.
Yeah, what WAS that all about, back in May and June? (The kerfuffle is beginning to simmer down now.) Dr. Roberto Baeza, popular and successful principal of Anaheim’s Benito Juarez Elementary School, was transferred to another Anaheim elementary school as is the custom with Anaheim principals after a certain number of years, and a group of upset parents decided to blame it all on the machinations of Latino activist and school board member Dr. Jose Moreno. The Weekly‘s Gabriel San Román wrote a three–part series about it, and corporate shill Matt Cunningham jumped on it with both feet once he realized that Moreno was being portrayed as the villain!
Gabriel attended the meetings and gave sympathetic portrayals of the angry Baeza-loving parents, praising them as laudable, passionately-involved “stakeholders,” although to other witnesses they sometimes resembled a frothing lynch mob. Gabriel did provide a bit of the other side of the story, but did not neglect the standard Weekly anti-Moreno snark.
But there are a few facts that Gabriel knew, that you’d think might have been of interest and relevance to the story, but he chose not to mention: Possibly most notable was the fact that Baeza was appointed to Anaheim’s Community Services Board by Kris Murray, the Alpha Dog of the Council’s corporatist-fascist majority and the staunchest foe of Moreno’s attempts at reform. Add to that the fact that Baeza is an ambitious budding politician craving a place on the High School Board, and his blaming – wrongly! – his transfer on the hated Moreno, you’d think that suggests a highly provocative angle. But Gabriel thought not.
How It All Really Went Down.
As has been frequently mentioned, it’s standard procedure in Anaheim to rotate principals once they’ve been at a certain school for six years or so, and Baeza had just begun his sixth year at Benito Juarez. In this particular case, a dominoes-series of transfers began when a spot opened up at Westmont, which has a large special ed program. New superintendent Linda Wagner (NOT the board or Moreno) sat down and looked at her options, beginning with seeing which principals were ripe for rotation. The principal of Roosevelt had a kid in special ed, so she seemed like a natural fit for Westmont; the Roosevelt spot was filled with the principal who’d been at Palm Lane for several years, and then it made sense to move Baeza from Juarez to Palm Lane, replacing him with the fine Cecilia Román, who had been out of the principal loop for a few years due to a family emergency.
Nobody expected Baeza to take such umbrage over this standard rotation. He announced to a group of parents that he did NOT wish to leave, and he blamed the move on some imagined Moreno grudge against him. (Moreno had supported Al Jabbar over Baeza for High School Board replacement of Jordan Brandman, but still thought he and Baeza had a cordial professional relationship.)
It was really pretty unprofessional for Baeza to kick up such a fuss over this move, to rile up his favorite parents and to turn them against Moreno. Only slightly less unprofessional would have been to tell them he was reluctant to leave but would do as ordered. He should have just said, it’s been great but it’s time to move on, and my replacement will no doubt be as good as me. Anyway, if Baeza is such a fucking great principal, what’s wrong with Palm Lane enjoying his greatness for a few years?
But instead he whipped them into a pitchfork-wielding mob, and I do worry a little about seeing this guy go farther in politics. The Baezistas, in their flyers, rally, and board meeting appearance, went beyond expressing support for Baeza, viciously attacking not only Moreno but Superintendent Wagner, and, most unfairly of all, their new principal Cecilia Román.
MY conspiratorial mind tells me Kris Murray or ultimate puppetmaster Curt Pringle put Baeza up to this chingada, to discredit the man behind the districting lawsuit who could also be one of the most formidable council candidates against Murray and Eastman next year – while grooming another Mexican who will toe the corporate line, adding to Teamster / charter review member Ernesto Medrano and “sudden Mexicans” Steve Lodge and Sandra Day.
Moreno is less cynical; even if Baeza’s actions were reprehensible and unprofessional, Jose’s impression is that he really simply did not feel like leaving that school, and it was others with their own agendas who created a political football out of the situation. Which brings us to…
Jerbal & the Weekly vs. Moreno and Los Amigos
From my point of view, much of the most meaningful and promising attempts at reform in Anaheim are coming from Moreno and Los Amigos, and it makes sense that the corporatists’ paid shill Matt Cunningham would jump at a chance to discredit them (and exaggerate their radicalness.)
But then there’s Gabriel San Román and his Weekly boss Gustavo Arellano. They can both be fine journalists and I’m pretty sure they’re both lifetime Anaheim residents; Gabriel’s a smart leftist and Gustavo’s a famously funny guy; so it’s unfortunate that any time Moreno or his group Los Amigos comes up, their eyes turn bloodshot and they see through blinders, darkly. There are a couple of grudges involved that go back over a decade (to before Moreno was even involved in the group); and most recently Gustavo wrongly blames Moreno for trying to kick him out of a speaking gig at Chapman University last year (I could give more details on that but this story is long enough.)
For sure, criticism of Moreno, Los Amigos, and other reformers and rebels, could be true and fair and necessary, but it’s also unavoidably helpful to the corporatist-fascist regime running the town, which makes for an interesting balancing act. Certainly the Weekly has to call things the way they see things, but when they do, we’ll be here telling the rest of the story.
Searching San Echón’s stories for the word “rotation” in the three Weekly stories in your first set of links:
First one:
I see. A private fundraiser that was not open to the public — which Baeza attended (late.) Scandal? Let’s try again:
Second one:
No mention in the story of “rotation,” “rotate,” “rotelli,” “relocation,” “bilocation,” or “policy.” But there is this:
I see. She had a meeting where she could listen to residents concerns — and she just listened. Horrific? One last try:
Third one:
Here’s the closest I could come to mentioning the critical point in your story, Vern:
This is massively shabby. I used to think that lefty San Echón was just grateful to libertarian Gustavo because finally someone with a little clout was taking him seriously. Now it’s clear that he’s just acting as a paid character assassin. Que huevos.
As the Tortilla Burns.
Greg, why do you call him San Echon? What was that first name again that you referred to him as in the other article? Whats that all about?
Because GSE (né “GSR”) is an echón. (I also like the translingual pun to “echo.”)
Until I read this piece, though, it was half-affectionate, a tit-for-tat swipe at Gabriel for adopting Gustavo’s almost-illiterate employment of the term “bloviator” for me, as if he was his patron’s trained monkey. Now I realize that, what do you know, the young man is actually dangerously irresponsible and willing to make common cause with Latinos who hate the liberal activist establishment more than they do the people who are actually oppressing them..
I had thought that the sliming of Dr. Moreno was just Gustavo being pissy. He’s a thin-skinned libertarian and doesn’t want part of any civil rights struggle that doesn’t put money in his pocket. He can’t stand other Latino leaders who don’t bow and scrape to his naughty naughty persona. It’s a gimmick, but hey — everyone has to make a living, and within that very limited corner of comedy he does it passably well.
But Gabriel — he’s supposed to be political. He’s supposed to be able to figure out that, his personal ambitions for a larger audience aside, the “threat” posed by the occasionally overreaching, occasionally inconsistent — read “just flesh and blood human” — Latino activist class is nothing compared to the threat posed by monied interests who don’t give a damn whether people in the barrio live or die. He’s supposed to be smarter than that.
This whole brouhaha — dishonestly ginned up as a means of attacking Jose Moreno! I gave up being disappointed in Gustavo quite a while ago, even before last year’s shootings. He just doesn’t belong in politics; he’s essentially an avariciously clown and the major problem with him is that he’s been given the wrong forum by his bosses, people who figure that the taste of the young OC public cannot be underestimated.
But GSR? I am disappointed. I had never figured him for fundamentally dishonest. Live and learn.
The Bloviator must always bloviate about matters which he knows nothing about. It’s amazing how he and Vern—two gabachos who don’t know shit about Anaheim politics and have no ties to the city whatsoever—dismiss angry Mexican parents who have a legitimate complaint about a beloved principal being moved simply because Moreno tells them not to care. That shows not only that they are shills for anyone who’ll ask them to, but also shows Moreno’s true agenda: the only worthwhile Latinos are those who are with him. If this had happened to one of Moreno’s favored, guarantee Vern and the Bloviator would be crying racism.
Bloviator: Unlike this shit blog, the community has long respected Gabriel’s reporting, which has covered Anaheim long before you ever bored Orange County with your bloviating.
Actually, I know quite a bit about anti-liberal journalists such as yourself trying to use their influence to influence political events and settle petty grudges. I just didn’t realize until now the lengths to which you’d go. (I had attributed the Costa Mesa and Irvine interventions to stupidity, but now it all looks intentional.)
“No ties to the city” — first refuge of scoundrels. Tell you what, Gustavo, now that you’re a political player trying to intervene in city politics — both directly and through your ninja Echón — maybe you’ll sit for an interview. You see, rotating school principals and having journalists from outside a city cover it have similar rationales — to keep personal relationships from trumping everything. You show right here how prejudiced you are — perhaps because you know some people involved? (Or maybe just because you hate Moreno.)
You say that we (1) “dismiss” (2) “angry Mexican parents” with (3) “a legitimate complaint” about (4) “a beloved principal” (5) “because Moreno tells them not to care.”
(1) Nope, I don’t not “dismiss” any complaints — but I do not swallow them credulously either, as you and Gabriel have. (Hey, did you even know about the stated explanation for the move before this story? Because it wasn’t in the three published in the rag that you edit. (“Good job, Gabriel!”?)
(2) Were they angry — or was the anger ginned up by misrepresentations and lies (often anonymous, as is the Orange County style), as well as lack of understanding of standard district rotation policies? I’m not asserting it either way. You are. (I guess you trust some people in your old city implicitly, eh? The concept of “too close to the story” familiar to you?)
(3) Was the complaint legitimate? In questioning another anonymous writer in a comment below, I’d trying to find out. Yet you seem to have decided. Why, Gustavo? Explain why you as a “responsible journalist” have decided, based on the information available — including GSR’s barely mentioning the stated basis for the move — that the complaints are legitimate?
(4) Was he “beloved”? You have the position of how many parents who seem likely to have been ginned up for a cause — in part because the principal (astoundingly) asked them to agitate on his behalf. (I guess that that doesn’t raise your eyebrow, though — maybe it’s the kind of thing you’d do.)
(5) Did Moreno “tell us not to care”? In my case, nope. I’ve never spoken to him about it. I’ve spoken to him about Anaheim redistricting (about which you yawn) and about about the Perez campaign when it was open (which you sat out — despite it including the district in much of your “beloved city”), but not a word about this.
Now’s the point where you tell me that journalists don’t bet involved in politics. Except, you do — and you seem like you’re laying the groundwork for 2014.
As for “shills for anyone who’ll ask” — this may be the stupidest thing that you’ve ever written, and I include your analysis of civil rights law in that, so it’s a pretty impressive feat.
It is HILARIOUS to see the Bloviator just brush aside the complaints of Latino parents who actually have a connection to the city, then suggest they’re pawns of other forces at play. Bloviator: to dismiss these parents so quickly is farce at its finest, and just proves my point anew. Keep bloviating, Bloviator!
The “complaint of Latino parents” seems to be that they wanted to keep their school principal past the time that district policy would call for rotation. I don’t brush that aside; if they liked him, it’s understandable. However, their own parochial interests don’t necessarily outweigh the wisdom of a rotation policy — assuming that one exists as described. (You may not have known about it because it was barely mentioned in your writer’s article. Worse, you may have known about it and decided to downplay it to make your own political point.)
Ms. Saldivar’s comments about Dr. Moreno suggest that other forces are definitely at play — hence the extremely broad and vicious political attack on Moreno. I don’t know whether she’s a pawn or a higher ranked piece, but I’d certainly like to. Maybe she came up with all that by herself; she’s certainly welcome to clarify. Maybe someone intervening in the community, like you and your assistant, came up with them — it would fit with your long-time vilification of Moreno (which you recently claimed had to do with his trying to derail your commencement address at Chapman with a threat of a boycott, something that he denies.)
I am not going to respond for these two gabachos. I established my credential as a long term Anaheim resident, in a previous post, and let me add that my oldest daughter has played for several years, in an Anaheim mariachi group.
I don’t know Dr Moreno’s side of the story, whom I briefly met today for the first time. His personal political ambitions are fair to scrutinize, and if the facts prove your point, then he has to do some explaining. What bothers me is your position on the district issue.
It is unfortunate that the major contemporary civil rights issue in our city, for many of us, has encountered unexpected opposition from you, Gustavo, one of the most well known latinos from Anaheim.
Your “Anaheim’s Tragic Kingdom” article moved me into action, to get involved again in changing what is causing our problems. Now you think that the remedy pursuing districts elections is irrelevant, it makes you yawn. I have been asking you how to achieve your proposed goal on “to truly caring about minority representation leading Anaheim.” You endorsed Duane Roberts as a council candidate. Duane is supporting district elections, and today he participated in the meeting of the organizations supporting the lawsuit.
As I said in a previous post: “use your talents and contacts to advance the concerns and needs of our community. Take your excellent book series at the Fullerton Library to a higher level. Organize a campaign of celebrities, writers, artists, musicians to make it more known and condemn the pillage of our city by Pringle & his associates, to demand a change in the APD insensitive culture against our gente, to start a massive voter registration campaign to get rid of the Jordans, Krings, Murrays, Eastmans, to bring good people to the council. Finish this campaign in the emblematic People’s park with a concierto de mariachis, salsa, cumbia., rancheras, reggae, hip hops ; musicians, painters, poets from all the walks of life, especially from our barrios and neighborhoods.”
The organizations supporting council districts are planning several activities. Your participation and help would be a great, and a loud message to Murray and her bosses.
I see little reason to believe that he’s on your side, Ricardo, but good luck trying. Maybe if Kris Murray dissed him he’d get involved.
Ricardo: You are the lone voice of sanity here, so I will be respectful–at which point, the Bloviator will hijack the post with his bloviating.
We at the Weekly have fought Pringle and his minions longer and harder than anyone else, and we’ll continue to do so. I support district elections, but they’re being done solely to support a certain type of Latino—those blessed by Los Amigos, et al. That is disingenuous, and I will not stand by that. These are the same people who told us to vote for John Leos, for chrissakes.
You’re kind in your words towards me, but the best advocacy I can do is through journalism, and that is what I’ll continue to do, as I’ve always have.
This —
is amazingly telling, both about (1) what Gustavo sees as his role regarding political activity in Anaheim and (2) his misunderstanding of both what district elections are intended to accomplish (basically giving Latinos a chance to exercise their own voice, whether it’s a Moreno or a Baeza) and the meaning of the word “disingenuous.”
