area. I’m hoping most people do not. Terry Shiavo wasn’t brain-dead, yet the country was upset with the court’s (and Jeb Bush’s) interference.

The other vulnerable group targeted is teenagers. The “pro-life” group tries to mask its Personhood goal behind parent rights, but if the parent isn’t informed then Alabama will appoint a fetus lawyer.

In Alabama, a minor who wants an abortion must have permission from a parent. The Supreme Court has ruled that states with such parental involvement requirements have to provide an out for young women who fear abuse or have have cut off contact with their parents. Alabama, like 36 other states, allows a minor to ask a judge for permission instead. The process, known as a judicial bypass, is meant to be swift, non-confrontational, and strictly confidential.

Alabama’s new law sets up time-consuming inquisitions. It requires district attorneys to cross-examine minors who want an abortion without parental approval, and it allows DAs and lawyers for fetuses to call witnesses to testify against the pregnant girls. Under this measure, a judge can adjourn bypass hearings for long periods of time, and a judge can disclose the minor’s identity to any person who “needs to know.” If a minor’s parents become aware of a bypass hearing—which the Supreme Court intended to be confidential—the law allows the parents to participate in the hearing and be represented by a lawyer.

Let’s take a look at the cross examination:

McPhillips: You say that you are aware that God instructed you not to kill your own baby, but you want to do it anyway? And are you saying here today that notwithstanding everything that you want to interfere with God’s plan for your baby?

Minor: I think that is between me and God.

McPhillips: And you are not concerned after you have had the abortion that some day you may wake up and say my gosh, what have I done to my own baby?

Minor: It may happen.

McPhillips: You are not worried about being haunted by this? Here you have the chance to save the life of your own baby…. And still you want to go ahead and snuff out the life of your own baby?

Minor: Yes.

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the American Taliban – a Christian based group that uses their religious beliefs, and their god, as a guilt tripping bludgeon. Everyone who’s upset about ISIL and Islam… I’m not seeing much of an ideological split between them and American Christianists. These “pro-lifers” would support bringing back stoning harlots (harlots = any woman who likes or has sex) if they could get away with it. And, make no mistake, all of this is about sex. Don’t believe me? Then look up all the programs these “pro-life” people support after they’ve forced a birth. Pregnant Madonna morphs to Welfare Queen faster than the speed of light.

And take a look at another state that won’t consider a woman’s decision:

A Missouri Republican is pushing a bill that would allow a man who gets a woman pregnant to stop her from having an abortion. The measure would force a woman who wants an abortion to obtain written permission from the father first—unless she was the victim of “legitimate rape.”

Rick Brattin, a state representative from outside Kansas City, filed the bill on December 3 for next year’s legislative session. The proposed measure reads, “No abortion shall be performed or induced unless and until the father of the unborn child provides written, notarized consent to the abortion.”

The bill contains exceptions for women who become pregnant as the result of rape or incest—but there are caveats.

“Just like any rape, you have to report it, and you have to prove it,” Brattin tells Mother Jones. “So you couldn’t just go and say, ‘Oh yeah, I was raped’ and get an abortion. It has to be a legitimate rape.”

These guys just can’t let go of the “legitimate” rape stuff. West Virginia Rep. weighs in:

“Obviously rape is awful…” says Delegate Brian Kurcaba, R-Monongalia. “What is beautiful is the child is that could come from this.”

Obviously? It’s only obvious if you remove the rape. I guess all sperm is sacred. I swear, listening to these people reads like The Handmaid’s Tale.

We all know that “pro-lifers” and conservatives would outlaw abortion in a second. What we need to acknowledge is that Personhood bills, keeping dead, pregnant women on life support, putting pregnant teens under cross-examination by a fetus lawyer, and putting forth proposals to have the “father” have the final word in pregnancy are all part of the War Against Women – Women who are being denied (or trying to be denied) a voice in theses situations. Most women watch these situations closely because we realize forced birth not only affects our autonomy, it affects our economy. We really need to stop pretending that pregnancy isn’t an economic issue. It is.

 

It’s A Soup Day!

Looks like everyone is busy today, so I’ll blog while I cook. The recipe below is a little labor intensive, but worth it. I always double it!

Creamy Potato, Bacon and Cheese Soup

  • 6 large potatoes, cubed and peeled
  • 2 cups water
  • 1 onion, chopped
  • 2 tsp crushed garlic
  • ½ tsp ea: sage, rosemary, basil (fresh is best)
  • 4 cups milk
  • 3 tbsp butter, melted
  • 4 tbsp flour
  • 1 package bacon – cooked and chopped (We like bacon! You can use less… or more!)
  • 8 oz cheddar cheese, shredded
  • salt & pepper to taste

Lg. saucepan (2 to 4 qt)

Cover potatoes with water and boil until tender, drain all but 2 cups water (Keep the potato water with the potatoes).

Saute onions and garlic in butter until soft (If you’re in a rush, you can add the onion and garlic without sauteing). Add spices (to the onion/garlic saute or, if you’re not sauteing add them to the potatoes) then add the onion, garlic and spice mixture to potatoes/potato water.

