The Leonard Cohen controversy

Leonard Cohen: before his voice descended into the eternal Frog Zone.

We all agree, I think, that the fellow has written some awesome songs.

As a performer (I said earlier), he's strictly a ladies' man.

Naturally, some got pissed about that.

I suspect that Rebel Girl, were she available, would weigh in on this one. She'd defend "her man."

Buckley nailed it.

Some random pics from the Bauer family archive:

My brother Ron taking a picture of my mom taking a picture of Ron.

Mono Lake, twenty-five years ago.

I do believe this is GrayBall qua kitten.

One day, Brother Ray showed up with little Bobbie, cat.

"Is she pregnant? She looks pregnant," asked my mom.

"No way," said Ray.

Bobbie had seven kittens. My mom took care of 'em all.

I'm told that GrayBall lived to be twenty-two.

One day, she just didn't show up anymore.

Reportedly, my Tante (Aunt) Ruth was "a bit wild" as a teenager.
Here she is, hanging with her pals, maybe in the Black Forest (Germany).
It would have been the late forties or early fifties.
That's her on the far right, taking a swig from a bottle of beer.
She died a couple of years ago. She had always been a heavy smoker.

Years ago, I used to hike around Santiago Oaks park. Took some pics.

Back in the 60s, my dad was working somewhere north of OC and heard that the once-impressive home of the "Pantages" family was nearby and deteriorating. So his took his Retina and found the house; he took several pics. I did some research and it seems unlikely that Alexander Pantages had anything to do with this home. But I'm glad my dad took the pics anyway.

The "Teflon lobby"

A boom in for-profit colleges may be a bust for taxpayers and students (LA Times)

Many drop out or find the programs aren't accredited, a Senate panel reports. Fees, often twice as much as at public universities, are often paid with federal loans, with a high default rate.
. . .
Stephen Burd, an education policy expert at the New America Foundation, said the scrutiny is long overdue, but lawmakers will have to contend with the industry's "Teflon lobby." Many concerns have been raised about for-profit colleges, but nothing has stuck, he said.

"For-profit college lobbyists are accustomed to flexing their muscles on Capitol Hill and getting their way — no matter how much controversy is swirling around their schools," he said….

Inertial stupidity—and SOCCCD agendas

     I don't know about you, but I often find myself looking at a sheet of so-called information or, say, a form that I've gotta fill out and then experiencing puzzlement or annoyance at its evident stupidity.
     Usually I am dealing with something that many other people must deal with all of the time: a registration form, a set of instructions, etc. But then I think: if many people encounter this thing, and if this thing is stupid, then why hasn't it been changed?
     And yet, there it is before me, quietly being stupid. There are no indications of any movement to correct the situation. One might say that the situation's stupidity and intolerability possesses great inertia. And that is frustrating. Even perplexing.
     Earlier today, I was compelled to register on a website for my car insurance. At one point, I was asked to provide a number. A graphic clearly indicated where that number could be found. And so I gave them that number.
     But no. They didn't want that number. They wanted that number plus the numbers before it and after it. 
     This time I was lucky. I figured out what they wanted right away. I muttered, "morons," and then continued.
     At another point, I was told to choose between options supposedly listed before me. But as far as I could tell, there was only once choice available to me. There were no options.
     You know what I'm talking about. (No?) This sort of thing can mess you up.

* * *

     Now let's consider the agenda for SOCCCD board of trustees meetings. Until recently, the agenda was prepared by that under-educated yet self-important evil homunculus known as Raghu P. Mathur. And so I was not surprised that the board agenda often exhibited stupidity. I was, however, continually amazed that Mathur's regular idiocies, sprinkled over everything he touched, did not more often and more intensely inspire obloquy or vituperation!
     I just don't get it.
     For instance, consider this small matter. Individual trustees may request attendance of (at) conferences. Upon someone's making such a request, the board as a whole will approve, or fail to approve, the request by majority vote.
     The situation isn't complex. Some of these conferences are far away and thus entail expensive travel; further, lodging for these conferences can be expensive. Hence, at times, significant amounts of taxpayer money are at stake. And so, naturally, a trustee "requests" attendance at a conference—that is, he doesn't just up and go, expecting the district to pay. The board must decide whether to grant the request.
     Now, in fact, during some months, no "trustee conference" item appears on the agenda. That makes sense. Perhaps no trustee made a request!
     But, during other months, there is a "trustee conference requests" item.
     Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's pretty plain how this should work. If no trustee requests attending a conference, then there will be no item on the agenda. But when a trustee seeks to attend a particular conference, then, of course, there must be an agenda item.
     The item, naturally, would provide the following information:

