Mulgrew Turns His Back on the Mayor

How many of you remember the last 20 years when teachers were under the boot of Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg? I know I do. I could make a very long list of the ways they degraded the teaching profession, but you probably know them all. So my question is:

How many of you want to spend the next 20 years under similar or worse bullies after the next election?

I don't. I hope you don't either.

But that is precisely what is going to happen if PBA hothead and provocateur Pat Lynch  has his way. He has groomed anti-de Blasio sentiment in this city with stunning expertise.

Luckily, I do believe that a backlash is beginning. Many people are not happy that the police disrespected the funeral of Officer Liu by turning their backs on the mayor yet again. And I can't imagine that too many people are thrilled about the de facto police work slowdown.

Speaking of which, while not getting tickets may seem nice, refusing to make arrests is beyond the pale. When someone is inevitably murdered, raped, or robbed because the police refuse to so their jobs, will Pat Lynch have blood on his hands?

And where is Mulgrew in all this? Let's not forget that Mulgrew endorsed Thompson for mayor, not de Blasio. Yet our mayor did not turn his back on teachers. He continued to fight, and still is fighting, against charter schools in this city. He succeeded in establishing universal Pre-K, which may yet turn into the greatest education boost for underprivileged kids this city has seen. He settled a contract with us quickly, which will give us the raises and retro money we deserve. (For the record, I voted against the contract due to the ATR issue, but that is something Mulgrew apparently agreed to.) He put a much more teacher-friendly chancellor in place--and while I do not by any means think Carmen Farina is the best choice, she is light years better than Joel Klein or Cathie Black.

Don't kid yourselves--if Pat Lynch triumphs in his crusade against the mayor, de Blasio will not be succeeded by a teacher-friendly Democrat. His successor would almost certainly be a right wing, pro-charter republican, or worse still, a faux Democrat like....dare I say it?

How does Mayor Moskowitz sit with all you UFT members?

So the question remains--why has Mulgrew turned his back on a mayor who has had his back for the last year?

Mulgrew doesn't have to oppose the PBA to do this. He needs to show his support for de Blasio with public appearances and praise for this mayor. He needs photo ops shaking the mayor's hand, and a new initiative or two that will help change the perception that the mayor has lost union support. And make no mistake, that is the public perception, because not a single union chief has come out in support of this mayor since Pat Lynch seized control of the narrative.


If he keeps turning his back on this mayor, he may turn around in three years to see Eva Moskowitz staring him in the face.

Why Teachers Need Guns

It's time to arm teachers.


But not for the reasons you might think. Allow me to explain.


 
Here's what has NOT happened in the wake of the Eric Garner case in NYC:

• Governor Cuomo has NOT made it a major policy issue to break the PBA, which he clearly does not consider a monopoly like the UFT.
• He has NOT demanded a new evaluation system of any sort that would help weed out the "bad" cops.
• Eva Moskowitz has NOT called for the opening of a series of "Police Success Academies" to study best practices for police officers.
• Wendy Kopp has NOT opened a "Kopps for America" boot camp to train tightly selected individuals to patrol the city's most dangerous streets after six weeks of training.
• Campbell Brown has NOT called the unrest in minority neighborhoods (ignited by incidents like the Garner case and the cop who twice punched a subdued teenaged boy) the "civil rights issue of our time". 
• Campbell has likewise NOT called for an end to seniority rights nor job protections of police officers, nor has she filed a lawsuit to end those rights.
• The New York Post has NOT written stories on a daily basis vilifying police officers.

No, all those things were directed at teachers.

Let me make sure I'm not misunderstood here. I believe the vast majority of cops, like the vast majority of teachers, truly want to serve the citizens of NYC and make it a better place. And I believe when a cop or a teacher violates the trust the public places in them, they should be removed from that position of trust after a fair hearing.

Yet despite both being part of powerful unions, teachers and police are treated very differently by politicians and the media. Why is that?

When Michael Mulgrew threatens to punch people in the face if they mess with his Common Core, I don't think anyone quakes in their boots. But when Pat Lynch, president of the PBA, essentially blames the deaths of two police officers on Mayor de Blasio (while ignoring the culpability of Officer Pantaleo), everyone takes notice. Why?

It has to be the guns. Can you envision Campbell Brown telling an auditorium filled with armed police that they are the reason why minorities can't get a fair shake in this city? Me neither. I wonder if she'd have the guts to say it to a room of armed teachers.

So we must lay down the chalk and pick up the Glock. It's time to kick ass and tell kids to spit out their bubblegum.

It's worth a shot.

A Tale of Two Bills and One Andy

Ever since the snow day that wasn't, I've heard lots of teachers grumbling about Mayor de Blasio. It's as if teachers were just looking for a reason to carry on the mayor bashing that became so fashionable in the Bloomberg years. For the record, I think de Blasio should have closed the schools that day, but he at least made an attempt to make an early call. It was the wrong call, but it was better than waiting until 6 AM like we used to have to do with Bloomberg.

I have been a supporter of de Blasio from the beginning, when he was considered a non-contender for the mayoral race and Mulgrew was trying to make a "king" out of Bill Thompson, the man our fearless union leader failed to support the last time around.

One of de Blasio's problems is that he is an actual progressive, not a liberal in conservative's clothing, like Governor Cuomo. When Bill takes progressive stances, he is killed in the billionaire controlled press. His biggest transgressions so far seem to have been his sneaux pas, and allowing his security people to run a stop sign.

If you only read the Post, you'd think that's all he's done. But in reality, he's championed many of the causes he said he would when he ran, despite the political price:

He stood up to Eva Mosowitz and her program of manifest destiny for charter schools. That was the correct thing to do--the only problem was he was undercut by phony Democrat Cuomo who bravely stood up for Eva and her charter school cronies who have spent freely on politicians who support them. Cuomo would probably have stood up for Hitler given enough Deutsche marks.

He pushed hard for his pre-K plan, and looked to fund it the right way--by tapping the super rich who have benefitted so lavishly from government largesse. Cuomo, of course, undercut him again, because our governor can not stand the idea of his rich pals paying even one more cent to help the downtrodden in NYC. However it turns out, it's clear that without de Blasio's passion for Pre-K, nothing would have gotten done.

He has proposed 200,000 affordable housing units to be built. He has said he would require builders to put aside affordable housing, rather than merely suggesting it, as his predecessors did.

He promised to end stop and frisk profiling that has been a blight on this city for years. He kept that promise the other day by dropping the appeal Bloomberg filed to keep stop and frisk in place. In doing this, de Blasio has gone a long way toward healing the rift between minorities and police.

He is keeping his promise to end horse carriage rides in NYC, an issue near and dear to animal advocates such as myself.

In short, de Blasio, who won an overwhelming majority of the vote while running on a progressive platform, is now being crucified by many for actually carrying out that platform.

I have no idea how our contract will turn out, but I suspect that in the end we will get something close to the 4+4 that we are asking for, along with retroactive pay in some form. That other Bill that the UFT supported--Thompson--was on record as saying the city could not afford such raises. Does anyone think we had a chance of getting them in a Thompson administration? Would that other Bill have carried out the progressive plans that de Blasio has? I doubt it. Do you think Andy Cuomo will come around and support public school teachers the way he supports Eva Moskowitz, who makes FIVE TIMES as much as the most senior teachers without ever having taught a class?

So, if you're a teacher, you should be supporting de Blasio. As a true progressive, he will not look to bust our union the way Bloomberg did, nor undermine us as Cuomo does. For those teachers who have taken to bashing de Blasio, let me ask one question. Who do you think will be a better friend to teachers? The other Bill? Sellout Andy? Joe Lhota?

I understand many of you are still honked off about having to go to work during a snow storm. Get over it. We've got a mayor who supports public schools and looks to end charters. He's union friendly. He's looking to improve education through universal Pre-K.

If teachers don't get behind de Blasio in a big way, you may just have four years of Mayor Moskowitz to look forward to soon.

