Category Archives: public defender

by

JD Vance (and the polar society)

I don’t think many people (Democrats, and a million other American moochers who don’t vote, don’t’ give a fuck) really know who JD Vance is. I don’t really know either, except that I read his book, Hillbilly Elegy, and saw the movie – and really like them both.

Also know:

Investing

In 2017, Vance joined the investment firm Revolution LLC.[63] It was founded by Steve Case, who also cofounded AOL.[63] Vance was tasked with expanding the “Rise of the Rest” initiative, which focuses on growing investments in underserved regions outside Silicon Valley and New York City.[63]

So, in the world of sound-byte knowledge, I am a genius! A know-it-all, because no one wants to know-it-at-all, right?

Now I have also been to Appalachia many times, and not as a sight-seer. I’ve hung out with them hillbillies, drank, and played music. I know ones who died, and many who will die from inhaling heroin, for example. Last year I attended Healing Appalachia, and got my Narcon certification. Talked to a hundred junkies, all of them despised by the elites of our country, ’cause of the way the talk and jes’ lie around all day (sarcasm – it’s hard to spot these days).

Here’s my point: there is no doubt who will vote for JD Vance – lots of poor busted people from the hills, who finally see a guy that could understand him. Will there be the same amount of poor, working class people from Scranton NJ voting for Joe Biden (well, moot point now – but not totally). Will the poor working class people of Scranton ever going to vote for Joe Biden? Did Joe Biden write a book called “Scranton Elegy”, to honor “his people?”

But here’s the other side of the coin: JD Vance is a millionaire now, who went to Yale. He’s got a bit of Southern accent, but, he ain’t going back to Appalachia any time soon. And, while he may take their votes, greedily (why Trump chose him, of course), those people aren’t paying for the campaign, vis-a-vis paying for the Presidency. So is JD Vance disingenuous? I think (my opinion) that he can’t be completely disingenuous. Watch the movie.

The Presidency is indeed paid for. If you think that’s conspiracy theory, you are very, very confused about the fundamentals of American politics, or, you think that Mickey Mouse is not an actor inside a costume at Disney World, or you think that Disney Corporation is all about kids. These are not cynical conspiracies – this is America.

The question you need to ask yourself is: are the Democrats or the Republicans going to change America, to loosen the stranglehold of corporate greed?

by

Standardized Childhood Assessments: I Fear for our Children’s Emotional Safety

My father dedicated his life to education.  He dedicated his life to children.  He defended children against an ever-growing Orwellian machine that classified and branded children, and its only goal and end. I wish he were alive to help me.

In this article, Selecting an Appropriate Infant-Toddler Assessment, from Kaplan, the criteria they use are particularly instructive:

  • Screening and assessment materials should be developmentally appropriate and created specifically for the age group in your care.
  • Assessment should utilize a variety of tools and processes, including children’s representative work (artwork, stories they write, etc.), observation records, and progress summaries.
  • Assessment should be inclusive and recognize diversity in children’s backgrounds, learning styles, and rates of learning.
  • Assessment tools should support children’s development and learning; assessment should not make them feel bad about themselves. A focus on what a child can do independently and with assistance is the best marker of his or her growth and development.
  • Assessment should rely on procedures that occur during real activities and classroom experiences instead of putting the focus specifically on skills testing.
  • Regular and periodic assessment should occur in a wide variety of circumstances with information about children’s growth, development, and learning being systematically collected and recorded.
  • Teachers should be the primary assessor, but assessment should also promote parent involvement and encourage children to participate in self-evaluation.
  • Assessment should encourage parent-teacher collaboration with information about children’s growth, development, and performance being shared regularly by both parties.

I won’t deal with each one, but you should read each one carefully, and think about any experiences you have had that either support or deviate from these.

The first  point is: Assessment should utilize a variety of tools and processes – it should not be limited to a short interview, or really any assessment kit (I will list those later). Clearly, an on-the-spot test, in any subject, for any purpose, will NOT be reflective of the actual state of the person taking the test. This is often referred to as the observer effect, although this, and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle are misused in the context of psychology.  The correct notion is the Observer-expectancy effect.  This should be well-known by anyone who is assessing your child.  If your assessor is not aware of it, and is not able to cite its origin, then you should not trust their qualification.

 

Second, Assessment should be inclusive and recognize diversity.  This should not be dumbed down to only refer to cultural/ethnic  differences.  Often overlooked are the learning styles and rates of learning.  By and large, the childhood assessments I have seen are completely devoid of Howard Gardner’s Theories of Multiple Intelligences .  And that’s not OK. You certainly would laugh at someone assessed a visually-challenged child with flashcards, right?

Probably the most important for me is: Assessment tools should support children’s development and learning; assessment should not make them feel bad about themselves.  Standardized assessments are the antithesis of this!  They e-value-ate individual children on the basis of social and cultural norms, in alleged cognitive skill areas.  Nothing could be further from support.  It’s just evaluation.  And mostly, de-valuation.  Regardless whether someone tells the child “how they did”, the know – from a very young age – that they are being evaluated.  Further, subtle changes – or sometimes drastic changes – in the behaviors of parents and teachers after an assessment will be picked up by the children!  Do not think you are above this!  If you were raised in America, you have been damaged by the cult of performance.  We are NOT put on this earth to produce or to entertain!

Assessment should rely on procedures that occur during real activities and classroom experiences.  Ok.  Pretty obvious that an interview or testing situation does NOT meet this criterion, and should be invalidated.

Teachers should be the primary assessor, but assessment should also promote parent involvement.  Nothing here about a third-party evaluator.  Nothing at all.  Rest-assured, there ARE plenty of “professionals” who hire out for this.  Mercenaries who play on the insecurity of both teachers and children in their ability to assess the children they interact with every single day!  Preposterous!  Enable yourself!  Be the solution!

Once you have digested this, you could begin to look at the assessment instruments that are available – and COMPARE!  Here again from Kaplan is a handy chart. Look carefully, because it is NOT the case that having check-marks across the graph is the best!  Indeed, give the above discussion, only three of the tools listed do not use standardized (normative) comparisons. Particularly, a discussion of E-LAP and LAP-D used in rehabilitation could possibly change the way you think . This study uses Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFIM). E-LAP  (or E-LAP3) is neither standardized nor normative, whereas LAP-D and the WeeFIM are normalized.  The point here is, it’s not easy! But these tests can provide some insight in cognitive disorder, which could supplement (only!) teacher and parent awareness.

I particularly like the series Reaching Potentials.  There are two volumes, and you can get the PDF online right now and begin reading!  Here is the

Description:

Designed to assist early childhood professionals in applying the guidelines for appropriate curriculum content and assessment developed by NAEYC and NAECS/SDE, Volume 1 addresses reaching developmental potentials for all children—including those with varying language and cultural backgrounds and children with disabilities—and reaching the potentials of teachers and administrators.

by

Notes on Maureen Dowd’s “Who Do We Think We Are?”

The first line that tripped me up was:

in this century we have had only three brief moments when a majority of Americans said they were satisfied with the way things were going: the month W. took office, right after the 9/11 attacks and the month we invaded Iraq.

I unconsciously rewrote the line, replacing satisfied with dis satisfied. Take a moment, and work the sentence in your mind, like this

  • the majority of Americans said they were satisfied with the way things are going, in the month George W. took office
  • the majority of Americans said they were satisfied with the way things are going, right after the 9/11 attacks
  • the majority of Americans said they were satisfied with the way things are going, the month we invaded Iraq

I don’t think Maureen worked this out well enough for us: does it say that Americans were most satisfied with America, when things were the worst, since it was prefaced by  “chronic disillusionment” i.e. dystopia fits our disillusionment, therefore we are happy(?)

I think it demonstrates something more subtle – that the majority of Americans are happiest when we have black-and-white leaders, who rule by decisive, overt force (as opposed to ruling by secret-directive drone assassination), when we are pissed of, and can see the enemy clearly, and when we take off the gloves and kick the world’s ass.  The reality is Team America – not ecumenicism, world-mindedness, and peace politics.