One wonders, what does “I will not stand by that” encompass in this context? I guess we’ll find out as the Weekly’s forces are deployed.
Gustavo,
Even someone who has never had the displeasure of meeting you can tell that your skin is thinner than the first layer of an onion by the way you just launch yourself into frothing personal attacks. Get some help dude.
Good comments there Ricardo!
Well look who emerged from the political dung heap! Still slamming DREAMers because they dares speak out against your beloved Loretta? That sealed your laughable political career, btw, so go back into the dung heap alongside the Bloviator.
Never knew the Kris Murray connection on this issue but still think two wrongs do’t make a right. We are talking about kids here and their future not the politics usual crap.
I just can’t believe that anybody with half a brain would believe that an educator, a Principal in a successful Latino neighborhood school, is less qualified in any conceivable way, to someone who was/is political and had absolutely no background in school issues. How is this nonsense good for our community?
Then, If political aspirations was such a big deal then what about the 7th place finisher running for city council: What about Brandmans political aspirations? Oh, it’s not about political aspirations of progressives or those close enough, but of everyone else)
It’s truly sad that people are willing to say they care about school kids on one hand but will give the nod for candidates who aren’t absolutely the most qualified, concerned or committed but who is politically connected. That is just terrible!
Sorry, but I can’t figure out what you’re trying to say. Try it again, less abstrusely.
Rotating principals across elementary schools after half a decade or so is a good policy — or at a minimum a defensible one. That should have been a main part of the Weekly’s stories, as it was here. It didn’t even occur to me that GSR’s journalism might be quite that dishonest. I don’t blame the parents for not understanding or liking the policy, but I do blame the supposedly intelligent and informed reporter for playing it down because it got in the way of a hatchet job.
Joe, I don’t understand what you mean by two wrongs? Having support from Ms Murray is not necessarily a wrong; and moving principals around in the traditional way is also not a wrong. The only wrong I can see is Baeza being a drama queen about it and encouraging the parents to come out and “fight for him.”
Then I guess you shift into the question of why did Jose support Al Jabbar instead of Baeza for High School Board. I don’t know the answer really. I haven’t asked him that. But obviously he wasn’t the only board member to support Jabbar over Baeza. This is also not a “wrong.”
Sure the kids are more important than “political crap,” on that we can agree. I’m sure Baeza will do fine things at Palm Lane, as will Roman at Juarez.
@Vern What is the relevance of the city appointment of Baez? It just seems that with the many aspiring politicians all around, you find fault with candidate Baez?(I have never heard of him before the principle transfer issue. And does a city commission appointment mean someone has higher political aspirations?
You are right though, the ultimate decision was the AUHSD board to make. We all know how really off they have been with their appointments. Harald Martin, aspiring stepping stone candidate Brandman(he served all the crony corporate interests on the school board and still the progressives supported him as a council candidate and he did it again. got suckered twice. Interesting that it was the Republicans leaning board members who reportedly were pushing the Latino candidate but the Democrats on the board did care about diversity.
I certainly don’t like the current crony capitalist bs and want a corrupt free, kinder, and more responsive form of government but the perception i’m getting is accepting the status quo, (hoping they get it and change)or accept a bunch of progressive type candidates, with their own corrupt beholden special interests. No thanks! I don’t believer the flatlander are progressive thinkers but instead they are some where in the middle.
That is ” did not care about diversity.
Anywhere else in OC, a gabacho calling a group of Latino parents a “frothing lynch mob” when they support a Latino principal would get met with rightful protests. In this shit blog, it gets passed as “journalism.” Go figure…
For the record:
You’re supposed to be a professional journalist. Step one is: “get the quote right.” Did Vern call them “a frothing lynch mob” or was he reporting what others (probably Latino) told him about them?
Bloviator: You know as much about journalism standards as you know about brevity.
More than you.
Hey I thought it was supposed to be Moreno and the Amigos who dragged RACE into everything?
Judging by the parents Gabriel featured, and photographed, in his trilogy, there are at least as many gabachos in the angry Baezista crowd as there are Latinos. So maybe this has NOTHING to do with race. (And I think that’s progress.)
There are many red flags here. First off, yes, principals are transferred. But, the manner in which this all went down was very fishy. The SUPE had been employed for eleven days when the decision was made. Roberto Baeza had only been in the second year of implementation of a new program, Dual Language Immersion. They placed that program at the school because they felt he could handle the program. It didn’t make any sense to rotate him. The SUPE said she wanted a principal with experience with DLI. The principal that was hired has ZERO experience with DLI. Dr Moreno was upset with the manner in which the program was being implemented because he felt the school was not teaching enough about multiculturalism. He wanted a separate little group that was not part of the whole school. He expressed his concerns with several people. He was not happy with the program at Juarez. For the author of this article to say that Dr. Moreno had nothing to do with decision is naive. He had everything to do with the decision……there was no other reason to move the principal. How do you know that the SUPE came in and on her own after 11 days decided who to transfer ? And, if you really feel it was her sole decision, who does that after 11 days at a new job? Does a routine move happen? Yes!!! Did this situation have Dr. Moreno’s name all over it? YESSS!!
From the outside, yes, it looks like it was just a routine move. It was not. It really was not.
As far as the event that was held at Dr. Moreno’s house. This was a fundraising event for the DLI Program for Juarez. However, they did not even advertise it to anyone but the elite group of Dr. Moreno’s mafia. Many parents were upset because we all come together to support the school and we consider the DLI program a part of our WHOLE school, but Dr. Moreno likes it to be a separate group. Yes, Dr Baeza went, and yes, many of the non DLI parents attended. Several non DLI teachers were also there to support the program.
I do not see good things in the future as long as Dr. Moreno is on the school board. Teachers and parents are being divided. He makes everything about race. We want what is best for all kids. He DOES NOT!
I’m going to catalog your assertions (which I’m paraphrasing and summarizing in brackets) — while trying to figure out why you would feel the need to express them anonymously.
1) [Principals are transferred, but this was fishy.] Not actually an assertion of fact. Moving on.
2) [Supe had only been employed for eleven days.] So? What happened was explained in Vern’s story. Principal at Roosevelt, due to rotate, moved to Westmont because of interest in special ed. Palm Lane principal, near time to rotate, moved to Roosevelt. Cecilia Roman due to come off of leave. Could install her at Palm Lane, but Baeza would be due to move soon anyway and Palm Lane was a good fit. So Roman moves to Juarez. One can study that, with staff input, adequately in eleven days.
3) [Baeza was in second year of implementing DLI.] So? Why does that exempt him from rotation?
4) [DLI only went to Juarez because they thought Baeza could handle it.] OK, that sounds important, if true! Unfortunately, your posting anonymously makes it impossible to assess whether you’d know.
5) [Roman has no experience with DLI, contrary to job specs.] Interesting if true. Same problem as above.
6) [Moreno expressed upset because Juarez’s program didn’t segregate multicultural students.] This is where I smell not fish, but bullshit. This could be true, but it also looks like it could be laying the groundwork for a political attack. We’ll see what Dr. Moreno says. Your being anonymous really undercuts your credibility here.
7) [Moreno influenced the decision.] You don’t seem to be in any position to know that — although you don’t seem to have any hesitation to assert it as a fact.
8) [Fundraiser at his house didn’t invite the parents.] You don’t seem to know much about fundraising. This event didn’t preclude other fundraisers. It is a different type of fundraiser.
9) [Teachers and parents are being divided.] Cowardly accusation to make anonymously. Sorry, but for all I know you’re Baeza himself — or someone planning on running against Moreno. It sounds to me like it’s probably someone either setting up a political attack or settling scores. Go find the people who actually know about the things you say and who would talk on the record if you won’t do it yourself — whoever you are.
You know what you are talking about?? Roman was NOT coming off leave. She was a VP who applied for the job…..the job that was posted as seeking a DLI experience preferred applicant. She has zero DLI experience. The SUPE told the parents she was moving Baeza to build capacity and that she wanted to bring in a principal who had MUCH experience with DLI. None of this happened. It was all a plan to move Baeza. Why? Moreno wants to control the DLI school AND Baeza was the principal of that school and wasn’t going to bow down to Moreno.
Roman was returning to being part of the rotation of principals.
So fine — ask the Supe why she appointed someone without DLI experience to the spot in Juarez. I have no problem with her being asked that question. That would be proceeding skeptically but in good faith. The hatchet job from the Weekly is not good-faith writing.
And that, of course, is taking your anonymous and responsibility-free word that you’re even right about the facts. Your incendiary terms (“not going to bow down”) suggest that you’re not a fair and disinterested observer — whoever you are.
(Your theory is also a bit odd. As a political matter, if moving Baeza would be controversial this year but not next year, why not wait a year? The explanation that seems to makes more sense is the one presented above. But, unlike what you get from Gustavo, that’s only a tentative assessment, not a firm conclusion.)
Vern Nelson:
Who are you? How do you know any of this trash you wrote is true? Or is the truth not important. What I think is “reprehensible and unprofessional” are your statements about the Juarez parents, Dr. Baeza, and who knows what else you made up in this hit piece you wrote. It proves just how low Moreno will go to defend his reputation before election time. And again it proves our point: he hides behind others to do HIS dirty work. The fact that you write as if you know the only truth in this matter makes you a liar, a hypocrite, and another of Moreno’s puppets. I have never met you, or spoken to you, let alone shared how we parents organized ourselves. I will not argue with you about the political stuff because I am not up on that. But what I will argue with you about is YOUR LIE about how parents were organized by Dr. Baeza. NO ONE organizes me into a “pitchfork-wielding mob.” So when parents speak up they are now some sort of mob or gang? Moreno is the one who goes around the district organizing innocent parents into doing and speaking about issues that he cares about. He’s the most hated man in the district. And he’s earned it. What you write here is slanderous and you should be ashamed of yourself. We made sure to keep Dr. Baeza out of it so that he would not find himself in a bad position. But I guess it didn’t matter because you were going to make up that he did organize us. Be a cynic if you want, BUT DON’T LIE!!! Have you ever met our former principal? How do you know Cecilia Roman is a fine principal? She left and came back is all we know. It’s clear that your next blog should be public apologies for making parents seem like non-thinking idiots and our principal like a cry baby. SHAME ON YOU!!! And SHAME ON YOU JOSE MORENO for sharing all these lies to benefit and defend yourself.
Yeah, someone is clearly politicizing this — but it’s not me and I don’t think it’s Vern. The Weekly did a lousy job of presenting the school district’s side of the story because Gustavo has a bone to pick with Moreno. I’ve never spoken to him about this; I believe that Vern said that he sought out the interview with Moreno, not vice-versa. It’s called reporting.
Now here you come, anonymous as usual, claiming to speak for a mass of others, attributing this to Moreno’s political work. In my experience, parents who are really exercised about something are happy to speak up by name. Political operatives tend to hide, though — just like this. And parents tend not to make statements about their target “being the most hated man in the district.” Political operatives do.
Benito Juarez Elementary School
This Concerned person just connects all the dots(just seems to be an insider and in the know) and you want to categorize her/his statements and throw some nice words together as a response.
This is what I’m thinking based on Vern’s statements about Dr Baez city appointment by councilwoman Murray and his political aspirations.(Sorry if someone already suggested this)
Greg,
Do you think, just like Vern took note of Dr. Baez possible political aspirations, Dr. moreno took note of this and knew of his popularity among those families served by Benito Juarez school and wanted to reduce Dr Baez political exposure by moving him to another school?
Joe (by the way, I changed the name on your comment to reflect that it’s you rather than Dr. Jose and deleted your clarifying comment as unnecessary):
Let’s see: do I think that Dr. Jose Moreno, knowing that Baeza had a following among Juarez parents, chose to transfer him and risk his also developing a following at a new school as well? No, I don’t — because that would be a bad idea.
@ Gregg, my name is Jeanette Saldivar!
Thanks for saying so. Did you have any involvement with Baeza’s previous campaign for High School Board?
Some additional questions, Ms. Saldivar:
(1) You posted the first comment on a story on this matter posted by Matt Cunningham on his Anaheim blog at almost 10 p.m. on May 7. (The second comment came about eight hours later.) Your comment was: “Want dr. Moreno to be removed from school board.”
(a) Did you know in advance that this story was going to be printed that evening? Did you have contact with Matt Cunningham about it — or with anyone else who had advance knowledge of its publication?
(b) Did your expressed desire to see Dr. Moreno removed from the School Board have to do solely with this situation involving transfer of Dr. Baeza, or were there other causes as well? If there were other causes, what were they and how did you come by your knowledge of them?
(2) A story with Gabriel San Roman, also linked above, includes an interview with you that he says was conducted in Spanish. Here is the relevant section of that story:
(a) Is Mr. San Roman’s transcription and translation of your comments accurate?
(b) You use harsh language towards Dr. Moreno, including saying that he acts like “the godfather of the Latino community but … isn’t supporting us” and that he “comes in like a scorpion….” Is this based entirely on your experience with the transfer of Dr. Baeza, or is it based on other evidence as well. If the latter, can you explain how you came by your first-hand knowledge of it? If your knowledge of events that led you to call him a “scorpion” comes from others, who told you what and when — and what steps did you take to verify such information before you decided to express this opinion to a reporter?
(3) Do you know Gustavo Arellano personally? Have you discussed him and his political beliefs (including any about Dr. Moreno) with anyone else? Were his desires as to what would happen in Anaheim, or his grievance against Dr. Moreno, ever conveyed to you?
Thanks for whatever clarification you can provide.
Ms Saldivar would not have had personally know Gustavo, for her to know his grievance against Dr Moreno. Gabriel shares the same opinion as his editor on this issue.
It is interesting the connection to Cunningham’s blog. Let’s assume that this blog attracts readership/commenters based on its name, “Anaheim blog”, and/or on its outlook on the issues. Some of these readers may not realize or care whether this blog’s operator is paid by the Chamber of Commerce (Cunningham has not denied it). They may not even realize the connection between the Chamber and Ms Murray and the interests she represents.
However, Gabriel does, and he does not make the connection between Dr Baeza and Ms Murray known in his reports, unless I missed it. This is a significant point in the story, as the legitimate concerns of the parents, apparently mishandled by the school authorities, has been portrayed as another character assassination of one of the leaders of the ACLU lawsuit. This is not to say that Dr Moreno should be immune to criticism, but the context of this controversy is politically charged.