Mr. Talk Predicts: Your Guide To 2013

As many of you are aware, I have an uncanny knack of predicting the future of the NYC public schools. I don't wear this fortune teller's hat because it's a babe magnet, you know.

We have an interesting year ahead of us, with a contract to be negotiated, evaluation talks, an outgoing mayor, a union election, and more. Here are some of my prognostications for the new year:

Despite the fact that "Waiting for Superman" failed to influence anyone and "Won't Back Down" earned less money than I currently have in my couch cushions, the reformers will once again try to use entertainment to sway public opinion. Reformers will pick a new genre, as documentaries and fictional movies have failed to click. To that end, StudentsFirst will present "Rhee-formers on Ice", an entertainment extravaganza starring Michelle Rhee as the Ice Queen, who will skate a bloody figure 8 into a senior teacher's chest in the finale. Kevin Johnson will co-star as the uncle no one will let near their children.

The UFT will continue breaking off large chunks of our contract and handing them over, gratis, to the city. Mulgrew will call each of these events a victory, and talk about how glad he is to have a seat at the table, even as he pulls the chair out from under teachers.

Teacher's Choice will survive, but in a new format. Rather than giving each teacher the current whopping $45 a year for classroom supplies, the city will finally increase that amount to $1000 per teacher. Unfortunately, that money will come directly from teacher salaries. Michael Mulgrew will promote this idea because "teachers already spend more than $1000 dollar a year each, on average. Making it official gives us leverage with companies like Staples, who want our business." The UFT will declare this a victory for teachers.


Despite no contract, a sellout evaluation agreement, and a loss of vacation days due to Sandy, Mulgrew will win re-election as UFT president. Only 25% of UFT members will vote. The other 75% will express surprise that there was even an election. This will be the only victory that the UFT will declare in 2013 that will actually be a victory, albeit not for the teachers themselves.

In a surprise move, Anthony Weiner will throw his hat into the mayoral race. He will immediately grab his hat back when he realizes it was the only thing covering his genitals. His campaign slogan, "Go Big with Weiner!" will be a huge hit with bloggers everywhere. The UFT, in keeping with their history of supporting wieners in elections, grants him an endorsement. Weiner will win the election and Mulgrew will declare that his endorsement gave Weiner the momentum he needed to thrust himself to victory, causing the city to come together.

To no one's surprise, this blog will continue making Weiner jokes in 2013.

Mayor Weiner will choose erstwhile Gotham Schools blogger and celebrated E4E asshat Ruben Brosbe as Chancellor. He will cite Ruben's extensive experience at not achieving tenure as a major plus. "None of our three previous chancellors had any real experience in the classroom," Weiner will say. "Brosbe actually taught and failed to achieve tenure, which will inspire future teachers not to expect tenure, either."

Although there will be no new teacher's contract in 2013, it will be a year of innovative deals, such as giving in on teacher evaluations in exchange for a promise of 'economic credit" in the event a contract is ever signed. This will lead to a pinky swear on the Danielson Framework, a cross-my-heart-and-hope-to-die ATR agreement, a hand-to-God paperwork reduction agreement, and a swear-on-my-mom's-life no charter school pledge. Mulgrew will hail all these innovations as a victory for the union. In a shocking turn of events, Mayor Bloomberg will reveal that he had his fingers crossed the whole time. Anthony Weiner's "No Take Backs" pledge will turn the tide in his favor and sweep him into the mayor's office.



Some quick predictions to round things out:

• At least one of your admins will be a dick.
• Cathie Black's emails to Bloomberg will finally be released.  The most damaging revelation will be that she referred to the mayor as "Poopsie".
• Reformers will claim that everything they do is for the kids, even if they propose tying students in potato sacks and beating them with ball peen hammers.
• Eva Moskowitz will begin planting flags in the public schools she wants to take over and claiming them for "The Country of Moskovia".
• Evan Stone and Sydney Morris will marry, but only so they can spawn more members for E$E.
• Diane Ravitch will continue to defend public schools and sound educational policy by typing more on her blog and Twitter feed than seems humanly possible. It will be revealed that she also types with her feet.
• Arne Duncan will bring phonics back to schools, but only after he gets tired of everyone pronouncing his name "Arn" instead of "Arnie".
• Mayor Bloomberg will continue to increase class sizes while pushing a law to reduce the size of a "large fries" to whatever can fit in a urine sample cup. 
• The mayor's push to eliminate guns will take up a larger and larger amount of his time. This will result in dramatic improvement in the schools.
• Michael Mulgrew will declare all of the above a victory for teachers.