And it belies another underlying truth: that liberal America lives inside a well-walled fantasy world, where Obama brought change for the good, where Occupy Wall Street changed Wall Street, and Egypt was liberated from oppression.  Didn’t happen – except in the digital media world.

Which connects, in my mind, to another tract she follows in the article:

Young people are more optimistic than their rueful elders, especially those in the technology world. They are the anti-Cheneys, competitive but not triumphalist. They think of themselves as global citizens, not interested in exalting America above all other countries.

This isn’t a “good thing” (we really do want it broken down in the George W. fashion: good v bad). It’s a collective hallucination, perpetrated in the device-world. Worse than Orwell could have imagined (he only had big bulky TVs to base his dystopia on.  These small, sleek brain-control devices are much closer in size to bacteria!), the world-within-the-world of device-logic, device-communication, device-policiticism, has made those would would Act for Change, not act at all; rather, key-punch, key-enter, their virtual activism. In the end, nothing gets done, really, and nothing is wrong, virtually.

I also love the Walter Percy quote:

Lucky is the man who does not secretly believe that every possibility is open to him.

While she heaps this anti-awareness entirely upon the millennials (which misses her age-group by just a finger-breadth?), it is probably the same old “me-generation” started back in the 70’s by Eric Fromm. We all believed Mr. Rogers when he told us we could be whatever we wanted to be, and the implicit cognate idea: everything you do should be about your own becoming.

Lastly, I want to jab Nathaniel Philbrick, who, speaking of our Founding Fathers/Mothers, writes:

They weren’t better than us back then; they were trying to figure things out and justify their behavior, kind of like we are now

I think Patrick may be one of those millennials, who constructs excuse-houses of cards.  My response: they were better than us; they were more thoughtful, more educated, and more ethical, by a degree which is simply unrecognizable to us, in our modern highly mis-educated unintelligence. Benjamin Franklin was an amazing person – not just really cool,but by deed, word, and legacy, an amazing person – who strove only to be better and more accountable, and, who actually did the work! We don’t have leaders like that, nor did Egypt – which is why these new age revolutions fail, but our crazily idealistic one did. Same goes for Thomas Jefferson: despite the modern critique, fostered probably just to make us not look so bad, is that we was secretly married to a Black woman, and had children by her, but did not acknowledge it publicly.  Seems to me more like he lived his beliefs, only they weren’t beliefs –  they were his feelings – in the only practical way possible in a time where his wife would probably have been killed publicly, despite any valiant efforts on the part of Tom.  My point, however, is that he was a kind of genius, and a seer, far beyond anyone we know of today, save possibly Noam, the Wise, or Ralph, the True.  But even those guys don’t seem to be able to make a real revolution happen.  No, there is something else in the recipe for Patriot that we can put a finger on.

 

by

the very humanity of the teachings of Jesus…

…renders them obsolete in a world without people. in the world of the loner. in a world without government; in  a world without commerce. the teachings of Buddha, in contrast, require no world. Buddhism is a doctrine about the struggle between human and universe.  Jesus’ teachings are about the struggle of the individual to understand and create his/her place in a society.

This bit of wisdom comes from a cult sci fi book, “Earth Abides”, by George R. Stewart, about the survivor of a pandemic, who suddenly finds himself alone, with lots of time to read.  Actually, I can’t be sure this is his idea originally – Pope John Paul said much the same in “Crossing the Threshold of Hope.”

Jesus said “Love one another.”  How is it possible to practice this faith, when there is none other? If there were no money, no system of commerce, how could I “… go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.”  There are no poor.  I can not have possessions if there is no one else – the concept of ownership and private property are illusions create by a commercial society.

