Saturday, April 7, 2012

Schmeidler v. Chandos for IVC Academic Senate President

Kathy Schmeidler
     The faculty of Irvine Valley College have a problem: almost no one wants to run for the offices of the Academic Senate, a crucial “governance group” at the college. —And the election is coming up soon.
     Morale is pretty low, I'm afraid (listening, trustees?). Participation in governance is among the casualties of all this gloomitude.
     As of two weeks ago, the matter looked pretty grim, for no one had volunteered to run (or agreed to be nominated) for the two major Senate offices (Prez and VP).
     But, recently, one person stepped forward as a Presidential candidate—namely, the widely respected Kathy Schmeidler, a bio instructor and a long-time grievance officer for the Faculty Association. Still, by Thursday, the most recent Senate meeting, no one had yet stepped forward to run for VP.
Ray Chandos
     Yesterday (Friday), a reliable source told me that one more person had thrown his hat into the ring for the Presidential gig: Ray Chandos, a close pal of Raghu Mathur's and an important member of the notoriously unprincipled and ruthless union leadership circa 1996. [BUT SEE THIS UPDATE]
     For those unfamiliar with the Rayster, the following posts should get you up to speed in a hurry:

• Ten Years of Bowdlerizing Excellence!
aka Ray Chandos
• The 1998 Accreditation White-Wash [brought to you by RC]
• Ray Chandos defends Steve Frogue
• From the people who brought us fifteen years of abject shittitude comes....
• FYI • OMG/WTF

Lee Rhodes

     Recently, former Saddleback College instructor—and SOCCCD trustee—Lee Rhodes died. The Lariat and the Coastline Pilot have noted his passing:

• Long-time instructor dies (Lariat)
• Professor Lee W. Rhodes, Ph.D (Coastline Pilot)

     The Coast Pilot explains that Lee
was deeply committed to education, serving as an instructor of biology and microbiology at Saddleback College from 1969-88; former president of the Faculty Association; trustee from 1992-1996, and board vice president from 1995-1996.
     As I recall, in 1992, Lee was recruited by the Faculty Association to run for the area 3 seat. In those days, the union was controlled by secretive schemers, including instructor Raghu Mathur at IVC and the likes of Mike Runyan at Saddleback College. They were happy to get their boy on the board.
     But Lee was a decent guy, and so he soon realized that the union’s trustees—Williams, Frogue, and Teddi Lorch—were the worst of the board and that the other trustees—including the union’s public enemy #1, Harriett Walther—were the best. When the union seized upon Walther’s technical violation of conflict-of-interest codes, exaggerating and distorting the facts outrageously in order to discredit her, Lee came to her defense with a letter attesting to her character. Such actions likely sealed Lee’s fate with the utterly unprincipled union schemers, who eventually targeted Lee and other members of the PIE slate (that went up against the union’s Frogue/Williams/Davis/Fortune slate) with the infamous “same-sex flier.” The latter was a blatant red herring; it was homophobic to boot. But it worked. Lee was replaced by the odious Dorothy Fortune, who eventually resigned from the board, in disgrace, amid unanswered allegations that she had ceased living in the county.
     Here’s a letter from the campaign of 1996 by our late and much-missed colleague Jody Hoy. It provides a sense of what was going on in the district at the time:
     Last Friday evening, Oct. 18, a candidate's forum was held at Irvine Valley College for the Nov. 5 election of Board of Trustees for the Saddleback Community College District. The forum was sponsored by the Irvine Valley College Academic Senate and the Associated Students of Irvine Valley College.
     Invitations were sent to all nine candidates for the board including current board members Steven Frogue, Lee Rhodes and John Williams. Great care was taken to provide a fair and open forum for all: candidates and to assure all candidates of the public's interest in hearing their views. The forum was moderated by the League of Women Voters. Questions were prepared in advance and the same questions were posed to all candidates.
     When neither Frogue nor Williams responded to initial letters of invitation, second letters of invitation were hand delivered by forum organizers. When Williams raised a question concerning the "legality" of such a forum, counsel for the district was consulted. Counsel assured Williams that such a forum was legal, whether on campus or off. In addition, the academic senates of both colleges sought counsel and were informed that the forum was legal. This information was also communicated to Williams.
     Given the lengths to which the college community went to provide a fair and open forum for all candidates, I was surprised and very disappointed to see that Frogue and Williams, who purport to represent the voters of this district, did not show up for the candidate's forum-nor bother to inform the people who set up the forum that they would not be present.
     I can only conclude that Frogue and Williams are indifferent to the democratic process or they believe that, as incumbents, the election is in the bag. Why else would they not even bother to appear? As the only other possible explanations are arrogance or contempt for the public in general, I prefer to assume that the former is the reason why they chose to stay away.
     Rhodes, who represents the Laguna Beach area, did attend. Rhodes has been an outstanding board member. He was a biology professor at Saddleback College until his retirement. He was also the chief negotiator for the first faculty association contract. The fact that he has been steadfastly independent and fair handed has won him the enmity of the current union leadership, which is backing candidate Dorothy Fortune, who also chose not to show up. [My emphasis.]

Nancy Jo Hoy
(Irvine Citizen, 10/24/96)
     (The two board remnants of the Bad Old Union are Nancy Padberg, for whom the union campaigned in ’98 (along with Don Wagner), and Tom Fuentes, for whom the Old Guard came to speak, supporting his bid to replace the resigning Frogue in the summer of 2000.)

Friday, April 6, 2012

Tom foolery
After pepper spray: College fee raise put off (OC Reg)

     This is about that goofy Santa Monica College two-tiered fee scale for scarce courses idea—and the protest it inspired and the free use of pepper spray by moron cops that that inspired. Well, now the trustees are backing off of this two-tiered thing for the time being. Sheesh.

Bang bang
Campus police department under review (Saddleback College Lariat)

     Looks like consultants are reviewing the SC Campus Police Dept. and the cops don’t like it a bit.


White powder and a fuse

     The story below describes a scary incident at the home of one of the instructors in our building at IVC (A200). She doesn’t think the prank (?) was done by a student, but who knows:

Woman finds suspicious device on her porch (Daily Pilot) April 05, 2012

     A Costa Mesa street was closed for hours Thursday as authorities tested a device found on a resident's porch, police said.
     About 7:15 a.m., a resident in the 200 block of 23rd Street was leaving for work when she found a sandwich bag on her porch filled with white powder, with a fuse and a partially burned firecracker-type device, according to Costa Mesa Police Department Sgt. Phil Myers.
"Poof"
     The material later tested negative for hazardous materials.
     The resident told police she heard a thump on her front door about 9 p.m. Wednesday, but because her husband was out of town, she didn't go to the door to check the source of the noise, Myers said.
     The next morning, the woman found the device and called police, Myers said.
     Nearby Lindbergh School was locked down, and students were barred from using the playground or outdoor facilities, but class sessions continued as planned as authorities assessed the material, according to Myers and Patty Esteves, who works at the school.

SEE ALSO: School lockdown over after package found to be safe (OC Reg)

Happy Passover!



Rebel Girl says "Happy Passover!"

*

Thursday, April 5, 2012

The Saddleback College Lariat reports the “horse head” incident

IVC Horseman ignites security concerns: A student prank causes administration to take a new look campus security
     …An unnamed instructor whose classroom was disrupted reported the intrusion to the college, but according to a post by IVC philosophy instructor Roy Bauer on Dissent the Blog, was dissatisfied with the apparent lack of response from the administration at the time.
     “The college has a history of potentially dangerous incidents handled badly,” said Bauer, creator of Dissent the Blog, referring to an incident that occurred in the fall of 2010, when a disturbed student sought after his writing instructor with a pair of scissors in his hand. “Generally speaking, faculty have been unimpressed with administrative efforts in [ensuring campus security]. As in so many other regards, in this [incident], we worry that they're all talk and no action.”
     In the administration’s defense, Vice President of Student Services Gwendolyn Plano cited the confidentiality of the investigation and the lack of names as the reasons for the administration’s seeming idleness.
     “A lot of times when something like this occur, people outside would not know that each of us [in the administration] are looking at it,” said Plano. “I think the dissatisfaction was that [the faculty] were hoping it could be resolved quickly. Unfortunately, there were no names initially. It took about two weeks before there were any students named to be able to do something. The only way you can invoke emergency preparedness process is if the police were called and they were not. They weren’t called until the day after.”….

The Morning Matinee: Don't Know Much About History...

Skip to 55 seconds in to hear Rick Santorum break the news that California state universities no longer teach American history.
The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Rick Santorum Speaks from His Heart - California Colleges
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire BlogVideo Archive

Tom Fuentes and pal Rick Santorum
*

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Tom & Ron, 1973

Orange County Supervisor Ronald Caspers with executive aide Tom Fuentes, c. 1973
Tom Fuentes with VP Gerald Ford, c. 1973
Tom F and Chris C look to the future
Tom and the Duke

Republican and Tea Party doltitude

Poll: Many conservatives doubt global warming (OC Reg)


View more videos at: http://nbclosangeles.com.

Sunday, April 1, 2012

Orange County incomporuption: toward a "big picture"

A young Tom Fuentes and his hero, Richard Nixon, San Clemente
     A couple of days ago, somebody over at the Orange Juice Blog beefed about corruption and incompetence in OC government. (See Orange County Government Melting Down, by OBNO.)
     That’s like Arizonans complaining about the heat.
     But in Orange County, incompetence/corruption ("incomporuption") varies from bad to extreme from era to era. We’re in the midst of a so-so era, incomporuption-wise. We've seen worse.
     Carps OBNO, “it looks like no one on the Board of Supervisors is interested in or capable of doing the things it takes to effectively run a large organization. Things like team building, leadership, ethical behavior and vision come to mind as essential characteristics that seem to be lacking. It also looks like the job of attracting and retaining top talent to run the various county programs is not a priority for the Supervisors either.”
     OBNO notes the obvious recent examples, including “the multi-year saga of disarray in the office of the County Public Guardian/Public Administrator position resulting from a Board-driven appointment of [long-time SOCCCD trustee] John Williams to the Public Guardian position against the advice of key county staff….”
     Here on DtB, we’ve pursued various stories increasingly in relation to the larger fabric of corruption and cronyism that is OC politics. The truth is, you can’t make sense of guys like John Williams, Tom Fuentes, Don Wagner, or Dave Lang unless you understand county politics, the OC GOP Central Committee, and trends and factoids of the last, ten or twenty years.
     Besides, anyone who’s been reading DtB for a while knows that we have an interest in the past, and especially OC’s past—e.g., the appearance of the KKK in the 20s, the doings of ranchers and farmers and businessmen in the 19th Century, the adventures of Madame Helena Modjeska in Anaheim and in the Santa Anas, etc.

     TOM FUENTES. One figure who has been present for a huge chunk of OC political history—from the late sixties to the present, more than 40 years—is our own trustee Tom Fuentes, who, as near as I can tell, is in the last stages of terminal cancer but who nevertheless has maintained oars in the political waters throughout his remarkably long good-bye. (I recently noticed that he is listed as the campaign co-chair for OC Board of Education trustee Ken Williams’ June reelection bid!)
     So here’s some OC incomporuption history—from the perspective of someone attempting to understand the highly odd Mr. Tom Fuentes.

* * * * *
Ron Caspers (1931-1974)
     RON CASPERS & THE BOARD OF SUPES. It turns out that, at least according to some of my sources, the Orange County Board of Supes were neither important players nor even particularly noticed until the late sixties, when people with big money started buying supervisorial candidates. That started, it seems, with Ron Caspers’ ruthless campaign for Alton Allen’s board seat in 1969 (he won it in 1970). According to former OC GOP Central Committee Chair Tom Rogers (see), “it was after his election that Caspers made the contacts and set the ground rules for developer participation in the grand scheme of patronage carried to an exponential degree.” Elsewhere, Rogers notes that many Orange Countians “blame [Caspers] for the descent of Orange County into the world of political intrigue, campaign finance abuses and influence peddling.”
     And, right at the start, Fuentes was there.
     Caspers was a Republican but the rest of corrupt 70s kingpin Louis Cella’s stable of Supes were Democrats, and so the patronage wasn’t really about politics; mostly, it was about money—i.e., how to get lots of it.
     Tom Fuentes would have been twenty years old at the time of this patronage genesis or pre-genesis. From what I’ve read, Fuentes was up to his eyeballs in that nasty campaign of 1969-1970, and, upon its success, he was showered with Caspersian goodies: he received retroactive support for his education; he became Caspers’ executive aide; and he even got a job with Caspers’ S&L in Anaheim.
     It seems clear that Caspers was not merely ruthless; he was dirty. It is likely that he was spared from lasting ignominy by his own death, via the peculiar “Shooting Star” disaster in 1974. The criminal prosecutions that brought down the Cella-O’Neill political machine of which Caspers was a part started a year or two later. The county settled a lawsuit that charged Caspers and (“Shooting Star” owner and Cella’s chief strategist) Fred Harber with a shakedown—quietly, in the late 70s.


     FRANK MICHELENA. But let’s go back to those early years, starting in 1969. According to Tom Rogers, “As Casper’s assistant, Tom Fuentes … worked diligently to convince Republicans that Caspers was not what many party regulars feared, an unscrupulous opportunist who had no permanent loyalty to any political party. Fuentes was aided in his duties by the ubiquitous Frank Michelena. Michelena, a lobbyist with a checkered career, was notorious in the field of political influence.”
I couldn't find a pic of
Frank M. This'll have to do
     I haven’t been able to find out much about Michelena, Fuentes’ coworker on Team Caspers. I know this: he was born in 1930 and lived in Costa Mesa (it appears that he died in 2005). He seems to have started his political career in his thirties, as an assistant to OC Supervisor Bill Phillips (1957-1973). Later, he was a campaign advisor to the Cella-sponsored OC Supervisor, Ralph Clark, and has been associated with campaigns that, early on, used outrageous tabloid-style hit pieces against opponents.
     By the 80s, he was known in Orange County as a high-powered lobbyist. According to a 1990 Times article, “Frank G. Michelena is the guy you go to see when you want something from Orange County government.”
     Writes Rogers (in 2000), “Frank Michelena’s activities have been so pervasive over the years that no brief history [of OC] could possibly list their scope and impact on Orange County and the establishment political structure.”
     Elsewhere, Rogers adds: “After striking out on his own [in the 70s] [Michelena] seemed always in the shadows of county political controversies….”

Lyle Overby
     LYLE OVERBY. Another name that pops up in the Cella saga is that of OC lobbyist Lyle Overby, with whom I briefly corresponded. (He wrote to tell me that he was on the “Shooting Star” during its fateful trip, but he disembarked at Cabo before the more hazardous portion of the trip; see this and this.). By the early 70s, Overby was an aide to Supervisor Ralph Diedrich, a fellow who was later indicted (1977) on 16 felony and misdemeanor violations concerning campaign finance. (Soon after, the county grand jury charged him with two counts of bribery and one count on conspiracy. In the 80s, he served 20 months in Chino.)
     Back to Overby: during the era of the “Dick and Doc Show”—i.e., the shadow government organized by Dr. Louis Cella and land baron Dick O’Neill—the two actually gave over a million dollars to various political candidates in one year, 1974. Dr. Cella was diverting money from medical companies to candidates. Beyond that, Cella provided candidates with printing, postage, and other services.
     Cella’s Mission Hospital hired workers whose work was entirely political. (Arlene Hoffman, who was mysteriously murdered—with a crossbow!—in the 90s, was among these workers.) The place had a printing press that churned out campaign literature and mailers. Some curious persons received refunds from the hospital for postal costs, including Bill Butcher of the consulting firm Butcher-Forde. (Forde had been closely associated with Caspers and his campaigns.) Another was—you guessed it!—Lyle Overby, who received $4,600 in postage funds from the hospital. (Source: Rogers.)
Bill Butcher, c. 1982
     One older reporter I spoke with advised me not to trust Overby. Back in ’74, he said, Overby was an aide, like Fuentes, and seemed to be perfect for the “bagman” role. (You'll recall that Nathan Rosenberg once referred to Fuentes as "Caspers' bagman.") After the “Shooting Star” disaster in 1974, Overby was hired by O’Neill’s company and, still later, he became a major “lobbyist” in Orange County.
     Back in 2000, the OC Weekly declared Overby to be one of OC’s top 31 “Scariest” people:
#16. [Lyle Overby is] Orange County's überlobbyist and the former aide to two county supervisors—both later convicted of corruption. He's close to former county Supervisor Don Roth—also convicted—and close to onetime county Treasurer Bob Citron—jailed after the 1994 bankruptcy. His name appears repeatedly in just about every county supervisor's campaign-finance statement. He lobbied for Newport Beach City Council (until recently), the Irvine Co. and Lockheed Martin. He's now the boss of American Taxi, for whom he delivered in March an exclusive contract for taxi service at John Wayne Airport—despite the fact that (a) his company was barely six months old and the contract required at least five years' experience; and (b) his company was bleeding money through every fiscal orifice, clocking an operating loss of more than $130,000 when airport officials gave him the contract. [Note: as I understand it, Louis Cella also assisted Bob Citron in his bid for OC Treasurer.]
     In the early 90s, Supervisor Don Roth was investigated by the DA for various abuses, including the receiving of gifts. Among the people who gave Roth questionable gifts were Lyle Overby and Frank Michelena. (Source: Rogers.)
     Overby and Michelena were involved in setting up an expensive fundraiser for their pal Roth when he resigned and entered a guilty plea to seven charges in 1993. (Rogers.)

* * * * *
Tom Fuentes, c. 1973
     Big Picture-wise, here’s what’s becoming clearer to me.
  • CASPERS AND THE PATRONAGE SYSTEM. Things changed in Orange County politics/governance, starting with the arrival on the scene of banker and businessman Ron Caspers in 1969-1970. Caspers, who was supported by the ambitious team of Louis Cella, Richard O’Neill, and Fred Harber (aka the “Coalition”), established a patronage system, focusing on developers. This scheme survived Caspers and Harber’s death and ultimately led to a disastrous and ongoing over-development of Orange County, especially in the south. The manner and degree to which OC politicians are routinely "influenced" is not yet widely appreciated by the public. 
  • CASHING IN. Many of the figures, some minor, of the early days of this saga (Fuentes, Michelena, Overby, et al.) have become rich and powerful in subsequent decades.
  • CASPERS & MODERN CAMPAIGNS. Caspers set a new standard by employing, not merely stunningly unscrupulous campaign tactics (some of these, of course, were already familiar), but also advanced, computerized, data-driven campaign approaches associated with the consulting firm Butcher-Forde. These approaches have come to be considered essential.
  • THEY MUST HAVE KNOWN. Caspers and his pals were dirty, and, as reporters have suggested to me, though some people present for the hinky financial and political dealings of Caspers-Harber (et al.) may not have actually directly participated in criminal schemes and activities, they were certainly at least aware of them. This group would include such minor players as, say, supervisorial aides of the principles.
* * * * *
Some further thoughts:

  • I find it odd that Tom Fuentes, a man known for his intolerance of Republicans who are not sufficiently “conservative” (RINOs, they're called), and who has long been a noisy champion of party discipline and unity ("thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican"), got his start, and learned his chops, from a man like Ron Caspers, a “Rockefeller Republican” (as one reporter I spoke with labeled him) who seemed to care much more about making money than about pursuing an ideological agenda or remaining true to his party (or to its incumbents).
  • A find it less odd that Mr. Fuentes, with all his airs and gestures of piety and rectitude, got his start with a politician who is memorable (at least to me) for being unscrupulous, unprincipled, and just plain dirty.
  • As near as I can tell, a year or so after the “Shooting Star” disaster (and after an aborted training for the priesthood), Fuentes commenced his career as a “consultant”—a job that seemed to involve, among other things, his “influencing” government officials on behalf of private firms. How curious that he pursued such work in an era known for the rise of patronage and influence peddling most foul—an era initiated by his first boss and the man he reportedly credits for his political rearing.
     It's a curious world, is it not?

Not so fast! Rethinking fall opening

Today's report  — up again USC reverses robust fall reopening plans, asks students to stay home for online classes LA Times  ...

Invited to IVC—this time a notorious admitted HOMOPHOBE

—Conservative radio host, Michael Reagan


Here at IVC, natch, we have an Accounting Department. It happens to support something called the Guaranteed Accounting Program: GAP4+1.

According to the department website,

This unique pathway program — a partnership between Irvine Valley College (IVC) and Cal State Fullerton (CSUF) — will enable you to graduate with a bachelor’s degree in four years and a master’s degree with one more additional year (thus GAP4+1).