Add your own predictions to the comments, and happy new year!

A Response to Anti-Union Teacher, Matt Polazzo

Matt Polazzo, a teacher at Stuyvesant, recently appeared in the Daily News promoting the Success Charter run by Eva Moskowitz. I blogged about it here. Mr. Polazzo is also the person who suggested that we should rip up the union contract in an opinion piece in the same Daily News. He emailed me his side of this issue. I will not post his email here, but I have chosen to post my response to him, which follows below. The first paragraph refers to Mr. Polazzo's dismay that I blog anonymously while calling myself Accountable:


The irony in my anonymity, if any, lies in the fact that I am a tenured teacher whose views might end up getting him fired if his name became known. I have told the truth about Bloomberg, Klein, Black, Walcott, and other power brokers in the DOE. They do monitor my blog, and it would be foolish for me to disclose my identity. Tenure is supposed to protect me and give me the freedom of speech that an educator should have, but it does not. I have heard of at least one blogger who was U rated after her identity became known. She is now out of the system. You would have it that tenured teachers can not be removed. That is nonsense. I know outstanding teachers who have run afoul of admins and were fired for their troubles. This includes union leaders who were fired for their involvement with the UFT.

You took a poke at this blog, alleging that few people read it. While "few" is subjective, you can see that I have 72 followers, and I have received more than a half a million hits. One post of mine reached 150,000 readers. Quite a few of your own students have been here, if you care to read the comments in the posts that feature you as their subject. Perhaps you're just hoping that no one hears how real teachers feel about your blatant betrayal of your colleagues and your union?

You asked me quite a few questions about my personal life, which I decline to answer, once again for the sake of anonymity. You seem to think using your name makes you more courageous than me, but followers of Kim Jong-un who praise their dear leader aren't showing courage. You are likewise showing no courage by sticking up for the billionaires who would steal the jobs and pensions of hard working teachers.

In your letter, you claim to be anti-union. Don't you find it in the least hypocritical that you rake in the benefits of union protection while trying to tear it down? As a 14 year teacher, presumably with a master's plus 30, you earn at least $80K a year. Do you think anyone would be paying you that without your union negotiating on your behalf? When you go to the doctor, are you thankful for the health benefits that the contract affords you, or do you wish you could rip up the contract and pay your medical bills yourself?

Exactly how much do you think Eva Moskowitz would be paying you? What job protections would you have? Do you think you'd perform as well teaching poor inner city children as you seem to teaching the brightest kids in NY at Stuyvesant? If you are so anti-union, quit it and go work for Eva. You want to talk the talk, then walk the walk. Then I'd have respect for your position, if not agreement.

Speaking of which, it's extremely easy for you to ask for the contract to be ripped up when you teach at a school like Stuyvesant. Those kids are self motivated, and even if you sucked as a teacher, they would still do quite well. Why don't you try teaching in a high poverty, gang-riddled neighborhood as I did for 20 years and see how well you do. Perhaps that experience might make you more aware of the issues involved in good teaching. Perhaps then you might appreciate the job protections that your union affords you, especially when your class is NOT a group of Harvard bound seniors, but a bunch of kids who are lucky if they manage to scrape through high school.

You claim that the article in the News, in which you vilify your union and your fellow teachers, was not submitted by you. So what? You clearly gave your consent once you found out that they wanted to publish the piece. Was your 15 minutes of fame worth selling out your colleagues?

Regarding your daughter winning the lottery for Eva's school: You claim it was fortuitous that the reporter for the Daily News just happened to be there when you were and just happened to ask you questions that showed Eva in a good light. Perhaps so, but this is the same newspaper that used you once before to strike out at your colleagues. It's entirely reasonable for anyone to be suspicious when you suddenly appear in the same paper, lauding a charter school while you work for the public schools.

