DH Has Great Recap of Lebanon Fiasco

I'm sure many people have seen this already, but Jennifer Moody of the Albany Democrat-Herald has a great story up today that recaps the ongoing implosion that is the Lebanon Community School District these days. She covers a whole host of issues - this is a wonderful recap or introduction to what's going on, so if you've been tuning out all the posts on Lebanon, I'd encourage you to read (or at least skim) this story.

So far, I've only seen one comment on the story at the DH's website, and it's not a happy one. I'd suggest you read the article first and then look at the first comment and decide for yourself whether or not the criticism is warranted; however, I'm sure there will be more, since this is one of the most contentious issues to hit Lebanon in some time.

Also, life has kept me from posting a whole lot lately, especially about non-Lebanon stuff. C'est la vie, I suppose. I hope to be able to get some substantial posts out in the future, but I've just not got the mental energy for it right now.

What It Means to Understand Writing

William Gibson, in an interview in the Washington Post:

I make black marks on a white surface and someone else in another location looks at them and interprets them and sees a spaceship or whatever. It's magic. It's a magical thing. It's very old magic, but it's very thorough.

Truth and Power

Tristero, who writes at Hullaballo, gets one right:

But the truth, George W. Bush knows, can be magically nullified through the exercise of sufficient power. That - and only that - is his mad delusion, a delusion nurtured by his toxic upbringing where his family shielded him from the consequences of his failures and incompetence. It is a delusion that has led to the pointless suffering and death of hundreds of thousands of people.

All I have to say is that wouldn't it be nice to be a world where 'power' was not defined as the ability to fuck people over against their wills?

Oh, and in the case of the Lebanon School Board, um, the answer is no. Rick will never exercise enough power to nullify the truth. That doesn't mean he and his cohort haven't tried. But creating an alternate reality is hard.

Says Ralph Ellison: "Could politics ever be an expression of love?"

Were it only the case.

(h/t CM for the quote)

A Very Good Question

From a political perspective, I really want to know the answer to this one, put forth by Lebanon Truth:

And isn't it interesting that the jock block wanted to appoint Ken Ray as Bo's supervisor. Why did they think that Ray wouldn't fire Yates for his money monkey business?

I'm also really curious what happened in the executive session in which Ray met with the board and the decision was made to not appoint him interim Superintendent. The cynic in me says that Rick and maybe Josh asked him to do something he knew was flat-out unethical or even illegal, and in good conscience, he decided to decline rather than put his own ass on the line. I'd call that a very smart move on his part. He's the principal of the high school, has worked at the District Office in the past, and assuming he's followed the rules thus far (and I have no reason to think he hasn't), the only reason he won't survive this mess is if he decides to leave.

So if Ray decided not to get involved with Alexander's little war on reason, I can understand and support that. It makes me wonder, further, if Ray suffered or will suffer any loss of credibility with the anti-Robinson folks because of his choice.

It also makes me wonder what was expected of him to make him decide not to accept.

I am assuming, of course, that he decided not to accept the position, since when the board left the public eye it was waiting on him to say yea or nay. I suppose that if he told the board - or Alexander in particular - he wasn't going to do their dirty work, the offer may have been rescinded.

In any case, Kelley was appointed temporary superintendent, which I think was the best possible move under the circumstances.

Another Lebanon Voice Speaks Up

This is what I've been waiting for - no, not this person specifically in this format - but something like this:

After making the decision to decline running for re-election to the Lebanon School Board, I thought it inappropriate to become involved, at least for a time, with the workings of the new Board.

However, it is impossible to sit by and watch a vocal minority destroy the many accomplishments of your past school boards in putting the Lebanon School District on track to be innovative in programs, rigorous in expectations and relevant in curriculum. The current proceedings of the Board have caused further embarrassment to this community and all citizens need to be aware of current activities and be supportive of the work prior to July 2007.

...

But for many in our community who haven't recognized the real importance of what is going on in our District, it is time to become informed and see how far we have come in our education system. The outside world looks in and sees, simplistically, a dysfunctional Board which flops around at meetings, trying to “get” each other, and this view becomes, for that outsider, the “norm” for our whole community. We, together, have accomplished much and we can't afford to keep being the laughing stock of public officials in this state. Prospective businesses read about these public antics and wonder why they would want to come to our community.

McHill is nice, so his taking folks to task is very polite. It's fitting of an attorney, former school board member, and upstanding citizen.

Still...

The New Lebanon Express Story

My titles aren't that great today. Oh well.

There's a new LE story out this week, and if someone hadn't clued me in to the events presented in the story already, I'd be all over it. As is, I don't want y'all to think I'm ignoring it, so consider this a reminder that I'll blog about it later.