Jesus’ life, as we know it, was about a rebellion of love, against a society. He never concerns himself with “the universe.”  Satan tempts him only with corporeal and political desire – the temptations the have arisen from social and political organization.  Indeed, how could the message of Jesus be relevant to the Masai? “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s due”? Who is “Cesar”, when you are a nomad? How will you give away anything, when you have nothing in your culture like “ownership” – the herd is tended by the tribe, and the tribe follows the herd, to live, to survive.  None of the individual animals belongs to any individual.  “Love thy neighbor”?  In a nomadic tribe, who is the neighbor?

George Stewart does discover that the “old testament” speaks more to the questions of the one within the universe – make sense, given that the Jews were nomadic, had no Kingdom, per se (at that time).  How indeed would Jesus invitation to enter into the larger global society, have been appealing or even comprehensible by (at least the earlier) Jewish civilization? To acknowledge a caesar? Above JHVH? To support the poor and the sick, when nomadic survival was only survival of the fittest, not by dogma, but by the necessity of the desert.

And so, for us, we the modern social animal – will you be able to adopt such a social religion as Jesus’, if you do not desire in your heart to plunge into the seemingly absurd chaos which is fundamental to a liberal society of egoists? Love is only useful to salve the wounds of human interaction.  It becomes a useless burden if you intend to go it alone.

 

by

what is this thing

Violence Across New York Leaves 7 Dead

we live in Hell. actually, “we” don’t – Hilary Clinton and I.  But most people live in Hell.

The police said the boy’s mother called 911 from her apartment on Marcus Garvey Boulevard in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, just before 11 p.m. Friday, and said that she had killed her son and then swallowed pills. Officers found the boy, 7, lying in bed with “bruising and lacerations” to the back of his head, according to a police official.

He was declared dead at the apartment, and his mother, Tenika Revell, was taken to Woodhull Medical Center for evaluation. Ms. Revell, 40, was charged with murder, manslaughter and endangering the welfare of a child.

Neighbors said Ms. Revell had treated the boy, Bernard, lovingly, buying him snacks, watching him ride a bicycle and holding his hand while crossing streets.

Several people said Ms. Revell had told them she received a diagnosis of terminal cancer.

“She was always very nice, and when she came in with the boy, she would buy him cakes, potato chips, water,” said Raymond Espinal, 56, who works at a bodega in the building where the boy lived.

but she bludgeoned him to death. after all those cakes, and safe trips across the street.

 

by

Morsi Is Sworn In as President of Egypt – NYTimes.com

Morsi Is Sworn In as President of Egypt – NYTimes.com.

fascinating, no?  the result of Arab Spring – the ousting of Mbarek the militarist, results in this democracy  – a nation with a radial Islamist ruling party, albeit democratically elected, but clearly with the need to be backed by the military (these guys have never done government before – they will need help).

not being cynical here – I am drawing your attention to the fact that democracy is “by the people”, and the people just might elect a very sectarian ruler.  it does not mean that they have cheated – it means, really, that the majority of people in this country are aligned with the elected ideology.

I think that in Amerika, people get confused: in their childish view, they equate “democracy”  with something more along the lines of republic – that each faction/interest will be equally represented.  but in fact, democracy ir rule by the majority, and so, the “minority” is simply the side that did not get elected, and, they will suffer.

I’ve always drawn attention to the fact that Amerika was designed to be a republic, and its certainly ha all the trappings of one – especially the Electoral College – which people misunderstand and hate. But I now realize that the republican components are simply not working. And thus, we a ruled by the masses, by mass opinion, and, unfortunately, by tools of mass dysinformation, like sloganeering and propaganda.

by

Putting the Lie to the Republicans – Ralph Nader

Masters of the repeated lying sound byte, the craven Congressional Republicans are feasting on the health and safety of the American people with gleeful greed while making the corporate and trade association media swoon. “Job-killing regulations,” exudes daily from the mouths of Speak John Boehner, his Wall Street-licking side-kick Eric Cantor and Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell.

Then all the way down the line, the Republicans are on cue bellowing “job-killing regulations” must be revoked or stopped aborning over at OSHA (protecting workers), EPA (protecting clean air and water), FDA (safer drugs and food), and NHTSA (making your vehicle safer).  Imagine how much more civil servants could do to accomplish the statutory missions of their respective agencies if they could get the Republicans and their corporate pay masters off their backs.

