[Snark] Passive-Aggressive Friday, or, How the Rude Pundit Gets By

The Rude Pundit (uh, NSFW) summarizes the week in politics:

The speech was little-noted among the other events of the week: the media swallowed a load of Spitzer, the Clinton campaign got some Ferraro in its vagina, and, if anyone was paying attention to the President, it was for the complete and utter degradation of the office of the presidency as he sang a country song about how he punked us all to teat-sucking reporters at the Gridiron Dinner. But on Tuesday, President Bush gave a speech at the convention of the National Religious Broadcasters...

[Bizarro World] Sara Gelser's Primary Challenger

I heard this at work today, and, well, see for yourself. From Blue Oregon:

I'll have a full recap on the House races now that filing day has come and gone, but this is just too good to pass up.

There's one name that jumps off the page when you're scrolling through all the filings: Rockne Roll.

What the heck kind of name is that? (Yeah, I know, I'm one to talk about weird names.)

He's the Republican who filed to run against Rep. Sara Gelser down in Corvallis. So, wondering who he was, it's time for a little Google action. Turns out he's a student at Oregon State. He's got bloggers who like him, he edits a right-wing student publication, and likes to blab about his personal life and underage drinking on the internet.

Yes, it's that Rockne Roll, the guy who edits the Liberty, the hate-screed that its supporters think is a newspaper at Oregon State.

Words fail me.

Luckily, laughter does not.

[LCSD] Lebanon Express: "Alexander drops lawsuit against district"

Given that it was almost certain to be dismissed anyway (note that he dropped it the morning of the day oral arguments to dismiss were being heard), that's not surprising.

This, on the other hand, is... well, not really. But a little depressing nonetheless:

Asked if the issue of not renewing a contract without a poor performance review isn't an issue the board may have to deal with in the future, Alexander said he expects that the next superintendent will have a contract that makes clear the board's authority to dismiss without an unsatisfactory evaluation.

What superintendent wants to work in a district where they will have no job protection?

Dismissal without cause: That's what Alexander is really talking about. Even if it can only occur once per year, it's not a good deal.

And yes, I realize that many people work in jobs where dismissal without cause is the norm. Being a district superintendent or other relatively high-ranking administrator generally comes with a little bit of job protection. I'm not saying that's fair, but to simply arbitrarily remove that protection while ignoring the larger context will be detrimental to hiring a good replacement.

I can't decide if Rick doesn't know that or doesn't care.

I repeat: Why would a potential superintendent apply to work in a district where the previous superintendent got non-renewed with no chance to improve (and coming on the heels of a very positive evaluation) and where a board member has stated he doesn't think superintendents need protection from being arbitrarily fired?

Also, I wonder how teachers (and the LEA!) and other administrators feel about this proposal. I see no reason certain board members will resist from pushing for this level of control over everyone else as soon as a conflict arises. I can't wait for Rick to get the board to fire a teacher because he doesn't like them.

You laugh, but it's getting closer to the realm of possibility.

[LCSD] A Thought

Larry Coonrod and/or Jennifer Moody should write an op/ed in the DH or Express in response to Debi's claims regarding secret information. After all, I believe reporters are allowed in executive session.

Am I suggesting one or both of the reporters break that privilege? No, not really - but they, more than anyone outside the LCSD, know if there is any truth to what Shimmin is saying or not.

So what about it? Can we get the shining light of truth in here, or does journalistic "neutrality" require that you let a lie stand?

What happens when two principles collide?

[LCSD] The Shimmin Letter

I suppose I'd better get to Debi's DH letter before Bernstein blows their cap.

Debi's letter appeared in the DH on March 10. It was addressed to the citizens of Lebanon with a message of 'moving forward'.

On its face, that's funny coming on the heels of her vote to nonrenew Robinson's contract. It makes a certain amount of sense, though, as she has been consistent in claiming that moving forward and seeing Robinson leave the district were synonymous. Sadly, she has not made a good case convincing others that such a point of view is even remotely true.

Onto the letter itself:

Move forward, Lebanon

To the citizens of Lebanon:

As a new board member, I have learned a lot about the current state of our school district. Many in our community care deeply about creating a positive experience for their children’s education. We have an opportunity to do one of two things: continue on our present course or forge a new path.

It is time to move forward and create a positive culture where teachers, administrators, parents, staff, citizens and students work together.

