Fact Checker 13 
Member since Sep 5, 2014



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “When Democrats Turned Tail, And Kept Running

Ah yes, the Democrats just love to "keep their powder dry". But they can never find a fight where they think it is worth using it. Lloyd Bentsen, Dukakis' running mate, told Dukakis that politics is a "contact sport". But Dukakis wouldn't play by those rules. And lacked charisma. B. Clinton and Obama had charisma and knew how to talk the populist talk. Remember when Obama said he would support Card Check and "put on a soft shoe" and support striking workers, and then did nothing at all to help labor? Good times.

Did you hear that Fox & Friends (those notorious liberals) did a poll about whether the benefits of Medicare for All outweighed the cost, and 73% of the 32K+ respondents said yes? So who exactly is "dragging" the Democrats to the center? (Hint: their donors).

71 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Fact Checker 13 on 08/03/2018 at 2:48 PM

Re: “Danehy

I would attribute the lack of left-wing talk radio to the fact that six major media conglomerates own virtually all the media. 25 years ago it was 50. But then came the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

55 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Fact Checker 13 on 03/29/2018 at 6:09 AM

Re: “T.H.R.E.A.T. Watch: Bless, Keep and Protect Our Free Press

For a different viewpoint (press as servants of their oligarchic masters), see Ian Welsh:

And for two counterexamples:

Remember Jesse Bohon, the Christian HS French teacher who got up and said (to enormous applause and the clip going viral) "Why don't we expand Medicaid and have everybody have insurance?" Except you won't find that key quote CNN's coverage:

And here's Matt Taibbi, describing how a semi-positive Bernie Sanders story in the NYT was edited to be anything but:
Or, as Matt said: "This is, after all, the New York Times, which has practically been an official mouthpiece for the Clinton campaign this election season."

18 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Fact Checker 13 on 02/21/2017 at 8:09 AM

Re: “TUSD Magnet Schools, Desegregation, and the Next Step

When unitary status was revoked and the TUSD deseg case was reopened, it was supposed to address the "vestiges" of segregation (Much of the overt discrimination was addressed fairly early on). In 30+ years, the district had gone from 1/3 to >3/4 minority, and the "Green" factors, including student achievement, had been added as criteria. So:
a) Are 20 magnet schools too many given that TUSD now has ~88 schools (the special master has always maintained the answer was yes)?
b) Is 24% of the deseg budget the right amount to spend on magnet schools (including magnet transportation) to address integration, when desegregation/integration is no longer the only goal?

Notice that "demagnetizing" these six schools, while "good" in the long run (freeing up more money for the other magnet schools or other deseg priorities), is "bad" in the short run, since the programs AFAIK will be phased out gradually--that is, the magnet programs for years to come still need most of their magnet staff (and filling these positions has been problematic) while serving fewer and fewer students.

The daily enrollment on TUSDStats was produced and maintained by the Accountability & Research department using Mojave SIS data. With the switch to Synergy SIS six months ago, an alternate procedure would have to be put in place to transfer and format the Synergy data for display on the existing pages, and this has not happened.

Why it hasn't happened--the short answer is TUSD hasn't prioritized it. Longer answers might note the disbanding of the Accountability & Research department in 2014 (under the auspices of the Efficiency Audit), and the "nerfing" of most of the TUSDStats functionality in 2015, as well as the lack of the word "transparency" (except in the finance sections) in the strategic plan.

7 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Fact Checker 13 on 01/09/2017 at 10:32 AM

Re: “Obama Takes Executive Action to Limit Gun Violence. Let the Shouting Begin.

Gun deaths due to gun show loophole:



"For example, in 2012, a gunman killed three people, including his wife, and injured four others at a spa in Wisconsin, after buying a gun through a private seller he found online. The shooter was prohibited from purchasing guns due to a restraining order his wife had acquired against him, but was able to buy the gun anyway because the seller was not required to run a background check."

17 likes, 10 dislikes
Posted by Fact Checker 13 on 01/06/2016 at 8:36 AM

Re: “A Different Perspective on the Diane Douglas/Board of Education Battles


Ann-Eve's Peterson's salary numbers may be wrong, but I have not see any evidence that you have furnished that this is so. Superintendents and principals even of larger/public school districts must wear "many hats" and do much outside of the job description.

As Joe Weirather notes, the audits on the ASBCS site provide little breakdown of where the money is spent. I also do not see any calculations for the 59% classroom spending you mention.

You claim Challenge has students from all backgrounds. http://www.greatschools.org/arizona/glenda… says that Challenge is 74% White and 11% Hispanic, with 19% Free/Reduced Lunch (in TUSD you would be deemed a Racially Concentrated school). This may be representative of the neighborhood Challenge is in, but it is not representative of Arizona.

8 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Fact Checker 13 on 05/25/2015 at 5:28 PM

Re: “MALDEF’s Latino State of the State to Focus on Education, Desegregation

More facts:

The USP states (V.A.2.a): "The ALE Coordinator shall have responsibility for: ... developing annual goals, in collaboration with relevant staff, for progress to be made in improving access for African American and Latino students, including ELL students, to all ALE programs. These goals shall be shared with the Plaintiffs and the Special Master and shall be used by the District to evaluate effectiveness."

The R&R from the Special Master objects that (in the ALE Access and Recruitment Plan) 1) Goals were not set for each separate program (e.g. Self-Contained Gate vs. Advanced Placement); 2) Goals are too low (Lois Thompson reiterated this point at the State of the State last night); and 3) Goals are not set for ELLs.

Here is a quote from the R&R:
"It does seem that the District’s goals are embarrassingly low...The plaintiffs do not offer
an alternative based on research or expert opinion...The District has selected a target that its consultant suggests should be a minimal goal. The plaintiffs want parity. Splitting the difference—that is 90 percent--is arbitrary but not much different than selecting the lowest possible number that might be justified, as the District did."

In this case, the consultant, Dr. Donna Ford, is an expert on minority participation in ALEs. But the opinion of the plaintiffs (not experts on minority participation in ALEs), with (admittedly) no research or expert opinion behind it, is given equal weight by the Special Master in devising (admittedly) arbitrary goals to address an issue (the size of the goals) which the USP does not in any case mention.

So yes, the ALE plan is late, and the district is therefore out of compliance on this issue. But the reason it is late is not because it did not do what is asked for in the USP, but because the plaintiffs do not like the goals, even though the USP explicitly states the ALE Coordinator (not the plaintiffs or Special Master) has the responsibility for setting these goals. Likewise the other issues raised in the R&R are not requirements in the USP.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Fact Checker 13 on 09/05/2014 at 5:44 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2018 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation