Friday, March 14, 2008

Regional Superintendent Charles Flowers Sued Again???

The Insider has learned that the Cook County Regional Superintendent of Schools will be sued again. Sources say that Flowers is being accused of wrongfully terminating Jeremy Bloom from his position in the Regional Superintendent's office alleging that cuts were necessitated for budget reasons. However, shortly after Bloom was fired for budget reasons, Flowers hired all of his political cronies at whopping salaries including Harry Reynolds, Predonna Roberts, Willie Mack, Nichelle Rivers and Arbdella "Della" Patterson. Bloom has hired the law firm of Segal and Segal, and plans on pursuing all legal recourse available to him.

Has Flowers destroyed the Regional Superintendent's office? Is it time to call for impeachment?

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is unbelievable!!! How can he keep getting away with this corruption? I do find it interesting that he has hired several rejects from D88, Willie Mack and Nichelle Rivers. Flowers is a disgrace to the Regional Office of Education. He has proven to me that he does not care about right and wrong or about doing the right things in the school systems. This is patronage at it's best.

Bryant's an Imbecile said...

What's NEW? Everyone knew what Flowers was about,exept his foolish supporters. I remember when that fool Arnie Bryant use to have him on his show all the time pushing his canididacy, and Bryant saying he was such a Scholar!
Well if Arnie Bryant thought he was such a scholar that must make Arnie Bryant an imbecile!
I wonder when Arnie Bryant will have Flowers on his show again? I heard Flowers does'nt want to go on his show anymore because he also thinks Bryant's an imbecile!

Anonymous said...

I heard about this lawsuit. I even heard that Flowers tried to fire him before Flowers even took office! That would be because of who Jeremy Bloom's mom is. But no Flowers is not racist or holds grudges.

This man needs to be taught a lesson. Go Jeremy Bloom!!

Anonymous said...

Is that Shirley's son? They were such hard workers. How could he fire them!

I hope Jeremy wins and teaches Dr. Flowers a lesson. He needs to be put in his place.

Anonymous said...

Yeah and that doesn't even count all the family members that the good ole' doctor hired to replace this one person!

Oh he is sooooooo smart!

And who voted for this creep. Shame on all of you people that took a GREAT man like Ingraffia out of office and replaced him with a self centered, racist, fraudulent jerk like FLOWERS!

SHAME on ALL of YOU!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

IMPEACH!!!!

Get this jerk out of there! He even had his office sign legal affidavits saying that they will not discuss anything that happens with the office with anyone!

This was not needed with Ingraffia!

Anonymous said...

That is what happens when a good for nothing gets elected into office.

Will he get impeached - No everyone will turn around and eventually forget how awful this man is. Except for the individuals that will continually need to face his wrath. Hopefully this will not happen again and people can elect someone else in the next time around.

Anonymous said...

The people should impeach the committeeman for placing do-nothing flunkies on the Democratic ticket.

Yabrough's judgment sucks

Anonymous said...

You called him Doctor Flowers. What a joke! He got his degree through the mail. The school was not even regionally accredited. No wonder this office is wreaking havoc.

Anonymous said...

If everyone knew what Flowers was like then how did he get ELECTED?

I blame the stupid people that wanted change! Are Republicans that bad? Obviously not! Stupid uninformed people that vote, DO YOUR HOMEWORK before voting. They should not give a voters registration card to idiots!!!

Anonymous said...

Amen, black folks have an inherently bad habit of punching Democrat without sizing up the Democrat on the ticket. Poor habits and poor judgment reap poor elected officials.

Sunshine said...

I love it - when Googling Karen Yarbrough, the reformer doesn't appear so squeeky clean anymore. Good news travels fast, but bad news travels faster. What a pity.

Anonymous said...

The Obama Bargain
By SHELBY STEELE
March 18, 2008; Page A23

Geraldine Ferraro may have had sinister motives when she said that Barack Obama would not be "in his position" as a frontrunner but for his race. Possibly she was acting as Hillary Clinton's surrogate. Or maybe she was simply befuddled by this new reality -- in which blackness could constitute a political advantage.


AP
Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama, June 4, 2007.
But whatever her motives, she was right: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position." Barack Obama is, of course, a very talented politician with a first-rate political organization at his back. But it does not detract from his merit to say that his race is also a large part of his prominence. And it is undeniable that something extremely powerful in the body politic, a force quite apart from the man himself, has pulled Obama forward. This force is about race and nothing else.

The novelty of Barack Obama is more his cross-racial appeal than his talent. Jesse Jackson displayed considerable political talent in his presidential runs back in the 1980s. But there was a distinct limit to his white support. Mr. Obama's broad appeal to whites makes him the first plausible black presidential candidate in American history. And it was Mr. Obama's genius to understand this. Though he likes to claim that his race was a liability to be overcome, he also surely knew that his race could give him just the edge he needed -- an edge that would never be available to a white, not even a white woman.

