As long as “WE” remember “WE” elected these lackeys to Congress to serve & to protect …

…As long as “WE” remember “WE” elected these lackeys to Congress to serve & to protect …

Thanks to the NRA and Their Lackeys in Congress, It Is Illegal to Study Gun Violence

It is illegal for the Federal Center for Disease Control and Prevention to study connection between gun ownership and police violence.

By Thom Hartmann / AlterNet ….July 14, 20..16 …..As Black Lives Matter protests continue across the nation, a new study is complicating the debate around police violence.

The study, which comes out of Harvard, took data from a number of police departments across the country and looked at how different groups of people are treated by law enforcement.

As expected, the study found that police officers are more likely to use force when dealing with black people than they are when dealing with white people.

For example, police are 18 percent more likely to push black people against a wall, 16 percent more likely to put them in handcuffs, 19 percent more likely to draw their weapons, and so on.

These statistics are depressing for sure, but not really all that surprising given the reality of systemic racism in this country.

It is solely your responsibility to determine if the information offered is “vetted” authentically and sufficiently

CIA funded … go figure… Frankly it would not surprise me

…CIA funded … go figure… Frankly it would not surprise me…


The Pokemon Go zombie apocalypse has arrived… mindless humans stalk virtual monsters across America

By now, you’ve probably heard of Pokemon Go, the new "hybrid reality" mobile app game that overlays real world geographic locations with virtual monsters that are collected for points.

What you may not yet know is that the game was actually developed by a CIA-funded software front group for the purpose of using all the mobile device cameras of the brain dead public to conduct what I call "mass redundant surveillance."

And now, zombified Americans are being spotted converging in large, brain dead groups with their eyes glued to their mobile phones… some people are walking off cliffs or waltzing into traffic.

Click here for the full story (and see the PHOTOS).


It is solely your responsibility to determine if the information offered is “vetted” authentically and sufficiently

As Bob Dylan noted … “Times they are a’changing”…!!!


The goal is a fundament transformation of America’s political culture and its many tentacles … the change has begun the degree of change may well be far too slow for some and far too fast for others … likely there is no happy medium … it will take time … how much is unknown but do not be overly surprised if the change occurs far quicker than many envisioned or are readily able to accept…

…Most recognize the rate of change and the speed at which change is occurring on all fronts is startling … close your  eyes and sometimes It appear as if you awakened in a new world feeling uncomfortably stretched … Get use to that feeling … As Bob Dylan noted … “Times they are a’changing”…!!!


The Long Victory of Bernie Sanders  William Rivers Pitt, Truthout: For a time, Bernie Sanders showed us something other than fear or corporate hegemony or permanent war. He showed us our best selves with a bull-throated roar, and people listened. He reminded us that despite what we hear from the media, the struggle for justice and equality is far from over.

Read the Article 


It is solely your responsibility to determine if the information offered is “vetted” authentically and sufficiently

chief difference is the manner in which they see change occurring

image…Their chief difference is the manner in which they see change occurring … HILLARY believes change comes from INSIDE an organization whereas BERNIE sees change coming from OUTSIDE an organization …

…If you follow my blog you are aware I am NOT a believer in polls or studies as the outcome can always be pre-determined…

…Having made this statement I note the goal of virtually every institution…organization…association becomes protecting its life … change from inside is normally NOT encouraged … usually those attempting to affect change from within are branded, labeled and ostracized as they fail to life up to the “group” expectation…

As Margaret Mead so aptly noted … “never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.   Indeed it is the only thing that ever has”…


The biggest difference between Clinton and Sanders wasn’t policy. It was something more important.


By Chris Bowers and Matt Kerbel   …2016/07/14 · 05:06  Purchase Chris Bowers and Matt Kerbel’s book Next …

This is the second of five diaries looking at the 2016 election from the perspective of our new book Next Generation Netroots: Realignment and the Rise of the Internet Left. Click here for part one: The unmistakable lesson of the Sanders campaign: The left-wing is ascendent in the Democratic Party.

