Powered by TypePad

« Nor Was It Over When The Germans Attacked Pearl Harbor | Main | Common Sense From Wild Bill »

September 23, 2008

Comments

nlcatter

hmm let me parse

1 The CAC money of $50 million was NOT public money.

CAC -> $50 million -> not public money

simple except for fucking moron like you

2 it was grants to the 40% of the Chicago school system

grants -> to 40% -> schools

again simple

schools -> budget 3 Billion dollars

budget -> not under CAC control

I will change the Conclusion -

50 million of CAC money was NOT public MONEY!

DrJ

I just can't let stupidity go. I'm terribly sorry, but some assertions are just so silly.

it was grants to the 40% of the Chicago school system that had a budget of 3 Billion dollars that was not under CAC control

Ok, so the remaining 60% was controlled by the CAC. Work out the sums, and that is $120 million, far in excess of the $50 million or so claimed here.

Obam accounted to the board of CAC where the 50 Million went.

Obam[a] was board chair early on, and on the board later on. Would you explain to me please what Obam[a]'s accounting to the board means when he was either the chair of that board or a member of that board? This is terribly ill-formed. He either had a fiduciary responsibility or he did not. Did he?

bad

DrJ, denial is not just a river in Egypt. This one may be the funniest one yet. Bless its widdle heart...

JM Hanes

I think nicatter must have gotten one of those action memos and is just getting her talking points mixed up. It seems she's unfamiliar with the concept of matching funds.

DrJ

I'm terribly sorry 0.6x3=0.18, in contrast to the 0.12 I showed earlier. My mistake. I await eagerly nlc's response.

bad

Its almost embarrassing...but not quite. Just really funny.

Topsecretk9

Bad

Obama's $7 an hour crew is working over time.

---

Tell em, Why would Clarice need the charity list of Independent Sector?

DrJ

bad, JMH,

Please forgive me. I have had so many coops and interns that are just so uninformed with basic things like adding and subtracting that I feel compelled to respond.

Please forgive me for me grievous sin.

:)

bad

Tell em, Why would Clarice need the charity list of Independent Sector?

She's serving arugala?

bgates

bad, I think I recognize nlcatter's writing style.

bad

Obama's $7 an hour crew is working over time.

If this crew is like ACORN they earn far less than minimum wage.

bad

bgates

How generous of you to refer to that as a "style."

JM Hanes

LOL

nlcatter

matching funds were not GIVEN to CAC

CAC gave matching funds to the Schools.

nlcatter

NO you fucking faced moron,

40% of the schools were involved

DrJ

Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.

I see no proper English, no links, no sums, no response to earlier posts, and nothing of worth.

nlc, I do hope that you are able to graduate from whatever institution to which you currently pay tuition. If any. And if I were you, I would ask for my money back.

nlcatter

aha ad hominem attacks
showing you are bereft of intellgence


such as Palin the Creationist.

DrJ

I see no proper English, no links, no sums, no response to earlier posts, and nothing of worth.

No response here. This is not ad hominem. It is simple fact.

nlcatter

talking about grammar is not addressing the issue - thus ad hominem -

imbecile

nlcatter

CAC did not control ANY public money,

they administered the DONATED money from Annenberg.

Topsecretk9

Bad, my bad...I meant, Tell ME why a list of ISector charities would be useful to Clarice?

Topsecretk9

they administered the DONATED money from Annenberg.

And as an executive he sucked on both fronts, is that what you are saying?

Topsecretk9

they administered the DONATED money from Annenberg.

And Fannie Mae executive and Obama adviser administered upwards of 500 million of taxpayers money - DONATED MONEY - to charities that do not perform...

I.E. Go down that road Obamabot.

DrJ

I see no proper English, no links, no sums, no response to earlier posts, and nothing of worth.

There is nothing you have offered to change the above. That is, unless you have something to contravene the documents issued by the CAC board. Obama was a member of that board.

Have at it!

Ann

There really isn't more to be said here than bad's wonderful:
"Bless its widdle heart..."

