Students Remembering 16-Year-Old Girl Gunned Down after Stepping Off SEPTA Bus In North Philadelphia

By David in TN

Mon, Dec 2, 2019 11:30 p.m.

Students Remembering 16-Year-Old Girl Gunned Down After Stepping Off SEPTA Bus In North Philadelphia

https://cbsloc.al/2LfyDjP#.XeXkYyAmq-4.gmail

This is the only news story I could find with a photo of the "gunman." He's black, but not a "teen," Robert Jamieson, age 41. 

New York’s Welfare Reform Shell Game

By Nicholas Stix
Middle American News
1998

Welfare reform was supposed to radically reduce the number of people living on the dole, and the amount of time any one family could expect government largess. However, a program being held up as a national model guarantees unending dependence on big government.
In the early 1990s, demands for welfare reform became so loud, that even established political elites, and their academic and media supporters were unable to forestall the movement that became law in 1996, through the “The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996” (P.L. 104-193). The welfare reform bill renamed the largest welfare program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), “Temporary Aid to Needy Families” (TANF), and more importantly, changed welfare from an unlimited, eternal “entitlement” to a program with a five-year limit per family. The Welfare Reform Act also gave states freedom to experiment with ways to reduce welfare dependency. Perhaps the most famous experiment was carried out in Wisconsin, where Gov. Tommy Thompson’s welfare commissioner, Jason W. Turner, radically cut the number of welfare recipients.
In January 1998, Turner was hired by newly re-elected New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani as commissioner of the New York City Human Resources (welfare) Administration. Turner’s mandate, as in Wisconsin, was to cut the welfare rolls.
As Mayor Giuliani has presidential aspirations, and has been touting his successes in speeches around the country, the New York model is bound to become a national test case.
Today, Rudolph Giuliani takes credit for having reduced New York City's welfare caseload from 1.2 million (actually 1.1 million) upon his inauguration in 1994 to 763,000 in the present, a 36.4 percent decrease. [Actually, the decrease was 30.4%, based on the initial denominator of 1.1 million.]
Critics have asked where the former clients went. Turner and Giuliani insist clients were working off the books, and lost their benefits when they didn’t show up for their workfare assignments. There aren’t that many adequate off-the-books jobs in the world. Giuliani’s supporters, such as the husband-and-wife team of historian Fred Siegel and sociologist Jan Rosenberg argue, more credibly, that Turner made it much harder for new applicants to get approved for welfare. However, that explanation still does not account for old clients who are “missing in action.” I suspect that many clients have been statistically redefined, under what I call Newcount. [Postscript, 2019: Aka fakestats.]
Socialist critics want to see clients tracked, in order to determine how many of them leave the welfare rolls for jobs. However, it is essential to track clients to see how many of them leave the welfare rolls for some other, probably federal dole.
Borrowing from his socialist predecessor, Mayor David N. Dinkins' (1990-1993) bag of tricks, Giuliani had been taking clients off of TANF and signing them up for Federal disability (Supplemental Security Income – “SSI”). SSI clients are not counted as welfare recipients. And since they are primarily supported at Federal expense, as opposed to traditional welfare, which comes from the state house, then-Governor Mario M. Cuomo did not complain, when Mayor Dinkins began the client transfers.
Nick Buono of the New York State Press Office told me that from 1990-1996, the number of New York City SSI cases jumped 67 percent (from 222,710 to 371,535), a change that is demographically inexplicable. Under Mayor Edward Koch in 1988 and 1989, the numbers rose only 1.7 and two percent, respectively. Under Mayor Dinkins, the figure rose 5.5 percent in 1990, 6.8 percent in 1991, 9.2 percent in 1992, and 11.4 percent in 1993. Under Giuliani, SSI cases rose 7.7 percent in 1994; 5.5 percent in 1995, and 4.3 percent in 1996. Giuliani ended the practice in the election year of 1997, and as of early 1998, had not reinstituted it.
In a city that has not reindustrialized, and thus enjoyed little job creation, not even SSI can account for the missing TANF clients.
Last April, Giuliani and Turner began renaming “income maintenance” (welfare) centers “job centers” matching clients with jobs, and in July 1998 Giuliani promised to end welfare in New York by the year 2000. More ominously, Giuliani left the door open to creating public jobs to close the client-job gap. Giuliani has embraced the interventionist workfare model that NYU political scientist Lawrence Mead calls “the new paternalism.” This model provides day care, “parenting skills” classes, job training, and in Giuliani’s vision, mandatory (drug-free) drug treatment, motivational job coaches, counseling, housing assistance, and transitional Medicaid, child care and transportation money. This is good news for “non-profits” and training contractors.
When I was a foster care worker during the late 1980s and early 1990s, clients and foster parents alike would mock the parenting skills “teachers.” They spoke derisively of how these “professionals,” whose chief contribution was in handing out free cookies, virtually never had children of their own, and were the prisoners of trendy, silly theories. Ultimately, the parenting skills teachers were trying to teach the unteachable – the love of one’s one flesh and blood.
While showing little promise of strengthening the family, which is supposed to be the point to all this, the new paternalist state will micromanage people’s personal lives. The state will become even stronger, while dependency will become redefined, and made even more respectable. The difference between “work” and “welfare,” independence and dependence, which many socialist social scientists have long worked to undermine, may be destroyed by a Republican politician.
