The SOUTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT —
"[The] blog he developed was something that made the district better." - Tim Jemal, SOCCCD BoT President, 7/24/23
I hand you my ball and chain You just hand me that same old refrain I'm walking on a wire, I'm walking on a wire And I'm falling I wish I could please you tonight But my medicine just won't come right I'm walking on a wire, I'm walking on a wire And I'm falling Too many steps to take Too many spells to break Too many nights awake And no one else This grindstone's wearing me Your claws are tearing me Don't use me endlessly It's too long, too long to myself Where's the justice and where's the sense? When all the pain is on my side of the fence I'm walking on a wire, I'm walking on a wire And I'm falling Too many steps to take Too many spells to break Too many nights awake And no one else This grindstone's wearing me Your claws are tearing me Don't use me endlessly It's too long, it's too long to myself It scares you when you don't know Whichever way the wind might blow I'm walking on a wire, I'm walking on a wire And I'm falling I'm walking on a wire, I'm walking on a wire And I'm falling I'm walking on a wire, I'm walking on a wire And I'm falling
When I was a kid, Feliciano lived up the street. But I never saw him, and I'm sure he never saw me.
Anyone who skims or peruses old Central Montanan newspapers from around the turn of the (19th) century cannot avoid noticing that the denizens of that region were (they still are!) mighty conservative—as in "classical liberal" or "libertarian." True, the conservative and dominant Fergus County Argus had competition, for a time, from the Fergus County Democrat, but these Democrats were not socialists. But, as its turns out, socialism did emerge—and soon fade—in Montana during the first two or three decades of the Twentieth Century, and it turns out that Lewistown, of all places, was the locus of the state's first socialist newspaper!.... READ MORE
The Supreme Court’s decision upholding President Trump’s travel ban on Tuesday came with a number of interesting wrinkles. It contained an implicit rebuke of Trump’s motives in signing the order, even though it let the order stand. And it repudiated Korematsu vs. United States, a discredited 1944 decision that allowed the U.S. to send Japanese-American citizens to internment camps during wartime, even as it upheld a policy with a discriminatory motive on grounds similar to that 70-year-old ruling….
. . .
… Sometimes the Court is willing to deem a government action constitutional by pretending that the government’s underlying purpose was something acceptable, rather than something forbidden. And sometimes the Court decides that even if a governmental action is or might be fully unconstitutional, there's simply nothing to be done about it by the justice system. In other words, the Court sometimes lets unconstitutional behavior stand. If Tuesday’s decision is read closely, it is possible to see both of those limits at work. Indeed, it is reasonable to read the opinions to mean that at least five Justices, not just the dissenting four, believe the President acted unconstitutionally in proclaiming his travel ban. But just because something is unconstitutional doesn’t mean that the Court will strike it down.
Consider first the majority opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, which found a way to acknowledge the President’s unconstitutional motivations without concluding that the policy itself was unconstitutional. Roberts’s opinion spent no less than a page and a half chronicling some of Trump’s statements, as a candidate and as President, suggesting that the travel ban is motivated by anti-Muslim animus. (The ban, which restricts travel from Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Venezuela and North Korea, is the third version of an order that originally applied only to a group of Muslim countries.) An anti-Muslim motive would make the ban unconstitutional under the First Amendment, which forbids the government to disfavor particular religions. But that’s not what Roberts ruled. In the end, the Chief Justice decided for the President on the theory that the policy “can reasonably be understood to result from a justification independent of unconstitutional grounds.” This is what constitutional lawyers call the “rational-basis test”: even if the actual reason the ban exists is rooted in an unconstitutional motive like religious bigotry, the Court will let the ban stand if the judges can imagine some legitimate interest that could have motivated the order….
"I'm Jimmy Carl Black and I'm the Indian of the group."
Some of you might remember the issue, several years ago, concerning a tenured IVC Librarian, Carol Wassman, whose conduct became a problem for the college. Ultimately, she was fired. Her firing led to a lawsuit, which Wassman lost in 2016. She appealed. She lost that too. The opinion was filed two weeks ago (it became available for publication on the 21st).
I know about the latter filing because, tonight, I somehow happened upon the recent opinion on a site called “Justia.” Not sure how that happened.
You can find it here:
The South Orange County Community College District (the District) dismissed Carol Wassmann from employment as a tenured librarian at Irvine Valley College (IVC) in April 2011. Several years later, Wassmann obtained a right to sue notice from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) and brought this lawsuit against the District, Karima Feldhus, Robert Brumucci [sic], Glenn Roquemore, Lewis Long, and Katherine Schmeidler. Wassmann, who is African-American, alleged causes of action for racial discrimination, age discrimination, and harassment in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), intentional infliction of emotional distress, and two other causes of action (not relevant here). The trial court granted two motions for summary judgment: one brought by the District Defendants and the other brought by Long and Schmeidler, on the ground the FEHA claims were barred by res judicata, collateral estoppel, or failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress cause of action was barred by res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the statute of limitations. Wassmann appealed, but finding no reversible error in the grant of summary judgment, the Court of Appeal affirmed.
I looked over the opinion, filed 6-12-18. Here’s some info based on that reading:
Back in 2010, Wassman’s dean (Feldus) tried to deal with what she judged to be Wassman’s unprofessional conduct. Here’s the beginning of the section of the opinion that discusses that alleged conduct:
(The section describing the struggle to curb W’s [alleged] excesses is long and remarkable. I won’t go through all of that here. See the above link.)
During this period, Wassman, as a member of the Faculty Association (union), was represented by two union officers: L Long and K Schmeidler.
I was a friend of Carol’s, having gotten to know her on the Senate. At some point, I met with her and urged her to accommodate the dean to keep her job. I gently suggested that, if she lost her job and sued, she would not likely prevail. (I felt strongly that she didn't have a leg to stand on. Her conduct, what I knew of it, struck me as very unprofessional.)
She was not disposed to take such advice. "You can't afford to lose this job," I told her. (I knew something about her circumstances.) But she was unmoved.
Ultimately, Wassman was dismissed as a tenured librarian. That was on April 2011.
Wassman filed her lawsuit Dec 2013.
District defendants: [Dean] Feldus, [Vice Chancellor] Bramacci, [IVC President] Roquemore
FA defendants (!): Long and Schmeidler.
Ultimately, Wassman offered six causes of action. (1) age discrimination, (2) racial discrimination—disparate treatment, (3) harassment (hostile environment), (4) wrongful termination, (5) intentional infliction of emotional distress, (6) unfair business practices.
1, 2, 4, and 6 were applied to district defendants (i.e., Feldus, Bramucci, Roquemore).
3 and 5 were applied to all defendants (i.e., union officers Long and Schmeidler too).
Next: unsurprisingly, district defendants (Feldus, et al.) filed a motion for summary judgment. Long and Schmeidler also filed such a motion. This is a request that the court summarily deal with the case instead of going through all the trouble of a long trial. (I—i.e., my lawyer—made the same move in my 1st Amendment suit against the district in 1998.)
The trial court granted both motions.
That was a victory for defendants, a major loss for Wassman.
With regard to the district defendants: causes 1, 2, 3 were barred for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and “res judicata,” which, according to my Mac’s dictionary, is “a matter that has been adjudicated by a competent court and may not be pursued further by the same parties.”
Cause 5 failed because it was derivative of the above 3 causes, and because of the statute of limitations.
For L and S:
Cause 3 was barred for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
Cause 5 failed because it was derived from the first three and because of the statute of limitations. Also, for technical reasons (incompetence of filing), Wassman had not actually managed to oppose L and S’s motion.
Wassman appealed.
At the end of the appeals process, the original judgment was affirmed.
Well, again, if you're interested in the details, go here: Justia Opinion
Situations like this cause administrators to adopt a slew of unfortunate CYA behaviors.
Can't really blame 'em, I guess. Litigation is hell. People start saying amazing things at you. It's hard to process that. You kinda get used to it, I guess, but still....
