Red Emma’s War Diary: National Truth in Recruiting—OR Golfers Against the War

I’D BEEN GETTING a little weary of the analysis from liberals about the nation’s presumed estrangement from our brave women and men in uniform. You know, the one arguing that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan surge on because there’s no draft and nobody who is white, privileged, middle-class, educated, urban or who golfs personally knows anybody in the military and therefore doesn’t, can’t, or won’t do anything to stop the killing and dying.

Friends and comrades, Red Emma doesn’t know anybody who plays golf, but I am still opposed to golf. And, no, Red doesn’t know anybody in the military personally either, but still marched against the invasion and occupation, and with military veterans too, though those were, admittedly Veterans for Peace, which I guess don’t count.

By the way, where are the golfers on this one? I’ll revisit my take on the elite behavior-aping, anti-environmental, funny dressing, 1950s-retro American golf constituency when I see a Golfers Against the War or just one pro golfer take a public position against, say, torture, or Guantanamo, or even pesticide run-off.

I was in an empirical mood on Monday morning, and wanted to see if meeting a couple of red-blooded U.S. servicemen would change my position—maybe somehow make me more against this fucking awful war, which Americans say in useless polls that they oppose—so I showed up at the first ever National Truth in Recruiting Day, September 17, which is a great day indeed, in fact, the same day in 1787 that the U.S. Constitution was adopted, for what that’s worth.

Not much it seems. Think: 5,000 preventive detentions and zero convictions.

When I arrived at the Army National Guard Recruiting Station in Santa Ana at 11 a.m. on Monday, there was just one guy there, wearing a white on black t-shirt reading “Iraq Veterans Against the War.” I shook his hand and, finally, just like that, Red Emma had met a real-life American soldier, in this case a four-time tour-of-duty Marine named Jason Lemieux, 24 years old from Anaheim, who is handsome, articulate, and brave, which are probably all perfectly bitchin’ when you are an active-duty infantry dude shooting at the enemy or avoiding roadside bombs but even better, I observed, when you offer an analysis of the war while standing in front of a recruiting station being interviewed by reporters.

Then, bingo-bango, just like that, I met Kevin Stendahl, also an ex-combat Marine, and stood listening to them both, right out in broad daylight, on the lawn on Warner Avenue. Who knew it could be so easy, America? In five minutes I’d doubled the number of soldiers I knew and, yes, let’s see, right, okay, I was still against the fucking war and also feeling pretty darn good about IVAW’s call for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, full benefits and adequate healthcare for returning troops, and reparations for Iraqis.

After a few more minutes of hanging with the ex-troops, I had the opportunity to meet even more service folks because, as it happens, this kick-off event was going down at an actual recruiting center, which turned out to be just chock-full of Army people. Soon two, three, four active duty folks came out, wearing camo gear and looking all buff and being polite, shaking hands with the anti-war veteran activists and their posse and—think of this!—all across our proud nation civilians like me with college degrees and mortgages could meet actual vets who were visiting recruiters and high schools, like these two fellas, offering their unshy analysis that Bush lies, recruiters lie and, yes, that lying is wrong.

Then, as if that wasn’t enough to beat the band, I met a local anti-war activist. Thu Trang of the National Lawyer’s Guild OC Recruitment Awareness Project showed up to remind everybody that her outfit helps active duty service people and Delayed Entry Program enlistees get out of the military without shooting themselves in the foot or pretending to be gay, and that parents of public high school kids can sign an “opt-out” form, which prevents recruiters from calling their kids to promise them money for college and that they’ll never, ever get shipped to Kandahar or Diyala where at least their odds of meeting an anti-war liberal, are mercifully small. — Posting for Chunk: Red Emma

Andrew Tonkovich

The district has a problem

WEDNESDAY'S "OPEN FORUM" concerning the SOCCCD's noncompliance with the “50% law" was good in every way that I can think of. Standing before a relatively large gathering of college personnel, Irvine Valley College President Glenn Roquemore briefly explained our situation, namely, that the proportion of our expenditures on “instruction” has dipped below 50%, contrary to requirements defined by statute.

He seemed to indicate that the DRAC (the District Resources Allocation Committee, which comprises faculty reps, among others) is the venue in which a “fix” will be developed, and that’s good news, for some of us had worried that Chancellor Raghu Mathur intends to blow off shared governance as per usual. Not so, apparently.

District Director of Fiscal Services, Beth Mueller, was on hand to answer questions, and, I have to say, she seemed to answer our queries forthrightly and to the best of her ability. And there were lots of questions, good ones.

IVC Director of Fiscal Services, Davit Khachatryan, gave a helpful PowerPoint presentation. Our district, he said, is out of compliance with Education Code 8462 for 2006/07, though not by much. According to the latest figures—provided by Beth—we’re at 49.76%. We're talkin' $257,000 — far less than, say, the Chancellor's inexplicably high salary.

That sounds like an insignificant amount in the grand scheme of things, but, for a variety of reasons, a fix will be very difficult, and the consequences of not fixing the problem will be serious.


If we fail to correct the matter, state apportionment funding will be withdrawn, despite our Basic Aid funding.

Davit listed numerous actions that could be taken by the college that would “help,” including faculty salary increases and new faculty hiring. Among the various other helpful actions, Davit seemed to favor adding more classes at ATEP, our district’s new instructional site in Tustin, though that suggestion proved to be somewhat controversial. There was lots of discussion and, for once, it wasn't silly.

The district is applying for a one-time waiver (re the 50% requirement), which is granted only in cases of extreme hardship or when faculty salaries are high compared to neighboring districts. Given our district’s healthy finances, we cannot plausibly claim hardship. When pressed, Beth opined that, if we seek a waiver, claiming the second condition would seem to be the more promising approach.

The audience looked skeptical.

Wendy asked Beth whether the district views our being granted a waiver as likely. Beth said she didn’t know.

But the facts seem to be clear enough. We likely won’t qualify for a waiver. So we have a real problem.

Some members of the audience (including me) pressed to learn how the noncompliance could have been allowed to occur, given that the district moved steadily downward toward the 50% line for the last five years. Our crossing over that line didn't just suddenly happen. But administrators generally deflected such questions.

(Recently, one of our readers [who writes often and knowledgeably] posted this remark:

All community college districts must file a budget report with the State of California each year. It's called the CCFS 311, and it's due every October 15. Part of this form — and your CFO and CEO must verify its accuracy under penalty of perjury — includes the 50% rule calculation.

If your Chancellor is unaware of this, then he hasn't been reading what he's been signing. (End)

— The State Chancellor's Office has this form. It's a PDF file. Check it out.)


It does seem clear that this "new" problem — the Chancellor insists that it was discovered "just last month"— is a DISTRICT problem.

It will be interesting to see whether and how the Chancellor will explain this nasty little predicament, come Monday night.

I’ll be watching Raghu’s pointing finger.

You know the one.

P.S.: I do believe that another "forum" will be held this morning (Thursday) at 9:30. LIB 213.

GRATUITOUS IMAGERY:

Kids whispering at last week's IVC 9-11 ceremony.

Sunny the cat poking around near my chifforobe.