I am still waiting for Gustavo to present his plan on “to truly caring about minority representation leading Anaheim.” Hey, Gabriel, if you read this, please transmit my request to your editor.
I’m just asking questions here, Ricardo, not making assumptions. I don’t know if she knows Gustavo. I do get the impression that either Gustavo or GSR is friendly with someone involved in this — could be Baeza, could be Murray, for all I know — and that that has led them to publish a very one-sided story. Maybe it’s just that any opportunity to take a swipe at Moreno while painting him as what used to be called a “race guy” is a good one.
What does strike me is that Ms. Saldivar seems much more aware of Moreno’s politics overall, and of Moreno’s (alleged) role in parts of them, than I would expect a standard parent to be. That’s interesting. She either has a very low threshold for calling someone a scorpion — based on one event in which his role as the mastermind is a conspiracy theory — or she’s deeply involved in attacking him for whatever reason. I’m not at all sure that the complaints were “mishandled” at all — parents not liking a perfectly good policy isn’t that uncommon — but they may have been. I don’t rule out the possibility that Dr. Moreno could warrant criticism here, I just don’t see much actual evidence for it. Had I read only Gabriel’s story without what Vern’s uncovered, I’d be more inclined to believe he’d done something wrong. As it is — not so much.
Greg Diamond,
When things were calming down why are you starting this now? Why are you wanting to pick a fight with the Juarez parent community or saying bad things about Baeza? Are you Moreno supporters? Are you supporting his next run for office? How much money are you giving him to help him run? How much he paying you two to write these mean things? We did what we thought was right as parents because we know he will succeed where he goes but we are afraid that our children may have lost someone who was making sure they succeeded. He wasn’t just their principal. He motivated the children. He connects with them and they want to do good things because of him and for him. He would get on us parents when he thought we weren’t on top of things. And when I arrived at that school, I demanded to know why they were a program improvement school. He sat with me and talked me through all those things that are involved and made me feel comfortable about leaving my children in his hands. Dr. Baeze is NOT just a principal. So how dare you question my right as a parent to support a principal who has been good to my kids and to all the other children in the school? Hell yeah I support anything this principal does because he has earned my respect and trust. After all, when I spoke to Moreno about supporting our effort even he took credit for Dr. Baeza’s being made a principal. Why is he now attacking him? Was I involved in his campaign to become a high school board member other than to support him, no I was not. But don’t question me to try and say that I don’t count because I support a great principal. In that case, your and Vern’s opinion doesn’t really count because you are Moreno’s political backers and friends. So when you speak of me as one of those parents, make sure you make it clear that I am a Baeza supporter because he does what is best for kids. Go watch him work with our kids. You can’t talk about someone you have never met. I’ve never met you too so don’t make it seem like I’m just part of a crazy mob. i am an informed parent. And for the record, not because it’s your business, I have never met or know who Gustavo Arellano is. I reached out to Gabriel because I noticed he was covering some of our parent meetings and I also organized the parent signature lists. Stop lying!!!
You two are bullies, Mr. Diamond and Vern. But then so is Dr. Moreno. So Dr. Moreno, stop being a VIEJA DE VECINDAD. Talk to us parents not these two men who know nothing about this situation or any of us. Oh, and since you two weyes write nothing but lies I am not going to make you more famous by answering all your bull shit.
A Proud Baezista
To answer this parent’s question: the Bloviator and Vern are bringing this up because they have no lives and you parents must be slimed by the Moreno camp because you sully their carefully set narrative.
No, it’s because our “alternative weekly’s” editor is apparently using his position to settle political scores.
Brief enough for you?
Way too many Egos involved here.
No wonder the shallow heart Big Money interests prevail.
they step outside of the circular firing line.
I wasn’t even going to dignify all this recklessness with a comment, but consider this the first and the last. (I have no intentions of boosting your sagging blog’s hits with tit-for-tat responses after this) Yes, Baeza was a Murray appointee. Weren’t folks complaining last August that there wasn’t enough Latino representation in the city’s commissions? Oh, that’s right, only the *right* kind of Latinos!
Anyway, Vern doesn’t link to the February 2013 city document, just the Community Services Board page. Had he, the full context that Baeza was appointed to fill an unscheduled vacancy there until June 30, 2013 and that his selection was unanimous would have been provided. All hands on deck, including Mayor Tait.
This internet dung dropping fails to make the case that is trotted out nonetheless and upon which the photo header and opening paragraphs are predicated– that this entire ordeal was the master scheme of two white politicians including the boogeyman Curt Pringle himself. Failing to make the case has never stopped Vern before…
But in doing so in this instance, he evaporates the Latino agency of the parents folding their activism into an unproven conspiracy theory where they were manipulated dupes instead of genuine stakeholders. (Really, you’re going to say that of more than 300 petition signatures for retention, really?) The browbeating in the comments section of a parent who made her feelings known operates from this same basic premise.
That is most regrettable and reminds me, though wholly separate in terms of circumstances, of when the Latino agency of those protesting on the streets on July 24, 2012 was subjected to similar, unproven sentiments by then-Chief Welter, you know, the oppressor Moreno wanted to have the ACSD and Board honor upon his retirement. The ex-head of the APD blamed the genuine unrest on “outside agitators” and “anarchists.”
There’s a word for that kind of nonsense, and I will leave you all to figure it out. In the meantime, I am thoroughly disgusted. That being said, the parents, since they were being ignored, spoke to me in droves. I wish I could have had space enough to include them all. One thanked me for being their voice. I wasn’t. They were their own.
And San Echón demonstrates that the facts don’t matter to him at all. Our blog performance has been stable for the past six months. Of course, it’s not like he checked or anything; why do that when you can make things up?
It’s funny how he looks at the world. It’s the business interests who are looking for “the right kind of Latino” — meaning, mostly the “right-wing” kind. If you were actually reporting on Anaheim, you’d note that the few Latinos who have been gaining favor have been those pushing for the giveaways to major developers and building interests and for locking in the political system in a way that makes sure that those interests remain in control. For Los Amigos, it seems to be less seeking to get only a select few appointed than to oppose those who are basically there for the interests of wealthy interests — whose road to maintaining power just happens to be undercutting the power of the Latino areas, because they want money to go to things other than Curt Pringle’s clientele.
What Vern has shown is that you told one side of the story quite convincingly — when I read them, I found your stories compelling — without giving more than a passing wave at the information that he presented here about how district policy, routinely applied, led to this transfer. You broke a pact with your readers to give them the straight facts. You fooled me — my fault for trusting you, I suppose — and would have continued to do so if Vern hadn’t dug out the actual facts. You should be ashamed — but I’m sure Gustavo will tell you that it’s just how things are done when you’re trying to use your journalistic power to support a political faction.
It’s not that hard to get 300 names to retain a Principal — even in violation of a school district policy that they don’t know — when the principal takes the highly unusual and somewhat startling step of asking parents to sign them. They may or may not be Baeza’s “dupes,” but that was certainly “manipulation.” So your position now is that whatever a group of Latinos do must be bowed to because it’s a matter of “agency”? Well then how do you explain you’re not bowing to Los Amigos? Simple: it’s because there’s no such rule.
Can we get a list of those who signed the petition? I want to know how many of them knew about the standard policy that you somehow left almost entirely out of your article.
As for “browbeating” a parent who wades in deeply with condemnation of a public official — which of those questions are “illegitimate,” little journalist? Is the rule here is that no one can ask questions of a Latina parent — at least so long as she’s “the right kind of Latino”?
So what that the entire council voted to approve Kris Murray’s choice of Baeza? He hadn’t done anything at that point to justify losing Tait’s support … and all three others vote in lockstep with Murray no matter what. The point remains that Baeza is the guy that Kris Murray picked out of many, and they do nothing without thinking it through.
More salient points in my comment below…
OK, here’s something I’d forgotten about (cuz I wasn’t paying much attention to this story back in May or even June) but I really should add to my story, if it weren’t for the fact that 500+ people have already read it….
Speaking of these crowds of Latinos backing Dr Baeza (who I did admit appears to be an exceptional principal, don’t forget) and these 300 latinos and others who signed that petition, know this:
Three angry Latino parents came to Los Amigos to demand to know why Baeza was being FIRED. Yes, MANY of those 300 and many of those dozens of demonstrators were under the impression he was being FIRED, not transferred (let alone regularly) to another school. Gee, why did they think Baeza was being fired? Gabriel calls ME reckless, I’d say whoever told all these parents he was being fired was the reckless one. Or is the language barrier that hard, the Spanish speakers just didn’t understand the word for transferred? And this with ladies like the righteous bilingual truthteller Ms. Saldivar around? How can this be?
In any case, the three parents who came to Los Amigos, once they learned the truth, that he was being transferred and that there was nothing punitive about it, they left satisfied. You see, over at Jagerhaus Restaurant on a Wednesday morning, many of us do speak Spanish, and we’re pretty much honest.
Another thing. GUSTAVO. GUSTAVO! Please answer this seriously. How does it work, in your mind, that the reform Moreno, the ACLU, et al. are trying to get – that is, 6 or preferably 8 single-member districts mapped by a nonpartisan panel of judges – how does THAT favor the “certain kind of Latino” that Los Amigos likes – what’d you say, “union-friendly, Disney-hating” – rather than any kind of Latino or really anyone else?
I know you take issue with the way local history was told in the ACLU suit, but really… what is your logic in claiming that this reform would favor only “THAT kind” of Latino? I’m listening…
Actually, you should ask that question to your new buddy (and what’s up with your old buddy, Lucille Kring?) Moreno: if Anaheim voters elect vendidos, will he and Los Amigos hail that as the diversity they seek? Or will they dismiss it as Disney hijacking the system?
It will be good in its form (self-determination), but bad in its content — especially if Disney does hijack it. So they can do both.
I wonder how many of these self-determining stakeholder parents that Gabriel interviewed at length were under the misimpression that Baeza was being fired or otherwise punished. Could Gabriel tell that’s what they thought? Did he correct their misimpression? Or would that have been damaging to their self-determination?
Stop asking those sorts of legitimate journalistic questions. You’re getting in the way of the political campaign against Los Amigos and others who agitate over issues of race. As proven in Florida this weekend, race is not important in American society.
(Note to Gustavo: this is sarcasm.)
Are you two gabachos still trying to paint these Mexi Juarez parents as too stupid to understand what they were advocating for? Real good look! One of the photos of parents and children at a library meeting with Supe Wagner showed that their protest signs were on message. “Stop Transfer.” Pretty simple stuff, Ace! (BTW, the parents I interviewed were Latino/as, two in my last piece had Anglo last names by way of marriage. Even our resident dumbass white supremacist Mitch Young understood that!)
As for you Bloviator…yeah, the Orange Joke Blog has been steady over the last six month…in decline! Look at your own hits as compared to years past. This shit blog is sagging lower than the pants off my ass!
First of all, stop using a racist insult.
Second, OJB’s hits generally go up in election years and down in off-years. We’re largely a political blog, not a crime and porn blog. We absolutely did take a hit when FFFF closed down and its online community (which read our stuff as well) disbanded. For the last approximately six months since then, we have not been in decline — as you state as if it were a fact to which you had any access — we’ve been stable. From February through our projection for July (roughly doubling the figures we have today, almost halfway through the month) there’s been less than 10% month-to-month variation in total views. For February through July last year, it was around 20%. (For August through January, including the election season, around 70%.)
I stress this not because it’s intrinsically important — it isn’t — but to let readers know that even when Gabriel says something very confidently, as he does above in saying that OJB is “steady in decline,” there’s a good chance that it’s total bullshit. I wouldn’t care that much except that his stories about Baeza suggest that he’s simply not a responsible journalist, which has surprised me, because I’d always presumed that he was. (Maybe he used to be before Gustavo seduced him over to the Weekly.
As to the merits: there’s no question that some parents such as Ms. Saldivar were very aware what was going on. Vern never challenged that. He asked whether the 300 people signing the petition had been given the right facts — and he presented evidence suggesting that there’s good reason to think that they didn’t.
Vern made no allegation that the Mexican-American parents of Juarez “stupid,” and Gabriel is a miserable shit for trying to race-bait Vern that way. The suggestion is that they may have been “misinformed” — or, given the likelihood that it was deliberate, lied to. If true, that doesn’t reflect badly on them, but on the people who lied to them. It also reflects badly on Gabriel for writing three stories where the truth of the matter — transfer per policy — was so easy to miss.
A fair and competent reporter wouldn’t misrepresent what someone else said to win an argument. I don’t think that Gabriel has completely grasped how much credibility he has lost here in trying to fashion a story to Gustavo’s liking.
I could drive a mack truck right through the size of both of your white privilege blind spots!
People in education know that principal transfers often are political. Base point: the parents wanted retention. They were ignored. That didn’t have to be the case. This shit blog, which is in decline compared to 2010-2012 stats (including 2011, a non-election year), wasn’t there on this story, but acts like it can spew all kinds of knowledge on it.
Post the monthly views chart. Do it!
Too bad Occupy OC isn’t around in the same manner as before. That way you’d be pitched in some tent somewhere and the rest of OC would breathe a sigh of relief! LOL!
I’ll ask Vern if I can post the monthly views chart for that period if and when you and Gustavo answer my questions. (I may want some other proprietary info as well, since you seem to think it isn’t confidential.) But I note that now you’re changing your story about our “decline.” One event, the closure of FFFF, reduced our views. Before then, pretty much steady. Since then, pretty much steady. We had big bumps in fall 2010 and fall 2012. We could get a lot more hits if we posted more nude pics, admittedly, but that’s your meal ticket.
I never spent the night in a tent at Occupy. There’s another thing you got wrong. Anyway, back on topic:
Principal transfers may well often be political. But they aren’t always. In this case, there was a standing policy and a cogent explanation — which the reporter on the scene chose not to give more that short shrift across three stories. Why? Because that reporter — who has as his patron someone with a grudge against Latino civil rights leaders, one of whom is on the school board — thought that the sole story was that parents wanted a different decision and they didn’t get it. That’s either stupid or tendentious reporting — or both.
I don’t believe that you can drive a mack truck at all. I do think that your race baiting — odd coming from the servant of someone who tries to downgrade the importance of race in Anaheim politics — is more sad than pathetic, but still pretty pathetic. You insult non-whites by saying that wanting to hear from both sides of the story is somehow “white privilege.” It’s a belief in good journalism.