At its core, the Bernie-vs-Hillary dispute was as much, if not more, about how political power is best organized in order to achieve progressive outcomes as it was about ideological or policy differences. Their clash over who is the better progressive, on display during the primary debates, often boiled down to this distinction: Clinton believes you have to know and work within the system in order to achieve progressive outcomes, while Sanders believes you have to organize new power from outside the system in order to achieve progressive outcomes. This is why both candidates can claim agreement on 90% of their policy objectives and still engage in such a bitter contest, and why we find self-described progressives on both sides of the debate.

Hillary is the epitome of the philosophy that change is best accomplished by working from within established power structures. She describes herself as an ultra-qualified, experienced and knowledgeable incrementalist, someone who can effectively implement practical solutions within the system to produce real accomplishments for average Americans. Further, she has used that characterization to suggest that Bernie is an idealistic dreamer whose self-described revolutionary ideas are bound to dissipate upon contact with reality.


It is solely your responsibility to determine if the information offered is “vetted” authentically and sufficiently

This is not Arizona voter’s first bite at this education apple

image…This is not Arizona voter’s first bite at this education apple … We’ve allowed more than a decade of legislatures to  underfund education all the while turning our back saying nothing … doing nothing …

…If “WE” are going to get back in the education game “WE” need to stop playing games and just do it…


We Are the Ones Failing


Posted on July 15, 2016 by Linda Lyon Cross-posted from AZ Department of Education released AzMERIT test scores to districts this week and results show 1,400 third-graders did not meet the “Move On When Reading” (MOWR) cut score required by ARS 15-701. The law requires all third graders in Arizona to read proficiently at grade level or be retained, with three exceptions. The exceptions pertain to English Language Learners, students under evaluation for a special education (SPED) referral or severe reading impairment, and those on Individual Education Plans (IEP.) The law also provides for remedial strategies and once a student demonstrates reading proficiency via a district-administered assessment, they can be promoted to the next grade.

Although MOWR was signed into law in 2010 andenacted by the Legislature in 2012 with the appropriation of approx. $40 million annually, it wasn’t until the 2013-14 school year that the retention was implemented. That year, close to 650 third-graders were eligible to be retained, but less than one percent were. During the 2014-15 school year, data from the new AzMERIT was not expected to be available until after the start of the next school year, so no third-graders were held back.

There can be no doubt that the ability to read, the earlier the better, is critical for a student’s success. Studies show that children who cannot read at grade level by the start of fourth grade are four times less likely to graduate on time. Third graders who live in a poor family for at least a year are six and a half times less likely to graduate on time and have much higher risk for dropping out. “While it is an urban myth that prison population projections are based on the number of third graders that cannot read” –  high school dropouts were 63 times more likely to see the inside of prison walls than college graduates.

Social promotion, or “the practice of promoting a child to the next grade level regardless of skill mastery in the belief that it will promote self-esteem”, has numerous problems of its own. Among them are the potential for ill-educated students, providing parents a false sense of confidence, setting the bar low, and creating a false sense of accomplishment. While social promotion can help ensure students don’t drop out, the stark reality is that they’ll likely be no more prepared for a post-secondary education than if they had.

Retention of students though, is also very problematic. According to the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), as many as 15 percent of U.S. students repeat a grade each year, and 30 to 50 percent of students are retained at least once before ninth grade. Nineteen empirical studies from the 1990s compared retained students with those promoted. The results showed grade retention negatively impacted all areas of achievement, from reading to math and language, and socio-emotional adjustments such as peer relationships, self-esteem, problem behaviors, and attendance.

So, it is critical for students to be able to read by the third grade, social promotion is the wrong solution, and retention should be the very last resort. What then is the answer? As is often the case with complex problems, we pretty much know what we need to do, we just don’t either want to do it, or don’t have the political will to do it. New America, a centrist nonprofit think tank and civic enterprise, says the solution requires “a comprehensive approach to literacy including attention to a wide range of factors,including teacher preparation and professional development; early identification of struggling students and intervention to support their success; comprehensive and shared assessments; language-rich and engaging reading curricula; provision of pre-K and full-day kindergarten; and school-community-family partnerships.”


