Saturday, April 16, 2011

A picture worth “a thousand words”

Davenport: an "ethical
Republican lady"
     R. Scott Moxley has updated his story about the clueless Tea Partier—and OC GOP Central Committee member—who sent around a Photoshopped picture of President Obama as an ape child with ape parents.
     According to Moxley, Marilyn Davenport continues to respond to the brouhaha with incredulity and even defiance. That's not good.
     While local GOP chief Scott Baugh quickly threw Davenport under the bus, other GOP regulars are coming to her defense:
     Tim Whitacre, a longtime conservative Orange County Republican activist in Santa Ana, defended Davenport: "Marilyn Davenport is a staunch, ethical Republican lady. There is nothing unethical about this from a party standpoint because it wasn't sent out to the party at large with any racist statements and it wasn't signed as a central committee member. As a private individual, she is just real big on Birther stuff. One of her passions that drives her is the president's lack of forthrightness about where he was born. Marilyn believes that nobody knows where he was born and so this picture says a thousand words."
     Whitaker continued: "She is not a perfect lady, but she is no racist. She is a gentle person who would feed you, help you, be there for you if you were in trouble. She is known as a pleasant, loving person, and it kills me that she is being attacked by this non-story knowing her mindset."
     Gosh, Tim. I don’t see how that kind of talk is gonna help.
Some Republicans have rallied in Marilyn's defense

Student reactions to the "Westphal v. Wagner" (prayer) settlement (VIDEO)

     I came across a video on something called the Mission Viejo Patch. It presents a series of Saddleback College student reactions to the recently announced settlement of “Westphal v. Wagner,” which yielded a mixed result. See: Video Reaction: Prayers at Saddleback College Cut at Two Ceremonies.

To see the video, click here

     CLUELESS. Contrary to what is implied by some (not all) of the video's interviewees, the settlement does not "ban" prayer at the colleges. It applies only to official college and district events, not private moments on campus.
     This was true, too, of the original lawsuit.
     According to the settlement, the district agrees to cease the practice of prayers/invocations at scholarship ceremonies and the Chancellor’s opening session. Invocations (or moments of silence), however, are permitted at commencement, but the decision whether to have such prayers/moments and who shall provide them is to be made by the college’s planning group, not the board of trustees.
     Further, any such invocations are to be non-sectarian. Etc.
     Read the settlement documents here. Here are excerpts:
     ...Beginning on the effective date of this Agreement, neither the SOCCCD nor its Colleges…shall include an invocation on the program at any future Scholarship Ceremony or Chancellor’s Opening Session....
     Within 30 days of the effective dates of this Agreement, the Board shall adopt the Resolution attached as Exhibit A to this Agreement….

The Resolution:
     The district desires to expand upon Resolution No. 09-23, and provide guidelines to the planners of important District and college events if they choose to invite a speaker to deliver brief , personal remarks in the form of an invocation, a moment of silence, or inspirational message…
     Whereas the purpose of these guidelines is to continue to allow the event planners to direct the form and content of their own events, including the selection of the speakers at those events…without monitoring or review by the Board of Trustees….
     …The decision on whether to select a speaker to deliver personal remarks in the form of an invocation, moment of silence, of opening and/or closing message, not to exceed two minutes, at important District and college events shall rest within the sole discretion of the event planners….
     …the person selected…shall be provided with a copy of this resolution…shall be informed of the District’s request that any personal remarks be non-sectarian; shall be informed that the opportunity to speak at a District or college event must not be exploited to proselytize or advance any one, or to disparage any other, faith or belief….
     The suit challenged the district's practices, arguing that some of them violated the First Amendment to the Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 
     In a recent press release, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which litigated the case, explained the suit as follows: “Plaintiffs asserted that school officials routinely sponsored official invocations at events for students and faculty at Saddleback College in Mission Viejo, including scholarship-award ceremonies, commencements and Chancellor's Opening Sessions (training programs for faculty). ¶ AU noted that attendance at some of these events is mandatory. For example, students [at Saddleback College] who are awarded scholarships must attend a public ceremony or forfeit the financial aid….”