“I’ll ask Vern if I can post the monthly views chart for that period if and when you and Gustavo answer my questions.”
LOL! Got something to hide?
Now here’s the kicker from all of your bloviating:
“What does strike me is that Ms. Saldivar seems much more aware of Moreno’s politics overall, and of Moreno’s (alleged) role in parts of them, than I would expect a standard parent to be.”
Says who? What we have here, in addition to Vern’s wild, unproven conspiracy theory that attempts to rob Mexi parents of being capable of formulating their own agency and places it in the hands of puppet master whites instead, is an arrogant evaluation of the political intellect of a Latina mother by a Blovaiting baboso.
You’ll never see it for what it is. That’s why it’s a blind spot. Pathetic!!!
What wild unproven conspiracy theory? All I point out is that this guy gets appointed to a commission by Kris Murray, and then he immediately goes out and unexpectedly, unprovokdely attacks one of Kris Murray’s biggest opponents. People can conclude what they want from that. All I conclude is that while he may be a real good principal, I don’t trust him in politics.
It’s not my blog; I’m not entitled to release specific numbers. So, you and Gustavo got something to hide? Give a little, get a little!
Since I wouldn’t trust you to do it and you wouldn’t trust me to see the list, why don’t we find a neutral party to contact those 300 people and ask them (1) what they thought was happening to Baeza at the time that they signed the petition and (2) what they know about any of the Anaheim School Board members (not just Moreno.)
My estimation of what proportion of people (including parents of elementary school age children) follow the careers of their local School Board members enough to form an opinion of them beyond a particular issue comes from my decades as a political activist (involved, unlike you, in electoral as well as issue politics) and my time as a Political Scientist studying American elections. Most parents — including, I’d bet, the great majority of those 300 names — have little idea of their School Board members. The low interest in those elections is borne out in voting statistics. So, yes, I’d say that Ms. Saldivar shows an unusual degree of political interest and activation — as well as a talent for evocative insulting imagery. That’s the opposite of challenging her intellect.
So what position are you defending here: that voters — white, Latino, or other — always promote their own real interests and are never fooled by people with political agendas, especially on hot-button local issues? Ever heard of “false consciousness”? We have a whole industry — many, in fact — dedicated to fostering it. It has nothing to do with “capacity” and everything to do with practice.
Disney can not hijack it unless they are given the opportunity to hijack it.
Latinos can not have their Self-determination to reject unless they are going to have their voting representation to neglect.
Wait,
Disney is already hijacking it, and Latinos already are happily ignoring their self-determination.
Maybe Gustavo is right. Status Quo serves all of our interest.
“Latinos already are happily ignoring their self-determination.”
What self-determination? Have you been paying attention to the discussion of the problem of at-large districts?
We’re not talking about Santa Ana, double-eye.
I can’t believe that you’re making me defend Gustavo, but his stated position is not “status quo serves all of our interest[s].” Pay better attention.
Just to expand the issue…..Costa Mesa Parents aren’t happy that Anahiem is poaching the Principal that was slated to begin the new school year at TeWinkle Intermediate School. She is now going to Anahiem High school. As for her experience in working with DLI, her previous school had a 98% Latino demographic.
Don’t know what happened to Anahiems last principle, but we are sorry Costa Mesa is losing one of hers.
This is for an elementary school, not a high school. In Anaheim those are different school districts.
Anaheim High School Principal, Ben Sanchez has moved to Oxford Academy
Gustavo barely over a year ago, in a June 26, 2012 post:
“Fact is, Anaheim has never had a Latino political machine because the local Democrats under Frank Barbaro have never given a shit about fostering Latino candidates in the city, from the minor leagues that is the Anaheim City School District to the training ground that is the Anaheim Union High School District to the council and beyond. In a city that’s been Latino for so long, the only wabs who ever had any success were Republicans: Lopez (who served two terms, I believe), the two-termed Hernandez, and former AUHSD trustees Thomas ‘Hoagy’ Holguin and Alexandra Coronado. Chavez served one term before losing in 2006; ACSD trustee Jose Moreno, while awesome and on his second term, reportedly wants to concentrate on helping kiddies instead of climbing the political ladder.”
…so what the hell changed since then?
The ironic thing is that Democrats in the general area — including Gloria Alvarado, Valerie Amezcua, Ana Cabral, Julio Lopez, Jeff LeTourneau, Carina Franck-Pantone, Jim Pantone, me, and others — have been working quite hard (with No Party Preference people like Dr. Moreno) and with significant success to try to build just such a “machine,” both to challenge the Democratic Party old guard and to take on Anaheim’s entrenched interests. The new DPOC Chair, Henry Vandermeir, has been much more helpful and active than Frank Barbaro was. (Frank was never anti-Latino, but less actively focused.) But amazingly, one of our problems turns out to be the Editor of the Weekly, who — rather than lending an encouraging hand — yawns at progress, tosses bricks, and focuses on nursing his grudges.
Frank….who?
You say that now, but if you ever have a personal injury suit you’ll admit that you know who he is!
My comment was flip and thoughtless…..but your response to it made laugh.
Gabriel’s ringing endorsement of Moreno during his 2010 re-election. What changed since then? Not much I can think of. His districting lawsuit, which is good, and a few of Los Amigos opining that there might be a more appropriate speaker for a conference on the Latino educational gap than Gustavo.
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2010/10/dr-jose-f-moreno-seeks-re-election-to-anaheim-city-school-board/
“Dual language immersion and culturally responsive education: Dr. Moreno gets it in a city that needs both. Anaheim, whose civic governance doesn’t always reflect the needs of large segments of the community, will be well served to return him to the Anaheim City School Board.”
I always was interested in Anaheim education issues which is why your original working title suggesting ‘sudden’ interest was off-base. The only one with sudden interest was yourself (and the Jerb)
I am of the opinion that DLI, though it has expanded to a third school in the ACSD, is in a worse off position due to the shuffle fiasco I chronicled. That, and the integrity of the process (or lack thereof) was unfortunate. I would have been happy if Moreno and/or the supe took the initiative, communicated with the parents in a real way and acted on their simple demand. Would that would have been the case, that’s how the story would have been written.
What changed since then, you ask? Everything I’ve voiced and reported on (and some things I haven’t) since that time. People can agree or disagree. Ms. Saldivar was a Moreno voter, but soured up based on her experiences. Perhaps more people will experience the same, perhaps not. Either way, I’ll be observing.
“The Weekly‘s Gabriel San Román wrote a three-part series about it, and corporate shill Matt Cunningham jumped on it with both feet once he realized that Moreno was being portrayed as the villain!.”
That is, of course, completely false speculation on your part, Vern.
The truth is a parent with a child in the dual-immersion program posted a comment on Anaheim Blog about the situation there. I thought it merited being re-published as a stand-alone post. I wasn’t aware of Gabriel San Roman’s post until later when a Benito Juarez School parent reached out to me to discuss the situation further, and told me about GSR’s article.
Naturally, you are free to boil it down to whatever fits your simplistic fever-swamp view of Anaheim.
Im on the bus typing on a phone, so im just gonna paraphrase your intro by memory, lets see how well i do… “Someone left this lengthy anonymous comment on an unrelated post, but this seems so important that ill do sonething i rarely (never?) do, reprint it in full here as its own standalone post.” I call that jumping on it with both feet.
And that comment was rife with nasty false attacks on
Baeza’s replacement Cecilia RomanPalm Lane principal Deanna Pelaski, which you later excised. Thanks for doing that at least.You’re shifting, Vern. You said (falsely) my motivation was Jose Moreno. Now your shifting to defending your use of an idiom.
He’s right, Vern. His ultimate motivation was making money off of being a political hit man through his blogs.
I’m not shifting. I still think what attracted you to that long hysterical comment was the fact that it cast Moreno in a bad light, as you do in every other story.
See, Matt — this is where it would really come in handy for you to have even a few threads of remaining credibility.
Oh, I have plenty of credibility, Greg. It stems from the fact that — unlike you — I am experienced, I know what I am talking about and have a pretty deep institutional knowledge of OC politics.
No, you don’t have credibility, because you’ll say what you’re paid to say.
Experience, knowing what you’re talking about, and institutional knowledge do not foster credibility if one is using them to mislead people in exchange for money — as you do.
It’s long past time for you to exit your fantasyland, Greg. It’s pretty simple: I blog about what I choose to blog about. I don’t get orders about what to write or not write about.
The qualities I mentioned do foster credibility because readers know I am providing them with reliable information (regardless of whether they agree or disagree with my opinions).
You’re a newbie who attempts to camouflage his ignorance in a torrent of words. As others have pointed out, you know little about Anaheim politics; you interpret everything through an artificial “Pringle-Disney control everything” template.
That nobody pays you to publish your ignorance of OC politics doesn’t make you less ignorant, or imbue your ignorance with credibility.
“I blog about what I choose to blog about.”
Do you get paid to blog, Matt? (Either directly or as part of a package of other services?)
“I don’t get orders about what to write or not write about.”
You don’t need orders. You probably made the proposal in the first place.
“The qualities I mentioned do foster credibility because readers know I am providing them with reliable information (regardless of whether they agree or disagree with my opinions).”
Now who’s in fantasyland?
“You’re a newbie who attempts to camouflage his ignorance in a torrent of words. As others have pointed out, you know little about Anaheim politics; you interpret everything through an artificial “Pringle-Disney control everything” template.”
I’ve studied up pretty extensively on Anaheim politics in the past year. I’ve already taken apart the “expert witness” report and I’m planning on doing the same to Kris Murray’s presentations on the issue. But I’ll tell you what — if you’re so brilliant, why don’t you put out a logical analysis of Murray’s article yourself. Do your best work! We’d be happy to publish it here, where you’ll get a much bigger audience than on your PR site, the 3,649,434th largest site in the world.
Then, let’s have a debate about it.
“That nobody pays you to publish your ignorance of OC politics doesn’t make you less ignorant, or imbue your ignorance with credibility.”
That’s a logical fallacy, akin to my saying that the fact that you don’t serve your patrons particularly well doesn’t prove that you don’t try to serve your clients at all. Broad and general accusations not grounded in facts are part of your stock in trade.
Ooooo. An interminable, unreadable, multi-part post on a demographer’s report. I guess that makes you an expert on Anaheim politics, after all!
Plus, more of your typical guessing about how other people conduct their business.
And you’re the one claiming, by inference, your amateur status makes you or your blogging credible.
Give it up, Greg. Trying to find worthwhile, reliable information in the recesses of your turgid screeds is harder than finding a needle in a haystack.
Here’s a nickel’s worth of free advice, Greg: learn how to write. Learn how to be concise. Stop packing your posts with tangential, self-referential asides; they’re annoying, not cute and amusing.
Until then, you will be a tree falling in the forest but making no sound, because the tree is falling in slow motion and no one has the time to wait all day to hear it hit the ground.
You say “unreadable” a lot. Maybe you need tutoring.
I don’t need writing advice from someone for whom Step 1 is “sell your soul” and Step 2 is “treat your readers like gullible marks.” Thanks, though!
Further proof the Bloviator has no life, Matty: all that’s needed to shred your logic is bring up John Urell and how you ran to the Aitkens when you published that deposition with the name of sex-abuse victims. Instead, he can’t help but to bloviate to the laughter of everyone.
Gustavo, that’s very closed-minded of you to prescribe how best to discredit Jerbal, there are really so many ways to do it. I know you prefer the old-school Urell method; Greg has his own more laborious method.
I think a very good way to demonstrate his lack of credibility is to remind readers how he spent years on Red County pretending to be a small-government conservative by day, while secretly making hundreds of thousands shilling for a big wasteful liberal government program, as revealed by Bushala.
You see? Different strokes for different Jerbal-discrediting folks.
I guess Dr. Moreno is getting desperate. How is this behavior professional? How are these two guys experts on our school when we never have seen them? Is Moreno sharing all these details? Isn’t he supposed to keep his mouth shut on district business especially about personnel? So he was too afraid to talk to parents even having the parent phone lines taken off the website so that board members and the superintendent would not be bothered. I am offended that you guys think that we are Baeza puppets and can’t think for ourselves. And if you were familiar with the school and the people at Juarez you would understand the relationships that exist. It seemed like it would have been pretty easy for anyone to get more than 300 signatures at Juarez. The majority of parents love him because he is easy to talk to and takes care of our kids. I never heard that Dr. Baeza made any type of announcement about not wanting to leave Juarez. We never saw him at any organizing meeting or saw or heard him speak of the transfer. You insult parents who speak Spanish by making it seem that they did not understand that the principal was not being transferred but fired. We all know he is going to Palm Lane. Stop offending us. We are thinking people who love our principal and when we heard he had been transferred we understood that it wasn’t by his own doing. We found out mostly through word of mouth because many employees have their kids in that school and our kids play sports or dance together. He didn’t tell us anything. Perhaps the next signatures we need to collect are for a recall on this board member who does not appreciate district employees and treats us parents like idiots.
– Lilly
A few questions, Lilly:
(1) If it turns out that Vern’s report is accurate and that some parents came to Los Amigos complaining that Baeza had been fired (rather than transferred), then would you agree that it is fair to write that “they did not understand that the principal was not being transferred but fired” and that it is incorrect to say that “we all [knew] he is going to Palm Lane”? (You wrote “know” rather than “knew,” but the question is not what everyone knows now, but what they knew when they were signing the petition.)
(2) I’ll take you at your word that you don’t know of Baeza saying that he didn’t want to leave Juarez (although, if he didn’t, how do you know that the petition drive is even welcome?) But is it plausible to you that other people did hear him say so? If no one has heard him say anything to suggest that he wouldn’t actually be just as happy or more so to transfer to Palm Drive, then you do make an important point, which I’m sure that Vern would acknowledge.
(3) Do you have any personal knowledge of Dr. Moreno’s involvement in any of these decisions, or is it all supposition?
(4) Do you understand — and did you understand at the time that you helped organize this drive — that the district has a standard policy for rotating principals (which some have said is every four years, some seem to think it’s five or so)? If so, do you think that this policy is always illegitimate — or just that it shouldn’t apply in this situation? Do you think that parents should always have a veto over such transfers? If it’s a standard policy, do you remain convinced that it was somehow being used here as a personal attack on Baeza?
And a couple of comments:
(1) To my knowledge, the only “disclosures” made by Dr. Moreno to Vern in this matter are what you see in Vern’s interview with him. I’ve received no direct or indirect disclosures from him about it.