In a bowl mix together  milk, flour, salt & pepper. Mix well.  Add 3 Tbsp melted butter. Add to potatoes and mix well.

Use a potato masher and mash potatoes in the pot – this will make the soup creamy. (You can remove approx. 1/3 of the potatoes and mash outside the pot if you don’t have a masher)

Bring to a low boil, stirring constantly, add cheese and cooked, chopped bacon. Simmer on low – the longer the better! Serve with fresh bread. Yum!

 

Comment Rescue: Jason330’s Step By Step Plan For Dems Not Voting

On the post “What does being a “Democrat” in 2015 actually mean anyway?” Jason330 lays out a plan. I started to respond in the comments, but realized I couldn’t possibly list all the ways 100% enacting the Republican agenda would take shape. So, I’m turning to our commenters for help creating the list. First, let’s look at the Jason’s comment:

Jason330 says:
February 6, 2015 at 9:02 am

Agreed. A press would be nice. And yes, it is going to be tough medicine for everybody (mostly, as you and Cassandra point out the least well off among us) but at this point I’m a political nihilist. This so-called two party shit mess has to be reduced to splinters. Here is my step by step.

1) GOP takes everything. White House, Congress, Courts, State Governments, School boards. With just a couple of Dem show ponies hanging on to keep the hoax of bi-partisanship alive. [Don’t gasp… With Citizens United and the Democratic Party we have now, this is inevitable, so I’m just saying hurry up and get here.]

2) The country wakes up to what a fucking disaster it is in.

3) The pretend Democratic Party we have now is swept away.

4) Something better replaces it.

So, if the GOP takes everything (and he pretty much covers everything) what would that look like?

Here’s a few things off the top of my head:

1. Massive deregulation of everything – food, medicine, safety, no minimum wage

2. Privatization of everything – schools, social security, post office

3. Discrimination permitted, and encouraged

4. Forced birth and no birth control

5. While they control everything they also get to write laws (at every level of government) that would make it extremely difficult to overturn what they’ve done. Add to that… they’ll have stacked the Supreme Court to uphold these laws no matter if Dem’s eventually come back into power. Electing Progressive Dems will not be enough to undo the damage.

6. Gay Marriage… gone – complete with laws defining marriage as between one man and one woman, which the Conservative Court will uphold.

7. Christianity established as the official religion – religion in our public schools, work places, government buildings

8. And they won’t need to worry about Dems taking any elected office since the new voting laws they pass will make it almost impossible and difficult for Ds to vote.

I dashed those off the top of my head. Add more in the comments – because there are a lot more. Like having to tug your forelock and/or curtsy when in the presence of the 1%.

And I do understand Jason’s frustration. I just don’t think his plan will turn out the way he thinks.

Did You Know That “firing a woman for breastfeeding isn’t sexist because men can lactate, too”

Every new mother is well aware of the benefits of breastfeeding and why they should breastfeed their baby. A pregnant woman and new mother are bombarded with research, flyers, books, advice, advice from strangers, etc. on why the breast is best.  It’s everywhere… except, it seems, at Nationwide Insurance. Although I’m sure Nationwide would claim to be pro-breastfeeding in a “We 100% support breastfeeding… in the home” sorta way.

The Supreme Court has declined to overturn a lower court’s ruling that an insurance company was within bounds when it fired a breastfeeding mother. The woman’s suit was dismissed by the Eighth Circuit Court on the grounds that firing a woman for breastfeeding isn’t sexist because men can lactate, too.

The ACLU’s Galen Sherwin wrote Monday that former Nationwide Insurance Company employee Angela Ames sued her employer when she returned from maternity leave to find that no allowances had been made to enable her to pump breast milk for her baby during the day.

When Ames asked her supervisor for accommodations that would enable her to express milk and store it for her child, the supervisor reportedly responded that Ames should “go home and be with your babies” instead. That supervisor went on to dictate a letter of resignation to Ames that day, effectively forcing her to resign.

Men can lactate, too! They don’t, but they can (or some can), so… hand that baby over to dad and get back to work, Ms. Ames!

I breastfed both of my children, and while I sincerely enjoyed it I would have loved to hand off those 3am feedings to my husband. If only I had known at the time some men could lactate! I would have bought him his very own pump!

Perhaps it’s time to encourage new fathers to try inducing lactation. I can’t imagine new mothers being against this since it would equate into more sleep and free time – two things new mothers have very little of. And if breastfeeding is so important, then let’s spread out the work.

Why aren’t expectant fathers presented with countless materials, instructions and advice on breastfeeding at the doctor’s office… or in line at Target? Why aren’t there breast pumps marketed to men? I Googled “breast pumps” and every one pictured (in its original packaging) had a picture of a mother and child on it. Where was the father? Yes, I know it’s a silly question, but not as silly as pretending it’s okay to fire a mother because men can lactate, too! – and pretending men breastfeeding their children happens all the time. It’s like the court is saying, “I can’t believe you refused to consider your husband breastfeeding your baby! What were you thinking, you selfish, sexist, breastfeeding monopolizer!”