In Which the Author is Pleasantly Surprised

Not so long ago, a new blog formed using the name Lebanon for Truth and Reconciliation. The founder of the blog had left comments at my site and on at least one news story related to the ongoing controversy regarding the LCSD School Board.

The first few posts came slow, but after last night's board meeting, things seem to be looking up for both the blog and for LCSD politics in general, so kudos for LT and their cobloggers.

According to LT, there was a strong showing at the latest board meeting by folks who were no longer afraid to speak out against what's going on. That's fantastic news, and here's why: In cases like this, where this is one group who has very little positive agenda to offer (but has a lot of negative things to say), just about the only way for such a group to "win" is to shout down anyone else from saying anything- something that has quite literally happened at previous board meetings. If that doesn't work, it often becomes clear very quickly that such a negative message doesn't really have any long-term traction.

Now, I wonder, if it's becoming clear that several of the anti-Robinson folks don't have much of a platform beyond "Academies bad! Robinson bad! Football good!" (To be followed by "Unions bad!" the next time contract negotiations occur.) The political tactics present here are pretty universal - distract everyone with your shiny complaint because if they look away they'll realize the emperor has no clothes. Or, circa early 2003, scream "9/11 Al Qaeda! Iraq! Saddam Hussein! Weapons of mass destruction!" any time anyone suggests that going to war (or electing anyone but Bush) would be a bad idea. The comparison, from the point of view of, say, a political strategist, is eerily apt.

LT:

While the jock block/Alexander alliance had planned to exercise a coup, installing their Bo as Athletic Director and principal of the Social Systems Academy, apparently that drive was blocked before the start of the meeting. LT would like to know what stopped the assault.

This blogger would also like to know what derailed that plan. I can hazard a guess, though I have no idea if it's correct.

Two guesses, actually, one already provided by LT coblogger IHDSM:

Because the staff and students of the Social Systems Academy deserve a principal who 'fits' the academy---one who supports and sees value in the arts and humanities. Students choose Social Systems because of the programs in the academy---not because of sports offerings. Is Mr. Yates an avid supporter of the arts? Does he attend high school concerts or plays? Can he connect with the students and staff who work hard to put on these events? Would he put as much effort into fund-raising for these activities as he has put into funding sports programs? Perhaps or perhaps not...

My instinct is to suggest a former football player and one-time Athletic Director would not, in fact, make the best principal for an academy focused on social sciences and the humanities. Go figure. I could be wrong, of course, but certainly the position warrants the kind of search IHDSM is calling for, if for no other reason than, you know, appointing people you like without going through an open process is nepotism.

The second potential answer is that the participants, or at least some of them, got cold feet. Perhaps the estimable Ms. Shimmin is realizing that this whole enterprise has consequences. (I don't particularly hold out hope that Mr. Alexander will ever become a completely reasonable person.)

Or, to throw out a third suggestion, perhaps someone got to the so-called "Jock Block" and convinced them what they were supposedly about to do was wrong. It could have been any combination of the above, or something else entirely. I don't know the answer.

What I do know is that at least for one time, the Board chose not to take an arbitrary and authoritarian action, and that's a good thing. IHDSM's post is titled "Is The Tide Turning?" I had that reaction as well when I read the latest Express story and LT's account of the most recent board meeting. However, I'd like to add a qualifier to that suggestion: While it may be turning on this particular act, as long as the board is so fractured and Robinson continues to provoke such strong emotions through his management style, the tide will come back in. Count on it.

Guest Post on the Lebanon Sports Mafia

[Note: The content of this post was written by frequent commenter I]

There are so many mysteries here.

What about the previous head football coach, a young man from out of state named Dave Kline? It was his first head coaching position and he suddenly announced his coaching departure at the football banquet knowing the following year the team would be playing in a smaller classification and have a terrific season. What a resume builder that would have been for him. Lead a team that hadn't had a winning season in however many years and in his forth year go to state? It looks like he's actually the one that built the program yet I've heard no mention or credit given to him? He claimed he was leaving for his family because his wife had a new baby but the next year he was coaching for Silverton. Did the "sports mafia" run him out? Was that poor guy unknowingly thrown to the wolves with no support?

Here's one of his quotes from the Express: “They need to bring somebody in that has the same goals of having high integrity and high standards,” Kline said. “That is the most important thing.”

Was there a hidden meaning? What did he know?

Then there's Bo Yates. If nothing else here is a man that bites the hand that feeds him. The superintendent hired him and apparently gave him the financial support to build up athletics. It was his first administrative position. We have not seen Bo giving any credit to Jim Robinson and there is mounting evidence he is actually stabbing him in the back.