What concerns me most about your efforts to sabotage the UFT is that you have no skin in the game, and that you offer no solutions. Your skin is safe in Stuyvesant--as I said, whether you are a good teacher or not, your students will perform. More concerning is your lack of solutions. You advocate throwing out the UFT contract but say nothing about what would take its place (if anything). How many teachers might lose their jobs unjustly if the contract disappeared tomorrow? How many excellent teachers would be fired because they could be replaced by two newbies? Maybe if your job was at stake, as well as your ability to provide for your daughter, you might think twice before advocating that others be fired without due process.

Finally, you claim that education is in "crisis" and that we need to do something. I suggest you read Diane Ravitch, who knows more about this than anyone else in America. She would tell you that American students are actually doing better than ever in the PISA tests, and that if we adjust for poverty of our students, we perform as well as any nation in the world. So the "crisis" is a crisis of poverty, and you will never solve it by attacking teachers, any more than Bush solved the problem of terrorism attacking Iraq. You solve a problem by attacking the things that cause it, and not by randomly attacking the easiest target.

Your attack on the union was Bush-like, and bush league. If you really want to help children, you'll advocate for an end to poverty, and not take a sledge hammer to your colleagues.

I will be posting this letter (but not your letter to me) on my blog, in the hopes that my tiny audience will read it. I once again extend you an offer to guest blog and attempt to refute anything I have said here.

I do appreciate you writing to me, and I hope you decide that you would like to respond publicly.

Yours,

He who shall remain nameless

Stuyvesant's Matt Polazzo Wins the Lottery!

Some of you may remember our old pal Matt Polazzo. He was the genius who suggested that the we tear up the union contract and allow "bad" teachers to be fired at will. Of course, Mr. Polazzo teaches at Stuyvesant, the city's top high school, so the odds him ever being classified as "bad" are practically nil. Nevertheless, he courageously offered his colleagues as cannon fodder for the Klein regime, without expecting  anything for himself, except perhaps the opportunity to go on teaching the top students in the city, while shitting on teachers who have to take on all comers.

I'd pretty much forgotten about this blot on education, until his name came up today unexpectedly. You see, he's won the lottery! No, not the Mega Millions, but something much more precious: he won his daughter a spot in a charter school run by fellow union basher Eva Moskowitz.

What an amazing coincidence! Matt Polazzo, one of Joel Klein's favorite ass-kissers, somehow gets his daughter a spot in a school run by Eva Moskowitz, who was famously at the top of Klein's speed dial. I mean, what are the odds?

A suspicious person might think that maybe this whole lottery thing was rigged, given how closely related these folks are. It must be a million to one shot that Polazzo, whose brown lips were firmly fastened to Klein's sphincter, got a spot in a school run by Moskowitz, who had to have Klein's lips separated from her own ass with a derrick. Seems hard to believe, eh?

And then, add in the fact that Polazzo just happened to be on hand to suck up to Moskowitz for the reporters at the Daily News.

Of course, we all know that charters are 100% on the up and up, and they would never show preferential treatment to someone who sucked up to them. Charters would never cherry-pick their students, or kick out students who don't perform, or accept less than their fair share of ELL or special ed students, so we can be confident that this lottery was legit.

Maybe, if Matt plays his cards right, he can win the lottery again, and end up a principal in one of Moskowitz's  schools. It's a long shot, but hey, who knows? He's been pretty lucky so far.

A Challenge for Charters

It's obvious that with the second round of RttT awards looming, New York is going to try to burnish its application a bit. The initial response from Klein was predictable: the unions cost us the money. Today, we got the news that at least some of the blame needs to go to the state itself, because they filled their application with a bunch of outlandish suggestions on how they would spend the money, such as buying desks for bureacrats that cost $3000 each, or exactly what 20 teachers currently receive in Teacher's Choice money. Nevertheless, the media will forget about that faux pas quickly and refocus on unions.

