Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Scuba
Scuba's Journal
Scuba's Journal
January 15, 2014
Hang Me, Oh Hang Me
Thought it might be fun to exchange some tabs. Here's one I ran across today. I'd love to see some more here.
January 15, 2014
Regarding the national average abuse payments to abuse victims being in the $400,000 range ...
And $11,000,000 for their lawyers. Wonder if Pope Francis will have a comment on this case.
575 Sex Abuse Claims: Milwaukee Archdiocese's bankruptcy plan is in the works
http://www.jsonline.com/news/religion/milwaukee-archdiocese-is-ready-to-file-bankruptcy-plan-b99180350z1-240195521.htmlThree years after it declared bankruptcy as a way to deal with its mounting sex abuse claims, the Archdiocese of Milwaukee is poised to file the reorganization plan that will detail how it compensates abuse victims and operates as an institution into the future.
...
While the reorganization plan is a significant step toward exiting bankruptcy, legal scholars suggest that exit could still be a long way off. Even then, the legal battles could go on for years. "This is not the end game. There will be multiple objections on multiple bases," said Pamela Foohey, a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law in Champaign, who specializes in bankruptcy law.
The Milwaukee bankruptcy, filed by Archbishop Jerome Listecki in January 2011, came after the archdiocese had been largely successful in fighting lawsuits dating back at least to the 1950s. With 575 sex abuse claims and legal fees topping $11 million, it is one of the largest and most contentious bankruptcies filed by Catholic dioceses around the country, say observers and lawyers who've worked on those cases.
...
While the reorganization plan is a significant step toward exiting bankruptcy, legal scholars suggest that exit could still be a long way off. Even then, the legal battles could go on for years. "This is not the end game. There will be multiple objections on multiple bases," said Pamela Foohey, a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law in Champaign, who specializes in bankruptcy law.
The Milwaukee bankruptcy, filed by Archbishop Jerome Listecki in January 2011, came after the archdiocese had been largely successful in fighting lawsuits dating back at least to the 1950s. With 575 sex abuse claims and legal fees topping $11 million, it is one of the largest and most contentious bankruptcies filed by Catholic dioceses around the country, say observers and lawyers who've worked on those cases.
Regarding the national average abuse payments to abuse victims being in the $400,000 range ...
By all accounts, that seems unlikely in Milwaukee, where the archdiocese has insisted from the beginning that all but a few million dollars of its $100 million or more in assets is restricted and cannot be used for sex-abuse settlements. Insurance funds, which have been a major contributor to other church settlements, are expected to be a much smaller part of the Milwaukee reorganization plan. Insurers have argued that they are not liable because the underlying allegation against the archdiocese is fraud, but one group has negotiated with the archdiocese to buy back its policies for an unspecified amount of money.
And $11,000,000 for their lawyers. Wonder if Pope Francis will have a comment on this case.
January 15, 2014
I don't always trust my memory, but I can't ever recall a public school with such a history.
Milwaukee voucher school LifeSkills Academy closes 'in the dead of the night'
http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/milwaukee-voucher-school-closes-in-the-dead-of-the-night-b99183859z1-240125681.htmlOnly 1 student attending the school scored proficient in reading in 2012-'13
A small private school participating in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program abruptly closed in the middle of December, but not before collecting more than $200,000 from taxpayers this academic year to educate students who now attend other schools, state officials confirmed. LifeSkills Academy, a K-8 school that had dwindled to 66 students, appears to have closed around Dec. 12, according to a letter sent to the school from the Department of Public Instruction.
All Saints Catholic Church owns the building that LifeSkills rented at 3434 N. 38th St. "They moved out, as people say, in the dead of the night," Father Carl Diederichs of All Saints said.
...
LifeSkills received $202,278 in taxpayer-funded voucher payments from the state this year, and more than $633,248 in voucher payments in 2012-'13, according to the DPI. The school joined the voucher program in 2008-'09 and collected more than $2 million in total public payments to educate children.