(1) The identity and nature of the conference
(2) The expense to the district (i.e., the taxpayer) per trustee attending
(3) The identity of the trustee or trustees who seek to attend that conference (and thus the number of probable board attendees)

     It ain't rocket science.
     Now, in Roy World, it would go like this. A trustee seeks to attend conference C. It wouldn't matter whether he has already registered for the conference. After all, his attending the conference hinges on board approval, and that has not yet been granted. If trustee T were to have already registered for a particular conference, and if his proposal or request to attend it failed to be approved, then he'd just have to unregister.
     But none of the logic of Roy World seems to hold for the people, whoever they might be, who produce SOCCCD board agendas--and, I guess, for our mostly uncomplaining trustees.
     It's alienatin'!

     Until March of 2010, the information ("exhibit") that was attached to "trustee conference request" agenda items always looked like this:

     Already, my brain hurts.

     First: the heading reads, "trustee attendance at conferences and meetings." That's all wrong. This item is not reporting trustee attendance at conferences. Rather, it is supposed to provide information useful in determining whether a particular request should be honored. What sort of bonehead wrote this? The heading should be, "Trustee requests to attend conferences and meetings."

     Isn't that obvious? Am I crazy, or what?

     Second: the heading is followed by an introductory phrase—namely, "trustees wishing to attend." That makes sense. After all, it would be good to know who is making the request (if, for instance, that person has abused this privilege in the past). At any rate, the number of trustees requesting attendance of that conference is important to know. Obviously.

     Plainly, what should come next is a list of trustees, namely, those wishing to attend some conference or other.

     But no. No such list is provided.

     I don't get it. Maybe I've got some kind of syndrome or something. I do get spasms and tics sometimes. To me, if you write, "trustees wishing to attend," followed by a colon, then the next thing you write ought to be the names of trustees.

     What we get instead is a list of "events" (i.e., conferences), the dates of the conference, and the cost per trustee. No trustee names appear. Not even the number of trustees requesting attendance of the conference is provided.

     I've been at board meetings in which a trustee has requested that information: Who requested this? —You wouldn't believe it. All sorts of contortions and gyrations ensue to disguise that person's identity. At times, when the pesky requester (Nancy) simply will not back off, that produces a vague indication that, well, no trustee plans to attend. Oh.

     But then why was there an item on the agenda?

     Here, I believe, is the key question that inquiring minds (e.g., members of the community who dislike government waste and inefficiency) want answered. Is there a trustee who seeks to attend this conference? If so, who is she? How can it be that an item described as "trustee requests to attend a conference" is approved — and yet no member of the audience (in the Ronald Reagan Room or TV Land) knows whether any of the trustees will be attending that conference? 

     But hey, I've been there. It's Orwellian. 

     Or is it merely Bauerian?

     For some reason, starting in March (of 2010), the format of the information ("exhibit") changed. It then looked like this:

     Again, there's that bizarre heading, which seems to describe or report trustee attendance when it should be referring to trustees, the conferences they seek to attend, and the cost of their attending.

     The heading should be: "trustee requests." Something like that. It shouldn't be idiotic or moronic.

     (If these people had any imagination, they'd choose, say, "my left nut" or "puppy ears" as a heading. Idiotic but fun.)

     And, again, there's the phrase "trustees wishing to attend," followed by a colon. 

     And, again, the expected list of friggin' trustees does not appear. On the contrary. Look at the information provided. It is that "none" of the trustees has requested attendance of these two conferences (see).

     But then, why is there an agenda item at all? I am contemplating suicide.