Among the Master's degrees available through the program, we're told, are "Accountancy and Finance; Taxation; or Accountancy."


We're also told that "The number of students accepted into this program in any one year is limited so be sure to apply early."


Great. The early bird gets the worm.


Evidently, the good people of the GAP4+1 program have recently seen fit to invite someone to speak at Irvine Valley College (in late April): Michael Reagan.




The Republican Party of OC just loves IVC (from their website)

That's right. They've invited Reagan family embarrassment Michael, a man of, let's face it, little or no distinction.


He was expelled from his High School and he washed-out of college. Eventually, he went into clothing sales.


In those early years, he made some curious friends:

In 1965, the FBI warned Ronald Reagan that in the course of an organized crime investigation it had discovered his son Michael was associating with the son of crime boss Joseph Bonanno, which would have become a campaign issue had it been publicly known. Reagan thanked the FBI and said he would phone his son to discreetly discontinue the association. (From Wikipedia's Michael Reagan.)

[“F.B.I. agents in Phoenix made an unexpected discovery: According to records, ‘the son of Ronald Reagan was associating with the son of Joe Bonnano [sic].’ That is, Michael Reagan, the adopted son of Reagan and Ms. Wyman, was consorting with Bonanno’s son, Joseph Jr. The teenagers had bonded over their shared love of fast cars and acting tough.” ... "Joseph Jr. was not involved in organized crime, but he was spending time at his father’s home... [I]n October 1964, he had been arrested in connection with the beating of a Scottsdale, Ariz., coffee shop manager. ... Following routine procedure, F.B.I. agents in Phoenix asked agents in Los Angeles to interview Ronald Reagan for any information he might have gleaned from his son. The investigation, after all, was a top priority. But Hoover blocked them from questioning Reagan, thus sparing him potentially unfavorable publicity. Declaring it 'unlikely that Ronald Reagan would have any information of significance,' Hoover instead ordered agents to warn him about his son’s worrisome friendship." - New York Times]

Later, there were legal problems:

In 1981 Reagan was accused, but later cleared of felony violations of California securities laws in court documents. The Los Angeles County District Attorney alleged that Reagan had baited investors into unlawful stock arrangements, and selling stocks despite the fact that he was not legally permitted to do so. The D.A.'s office investigated allegations that Reagan improperly spent money invested by others in a company, Agricultural Energy Resources, he operated out of his house in a venture to develop the potential of gasohol, a combination of alcohol and gasoline. Investigators said they were also checking whether he had spent up to $17,500 of investors' money for his living expenses. The district attorney's office cleared Reagan of both charges later that year. [“The investigators said they became interested in Michael Reagan after being informed that he had steered customers to Mr. Carey {Richard Francis Carey, who "was selling worthless stock,"} had accepted a $4,000 check from one investor, and that, in at least one meeting of potential investors, his relationship to Ronald Reagan had apparently been exploited as a promotional tool for the stock.” - New York Times]
On September 20, 2012, Reagan and two associates were sued by Elias Chavando, a fellow partner, for allegedly withholding Chavando's interest in an e-mail business built around the Reagan.com domain name. In 2015, a Los Angeles Superior Court jury found Reagan liable for conversion and breach of fiduciary duty. Reagan and his business partners were ordered to pay $662,500 in damages.
(From Wikipedia's Michael Reagan.)

Michael tended to smash things (cars, etc.) in his youth. Well into his 40s, he tells us, he was full of "rage" (owing, he explains, to having been molested) and he treated his family badly.


Then, natch, he found the Lord.


Plus, owing to his relationship to his pop, President Ronald Reagan, Michael grabbed the brass ring and became a talk-show host on one or two right-wing radio networks. Blah, blah, blah, he said.


In his latter-day career as mediocre right-wing bloviater and Pious Christian, Michael Reagan has said some unfortunate things:

In April 2013, in a syndicated column, Reagan accused American churches of not fighting hard enough to block same-sex marriage. He wrote that, in regards to arguments supporting gay marriage, similar arguments could be used to support polygamy, bestiality, and murder.

. . . In June 2008, conspiracy theorist Mark Dice launched a campaign urging people to send letters and DVDs to troops stationed in Iraq which support the theory that the September 11 attacks were an "inside job". "Operation Inform the Soldiers", as Dice has called it, prompted Reagan to comment that Dice should be executed for treason. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a liberal/progressive media criticism organization, asked Radio America at the time to explain whether it permits "its hosts to call for murder on the air".

. . . He spoke out in support of profiling in October 2014. In a piece called Profile or Die, he wrote that it would be left to citizens to defend themselves if there were an attack against them by terrorists such as the Islamic State. (Wikipedia)

Golly. It's pretty clear that Michael Reagan is just another "former total fuck-up, now reborn and pious."


Intellectually, he's a low-rent Limbaugh, and that's pretty low.


I mean, when he gets here, just what is he gonna say? That liberals are evil? That his dad was a saint? That freedom and democracy are good? That you oughta put your life in the hands of the Lord? That you don't need to go to college? That homosexuality is a sin?


Only in Bizarro World would Michael Reagan be judged a good speaker to invite to a college.


* * *

Meanwhile, IVC's Guaranteed Accounting Program folks have only wonderful things to say about the fellow:


Michael Reagan

The eldest son of former President Ronald Reagan and one of the most dynamic and sought-after public speakers, Michael Reagan’s commitments to public service and the conservative vision his father championed are second to none, making him the natural heir to the Reagan conservative legacy. Michael serves as chairman and president of the Reagan Legacy Foundation, which seeks to advance the causes President Reagan held dear and to memorialize the accomplishments of his presidency. Michael’s career includes hosting a national conservative radio talk show syndicated by Premiere Radio Networks, championing his father’s values and principles in the public policy forum, commentating and appearing on the Today Show, Good Morning America, Good Day LA, CNN, and Fox News, and contributing to Newsmax Television. Also an accomplished author, Michael has many successful books including On the Outside Looking In, Twice Adopted, and his latest book, Lessons My Father Taught Me.

Well, sure. But he's also the worst kind of insubstantial, opportunistic "celebrity." And he's not an intellectual; he's a propagandist. He's a minor player in our sad era of noisy and loutish conservative anti-intellectualism and demagoguery.


—And he's a homophobe, among other things. Or so he says.


WAY TO GO, GLENN


IVC Prez Roquemore shares Reagan's enthusiasm for the Pussy-grabber-in-chief.

Recent columns by Michael Reagan


ALL IS FAIR IN THE WAR ON TRUMP (Cagle.com) - by Michael Reagan, December 13, 2018

…Hillary continues to skate free, unbothered by the FBI or any federal agency for the dirty things she and the Obama administration’s injustice department did during the 2016 election to try to defeat Donald Trump.

But not General Flynn.

His life was ruined by the FBI bosses who set out to nail him – and did….