Such a development would represent a closing of the circle. New York’s welfare revolution was initiated by liberal Republican Mayor John V. Lindsay (1966 through 1973), who more than doubled the welfare rolls. A charming and handsome but deranged do-gooder, the patrician Lindsay bought black votes by encouraging the welfare rolls and “social programs” to explode. As historian Fred Siegel has chronicled, Lindsay hired as his welfare commissioner, Mitchell “Come and Get It” Ginsberg, a member of the revolutionary Marxist National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO). The NWRO sought to inflate the welfare rolls through signing up those who were ineligible by the legal standards of the time, and eliminating those standards, in order to cause New York’s financial collapse, thereby hastening the “revolution.” At the same time, NWRO theorists sociologists Richard Cloward of Columbia University and Francis Fox Piven of the City University of New York, respectively, pursued the “politics of turmoil,” the title of a book they wrote at the time, which exacerbated racial conflict between blacks and whites; the NWRO planned to use black welfare recipients as their revolutionary foot soldiers. (Cloward and Piven have since dropped The Politics of Turmoil from their list of published works.)
Political scientist Lawrence Mead considers himself a conservative, but has realized presciently that the new paternalism cuts across long-standing political lines. This puts Mead on the same side of many issues as socialists such as sociologists William Julius Wilson and Christopher Jencks, and Jencks’ protegés sociologist Kathryn Edin and anthropologist Laura Lein, the authors of Making Ends Meet. Edin and Lein refuse to acknowledge the difference between independence and dependence. They see those who work as no more virtuous than those who refuse to work, and seek to make government take responsibility for both the working and non-working poor.
Sociologist Nathan Glazer, who oscillates between neoconservatism and welfare state liberalism, once accurately diagnosed the decline of cities like New York as having begun when they stopped doing the sorts of things that cities traditionally did well, like paving streets and picking up garbage, and invested their money and energies in solving citizens’ personal and moral problems, something cities had never done well.
The ever-expanding notion of government responsibility in metropolises such as New York occurred when, following the welfare revolution, clients and their children fell prey to the sort of pathologies that come of lives of dependence, but which transcend mere economic poverty, and excite “not-for-profit” social work entrepreneurs: drug and alcohol abuse, child abuse, violent crime, educational neglect. Each of these social problems was an invitation to demand specific additional, expensive programs. Those programs sucked away scarce resources, as their staffers and administrators re-socialized clients to become bottomless pits of needs. The period from the 1960s-1990s thus became the Golden Age of “not-for-profit” organizations, which while enjoying legal status as “private” (or the traditional term, “voluntary”), lived entirely off of taxpayer dollars. These are the same organizations that will be looking to cash in on new paternalist welfare reform.
Today, in participating in workfare, known as the Work Experience Program (WEP), most TANF clients’ labor is wasted on make-work, which is more grist for the socialists’ mill. Newspaper reports have quoted WEP participants stationed at the City Department of Parks and Recreation as complaining of sweeping up leaves, only to have their Parks supervisor dump the bags of leaves, and make them start all over again.
In New York the problem is, New York State Social Service (formerly “welfare”) Law §164 (“work relief”) prohibits using welfare clients to do any work, unless additional public works programs are created especially for them. Even then, those programs may not displace any civil servants or private workers. A prohibition by any other name...
And so, when Rudolph Giuliani and Jason Turner assigned untrained WEP participants to do real (certified nurse aide) work, in Manhattan’s already overstaffed Harlem Hospital last spring, the union workers screamed bloody murder. Giuliani responded by simultaneously claiming that no WEPers were doing city workers’ jobs, and pulling them out. Giuliani had to lie. (He then proceeded to fire 200 nurse aides, for good measure.)
It is no fluke that New York State Social Service Law §164 makes meaningful (meaning productive) workfare an impossibility; that is the subsection’s reason for existence. It was enacted during the 1970s to protect unions, particularly the municipal labor unions that have dominated the city since popular Democratic Mayor Robert Wagner Jr. handed them the city in 1961, in exchange for their support for a third term.
Municipal unions have a vested interest in malingering, and in expanding the work rolls through endless featherbedding. Nothing is a bigger threat to them than an army of cheap, non-union labor. It should be no surprise that the city’s municipal unions have steadfastly opposed workfare.
In contrast, productive workfare has a moral function for long-term welfare clients. They are discouraged from bearing children out of wedlock, with the State as their surrogate husband; they are encouraged to reconcile with, and marry the fathers of their children; they see the relationship between effort and results; they see themselves as active participants in their own lives, rather than as passive beneficiaries; they gain self-discipline; they learn to be more discriminating in choosing their associates; and their lives receive a structure they often previously lacked. If clients instead get sucked into the municipal union world, they will instead develop the clock puncher’s mentality, which differs little from the welfare mentality. In both cases, an unproductive person feels the world owes him a living.
Workfare will have little moral and no economic value, until N.Y.S. Social Service Law §164 is rescinded, and the municipal unions which it exists to protect, are weakened. Neither outcome appears imminent.
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani may be appearing soon in your city to entice you to play his shell game. Don’t play it.