Don't mess with our "bad AssJOMer". She will win every time.

It is funny how these dog trolls get out, and everytime they head straight for the road.

DrJ

It is funny how these dog trolls get out, and everytime they head straight for the road.

Agreed, but you do a disservice to dogs.

JM Hanes

How about this scenario, nicat: CAC was supposed to raise $100 million in matching funds per the 2:1 agreement with Annenberg, but they didn't. They scoured everybody's books for money they could list as matching funds, but that they never actually raised from anybody. Then they handed out the original $50 million to Ayers' pet projects. Et voila! No wonder there was no discernable change in the schools they were supposedly helping, eh? If you don't like that scenario, there are other variations on the numbers -- none of them good, alas.

nlcatter

I pointed out from the report that he was not in control of ANY public money,

CAC provided and controlled their OWN money,
but you liars are seem too stupid (ala Palin) to understand the facts.

DrJ

Ask for your money back. It is the only recourse for education monies misspent.

kim

'Bless his widdle heart'. Wong, wong, wong!
===========================

clarice

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/obama-ayers-partners-in-revolution/2/

DebinNC

Link to clarice's article.

bad

Great article Clarice. I like that you asked the question of why Obama omitted reference to Ayers in his books. Someone with intellectual curiosity would be fascinated by a pair of terrorists, former FBI's most wanted, married and immersed in the shaping the lives of children.

The silence is deafening.

clarice

Thanks, bad.

bad

Tops

She is looking for Obama connections with that group.

JBean

Clarice --

Great job!

JBean

They scoured everybody's books for money they could list as matching funds, but that they never actually raised from anybody.

But they repeatedly claimed they did raise the money from public and private sources -- until of course, the CAC is criticized as having wasted public money. Then they didn't. Interesting how that works.

On the same subject of matching funds, I just re-read that 9/08 NYT article by Sam Dillon which was referenced in the Rollings email published by Kurtz yesterday, and we have yet another take on the subject:

"Chicago received $49 million from a $500 million endowment by Walter H. Annenberg, the billionaire publisher, for school reform efforts nationwide, and the city added $98 million in matching funds for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge..."

The 2007 Loyola report (linked previously), has numerous 2004 quotes from Rollings whining about how the city, in the person of Paul Vallas, "tried to wrest that money (the Annenberg grant itself) away from us." Rollings also moaned about Vallas' attempts to control Title One monies -- those public taxpayer funds that CAC was counting on as a "local match."

But now, four years later, with a presidency on the line and all the Chicago bags packed and ready for the move to DC, the city gave CAC the matching funds.

Change you can believe in!

bad

the city added $98 million in matching funds for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge..."

Sloppy and careless of Sam Dillon, although typical of the NYT, to get the amount wrong when the CAC files show the actual amount raised. Steve Diamond and Tom Maguire managed to get it right. And they are (gasp) bloggers...


Ranger

the city added $98 million in matching funds for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge

Well, it is correct if you take "city" to mean the entire community, not the city government. It is sloppy writing but I don't think it is technically wrong. I have a feeling it results from just being too lazy to figure out how much came from local foundations and how much was added from education money already targeted to various schools that the NAC allowed CAC to count as "controbutions".

bad

Ranger

My point is that the amount is wrong. The correct figure is $110 million. Sorry to be unclear-- again. (sigh) People will think I write for NYT...

bad

Page 37 of the LINK UNDER NAME pdf file Annual Report to Annenberg shows the final figures for matching funds raised at The Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

Private Funds $59,808,146
Public Funds $50,655,505
Grant $49,000,000

The referenced document is the final certification of matching funds for The Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

LUN

Ranger

Sorry bad,

I'll be honest, after a certain point I just stop paying attention to the numbers.

bad

Look out world!! Obama is gonna bring Chicago Annenberg Challenge education to the entire world.

nlcatter

Chicago did NOT add 98 million in matching funds.

and the mathcing funds they did provide were dollars ALREADY allocated to the schools under Title 1.