(2) I understand that you may feel that we’re belittling you and other Latino parents in this discussion. We’re not. The fact that I’m writing detailed responses, ones that presume good understanding and ability to reply, to both you and Ms. Saldivar should convey that I think that you know a lot about this issue. At base, with the exception of the role of DLI, this is very similar to other situations where white parents, Black parents, Asian parents, etc. like a given principal or staff person or teacher and don’t want them to be moved. It’s a perfectly understandable and potentially legitimate reaction. And yet, it doesn’t mean that you’re right on the merits. There may be good justification for a policy of regular transfers — and a good justification for having it apply across the board (mostly because that reduces the possibility of discrimination.) The Superintendent — and the school board — may be unwise in having such a policy, but there’s a huge difference between being unwise and being evil or scorpion-like.
The intense focus on Dr. Moreno here invites speculation that this really is political at its core — maybe not on your part, but maybe on the part of political actors in Anaheim (such as Matt Cunningham and his paymasters) and grudge-bearing journalists (such as Arellano and San Roman.) That doesn’t mean that you’re consciously involved in such, nor does it mean that your grievances are illegitimate — it would just mean that you’re being used. That happens all over the place in politics when grassroots concerns get hijacked — and it happens to parents rich, poor, and in-between; Anglophone, Spanish-speaking, and otherwise.
So, nothing that Vern or I have written suggests or should be taken to suggest that we conclude that you “are Baeza puppets and can’t think for [y]ourselves.” At base, you’re almost surely parents with a grievance over something that you think benefits your children — which is admirable. However, you — and if not you and Ms. Saldivar yourselves, surely parents who are less active and “in the know” — may still be manipulated by others with political ends in mind. It is to probe those possibilities that I ask you the questions above, which I hope that you’ll take the time to answer.
You’ve got it all right, Lilly! Moreno is not good for ACSD. He does not think first about kids, and doesn’t care about parents. Oh wait, he does care about his LOS AMIGOS parents. I should consider joining and then maybe my voice will be heard. The district is going downhill and will FAIL with him on the board. He is a manipulative snake.
Hey, Duane! Did you say that there was “not a shred of evidence” of a grand scheme to attack Dr. Moreno! Look at this anonymous political attack that goes way beyond this single decision at hand of which Moreno may or may not have had a part. Sure looks like a shred of evidence to me!
Greg Diamond wrote:
> Hey, Duane! Did you say that there was “not a shred of evidence”
> of a grand scheme to attack Dr. Moreno! Look at this
> anonymous political attack that goes way beyond this single
> decision at hand of which Moreno may or may not have had a
> part. Sure looks like a shred of evidence to me!
Nothing here changes the fact neither you or Vern Nelson can prove any of the key claims you’ve made. When you get something that is admissible in a court of law, please let me know.
Can’t “prove” any of the key claims? This is journalism, Duane — we’re at the evidence-gathering stage. There’s far more than one shred of evidence of an attempt to use Baeza’s transfer as the basis for a broader to attack Dr. Moreno. And any of these statements, right here would be “admissible in a court of law” — although I can’t imagine why they’d end up there — just not themselves conclusive.
The same, by the way, is true of the charge that Moreno himself engineered the transfer of Baeza. Can you “prove” that in a “court of law”? Nope — but you don’t mind when people say that.
and this, my friends, is why we put our children in private school
Lost completely in this discussion is the infiltration of the bible thumpers into this largely impressionable segment of society:
http://www.anaheimrt.org/
And why did AUSD name a school after a five term foreign President, are we out of astronauts in this country?
your mother is an astronaut
No she’s dead. A typical Irish catholic San Francisco drunk, I don’t think they’d be naming schools after her. She did raise eight kids, all college graduates, a couple of cops, teachers, lawyers and even a CNN cameraman (loser).
But she never left the atmosphere (without a little help!).
It has been my experience that schools are incredibly territorial. I watched kids get pushed aside for Mayors kids, a state senator or a popular realtor. This seems to me like local bickering gone viral.
The big deal is that when your kids are successful and happy you will do what you can to make sure that continues! My kids and the school were happy and successful and I want that to continue. We were told by Jose Moreno that we should speak up and get more involved in our kids education and that our voices matter. We have been doing that all along and stepped it up when we felt strongly that in the best interest of our kids that we wanted Dr Baeza to stay. But it was made clear to us that they(Moreno and Wagner) don’t want to hear us or engage in discussions when we don’t believe their direction or decisions are in the best interest of our kids. The big deal is these are OUR kids and we want and know what is best for them!
Carlos,
Thanks for writing in — and thanks especially for presenting reasonable points without engaging in demonization. A few points.
(1) When you say that “it was made clear to us that they(Moreno and Wagner) don’t want to hear us or engage in discussions when we don’t believe their direction or decisions are in the best interest of our kids,” I can’t tell who made that clear to you regarding Moreno. I believe that Gabriel reported that you spoke to Wagner, although I’m not sure that she’d agree with that characterization. Did you have direct contact with Moreno on this topic? If so, did he give his reasons against it — or was he deferring to the decision of the executive staff (including the new Superintendent?
(2) It is understandable and appropriate and admirable that you want “what is in the best interest of [y]our kinds.” The question is whether your deeply held desires can be overruled for reasons having to do with the district as a whole. You may, for example, think that it would be better for your kids for the Principal of your school NEVER to be rotated. You might even be right! And yet, the school district may still be justified in retaining a policy that is the best for more kids in the district. They may have good reason to have a rotation policy, for example, and as a parent you’re probably aware of the “if we do it for you we have to do it for everyone” problem. Consistent application of the policy may occasionally lead to unfortunate results in a single case while being better for most of the schools overall. It may also be that Dr. Baeza is so good that they want him to rotate through the schools so that other teachers and administrators can learn from him. Or it may be that the good that he can do in one additional year at Juarez is less than the good that he can do by putting in a first year somewhere else.
As parents of children at a given school, you’re supposed to keep their interests primary in your mind. The Superintendent and the School Board members aren’t; they’re supposed to keep everyone’s best interests in mind. I still haven’t spoken to Dr. Moreno about this matter (and I don’t really intend to, as I don’t usually do interviews), but I think that he’d stand by his statement that you should push him and others to do what you think is best — while bearing in mind that the Supe and the Board Members are supposed to have expertise that you don’t and may have good reason to think that this decision does not actually disadvantage your children. But, as a member of a governing board, I think that he’d also have to add that you need to prepare, in some cases, for an even strongly held preference to be overruled. I don’t begrudge your disliking that — or even continuing to agitate. But when someone (who didn’t even clearly have the final say here) gets compared to a scorpion and accused of involvement in a broad conspiracy theory, I think that things have gone too far.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> Thanks for writing in — and thanks especially for presenting
> reasonable points without engaging in demonization.
But you, as a privileged White lawyer who lives in an upper middle class neighborhood in Brea, California, seems to have no problem whatsoever with attacking and demonizing dozens of Mexican moms whose only “crime” was to oppose efforts by the Anaheim City School District to remove a principal who served their children well. What’s even more remarkable is you and Vern have the audacity to scold and belittle them for doing what any parent would have done in their situation. If that’s not arrogance, what is?
I’m hate to burst your bubble, but there is not a shred of evidence to back Vern’s hallucinatory claim that Matt Cunningham, Kris Murray, or anyone linked to them were engaged in some grand scheme to smear Dr. Jose Moreno. If anyone is to blame for the turmoil that recently took place within the ACSD, it’s Moreno. When people in leadership positions fail to serve the needs of the community they represent, they get protested. If that simple fact of life is hard for you to swallow, that’s just too bad.
well said, Duane.
“anyone is to blame for the turmoil that recently took place within the ACSD, it’s Moreno. When people in leadership positions fail to serve the needs of the community they represent, they get protested. If that simple fact of life is hard for you to swallow, that’s just too bad.”
I only see more turmoil in the future…..
Another shred.
Gabriel has obviously become desperate: here comes Big Brother, joining in the political attack on Moreno.
First, Duane I defy you to point out where I’m scolding and belittling the Latino parents (dads as well as moms) in the above — other than to question them about where they get their facts and to suggest that it’s not helpful to call someone a “scorpion” over one decision (that it’s not even clear that he made), largely because it makes this look like a political attack.
I’ve explained to them why the decision apparently took place — information that was almost entirely left out of Gabriel’s trio of articles, which doesn’t seem to bother you much. (Maybe you kicked his ass in private. I doubt it.) I have said explicitly that it is understandable, appropriate, and admirable for them to fight for what they think is best for their children, but that a district-wide policy has to look beyond the expressed wishes of parents at a single school. There’s a reason for rotation systems; among other things, they’re an anti-corruption measure.
So, fine, I’ll ask you the same question: in your opinion (as, among other things, a former candidate for office in Anaheim) do you think that school board members and district leaders have the responsibility to suspend a district-wide policy because some parents (at least some of whom may have been misinformed about the facts and unaware of the policy) don’t like it in this instance?
P.S. I live in a 3-bdr apartment in a working-to-middle-class neighborhood in Brea, very vibrant and racially diverse. It’s not an isolated mansion on some cul-de-dac. We’d happily take another bedroom or two, but for the most part we love it here.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> [TRIPE DELETED]
Nothing here changes the fact neither you or Vern Nelson can prove any of the key claims you’ve made. When you get something that is admissible in a court of law, please let me know.
SHAME, SHAME on both Greg Diamond and Vern Nelson for engaging in a McCarthy-like (if not racist) smear campaign against dozens of working-class Mexican moms in Anaheim whose only major “crime” was to organize in defense of the needs of their children. This article makes it clear: both of them are out-of-town clowns who don’t have the foggiest clue as to what is going on inside the Anaheim City School District, much less the City of Anaheim.
By the way, before they start patting themselves on the back thinking they’ve done Dr. Jose Moreno a great service for publishing this slanderous and defamatory hit piece, guess again. Their vicious attack has done more to damage his reputation–and their credibliilty–than anything that Matt Cunningham could ever hope to accomplish. Even Cunningham would have not been stupid enough to go on a rampage against an army of working-class Mexican moms.
Funny how Moreno seeks, convinces, and manipulates his moms to fight against schools and administrators (when it is on Moreno’s agenda), BUT can’t take the heat when they fight against his CRAPPY decisions!!!
If YOU ARE A resident of ACSD, and you will vote in the next election, PLEASE consider NOT voting for Moreno. There is NO place for him in our schools.
This one is sort of too large to be called a shred.
No one is accusing them of a “crime,” Duane. As I’ve said, I salute their willingness to organize — even if they are wrong on the merits here. Shame, shame on you for misrepresenting what we’ve said.
Shame, shame on you again for accusing us of McCarthyism and racism. Shame, shame on you one more for calling this “slanderous” and “defamatory” (I presume that you mean against Gabriel — if not, I have no idea what you mean) when it is a fact based on the FACT that your friend Gabriel almost entirely left out one of the most important pieces of context for the Baeza transfer story from his trio of articles.
Shame, shame on you again for saying that we have no clue of what’s going on in ACSD when Vern’s story and both his and my comments show that we have a very good idea of what’s gone on here — that your friend Gabriel slanted a story to serve the political purpose that you apparently share.
Shame, shame on you for portraying the posing of legitimate questions to people who are taking an active role in electoral politics — as you’ll see through the comments by people who say they’re part of this effort — as “vicious” and a “rampage.” (Talk about McCarthyism!)
Shame, shame on your for thinking that due to their ethnicity, gender, and class, one has to shy away from asking appropriate questions of “middle-class moms” — or risk a (failed) political opportunist like you from charging prejudice for not treating them with kid gloves and just agreeing with whatever they say because of who they are (although you and Gabriel would not show such a courtesy to Los Amigos.)
I still have not spoken to Dr. Moreno about this. Shame, shame on you for implying that it’s in the service of his or anyone else’s election as opposed to opposition to Gabriel’s intentionally and unfairly slanting a story to do a hit piece to please his boss.
Speaking of “political,” Duane — are you running for office again in Anaheim? Your agitation here must be viewed in that context.
That the Bloviator is attacking Duane just further shows how pathetic he is. Duane had done more for progressives in Orange County over the past 15 years than ANYONE. The Bloviator calls himself one but is as much a progressive as he is succinct.
It’s interesting that Gustavo thinks that “Duane has done more for progressives,” etc. I wonder what he has in mind. Electing people? I don’t think so — ever. Correct me if I’m wrong, but: not even once. As a member of the Green Party, Duane is hostile to and dismissive of the Democratic Party as a matter of principle — something that is much more opposed to the stated position of overwhelmingly Democratic Anaheim Latino voters than anything involving Dr. Baeza. (And yet I’m not going to accuse him of disrespecting all of those Mexican moms and dads.)
I respect and understand Duane’s rejection of working through one of the major parties (members of which win almost every election), although I disagree with it. Under a different kind of voting system such as Instant Runoff Voting, where splitting the progressive vote did not matter, I wouldn’t care so much about it. But we have a “first past the post” system where splitting the vote leaves people without political power. Latinos in Anaheim don’t need that; they already lack political power.
(I’ll note, by the way, that Dr. Moreno is also not a member of the Democratic Party, but an independent — for reasons that I think are fairly similar to Duane’s. It’s an area where we’ve repeatedly disagreed, but I respect his choice too — it’s not like there’s a right answer. As a reformer within the Democratic Party, I’m quite familiar with it’s problems — but also with its strengths. I think the party in OC is getting much better. Lack of funds is our major problem — much as it is with progressive candidates, like Duane, in Anaheim.)
Part of what Gustavo seems to like about Duane is that by taking a hard line he pretty much guarantees that he’s not going to be elected to office — as evidenced in his last-place finish last year. That’s sort of the equivalent of Gustavo usually staying out of supporting progressives in races where they actually might win in favor of being a “beautiful loser” and leaving business-friendly Republicans (who are generally friendly towards Gustavo’s own libertarianism) in charge. So to the extent that Duane’s undercutting Democrats helps OC’s libertarians, it’s no surprise that he’s Gustavo’s favorite.
I’m glad that there are people like Duane who hold to a leftist ideological line and help keep people honest. But I’m also irritated when those people undermine the efforts of those who are trying to actually effect change with something other than easily disregarded agitation. Being nobly outside of the levers of power has its charms — but it’s not enough.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> [AD HOMINEM ATTACK DELETED]
Nothing here changes the fact neither you or Vern Nelson can prove any of the key claims you’ve made. When you get something that is admissible in a court of law, please let me know.