It's being said that we hindered the application on two main counts: The charter school cap and using test scores to evaluate teachers for tenure. Considering what a fiasco the recent Teacher Data Reports were, I think that should be off the table. But perhaps the union should reconsider its opposition to lifting the charter school cap--on one condition.

As things now stand, charters generally cream the top students from a neighborhood which automatically gives them a leg up. In addition, parents who apply to charters tend to be the most engaged parents in some of the worst schools--that's why they try to get their kids into one of the Cadillac charters run by Eva Moskowitz rather than leave them in a public school that will be robbed of many of its top students. And even with all these advantages, charters haven't performed as well as traditional public schools overall.

Still, I'm willing to compromise. Moskowitz and her ilk claim that charters are the way to go. If that's so, here's my challenge: Instead of creaming the top students from neighborhoods, charters should agree to take on a different population. I mean the lowest performing students, the special ed students, the ESL kids, and the most disruptive behavior problems. After all, if charters are so great, they should be able to turn around the very same kids they say the public schools are failing. Without that pesky union, they can hire whomever they please, choose their own curriculum, lengthen the school day and year, etc.

So let's issue them that challenge. Let them take on the most difficult kids--you know, the ones they currently reject--and prove that they can do a better job than public schools. If they can, the UFT should remove their objections to lifting the charter school cap. If, as I suspect, they fall flat on their faces, perhaps we can all go back to the business of making the NYC public schools the best they can be.

What do you say, Eva? Are you up to the challenge?

Note to Klein: Resign

It is time for Joel Klein to resign.

I could list the thousand things that have made him the worst chancellor in NYC history, from children left out in the middle of snowstorms to irresponsible school closings. I could point out the myriad ways he has harmed school children by applying the corporate model to school communities. But those things, as awful as they are, were for the most part poor policy decisions borne from his ignorance of education. His latest shenanigans call for no less than his resignation.

I'm talking, of course, about his dealings with Eva Moscowitz, the charter school maven who for some mysterious reason seems to have special access and influence with the chancellor. Here is what Eva said to Joel:

"We need to quickly and decisively distinguish the good guys from the bad. And yes take away resources from institutions that are harming children and give to those who are truly putting children first."

How did Klein respond to this bald-faced power/money grab? Did he defend the public school system over which he presides? Did he defend the teachers and parents and children who do their best day in and day out?

No. The evidence suggests that Klein sided with the person he perceived to be the good guy and threw the bad guys (teachers, parents, and children) under the bus.

How Klein can continue to "lead" a system he obviously loathes is beyond me.

Worse still, Eva asked Klein for more space for her charters in two specific schools: PS 241 and PS 194. Two months later, the DOE announced that those two schools would be phased out. While Klein has not admitted that he was directly influenced by Moskowitz, the timing is more than suspect. Furthermore, Klein's spokesman, David Cantor, confirmed that "The chancellor signs off on all closure decisions". In addition, Juan Gonzalez reported that "Klein had not submitted the closings to a vote of the community district education councils, as required by state law."

School closings affect hundreds, if not thousands, of students, teachers, and parents. They change the entire structure of a neighborhood. Klein did not reach out to those vital stakeholders. They, it seems, do not matter. Eva got what she wanted--that's what's important.

I agree with Eva Moscowitz on one thing: It's time to distinguish the good guys from the bad.

It's time Klein to go. The UFT should demand his immediate resignation for this latest fiasco and for everything he has done to undermine what was once the finest public school system in the country.

Note to Klein: Resign.

Joel and Eva--The Transcripts

We here at Accountable Talk take our hats off to Juan Gonzalez of the Daily News, the only reporter for the NY dailies who seems to give a damn about how the NYC school system is run. Using the Freedom of Information Act, the DN obtained 125 emails between Eva Mosowitz and Joel Klein, detailing just how much Klein favors charter schools, and Eva's schools in particular. Among other disturbing messages, Eva writes to Joel that "We need to quickly and decisively distinguish the good guys from the bad. And yes take away resources from institutions that are harming children and give to those who are truly putting children first." You'd assume that the chancellor of the public schools would object to having his schools painted as the bad guys, but he acquiesced to Eva's request. Apparently, those putting children first are people who make half a million dollars a year, like Eva, not underpaid teachers like you.