George Will, a longtime political commentator and staunch defender of the conservative movement, chided the Republican Party, citing the party’s support for Donald Trump in the upcoming 2020 presidential election.
On Friday, Will published a column in the Washington Post explaining his view, using the kind of excoriating language his columns are known for. The column, titled “Vote against the GOP this November,” argued that the number of Republicans in Congress “must be substantially reduced.”….
The never-Trumpers are having an interesting debate over the question, Is it time to leave the Republican Party? George Will and Steve Schmidt say yes: The Trumpian rot is all the way down. Bill Kristol says not so fast: Once Donald Trump falls, the party could be brought back to health, and the fight has to be within the party as well as without it.
. . .
Burke
Conservatism, as Roger Scruton reminds us, was founded during the 18th-century Enlightenment. In France, Britain and the American colonies, Enlightenment thinkers were throwing off monarchic power and seeking to build an order based on reason and consent of the governed. Society is best seen as a social contract, these Enlightenment thinkers said. Free individuals get together and contract with one another to create order.
Conservatives said we agree with the general effort but think you’ve got human nature wrong. There never was such a thing as an autonomous, free individual who could gather with others to create order. Rather, individuals emerge out of families, communities, faiths, neighborhoods and nations. The order comes first. Individual freedom is an artifact of that order [that sacred space].
. . .
Locke
Conservatives fought big government not because they hated the state, per se, but because they loved the sacred space. The last attempts to build a conservatism around the sacred space were George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” and, in Britain, David Cameron’s Big Society conservatism.
They both fizzled because over the last 30 years the parties of the right drifted from conservatism. The Republican Party became the party of market fundamentalism.
Market fundamentalism is an inhumane philosophy that makes economic growth society’s prime value and leaves people atomized and unattached. Republican voters eventually rejected market fundamentalism and went for the tribalism of Donald Trump because at least he gave them a sense of social belonging….
. . .
Mill
Today you can be a conservative or a Republican, but you can’t be both.
The new threats to the sacred space demand a fundamental rethinking for conservatives. You can’t do that rethinking if you are imprisoned in a partisan mind-set or if you dismiss half of Americans because they are on the “other team.”….
TRUMPISM AS A FAILURE OF AMERICAN EDUCATION. In my recent Philosophy 2 courses, I (briefly) focused on this conservatism, on Liberalism, and the relationship of these philosophies to Trumpism.
Among other things, Trumpism is a massive failure of our educational system. Most Americans don't know the first thing about political philosophy. One who understands and has some fidelity to either conservatism or Lockean liberalism (and its descendants: classical and social liberalism) (or both) will utterly reject Mr. Trump and his politics.
VARIOUS CONSERVATIVE VOICES—ON TRUMP:
Charles Krauthammer:
"I used to think Trump was an 11-year-old, an undeveloped schoolyard bully. I was off by about 10 years. His needs are more primitive, an infantile hunger for approval and praise, a craving that can never be satisfied. He lives in a cocoon of solipsism where the world outside himself has value — indeed exists — only insofar as it sustains and inflates him."
David Frum:
Let Trump be Trump.
Let decent people be decent.
Trust your country—not all of it, sadly, but enough of it—to notice and appreciate the difference.
Bill Kristol:
“I’m a little surprised by my own reactions over the last two or three months.... One really is conflicted. I really could make a case that the country would be better off with the Democrats running the House, because, if the Republicans aren’t willing to check Trump, someone has to.”
Jonah Goldberg:
"Off the record, Republicans often say they’re afraid Trump responds to being told not to do something by doing it out of spite. That’s a real concern. But it’s not an excuse [for not telling him to stop doing something].
If Trump does fire Mueller and a constitutional crisis ensues, the previously silent, suddenly angry Republicans will be asked why they’re speaking up now. That is, if they speak up at all."
* * * * *
My latest post about life in central Montana a century ago: Freezing to death
Montana isn't the coldest state. Still, brrr-wise, it's pretty chill. The names people choose to use about things and places tell us much about them and about their relationship to those things. Montanans have creeks named "Froze to Death" and "Starve to Death"....