Again, the Bloviator bloviates without reason and with pure stupidity. You dismiss Duane as next-to-nothing; he has done far more than any of your beloved Dems has done to help working-class folks in Orange County. Again: I’ve seen it. You, as a bloviating interloper reliant on the skewed accounts of people who despise Duane and I, don’t know shit about what you bloviate.
Gustavo, if one thing should be clear by now, it’s that I don’t trust your judgment. You tend to be emotional, defensive, biased, and self-interested. You substitute insult and shrieking for rational argument. It works as clowning, but not so much as journalistic analysis.
You know, I like Duane, even though he has some pretty obvious limitations. He’s a good issues-based organizer. Now, as I said before, what has he done to put better people into positions of power? If it’s so obvious, you should be able to rattle off a short list.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> [EVEN MORE TRIPE DELETED]
Nothing here changes the fact neither you nor Vern Nelson can prove any of the key claims you’ve made. When you get something that is admissible in a court of law, please let me know.
Calling my writing “tripe” is not actually an argument, Duane, although if you do it about 995 more times you may eventually hurt my feelings. To me, this suggests that you most likely just don’t have a good response to it. That’s not surprising.
I have never made a comment on a blog before but feel compelled. I am disgusted by the unprofessional portrayal and treatment of the parents, supporters, and the former principal of Juarez. After reading this piece and some of the comments, I am even more ashamed of having the likes of Moreno and his camp on our school board or any elected position. I will not only not support him in the next election, but will fully support candidates that will truly respect and support us.
Another shred.
Welcome to the blog, Ms. Hernandez. What’s your specific complaint in anything that Vern or I have said?
I’m treating you and your fellow parents as intelligent people who are active in politics. (I presume that you realize that your comments makes you “active in politics.”) I want to know the facts — not supposition — on which you base your opinions. That’s a gesture of respect. If the only reaction that would be acceptable to you as “professional” is simply agreeing with your position, because of who you are, then I respectfully disagree.
“Another shred”. – Respectful? No
I presume that you realize that your comments makes you “active in politics.” – Respectful? No… very condescending.
“I want to know the facts — not supposition — on which you base your opinions. That’s a gesture of respect”. – Respectful? I based my opinion on facts not assumptions. Anyone who reads this piece and comments can judge for themselves. I feel stating my facts will only open the door for more unprofessional and disrespect comments, so I respectfully decline your request.
I will not be looking here for “the rest of the story” ever!
“Another shred” refers to Duane Roberts’s comment below that there was “no shred of evidence of a grand scheme to attack Dr. Moreno.” I’m sorry if it didn’t make sense to you (and thus seemed disrespectful) out of that context.
Some people who become active in politics in situations like this — by which I don’t mean “complaining and agitating about a given decision” but “calling for people to recall or vote out a School Board member” — don’t see themselves as being “active in politics.” And yet, when you move to the broader level of criticism, you are. I’m taking what you have to say seriously, as a political actor, and trying to assess (and in this case) challenge it. How is taking your position seriously and worthy of criticism “condescending”? Is it just because I don’t agree with you?
It has been presented as a “fact” that Moreno was behind the move to transfer Baeza. Maybe, maybe not — but I haven’t seen a single thing to support that extremely critical part of the argument that look like a fact rather than an opinion. If you don’t want to present the facts on which you base your opinion — including your understanding of whether or not this is simply a case of a district-wide policy being applied evenhandedly, as the district apparently asserts — I think that that’s a real shame, because I am completely willing to listen and potentially to be convinced.
Using this as a rallying cry to get Moreno out of office tends to make me think that, while there’s certainly a legitimate gripe as the trigger for this (welcome, appropriate, admirable) activism, it is being used as part of a larger political struggle against Anaheim’s civil rights leaders. I would like to think that most Latino parents, including the vast majority of those who signed the pro-Baeza petition, don’t actually feel that negative towards Latino civil rights leaders. I could be wrong, but I’d certainly need a lot more convincing — especially given that, whether you know it or not, anti-reform interests (including paid agents like Cunningham) are using this conflict as a sword in that larger fight against political equality for Latinos.
I’m sorry that you don’t want to continue the conversation. That’s your call.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> [MORE TRIPE DELETED]
Nothing here changes the fact neither you or Vern Nelson can prove any of the key claims you’ve made. When you get something that is admissible in a court of law, please let me know.
Damn. I can’t go off and cause unrelated trouble all over town all day without getting back here and seeing that my ass is still being kicked on this thread. Well, people, we can keep this going as long as you like.
And right when G&G were starting to sound reasonable, here comes big Duane AT HIS MOST UNHINGED. (Duane, I hope we can put this issue aside when I call you today or tomorrow to get your valued opinions on some aspects of the Acevedo report.)
OK, let’s see what I stand accused of: Mostly, calling a group of angry parents, with slight hyperbole, “a frothing lynch mob” (actually saying that some observers saw them that way) and a “pitchfork-wielding mob.” AND claiming that they were manipulated by the principal, whom I in turn suspect of currying favor with the political establishment led by Pringle and Murray.
Apparently, whether I’m right or wrong, I have no right to say that because most of the people I’m talking about are MEXICAN and I’m not. Well, fuck that shit. I’ll say what I think about anyone of any race. Let’s make this a two-or-three-part comment. In the next, I will justify my calling these folks angry mob type names.
Vern: Duane schooled you and the Bloviator. Unlike the two of you, he knows something about Anaheim, namely because he’s a native and has been in the trenches forever instead of your cozying up to anyone who’ll pay attention to you—how’s your pal Lucille Kring again? Take your beating like a man, put your tail between your legs, slink back into this shit pit and concentrate on playing the piano.
Yeah, yeah, sure, I’m not even half done here. You just wait…
Can’t wait! This shit blog is matching Matt Cunningham for laughable hackery—if Moreno were smart, he’d tell you and the Bloviator to zip it. But he ain’t, so you won’t…HILARIOUS!
Duane is good on many issues. He’s worthless when it comes to actually putting better people into positions of power. I think that anyone who reads our coverage about Anaheim knows that we’re following it well. (And “if you don’t live there you can’t write about it” is a very strange stance for a journalist to take.)
Stomping around proclaiming victory and beating your chest doesn’t actually win an argument or make you right, but whatever helps you sleep at night.
Vern Nelson wrote:
> AND claiming that they were manipulated by the principal, whom I in turn
> suspect of currying favor with the political establishment led by Pringle
> and Murray.
You have no evidence to back this claim.
No evidence of which part there? My evidence they were manipulated by the principal is below (unless you choose not to believe it) and I don’t need any evidence for my “suspicion that Baeza is currying favor” with the big boys – it’s just a reasonable suspicion of mine that I’m reporting.
If you have evidence proving that Baeza is a puppet of Kris Murray and Matt Cunningham, please post it.
nobody is a puppet of matt cunningham.
and I don’t know if he’s a puppet of kris murray, but it’s worth looking into, since right after getting appointed to a commission by her, he went out and attacked Moreno, who if he runs will probably be her most formidable rival, and is also behind the districting suit she despises. But I already said all that. I don’t need any “evidence” for me to suggest what seems like a reasonable theory.
Vern Nelson wrote:
> and I don’t know if he’s a puppet of kris murray, but it’s worth
> looking into, since right after getting appointed to a commission
> by her, he went out and attacked Moreno
Correlation is not causation.
So you conclude that, because cause isn’t proven on its face, that Vern’s wrong about it being “worth looking into”?
Do you think that your own writing could withstand such criticism? Or do you too look for fire when you smell smoke?
And denial is not necessarily fact.
Ever heard of the inference to the best explanation?
Anon wrote:
> And denial is not necessarily fact.
True.
> Ever heard of the inference to the best explanation?
Yes.
But Vern’s no scientist.
Many of the articles about Anaheim he posts on the Orange Juice Blog are based on rumor, hearsay, and wild speculation–not evidence. He can’t prove many of the things of the things he says.
Duane, the best way to refute that allegation regarding this matter is to ask you to state your best understanding of the case that Vern has made and the evidence that he purports to have provided. I think that you’re missing things. (Did you read the story and all of the comments?)
Interestingly, “rumor, hearsay, and wild speculation” are what seems to be behind the charges made against Dr. Moreno here.
I’m interested in your take on whether your friend GSR was right to almost entirely brush aside the stated reason for the transfer — that it was a standard application of a district-wide policy — in his trio of articles in the Weekly using the Baeza transfer to attack Moreno. That, if it’s not clear to you, is what prompted this story. As someone who has had my differences with GSR since he became Gustavo’s thrall, but who had always thought of him as an honest writer, I found this horrifying.
Chances are that personal loyalty will cloud your judgment here, despite your probity, but if you think you can defend his eliding that very important fact then please get on with it.
My basis was my sourcing and evidence collection regarding the North OC CABE fundraiser. Of everything, this is the part of the story Moreno himself really didn’t appreciate as he made known to me. I didn’t trot out everything I had, and you wouldn’t want me to, not in a million years.
I actually re-read my trio and am left wondering why this deluge of bloviating has come in response. It wasn’t that bad. I asked the supe for comment. I asked the former director of instruction about DLI claims at Juarez for clarification. Yeah, it has some of the Weekly’s characteristic flavor, but Moreno didn’t mind that when I called out my Arabheimers’ support of Brandman last year and actually gave credit to David for a legitimate criticism of the AUHSD board member at the time.
The only thing brushed aside, Bloviator, was the retention demand of Juarez parents. Up until the appointment of Roman, many parents still thought it better to use honey as opposed to vinegar. Make the case to all interested without calling anyone out. In the end, those who spoke from that basis felt ignored anyway.
This blog trotted out a wild conspiracy theory taking a page from former Chief Welter’s book in denying Latinos agency in their own grievances. Raising the issue again, but especially from this premise, is more damaging than anything else out there.
Congratulations!
Hey Gustavo, pass me the Bukanas. I can feel some more Bloviating coming!
You’re right, it wasn’t ALL that bad, but i stirred up a hornet’s nest, and now I gotta swat?
How utterly shocking that you’d be deficient at criticizing your own work.
Vern and I have both said many times now: you gave short shrift to the plausible stated reason for the transfer.
If you don’t see the problem with that even now, then you are an even worse journalist than your trio of articles would suggest.
Even Moreno was more generous than you two clowns. The supe said her piece about the rotation being routine policy. I reached out to the supe for her reasoning behind the move and what she would be looking for in a new principal.
That being said, knowing education circles as I do, within policy there are often politicized transfers that are less than routine. Based upon my sourcing, research and evidence, I presented what I presented.
Regardless, parents wanted to organize on the demand that this principal be retained. They were brushed aside. Which again was more generous than what you two clowns have exhibited here.
Like either of you give a shit about education in Anaheim. Everybody knows the city is hot topic (one that can keep a sagging blogs hits from sagging even lower)
Everyone wants a piece of Anaheim’s ass.
So:
(1) She said it was routine policy, which is barely mentioned in your story.
(2) You determined that sometimes transfers are political rather than routine policy — and that, because the parents didn’t like it, therefore this must be one!
(3) Implicitly, you think that when parents object to the evenhanded application of a routine policy, it should be overridden. (Or maybe that’s only when they are also targeting Dr. Moreno.)
(4) My interest in Anaheim is pretty clear over the past year. And one thing I’m VERY interested in is misguided attempts by poseurs like you, San Echón, to slag civil rights leaders because they don’t dance to your tune. It’s worse when you do so in the guise of an objective journalist.
(5) Blog hits are stable over six months. But why should our motivation be suspect and your desperate careerism, sucking up to the libertarian anti-civil liberties activist Gustavo, not be suspect?
You did a bad job on one trio of stories. That’s sad. Now you’re making it worse. That’s somehow less sad, because of the desperation.
Actually, I looked forward to this critique and it hasn’t let me down. The eviscerating of Latino agency was above and beyond what I expected. It’s outright appalling. That’s worse than whatever you think of my trio of stories.
Haters gon’ hate and bloviators gon’ bloviate!
1. Why would I call these dozen-or-so Baezista parents a lynch, or pitchfork-wielding, mob?
Some of you Baezistas, if you don’t feel like you’ve made my case well enough in the comments above, could help out better if you could send me a copy of the flyer you put on everyone’s windshield on open house night. You know – the one that defamed and slandered not only Moreno and Superintendent Wagner, but also (as I mentioned in my story) the incoming principal Cecilia Roman, as well as (very bizarrely and brutally) the outgoing Palm Lane principal Deanna Pelaski.
I’m waiting for a copy of that flyer, but if any of you proud Baezistas have copies of it, which I’m sure you’re proud of, you could speed things up by e-mailing it to chezvern@aol.com, and I’d appreciate it. And then once I have it up, I’ll ask Duane and Gustavo if they approve of it.
The lynch mob’s weird persecution of Principal Pelaski lives on in phantom form on Cunningham’s blog – he eventually cut those sections out of his “guest post” here http://anaheimblog.net/2013/05/07/why-is-benito-juarez-elementary-school-principal-being-transferred-against-parents-wishes/ but you can get a sense of its viciousness from the comment thread, with all the sane people asking him to take the stuff down.
The attacks on Pelaski, Roman, Wagner, and Moreno (two of whom I believe are latino themselves, and only one of whom – Wagner – actually had anything to do with Baeza’s transfer) continued through three consecutive board meetings, at the second and third of which, defenders of Pealski and Roman began to show up, shouting down the lynch mob. [Afterthought added in morning – And throughout each of these meetings, Dr. Baeza sat still and smug, not saying a word or lifting a finger to stop all the attacks and character assassinations, just basking in the glory.]
When I tell the story of what I saw at Los Amigos – three parents coming to demand an answer as to why Baeza was being FIRED – am I calling Mexicans particularly stupid or gullible? Am I jumping to conclusions when I assume those three Magi represent a cross-section of Juarez parents who were led to believe the same thing, whether through purposeful misinformation or the general nature of rumor? NO.
I’ve spoken to other Juarez parents, who, like the majority of parents there, are totally agnostic on the transfer question. None say anything bad about Baeza, but they feel the whole transfer thing is a tempest in a teapot, and look forward to their new principal. (They also ask me not to name them; they feel there’s a spirit of intimidation there, and just wish this would all blow over. They probably wish I hadn’t written this piece. I invited them to comment anonymously, maybe they will or won’t.) But the thing is, one of them told me he was approached by SEVEN different friends, asking him if they’d heard about the “firing” of Baeza. This knowledgeable parent set them all straight. I’m telling things as they are.