How to turn one's blackness to advantage?

The answer is that one "bargains." Bargaining is a mask that blacks can wear in the American mainstream, one that enables them to put whites at their ease. This mask diffuses the anxiety that goes along with being white in a multiracial society. Bargainers make the subliminal promise to whites not to shame them with America's history of racism, on the condition that they will not hold the bargainer's race against him. And whites love this bargain -- and feel affection for the bargainer -- because it gives them racial innocence in a society where whites live under constant threat of being stigmatized as racist. So the bargainer presents himself as an opportunity for whites to experience racial innocence.

This is how Mr. Obama has turned his blackness into his great political advantage, and also into a kind of personal charisma. Bargainers are conduits of white innocence, and they are as popular as the need for white innocence is strong. Mr. Obama's extraordinary dash to the forefront of American politics is less a measure of the man than of the hunger in white America for racial innocence.

His actual policy positions are little more than Democratic Party boilerplate and hardly a tick different from Hillary's positions. He espouses no galvanizing political idea. He is unable to say what he means by "change" or "hope" or "the future." And he has failed to say how he would actually be a "unifier." By the evidence of his slight political record (130 "present" votes in the Illinois state legislature, little achievement in the U.S. Senate) Barack Obama stacks up as something of a mediocrity. None of this matters much.

Race helps Mr. Obama in another way -- it lifts his political campaign to the level of allegory, making it the stuff of a far higher drama than budget deficits and education reform. His dark skin, with its powerful evocations of America's tortured racial past, frames the political contest as a morality play. Will his victory mean America's redemption from its racist past? Will his defeat show an America morally unevolved? Is his campaign a story of black overcoming, an echo of the civil rights movement? Or is it a passing-of-the-torch story, of one generation displacing another?

Because he is black, there is a sense that profound questions stand to be resolved in the unfolding of his political destiny. And, as the Clintons have discovered, it is hard in the real world to run against a candidate of destiny. For many Americans -- black and white -- Barack Obama is simply too good (and too rare) an opportunity to pass up. For whites, here is the opportunity to document their deliverance from the shames of their forbearers. And for blacks, here is the chance to document the end of inferiority. So the Clintons have found themselves running more against America's very highest possibilities than against a man. And the press, normally happy to dispel every political pretension, has all but quivered before Mr. Obama. They, too, have feared being on the wrong side of destiny.

And yet, in the end, Barack Obama's candidacy is not qualitatively different from Al Sharpton's or Jesse Jackson's. Like these more irascible of his forbearers, Mr. Obama's run at the presidency is based more on the manipulation of white guilt than on substance. Messrs. Sharpton and Jackson were "challengers," not bargainers. They intimidated whites and demanded, in the name of historical justice, that they be brought forward. Mr. Obama flatters whites, grants them racial innocence, and hopes to ascend on the back of their gratitude. Two sides of the same coin.

But bargainers have an Achilles heel. They succeed as conduits of white innocence only as long as they are largely invisible as complex human beings. They hope to become icons that can be identified with rather than seen, and their individual complexity gets in the way of this. So bargainers are always laboring to stay invisible. (We don't know the real politics or convictions of Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan or Oprah Winfrey, bargainers all.) Mr. Obama has said of himself, "I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views . . ." And so, human visibility is Mr. Obama's Achilles heel. If we see the real man, his contradictions and bents of character, he will be ruined as an icon, as a "blank screen."

Thus, nothing could be more dangerous to Mr. Obama's political aspirations than the revelation that he, the son of a white woman, sat Sunday after Sunday -- for 20 years -- in an Afrocentric, black nationalist church in which his own mother, not to mention other whites, could never feel comfortable. His pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is a challenger who goes far past Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson in his anti-American outrage ("God damn America").

How does one "transcend" race in this church? The fact is that Barack Obama has fellow-traveled with a hate-filled, anti-American black nationalism all his adult life, failing to stand and challenge an ideology that would have no place for his own mother. And what portent of presidential judgment is it to have exposed his two daughters for their entire lives to what is, at the very least, a subtext of anti-white vitriol?

What could he have been thinking? Of course he wasn't thinking. He was driven by insecurity, by a need to "be black" despite his biracial background. And so fellow-traveling with a little race hatred seemed a small price to pay for a more secure racial identity. And anyway, wasn't this hatred more rhetorical than real?

But now the floodlight of a presidential campaign has trained on this usually hidden corner of contemporary black life: a mindless indulgence in a rhetorical anti-Americanism as a way of bonding and of asserting one's blackness. Yet Jeremiah Wright, splashed across America's television screens, has shown us that there is no real difference between rhetorical hatred and real hatred.