     It gets worse. We are informed that "none" of the trustees will be attending. What?

     When I read something like this, I feel that I have entered Bizarro World. I'm inclined to shout, "what the hell is this?! What the F*CK is going on here?!" 

     Am I alone? Am I a nut? I do love puppy ears.

     In April and May, no "trustee requests" item appeared on the board agenda. Again, presumably, this suggested that no trustee indicated (to the Chancellor) an interest in attending any conferences. OK then.

     But then, in June, a "trustee request" item appeared. Here's the "exhibit" that accompanied that item.

     Yep, it was back to March's Bizarro World. 

     Stupid!

     That brings us up to July and Monday's meeting. There is indeed an agenda item for "trustee requests" on the July agenda. (Find the agenda here. See the box at the right.)

     Here's the "exhibit" that accompanies the item. It sports a spankin' new format:

     Good grief.
     Note the same bizarre heading and introductory phrase. F*ck.
     Arguably, the bizarrotude has diminished, for we are no longer told that none of the trustees is interested in attending or indeed will be attending these conferences.
     Oh good. The world is right again.
     But no. It remains wrong. Instead, we're informed how many trustees have "registered" per conference.
     I don't get it. What difference does it make that Trustee T has or has not registered for conference C? Suppose he has registered. So what? Now the board must decide whether he should be supported in attending that conference.
     And suppose he has not registered. Again, so what?! Maybe he's holding back on registering until he gets approval! That seems sensible. Or maybe, upon hearing about this conference, he or she will seek to attend.
     Why isn't this goddam "exhibit" simply and clearly telling us what we f*cking need to know--namely, which trustee seeks to attend this freakin' conference!?
     You watch. On Monday, Nancy or somebody will ask, "So who wants to go to this stupid Orlando Mickey Mouse Club thing?"
     And I betcha she won't be told. Not clearly, anyway. It'll be a cloud of dust. Or another, "Nobody wants to go. Maybe."
     But the item will pass.
     And I will return to my tidy cave, far far away from Bizarro World. Like Puff the goddam' magic dragon.

Is John Williams headed to Orlando again?

SOCCCD July board meeting agenda item 5.17

     Lately, something odd has happened to SOCCCD board of trustees meeting agendas. It used to be that trustees would express interest in attending a conference somewhere. Consequently, the Chancellor would list those conferences and their cost (plus dates, etc.) on “exhibit A” of an agenda item. Armed with that info, the board would approve the requests or not.
     With the new format, whether any trustee is interested in a particular conference is obscured. On June’s agenda and on the agenda for Monday’s meeting, there’s a column for “trustees currently registered” on exhibit A (see). “None” is indicated.
     This may leave the impression that no trustee plans to register.
     But then why list these particular events? Plus: read the agenda item. This item is supposed to handle trustee requests for travel/conferences. It is not a mere information item.
     I smell a rat.
     The rat’s name is John "Orlando Boy" Williams, who, when he isn't vacationing in Florida at taxpayers' expense and spending one Monday per month as a trustee, is the Orange County Public Administrator/Guardian, a remarkably well-compensated position that, according to the OC Grand Jury, he executes very badly.
     You’ll notice that one of the conferences listed (see below) is yet another “Orlando” junket. And you know who loves those. John’s got family down there in the sunshine state. He spends weeks there each year, travel and lodging paid for by taxpayers.
     So is Williams planning to attend this thing or not?
     Inquiring minds wanna know.

* * *

Exhibit A

     What, you may ask, is the STEMtech Conference?
     And what on earth is “Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin”?!
     Well, I’m glad you asked those questions. There’s a website: here. It answers our questions, I suppose:

Let the Magic Begin!
Excitement is building for the League for Innovation's new conference

The League for Innovation in the Community College is proud to announce its first annual STEMtech conference, October 31 - November 3, 2010, at Orlando's Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin. Educators, industry leaders, and others will gather to discuss increasing student access into and success in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors and careers. The 2010 STEMtech will also help educators explore the strategic use of information technology to better serve their students, campuses, and communities.