If anyone is interested, here are some recent posts on my Jenni Family blog. It concerns a famous hanging that occurred, in Lewistown, Montana, in 1900, over a double murder, occurring in a remote area to the east, to acquire 700 or so sheep, by three young men.
The Musselshell River
A hanging in Lewistown, Part 1: double murder at the Musselshell - 1898: evidently, two men are murdered, in a desolate region near Musselshell River, 70 miles to the east, over sheep. There's a bloody trail, no bodies. Eventually, remnants of bodies are found, mostly burned.
A hanging in Lewistown, Part 2: Billy Calder convicted of murder - Three men are arrested: Billy Calder (26), Jimmy Calder (18), and Eli Fisher (21). Billy bullied the others into participating, it seems. Billy defiantly blames others, including his hated stepfather, for the killings.
And I followed her to the station With a suitcase in my hand And I followed her to the station With a suitcase in my hand Well, it's hard to tell, it's hard to tell When all your love's in vain All my love's in vain When the train rolled up to the station I looked her in the eye When the train rolled up to the station And I looked her in the eye Well, I was lonesome, I felt so lonesome And I could not help but cry All my love's in vain When the train, it left the station With two lights on behind When the train, it left the station With two lights on behind Well, the blue light was my blues And the red light was my mind All my love's in vain
Let me ride on the Wall Of Death one more time Let me ride on the Wall Of Death one more time You can waste your time on the other rides This is the nearest to being alive Oh let me take my chances on the Wall Of Death You can go with the crazy people in the Crooked House You can fly away on the Rocket or spin in the Mouse The Tunnel Of Love might amuse you Noah's Ark might confuse you But let me take my chances on the Wall Of Death On the Wall Of Death all the world is far from me On the Wall Of Death it's the nearest to being free Well you're going nowhere when you ride on the carousel And maybe you're strong but what's the good of ringing a bell The switchback will make you crazy. Beware of the bearded lady Oh let me take my chances on the Wall Of Death Let me ride on the Wall Of Death one more time Oh let me ride on the Wall Of Death one more time You can waste your time on the other rides This is the nearest to being alive Oh let me take my chances on the Wall Of Death Let me take my chances on the Wall Of Death Oh let me take my chances on the Wall Of Death
He's five foot-two and he's six feet-four He fights with missiles and with spears He's all of thirty-one and he's only seventeen He's been a soldier for a thousand years He's a Christian a Hindu an Atheist a Jain A Buddhist and a Muslim and a Jew And he knows he shouldn't kill And he knows he always will Kill you for me my friend and me for you And he's fighting for Palestine He's fighting for Israel He's fighting for the USA And he's fighting for the Russians And he's fighting for Iran And he thinks we'll put an end to war this way And he's fighting for Democracy He's fighting for his soil He says it's for the peace of all He's the one who must decide Who's to live and who's to die And he never sees the writing on the wall But without him how would Hitler have condemned them at ... Without him Caesar would have stood alone He's the one who gives his body as a weapon for war And without him all this killing can't go on No He's the universal soldier and he really is to blame His orders come from far away no more They come from here and there and you and me and brothers can't you see This is not the way we put the end to war No
I knew Virginia once She was a pretty girl She walked in the wild fields And swam the wild streams I took her out one day to the Civil War battlefield Way down in Manassas Where I told her my dreams [Chorus] But now it's Disney's America A long way from anywhere You get what you pay for there Man, you get it in spades Just Disney's America Virginia she chose to stay And we drifted apart like runoff Into the Chesapeake Bay Then I had a family Virginia, I guess she forgot about me She lives near the concrete sea Or so people say I don't remember much About her gentle touch My skin just turned so hard And my feet turned to clay [Chorus]
You can[’t] get too excited
You can[’t] get too enthused
From Dismal Land to the Tragic Mountain
We are not amused I knew Virginia once She was a pretty thing....
