Still Hating America.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
All pro bono is "subsidized" by paying customers. Are you seriously trying to say it isn't?

There are thousands of indigent and/or unrepresented defendants out there and that any of these firms* could step up and represent.

Rather, they are making the deliberate choice to pick up a political football and meddle in wartime affairs.

So...if they suffer from their choice, so be it.

*Pillsbury Winthrop; Jenner & Block; Hunton & Williams; Alston & Bird; Cutler Pickering; Weil Gotshal; Paul Weiss Rifkin; Covington & Burling; Mayer Brown; Pepper Hamilton; Perkins Cole; Fulbright Jaworski;Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, and Venable.

And their offices all probably have flowers, which were undoubtedly bought from hippies, who then use their money to by pot and the money eventually winds up in the hands of terrorists. You're on to something here, slave.

[Oliver_Wendell_Ramone]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
And their offices all probably have flowers, which were undoubtedly bought from hippies, who then use their money to by pot and the money eventually winds up in the hands of terrorists. You're on to something here, slave.

Not to mention the wholly unsupportable financial backing of bike messangers; brick-throwing dope-smoking anarchists, the lot of 'em.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Adder
At the risk of speaking (inaccurately) for SAM, they really aren't. You often do begin the discussion by declaring your position to be obvious and unassailable (as you did this one).

And here, when some of us suggested that your positions were less than obvious and unassailable, you really haven't done much beyond repeat your assertions (without sharing why you think the critiques are inapt) and trumpetted that you sit on a board. For example, G3 has shared a number of thoughtful posts, and I don't think you have responded to any of them (although, admittedly, I have not checked).

As SAM mentioned, this is frustrating because at times you really do seem open to discussion. Other times (this discussion, and the "torture is good" argument, as examples) you have merely become repitive or defensive when challenged.

As for suggesting that you know nothing about this topic, well, I was simply drawing conclusions based on your absolutist statements. Clearly I was in error. It isn't that you know nothing about the topic, it is that you wish to stick to your opinion without letter facts get in the way. My apologies. The positions that you advocate do happen to be republican dogma, but if you have reached your conclusions completely independently of that fact, again, my apologies.

But let me give you an yet another example that I think shows that your conclusion that the core issues that trouble public education are tenure, social promotion, and lack of testing. Let me begin with the caveat that my exposure to these schools is rather old, but my depictions were accurate as recently as five years ago.

For our case study, let's look at the Minneapolis public schools. In particular, Minneapolis North and Minneapolis South. The former is in the roughest, and poorest part of Minneapolis. It struggles to do a fair job educating its students. Minneapolis South, on the other hand, is has a strong reputation for producing top-notch students, and is well respected in the community. It also happens to be in one of the wealthier parts of the city (drawing its local students from the lakes area south of downtown).

Both schools are part of the same school district. Teachers at both are part of the same collective bargaining unit, and subject to the same job protections. The schools have the same testing (and did before the recent rounds of additional state-mandated testing), and presumably have the same policies on social promotion (I have to assume as I don't specifically know).

Yes, I know that Minneapolis isn't in California. And maybe there is something extra special unique about the LA labor situation (which I doubt, as I have said and you have not responded to), but it is safe to say that Minneapolis's liberal-dominated city government is just as beholden to the political power of the teachers unions as anywhere.

So, Spanky, what do you think explains their different results?

What thoughtful posts besides me has anyone made on this discussion, especially GGG? Seriously. All people have done have made general criticisms of my criticisms of the education system. Can you show me a post of someone that made a good critical and factual defense of teacher tenure, social promotion, or not having annual testing? Please paste it if you can find it. If no one did make a post like that, then what was the relevance of all the posts of you, GGG and Sidd? I said again and again that the main problem with the school systems is tenure, social promotion and lack of testing. Wouldn't the best way to critique that position is to show how those things are actually good for education?

There is no question that schools with affluent students do better. But that is because the bad teachers are taken from those schools (because the parents complain) and put in bad schools where parents don't complain (the poorer districts).

