JUST the NY "Hush Money"/Election Interference Trial

[MDlaxfan76]

The left considered those who “Dissented ” 4 years ago patriotic.

Now they are being labeled as “anti-vaxers,” and “Domestic terrorists.”

"Dissented"???

Who are you talking about, Kram?

Want to dissent?
Go ahead, march, wear fuzzy pink hats, whatever...

But threaten to kill my family, name my children, publish my address, name of their school, pictures...different story.

Go into a black church or a synagogue or a ballfield and mow down people with a gun or set off a bomb to kill people, for some sort of angry, hate-filled ideological reason?

Yeah, that's domestic terrorism.

Doesn't matter whether it's left or right...it just happens to be mostly from the whack job right this past decade and right now, but that could well change.

We’re not talking about real terrorists.

We’re talking about bs claims being made to label and silence critics.

Much of it we see here at fanlax. On a daily basis:

All of Brookie and the fake Dr’s greatest hits:

The right are nazis.
People who complain about school policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to take an unstudied medicine (or submit their medical history to HR) are antivaxers.
All whites are racists.

It’s all the same move- say it enough to brand someone with an offensive term. Wipe out opposition.

Complaining at a BoE meeting doesn’t make one a domestic terrorist. But the left will say it enough times to paint that picture.

They will even bring in the feds to “investigate.”

It’s the left’s current favorite game. Has been for at least a decade now.

Yeah, I think you grossly exaggerate your fellow posters' views.

You're focused on just two as the most egregiously strident, but I don't think even our most strident such left posters have made the blanket statements you claim. Close, sure, but IMO you exaggerate., and thus undermine your fundamental point about 'labeling'.

and the question is why do you exaggerate?
Do you really believe they've made those explicit claims?

Or is that a rhetorical exaggeration on purpose?

Seems to me, for instance that you would be more persuasive if you said something like 'it's important to differentiate between protesters at a school board meeting who simply want to be heard and those actually threatening violence, don't label them all 'terrorists' '...and that would be persuasive.

Or say 'not all conservatives want any form of fascism' to make the point that indeed, lots of conservatives support democracy and are uncomfortable with those on either side of the political spectrum who don't...that would be a reasonable and true statement.

Or 'lets differentiate between 'racist' and 'privileged'; all whites are clearly not 'racist', but may well not understand the inherent, race based advantages that white people in America have historically had and continue to have. The latter doesn't make them 'racist', simply not fully understanding...big difference" Again, a persuasive rejection of any notion that "all whites are racist" which would indeed be an extreme fringe rhetorical position...a dumb one at that.

On your vax one, you begin to lose me as well, when you say "unstudied medicine" as if that's factual, which it most certainly is not...but if you said, "we should better understand how ill informed, but well meaning, some people are in order to better accomplish the goals of public health" I'd be right there with you in any discussion of how to be more empathetic towards those resisting getting the vaccine...but yeah, if you're refusing to take the vaccine because you think it's "unstudied medicine" I don't think it's inaccurate to say of that person that they're "antivaxer'.

[cradleandshoot]

The left considered those who “Dissented ” 4 years ago patriotic.

Now they are being labeled as “anti-vaxers,” and “Domestic terrorists.”

"Dissented"???

Who are you talking about, Kram?

Want to dissent?
Go ahead, march, wear fuzzy pink hats, whatever...

But threaten to kill my family, name my children, publish my address, name of their school, pictures...different story.

Go into a black church or a synagogue or a ballfield and mow down people with a gun or set off a bomb to kill people, for some sort of angry, hate-filled ideological reason?

Yeah, that's domestic terrorism.

Doesn't matter whether it's left or right...it just happens to be mostly from the whack job right this past decade and right now, but that could well change.

We’re not talking about real terrorists.

We’re talking about bs claims being made to label and silence critics.

Much of it we see here at fanlax. On a daily basis:

All of Brookie and the fake Dr’s greatest hits:

The right are nazis.
People who complain about school policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to take an unstudied medicine (or submit their medical history to HR) are antivaxers.
All whites are racists.

It’s all the same move- say it enough to brand someone with an offensive term. Wipe out opposition.

Complaining at a BoE meeting doesn’t make one a domestic terrorist. But the left will say it enough times to paint that picture.

They will even bring in the feds to “investigate.”

It’s the left’s current favorite game. Has been for at least a decade now.