We at AT wanted to investigate this further, so our crack team (we're not drug users, but we wear really low rise jeans) filed our own Freedom of Information request in an effort to obtain chat logs between Joel and Eva, and we soon hit paydirt. Our request was delayed a few days because the chancellor and the white hat school maven apparently use pseudonyms in their communications. One warning: some of these chat logs are disturbing, mostly because they are entirely made up.

The ChancelLORD: Eva, you there bb?

Evil Eva: Yes, my lord.

The ChancelLORD: Oh baby I love when you call me lord my little mousekowitz.

Evil Eva: Shhh...no last names, remember?

The ChancelLORD: Of course, Eva. What are you wearing?

Evil Eva: Not so fast, my lord. Business before pleasure, K?

The ChancelLORD: I'd do anything for you, my charter cutie.

Evil Eva: I need more space for my school. Can you arrange that?

The ChancelLORD: That depends. Can you find a little space for me, too?

Evil Eva: Oh, I don't have much, Joelsy. But I might have a tight little spot for you if you do me this favor.

The ChancelLORD: Consider it done!

Evil Eva: Good boy. I'd like to use ps194 and ps241.

The ChancelLORD: Will that be enough space? I'll close them if you like!

Evil Eva: Purrrrrrr. One more thing. Can you help me raise a million dollars? Private funds hon--we need to keep it quiet.

The ChancelLORD: If you help me raise something first!

Evil Eva: mmmmm...I hope you're UP for it.

The ChancelLORD: Oh I am! I had my head shined this morning just like you like it!

Evil Eva: You tease! I wish I could be there to buff it for you. And speaking of buff...I'm in it.

There was much more, but frankly we threw up in our mouths a little bit just reading it.

Dr. King Bites Bloomberg in the Ass

In this case, Bloomberg's ass being Joel Klein.

If you recall, Bloomberg recently hijacked some of Dr. King's words as a means to try to bully the state into creating more charter schools. "A right delayed is a right denied," Bloomy told us, ignoring the fact that Dr. King would have proudly supported unionism and the concept of good public schools for everyone, not just the kids creamed off the top for schools run by education hacks like Eva Moscowitz. Dr. King would have been appalled that students are crammed into classes while Eva makes 400K a year under the proud eye of the billionaire mayor.

Mayor4Life sent his stooge Klein out to smear residents of the rubber rooms, and Klein chose to villify Alan Rosenfeld in an article in the Post, a rag run by fellow billionaire Murdoch. It appears that Rosenfeld was charged 10 years ago, and according to the ICE blog, charges were largely dropped against him, with the only penalty being a week suspension. Because he was initially charged with making lewd comments, Joel Klein decided that he was not fit to return to the classroom, and Rosenfeld has languished there ever since.

I'm 100% behind my fellow blogger NYC Educator when he says that if Rosenfeld is guilty, he should be bounced out on his ass. The problem is that he was found guilty of a minor offense, was given a punishment, and that should have been the end of the story. Instead, he has been in the rubber room for 10 years, collecting a salary for not teaching.

Klein is using this as a PR tool to say that we should fire all RR teachers. But the fact is that Rosenfeld was apparently given his day in court, most of the charges against him were thrown out, and he paid a small price for the infraction they felt they could make stick.

If Klein or the DOE had evidence against this man, they should have used it 7 years ago to get him out of the system. If they had no evidence against him, as it appears they did not, he should have been returned to the classroom. But for Klein sentence him to an interminable stretch in the RR in unconscionable.

Under state law, Rosenfeld had rights, and his rights have been delayed. And as BloomKlein should know, a right delayed is a right denied. And in this case, unlike Bloomberg's bogus charter school analogy, the phrase actually fits.