The Court also found that the dismissive statement that Ames should “go home and be with (her) babies” was in fact gender neutral and not directed at Ames because she was a new mother.

Talk about something else that happens all the time. How many men are told to go home and be with their babies? I imagine most fathers would love to hear those words, but they won’t because everyone knows that staying home with children is women’s work. Anyone pretending otherwise (cough, Eighth Circuit Court and Supreme Court, cough) is lying.

Women can’t win. Don’t breastfeed your child? You’re a bad mother who’s hurting her child. Breastfeed your child? You’re fired because you could simply hand that job off to dad… like everyone else. And, why are we having to deal with your breastfeeding issues at work? You should be home with your babies.  This is what a War on Women looks like. It’s a no-win situation.

 

Vaccinations Should No Longer Be Optional

The anti-vax crowd is really an anti-science religion. It’s 100% based on faith, not fact. And it’s time to stop indulging stupid.

Vaccination is about public health, and everyone should have to be vaccinated – unless a qualified doctor says otherwise. If you refuse to vaccinate then you should not be allowed out in public. Your right to not vaccinate ends the second you go outside… perhaps to Disneyland?

And people who vaccinate are getting upset with the public health hazards known as anti-vaxxers. Their right to not vaccinate ends the second their irresponsible decision impacts (infects) others. This isn’t about personal choice. You want to feed your kid a vegan diet? Fine. You want to not vaccinate your kid and then send them to school, take them to the doctor’s office, go to Disneyland? Not fine.

This example shows how we do this very thing when it comes to drunk driving.

Take drunk driving.

People may have their own beliefs around how and when they drink alcohol – but once they run the risk of harming others, it really is in the state’s interest to start legislating rules. How different is that from a preventable outbreak?

“If you choose not to vaccinate your child, and your child infects mine and harms or kills them, I believe you ought be held liable for your choice just as we would do for a drunk driver,” Caplan argued.

Your choice. Your responsibility.

And I’m reaching the point where, if an infant (one too young to vaccinate), or an immunosuppressed person, or a vaccinated person whose vaccination didn’t take comes down with the measles then they should be able to sue. Because I’m not sure what else will get through to these anti-vaxxers. Lord knows, facts don’t.

Brendan Nyhan, an excellent political scientist at Dartmouth University, has done pathbreaking research into convincing anti-vaxxers to back off their flawed ideas.

His team’s disturbing findings: Trying to educate anti-vaccine parents only forces them to retreat further into their shell. Attempting to correct false beliefs about vaccines “may be especially likely to be counterproductive,” Nyhan dryly notes.

For instance, “when [researchers] gave evidence that vaccines aren’t linked to autism, that actually made parents who were already skittish about vaccines less likely to get their child one in the future,” Dr. Aaron Carroll writes at The Incidental Economist, summarizing Nyhan’s research. “When they told a dramatic story about an infant in danger because he wasn’t immunized, it increased parents’ beliefs that vaccines had serious side effects.”

“Basically, it was all depressing.”

This is why the anti-vaccination movement is a religion. They are exactly like climate change deniers – long on beliefs, zero facts. So what can we do to protect ourselves? Well…

So talking to anti-vaxxers might not work. Public shame might not work. What might?

Turn to the law.

“The real goal [of our paper] — and this is so often difficult in public health — is to utilize the law to affect the right public health changes,” Nicholas Diamond said.

“Basic tort law or criminal law can both be tools to affect positive public health changes.”

Another way to put that: What might encourage some parents to finally get over their fear of vaccines?

Fear of lawsuits.

Sad, but true. And this case is striking:

A California woman said anti-vaxxers endangered her baby’s life and forced the 6-month-old girl into a month-long quarantine.

Jennifer Simon took her daughter, Livia, to the doctor Jan. 2 because she had a cold, and the pediatrician’s office called two days later to report that an unvaccinated child with measles had been there the same day.

[…]

She was ordered into a 28-day quarantine in case she became the 53rd person to contract measles in connection with the Disneyland outbreak.

Eight other infants are in quarantine in Alameda County, where Simon lives.

Simon said she was angry that her child’s life was endangered because of another parent’s “personal choice.”

“Their choice endangered my child,” she said.

28 eight days. This couple missed work and had to fly her mother in to take care of the infant. Who should pay for that? If I were having children today my first question to a pediatrician (before I stepped into their office) would be… Do you treat unvaccinated patients? If their answer was “yes” I wouldn’t use them.

And here’s the big question: “What happens if a child dies because some parents decided not to vaccinate their own kid?” Good question, because it’s only a matter of time.

 

 

The Vanderbilt Rape Case Is Horrific

I’ve been following this case for months. If you aren’t familiar with it, here’s a recap:

1. Brandon Vandenburg and the victim were dating. They had spent the evening at a bar – also known as going on a date.

2. Vandenburg drove the extremely intoxicated (unconscious) woman back to his dorm.

3. The incident began in the dorm hallway and moved into a dorm room.

In opening statements, Thurman said they giggled, shot video and sent text messages while they sexually abused her in an assault that began in a hallway. He described in sometimes explicit language how one former player assaulted her with a water bottle while a teammate egged him on. The prosecutor said one of the players passed out condoms and assaulted her.