Yeah, I think you grossly exaggerate your fellow posters' views.

You're focused on just two as the most egregiously strident, but I don't think even our most strident such left posters have made the blanket statements you claim. Close, sure, but IMO you exaggerate., and thus undermine your fundamental point about 'labeling'.

and the question is why do you exaggerate?
Do you really believe they've made those explicit claims?

Or is that a rhetorical exaggeration on purpose?

Seems to me, for instance that you would be more persuasive if you said something like 'it's important to differentiate between protesters at a school board meeting who simply want to be heard and those actually threatening violence, don't label them all 'terrorists' '...and that would be persuasive.

Or say 'not all conservatives want any form of fascism' to make the point that indeed, lots of conservatives support democracy and are uncomfortable with those on either side of the political spectrum who don't...that would be a reasonable and true statement.

Or 'lets differentiate between 'racist' and 'privileged'; all whites are clearly not 'racist', but may well not understand the inherent, race based advantages that white people in America have historically had and continue to have. The latter doesn't make them 'racist', simply not fully understanding...big difference" Again, a persuasive rejection of any notion that "all whites are racist" which would indeed be an extreme fringe rhetorical position...a dumb one at that.

On your vax one, you begin to lose me as well, when you say "unstudied medicine" as if that's factual, which it most certainly is not...but if you said, "we should better understand how ill informed, but well meaning, some people are in order to better accomplish the goals of public health" I'd be right there with you in any discussion of how to be more empathetic towards those resisting getting the vaccine...but yeah, if you're refusing to take the vaccine because you think it's "unstudied medicine" I don't think it's inaccurate to say of that person that they're "antivaxer'.

The problem with your well stated argument is very simple. A person who speaks up at a BoE meeting with a conflicting opinion of the status quo will be labeled in a negative way. The people in charge of many of these school districts are no fans of dissenting opinions. That means those opinions will go in one ear and right out the other. The only option these people have is to object vociferously. That is the only way their objections will be listened to. When you do so you risk being labeled a "domestic terrorist. You don't have to threaten anyone.

[Farfromgeneva]

That’s ridiculous. I am a contrarian all the time. Will take anyone on including some dipshit moms. You don’t have to act like a jerkoff to be in opposition, just plain absurd.

No come back with some counterattack about how I’m stupid because I gots an education and you know better than me because you stayed in your hard knocks world without any other options for a long time.

[seacoaster]

"The people in charge of many of these school districts are no fans of dissenting opinions. That means those opinions will go in one ear and right out the other. The only option these people have is to object vociferously."

Nope. Totally wrong. Read the social contract.

[MDlaxfan76]

The left considered those who “Dissented ” 4 years ago patriotic.

Now they are being labeled as “anti-vaxers,” and “Domestic terrorists.”

"Dissented"???

Who are you talking about, Kram?

Want to dissent?
Go ahead, march, wear fuzzy pink hats, whatever...

But threaten to kill my family, name my children, publish my address, name of their school, pictures...different story.

Go into a black church or a synagogue or a ballfield and mow down people with a gun or set off a bomb to kill people, for some sort of angry, hate-filled ideological reason?

Yeah, that's domestic terrorism.

Doesn't matter whether it's left or right...it just happens to be mostly from the whack job right this past decade and right now, but that could well change.

We’re not talking about real terrorists.

We’re talking about bs claims being made to label and silence critics.

Much of it we see here at fanlax. On a daily basis:

All of Brookie and the fake Dr’s greatest hits:

The right are nazis.
People who complain about school policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to take an unstudied medicine (or submit their medical history to HR) are antivaxers.
All whites are racists.

It’s all the same move- say it enough to brand someone with an offensive term. Wipe out opposition.

Complaining at a BoE meeting doesn’t make one a domestic terrorist. But the left will say it enough times to paint that picture.

They will even bring in the feds to “investigate.”

It’s the left’s current favorite game. Has been for at least a decade now.

Yeah, I think you grossly exaggerate your fellow posters' views.

You're focused on just two as the most egregiously strident, but I don't think even our most strident such left posters have made the blanket statements you claim. Close, sure, but IMO you exaggerate., and thus undermine your fundamental point about 'labeling'.

and the question is why do you exaggerate?
Do you really believe they've made those explicit claims?

Or is that a rhetorical exaggeration on purpose?