It is the poor schools where the lack of standards, social promotion and tenure cause the most problem. When parents are involved and students are motivated they can overcome these problems. But in a poor system where the students are not motivated, and the parents don't get involved the potential problems caused by these deficiencies are amplified.

One of the major factors that encourage students in poorer schools is the shame of being held back. People don't respect smart students, their parents don't care, but there is serious shame, even in the poorest neighborhoods, of being held back. Social promotion took that one incentive away. Without that incentive, no one cares if they learn.

I still believe that social promotion was never a good idea. In fact, I have never heard a good argument for it. Sidd explained what happened to the student that was held back, but never explained how social promotion fixed the problem. Has anyone described how social promotion helped? It was also claimed no one defends it. That is not true. The CTA still defends social promotion.

If keeping the held back students in the same class is not an option, then you create special classes for held back students. But a reasonable option (in my opinion) has never been promoting someone to a grade they are not ready for. Not only does it hurt the students, but if you do that, it kills the incentive for other students to learn. Yes it would be nice if we could just encourage students to learn and teach them the "joy of learning". But in inner city schools that is not realistic. From what I have read and heard, the only way to fight the apathy and pier pressure is with the stick. Threat of non promotion and the threat of not graduating motivates them and works. You said said I didn't cite facts to back up my evidence, I explained how the CTA fought against and exit exam in CA, one was instituted anyway and the passage rate has increased every year. Didn't that fact show that testing works, social promotion doesn't and the CTA fought against and still fights against a good reform? Who in this discussion has made a good defense of social promotion? Or disputed my facts about the California exit exam?

As far as teacher tenure is concerned I don't know what else people need to hear. I have heard from Mayor Riordan that it is a huge problem, have read experts, and my nephew, who is a total screw up, never got fired at the LA school district. How can any one argue that it is easy to get rid of bad teachers in most CA schools? And who can really argue that having bad teachers is not a really bad thing? Yes some top executive get golden parachutes when the company does badly, but that is not always the case. That is bad, but that doesn't justify a bad policy for schools. And in addition, that is just one or two employees. What sort of organization can work when the whole organization has no quality control when it comes to its employees? In many California School districts there is no quality control at any level. Who so far has made a good defense of teacher tenure? How does teacher tenure in K-12 help educate our children? And there is tenure in CA, just a year ago a proposition was put forward to extend tenure from two years to five years and the CTA put fifteen million to defeat it. So there is tenure in CA. You say I don't cite facts to back up my statement, I cited that fact didn't I. Who has cited any facts or made a good critical argument in defense of teacher tenure?

As far as testing is concerned, in my experience, how can knowledge and data ever be a bad thing? Why shouldn't you track every year how students are doing? How can it not be good to know exactly where you are succeeding and where you are failing? The only reason I can see for not having yearly testing is if you have something to hide? But seriously, who has come up with a serious critique of annual testing. (And by the way, "teaching to the test" is a red herring. When you are talking about basic reading and writing, by teaching to the test you are teaching them to read and write. There is no difference between teaching to the test, and teaching someone to read, write and do basic math).

Has anyone made a good critical and substantive argument of why annual testing would be a bad thing?


As far as the teachers Unions, I have seen them at work. Like I said, sometimes the problem is complicated and there are no easy answers, and sometimes the answers are pretty straightforward but a powerful interest group fights the obvious change. In California the obvious change is Standards, tests and getting rid of bad teachers, but the CTA has fought these changes every step of the way. At the hearings the only people that defend these policies are the CTA. Everyone else agrees they are bad. I have never heard a good defense for these three things. Especially not on this board. Have you? What strong argument has been made on this board that what the CTA has done is good for education, or that they are not that powerful?

And finally, you claim my posts are unnecessarily vindictive and inciteful. Have I have criticzed someone's spelling? How can you argue that such an attack is anything but a personal attack that has absolutely no relevence to the subject at hand? And I am the one that poisons the pond?

[SlaveNoMore]

Adder
Only the expenses. And even that indirectly.

Whether I spend 2 hours or 200 hours doing pro bono this year has no effect on my paying client's bill.