Thurman said one of the former players urinated on her and made a racial statement. Three of the ex-players are black and one is white. The victim is white.

4. “The Nashville Police only began investigating the incident when school officials reviewed dorm security footage after a vandalism report and instead saw her being dragged down a hallway.”

5. She (the victim) doesn’t remember anything. In fact, she defended him until she was shown the video evidence.

The woman testified that the last thing she remembered on the night in question was Vandenburg plying her with drinks at a popular Nashville night spot. She awakened, she told jurors, alone in a dorm room in her clothes and not knowing where she was.

“I felt very out of it,” the alleged victim, who is now pursuing a Ph.D. in neuroscience at a school outside of Tennessee, testified. “I didn’t feel like myself. I felt very confused. I felt sick and nauseous. I started to develop a really bad headache and I was also in pain in certain parts of my body.”

Vandenberg would tell her later in the day that she got very drunk and he tended to her, she said.

“He told me that I had gotten sick in his room and he had to clean it up and that it was horrible and that he had to spend all night taking care of me and that it was horrible,” she testified of what Vandenberg told her about what had happened. “I apologized. I was embarrassed.”

She apologized to him. And then she did this:

Detectives asked the woman to get a physical examination, but she initially refused, still not knowing what had happened.

When Vandenberg sent her a text message saying that he was probably going to get kicked off the team, she replied by telling him, “I don’t want anyone to get in trouble because of me.”

“I’ll do everything I can to clear your name,” she said in a text to Vandenberg.

Her main concern at the time, she testified, was protecting him. To this day, she said she has no memory of what happened.

We saw this very thing in the Steubenville rape case – the victim consoled their attacker, said that they didn’t believe their attacker had done anything wrong. Little did they know.

It was after Vandenburg and three other football players were charged with her rape that she would see graphic videos of the alleged attack, she testified. Prosecutors played videos of the alleged attack for jurors that they said were shot from Vandenburg’s cellphone. A Nashville detective testified that police were able to recover the videos from a laptop. […]

Earlier this week, McKenzie testified that Vandenberg was “amped” and coaching players to violate the woman. McKenzie said he did not touch her but took pictures. He also testified that Banks and Batey violated the woman.

There’s also testimony that Vandenberg handed out condoms and covered a security camera. Those acts seem pretty deliberate for a guy saying he was too drunk to instigate rape.

Defense attorneys for the players have said that evidence at the trial will show that Batey and Vandenberg are innocent and were extremely drunk at the time. Batey’s lawyer has said that his client was changed by a culture of binge drinking and sex at Vanderbilt.

Oh my. Their reason for what they did was 1.) they were drunk, and 2.) school’s culture of sexual freedom. Guess “sexual freedom” only applies to these guys. Her freedom obviously didn’t count. And for anyone going along with the “I was too drunk to rape/know what I was doing defense” I have a question for you. If you believe that then would you have sex with your mother or a child because you were drunk? If you believe alcohol makes you do things you’d never, ever do when sober then everything’s on the table, right? If not, why not?

I don’t believe for one second that this behavior is new. We just video tape our rapes/assaults now. We need to speak with our boys about this sort of thing. Unconscious women cannot consent (and if they’d do this to an intoxicated woman, then I wouldn’t be the least surprised if they did it to any incapacitated, injured, mentally impaired, etc. woman). Then again, my bet is that everyone involved in this incident relied on the victim being passed out. It’s what made their night possible – it was… a feature, not a bug.

Wilmington City Council Votes To Not Let In More Charter Schools

Yes, this is symbolic, but we’ve come a long way.

The Wilmington City Council sent a request to state leaders Thursday night: Don’t allow any more charter schools to open in the city for the time being, and give the city more say over which schools get approved.

Council approved 9-3, with President Theo Gregory absent, a resolution urging the Department of Education not to consider any new charter applications in the city to “allow elected officials and community representatives time to assess the impact of charter schools in Wilmington and throughout the State.”

Impact is the key word and one of the biggest problem with charters – their impact on surrounding neighborhoods and schools isn’t really considered – and even though the new charter law pays lip service to impact, impact alone isn’t enough to stop a charter from entering a community. Try building an addition to your house without community approval. Maybe labeling the addition as a charter school would be the way to go!

Whether or not a community wants a charter in their neighborhood doesn’t matter. As long as a charter follows state law they can pretty much go where they want. Westgate Farms fought against Odyssey Charter moving in.  They eventually won by focusing on the historic location.  Good thing a cemetery was located there. Otherwise, Odyssey could have moved in – no matter what the surrounding community thought or wanted.

Midtown Brandywine (a city neighborhood) is the latest community facing a charter school moving in.  Their complaints are familiar – they have no voice.  Exceptional Delaware covered this yesterday:

Freire Charter School, scheduled to open in the 2015-2016 academic year is already causing huge problems for the neighborhood it will be housed in.  According to one area resident, this small neighborhood of 220 will be faced with an initial 224 students being transported to the school via DART or walking to the school.  The school was previously going to be located at 920 French St. in Wilmington, but was moved to 201 W. 14th Street.

[…]

Current estimates by the school are to have 560 students by the 2018-2019 year.

If you aren’t familiar with Midtown Brandywine, you should go take a look – go drive those narrow city streets.  Freire (a charter whose “special interest” is zero tolerance) will be smack dab in the middle of that neighborhood. And the idea that the community won’t be impacted by this school is nuts.

Many years ago my kids attended the Academy of the Dance and the drop off and pick up of that small business created quite a back up in Midtown Brandywine.  During that time the community was dealing with 15 – 20 ballerinas staggered over various class times.  Now imagine 224 (eventually 560) students being dropped off and picked up in the morning and afternoon. No wonder this community is concerned.  The traffic will be horrendous. And the idea that traffic will not be a problem because students will not be dropped off and picked up by car, or they will take DART or walk, is ludicrous.

A Midtown Brandywine resident shared their concerns on Facebook:

Thank you to Red Clay Education Association President, Mike Matthews, for adding Midtown Brandywine Neighborhood Wilmington DE‘s concerns as he addressed the State Board of Education today! Little did we know that on 12-31-14, the Freire School reps submitted a request for a Major Modification of their application for a Charter. Reasons: lower than expected student registrations; change in building (they had planned to be on French Street); need for less space (due to lower than expected enrollment); no cafeteria on site. The reason for the Modification request? To remain eligible for $687,000 federal/state start-up funds. My questions? Why wasn’t this mentioned by Freire reps at our Tuesday Board meeting, and why isn’t this money being spent to bolster our existing public schools that really need it, instead of a Philadelphia-based organization?

It wasn’t mentioned because Freire didn’t need to mention it to the community, and mentioning it could only cause problems for Freire’s plans.  The resident sent a letter to the Secretary of Education about the neighborhood’s concerns which prompted this comment from Mike Matthews:

You sent your letter to the secretary of education. I’ve learned that he did NOT share the letter with the state board. Oh my!

Oh my, indeed.

I’m not sure City Council’s vote last night will make a difference, but it does send a message. A message I hope is heard. It’s past time residents have a say – and a vote – into what’s allowed in their communities. School districts can’t build new schools without getting community support. The same should be true for charter schools.

 

Christina Fights Back – Delay Granted, But The End Game Remains The Same

So… last night this happened:

The Christina School Board again delayed a final decision on its three Priority Schools on Tuesday night, saying they wanted to give the school communities time to study a new compromise proposal worked out between district and state officials.

[…]

Originally, the state had said the state and district needed to work out an agreement by last week or Gov. Jack Markell would shut the schools down or hand them over to charters or other outside operators. Some board members originally believed they had to vote Tuesday night or that takeover would occur.

But Sen. Bryan Townsend, whose district includes Christina, said he called Markell’s office during the board meeting and the governor’s staff said they were willing to further extend the deadline.

The strike through words are my doing, and it would be refreshing if someone asked how closing these schools would actually work. Until that question is asked and answered I’ll file “closure” under meaningless threat. Unless someone thinks redrawing attendance zones that bus these children out to suburban schools is actually on the table. No? Well, neither do I.

Evans voted against postponing a decision, saying the children in these schools need urgent help.

Others, though, said they would not vote on a plan worked out by a handful of officials after months of work with community groups.

The children in these schools need urgent help? You don’t say? Remind me whose job it’s been to help them, Mr. Evans. As much as I don’t like the Priority Schools plan, the idea that a school board member – the person whose job it is to urgently help these schools – can utter these words as a reason for signing a hastily written, not publicly reviewed or discussed MOU astounds me.

Perhaps Mr. Evans could explain how the MOU helps the children in urgent need and why it took a threatened state takeover of his schools to address these urgent needs.  Up until Priority Schools came into play, I didn’t see the urgency.

The MOU the board was voting on approved a “school leader” to run Bayard and “executive director” and “school leader” for Bancroft and Stubbs. The executive director would be the top boss of the school, while the school leader would spearhead the curriculum and instruction.

Polaski said the Department pushed for that structure.

A school leader and an executive director? I have no doubt the Department pushed for that structure – DDOE is full of administrators. Remember, the only clear detail in the original MOU was the excessive salary (160,000.00 minimum) of new school leaders (still hate that phrasing – every time it’s used I think of North Korea. Which doesn’t seem far off the mark. Sorry.)