Seems to me, for instance that you would be more persuasive if you said something like 'it's important to differentiate between protesters at a school board meeting who simply want to be heard and those actually threatening violence, don't label them all 'terrorists' '...and that would be persuasive.

Or say 'not all conservatives want any form of fascism' to make the point that indeed, lots of conservatives support democracy and are uncomfortable with those on either side of the political spectrum who don't...that would be a reasonable and true statement.

Or 'lets differentiate between 'racist' and 'privileged'; all whites are clearly not 'racist', but may well not understand the inherent, race based advantages that white people in America have historically had and continue to have. The latter doesn't make them 'racist', simply not fully understanding...big difference" Again, a persuasive rejection of any notion that "all whites are racist" which would indeed be an extreme fringe rhetorical position...a dumb one at that.

On your vax one, you begin to lose me as well, when you say "unstudied medicine" as if that's factual, which it most certainly is not...but if you said, "we should better understand how ill informed, but well meaning, some people are in order to better accomplish the goals of public health" I'd be right there with you in any discussion of how to be more empathetic towards those resisting getting the vaccine...but yeah, if you're refusing to take the vaccine because you think it's "unstudied medicine" I don't think it's inaccurate to say of that person that they're "antivaxer'.

The problem with your well stated argument is very simple. A person who speaks up at a BoE meeting with a conflicting opinion of the status quo will be labeled in a negative way. The people in charge of many of these school districts are no fans of dissenting opinions. That means those opinions will go in one ear and right out the other. The only option these people have is to object vociferously. That is the only way their objections will be listened to. When you do so you risk being labeled a "domestic terrorist. You don't have to threaten anyone.

Sure, be "vociferous".
March, wear funny pink hats, make speeches, go on TV and make your case. Persuade.

But screaming inanities and disrupting public meetings is going to get you rejected as simply incapable of self-control.

While that's not "terrorism", the issue is the very real physical threats these people are facing from those who actually are. It's ridiculously not ok.

I think we need to get much, much more serious about tracking down and locking up those who make such threats against public officials and their families. Jail time, plus civil penalties.

But I'm not suggesting that those who disagree and civilly make their case are out of line at all...However, while those who scream and disrupt are not criminals, sure, I think they should nevertheless be condemned as giving cover to those who are indeed 'terrorists'...we need to differentiate and take action against the actual violent threats, not wait for the acts to occur.

[cradleandshoot]

The left considered those who “Dissented ” 4 years ago patriotic.

Now they are being labeled as “anti-vaxers,” and “Domestic terrorists.”

"Dissented"???

Who are you talking about, Kram?

Want to dissent?
Go ahead, march, wear fuzzy pink hats, whatever...

But threaten to kill my family, name my children, publish my address, name of their school, pictures...different story.

Go into a black church or a synagogue or a ballfield and mow down people with a gun or set off a bomb to kill people, for some sort of angry, hate-filled ideological reason?

Yeah, that's domestic terrorism.

Doesn't matter whether it's left or right...it just happens to be mostly from the whack job right this past decade and right now, but that could well change.

We’re not talking about real terrorists.

We’re talking about bs claims being made to label and silence critics.

Much of it we see here at fanlax. On a daily basis:

All of Brookie and the fake Dr’s greatest hits:

The right are nazis.
People who complain about school policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to take an unstudied medicine (or submit their medical history to HR) are antivaxers.
All whites are racists.

It’s all the same move- say it enough to brand someone with an offensive term. Wipe out opposition.

Complaining at a BoE meeting doesn’t make one a domestic terrorist. But the left will say it enough times to paint that picture.

They will even bring in the feds to “investigate.”

It’s the left’s current favorite game. Has been for at least a decade now.

Yeah, I think you grossly exaggerate your fellow posters' views.

You're focused on just two as the most egregiously strident, but I don't think even our most strident such left posters have made the blanket statements you claim. Close, sure, but IMO you exaggerate., and thus undermine your fundamental point about 'labeling'.

and the question is why do you exaggerate?
Do you really believe they've made those explicit claims?

Or is that a rhetorical exaggeration on purpose?

Seems to me, for instance that you would be more persuasive if you said something like 'it's important to differentiate between protesters at a school board meeting who simply want to be heard and those actually threatening violence, don't label them all 'terrorists' '...and that would be persuasive.