Any use of firm resources ultimately affect the client's bill.

How can someone as educated and successful as yourself be so stupid?

You don't have a complete list.

Feel free to fill in the blanks then, so I know who to hang up on when they pitch us for business.

[SlaveNoMore]

Gattigap
So do you agree with the legal scholars at The Corner currently speculating that these firms are accepting bribes for their pro bono work, or that they're seeking to curry favor with foreign governments or terrorist groups?

Or is your theory that these firms' hatred of America is more general and diffuse?

In typical leftist fashion, its their blind hatred of all things Bush.

Query: what party do most lawyers contribute to?

[SlaveNoMore]

Shape Shifter
And their offices all probably have flowers, which were undoubtedly bought from hippies, who then use their money to by pot and the money eventually winds up in the hands of terrorists. You're on to something here, slave.

You forgot the part about the "exploited" Mexican "undocumented workers" working for "less than a living wage" and "without medical insurance" - all the while slaving away for some "wealthy" owner of a flower warehouse (a/k/a "sweatshop")

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You forgot the part about the "exploited" Mexican "undocumented workers" working for "less than a living wage" and "without medical insurance" - all the while slaving away for some "wealthy" owner of a flower warehouse (a/k/a "sweatshop")

You support hiring illegal immigrants -- people who have snuck into the country, and are staying here and using resources without any right to -- and depriving law-abiding, real Americans of jobs?

[SlaveNoMore]

Oliver_Wendell_Ramone
Not to mention the wholly unsupportable financial backing of bike messangers; brick-throwing dope-smoking anarchists, the lot of 'em.

2

[Adder]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore

Feel free to fill in the blanks then, so I know who to hang up on when they pitch us for business.

This is all that I know of: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/01/12/...ing-detainees/

[taxwonk]

It may be fun for him; it's just a drag for me. Adios.

[Adder]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Spanky
What thoughtful posts besides me has anyone made on this discussion, especially GGG? Seriously. All people have done have made general criticisms of my criticisms of the education system. Can you show me a post of someone that made a good critical and factual defense of teacher tenure, social promotion, or not having annual testing? Please paste it if you can find it. If no one did make a post like that, then what was the relevance of all the posts of you, GGG and Sidd? I said again and again that the main problem with the school systems is tenure, social promotion and lack of testing. Wouldn't the best way to critique that position is to show how those things are actually good for education?
[quote]

I am not going to rehash this entire thread. But go back and read the posts and you will find that that is exactly what we did.

Seriously, do you just hyperventilate and lose all ability to focus at the first shot thrown your way or what?

But that is because the bad teachers are taken from those schools (because the parents complain) and put in bad schools where parents don't complain (the poorer districts).

My god. The world really is that simple isn't it. Wow.

You said said I didn't cite facts to back up my evidence, I explained how the CTA fought against and exit exam in CA, one was instituted anyway and the passage rate has increased every year. Didn't that fact show that testing works

Only self referentially.

[And finally, you claim my posts are unnecessarily vindictive and inciteful.

I never said that. But they are tedious at times when you resort to simply repeting yourself (as you are doing here) and refuse to suggest that a issue has any nuance to it at all.

I am done discussing this with you. Tenure, social promotion and a lack of testing are absolute evils. We have received the word of Spanky.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
It may be fun for him; it's just a drag for me. Adios.

Why so much hate? I invented this board.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Spanky
What thoughtful posts besides me has anyone made on this discussion, especially GGG? Seriously.

Start with Sebby's post at 213 and see the exchanges that include Hank, me and others (not you).

You don't listen to anyone else's posts, just treat them as reasons to repeat the same simplistic stuff over and over and over again. Thus, I, at least, brush you off. I mean, blessed Jesus, Mary and Joseph, Spanky, Hank contributed more substance to this discussion than you.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by taxwonk
It may be fun for him; it's just a drag for me. Adios.

If we all put him on ignore and give him the ppnyc treatment will you come back?

[Yankee Doodle Greedy]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
If we all put him on ignore and give him the ppnyc treatment will you come back?