No matter his ultimate political fate, there is already enough pathos in Barack Obama to make him a cautionary tale. His public persona thrives on a manipulation of whites (bargaining), and his private sense of racial identity demands both self-betrayal and duplicity. His is the story of a man who flew so high, yet neglected to become himself.

Mr. Steele, a research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution and the author of "A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can't Win"

Anonymous said...

If I am correct this blog was suppose to be about the low life loser FLOWERS that cannot do anything right! How did we get side tracked on Obama? I guess because of the race thing! Well if anyone knows Flowers, they know he is racist.

He cannot work with anyone that is any other race than African American! Where does he get all of his money? From Grants that only give to African Americans. How does he use that money? On himself - An African American!!!

So thus he assumes that he is correct in spending it on a TV for his home, a trip here or there, or even home furnishings! Well you know what they say about when you assume - You make an "ass" out of "u" and "me". Well he already made an ass out of everyone that voted for him and now he is working on making an ASS of himself.

If this man had any brains (which he does not) he would settle with this man Jeremy Bloom. Further if the people that read this blog had any courage they would contact the proper authorities to get him investigated.

I would except he knows me too well!

Anonymous said...

"I would expect he knows me too well!!!"..... is this you Karen Yarbrough? Girl, you so funny.

Anonymous said...

Flowers does not have the ability to be a racist he is not in the majority.

Anonymous said...

Did you see the office? Of course he is in the majority there!

Being Racist does not have anything to do with being in the majority or minority! The definition is: "a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others".

Does it say anything about having to be in the majority?

GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT!!!

This is the most racist BLACK man I know!

Anonymous said...

who is the idiot who said Flowers doesn't have the ability to be a racist?

You have blog suspension for two weeks due to dumb comments.

Anonymous said...

Flowers is not racist. He did what Ingratti would do and did. Fire all of the old guard and bring in his people. Flowers surrounded himself with his handpicked people. Why would he want to keep the same people that Ingratfi hired, who has been there over 20 years. Did you not forget this is government from the Presidency to the municipalities. Why don't you ask Bush and Yarbrough why all of their republicans friends are rich through government.

Anonymous said...

Before you speak you should learn your FACTS (to the person who posted April 3rd comment)!! It was not Ingratti or Ingratfi!

Further INGRAFFIA hired competent people to get jobs done! Flowers is/has hired slackers that are a waste of space that have been fired or investigated for different scandals! When INGRAFFIA was in office things got done. The teachers were properly certified, help was given to the schools, PROPER audits were done, fingerprinting was checked and there were little to no complaints.

Now I understand you cannot please everyone but tell me how is it that NOW there is only 1 or 2 (out of 140) districts (run by black people) that are happy with the help received by the ROE. Probably because Flowers that is a racist pig that only hires family, or African Americans that cannot do anything at all ran the office into the ground. You go to that office and see what people actually answer the phones there! My bet is only the experienced white and Hispanics!

Ingraffia was a smart man on keeping QUALIFIED people for the job. People that can actually help and knew the process. Most of these people were not hired by Ingraffia; they were kept on from when he was first elected into office. Why did he do this? BECAUSE he wanted the office to run smooth and to be sure that the Students, Teachers, Administrators and Districts really did come first. Unlike Flowers who just wants to change the entire racial set-up of the office and probably drain any money possible!

So no, it is not REPUBLICANS that are rich through government - they cannot help it that they are wealthy! It is the Democrats - they get rich once elected because they are crooks (at least in this case they are)! Tell me how this FLOWERS cannot pay taxes? Should we really have a man that should be a role model to children, teachers and administrators in office that cannot even pay his own taxes? So he does not abide by laws however he has no problem sticking it to anyone that he can!

Can you tell me how he did NOTHING to a BLACK principal that was caught having sex at school during school hours (on tape by the way)? Because he is racist! I mean the School Board in that district even took legal action against Flowers on that one. Is this a good example of leadership? No this shows children the total wrong message.

Can you tell me why his right hand man Johnny Diggs quit? Because he saw how racist Flowers was!

Can you tell me how come now since Flowers has been in office it takes 4(African American) people that get paid 2 or 3 times the amount that it took 1 person to do a particular job when Ingraffia was in office? Well it looks to me that either Flowers is hiring incompetent people or he seriously is trying to drain as much money from any government funding that they are getting.

He is a waste of life! And you whoever wrote the comment of April 3rd is probably one of the IDIOTS that voted for the good for nothing waste of life! It is people like you who do not research anything before you speak or vote!

Go Back to School!!!!

Anonymous said...

Wow very insightful comment dated April 9th. I am surprised nobody blogged about that!

Someone needs to expose this FLOWERS for the person he really is!