Or say 'not all conservatives want any form of fascism' to make the point that indeed, lots of conservatives support democracy and are uncomfortable with those on either side of the political spectrum who don't...that would be a reasonable and true statement.

Or 'lets differentiate between 'racist' and 'privileged'; all whites are clearly not 'racist', but may well not understand the inherent, race based advantages that white people in America have historically had and continue to have. The latter doesn't make them 'racist', simply not fully understanding...big difference" Again, a persuasive rejection of any notion that "all whites are racist" which would indeed be an extreme fringe rhetorical position...a dumb one at that.

On your vax one, you begin to lose me as well, when you say "unstudied medicine" as if that's factual, which it most certainly is not...but if you said, "we should better understand how ill informed, but well meaning, some people are in order to better accomplish the goals of public health" I'd be right there with you in any discussion of how to be more empathetic towards those resisting getting the vaccine...but yeah, if you're refusing to take the vaccine because you think it's "unstudied medicine" I don't think it's inaccurate to say of that person that they're "antivaxer'.

The problem with your well stated argument is very simple. A person who speaks up at a BoE meeting with a conflicting opinion of the status quo will be labeled in a negative way. The people in charge of many of these school districts are no fans of dissenting opinions. That means those opinions will go in one ear and right out the other. The only option these people have is to object vociferously. That is the only way their objections will be listened to. When you do so you risk being labeled a "domestic terrorist. You don't have to threaten anyone.

Sure, be "vociferous".
March, wear funny pink hats, make speeches, go on TV and make your case. Persuade.

But screaming inanities and disrupting public meetings is going to get you rejected as simply incapable of self-control.

While that's not "terrorism", the issue is the very real physical threats these people are facing from those who actually are. It's ridiculously not ok.

I think we need to get much, much more serious about tracking down and locking up those who make such threats against public officials and their families. Jail time, plus civil penalties.

But I'm not suggesting that those who disagree and civilly make their case are out of line at all...However, while those who scream and disrupt are not criminals, sure, I think they should nevertheless be condemned as giving cover to those who are indeed 'terrorists'...we need to differentiate and take action against the actual violent threats, not wait for the acts to occur.

There were 4 people at a school board meeting in Hilton NY that wound up in jail a few days ago for being vociferous at a meeting. One person refused to wear a mask and several others chimed in when he was threatened with being arrested. They did not "threaten" anyone. Their objections to the mask mandate were the issue. I think anyone at any BoE or school board meeting that threatens anyone with bodily harm should be arrested. I don't think the issue deserves the AG of the USA stepping in to declare them domestic terrorists. The laws already on the books work just fine thank you very much. AG Garland is attempting to make a mountain out of a molehill.

I understand the frustration people have when dealing with their local government leaders. i had an issue last winter with the town of Irondequoit. They refused to plow the sidewalk on my street. They plow the sidewalks on every block surrounding me, but not mine. The end of my street there is a crosswalk going to the elementary school. A simple question sent me on an adventure that resembled Alice in Wonderland. The town bumpkin told me they had never plowed our sidewalk.

i asked very politely.. why not? the answer.. because they never had in the past. I ask why do you plow all the other sidewalks surrounding my street. The answer again... because we never have before. I am now informed they will look into it. I am then informed they simply choose not to. I simply inform them we pay the same taxes as everybody else and why do you not plow our sidewalk? I am then informed by an underling at the local DPW that some people would complain about the snow being plowed onto their driveways. I then ask do these same people complain about the street plows leaving 2 feet of slush at the end of their driveway usually right after blowing the driveway out. I am then informed i need to go door to door and have everybody on my street sign a petition that they want their sidewalk plowed. i said why? the towns responsibility is to plow our sidewalk like they do on every other street. I am again informed that the town has never plowed our sidewalk before. i again respond why not? So this same dance goes on and on until i finally informed the nice lady at the Irondequoit DPW that I am going to take the issue up with a local TV news investigative reporter. I told her the town has been advised of this dangerous condition of kids walking down our street that have to walk in the middle of the road.

It was not to long after that we received a letter informing us that the town had graciously decided to plow our sidewalk. The moral of the story is... until you are willing to become a huge pain in the ass to these people, they will ignore your concerns and requests until the cows come home. There was no point in time I was ever disrespectful to anyone. Until i finally was ticked off enough to threaten them with exposure to the local media did they consider changing their mind. I guess i must be some sort of a domestic terrorist. I know my chart is flagged at the Town of Irondequoit. I understand why if you want your local BoE or school board to not ignore your concerns you better be willing to put up a big stink about what matters to you.

