Friday, February 28, 2020

DIRTY TRICKS: It's Dandy Don Wagner and his Developer Friends!

Court: Dirtiest Election Trick In Decades By Developers In OC Supervisors Race Should Change Rules For Future Candidates
Voice of OC
     Just days before the election mailers arrived exposing the candidate’s crimes. She protected rapists, not women. She wrote a letter about a judge to reduce the sentence for a 3 year old’s rapist. Only, none of it was true.
     The candidate –Orange County Board of Supervisor’s challenger Ashleigh Aitken — is in fact a girl scout leader, mother, and former federal prosecutor of sexual predators.
     The mailer, which disclosed its funding source only as “Californians for A Growing Economy and Safe Streets,”(CFGESS) was in fact funded by real estate developers with an interest in Orange County. They supported the incumbent Republican Orange County Supervisor Don Wagner, who has repeatedly sided with developers in local control matters…. Continue reading
The propaganda in question 

OC Supervisors candidate Ashleigh Aitken demands apology for mailer
OC Reg
     Orange County Board of Supervisors Third District candidate Ashleigh Aitken said on Tuesday, Jan. 25, her campaign has sent a cease-and-desist letter to her opponent, Supervisor Don Wagner, demanding he renounce a mailer she says falsely accuses her of supporting an Orange County Superior Court judge who reduced the sentence of a man who sexually assaulted a 3-year-old relative….

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Don, are you reading this? Why have you turned to the dark side? You had likable but questionable qualities in you when you served on the BOT.

You've sold your self out it appears. Head for the monastery to cleanse yourself.

Anonymous said...

I don't remember any likable qualities while he was on the BOT. I remember his arrogant dismissive attitude toward faculty and higher ed. I remember his self-serving photo ops and his own lazy leadership that allowed problems he recognized to get worse for years.

Anonymous said...

Wasn’t he the one to cancel our American Library Association affiliation because he decided the group was too liberal? You know, a typical point of view of people who love education.

Anonymous said...

Yes, - he called librarians liberal busy-bodies. He LOVED Mike Carona. He was terrible in Sacto - ultra right wing, anti-woman.

Anonymous said...

That’s a worthwhile target. Librarians.

Anonymous said...

Who did the same sex benefits hit piece in the BOT elections? Who was running?

Anonymous said...

The infamous same-sex hit piece was in 1996: Fortune, Frogue, Williams and a guy named Don Davis (he lost) - the other three won.

Anonymous said...

And the then officers of the Faculty Association had spent a chunk of money on that hit piece and when they left office some questions were raised: how did they secure credit cards without the ok of the membership? And how, as some have said, was money supposedly not accounted for? There was, I believe, an audit.

8-14: do you regret all the lying?

✅ Trump Encourages Racist Conspiracy Theory on Kamala Harris’s Eligibility to Be Vice President NYT ✅ Orange County Sees Overall Coronavirus...

Goals and Values and Twaddle

blather: long-winded talk with no real substance*
The whole concept of MSLOs [measurable student learning outcomes] as the latest fad in education is somewhat akin to the now discredited fad of the '90's, Total Quality Management, or TQM. Essentially, the ACCJC adopted MSLOs as the overarching basis for accrediting community colleges based on their faith in the theoretical treatises of a movement.... After repeated requests for research showing that such use of MSLOs is effective, none has been forthcoming from the ACCJC [accreditors]. Prior to large scale imposition of such a requirement at all institutions, research should be provided to establish that continuous monitoring of MSLOs has resulted in measurable improvements in student success at a given institution. No such research is forthcoming because there is none….
The Accountability Game…., Leon F. Marzillier (Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, October, 2002)
In the summer of ’13, I offered a critique of the awkward verbiage by which the district and colleges explain their values, goals, and objectives —aka SOCCCD'S G&V (goals and values) blather.
I wrote a post each for the district, Saddleback College, and Irvine Valley College efforts. (See the links below.)
This verbiage—stated in terms of “values,” “missions,” “goals,” “visions,” and whatnot—is often badly written. It is sometimes embarrassingly trite.
It occasionally communicates something worthwhile.
No doubt you are familiar with the usual objections to jargon. Higher education, too, has its jargon—an irony, given typical college-level instruction in writing, which urges jargon eschewery.
Sure enough, SOCCCD G&V blather is riddled with jargon and with terms misused and abused. For instance, in the case of the district’s dubious blather, the so-called “vision” is actually a purpose. Why didn't they just call it that?
As one slogs through this prattle, one finds that "visions" tend to be awfully similar to “missions,” with which they are distinguished. The latter in turn are awfully similar to “goals,” which must be distinguished from “objectives.” But aren't goals and objectives pretty much the same thing?
These perverse word games will surely perplex or annoy anyone armed with a command of the English language. In fact, readers will be perplexed to the degree that they are thus armed. Illiterates, of course, will be untroubled.
Here's a simple point: the district and colleges’ G&V blather tends to eschew good, plain English in favor of technical terms and trendy words and phrases (i.e., it tends to be bullshitty and vague). Thus, one encounters such trendy terminological turds as “dynamic,” “diversity,” “student success,” and “student-centered.” Even meretricious neologisms such as ISLOs and “persistence rates” pop up, unexplained, undefended.
Does anyone see a transparency problem with all of this? Shouldn't the public, or at least the well educated public, be able to comprehend statements of the colleges' goals and values?
In the case of the district, to its credit, all it really seems to want to say is that it wants to teach well and it wants students to succeed. Admirable!
So why all the ugly, common-sense defying, buzzword-encrusted claptrap?

Districtular poppycock: our “vision” and our “mission” and our tolerance of twaddle - July 31, 2013

THEY BUZZ: Saddleback College's "Mission, Vision, and Values" - August 4, 2013

IVC’s vision, mission, and goals: nonsense on stilts - August 5, 2013

THE IRVINE VALLEY CHRONICLES: no ideas, just clichés & buzzwords - Sep 30, 2013

*From my Apple laptop's dictionary