TRUMP VS THE CRAZIES (Cagle.com) - by Michael Reagan, January 11, 2019

…Some of the country’s most desperate liberals in the media actually argued that the president’s televised pitch to the country for congressional funding for a stronger border fence should not be carried live by the networks.

Why? Because they said the president lies too much and they wanted to be able to fact-check his speech beforehand….

TRUMP SAYS ‘ADIOS’ TO BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP (Cagle.com) - by Michael Reagan, November 1, 2018

…Ending birthright citizenship, better known as dropping the anchor baby, is the most significant illegal immigration reform the President Trump has announced. With a single executive order, he unplugs a beacon that attracts scammers from the world over. He also attacks a visible manifestation of the “foreigners first” mindset that has infected the State Department, and the rest of the federal bureaucracy, since the 1960s….

THE PARTY OF EVIL (Cagle.com) - by Michael Reagan, October 11, 2018

…Now, thanks to the Democrats’ ugly smear campaign against Judge Kavanaugh, Republican senators like Susan Collins and Trump spokeswoman Sarah Sanders need security guards 24/7.

It’s not the new Supreme Court Justice who’s evil.

It’s the Democrat Party and the nasty “progressives” who’ve taken it over and are willing to say or do anything or destroy anyone to bring down President Trump.

Maybe this is not something new. Maybe the Democrats have always been this evil….

About Michael Reagan:


A separate peace* (LA Times, August 31, 2004) – by Anne-Marie O'Connor

For years, Michael Reagan, the older son of Ronald Reagan, felt unloved and unwanted. His parents divorced when he was 3. Two years later he was packed off to a boarding school where, he says, he was so lonely he cried himself to sleep. Sexually abused at age 7, he felt shame and self-loathing, compounded by Bible passages that convinced him he would never go to heaven.

He grew up so angry he smashed a childhood bicycle and later took a sledgehammer to his new car. Well into his 40s, his "rage came to a full boil," and he often yelled at his wife and young son.

Then, he says, he found salvation through the love of his family and his "adoption" by God. He embraced conservative values and became a syndicated talk-radio host who today tells listeners: "I am homophobic."….

Roquemore and U of Phoenix

From Clueless IVC Prez Glenn Roquemore smiles as he makes nice with the enemy DtB, 8-26-14

Vice President, Western Region, Workforce Solutions/University of Phoenix, Chuck Parker, President, Irvine Valley College, Dr. Glenn R. Roquemore

Members of the Irvine Valley College community just received this gushing email from the President:

Irvine Valley College Signs Memorandum of Understanding with University of Phoenix

Irvine – Irvine Valley College (IVC) administration, faculty and staff held a formal signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the University of Phoenix, Inc. (University) on Wednesday, August 20, 2014.

Irvine Valley College President Glenn Roquemore said, “This partnership will expand the many transfer opportunities available to the IVC students and staff. One of the major benefits of the MOU is the tuition discount."

Irvine Valley College students transferring to University of Phoenix into an undergraduate baccalaureate degree program … will be considered as having satisfied the general education requirements for the breadth of the liberal arts degree program….

IVC students get 10% off Phoenix tuition, which is way pricey.

Evidently, President Roquemore is not aware that entities such as the U of Phoenix exist to make huge profits by taking advantage of students who typically receive federally insured loans, putting them in serious debt. Those students, upon graduating, typically fail to find the work they were expecting and often default on their loans, forcing the taxpayer to pay. (It's a massive bubble that, one day, will pop.)

You’re fine with all that, are you Glenn? You're a Republican, aren't you? Yeah. I see you smiling with those vets you claim to love!

Alas, the "predatory for-profits" problem is especially egregious in the case of Vets, who pay their way via the new GI Bill:


GI Bill funds failing for-profit California colleges

(Desert Sun)

The ever-clueless Glenn R

Over the last five years, more than $600 million in college assistance for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans has been spent on California schools so substandard that they have failed to qualify for state financial aid.

As a result, the GI Bill — designed to help veterans live the American dream — is supporting for-profit companies that spend lavishly on marketing but can leave veterans with worthless degrees and few job prospects, The Center for Investigative Reporting found.

. . .

Financial records analyzed by CIR show that California is the national epicenter of this problem, with nearly 2 out of every 3 GI Bill dollars going to for-profit colleges.

The University of Phoenix in San Diego outdistances its peers. Since 2009, the campus has received $95 million in GI Bill funds. That's more than any brick-and-mortar campus in America, more than the entire 10-campus University of California system and all UC extension programs combined.

. . .

The school's large share of GI Bill funding reflects more than just the number of veterans enrolling. The programs are expensive. An associate degree costs $395 a credit, for instance — nearly 10 times the cost at a public community college.

The University of Phoenix won't say how many of its veterans graduate or find jobs, but the overall graduation rate at its San Diego campus is less than 15 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Education, and more than a quarter of students default on their loans within three years of leaving school.

Those figures fall short of the minimum standards set by the California Student Aid Commission, which dispenses state financial aid. The commission considers either a graduation rate lower than 30 percent or a loan default rate of more than 15.5 percent clear indicators of a substandard education.

No such restrictions govern GI Bill funds. And nearly 300 California schools that received GI Bill money either were barred from receiving state financial aid at least once in the past four years or operated without accreditation, CIR has found.

. . .

Of the $1.5 billion in GI Bill funds spent on tuition and fees in California since 2009, CIR found that more than 40 percent — $638 million —went to schools that have failed the state financial aid standard at least once in the past four years.

Four of those schools were University of Phoenix campuses, which together took in $225 million….

An Enemy In Common? The Case Against For-Profit Colleges

(Cognoscenti [NPR Boston])

… As Americans, we should all be concerned that veterans are being taken advantage of by unscrupulous profiteers. As taxpayers, we should be aware that we are paying for this disservice. Approximately 85-95 percent of the for-profits’ revenue comes from taxpayer-supported benefits….

For-Profit College Investigation--Is the New GI Bill Working?: Questionable For-Profit Colleges Increasingly Dominate the Program

([Senator] Harkin newsletter)


…Senator Harkin's HELP Committee investigation found:

. . .

  • Most for-profit colleges charge much higher tuition than comparable programs at community colleges and flagship State public universities. The investigation found Associate degree and certificate programs averaged four times the cost of degree programs at comparable community colleges. Bachelor's degree programs averaged 20 percent more than the cost of analogous programs at flagship public universities despite the credits being largely non-transferrable.
  • Because 96 percent of students starting a for-profit college take federal student loans to attend a for-profit college (compared to 13 percent at community colleges), nearly all students who leave have student loan debt, even when they don't have a degree or diploma or increased earning power.
  • Students who attended a for-profit college accounted for 47 percent of all Federal student loan defaults in 2008 and 2009. More than 1 in 5 students enrolling in a for-profit college-22 percent-default within 3 years of entering repayment on their student loans....

Hey-Diddly-Ho, Neighbor!