He didn't have a winning season the entire three years he was at West Salem.The year after he left they played the exact same teams as when he was there and finished 4th in state. The next year they were classified 6A instead of 5A and finished 2nd in state. If he built the program as Dave Kline built Lebanon's, why would he leave? He doesn't mind taking other peoples credit, why wouldn't he stay and accept his own? What happened in Salem?

Who are the puppets, who are the pawns and who is really running this horror show?

The Only Bush I Trust is My Own

During my recent Internet hiatus, I read a lot, just sort of whatever was at hand. One of the things I read - quickly, since it's a short book - was Periel Aschenbrand's The Only Bush I Trust Is My Own. It's a quick read filled with a no-bullshit attitude and a dangerous sense of humor. There are two passages I wanted to highlight from the book that stood out to me:

From page 190:

[Walt] Whitman said: I am large, I contain multitudes, and I wallow in my inconsistency.

Perfect. Internal coherency is overrated, anyway, not to mention nearly impossible to achieve. We are human, after all.

The second passage, from later on the same page, is Roland Barthes on what he termed The Fashion System:

Fashion is a social fact; those who exclude themselves "suffer a sanction: the stigma of being unfashionable."

I'd never thought about it that way before, but I think Barthes is essentially correct. I think that goes a long way towards explaining the tension in my style of dress: Just acceptable enough not to be noticed.

Anyway, grab the book some time if you can. It's pretty funny, especially the first section.

Tony Karon on the Israel Lobby

There's been an interesting divide in my reality for some time: The social-justice circles I'm familiar with, especially the white folks, are usually pro-Palestine, the reason being that Israel, as a state actor, has dumped on Palestinians for years and continues to do so. Oh, and the U.S. has long supported Israel's highly immoral policies.

The mainstream media and intelligentsia, on the other hand, has been painfully pro-Israel. Lots of lefty commenters know this, but I've seen very little change in the mainstream position.

Tony Karon has a great essay up commenting on the attempts of a couple of authors to challenge the orthodox view of the Israel/Palestine conflict. I'm not going to rehash the incredibly complicated conflict here or even summarize his essay (go read it yourself), but I want to note a few things.

First, my own conclusion is that anything resembling a just and justifiable outcome has to acknowledge the essentially unjust creation of Israel. It was, as Karon notes, colonisation of the worst kind. That doesn't, of course, mean the abolition of the state of Israel. Why do I say this? Because as far as I can tell, that's the root cause of the conflict.

Anyway, Karon says some good stuff:

And, revealing the extent to which Washington is encased in a bubble when it comes to matters involving Israel in the Middle East, Senators Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid and Dick Durbin wrote Maliki a letter saying the following: “Your failure to condemn Hezbollah’s aggression and recognize Israel’s right to defend itself raise serious questions about whether Iraq under your leadership can play a constructive role in resolving the current crisis and bringing stability to the Middle East.”

To cut bluntly to the chase, there is scarcely a single politician in the Arab world willing to endorse Washington’s definitions of the problems or the solutions when it comes to Israel’s impact on the region — and that even among the autocrats with whom the U.S. prefers to work, much less that rare breed that Maliki represents, i.e. a democratically elected leader. It is the U.S. leadership that is in denial about what is needed to create security in the region.

Indeed, the grownups in Washington know this better than anyone. In response to the same crisis in Lebanon, former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft wrote:

Hezbollah is not the source of the problem; it is a derivative of the cause, which is the tragic conflict over Palestine that began in 1948.

True, true, and true. But this is part of the Establishment's longtime problem of not even trying to look for root causes that can't be solved with guns. Deny so-called "terrorist groups" recruits and they'll go away. Killing civilians, I'm sorry to say, does not hinder recruitment as much as one might think.

More Karon:

Like the tech-bubble and real estate-bubble, Washington’s “Israel bubble” is unhealthy and dangerous — in fact, it not only jeopardizes U.S. interests throughout the region and beyond (by serving as Exhibit A for any anti-American element anywhere in the Islamic world to win the political contest with America’s friends), but it is also exceedingly bad for Israel: Particularly over the past decade, the U.S. has essentially enabled Israeli behavior so self-destructive that it may have already precluded any chance of it being able to live at peace with its neighbors.

Now we're getting somewhere, though it's sort of pathetic that arguments based on the rights and dignity of Palestinians have gotten nowhere while an argument based on Israel's self-interest is about the only thing that will get traction. In fact, it does not speak well of those who ignore the incredible injustice of the situation. Can someone hand this guy a megaphone? Please?

Go read.