[kramerica.inc]

Look, believe what you want.
From the other perspective- I covered Board of Ed meetings for many years for the WaPo in 5 districts including DC. The claims above about public comments being ignored, until someone makes a scene is very often true. More so than not.
I am not a proponent of threatening any public servants, but to label any of these actual parents (not people who are threatening) is just absurd and a heavy handed response trying to silence critics.
People used to get thrown out of BoE meetings all the time.
Admins had intentionally stupid public comment rules just for that purpose. I’ve Seen mics shut off at exactly 60 seconds, commenters get shouted down by board presidents when their time was up. Pretty classless stuff, because the school boards didn’t like dissent.
Overall I’ve never seen an industry based more on the “good idea fairy” instead of actual results. These school board administrators take their workshops in the summer and come back with an idea and changes to implement each year. When their ideas are turds, they don’t want to hear criticism because it makes them actually have to work. They take it too personal and want to shut down criticism. Very common.
More common than anyone here will ever admit, or know.

[MDlaxfan76]

Don't think they went to jail; looks like appearance tickets ("arrested") but not thrown in jail.

And for trespassing.

Apparently a bunch of folks refused to wear masks, which was required to be in the room. They grew unruly as well, disruptive, and the decision was made to clear the room and do the meeting online. Those who were arrested were only those who refused to leave school property.

None were labelled terrorists.

I'll call them knuckleheads.

Meeting was then held online.

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/st ... 581376002/

And yes, being a pain in the neck is sometimes what's necessary to obtain action, though I always advise being 'persistent', but politely so, as it'll result in much more likely positive outcome, sooner. Still, frustrating.

I can tell plenty of my own stories of such; we probably all can.

[MDlaxfan76]

Look, believe what you want.
From the other perspective- I covered Board of Ed meetings for many years for the WaPo in 5 districts including DC. The claims above about public comments being ignored, until someone makes a scene is very often true. More so than not.
I am not a proponent of threatening any public servants, but to label any of these actual parents (not people who are threatening) is just absurd and a heavy handed response trying to silence critics.
People used to get thrown out of BoE meetings all the time.
Admins had intentionally stupid public comment rules just for that purpose. I’ve Seen mics shut off at exactly 60 seconds, commenters get shouted down by board presidents when their time was up. Pretty classless stuff, because the school boards didn’t like dissent.
Overall I’ve never seen an industry based more on the “good idea fairy” instead of actual results. These school board administrators take their workshops in the summer and come back with an idea and changes to implement each year. When their ideas are turds, they don’t want to hear criticism because it makes them actually have to work. They take it too personal and want to shut down criticism. Very common.
More common than anyone here will ever admit, or know.

I think that's fair, though obviously we wouldn't want to suggest that it is universally true that all BD Presidents are this way. But human nature is to not want to be criticized.

That said, anyone who has held any such office, even simply a large club presidency, knows that there are some real a-holes in the public who make it extremely hard at times to have reasonable, civil discussions. Really stupid, ugly stuff; takes a thick skin...and most people really don't have thick skins.

Of course, let's separate that reality from the really awful physical threats these people are all too often facing from some members of the public, often hiding behind anonymity for the worst such. Track these people down and bring the hammer down.

[a fan]

All of PeteB et al greatest hits:

The left hate America, and wants to destroy it
People who complain about military policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to pay an obscene amount of money for life saving drugs and want single payer health care are communists
All BLM are terrorists
Anyone who questions Trump MUST be insane (TDS)
All Dems want open borders...oh, and we have open borders anytime a D is in the White House, and the borders are completely closed when a R is in the White House

Shall I continue?

[Kismet]

All of PeteB et al greatest hits:

The left hate America, and wants to destroy it
People who complain about military policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to pay an obscene amount of money for life saving drugs and want single payer health care are communists
All BLM are terrorists
Anyone who questions Trump MUST be insane (TDS)
All Dems want open borders...oh, and we have open borders anytime a D is in the White House, and the borders are completely closed when a R is in the White House

Shall I continue?

Nuance is DEAD in this country. Everything is either black or white. Love or Hate. Rich or poor. Right or wrong. Native or foreign.
Big or small. Nazi or Marxist.