Ed reformers love them some administration/CEO types – and it’s long past time to stop pretending the business community is the best and brightest among us. They aren’t – not by a long shot. Making money for themselves is their top priority – which is fine – but it’s no way to run public education, healthcare, the arts, social security, etc.. They have far more in common with owners of sports teams who focus on ticket and tee shirt sales than they do with truly intelligent people who tackle complex issues from every angle. I simply can’t wait for this phase to pass and we start tuning out the supposed “movers and shakers” whose only focus is the bottom line, shareholders (who, no matter what they say, aren’t the kids), and profits. Adding another layer of administration is the corporate way. If only they could figure out a way to fire/lay off the children…

But they have figured that out. Silly me. It’s called charter schools!  Schools that get to handpick their populations and even “counsel out” undesirables and then claim success! Which then gets repeated by “business leaders” only looking at the bottom line – never bothering to wonder what happened to children who were fired, laid off, down-sized…

Eastside Charter, a school constantly touted as a success by our Governor and Secretary of Education, had 57 Kindergartens in 2012-2013 and 56 Kindergarteners in 2013-2014. In 8th grade they had 22 students in 2012-2013 and 26 8th graders in 2013-2014.  Over half of their student body vanished. Is this really success, or just a numbers game that corporate CEOs excel at? Need to improve a bottom line? Get rid of people! Presto! Increased profits! Never mind that getting rid of employees, or children in this case, didn’t really “improve” anything. That isn’t success, and everybody knows it.

Another school being touted as a success is Red Clay’s Lewis Dual Language. Let’s look at their numbers.

Kindergarten 2012-2013 – 95 students
Kindergarten 2013-2014 – 104 students
5th grade 2012-2013 – 64 students
5th grade 2013-2014 – 56 students

31 children missing in 2012-2013 and 48 children missing in 2013-2014. What happened to those children? You want to rely on data in the form of test scores? Go find those children. Tell me exactly why they left those schools.  If you can’t answer that question, then your data is unreliable. Then again, the data (standardized test scores) being used has been deemed unreliable by the Governor, Secretary of Education and the DDOE… hence, the reason for the new test, Smarter Balanced. Remember, we needed this new, expensive test because the old test was unreliable. And yet… the old test is what we’ve based Priority Schools. Can someone explain that to me?

Back to Christina… We’ve now entered the phase where the state goes into PR mode. They want to appear reasonable; that they are bending over backward to “work with” Christina so when they charterize/privatize these schools (which is still the end game – that never wavers) the News Journal can write how reasonable they were. And the news Journal will write that. Which is sad, because there’s actually a big story here.

Wilmington Education Advisory Committee Weighs In On Priority Schools

The letter below was sent to Governor Markell yesterday. It is asking for the same thing most of us are asking – to slow down the process because more time is needed.

January 9, 2015

The Honorable Jack Markell
Governor, State of Delaware
820 North French Street, 12th Floor
Wilmington, Delaware 19801

Dear Governor Markell:

When you appointed the Wilmington Education Advisory Committee, you charged us with advising you and Secretary Murphy on how best to strengthen educational opportunities for all Wilmington students. Our Committee has been diligent in this regard. As such, today, I am writing on behalf of the Committee to request that you defer final actions on the Red Clay Consolidated and Christina School District priority schools until we issue our interim set of recommendations.

Our intention is to submit this set of recommendations by Monday, January 26, the contents of which will include initial analyses and proposals in the following critical areas we have identified.

  • Governance and the current landscape of traditional, Vo-Tech and charter schools in the City of Wilmington
  • The role of the City of Wilmington, particularly as it relates to formal representation, participation and influence
  • Overcoming barriers to student success, including the impacts of race, class, geography and the unique needs of Wilmington children and schools
  • Needs-based student funding, and
  • Implementation

We intend to make these interim recommendations available for public comment, which we will seek in earnest through early March. Our final report will be submitted no later than March 31.

We recognize that the approval process already is underway for the plan submitted by Red Clay and that the timetable is confirmed for actions on the priority schools in both districts. To be clear, we will not be commenting on the plans themselves, but do expect that our recommendations will have impact on the broader set of governing responsibilities for all Wilmington schools, including the priority schools in Christina and Red Clay. As such, we believe it is prudent that you consider our recommendations before moving forward.

In thinking through this request, we have gained the support of Wilmington Mayor Dennis Williams, Wilmington City Council President Theopalis Gregory, New Castle County Councilman Jea Street, the Wilmington delegation of the General Assembly as well as other elected officials and community partners.

The Advisory Committee agreed early in our convening that we would take the long view with respect to public education in Wilmington, but would also take advantage of any opportunity to weigh-in on specific action items during ‘moments that matter.’ This is one such occasion.

In that vein, I hope you will accept our request. We look forward to your response soon. Thank you. Sincerely,

Tony Allen, Ph.D., Chairman

cc: The Honorable Mark Murphy, Secretary of Education
The Honorable Patricia Blevins, Senate President Pro Tempore
The Honorable Peter Schwartzkopf, Speaker of the House
The Honorable David Sokola, Senate Education Committee Chair
The Honorable Earl Jaques, House Education Committee Chair
The Honorable Jea Street, New Castle County Councilman
The Honorable Dennis Williams, Mayor of the City of Wilmington
The Honorable Theopalis Gregory Sr., Wilmington City Council President
The Honorable Nnamdi Chukwuocha, Wilmington City Council Education Committee Chair

Wilmington delegation

The Honorable Margaret Rose Henry, State Senator
The Honorable Robert Marshall, State Senator
The Honorable Harris McDowell, State Senator
The Honorable Stephanie Bolden, State Representative
The Honorable Gerald Brady, State Representative
The Honorable James Johnson, State Representative
The Honorable Helene Keeley, State Representative
The Honorable Charles Potter, State Representative

Members of the Wilmington Education Advisory Committee

One thing is clear. The more people learn about the Priority Schools Plan the more they ask for more time before implementation.