No students attending LifeSkills were proficient in reading or math in 2012-'13, except for a single fourth-grade student, according to the most recent state achievement test score results.
A small private school participating in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program abruptly closed in the middle of December, but not before collecting more than $200,000 from taxpayers this academic year to educate students who now attend other schools, state officials confirmed. LifeSkills Academy, a K-8 school that had dwindled to 66 students, appears to have closed around Dec. 12, according to a letter sent to the school from the Department of Public Instruction.
All Saints Catholic Church owns the building that LifeSkills rented at 3434 N. 38th St. "They moved out, as people say, in the dead of the night," Father Carl Diederichs of All Saints said.
...
LifeSkills received $202,278 in taxpayer-funded voucher payments from the state this year, and more than $633,248 in voucher payments in 2012-'13, according to the DPI. The school joined the voucher program in 2008-'09 and collected more than $2 million in total public payments to educate children.
No students attending LifeSkills were proficient in reading or math in 2012-'13, except for a single fourth-grade student, according to the most recent state achievement test score results.
I don't always trust my memory, but I can't ever recall a public school with such a history.
January 15, 2014
Nixon: "I am not a crook." Christie: "I am not a bully." Ron Johnson" "I am not clueless."
http://uppitywis.org/blogarticle/evolution-political-meme-ron-johnsons-increasing-defensiveness-hEvolution of a political meme: Ron Johnson's increasing defensiveness on his lawsuit is a big political "tell"
Actually, Johnson is already pleading his cluefulness, over and over in op ed newspaper columns, news interviews and public speaking events where he has tried to defend his recent filing of a lawsuit against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"
. He sued because he's upset Congress itself chose to arrange things so that he and other members of Congress would have to apply for Obamacare (this after Republicans dared Democrats to join in requiring that. Oops!). The Obama administration thereafter opted to retain the pre-existing employer contribution to congressional health insurance premiums, as it always has done for its employees.
So Johnson is suing the president and demanding that the contribution be dropped on the basis that it's not legal. But a favorable ruling likely would impoverish his own office staff, though not himself, since Johnson is a millionaire. Just how elitest, clueless and bulldog snarky can a politician get?
The very fact Johnson feels it necessary to defend himself so vigorously speaks volumes, especially in that some of his toughest critics on this issue are within his own Republican Party, Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin among them. And read this, from a piece calling Johnson's lawsuit frivolous, at the conservative National Review web site: "Johnson and Republicans have innumerable ways of gumming up the legislative works ... . But legislative losers do not get to use the courthouse to refight their Capitol Hill defeats."
That Johnson and his advisors have deemed it necessary to spend valuable hours defending his latest quixotic attempt to de-fang Obamacare (or at least a very, very small aspect of it, which was driven by GOP political gamesmanship in the first place) is telling, indeed.
Actually, Johnson is already pleading his cluefulness, over and over in op ed newspaper columns, news interviews and public speaking events where he has tried to defend his recent filing of a lawsuit against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"
. He sued because he's upset Congress itself chose to arrange things so that he and other members of Congress would have to apply for Obamacare (this after Republicans dared Democrats to join in requiring that. Oops!). The Obama administration thereafter opted to retain the pre-existing employer contribution to congressional health insurance premiums, as it always has done for its employees.
So Johnson is suing the president and demanding that the contribution be dropped on the basis that it's not legal. But a favorable ruling likely would impoverish his own office staff, though not himself, since Johnson is a millionaire. Just how elitest, clueless and bulldog snarky can a politician get?
The very fact Johnson feels it necessary to defend himself so vigorously speaks volumes, especially in that some of his toughest critics on this issue are within his own Republican Party, Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin among them. And read this, from a piece calling Johnson's lawsuit frivolous, at the conservative National Review web site: "Johnson and Republicans have innumerable ways of gumming up the legislative works ... . But legislative losers do not get to use the courthouse to refight their Capitol Hill defeats."
That Johnson and his advisors have deemed it necessary to spend valuable hours defending his latest quixotic attempt to de-fang Obamacare (or at least a very, very small aspect of it, which was driven by GOP political gamesmanship in the first place) is telling, indeed.
January 14, 2014
I helped destroy Falluja in 2004. I won't be complicit again
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/10/iraq-fallujah-destruction-alqaida-malikiI helped destroy Falluja in 2004. I won't be complicit again
The media accepts the overly simple narrative that al-Qaida took over. The reality is Maliki is crushing dissent with US-made arms
One of the results of the US occupation was that Sunnis came out feeling like a targeted community, with Falluja being more marginalized than most Sunni cities because of its history as a center of resistance. These feelings have only been exacerbated over the past year of protests and government repression.
The Iraqi government's recent actions in Falluja turned the non-violent movement violent. When the protest camp in Falluja was cleared, many of the protestors picked up arms and began fighting to expel the state security forces from their city. It was local, tribal people – people not affiliated with transnational jihadist movements – who have taken the lead in this fight against the Iraqi government.
...
Already over 100 civilians have been killed in this violence, violence that has been facilitated by US weapons. The Independent reported that Iraqi security forces are bombing Falluja with Hellfire missiles sold to them by the US. But the US has supplied the Iraqi state with far more than this single weapon system. Recently, Congress has shown some reluctance to continue arms trade with the Maliki government, for fear that it would use the weapons for internal repression, a fear that appears to have some justification.
...
As Falluja relives a nightmare, once inflicted by my own hand, I find myself in a very different position from before. Today, I hope I can say that I am somewhat wiser, more responsible, more morally engaged than I was when I helped destroy Falluja in 2004. This time around, I cannot sit back and do nothing as the unreliable and self-serving claims of the government are reported without question, and repeated until they become conventional wisdom. I cannot just watch as Fallujans are again forced to flee from their homes, and as their bodies are again shredded by weapons made in my homeland. I do not want to feel complicit in their suffering anymore.
The media accepts the overly simple narrative that al-Qaida took over. The reality is Maliki is crushing dissent with US-made arms
One of the results of the US occupation was that Sunnis came out feeling like a targeted community, with Falluja being more marginalized than most Sunni cities because of its history as a center of resistance. These feelings have only been exacerbated over the past year of protests and government repression.
The Iraqi government's recent actions in Falluja turned the non-violent movement violent. When the protest camp in Falluja was cleared, many of the protestors picked up arms and began fighting to expel the state security forces from their city. It was local, tribal people – people not affiliated with transnational jihadist movements – who have taken the lead in this fight against the Iraqi government.
...
Already over 100 civilians have been killed in this violence, violence that has been facilitated by US weapons. The Independent reported that Iraqi security forces are bombing Falluja with Hellfire missiles sold to them by the US. But the US has supplied the Iraqi state with far more than this single weapon system. Recently, Congress has shown some reluctance to continue arms trade with the Maliki government, for fear that it would use the weapons for internal repression, a fear that appears to have some justification.
...
As Falluja relives a nightmare, once inflicted by my own hand, I find myself in a very different position from before. Today, I hope I can say that I am somewhat wiser, more responsible, more morally engaged than I was when I helped destroy Falluja in 2004. This time around, I cannot sit back and do nothing as the unreliable and self-serving claims of the government are reported without question, and repeated until they become conventional wisdom. I cannot just watch as Fallujans are again forced to flee from their homes, and as their bodies are again shredded by weapons made in my homeland. I do not want to feel complicit in their suffering anymore.