Over 400 sessions will cover everything from best practices for recruiting and retaining students for STEM-related programs to more effectively engaging students in instruction using social networking and other online tools. An extensive exhibition featuring timely products and services will also be included.
. . .
STEMtech Online allows individuals to participate in a great conference without incurring travel expenses. Because travel costs and online conference fees are reduced, more people will be able to participate in the most exciting professional development opportunity to come along in some time. As an added bonus, STEMtech Online participants receive a one-year membership to iStream, the League for Innovation's web-based professional development portal.

A special room rate for conference participants has been arranged at the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin. In the heart of Walt Disney World, the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin Resort is the gateway to Central Florida's greatest theme parks and attractions. Conference participants can enjoy 17 world-class restaurants and lounges, five pools, two health clubs, tennis, nearby golf, and many special Disney benefits, including complimentary transportation to Walt Disney World theme parks and attractions and the Extra Magic Hours.

     The “opening key note speaker” is none other than Ed Begley, Jr. –You know. The “actor and activist.”
     The closing speaker is a “special assistant” at the DOE.
     We’ve already got experts on the info provided at this conference. We don’t need John Williams going there and getting all confused about it. He is quite stupid and remarkably inarticulate. So he won't learn anything, and even if he were to do so, he'd be helpless to communicate it.
     And this conference is expensive--nearly $2,000 per person. (That's just an estimate.)
     I bet he’s going. And if he is, I’ll do everything I can to make sure everybody hears about it.
     When will people get sick and tired of "public servants" such as John Williams?

Big Star

I good piece by Ed Ward of "Fresh Air" (NPR) on the great and nearly forgotten band Big Star. Done a while back, I guess, but so what.

Canada in the 50s

Here are my parents, somewhere in eastern Canada, circa 1952. Jobs were hard to come by and, during some periods, they didn't eat much. They don't look very happy either.

Things soon improved. My folks were married in 1953—they had to wait for my Grandmother (Oma) to arrive from Germany. Then it was off to the other coast—British Columbia—where there was more work for an electrician. Annie came along in 1954 and I arrived fourteen months later.

This picture was likely taken in 1957.

By 1958, we were living in a home on a street overlooking Vancouver. Here are Annie, Prince, and I in our backyard. I recall the endless gloom and rain and the spectacular views of the blustery weather and the beautiful city and ocean.  And the music on the radio: "Volare," doo-wop, etc. And "fish and chips" down at the harbor. You have no idea!

Annie, looking deceptively innocent.

This is a scene from my second or third birthday (hence 1957 or 1958).

My dad got a mention in this 1957 trade paper (in Kitimat, BC, near Alaska).
Herb Frey was another German immigrant.
This morning, I gave my dad a ride to town to pick up his truck from the shop. I mentioned these pictures. He said that he had lots of great Canadian (i.e., English-speaking, et al.) friends back in 
Canada (including Bill Lee above), but it seemed clear that immigrants were frozen out of significant positions of leadership or authority. And educational opportunities were lacking. Everything pointed to moving to the U.S., he said, and to California in particular.
That, of course, was my parents' dream all along.

I still thrill to the cheesy organ, the cool tempo change, and all the rest.

I don't know what this guy's sayin', but the song speaks to me, man.
I'm a big fan of the cult fave Alex Chilton, who died not long ago. I was amazed to discover years ago that Chilton actually did a cover of this song, complete with Italian lyrics!

Back in the sixties, I was a huge Turtles fan. Still love 'em. It seemed odd to me that I always loved their (and the Mothers') versions of old doo-wop songs, such as this one, "Tear Drops." Only later did I realize that I had grown to love this music when I was three or four years old, listening to my parents' records and to the radio on the endless drives we took, seemingly to nowhere.

• The original recording, by Lee Andrews and the Hearts (1957).
• "Go Cry On Somebody Else's Shoulder," Frank Zappa (and the Mothers of Invention), 1966.
• "Later that Night," Frank Zappa (and the Mothers of Invention), 1968.
• "Only You," the Platters, 1955.

No textation without representation!