The school-community-family partnerships are every bit as important as the rest of the approach since we know literacy and language gaps start well before kindergarten.  Research has shown that children in families receiving public assistance hear as many as 30 million fewer words prior to entering kindergarten than their wealthier peers, putting them at an early disadvantage. Unfortunately, only 42 percent of four-year-olds and 15 percent of three-year-olds are served by public pre-K programs, including SPED and the federal Head Start program. Additionally, the quality of these programs varies significantly with most states requiring just a high school diploma for teachers of infants and toddlers.

New America published a report in 2015 called “From Crawling to Walking” which ranked states on birth to third-grade policies supporting strong readers. The report looked at seven policy areas influencing children’s literacy development: educators; standards, assessment and data; equitable funding; pre-K access and quality; full-day kindergarten access and quality; dual language learner supports; and third-grade reading laws. They then ranked states into three categories based on their progress toward achieving 65 policy indicators. Arizona was categorized in the “crawling” level, at 43rd in the nation. Some of the reasons were no requirement for specialized preparation in early childhood education (ECE) for administrators and ECE educators, pre-K programs not required to screen for dual language learners, and unfunded full-day kindergarten. This last item must carry much of the responsibility for Arizona’s 43rdranking. In 2004, the state passed legislation creating funding for full-day kindergarten to increase availability, but in 2010, the Legislature eliminated the funding. This forced school districts to adapt by charging parents tuition for kindergarten, raising local property taxes, increasing class sizes, or reducing other areas of their budgets.

Unfortunately just like everything else today, it seems that early childhood education has been politicized beyond the ability to effectively solve the problem. The Republican Party’s platform committee recently added language that opposes public prekindergarten. Of the decision, one of the members of the committee said the party opposes pre-K because it “inserts the state in the family relationship in the very early stages of a child’s life.” This goes right to the heart of the Conservative belief that parents are responsible for what ails a child and they alone have responsibility to fix it. Democrats want proper funding and support to get the job done even if the parents don’t do it.

The primary argument against retention is that in most cases it doesn’t prove motivational to the student. There are multiple reasons for this but in the end, the failure to read at grade-level isn’t primarily the student’s fault. Sure they must accept some of the responsibility, but teachers, school administrators, parents, and district and state officials all share a large part of the responsibility.

A kindergarten teacher I know recently said: “It seems that they [the state] are leaving the school districts responsible for the fallout, without offering solutions, support, or resources. It’s like it’s your problem, now deal with it and let us hold you accountable if you don’t.” One of my Facebook friends phrased it another way: They starve the horse, and when he can’t pull the loaded wagon up the hill, they beat him to death and then pin the blame on him.

Ultimately, what makes the failure of the 1,400 students not meeting the cut score on AzMERIT so unacceptable is that we collectively know what to do to help them. No, the solutions aren’t simple, easy or cheap to implement, but let’s please not pretend we don’t know what they are. These kids may have “failed” the test, but we are failing them.

It is solely your responsibility to determine if the information offered is “vetted” authentically and sufficiently

Montini’s position makes a lot of sense … I’m just not willing to count this election over

image…Montini’s position makes a lot of sense … I’m just not willing to count this election over given the degree of chaos in both political parties coupled with hope Arizona voters are ready for a change…

…Time to check out John you’ve had your day in the limelight … take a bow and exit the stage … Thank you…


It is solely your responsibility to determine if the information offered is “vetted” authentically and sufficiently

When do Arizona voters change a motto from

image…When do Arizona voters change a motto from Home of the Grand Canyon … to…Koch Bro$ approved Home to Dark $$$

…This is not the first bite at this “dark $$$” apple Arizona voters have had…



It is solely your responsibility to determine if the information offered is “vetted” authentically and sufficiently