Oldie but Goodie [2012]: See Senator Harkin’s For-Profit College Investigation: U of Phoenix

Glenn Roquemore, the Pacifica Institute & women's "primordial nature"

Glenn Roquemore, the Pacifica Institute & women's "primordial nature" May 21, 2013

Delivering factoids for

Turkish anti-feminists

Here’s a curious factoid. I came across the following press release, evidently dating back to April of 2008. It was posted by the “Pacifica Institute,” which has a dozen or so offices, including one in Orange County (Irvine):


Glenn R. Roquemore-Irvine Valley College President Speaks at PI - Orange County

Today Pacifica Institute hosted Irvine Valley College President Glenn Roquemore. Before this luncheon forum in Irvine , New Zealand Consul General Rob Taylor and Irvine Mayor Beth Krom were the keynote speakers. Consul General Rob Taylor spoke about Welcoming Diversity as a Path to Peace and Mayor Beth Krom’s topic was How to Create a Balanced Community. Dr Glenn Roquemore’s topic is the Role of Community Colleges in Higher Education.

Dr. Glenn Roquemore is President of Irvine Valley College….

Dr Roquemore gave very important statistics of the Community Colleges in California….

You’ll recall that, in the past, we’ve kidded Roquemore over his tendency to approach speaking always as an occasion to dispense the merest of statistics as though they were astonishing jewels. "Two percent of our students," he'll say, "sport a vestigial tail." Huh?

What’s the matter with ‘im? Dunno.

But just who are these “Pacifica Institute” people?

According to PI’s website,

Pacifica Institute was established in 2003 as a non-profit organization by a group of Turkish-Americans. Pacifica Institute designs and executes projects covering social welfare, education, poverty, and conflict resolution issues in collaboration with scholars, activists, artists, politicians, and religious leaders-communities….

. . .

The Institute seeks to …[engage] in a variety of civic activities and [seeks to invite] others to generate and share insights, thereby removing barriers to confidence-building and trust….

Gosh, it sounds as though that illiterate pseudo-educator, Raghu Mathur, may have had a hand in writing this stuff.

Elsewhere, PI presents “Frequently Asked Questions about Pacifica Institute and Fethullah Gülen.”

One naturally assumes, then, that Mr. Fethullah Gülen and his ideas are important to PI. Sure enough, in the Q&A, Gülen and his movement are central:

Fethullah Gülen

Q: How is the Pacifica Institute involved with the Gülen movement?

A: Some of the founders and donors of Pacifica Institute are participants of the so-called Gülen, or Hizmet movement. Pacifica Institute was inspired by the movement’s philosophy and goals….

. . .

The Gülen/Hizmet movement is a values-driven social movement and following a philosophy that advances interfaith dialog, education and community service as tools to build a better and more harmonious society. The movement was inspired by the philosophy and teachings of Fethullah Gülen, a Turkish scholar, author and advocate….

. . .

Q: Who is Fethullah Gülen?

A: Fethullah Gülen is a Turkish scholar, preacher, thinker, author, opinion leader, education activist, and peace advocate who is considered by many to be one of the world’s most influential religious thinkers. He is regarded as the initiator and inspirer of the worldwide civil society movement, the Gülen Movement, which is committed to education, dialogue, peace, social justice, and social harmony….

Well, I’ve done a little looking, and this Gülen fella is mighty controversial, in some circles at least.

I skimmed a couple of sites, which suggested that Gulen is, among other things, a conservative and a vocal opponent of feminism (although I ask that readers judge for themselves based on his writings--and the writings of his mouthpieces).

So I went to the Fethullah Gülen website. There, I searched the term “feminism” and that brought me to a page with links to various relevant essays, evidently by Mr. Gülen, including The Gülen Movement: Gender and Practice.

I clicked on that. That essay includes this passage:

Although he promotes equality between the sexes, Fethullah Gülen's views on gender can indeed be described as complementary. He sees women and men as having equal value but inheriting different roles and characteristics due to physical and psychological differences. He classifies men as "physically stronger and apt to bear hardship" and women as "more compassionate, more delicate, more self sacrificing" (Gülen 2006: 1). Although he does state that women can be involved in any field of work he idealizes the mother as the pure educator (Gülen 2006: 2) implicitly implying that the man should be the family provider. This may open up for critique on behalf of Western feminists or scholars of religion and gender. According to this relatively new academic discipline[,] gender is a social construction. Human beings are born with different sexes, but social roles and expectations of fulfillment of these are constructed and emphasized by the norms that prevail in society.

Another link takes one to an essay entitled Women Confined and Mistreated. Here are some excerpts:

As a reaction to all the injustice done to women … a movement to claim women's rights emerged, particularly in the West. Even though this movement is considered an awakening of women, it occurred as a reaction and was doomed to imbalance like all other reactionary movements and ended up in extremism. Although the starting point was to defend women, in time it deviated from the original aim to the degree of being full of hatred towards men and to feeling a grudge against them. The movement named feminism, which was born from the idea of protecting women and providing them with rights equal to those of men, has only left behind longing, sorrow, and wreckage as a movement of discontentment….

. . .

According to Islam, women's role in this world is not only restricted to doing the housework and raising children. In fact, as long as it does not conflict with her primordial nature or with observing religious requirements, she is responsible for carrying out the duties that befall her in every area of society and making up for shortcomings where men fall short in social life. However, this reality was ignored in time, even among Muslims; rough understandings and crude thinking upset this system based on women and men's mutual assistance. After this upset, both family life and the social order were also upset. Different peoples' perception of their own historical heritage as a part of Islam, their seeing and reflecting their folklore and traditions as essentials of religion, and making judgments pertaining to this issue at certain periods all resulted in the usurpation of women's rights; they were pushed into a more restricted area day by day, and in some places they were totally isolated from life without consideration of where this issue leads. However, the source of mistaken thoughts and deviations in this matter is not Islam whatsoever. The mistakes belong to those who misinterpret and misapply the religion. Such mistakes in practice must definitely be corrected.

On the other hand, while correcting these mistakes, approaching the issue from a feminist standpoint will upset the balance again and an opposite extremism will replace the former. For instance, just as it is very ugly to see women as merely child-bearing objects and is insolence towards them, it is equally unbecoming and unnatural to build a society where women are unable to bear and bring up the children they wish for, or for a woman to feel a need to rebel against marrying and to avoid bearing children in order to show that she is not a machine. As a woman is not a dirty dish, her place at home is not confined to the kitchen with the dirty dishes. However, a woman who claims to have no household responsibilities and thereby turns her home to a quarters for eating and sleeping is far from being a good mother, a good teacher, and a good spiritual guide to her children.

Besides all this, it is another form of oppression to make women work under difficult conditions, such as mining and road-building. It contradicts human nature to push women into heavy tasks like agricultural manual labor, or military field operations, and other harsh pursuits, just for the sake of proving their equality with men; it is nothing but cruel torture. It shows ignorance of women's qualities and conflicts with their primordial nature. Therefore, just as an understanding which imprisons women at home and takes them completely away from social life is absolutely incorrect according to Islam, likewise, depriving women of financial support, preventing them from bearing and raising children in security, and forcing women into the labor force to do uncongenial work is also oppressive. A woman, like a man, can have a certain job as far as her (and his) physiology and psychology are taken into consideration; but both women and men should know that a good life consists of sharing and division of labor. Each should assist the other by doing tasks in compliance with their nature.