The time frame is what frustrates so many – it simply cannot be taken seriously. The problems facing these schools are complicated, and ones we’ve ignored for years. Sadly, there is nothing in those MOUs that address, let alone acknowledge, the real issues facing these schools. And longer school days, getting rid of teachers and bringing in new “school leaders” (I hate that phrasing, btw) doesn’t address the very real challenges these children, and the schools serving them, face every day.

I stood on the steps at Warner when the Priority Schools plan was unveiled and, when the announcement was over, I walked away shaking my head. By the time I got home I realized that the main priority of the plan was the consequences of failure; that the only thing carved in stone in the MOU was the loss of our public schools. The time frame all but guaranteed that outcome. Hopefully, this letter will help slow things down.

Christina’s Plan For “Priority Schools” And Last Night’s Meeting

Here’s what happened at last night’s Christina’s School Board meeting:

With two days remaining before a threatened state takeover of its three inner-city schools, the Christina board delayed action on the state’s priority schools plan – but it gave Superintendent Freeman Williams permission to work with education officials on a compromise.

Department spokeswoman Alison May said officials there were willing to extend the deadline for negotiations – at least for the moment. Gov. Jack Markell has said he will close those schools down or hand them over to charters or other outside operators if the district and state can’t agree.

The board’s move comes after the Department of Education rejected draft plans the district had crafted after months of meetings with parents, teachers and others in the schools’ communities.

“At the highest level, the plans propose continuing the work that is already underway at the schools, which we know has not been effective,” May wrote. “The plans propose supplementing the current work in minor ways, which we do not believe will be transformative for students.”

Before continuing, let’s break this down. First, Gov. Markell will not close these schools down, so he should probably drop that bit of nonsense. Charter and privatization have always been the end game for these Priority Schools (It’s actually more than the end game, it’s the entire point of this), so let’s stop pretending that closure is on the table.  It isn’t… unless someone wants to tell me where the children attending the closed schools would go? And while the MOU doesn’t have much to say about the children attending these schools, they do, in fact, actually exist.

Second, let’s deal with this quote: “At the highest level, the plans propose continuing the work that is already underway at the schools, which we know has not been effective,” May wrote. “The plans propose supplementing the current work in minor ways, which we do not believe will be transformative for students.”

But, is this true?

A comprehensive review of Christina’s Stubbs and Bancroft elementary schools, conducted by the University of Delaware and commissioned by DDOE, released a report in early December indicating that these schools are making significant progress in a range of categories under their current leadership. In fifteen areas, including School Leadership Decisions, Curriculum and Instruction, and Strategies for Students Who Are at Risk, both schools received the highest possible evaluation.

This is a report (DASL) commissioned by the DDOE that they never mention.  What is Alison May basing her statement on? Not the report her department commissioned. I understand why DDOE wants to ignore these findings.  If they addressed them then they would actually have to change their mindset and their MOU; They would actually have to deal with the complicated issues facing our high poverty schools, drop their corporate fantasy of overpaid CEOs running our schools, stop blaming teachers who are on the front line with these kids and their families every day, start fighting for needs-based funding of high poverty schools – many (high poverty schools) of which didn’t exist until the legislature embraced Choice, Charters, Neighborhood Schools Act and Magnets – and simply consider trying smaller class sizes.

I said this in October, and I’ll say it again. “What’s infuriating is that we begin these discussions pretending we’ve actually tried to help these schools.  We haven’t, and the State and Districts are both guilty of this.  It isn’t as if the State and District are saying, “Hey, we tried smaller class sizes, putting more teachers in the schools, implemented equitable funding, added resources like wellness centers, school psychologists and put back programs such as TAG, Technology, Reading/Math specialists, Arts, etc. and these schools are still struggling so now we need to try something different.”  They can’t say that because they never did that.”

Now, suddenly, everyone is supposed to believe that the powers-that-be care about these schools? If they cared they’d have a track record of their efforts helping these schools. Can anyone show me what the DDOE, our Governor and Legislature has done to help these schools prior to labeling them Priority Schools? Serious question, btw.

Back to last night’s meeting:

State officials also say Christina’s rules for the turnaround don’t give principals enough flexibility from the district to overhaul their schools’ budget and operations, allowing them to “propose” changes instead of implementing themselves. Christina’s plan also does not allow principals as much authority as the state wants when it comes to hiring school staff.

Other changes Christina has proposed, like extending the school day by 30 minutes, aren’t ambitious enough to make a dramatic difference, the state argues.

Two things.

1.) What is wrong with principals “proposing” changes to the district? Why shouldn’t changes be reviewed? Principals having free reign, with no oversight, is the charter school model.  Go ask the families of the now closed Pencader Charter, Moyer Academy, Reach Academy, etc. how they felt when the state closed (slated for closure) their schools and they had nowhere to turn, no district to appeal to, a Charter School Network that threw them under the bus rather than fight for them. I’ve had those conversations. It’s time for DDOE, our Secretary of Education, Governor and elected officials to do the same.