CAC did not control those funds.

DrJ

Isn't he (she? it?) cute. Of course Chicago did not add $98 million in matching funds. Do you even read here? Nah, reading is too hard, it seems.

Ranger

...the mathcing funds they did provide were dollars ALREADY allocated to the schools under Title 1.


Posted by: nlcatter | September 25, 2008 at 11:00 AM

Which was essentially an acounting fraud to free up NAC funds by claiming matching monies that never existed (with a wink and a nod from NAC). I'm not sure that is really the argument you want to push.

bad

CAC did not control those funds.

Annenberg required 2:1 matching funds be raised and implemented in order for Ayers and Obama to qualify for the grant of $49.2 million.

Are you saying they committed fraud in order to get the grant?

nlcatter

yes, I agree they never raised new matching funds - just Counted funds taht were goign to be spent already

by point was not how much funds,

but that Obama did not spend , thus waste in your terms, public Funds.

Thus accountability was maintained.

MayBee

nlcatter- who sent you? We don't want nobody nobody sent.

Seriously- what is your background in looking at the CAC?

JM Hanes

"Thus accountability was maintained."

We now know a fraud was perpetrated, thus accountability has been maintained. You must be a progressive.

MayBee

He was accountable to the people who wanted the fraud carried out, JMH.

nlcatter

of public funds

thats what you all were WHINING about


you have no right to whine about funds from Liberal groups. its their money not yours.

bad

LOL LOL LOL The new talking points are killing me. What a hoot.

bad

The public funds were diverted from their original purpose, educating disadvantaged minority students, in order to pursue "The Annenberg Way. All of the evaluations incliding the ones funded by CAC say the initiative was a failure. A failure that cost $160 million.

If the money was not diverted to "The Annenberg Way" then CAC perpetrated a fraud in order to get $49.2 million from Annenberg.

Take your pick: failure or fraud?

MayBee

I want to know about the man running for President of the United States, nlcatter.
How he decides priorities, how he determines budgets, what he thinks are good investments, and with whom he chooses to collaborate. If he becomes POTUS, he will be making decisions with taxpayer money.

So yeah, it really is my business. They are our school children, right? They certainly weren't the children of the liberal group.

DrJ

Take your pick: failure or fraud?

Bad, I've been scratching my head about the truly bizarre logic (if that's what you can call it) nlc has been promulgating. We never brought up misspending of public funds -- that was just a given, as all the monies were misspent. That was nlc.

Now instead a fraud is proffered as a preferred explanation. I've never seen anything like it, and I've seen a lot.

JM Hanes

MayBee et al:

Could someone do me a favor? When I try to access Quasiblog, I keep getting a not found window. Could you give the link a click and let me know whether you get a "not found" error instead of the blog's front page? I'm trying to figure out whether or not it's just my internet host that's funky. I'm afraid it's something more though, because JOM won't allow me use the URL in my LUN.

bad

JMH

I was redirected when I went to your site. Wonder what that means? Who have you been writing about?

bad

DrJ

I'm flabbergasted by the new talking point. It has been proffered several times so it isn't that we are misunderstanding. But I'm cool with it.

boris

I get a "Cannot find server" and a redirect that claims it doesn't exist JMH.

JBean

JM Hanes -

Re: Quasiblog: I get an error in both FF3 and IE7 -- the website must be down.

DrJ

I don't get you site either, JMH. The whois database shows that the site registration expired yesterday Pay up!!

JM Hanes

Oh lordy. I can't possibly have had the domain name that long! On the other hand, I've had it so long, I can't remember whom to pay....argh. I hate it when it turns out to be my own damn fault!
Thanks guys!

DrJ

You've had it for four years. It looks like your registrar is pairNIC. You can change it to whatever company you want. GoDaddy is cheap.

JBean

nicat --

by point was not how much funds,

but that Obama did not spend , thus waste in your terms, public Funds.

Thus accountability was maintained.

Accountability of what? And to whom? 