These same Republicans get in their cars with their children and put on their seat belts. Out of sight are the air bags ready to deprive them of their freedom to go through the windshield in a crash. Who makes those seat belts and air bags? Workers in the USA.

The jobs these regulations may be “killing” are those that would have swelled the funeral industry, or some jobs in the healthcare and disability-care industry. On the other hand, by not being injured, workers stay on the job and do not drain the workers’ compensation funds or hamper the operations of their employer.

About twenty years ago, Professor Nicholas Ashford of MIT came to Washington and testified before Congress in great detail about how and where safety regulations create jobs and make the economy more efficient in avoiding the costs of preventable injuries and disease. He received a respectful hearing from members of the Committee. It is doubtful whether Messers Boehner, Cantor, McConnell and Dr. Coburn (Senator from Oklahoma) are reading Professor Ashford these days, who just co-authored a book with Ralph P. Hall called Technology, Globalization, and Sustainable Development.

The corporatist Republicans’ minds are made up; don’t bother them with the facts. But we must keep trying to dissolve the Big Lie.

In 2009 Professor David Hemenway published a stirring book titled While You Were Sleeping: Success Stories in Injury and Violence Prevention which in clear language described the success stories of people, often with the support of a past, more enlightened Congress, made lives safer and healthier in the U.S. Yes, life-saving, injury-preventing, disease-stopping regulations resulting in life-sustaining technology produced by American industry and workers.

Wake up Democrats. Learn the political art of truthful repetition to counter the cruelest Republicans who ever crawled up Capitol Hill. You’ve got massive, documented materials to put the Lie to the Republicans.

President Obama should set an example. For instance, on September 2, 2011 President Obama fell for the regulation costs jobs lie.  He said:  “[I] have continued to underscore the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover.”
Pete Altman, from the Natural Resources Defense Council wrote:

“In reversing his Administration’s previously strong support for ozone regulations to protect the health of American children, President Obama (in the words of one observer):  “drank the conservative Kool-Aid, and agreed that tightening ozone emission rules would have cost billions and hurt the economy. But clean air is very popular politically, and the EPA’s own studies show that a tighter standard could have created $17 billion in economic benefits.”

Earlier this month, Public Citizen issued a report about five regulations that spurred innovation and a higher quality of economic growth. As one of the authors Negah Mouzoon wrote, “when federal agencies implement rules for efficiency, worker safety, or public health and welfare, companies need to reformulate their products and services to comply. And so begins good ol’ American competition. To comply with federal standards, companies need to invest in research and development, which often yields to new products and systems that both solve public policy problems and, often, boost business. The result? A brighter idea emerges.”

It is important to note that such regulations give companies lengthy lead times to comply and, under the daily sandpapering of corporate lobbyists, regulations issued lose much of their early industry-controlling reach.

Here are the report’s five innovation-spurring products or processes that at their outset encountered significant industry resistance and inflated estimates of complying with the regulations. Before that is, the companies came to their senses, responded and found that such changes were not just good for the people but for their own bottom line.
1.      Protecting workers from poisonous vinyl chloride.
2.      Reducing sulfur dioxide emissions.
3.      Preventing ozone-layer-destroying CFC emissions from aerosols.
4.      Improving the energy efficiency of home appliances.
5.      Utilizing energy-efficient light bulbs.

For the full report go to http://www.citizen.org/regulation-innovation.

Maybe some “kids”—between the ages of 10 and 12 – having learned from their parents the importance of telling the truth, can start a Kiddy Corps for a Truthful Congress drawn from the Internet-savvy children all over the U.S. What a wonderful expression of grassroots truth-telling directed toward the Great Prevaricators on Capitol Hill. Yes –job-producing, life-saving, economy-stimulating, innovation-producing regulations for a more secure future for our children.

Interested parents may contact us at info@csrl.org.