Am I insulting Mexicans and calling them stupid and gullible when I say that Baeza misled them into blaming his transfer on Moreno? Moreno repeatedly put out offers to the parents to talk to him, offers which were rebuffed (just as he has and does to Gustavo, Gabriel, and Duane, to similar rebuffal.) The one parent to finally talk to him was our good friend, the righteous bilingual truthteller Jeanette Saldivar, “Proud Baezista.” She was implacable in her refusal to believe Jose, but at least she listened to him. But when Jose asked where the heck she got the idea that he was behind the Baeza transfer, she answered, “Because that’s what HE – “ and then quickly stopped herself.
What was that going to be, Jeanette? That’s what he said, right? That’s what Baeza said? Why did you stop yourself in mid-sentence? You realized it wouldn’t be helpful to Baeza for it to be known that he planted that seed in the parents’ minds? Were you about to say something else, like “that’s what he ate” or “that’s what heat can do to a fragile brain?” Do you deny that conversation took place, or that you uttered that half-sentence? Fill us in, Ms. Saldivar, we’ll be here all week.
Next: Dr. Baeza and Dual Language Immersion.
Why shouldn’t you believe a single bit of this laughable excuse? Because Vern offered up a big ol’ lie, namely:
“Moreno repeatedly put out offers to the parents to talk to him, offers which were rebuffed (just as he has and does to Gustavo, Gabriel, and Duane, to similar rebuffal.)”
Can’t speak for Duane or Gabriel, but the last time—the only time—Moreno ever reached out to me was years ago, after I delivered a lecture at Long Beach St.—I still have the business card to prove it, complete with cell phone. But keep digging yourself into your shit pit, Vern, and crack open another cold one!
So, to Gustavo, the damning rebuttal to the sentence, “Moreno repeatedly put out offers to the parents to talk to him, offers which were rebuffed (just as he has and does to Gustavo, Gabriel, and Duane, to similar rebuffal.)” is the fact that according to him Moreno only reached out to HIM once. And this claim of his disproves everything else.
This reminds me of when he thought he triumphantly punked the ACLU when they said “at least three Anaheim councilmen were Klan members” and he snorted, “no, there were FOUR!”
Hitting the wine early this morning? Your comment implied that Moreno has reached out to me about this Anaheim mess recently, when he never has. He reached out to me around 2009, long before he took his path down the shit pit with you and the Bloviator. Try again!
It implies that, like all the others listed, he has tried to meet with you and been rebuffed. Dodo.
There should be a sort of corollary to Godwin’s Law – the one that says the quicker you lose an argument the sooner you compare your opponent to Hitler and the Nazis.
Could be the Gustavo/Jerbal Dodge maybe? Or something catchier? But basically, the worse you’re losing an argument with Vern, the quicker you accuse him of drinking.
Is this your subtle way of saying that you WILL meet with Moreno? He’d love to hear that, I will pass it on.
I love how you and the Bloviator imagine yourselves to be movers and shakers in OC politics—further proof of your delusions that comes from writing in this shit pit.
So, no, then? Shall I count this as a second rebuffal?
No, Vern — I think that he said “yes.” Isn’t that one of his “yes” insults? It’s sometimes hard to tell his “yes” insults from his “no” insults and his “I have no idea what I’m doing and I just hope that no one ever finds out” insults.
Lies, all of them. If Moreno wants to meet with me, he has my email. And if he’s relying on you and the Bloviator as his intermediaries, then heaven help us all.
Still haven’t spoken to him about any of this, Gustavo. But hey — you want me to send him an invitation, I will. Say the word.
Great post, Vern, but I have to warn you: I think that the new feature “Ask a Mexican Mom” may be protected by Gustavo’s trademark. We’ll need to come up with a different name.
So in an act of desperation, you’re now making a feeble attempt to do some research into this matter? Sorry, but it is too little, too late.
Unlike Gabriel San Ramon, you don’t give a crap about education issues. The only reason why you posted anything about this matter is because you thought you uncovered some sort of wild conspiracy linking school politics to Kris Murray and Matt Cunningham.
You can grasp at all the straws you want, but I want you to prove to me that: (1) Matt Cunningham and Kris Murray engaged in a grand scheme to smear Dr. Josie Moreno through Dr. Baeza; and that (2) Baeza, acting at the behest of Cunningham and Murray, whipped up a crowd of Mexican parents to attack Dr. Moreno.
If you can’t cough up courtworthy evidence supporting this wild and speculative claim, you owe everyone an apology–especially the parents who protested Dr. Moreno–for writing such a defamatory and malicious piece.
And still no one has addressed how this is Moreno’s MO…..gather a group of mad parents and ATTACK school personnel AND rally them to head his mission!!! HE IS NOT an advocate for our kids. He is an advocate for his elite group of parents…..
This time, the protest was against the district’s decision and Moreno’s involvement in that decision……and he can’t take the heat!! DIsh it out but sure can’t take it.
I think that Duane may have something to say to you about producing evidence worthy of a courtroom.
Hi “concerned.” My next long comment will address some of the “points” in your first comment on this thread.
Thank you! I really think these are valid points to address—-the supe told all parents she felt the need to get someone into the position with a DLI background. However, this did not happen. Nothing against the new P Roman, she seems very professional and knows her stuff, but going back to the story the Supe gave the parents, it was all a bit fishy.
You really should read the original article maybe. Where do you keep coming up with CUNNINGHAM being part of any Machiavellian conspiracy? He just jumped on it once someone commented about it on his blog.
Yeah, all around, you should probably read the original article, it looks like. None of what you think is my main point, is my main point. Badger man.
“So in an act of desperation, you’re now making a feeble attempt to do some research into this matter? Sorry, but it is too little, too late.”
No, I knew all this before, I just try not to write pieces that go on and on and on, but can back them up later if I have to. Stay tuned later today for what a great DLI champion Baeza is, in comparison to Cecilia Roman. *snark* Till then, keep chewing on all the info above – I got a few weightier matters to attend to first….
There are no “weightier matters” for Vern to bother with—his entire being is this shit blog, which has accomplished NOTHING in its time under him and the Bloviator. Oh, for the days when this blog actually was good…
Go away for a while, Gustavo, you’re bothering us. Oh, and don’t be too scared when the scariest guy in OC e-mails you.
Ah, the Pedroza days, when I literally could not read the blog without cringing due to the (since deleted) vicious attacks, posed as display ads, against Claudio Gallegos, Paul Lucas, Chris Prevatt, Phil Bacerra, and others — largely accusing them, as I recall, of being in dire financial straits. (This was not long before Art went bankrupt himself.) No wonder you liked it!
Tell you what, Gustavo — why don’t you look through our backlist and pick some of the stories that you thought were especially “good” — maybe we can repost them so that everyone can appreciate your taste in journalism. I am really looking forward to seeing this!
Oh, poor Vern can’t take people calling him out on his lies. You’re turning more and more like Cunningham—gonna ban me from this shit pit as well? As for Moreno: I’ll believe it when I see it, and the first thing I’ll tell him is that he’s a pendejo for trusting you and the Bloviator with ANYTHING…
Awesome: despite parental support for Baeza, Vern is now going to rake him over the coals over some perceived grievance over DLI, which just happens to be Moreno’s pet cause. As if we needed any further proof that this shit post was done at the behest of Moreno, with Moreno’s full involvement. Vern: as the Bloviator got his nickname for his bloviating, you deserve a nickname for being an unapologetic, laughable water carrier. I’d call you Matty Jr., but you never apologized for pedophile protectors, so I’ll give you that much. Let me think…
You don’t know Juarez or its community! So many lies are being slung in order to push your and Moreno’s agenda. We know the truth and have seen the destruction first hand because we are in the way of his agenda. Don’t use my name and lies to try to slander Dr. Baeza! I NEVER said, “because that’s what he…” Vern what do you get out of Moreno being re-elected? You are writing about things you don’t know anything about because you weren’t there. And the details you have are all coming from the lying Moreno.
Moreno, you coward! Stop lying and using these pendejos to speak for you. What you are saying Vern is a LIE. Moreno is just using you to do his dirty work to try to clean up his name. How dare you say Dr. Baeza had any involvement with the group of parents that wanted to retain our beloved principal. Moreno, you have my number, let’s meet with your pendejo. You need to tell the truth, in my presence, that I didn’t say or mentioned that Dr. Baeza had informed me that you were behind his transfer or that he had any involvement in what we were doing as parents.
I approached you Moreno because I know you are the mastermind and have a lot of influence on the board, as well as, with your new Superintendent Dr. Wagner. All of a sudden you hide behind this superintendent and say it’s all her because that is the kind of rat you are. I made it clear that what the new superintendent was doing was not right, to transfer the principals, since she did not have any idea of the real needs of our schools. And that the work of Dr. Baeza was not done at Juarez, that the parents and children of Juarez wanted him to stay at our school longer. I told you that Dr. Baeza was doing great work and we needed him. You are a hater Moreno, who can’t see another Latino advance because you feel threatened.
I have never shared this with anyone, for fear of district retaliation against them, but you need to know that many people that work in the district have also approached me and thanked me for standing up for our children by trying to keep Dr. Baeza at our school. They believe your dirty work was behind the transfer. ACSD employees, that I don’t even know, have called me and come to my house expressing their feelings about what was going on with Dr. Baeza. They tell me they don’t like you and what you are doing to our district. The latest one came to my house about 3 weeks ago this Friday. They seek me out to offer help and support in any way they can. They look for me and find me because I have been one of the most vocal supporters. Actually, the last employee and I’m sorry I don’t remember her name, I didn’t think it was important because I never thought this bull crap would continue, said that she wished that “Roberto” could be the principal at her school! She mentioned how when Dr. Baeza was a teacher, he was very strict with the students, but students still wanted to be in his class. We still want him to be the ultimate teacher in our school…..our principal!
A Proud Baezista
Jeanette, do you have a copy of that open house flyer you could scan and send me?
Ms. Saldivar,
I just want to point out to you that Dr. Moreno, to whom you seem to be speaking, has not been participating in this discussion. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to Ask a Mexican (in this case, Gabriel) some questions about cultural etiquette.
I’ll be back in touch with you as soon as I get some answers, Ms. Saldivar!
Part of the way white privilege operates is making people of color do all the work for you. Figure it out yourself and then get back to me.
`g
It was strange – I finally heard Jeanette “Proud Baezista” Saldivar speak, at last Tuesday’s council meeting … and she doesn’t speak a word of English!
It just makes me wonder, who wrote all these long, pretty well-written comments for her, which came pretty fast and furious?
So perhaps, after Anaheim ‘sees the light’ (or gets it shoved in its eyes by the Court) and divides itself up into representational, ‘neighborhood’ pieces, maybe about the size of…oh..I don’t know,…School Districts!, can we look forward to a future like the glimpse of the PRESENT you’ve all given us above- endless rounds of bickering, name calling, personal attacks, debates about who even has the RIGHT to have a point of view (based on the length of their residency, of course!) Everybody cheer a better tomorrow, (and look at those clicks pour in!)
Well said!
LAST big comment (for now.) To read many of these comments, as well as Gabo’s originals, you’d get the impression that Dr Baeza was a staunch proponent of Benito Juarez’ beloved Dual Language Immersion (DLI) program, and that losing him will be a grievous blow to DLI. I wonder how many of you know that Baeza originally opposed DLI, but it was pushed on the school by the Board.
And so many complaints here about incoming principal Cecilia Roman having no experience with DLI. Well, guess what? She has exactly as much experience with it as Dr Baeza did when he came in – which was zero. But at least she is enthusiastic about the idea. The DLI will be fine.
Of the Baezista commenters above, the one that seems to be more concerned with ideology and philosophy rather than personalities is the one calling themselves “concerned.” In their first comment above (http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/07/what-was-the-big-deal-about-some-principal-getting-transferred-from-one-anaheim-school-to-another/comment-page-1/#comment-442938) they locate what they think is the crux of Moreno’s imagined antipathy to Baeza (which supposedly explains his nonexistent involvement in transferring him along with everyone else.) – “Dr Moreno was upset with the manner in which the program was being implemented because he felt the school was not teaching enough about multiculturalism.”
So I asked Jose what was the truth to that. (Yes, Jose is my friend, and I’m giving his side of the story here, to balance off accounts where his side was left out.) He recounts expressing to Dr Baeza that, since the school is Benito Juarez School, they should have some kind of event or program where the kids learn about Benito Juarez (just as kids at Paul Revere school learn all about the midnight ride!) Baeza strongly opposed that idea, lambasting it as liberal “multiculturalism,” and they just ended up agreeing to disagree on that. But this had nothing to do with his routine transfer, which was neither punitive nor orchestrated by Moreno.
Baeza, even though he is excellent at fostering personal connections and parental involvement, is a pretty conservative guy who opposed dual language immersion, opposes anything smacking of multiculturalism, and prefers focusing on “teaching to the test.” So it’s kind of weird watching progressives like Gabriel and Duane take his side against Moreno, when everything they purport to believe in comports much more with Moreno than Baeza. You wonder sometimes if there’s something in the blood of progressives where they turn against any progressive who achieves a certain amount of stature — what was that metaphor about crabs pulling each other back down into the bucket?
Well, that’s all I have to say for now. I understand by all accounts that the reason Juarez is such a great school is because of the unparalleled parental involvement, which would be great to see in ALL schools – and only secondarily to the credit of any principal. I’m sorry to have ruffled so many feathers; the best to Juarez under your new principal; and all I wanted to do was tell “the rest of the story!” Peace out…
THANK YOU for this comment. It shows that all you do is write what Moreno tells you to write. And, thanks to this, I have your nickname: The Puking Puppet. It commemorates your affinity for alcohol, your vomit that is your posts and comments, and how anyone call pull your strings (first Kring, now Moreno) to do your bidding. The Bloviator and the Puking Puppet: a match made in heaven!
Jose: That you entrust these pendejos to do your dirty work just confirms you’re the new Nativo Lopez—except Native was actually smart.
*can
yeah whatever
Gustavo, this is not high school and you are not a 16-year-old Mean Girl, hard as that may be for your readers to believe. Making up names for people doesn’t make those accusations true, any more than knocking someone out and dressing them in a clown suit when they’re unconscious makes them a clown.