January 14, 2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upton_Sinclair
Words to live by from Upton Sinclair
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upton_Sinclair
American author who wrote close to one hundred books in many genres. He achieved popularity in the first half of the twentieth century, acquiring particular fame for his classic muckraking novel, The Jungle (1906). It exposed conditions in the U.S. meat packing industry, causing a public uproar that contributed in part to the passage a few months later of the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Act.[1]
In 1919, he published The Brass Check, a muckraking exposé of American journalism that publicized the issue of yellow journalism and the limitations of the “free press” in the United States. Four years after the initial publication of The Brass Check, the first code of ethics for journalists was created.[2] Time magazine called him "a man with every gift except humor and silence."[3] In 1943, he won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction.
Sinclair also ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Socialist, and was the Democratic Party nominee for Governor of California in 1934, though his highly progressive campaign was defeated rather soundly.
In 1919, he published The Brass Check, a muckraking exposé of American journalism that publicized the issue of yellow journalism and the limitations of the “free press” in the United States. Four years after the initial publication of The Brass Check, the first code of ethics for journalists was created.[2] Time magazine called him "a man with every gift except humor and silence."[3] In 1943, he won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction.
Sinclair also ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Socialist, and was the Democratic Party nominee for Governor of California in 1934, though his highly progressive campaign was defeated rather soundly.
January 14, 2014
Wisconsin GOP Bill Would Give Mother-In-Law Power to Stop a Daughter-In-Law's Abortion
http://uppitywis.org/blogarticle/wisgop-bill-would-give-mother-law-power-stop-daughter-laws-abortWisconsin's Republicans have a new twist on taking away choice that is sure to please the ladyfolk: Allowing the woman's husband, parents or mother and father-in-law to stop a planned abortion.
Under an obscure provision of SB 201, which provides injunctive relief for a "parent or a grandparent," a particularly meddling mother-in-law who got wind of a planned abortion could go to court and get an injunction against the abortion provider, ordering them not to perform the abortion:
(b) Injunctive relief. A court may issue an order enjoining a person from performing an abortion contrary to s. 253.103. If the person violates the terms of the injunction, the court shall adjudge the person in civil contempt of the order and shall impose a civil penalty against the person for contempt in an amount of $10,000 for a first violation, $50,000 for a 2nd violation, and $100,000 for a 3rd and for each subsequent violation and may grant any other relief the court determines is just and proper in the circumstances.
The only catch, supposedly, is that the mother-in-law must have some sort of evidence that the abortion will be performed "solely on account of the sex of the child." Of course, the bill doesn't give any direction on how to determine when this threshold has been met. For example, a mother-in-law could get wind-of a planned abortion at clinic X, go to court claiming that this was a gender abortion based on previous pro-boy or pro-girl statements of the daughter-in-law. This law is so vague, that such a claim by the mother-in-law could be enough to get an injunction on the abortion.
Under an obscure provision of SB 201, which provides injunctive relief for a "parent or a grandparent," a particularly meddling mother-in-law who got wind of a planned abortion could go to court and get an injunction against the abortion provider, ordering them not to perform the abortion:
(b) Injunctive relief. A court may issue an order enjoining a person from performing an abortion contrary to s. 253.103. If the person violates the terms of the injunction, the court shall adjudge the person in civil contempt of the order and shall impose a civil penalty against the person for contempt in an amount of $10,000 for a first violation, $50,000 for a 2nd violation, and $100,000 for a 3rd and for each subsequent violation and may grant any other relief the court determines is just and proper in the circumstances.
The only catch, supposedly, is that the mother-in-law must have some sort of evidence that the abortion will be performed "solely on account of the sex of the child." Of course, the bill doesn't give any direction on how to determine when this threshold has been met. For example, a mother-in-law could get wind-of a planned abortion at clinic X, go to court claiming that this was a gender abortion based on previous pro-boy or pro-girl statements of the daughter-in-law. This law is so vague, that such a claim by the mother-in-law could be enough to get an injunction on the abortion.
Profile Information
Member since: Thu Apr 29, 2010, 03:31 PMNumber of posts: 53,475