Chicago Top Kwop Special Ed Gone; Fired Two Weeks before Retirement for "Ethical lapses" too Great to Ignore

By A.L.

The Real World of Affirmative Action

By Nicholas Stix
Middle American News
June, 2003

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court will rule on two lawsuits against the University of Michigan’s use of affirmative action in admissions to its undergraduate program and law school, respectively. The mainstream, socialist media have predictably supported the continued admission to otherwise highly selective universities of unqualified black and Hispanic applicants, based on their race or ethnicity, as a means to achieve “diversity.” Since affirmative action’s 1960s’ origins, however, this plague has spread beyond college admissions, to corrupt all of America’s institutions.

In higher education, affirmative action has led to the hiring of incompetent, often openly racist black and Hispanic professors. It has further led to the creation of multiculturalism, in which entire disciplines - black, women’s, Hispanic and gay studies -- exist in order to generate propaganda rationalizing affirmative action, and for the sake of hiring incompetent hate mongers.

Whereas academia had not previously been heavily bureaucratized, affirmative action has created patronage mills of highly-paid black and Hispanic administrators and staffers, whose job is to terrorize whites and protect incompetent and/or vicious minority students and employees. Historian Alan Kors and attorney Harvey Silverglate have named this bureaucratic subculture, “the shadow university,” in their book of the same name.

Perhaps the least publicized aspect of academic affirmative action, is the maintaining of remedial mills catering to “students” who increasingly function on an elementary school level. When I taught at William Paterson College (WPC) during the early to mid-1990s, administrators decided to boost the school’s “retention” rate, i.e., to keep students on the tuition rolls, no matter how poor their performance. The main impediment to retention was the remedial English Composition final, in which students had to pass the multiple- choice New Jersey Basic Skills Test (NJBST), and an essay exam. And so, the English Department chairwoman, Dr. Catarina Edinger, eliminated the NJBST altogether, expanded the time allotted for the essay exam from 20 to 75 minutes, gutted essay grading standards, and overrode instructors who failed minority students.

One such 75-minute final essay, from 1994, follows in its entirety.

“My father is the one person who I can truly say has helped me through school and work and just life in general, he has helped me to learn how to wash my clothes by showing me in detail from what Detergent to use Down to how long it will take them to Dry, and when ever I had trouble with school work he allways sat down and showed me what I was doing wrong and then showed me the right way and made me pratice it many times over, for example when the time I didn’t know how to Do frations he showed me how to do them and then tested me on them. There was a nother time when my father tought me how to Lift weightfirst he bought a weight set then we started from the brench press to the squat, he tought me ever thing I know. wHen I was first hired at Roy Rogers he was the one who showed me the fastes and best way to clean the grill because He’s a manager of that store in that area also. What makes my father such a great teacher in my eye’s is that he takes his time with me Doesn’t yell and most important of all He explains in very fine Detail whats and has to Be done in that situation.
“In conclusion to my essay I felt that my father is a good teacher throughtout my Life has tought me a great Deal of many things that I have needed to be successful up to this point in life.

Rather than sanctioning WPC, in 1997, the state of New Jersey rewarded WPC officials for their fraud, by promoting the school to university status. The school is now named William Paterson University.

Affirmative action’s supporters in academia have suppressed exposure of their abuses through political witch hunts, in which they have gotten faculty critics fired, stolen student newspapers which even mildly criticized affirmative action, and shut down or denied standing to conservative student groups.

A more recent development has been the rise in campus race hoaxes. Since affirmative action relies on a fantastic ideology claiming that all blacks suffer under white racism, the lack of factual support for the ideology requires the constant fabrication of “evidence.” And so, melodramatic race hoaxes, in which black students -- and now, even black professors -- invent non-existent white-on-black racial attacks and harassment, have become part of the academic landscape.