Let's leave aside the issue of  the fuzzy accounting of matching "public funds,"  for the moment.

Are you arguing that if a group takes private funds, designated for a specific purpose and goal -- most specifically, public school education -- and achieves no measurable results toward that purpose or goal, that's there is no accountability to the public?

MayBee

It worked for me, JMH.
But then, I've had you open in another tab for about 3 days.

DrJ

The way this usually works is that once you lose registration, the name servers no longer point to the right place. If you are already there (like from an open tab) you don't have that issue. The web site is not gone. It is just that no one can map the name to the IP address.

JM Hanes

Back in business, thanks to DrJ!

JBean

JM Hanes --

Back in business, thanks to DrJ!

Yes you are. Yay!

MayBee

I clicked JMH's link, though, and got there.

MayBee

Day late. Dollar short. Me.

DrJ

Nerds. Protectors of free speech!

JM Hanes

Yay Nerds! Yay, Engineers! Yay JOM!

The biggest problem with actually keeping a blog going is that the immediate feedback over here is a hell of lot more fun! That's why I decided to name my erratic effort quasiblog. I really don't know how the real bloggers like TM keep going, and going, and going. I'm always afraid he'll wake up one day and say, enough is enough.

DrJ

I really don't know how the real bloggers like TM keep going, and going, and going.

I share your amazement, particularly for bloggers who write original material (as opposed to link aggregators like Instapundit, for example).

bad

Has Ayers ever been asked about his relationship with Obama? Would he maintain silence like so many others from Obama's past?

JBean

Bad --

Has Ayers ever been asked about his relationship with Obama? Would he maintain silence like so many others from Obama's past?

Asked? Hard to say, but, as "a legend in his own mind," the silence must be really, really  tough on Bill. 

Would he maintain silence? Good question. I'm sure you know he's got a blog (no link from me)  --  he's been very, very, careful not to mention the "O" word. Cryptic?  Yes -- because of the inherent superiority of his very essence.


bad

OOOO JBean, good one!!

JBean

Bad --

Did you ever wonder why Obama never mentions Viet Nam, even though it's a a sure-fire bullseye among the '60's crowd (if you're not John Kerry, of course).

He's actually defended (publicly, if not through his subterranean media/net manipulation) McCain's service.

Hey, could it be because Viet Nam is an obsession of Bill Ayers?

I confess, I read "Fugitive Days" -- but I also attended the funerals of those who didn't make it back....and may Ayers, well, go to the place that's, um, appropriate.

JM Hanes

bad:

"Would he maintain silence..." With an appointment as Secretary of Education in the offing? I'd wager a yes.

bad

With an appointment as Secretary of Education in the offing?

I wonder if Obama could get away with that appointment. His need to loved is pretty strong. An Ayers cabinet position could result in some pretty low approval ratings.

AAWWW Who am I kidding....

JBean

Bad, JM Hanes --

No need for Ayers. There are plenty of surrogates. Ask Steve Diamond.

Speaking of the A-thing  (who shall not be linked), he has a new post up:

"My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a “We Deserve It Dividend.”

Where did I put that Zantac?

bad

Where did I put that Zantac?

I'd require something stronger...

DrJ

I'd suggest Xanax... May still be too mild.

JM Hanes

Actually I doubt Obama would officially welcome into his cabinet. Ayers would probably be willing to make do with deciding where all the federal grant money should go....

DrJ

Oh no! You mean I wasted my time visiting NSF and NIH last week?

JM Hanes

DrJ:

If you filled it up with terms like collaboration and partnerships and leveraging, you should be OK.

DrJ

:)

Actually I have all that stuff already. Private-academic partnerships in spades. I just happen that I use an academic clean room to make my gizmos.

bad

I use an academic clean room to make my gizmos.

resisting...resisting...resisiting......

DrJ

Aw go for it bad.

bad

It would be bad DrJ.

sophy

Please do not hesitate to have twelve sky Gold . It is funny.

The comments to this entry are closed.