I suspect that anyone from outside of the area reading our interchanges with you, with the names and identifying details removed, would think that you’re the unhinged adolescent rather than the established “talent.” As one who does not wish you ill, but wishes you more maturity and prudence — and ideally an interest in running an actual alt-weekly — I suggest that you take a good look at this conversation and maybe ask some friends in the field whether you come off as a competent writer or a scared, oversensitive, and defensive juvenile.
“I have your nickname.” God, man — have some self-respect.
Vern Nelson wrote:
> Baeza, even though he is excellent at fostering personal connections
> and parental involvement, is a pretty conservative guy who opposed
> dual language immersion, opposes anything smacking of multiculturalism,
> and prefers focusing on “teaching to the test.” So it’s kind of weird watching
> progressives like Gabriel and Duane take his side against Moreno, when
> everything they purport to believe in comports much more with Moreno
> than Baeza. You wonder sometimes if there’s something in the blood
> of progressives where they turn against any progressive who
> achieves a certain amount of stature — what was that metaphor about
> crabs pulling each other back down into the bucket?
Can you please direct me to comments on the Orange Juice Blog or anywhere on the internet where I stated that I supported Dr. Robert Baeza’s views on education?
The reason why I decided to post comments under this article was because I strongly objected to your *SLIMY* effort to characterize the protests that took place against Dr. Jose Moreno as (1) being instigated by Matt Cunningham and Kris Murray; and that (2) Dr. Baeza, acting at the behest of Cunningham and Murray, whipped up a crowd of Mexican parents to attack Dr. Moreno.
As much as you like to deny it, you strongly “hint” Cunningham played an important role in this affair by not only posting a photo of him squarely in the center of an image surrounded by the faces of Gustavo Arrellano and Gabriel San Ramon, but dropping his name throughout your screwball narrative. If this isn’t innuendo, then what exacty is it?
In addition, you made a claim–without any proof whatsoever–that these working-class Mexican moms were being manipulated by the “Pringle faction.” In other words, you conjured up a *RACIST* argument that Mexicans are just too stupid to act in defense of their own interests; that the reason why they are getting “riled up” is because white people must be telling them what to do.
I’ve seen you post plenty of garbage on the Orange Juice Blog, but this has got to be one of the most slanderous, malicious, and reckless articles that has ever been posted here.
You need to issue an apology.
You misread what Vern wrote — in several respects.
(1) He didn’t say that you support Baeza’s views on education; he said that it’s odd that you’re tearing down the person with whom you largely agree to support the person with whom you don’t. If I wanted to be pedantic (or wry), I’d tell you that you need to issue an apology.
(2) He didn’t say that the Jerb “instigated” protests, but that he capitalized on comments by angry parents when they found their way into his paid blog. He does say that Murray’s appointment of Baeza may give rise to suspicion, because — well, it does. (It’s not conclusive, though.) Perhaps you should apologize.
(3) The reports seem to vary — all the more so since some people figured out that Baeza’s being involved in whipping people up would reflect badly on him — as to what role (if any!) Baeza had in whipping up the parents — either directly or through leaks. (Note what Ms. Saldivar says about comments made to her by staff. He has had nothing to do with that?) At a minimum, if the whisper campaign (that is among other things poisoning the well for Roman) is THAT prevalent, is there evidence that he has stepped in and told people, for the good of the school to cut it out and respect the district’s decision? What has his role been, Duane? You write as if you know. It’s pretty clear from comments right here that at least some of the most active parents are keenly interested in sticking it to Dr. Moreno. If Baeza turns out to have dropped a hint or two (or more) about his displeasure to parents and staff, would it be proper for you to apologize?
(4) Vern says flat out (not hinting) that Cunningham plays a significant (“important” may be overstating it, as so few read his writing) — not by instigating, but by fanning the flames. It is regrettable and puzzling that this was unclear to you. You might wish to apologize.
(5) Murray is definitely part of “the Pringle faction”; depending on the relationship between them, Baeza may or may not be. Clearly, the tenor of comments by people here claiming to be Juarez parents is one that focus very broadly on Dr. Moreno’s political fate. Now, why should they really give a crap about that? Their goal is to overturn the decision, right? Why is a totalizing attack on Moreno in the service of such a goal? It’s a stretch to make that case — and it’s very easy to make the case that such an attack on a significant progressive Latino leader serves the purposes of the Pringle faction. If you weren’t so hell-bent on defending your friend Gabriel, you’d be among the first to see the connection and suggest the suspicion. That you say that he’s calling them “stupid”is appalling. They may be wittingly or unwittingly being manipulated, but that happens to intelligent people all of the time. PR firms like Pringle’s are dedicated to that dark art.
(6) Vern didn’t say that they weren’t defending their own interests. These parents (although perhaps a minority of the parents overall) may well feel that Dr. Baeza’s continuing presence would help their kids. They could be right — or they could be in the process of being seduced into support of an odious educational policy; if the latter, they have plenty of company — both across races and ethnicities and especially at the higher echelons of the income and wealth ladders. Can minorities experience “false consciousness”? Sure! What sort of demeaning view of their psyches would suggest that they’re somehow immune to a fairly common phenomenon, especially in a capitalist society?
You owe Vern an apology not only for calling him a racist, but for refusing to use your talents to read his article honestly and fairly. You have also yet to comment on Gabriel’s almost complete elision of the stated reason for the reassignment — which is intellectually dishonest.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> [TRIPE DELETED]
Greg, I can tell you’re definitely in a panic mode when you type lengthy responses. I notice you employ this strategy when you get caught with your pants down. You bury your critics in a sea of words in an attempt to divert attention away from the fact you can’t defend your initial claims. It’s clear to me you and Vern are squirming in your seats trying to figure how you can weasle out of this one.
And just how long does it take you to come up with this tripe? Twenty minutes? An hour? Two hours? Five hours? Keep it up. They are very entertaining. I got a chuckle out of this one.
Anyways, I’m not going to allow you to sidetrack me.
I’m going to pose the question again to Vern, but with one minor clarification.
The key claims of Vern’s article–through *INNUENDO* and otherwise–is the following:
1. That Matt Cunningham and Kris Murray engaged in a grand scheme to smear Dr. Josie Moreno through Dr. Baeza
2. That Baeza, acting at the behest of Cunningham and Murray, whipped up a crowd of Mexican parents to attack Dr. Moreno.
Can you prove it, Vern?
P.S. If Greg can prove it, I’ll buy him a bag of Cheetos.
Your reply is cowardly, immature, and intentionally avoids the answers I have already provided to your challenges.
I hope that that’s concise enough for you. Farewell, Duane.
Brilliant AND retarded – can a man be both? This is what the people want to know about Duane Roberts. I’m not going to answer your silly questions any more times, or any differently, than I already have at length.
If you REALLY don’t understand what I was getting at with my pictures and mentions of Jerbal, I’ll spell it out for you – it was a (perhaps cheap) attempt to shame Gustavo and Gabriel for being on the same side as him in this case. I don’t expect you, as someone who celebrates Ralph Nader’s role in tilting the 2000 election from Gore to Bush, to be sympathetic to that tactic.
I condemn your use of the word “retarded.” Not too thrilled about “brilliant” in this context, either.
Anyways, it’s time for me to leave the Orange Juice Blog sandbox. I’ve got an article to write for my Anaheim Investigator blog. I’ll leave Vern and Greg alone now so they can create more mudpies to sling at passersby.
Because I already know that Moreno lies or forgets when it comes to telling how things happened I can only say that Moreno puts multiculturalism and his politics ahead of children and what’s best for a school. This transfer without reason has proven to many of us that. I’m going to assume that Dr. Baeza probably put children first before any program or political viewpoint and this made Dr. Moreno mad if it even happened. And if you were not present during this conversation, or any of the others why do you write as if you are the truth Vern. Why don’t you try asking for the other side of the story since you feel that is the right thing to do even when it’s all lies fro your friend. The only “crab” here is MORENO. So tell me why this politician who fills his mouth saying he is about la raza and is suing the city doesn’t make a stink about the horrible schools in Anaheim High School district and demand more latino representation on that school board. I will tell you why because he is not here for any of us. Moreno is only here for himself and his politician friends making trouble for others for no reason. And if Dr. Baeza was opposed to dual immersion well he hides it well because he has turned our Juarez program into the program that others want to join in only after its second year. And if multiculturalism is not important why was my kid coming home telling me that Mexican independence day was the same for other Latino countries and talking about flags, and why did he learn about dia de los muertos and cempasuchiles, and why did we have programs where the kids sang in different languages and ate Mexican sweet bread, and they celebrated Chinese new year and other holidays from other countries? So if Dr. Baeza is against multiculturalism and dual language he hides it well because he was also visible during these things and enjoying these events. So stop your lies and stop trying to make him look bad because YOUR FRIEND, DR. MORENO, has proven to be a real TRAIDOR and looks really bad to many people. Or is Gabriel right and Baeza is not the right kind of latino for Moreno? Why doesn’t he just quit the school board already and go run for city council so we can be done with this bully.
I will never again vote for Jose Moreno.
I’d hate to be accused of dismissing the complaints of Mexican parents, etc., so rather than address the political aspects of your comment I’ll just ask this.
You say “So tell me why this politician who fills his mouth saying he is about la raza and is suing the city doesn’t make a stink about the horrible schools in Anaheim High School district and demand more latino representation on that school board.” Two questions:
(1) What information leads you to say that the doesn’t criticize deficiencies in Anaheim High Schools?
(2) Exactly how would one “demand more latino representation on that school board”? Do you mean like implementing a quota? They have to be elected, right? The most straightforward way of getting more Latino representation is to support Latino candidates — which, regarding the Latino currently on the School Board, you just said you will never do.
You distort my reporting and instincts. I had a proper appraisal of Baeza from the start. That was one of my first tasks. Newsflash: Most Latino principals aren’t ‘Viva la Raza’ Aztlanistas. You get a rare one here and there. Maybe. (Besides: Benito Juarez became corrupt anyway and former ally Porfirio Diaz challenged his rule who subsequently became even more corrupt when he came into power…the story goes on and on)
But, I did speak with DLI parents and they were supportive of the program. Those who didn’t have their children in it, wish that they could have. I did not detect a push to oust DLI from Juarez.
Parents organized against the transfer once they learned of it and spoke of Baeza’s effectiveness in leadership and creating a caring, positive climate at the school. Even if I have pedagogical disagreements with Baeza, as I surely do, I respected their experiences as stakeholders and heard them out.
There’s the issue of integrity of process that I’ll raise before and I’ll raise again. I told some parents that we probably don’t agree on everything in terms of education…I doubt that many would. But I did witness parents get ignored by a well paid supe. I noted their frustrations and how everything they tried was met by an entrenchment of power. Plain and simple. The CABE fundraiser, again, was foul. Talk about aping the ruling class (and even inviting one of them!) haha!
And if we are going to get pedagogical, I was taken aback when I talked to Moreno in early 2012 and he used the ’21st Century’ cliche rhetoric that is popular these days. I used to think he was Freirean, because I know the language of Pedagogy of the Oppressed quite well and he yaks it on his college program. But there’s little to show for that radical Brazilian’s influence. Did he dialogue (i.e. talk) with the parents? Didn’t see much of it. Neither did Wagner. She just sat there during those meetings. No serious reflections.
Anyway, back to this ’21st Century’ hype. Dr. Luis Ortiz-Franco of Los Amigos/Chapman blabbered on Voice of OC about “the opportunity gap” in applauding P21. Thd framework of P21 is one I find problematic for many reasons which I have already opined elsewhere. So I’m not generally impressed by the other side either.
Bottom line: I was there covering Juarez when a school board dug its heels, entrenched its power, and ignored a simple enough demand from stakeholders. I think it’s somewhat revealing in terms of the larger stories involving City Hall these days, but those analytical frames were not appropriate to inject into the discussion.
“I did witness parents get ignored by a well paid supe. I noted their frustrations and how everything they tried was met by an entrenchment of power.”
You seem to suggest that the stated reason for not granting the parents’ demands — that this was a good policy to be applied without exception — was illegitimate. (Otherwise, why would you use terms like “ignored” and “entrenchment.”) And yet, rotation is a commonly used rule — in part to prevent “corruption” — the legitimacy of which depends on its being applied consistently without favor.
In your view, would there be any limit on how long the Juarez parents could demand that Baeza remain as their principal? Another year? Two? Five? Ten? “Principal for life”?
And, presuming that the district did believe in the efficacy of this policy, precisely what were they supposed to tell other parents groups that liked their own principals in other schools within the district: “too bad, Juarez is granted ‘Latino agency’ but not you”? Your analysis ignores that they were asking for a special favor — to exercise their taste when others similarly situated could not.
That a demand is “simple enough” has nothing to do with its legitimacy. (Exercise of the droit du seigneur was a “simple enough demand”; that didn’t mean that it wasn’t used to screw someone against their will.)
In any event, I return to the fact that your story — of which I read one of the three and found convincing at the time — failed to mention something extremely critical, something that would get in the way of your going after Moreno (as you demonstrate above you had some taste to do.)
That was lousy, unfair, tendentious journalism — beneath your usual standards — and you hid the critical facts in the service of what? In essence, it sounds like you did so in the service of allowing parents to demand what Freire called a “banking model of education.” Now there’s a delicious irony.
Maybe Jose could learn better people skills. We all have different strong points. I’d like to see him become a great leader. So…we winding this down now?
You need to issue an apology.
The Bloviator lecturing on what makes good journalism is as legitimate as the Bloviator lecturing on brevity.
Are you honestly expecting readers of this blog to take that as an effective rebuttal of Greg’s comment?
Fuck, now I’ve read it all. “Bloviator of the Oppressed!” HA!
“Hit a nerve” barely begins to describe what Vern’s done with this one. Thanks for all of the extra hits, I guess. It’s nice to see a bump in attention without having to descend to writing repeatedly about Octomom’s vagina.
I know that this may sound funny, but it’s true: I was literally editing a daily campus newspaper at a Cal State when you were in diapers. (I don’t mean fetish diapers; I mean newborn or infant Pampers.) I’ve rarely come across a writer of supposed stature who quite so badly confused mere insult for argument.
How does one say “shrill premature has-been” in Spanglish?
I just tried and Google Translate came up with “Larry Manto.”