Yikes.

I’m in no position to judge this “take” on feminism relative to the various Muslim communities (e.g., in Turkey) and the possibility of discourse within them. But it’s pretty plain that Gülen’s philosophy, as expressed here, is antithetical to some of the core tenets of Western feminism, broadly understood. It seems clear that Gülen is not likely to gain many adherents or followers among contemporary Westerners, with their commitment to the ideal of equality, as they understand it at least, between the sexes.

The Wikipedia article on Gülen is alarming—if, that is, it can be trusted. It asserts that

...Gülen's views are vulnerable to the charge of misogyny. As noted by Berna Turam, Gülen has argued:

"the man is used to more demanding jobs . . . but a woman must be excluded during certain days during the month. After giving birth, she sometimes cannot be active for two months. She cannot take part in different segments of the society all the time. She cannot travel without her husband, father, or brother . . . the superiority of men compared to women cannot be denied." [35]

Berna Turam, Northeastern

Wikipedia is quoting Berna Turam, a serious academic at Northeastern U. She herself seems to cite a work from 1996 entitled Fethullah Gulen Hocaefendi ile ufuk turu (Aktuel kitaplar dizisi). It is written in Turkish.

One should be careful to note that the superiority that Gülen is discussing is physical, not moral, or at least that's how I read it. Even so, his remarks are mighty offensive, at least to these Western ears.


Gosh Glenn, you really oughta be more careful who you hang out with. Philosophically, these Gülenites are a problem, at least relative to most of our community on these shores.

I'll see if I can shed more light on the Pacifica Institute and what it means for the likes of Glenn Roquemore and Beth Krom (a Democrat) to be hanging out with 'em.

Votes of "no confidence" - 1999

from the Dissenter's Dictionary, Dec. 3, 1999


MATHUR, RAGHU P.



In April of 1997, in an action later judged a violation of the Open Meetings law, the Board Majority appointed chemistry teacher and campus joke Raghu P. Mathur as Interim President of Irvine Valley College. At the time, Mathur had no experience as a full-time administrator. Five months later, through a process that violated board policy, and amid strong faculty opposition, the BM appointed Mathur permanent president. That action, too, was later voided owing to violations of the Brown Act. Two years later, despite his miserable record, which included a vote of no confidence and the palpable contempt of nearly all IVC faculty and staff, the board majority renewed Mathur's contract, giving him a raise and a $200 a month "security stipend."

Mathur was hired as an instructor in 1979, and he quickly established a reputation as a schemer and liar who would stoop to anything in order to secure an administrative position. Owing to his manifest unsavoriness, however, that ambition was consistently thwarted both inside and outside the district.

His intrigues soon gained him the hatred of Ed Hart, IVC's first president. In 1986, Hart retired, and the college adopted a "faculty chair" model, partly for fiscal reasons. Soon, Mathur "ruled" the tiny school of Physical Sciences as its chair. During the "chair" era, he was, without doubt, the chief abuser of that office, engaging in endless machinations while arranging a lucrative schedule that netted him a salary far in excess of the college president's ($124,000 in 1996-7).

During this period, Mathur continued to seek administrative positions. When he was passed over, he played the race card, charging everyone in sight with "discrimination," apparently on the sole grounds that he had not been selected.

Mathur's habit, as chair, of circumventing the governance process eventually yielded an official censure of him by IVC's "Instructional Council' in April of 1994. Earlier, the IC membership had all agreed not to go outside the process--particularly with regard to the selection of the IVC presidential search committee chair. During an IC meeting in March (of 94), Mathur was asked whether, despite the agreement, he had presented a petition, urging the selection of a particular faculty member, to the chancellor. He answered that he had "not forwarded" a petition to the chancellor or anyone. In fact, he had and, apparently on that basis, the chancellor did appoint the faculty member as (co)chair.

When this came to light in April, Mathur was censured. According to the minutes of the April 5 meeting, "Instructional Council had agreed that no one will work outside of the IVC governance structure and agreed-upon processes. They felt that Raghu had lied to the Council...[One member] made a motion to censur Raghu Mathur for lying to the Instructional Council regarding the petition and the presidential search process and for misrepresenting not only Instructional Council, but also the faculty...Raghu Mathur stated that he did not lie to the Instructional Council. He said that he was asked if he had forwarded the petition to the Chancellor and he said he had not. He did admit, however, that he had shown the petition to Chancellor Lombardi...Raghu felt that the members of Instructional Council were making too big of a deal out of the situation...The question was called and the motion passed with 8 ayes, 3 noes, and 4 abstentions."

Classified employees, too, have at times found it necessary to complain about of Mathur's conduct. For instance, in August of 1995, IVC administration received a letter from Leann Cribb, Executive Secretary (and formerly secretary for the School of Physical Sciences), in which she wrote: "Mr. Mathur routinely revises facts and manufactures innuendo to suit his objectives." During the January '98 Board meeting, classified employee Julie Ben-Yeoshua explained that Mathur was the reason she was seeking employment elsewhere: "Since you first appointed Raghu Mathur as the interim president, the atmosphere at IVC has changed drastically; morale is in the gutter...[Mathur's] inability to tell the truth is so natural that I have come to gauge everything he says and writes by believing the complete opposite...."

By the mid-90s, Mathur had come to regard Terry Burgess, then-VP of Instruction, as his nemesis, and, in 1996, he tried to discredit Burgess with the board. In the spring of '96, a student sought to enroll in a chemistry course without enrolling in the concurrent lab, and the matter came before the chair--Mathur. Though the student provided documentation proving that she had done the equivalent work at UCI, Mathur denied the request, whereupon the student asked for a review of the decision by the Office of Instruction. Mathur agreed to go along with the Office's decision.

Later, however, he accused Burgess of signing the student's admittance card despite non-approval by the instructor. Mathur convinced his school to send a resolution of complaint to the board (and also to the senate and the union), appending the student's transcripts, without her permission, an action that violated the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and district policies. When then-IVC president Dan Larios learned of this, he requested an opinion from the district's attorneys regarding the legality of Mathur's action. The opinion, dated March 18, 1996, indicates that Mathur acted improperly, violating FERPA and board policy 5619. Larios was fed up.

Realizing that Larios now planned to deny approval of him as chair of his school, Mathur, as per usual, scrambled to lobby board members for support. On March 29, Larios met with Mathur; he explained that he had lost confidence in Mathur and that Mathur had better "change." In the end, Larios wrote a memo (May 14) expressing his serious reservations about Mathur's leadership, owing to his repeated circumventing of established processes and his violations of board policy, and placed him on probation. If there were any further violations of process, wrote Larios, Mathur would be removed as chair.