Given recent history, I cannot help but evaluate these words and this letter in light of her vote to not renew Robinson's contract.

Given that, her words are the slightest bit disingenuous.

First of all, there's always the opportunity to continue the present course or forge a new path. By definition, this will always be true: the options 'change' and 'stay the same' are exhaustive. And free of meaning unless we know what the change is. Good rhetoric, but not very filling.

Second, the timing is ludicrous. Shimmin is proposing moving forward (and again, I do not doubt her sincerity) in a positive fashion days after she voted to nonrenew the Superintendent's contract in a contentious manner and meeting. Convenient, that. I wonder what positively working together would have entailed three days ago? Would it have meant working with Robinson? I think it would have!

Lord knows we can't have that. Come to think of it, I never saw her clash with Robinson - in fact, I suspect she can personally work with him just fine. Interesting...

(And for everyone who has the urge to respond "but Robinson is mean!", I have to ask if you've ever gone to a board meeting and seen the procedural assassin that is Rick Alexander at work. It's f***ing embarrassing. FFA students in high school can use parliamentary procedure better than he can.) I'll take mean over incompetent or uncaring.

I'm wondering if her letter was actually written before she voted.

More Shimmin:

Each of us plays an important role in creating this positive culture. How we comport ourselves and treat others is the first step. Respect for all perspectives can build an atmosphere for creating consensus.

In order for our school district to move forward, we must be willing to make a commitment to each other that we will tackle the most difficult challenges in a manner that is respectful and professional.

This is a very positive thing to say. Actually, I support the language that she uses here. However, I have not seen this happen in the past - and the two most egregious offenders have been her allies. To her credit, she is not antagonistic in board meetings (but that's probably because she rarely talks). I have always seen Jim Robinson be professional. (If people are going to contest that, put your money where your mouth is: Names of people in the room, including your name, dates and exactly what he said. We're way past anything less. Sometimes you actually have to risk something to create positive change.)

Also, if this standard is going to be applied consistently, then I expect her to begin working to get rid of Rick Alexander. After all, he doesn't play well with anyone but Debi and Josh.

Or does constantly sandbagging two board members and the D.O. staff with new agenda items actually count as being "respectful and professional?" Because that's been Rick's M.O. since I started paying close attention to the school board last July - to say nothing of consistently short-circuiting the process by making motions before there is a chance for discussion on agenda items he cares about (and then ignoring everything else).

Bottom line: Shimmin just put herself in a tough position and her credibility on the line: She called for respect and professionalism from everyone involved. If she is seen as doing nothing to try and get her allies to abide by these rules, having already voted to nonrenew Robinson's contract, she's going to be seen as a giant hypocrite worthy of scorn.

Now we get to mine - and apparently Bernstein's - favorite part of the letter:

Elected officials are tasked with making difficult decisions. We have information from many sources that doesn’t always make its way to the public and this goes into the decision-making process.

You might be wondering if I agree with Bernstein's strong, strong language on this one, or whether I'm going to take my own high road.

Don't worry. I'm not. Bernstein is correct. This is transparent, self-serving bullshit of the worst kind.

Actually, I think Shimmin is being honest - but that only makes it worse.

The form of this argument is easily recognizable to anyone who was reading the news from Sept. 12, 2001 onwards. The Bush Administration used it all the time. "You have to trust us," they would say. "We have secret information on the bad guys that we can't share with you, and if you don't do what we want, YOU WILL SUFFER."

The problem was that almost every single claim made in that time period using that argument was completely and verifiably false - to say nothing of the fact that it's an undemocratic argument based on fear to make in the first place.

In this case, most of us perceive through news stories, comments made and actions taken by board members and stories and comments both here at at LT's place that, at the least, there is a hell of a lot of sketchy stuff going on behind the scenes in the LCSD. Even if that's not true, the perception is there and it matters.

In other words, there is no reason on earth to blindly trust Shimmin when she says this. None. Less than none, in fact, since we know that things are not all right in Candyland the LCSD. Unless I hear her backtrack on this, any credibility she had with me is gone (and yes, she had some).

Shimmin:

Our school board is made up of five very different individuals who were elected by the citizens of Lebanon. They all are passionate and care deeply about the education of our children. I have enormous respect for all of them.