This is a country where wanting to own the libs so bad...that a sitting U.S. Senator would defend the use of a Nazi salute to confront a Jewish attorney general at a hearing.

[MDlaxfan76]

All of PeteB et al greatest hits:

The left hate America, and wants to destroy it
People who complain about military policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to pay an obscene amount of money for life saving drugs and want single payer health care are communists
All BLM are terrorists
Anyone who questions Trump MUST be insane (TDS)
All Dems want open borders...oh, and we have open borders anytime a D is in the White House, and the borders are completely closed when a R is in the White House

Shall I continue?

Nuance is DEAD in this country. Everything is either black or white. Love or Hate. Rich or poor. Right or wrong. Native or foreign.
Big or small. Nazi or Marxist.

This is a country where wanting to own the libs so bad...that a sitting U.S. Senator would defend the use of a Nazi salute to confront a Jewish attorney general at a hearing.

Yes...and...not only nuance, but also reverse projection, up is down, fiction is truth...orwellian stuff.

I happen to think that's far more coming from the hard right, and very much on purpose, but it's not unknown from the left as well.

[Peter Brown]

All of PeteB et al greatest hits:

The left hate America, and wants to destroy it
People who complain about military policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to pay an obscene amount of money for life saving drugs and want single payer health care are communists
All BLM are terrorists
Anyone who questions Trump MUST be insane (TDS)
All Dems want open borders...oh, and we have open borders anytime a D is in the White House, and the borders are completely closed when a R is in the White House

Shall I continue?

Let me help you a fan.

1). Yes, the left does hate America; zero hesitation asserting that. They’d happily reduce most Americans to “shared misery” rather than overall excellence.
2). Nope. I myself would prefer that America have zero bases outside the United States. I guess that makes me a military critic too? A leftie, am I?!
3). Nope. I believe in national health care (I also believe in private health care). Am I a leftie?!?
4). Kind of. A large % of the BLM leadership are Marxist’s. Not sure about the terrorist part, but many clearly are not exactly card carrying capitalists…
5). Nope. TLD is real, but I myself criticize Trump, hoping he is gone forever. So, am I a leftie again?!?
6). Yes, many Democrats could not care less if the borders were wide open. They have this incorrect idea that Latinos vote D. They didn’t realize that the lefts odd embrace and prioritization of bizarre lifestyles opposed to the family structure would get a pass by the same Latinos. Unfortunately for Dems, Latinos are noticing and beginning a natural transition away from Democrats. I mean, I don’t know any trans person, and I’m guessing nor do most.

So, you got 2 of 6 correct, 3 absolutely wrong, and one halfway right. That kind of guessing doesn’t cut it in the debate big leagues.

Try again.

[youthathletics]

All of PeteB et al greatest hits:

The left hate America, and wants to destroy it
People who complain about military policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to pay an obscene amount of money for life saving drugs and want single payer health care are communists
All BLM are terrorists
Anyone who questions Trump MUST be insane (TDS)
All Dems want open borders...oh, and we have open borders anytime a D is in the White House, and the borders are completely closed when a R is in the White House

Shall I continue?

Nuance is DEAD in this country. Everything is either black or white. Love or Hate. Rich or poor. Right or wrong. Native or foreign.
Big or small. Nazi or Marxist.

This is a country where wanting to own the libs so bad...that a sitting U.S. Senator would defend the use of a Nazi salute to confront a Jewish attorney general at a hearing.

Yes...and...not only nuance, but also reverse projection, up is down, fiction is truth...orwellian stuff.

I happen to think that's far more coming from the hard right, and very much on purpose, but it's not unknown from the left as well.

It's not dead, its just far easier to use a flame thrower...just look at Brooklyns memes, you know those far more hard right posters.

[MDlaxfan76]

All of PeteB et al greatest hits:

The left hate America, and wants to destroy it
People who complain about military policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to pay an obscene amount of money for life saving drugs and want single payer health care are communists
All BLM are terrorists
Anyone who questions Trump MUST be insane (TDS)
All Dems want open borders...oh, and we have open borders anytime a D is in the White House, and the borders are completely closed when a R is in the White House

Shall I continue?

Nuance is DEAD in this country. Everything is either black or white. Love or Hate. Rich or poor. Right or wrong. Native or foreign.
Big or small. Nazi or Marxist.

