Just Who Was Madame Defarge?
Cold, confident, vengeful, broad (who has watched too much Stephen Colbert):
".....Dickens notes that Madame Defarge’s hatefulness does not reflect any inherent flaw, but rather results from the oppression and personal tragedy that she has suffered at the hands of the aristocracy.." (http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/twocities/canalysis.html)...."
".....Possessing a remorseless bloodlust, Madame Defarge embodies the chaos of the French Revolution. The initial chapters of the novel find her sitting quietly and knitting in the wine-shop. However, her apparent passivity belies her relentless thirst for vengeance. With her stitches, she secretly knits a register of the names of the revolution’s intended victims. As the revolution breaks into full force, Madame Defarge reveals her true viciousness ..."(http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/twocities/canalysis.html)
".....In the 1981 Mel Brooks film, History of the World, Part I, Mme Defarge (played by Cloris Leachman) is the chief conspirator in the plot to overthrow King Louis. She has become so poor, she has run out of wool, simply rubbing her knitting needles together..." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madame_Defarge)
".....Dickens notes that Madame Defarge’s hatefulness does not reflect any inherent flaw, but rather results from the oppression and personal tragedy that she has suffered at the hands of the aristocracy.." (http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/twocities/canalysis.html)...."
".....Possessing a remorseless bloodlust, Madame Defarge embodies the chaos of the French Revolution. The initial chapters of the novel find her sitting quietly and knitting in the wine-shop. However, her apparent passivity belies her relentless thirst for vengeance. With her stitches, she secretly knits a register of the names of the revolution’s intended victims. As the revolution breaks into full force, Madame Defarge reveals her true viciousness ..."(http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/twocities/canalysis.html)
".....In the 1981 Mel Brooks film, History of the World, Part I, Mme Defarge (played by Cloris Leachman) is the chief conspirator in the plot to overthrow King Louis. She has become so poor, she has run out of wool, simply rubbing her knitting needles together..." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madame_Defarge)
posted by Marsha V. Hammond, PhD at 6:48 PM
1 Comments:
Spurious 'bad apple' stink covers smell of Odum's lies about Community Support: Four good reasons to relieve us of Carmen Hooker Odum and Mike Mosley
Every single reporter seems to have missed this matter : what are the details (the Service Definitions) associated with the lynch pin service, Community Support, and who provides it. The zig-zag trajectory of the implementation of NC mental health care reform is documented in an ongoing series 'Communication Bulletins' which, "... are designed to provide information regarding key developments. ..." (http://www.dhhs.state.nc.us/mhddsas/announce/index.htm
When I called the Lieutenant Governor's office this past Friday, the mental health aide-de-campe was shocked that NC Senator Martin Nesbitt, who is co-director of the MH Legislative Oversight Committee, had this past week described to me Odum's management of MH/DD/SA as 'obstructionistic at every point' ("those are strong words"). And Odum, has honed the time-honored, despotic intervention of 'well, there were a few bad apples'----a common approach to to bury hidden malfeasance and mismanagement---along with her remarkable ability to 'never answer the question that is asked.' Several times, this past week, in newspapers, she and her underling, Mark Benton, the state's senior deputy director of Medicaid, ("Its not an admission we were wrong in making the cut retroactive," Mark Benton said; http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770412117) with a perverted sense of regret, remarked that because of a 'few bad apples' they had to hem in Community Support.
THREE GOOD REASONS WHY ODOM AND MOSLEY NEED TO BE FIRED:
Reason #1: (they have no idea how to manage this agency): If Odem and Mosley had a problem with the Service Definitions that they created which guide the Endorsed Providers, they should have at least politely and humbly suggested that they 'mis-spoke.' In distinct contrast to this, they slit the throats of the Endorsed Providers with the explanation that they were trying to protect the public against the 'bad apples.'
Reason #2: There are not enough of the sought-after, highly trained people whom Odum and Mosley have evidently been pining for in the mental health care community. Not by a long shot. Thus, they have created Community Support which is considerably truncated in its vision, to be administered by people with considerably less time to devote to it as more highly trained inviduals will not be willing to work for such a poor hourly rate. If the Endorsed Provider agencies get $40/ hour for Community Support, just how much do you think the hourly wage is going to be for a highly trained master's level mental health worker? How much running around to various clients houses do you think such a worker is going to be able to do? Bear in mind that under mental health care reform, individual providers, such as myself, a psychologist, cannot work with the clients. Oh no: you have to fly under the protective wing of the Endorsed Provider entity.
Reason #3: (Odum and Mosley play charades with disabled people's lives): The Supreme Court's Olmstead decision and the American Disability Act mandates that people with disabilities are to be given the resources to live within their communities. By cutting Community Support by one-third, Odum and Mosley have put at clear risk the continues existence of the fragile Endorsed Provider system and accordingly, disabled people's ability to continue to live in their communities
Post a Comment
<< Home