Nothing objectionable here. In fact, this might be a good time to point out that ill will is not a prerequisite for a dysfunctional district. People can have genuine disagreements about what they each think is best for the district and still drive a district into the ground.

Of course, I happen to think Rick's action suggest he's not even thinking about what's best for the LCSD, but what's best for PIE. But that's another story - again, I think Shimmin is being honest to what she believes.... but that's not good enough.

Shimmin, again:

It is often difficult to build consensus when there are those who try to divide the board.

Can we get her to address Rick's tendencies to destroy and disrespect the process (which is undeniably divisive)? Seriously - without that, I don't see how even she could think people would take this statement seriously.

More positive(ly empty) rhetoric:

If our leaders inspire our teachers, our teachers will inspire their students. A positive culture can breed inspiration. The boundaries of success are endless if we all work together and commit to creating a path to a positive educational environment for our children and our community.

Teachers are doing plenty of inspiring despite the school board. I'm not saying that a functional board won't help, just that it's a little insulting to suggest that teachers are so reliant on the mood of the board.

My take on this letter? Shimmin is largely being completely honest, but her high-minded rhetoric has just placed her in a very rough spot. There's a long ways to go to live up to the standard she just set, and right now, the two largest roadblocks are her voting allies. Honestly, I'm not sure this letter was a smart move - not to mention that it's going to hose off her existing opponents, who likely see her as having done none of this so far.

Debi Shimmin: Honest But Wrong Since 2007.

Think it will get her re-elected?

[LCSD] Letters

More on this later. Busy today.

Move forward, Lebanon

To the citizens of Lebanon:

As a new board member, I have learned a lot about the current state of our school district. Many in our community care deeply about creating a positive experience for their children’s education. We have an opportunity to do one of two things: continue on our present course or forge a new path.

It is time to move forward and create a positive culture where teachers, administrators, parents, staff, citizens and students work together.

Each of us plays an important role in creating this positive culture. How we comport ourselves and treat others is the first step. Respect for all perspectives can build an atmosphere for creating consensus.

In order for our school district to move forward, we must be willing to make a commitment to each other that we will tackle the most difficult challenges in a manner that is respectful and professional. Elected officials are tasked with making difficult decisions. We have information from many sources that doesn’t always make its way to the public and this goes into the decision-making process.

Our school board is made up of five very different individuals who were elected by the citizens of Lebanon. They all are passionate and care deeply about the education of our children. I have enormous respect for all of them.

It is often difficult to build consensus when there are those who try to divide the board. I myself have been subjected to receiving letters of a threatening nature if I don’t vote a certain way. This is not good for the board or for our community. Negativity can lead us nowhere.

Let’s put down our weapon of words and leave a legacy in our community where we can disagree with each other but respect each other’s views as well.

If our leaders inspire our teachers, our teachers will inspire their students. A positive culture can breed inspiration. The boundaries of success are endless if we all work together and commit to creating a path to a positive educational environment for our children and our community.

Debi Shimmin, member, Lebanon School Board

[Hasso Hering] Beware the Uncivilized!

From an editorial that started off being about libraries, the last line:

Let no one even think of cutting back on that essential service, so important in our deteriorating culture as a civilizing force for good.

Heh.

It certainly explains a lot.

I was going to suggest Hering views the world in a Eurocentric way, but I don't think that's a strong enough term. And frankly, I'm not sure what would suffice.

[Politics] A difference of degree, not kind, perhaps, but shocking nonetheless

Holy shit:

Indeed, the modern Alabama G.O.P. doesn’t believe in going into the field the old-fashioned way–by identifying a strong candidate to stand in the district, raising money for a campaign, and contesting the seat on the issues. This approach is entirely too expensive and speculative. The new strategy involves using tax-payer resources to trash political opponents. The U.S. Department of Justice is to conduct criminal investigations, the essence of which is meticulously leaked to the cooperating press in an effort to smear Democratic political figures. A couple of Republicans are being thrown in for good measure, as an imagined defense against the obvious charge of political manipulation. Alice Martin has prepared a dozen or more grand jury subpoenas to sitting legislators.

As this was getting underway, Martin conferred with her staff about a media spectacular. She described a plan to send a platoon of federal marshals, backed up by television media crews, into the Statehouse to serve subpoenas on law-makers on the floor of the legislature. This would be carefully timed just to make the evening news.

I should read Harper's more often.