Mayoral Control Goes to the Dogs

On the heels (!) of NYC Educator's proclamation that a dog could pass the NYS ELA and Math tests, and the announcement this week that dogs are as smart or smarter than your average toddler, Mayor Bloomberg announced that he is starting a new Doggie DOE at a nominal cost of four billion dollars per year. Using a formula that has worked well for him in the past, Bloomberg then cut 10 per cent from the budget and demanded that Albany give him total control over the new DDOE. Legislators argued for a few moments, but soon rolled over on their backs, whereupon Bloomberg scratched their bellies and fed them lumps of sugar.

Recognizing the need for a strong leader-of-the-pack type to ring in the new department, Bloomberg called upon Cesar Millan, the Dog Whisperer, to be the new Chancellor of the DDOE. At a hastily called press conference, Cesar refused to take questions, but made the reporters beg, bark, and ask permission before they could leave the room to pee. Infuriated that someone had more control over the press than even himself, Bloomberg immediately fired Millan and brought in a new chancellor.

"It's time we get rid of the same old politics that made NYC dogs so lazy," said Bloomberg. "All a dog has to do to get a license under the current system is breathe. We need to toughen up those standards and end social licensing. And I know just the man to do it--Joel Klein, the new DDOE chancellor." The reporters, sensing that Cesar Milan was gone, scrambled to their seats and began asking questions. Asked one reporter of Klein, "What makes you think you know how to train the city's 1 million dogs better than a canine expert like Mr. Millan? Do you have any experience with dogs?"

Klein thought for a moment. "On the way over I stepped in a big pile of dog shit. And I once tried to lick my own balls."

The reporters, hugely impressed, ran off to write lengthy editorials in praise of the new system.

All is not Alpo and Snausages with the new system as of yet. The first public doggie school slated to open in September, called Brooklyn Fetch, began taking applications from all neighborhood dogs yesterday. This morning, however, Eva Moscowitz showed up accompanied by a bunch of Dobermans with spiked collars and demanded space for her new FruFru Doggie Charter Academy. Joel Klein confronted Moskowitz but acceded to the request shortly after a giant hole was ripped in his trousers by a set of slavering jaws. It took security guards several minutes to wrest the torn pants from Ms. Moskowitz's mouth. Immediately afterwards, Moskowitz began signing up all the German Shepherds, border collies, and poodles for her new academy, leaving the neighborhood dogs to the public school system.

There are more signs that the DDOE is headed for controversy. Several trainers at the new school attempted to unionize in an effort to force the city to supply them with pooper scoopers. Fortunately, Randi Weingarten stepped in and created the new Doggie's Choice program, which will supply enough money for trainers to purchase scoopers or bags, but not both. She hailed this as enormous victory and kissed Joel Klein on both cheeks. Fortunately, he was not attempting to lick his balls at the time. On a sad note, the union organizers were sent to Trainer Reassignment Centers, known among trainers as "The Dog House".

In addition, owners of St. Bernards began demanding vouchers so their dogs could attend Catholic school.

A New Kind of Mayoral Control

It looks as if the State senators will come out of hiding and pass the mayoral control bill back into law with few modifications. Then, if they see their shadows, we will have six more weeks of winter. No, that's Groundhog Day. The rodents in the state legislature portend five more years of dictatorial rule.

It no big surprise that the mayor's money talked. Billions of dollars together tend to speak pretty loudly. However, there is a sliver of hope that rarely gets talked about these days. While the mayor gets to control the schools, let's remember that we, the voters, control who the mayor is.

Voting Bloomberg out is the ultimate in mayoral control. I know some of you think he is invincible, but I think the cracks in the mayor's highly polished image are beginning to show. Witness how he angrily stared down a disabled man who had a difficult time turning off a tape recorder. Remember how he told parents that they should leave the teaching decisions to teachers (the very ones he cut out of the decision making process). Consider his silence as Eva Moskowitz plays Capture the Flag with PS 123. Think of the phony reconstituted BOE he stuffed with his own deputy mayors. Add in his power grab for a third term as mayor in defiance of the will of the people who twice voted for term limits. Finally, remember his moronic hyperbole in stating that there would be riots in the streets should one word of the mayoral control bill be changed.

So no, we probably can't stop the return of mayoral control. But we might be able to stop the return of Mayor Mike.