Also keep in mind that the state took over Moyer – How’d they do? Oh, it’s closing? – and stepped in to help and oversee Pencader’s turn around. Is Pencader still open? Nope. Not to mention, even with the state “being there” Pencader ended up costing tax payers over 300,000.00 (additional monies) due to more financial mismanagement – and this happened on the DDOE watch. Go speak to these families and ask them how they feel about DDOE. If you think Priority School parents are angry… you don’t know the definition of angry.

2.) Can we please stop treating the families in Priority Schools as a monolith. Extending the school day isn’t the right choice for everyone. Most schools started 2 hours late today, and not everyone was happy about that.  So extending the school day may not be right for everyone.  I’m not necessarily against a longer school day, but to keep tossing this around like it will solve the problem is as lazy as school uniforms.

Red Clay is guilty of this as well.  I wrote about it here. The only people who would consider Warner and Shortlidge a campus are people who have never walked between Warner and Shortlidge.  It’s typical “sit around a conference table at district office” thinking.  May I suggest that those that came up with this idea take that walk today?

One last thing about the News Journal article…

Though Red Clay’s rules eliminated the two most controversial items in the state’s original proposals: $160,000 minimum to pay the new principals and forcing all teachers to reapply for their jobs, it did leave much of the rest intact.

Why no, no it didn’t. The most controversial item in the MOU is the threat of closure, converting to charter and privatization – and that will never be removed since it’s the entire flippin’ point of the MOU.

Exceptional Delaware breaks it down (If you’re not reading this bog, you should):

At the Christina School District Board of Education meeting this evening, the board announced the Delware Department of Education has set new strict guidelines regarding their memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the priority schools.  The DOE gave Christina three options in regards to their very limited choices:

1) Approve their existing MOU which the DOE has already said is not approvable.

2) Develop a negotiating team made of 3 members of the board, the superintendent, and other members hand-picked by the superintendent.  This team would have to meet with the DOE by 1/9 (Friday) and agree to a memorandum of understanding.  The DOE would no longer give feedback on the plan.  If the sides were not able to come to an agreement, the district would have the opportunity to choose one of the three turnaround models-turn the school into a charter, school closure, or turn it over to a management company.  If the two sides were able to come to an agreement, the Christina Board would have to vote on it at their 1/13 meeting.

3) If no action is taken, and all items are tabled, the turnaround models would again be the only option.

Okay. There was really only two choices. 1.) turnaround model (charter or privatization), or 2.) Do what the DDOE says and delay the turnaround model. Please notice how all roads lead to charter conversion and privatization.

Question: If the DDOE would no longer give feedback on the plan then how would Christina and the DDOE reach an agreement?  And what’s with the rushed schedule (again – this entire thing has been rushed) and the fact that this schedule will violate the open meeting law? Is DDOE above the law? Can they force Christina to break it?

You know, most school board members have real jobs and might not be able to clear their schedules for a long (and it will be long) Friday meeting.  Will Penny Schwinn clear her schedule – because she had better be free all day on Friday. If she’s not, then Priority Schools aren’t her priority.

In terms of where this negotiation meeting would be held, a twisted yet hysterical part of the meeting came when board member Harrie Ruth Minnehan read DOE Chief Proficiency Officer Penny Schwinn’s hours of availability during the next two days.  The longest block of time she could provide was two hours, but only if they met in Wilmington, between 9-11am on Friday.  Yes, I can see how bad the DOE wants to negotiate in good faith…

I plan to monitor Penny’s schedule. I expect it to be 100% cleared for Friday – with every slot labeled for Christina. I also expect the meeting to go well into the night – that no one leaves until an acceptable deal (for both sides) is done.  Mark Murphy and Jack Markell should be there as well. Either this is a priority, or it’s not. If you threaten to close, charter or privatize public schools then you need to be at the table helping to make this work. No more delegating, since, obviously, that doesn’t work. If it worked then Christina wouldn’t have had months of meetings with parents, teachers and community members only for the DDOE to shrug and say, “Nah.” Unless… their real purpose was to always say Nah?

I do know that there is probably no stopping this – let alone actually doing it right.  Because if we did it right then these schools wouldn’t privatize and/or become charters. Which defeats the true purpose of Priority Schools.

In closing, let’s look at one of the schools Markell, Murphy and DDOE keep holding up as a success – East Side Charter.

Nelia Dolan left this comment on Kilroy’s:

The greatest proficiency gains made in East Side Charter that everyone is touting was carried by a single cohort of students that went from 62 students in the third grade (2010/2011) to 29 students in the 5th grade (2012/2013).
Unless you can look at the gains of each individual student, then the possibility that the students who left the school were ones that did not perform well enough to meet standard is too great to ignore.
What difference does it make if the student body engineering is happening on the front end or somewhere in between?

I guess losing/counseling out over half of your student body is one way to raise test scores.

And about those tests… Brace yourselves for a massive explosion once the Smarter Balanced scores are released this summer.  On the bright side, we’re going to have a lot more Priority Schools. Boom!