     The Stupid People are feeling their oats again. Evidently fired up by the demagogic right-wing author Brigitte Gabriel, they caused a ruckus at last night's meeting of the Fountain Valley School Board.   
     Read all about it in today’s OC Reg:

Trustees decline to change portrayal of Islam (OC Reg)

     The gist of the story is that Gabriel’s group, “ACT! For America,” has read the text used in Fountain Valley to teach “social studies” to 7th graders—namely, Houghton-Mifflin Harcourts' "World History: Medieval to Early Modern Times.” The book includes a 55-page section about Islamic history.
     Uh-oh.
     ACT!'s complaint is that the book’s treatment of Islam portrays it too dang positively.
     The solution, proposed by an ACT!ual resident: just add some “supplemental materials,” provided by ACT!
     You can just imagine what that stuff is like. ACT! is really down on Islam and A-răbs. More on that in a moment.
     According to the Reg, about one hundred people filled the board room and many spoke passionately in favor of the “supplement” proposal. In the end, however, the board unanimously declined to take action, owing to a lack of authority. After all, the state must authorize all texts, trustees said.
     Yes, the State! Damn them, anyway! No textation without representation! Kill the bastards! Let's start with that guy! String 'im up! Garrrrrrrrrrh!
     Naturally, the board's inevitable decision not to take any action pissed off the ACT!-inspired people in the room, who, um, wanted some kind of action. Is this not a democracy? People groaned and grumbled. Someone farted loudly. Cops had to be brought in to restore order.
     Not all of the speakers were clueless right-wing Neanderthals. One guy reminded the crowd that some of the district’s students are Muslims and that “Muslims have died fighting for this country.”
     Hey yeah! What about that?
     On the other hand, another guy used part of his speaking time to suddenly put hand on heart and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Many in the audience dutifully stood up and followed his goofy example. I guess nobody laughed or snickered when they all got to the “liberty and justice for all” part. I woulda snorted.
     Toward the end of the meeting, the district Superintendent spanked the crowd a bit, suggesting that they had forgotten the “tenets of the … constitution” and our system’s reliance on law and “the appropriate process by which to resolve differences of opinion.”

* * *

     I checked into Ms. Gabriel and her crusade against Islam and Arabs. She’s tapped into the right-wing’s tendency to love Israel, right ‘r wrong, and to paint all Muslims (i.e., A-răbs) with one nasty stereotypicalating brush.
     I came across a couple of her most demagogic and clueless remarks:

“It is not politically correct to say that our Western societies are better than the Muslim Arab societies, but we are, we have been, and we always will be.”

“The difference, my friends, between Israel and the Arab world is the difference between civilization and barbarism.”

—Yeah, that sort of talk will be a big help in our efforts to get along with all those pissed off Muslims in the world.
     I looked up Ms. Gabby's books on Amazon. The blurb on one of ‘em sports this glowing remark from Publishers Weekly: “Her writing is eloquent and her passion tremendous."
     Sounds great!
     But no. It turns out that Ms. Gabriel isn’t into the “context” thing. Here’s what Publishers Weekly actually wrote about her:

With strident confidence, …Gabriel rebukes the American public for being "weak, asleep or careless" in the face of Muslim terrorism. A Christian survivor of the vicious civil war between Lebanese Christians and Muslims in the 1970s, Gabriel leans on her own terrifying experiences to condemn Muslims, without apparent regard for their ethnicity, ideology or historical role. Consistently using the words "Muslim" and "Arab" as if they were interchangeable, she concludes that the U.S. is "facing total destruction" at the hands of people who are uncultured and cruel, and prescribes such solutions as "profile, profile and profile," and banning "hate education" in Islamic institutions. Though her writing is eloquent and her passion tremendous, Gabriel's strict dichotomy between "evil versus goodness" is too extreme to be informative….

Gosh, I’d say that that was a negative review. Wouldn’t you?
     You can learn all you need to know about the woman by watching the following oddly edited chunk of video on YouTube, which includes Ms. Gabriel’s visit to Bill O’Reilly’s show. O’Reilly pits the always-yelling Ms. Gabriel against an always-purring Muslim apologist. The poor guy can hardly purr forth two words before the bullying bulldogging commences.
     Check it out. Or not.