For instance, in February, 2002, white graduate student Jay Gardner made the mistake of disagreeing with black Iowa State University (Ames) professor Tracey Owens Patton, during the constant anti-white rants she engaged in, in her journalism class. Patton had Gardner expelled from class, later charging that Gardner was a white supremacist, and that campus police had warned her of white supremacist activity on campus. However, campus police denied to this reporter having ever told Patton anything of the sort, and Ames police denied to me that any such activity was present in Ames.

But affirmative action’s pernicious effects go well beyond the university. It has resulted in hundreds of thousands of semi-literate, racist, and sometimes criminal blacks and Hispanics being hired as educators, police officers, and physicians, the handcuffing of police officers in dealing with violent minority criminals, and the deterioration of news coverage of urban and ethnic issues.

With the advent of affirmative action, activists demanded that largely unqualified (and often semi-literate, and in some cases, particularly those of Hispanic “educators,” functionally illiterate) black and Hispanic teachers, administrators, and staffers be given control over the education of black and Hispanic children. The result has been the destruction of millions of urban black and Hispanic children’s life chances. In New York alone, for example, thousands of black and Hispanic “teachers” cannot pass the New York State certification exam, even though the exam is dumbed down anew on behalf of just those testees on a yearly basis.

(A committee determines which questions black and Hispanic testees most frequently answer incorrectly, and eliminates them. You can’t make this stuff up.) As a result, impoverished New York children endure “educators” who have flunked an eighth grade-level test as many as 24 times.

In the criminal justice field, in order to increase black and Hispanic representation by any means necessary, police chiefs dropped criminal background checks of officer candidates in Washington, D.C. and Miami; chiefs in other cities have hired black and Hispanic candidates whom their own job screeners warned were a danger to society. The result has been police crime waves in Washington, D.C., Miami, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia and New Orleans. Black New Orleans police officer Antoinette Frank was hired in spite of failing the civil service psychiatric evaluation, and remained on the job, despite colleagues’ reports of her bizarre behavior. While on duty in 1995, Frank committed armed robbery and murdered three people, including an off-duty police officer. And Antoinette Frank is not unique.

Urban police chiefs also increasingly give black and Hispanic criminals carte blanche to rob, pillage, and even murder. During February, 2001 Mardi Gras celebrations in Seattle, for example, Chief Gil Kerlikowske ordered officers to stand down in the face of a racist black mob that was pummeling and robbing lone whites, and instead arrest white men for the pettiest of offenses. When civilian Kristopher Kime went to the aid of a petite white woman who was being brutally assaulted by several black men, the men stomped him to death.

Affirmative action in medicine has also cost lives. Los Angeles-area Dr. Patrick Chavis was celebrated by the New York Times and Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Ma.) as an affirmative action poster boy. Chavis was an unqualified black applicant who was accepted by the University of California/Davis medical school, in the place of qualified white applicant, Allan Bakke. In 1978, Bakke sued the UC system all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, and won.

Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby risked his job reporting, that by 1996, Patrick Chavis was an ob-gyn who, without bothering to complete the necessary training, performed liposuction on female patients. When three of Chavis’ patients hemorrhaged, he ignored their pain, and refused them treatment. One of the women, Tammaria Cotton, died. It was not until Chavis had killed a patient, that the Medical Board of California, citing 94 charges of gross negligence against him, revoked his medical license.

The mainstream media have largely refused to report on such corruption, because they are themselves in thrall to affirmative action. William McGowan’s book, Coloring the News: How Crusading for Diversity Has Corrupted American Journalism, chronicles how through affirmative action hiring, major newspapers and TV news organizations have installed cadres of black writers and editors who have taken over reporting on urban and racial issues, which they deliberately misreport, while intimidating and otherwise thwarting white reporters from doing honest reporting on such issues.

Thus, media watchers were not terribly surprised when in late April, the New York Times was rocked by one of the biggest scandals in the history of American journalism. Reporter Jayson Blair, a black affirmative action hire who had been at the newspaper for four years, and who had been held up by Executive Editor Howell Raines as a shining example of “diversity,” was discovered to have fabricated and/or plagiarized dozens, and possibly hundreds of stories. Although Blair had earlier been caught repeatedly engaging in journalistic misconduct that would have cost a white male reporter his job, instead of being fired, he was promoted. Indeed, Blair was hired as a reporter in spite of having failed to finish college, and having a “substandard” record as a student journalist and Times affirmative action intern. (See Chapter IX for a fuller accounting of America’s most corrupt newspaper.)

An unconstitutional, immoral, social engineering scheme that has turned the law, morality, and truth on their respective heads, affirmative action equals lies, censorship, crime ... and death.

NBC: Massive Chinese Fraud Suspected in OPT Visa-Worker Program

By R.C.