In the meantime, Mathur asked the senate to censure Burgess. It declined to do so, citing Mathur's misdescription of crucial facts. Larios, troubled by Mathur's misrepresentations, sent out a memo explaining that Burgess had in no sense acted improperly.

In December of '96, the Board Majority era began, and Larios sensed that it was time to move on. Normally, the VP of Instruction—Terry Burgess--would serve as interim president, but the BM blocked his selection, and, in March, Lombardi was chosen as a sort of compromise. But in April, Frogue presented another one of Mathur's petitions--this time, an “anonymous” petition urging Mathur's selection as president. On that basis, Mathur became IVC president.

Mathur's outrages while president are too numerous to recount here. Suffice it to say that in the early months of 1998, the IVC academic senate instituted a Special Inquiry into “abuses of power.” By April, it became necessary to abandon the investigation, owing to the number and the complexity of the charges against Mathur. Said the committee’s chair: “It’s like bailing water out of the Titanic with a tea cup…Every time we put an allegation to bed, another one jumps up” (Voice, 5/7/98). Soon thereafter, Mathur received a 74% vote of no confidence by his faculty.

Mathur has sought to rule through intimidation, punishing his critics in every way available to him. In early November of 1999, the IVC academic senate released the results of a survey of full-time faculty (78% participated). 90% disagreed with the statement, "I can express my opinion about issues at the college without fear of retribution or retaliation." The 90% figure will likely go up soon, for Mathur intends to fire an untenured instructor--a critic--for his involvement in the act of naming the plot of dirt next to the Life Sciences greenhouse. It was named the "Terry Burgess garden."


Huge Vote Against College Chief (LA Times, May 18, 2004 | Jeff Gottlieb)

Faculty in the South Orange County Community College District overwhelmingly voted no confidence Monday in Chancellor Raghu Mathur.
Of the full-time professors at Irvine Valley and Saddleback colleges who cast ballots, 93.5% voted in favor of no confidence, and 6% were against the union-sponsored measure. One person abstained.
Out of 318 faculty eligible, 246 -- 77% -- voted, according to the district faculty association….

Clueless IVC Prez Glenn Roquemore smiles as he makes nice with the enemy - August 26, 2014

Vice President, Western Region, Workforce Solutions/University of Phoenix, Chuck Parker, President, Irvine Valley College, Dr. Glenn R. Roquemore

○ Members of the Irvine Valley College community just received this gushing email from the President:

Irvine Valley College Signs Memorandum of Understanding with University of Phoenix

Irvine – Irvine Valley College (IVC) administration, faculty and staff held a formal signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the University of Phoenix, Inc. (University) on Wednesday, August 20, 2014.
Irvine Valley College President Glenn Roquemore said, “This partnership will expand the many transfer opportunities available to the IVC students and staff. One of the major benefits of the MOU is the tuition discount."
Irvine Valley College students transferring to University of Phoenix into an undergraduate baccalaureate degree program … will be considered as having satisfied the general education requirements for the breadth of the liberal arts degree program….

○ IVC students get 10% off Phoenix tuition, which is way pricey.

○ Evidently, President Roquemore is not aware that entities such as the U of Phoenix exist to make huge profits by taking advantage of students who typically receive federally insured loans, putting them in serious debt. Those students, upon graduating, typically fail to find the work they were expecting and often default on their loans, forcing the taxpayer to pay. (It's a massive bubble that, one day, will pop.)

○ You’re fine with all that, are you Glenn? You're a Republican, aren't you? Yeah. I see you smiling with those vets you claim to love!

○ Alas, the "predatory for-profits" problem is especially egregious in the case of Vets, who pay their way via the new GI Bill:


GI Bill funds failing for-profit California colleges

(Desert Sun)

The ever-clueless Glenn R

Over the last five years, more than $600 million in college assistance for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans has been spent on California schools so substandard that they have failed to qualify for state financial aid.
As a result, the GI Bill — designed to help veterans live the American dream — is supporting for-profit companies that spend lavishly on marketing but can leave veterans with worthless degrees and few job prospects, The Center for Investigative Reporting found.

. . .

Financial records analyzed by CIR show that California is the national epicenter of this problem, with nearly 2 out of every 3 GI Bill dollars going to for-profit colleges.
The University of Phoenix in San Diego outdistances its peers. Since 2009, the campus has received $95 million in GI Bill funds. That's more than any brick-and-mortar campus in America, more than the entire 10-campus University of California system and all UC extension programs combined.

. . .

The school's large share of GI Bill funding reflects more than just the number of veterans enrolling. The programs are expensive. An associate degree costs $395 a credit, for instance — nearly 10 times the cost at a public community college.
The University of Phoenix won't say how many of its veterans graduate or find jobs, but the overall graduation rate at its San Diego campus is less than 15 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Education, and more than a quarter of students default on their loans within three years of leaving school.
Those figures fall short of the minimum standards set by the California Student Aid Commission, which dispenses state financial aid. The commission considers either a graduation rate lower than 30 percent or a loan default rate of more than 15.5 percent clear indicators of a substandard education.
No such restrictions govern GI Bill funds. And nearly 300 California schools that received GI Bill money either were barred from receiving state financial aid at least once in the past four years or operated without accreditation, CIR has found.

. . .

Of the $1.5 billion in GI Bill funds spent on tuition and fees in California since 2009, CIR found that more than 40 percent — $638 million —went to schools that have failed the state financial aid standard at least once in the past four years.
Four of those schools were University of Phoenix campuses, which together took in $225 million….

An Enemy In Common? The Case Against For-Profit Colleges

(Cognoscenti [NPR Boston])

… As Americans, we should all be concerned that veterans are being taken advantage of by unscrupulous profiteers. As taxpayers, we should be aware that we are paying for this disservice. Approximately 85-95 percent of the for-profits’ revenue comes from taxpayer-supported benefits….

For-Profit College Investigation--Is the New GI Bill Working?: Questionable For-Profit Colleges Increasingly Dominate the Program

([Senator] Harkin newsletter)


…Senator Harkin's HELP Committee investigation found:

. . .

  • Most for-profit colleges charge much higher tuition than comparable programs at community colleges and flagship State public universities. The investigation found Associate degree and certificate programs averaged four times the cost of degree programs at comparable community colleges. Bachelor's degree programs averaged 20 percent more than the cost of analogous programs at flagship public universities despite the credits being largely non-transferrable.
  • Because 96 percent of students starting a for-profit college take federal student loans to attend a for-profit college (compared to 13 percent at community colleges), nearly all students who leave have student loan debt, even when they don't have a degree or diploma or increased earning power.
  • Students who attended a for-profit college accounted for 47 percent of all Federal student loan defaults in 2008 and 2009. More than 1 in 5 students enrolling in a for-profit college-22 percent-default within 3 years of entering repayment on their student loans....

Hey-Diddly-Ho, Neighbor!

Oldie but Goodie [2012]: See Senator Harkin’s For-Profit College Investigation: U of Phoenix