ALSO IN THE NEWS:
Tea Party racism!?
The story still has legs. Furry ones.

O.C. Republican allegedly sent offensive Obama email (OC Reg)
..."It's just highly inappropriate, it's a despicable message, it drips with racism and I think [party central committee member & Tea Partier Marilyn Davenport] should step down from the committee," [local GOP chief Scott] Baugh said. “It undermines everything we are doing to reach out to ethnic communities.”....

"I am...I said": Raghu Mathur points a finger at Democrats, produces a steaming pile of fatuous harrumphitude

     There is something terribly wrong with this fellow!

      Ever wonder what’s become of former Chancellor Raghu P. Mathur? Well, according to the OC Reg, he’s the Chair of the School of Education at Argosy University (in Orange).
     Yesterday, the OC Reg published an opinion piece by the fellow.
     His point seems to be that Democrats in Sacramento are lousy leaders because they don't "prioritize"; instead, they treat all programs as equally important.
     I.e., he's got nothin'. Why on Earth did they publish this?

Raghu Mathur: Time for Sacramento to put first things first (OC Reg)

     California government has become too large as it clearly demonstrates an endless appetite for increasing amounts of taxpayer dollars each year. Since Gov. Jerry Brown and the Republican legislators have ended their negotiations to settle the budget deficit of about $27 billion for 2011-12 fiscal years, the good news is that there will be no effort to sustain temporary tax increases for another five years through a ballot initiative in a special election this June.
     Now, Gov. Brown and the Democratic legislators have threatened to make huge and visibly painful cuts in schools, safety, and other vital public services to teach Californians a lesson so that they will ask for higher taxes for continuation of the services. They want to punish Californians through draconian cuts and dire consequences that will make their lives miserable. They want to punish Californians who are already suffering as the result of their past bad fiscal policies in addition to state unemployment rate of about 12 percent and with one of the highest home foreclosure rates in the nation. As if this wasn't enough, California families are reeling with rapidly rising gas and food prices.

"Disloyalty will not be tolerated!" —IVC Prez Raghu P. Mathur, 1997

     What we need from our elected leaders in Sacramento is leadership. Perhaps it's asking for too much? We need our leaders to provide leadership in making tough decisions through analytical and thoughtful prioritization of functions and expenditures in every aspect of the state government such that the Californians will have access to the most essential and efficiently delivered programs and services that will ensure future economic growth and prosperity, and do so with utmost commitment and self-discipline to live within our means. We need real prioritization with compassion and without gimmickry while we recognize that prioritization is an art. This can be done and must be done or the citizens must vote out of office leaders who don't understand this concept and thus stand in its way for the common good. Enough is enough!
     When the governor and the Democratic legislators ask for tax increases, they assume that all state programs and services are equal in weight and importance, and thus lack priority. This is neither planning nor strategic. Certainly such thinking reflects tremendous lack of leadership, and lack of respect for the intelligence of the taxpayers. Anyone can balance the state budget if we were to provide them more taxpayer dollars.
Occasionally, Mathur has
bitterness explosions
     As businesses know too well, the most likely source for needed resources for the most essential programs and services is through the reallocation of existing resources based on prioritization, and still balance the budget. This is exactly what we expect taxpayers to do with their home budgets, if they were to pay even more taxes and thus have less money to pay off all their bills. Why can't our leaders follow this golden rule in the first place, and then as role models demonstrate how it can indeed work at the state level in a constructive and responsible manner.
     While taxpayers prioritize their living expenses on a daily basis, our state programs and services seem to enjoy eternal life. There is s something terribly wrong with this picture!

     Dr. Raghu P. Mathur is the former president of Irvine Valley College, chancellor of the South Orange County Community College District, and president, Board of Trustees of the Saddleback Valley Unified School District in Orange County, CA. Currently he serves as the Chair, School of Education at Argosy University in Orange.



Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"

  This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...