This is a country where wanting to own the libs so bad...that a sitting U.S. Senator would defend the use of a Nazi salute to confront a Jewish attorney general at a hearing.

Yes...and...not only nuance, but also reverse projection, up is down, fiction is truth...orwellian stuff.

I happen to think that's far more coming from the hard right, and very much on purpose, but it's not unknown from the left as well.

It's not dead, its just far easier to use a flame thrower...just look at Brooklyns memes, you know those far more hard right posters.

yes, a lot of cartoons...and some do reflect some overly strong messages, IMO. Not entirely undeservedly, but perhaps you want to point at a couple that really do go too far? I've certainly felt some did, but pretty easy to either chuckle or dismiss.

[Farfromgeneva]

Look, believe what you want.
From the other perspective- I covered Board of Ed meetings for many years for the WaPo in 5 districts including DC. The claims above about public comments being ignored, until someone makes a scene is very often true. More so than not.
I am not a proponent of threatening any public servants, but to label any of these actual parents (not people who are threatening) is just absurd and a heavy handed response trying to silence critics.
People used to get thrown out of BoE meetings all the time.
Admins had intentionally stupid public comment rules just for that purpose. I’ve Seen mics shut off at exactly 60 seconds, commenters get shouted down by board presidents when their time was up. Pretty classless stuff, because the school boards didn’t like dissent.
Overall I’ve never seen an industry based more on the “good idea fairy” instead of actual results. These school board administrators take their workshops in the summer and come back with an idea and changes to implement each year. When their ideas are turds, they don’t want to hear criticism because it makes them actually have to work. They take it too personal and want to shut down criticism. Very common.
More common than anyone here will ever admit, or know.

Vote then out, easier in a localized situation.

[Bart]

Look, believe what you want.
From the other perspective- I covered Board of Ed meetings for many years for the WaPo in 5 districts including DC. The claims above about public comments being ignored, until someone makes a scene is very often true. More so than not.
I am not a proponent of threatening any public servants, but to label any of these actual parents (not people who are threatening) is just absurd and a heavy handed response trying to silence critics.
People used to get thrown out of BoE meetings all the time.
Admins had intentionally stupid public comment rules just for that purpose. I’ve Seen mics shut off at exactly 60 seconds, commenters get shouted down by board presidents when their time was up. Pretty classless stuff, because the school boards didn’t like dissent.
Overall I’ve never seen an industry based more on the “good idea fairy” instead of actual results. These school board administrators take their workshops in the summer and come back with an idea and changes to implement each year. When their ideas are turds, they don’t want to hear criticism because it makes them actually have to work. They take it too personal and want to shut down criticism. Very common.
More common than anyone here will ever admit, or know.

Interesting. I will say that after 10 years on a local BoE I never saw a person removed from a meeting. It is not in a large city and I stopped being a member prior to all this hub bub but we did have a few "controversial" issues, mostly around budget and cuts.

In NYS you are not guaranteed the right to speak at a BoE meeting. These are "open" meetings where the board conducts business in front of the public and does not have to allow public comment. If public comment is allowed it has to bet open to everyone and can not discriminate who can and can not speak. During most meetings, no one spoke a peep. If there was cause to think there were going to be some public comment then the president would read a list of rules that must be adhered to in order to speak, including but not limited to (I do not remember all) 1)a time limit 2)threatening or intimidating behavior not tolerated 3) no mention of students by name. 4) we would not comment on any staff issues 5) each person had to give their name and address prior to speaking.

For the most part people were passionate but respectful. I had no problem with hearing criticism. I had an issue when the criticism got personal to either a member or the superintendent. Luckily at the time this only happened in a very few instances. I do speak to friends still on the board and know that this is no longer the case and some people have gotten very personal with current members. Right on the edge of threats, which I know I would not have handled well......

I will also note that when, at least in NYS, the DoE gives "guidance" it really is not guidance in the sense that most people would expect. Their guidance tend to be rules and the disconnect happens when parents think that the district actually has a choice in the matter.

[Farfromgeneva]

All of PeteB et al greatest hits:

The left hate America, and wants to destroy it
People who complain about military policies are terrorists.
Those who don’t wish to be forced to pay an obscene amount of money for life saving drugs and want single payer health care are communists
All BLM are terrorists
Anyone who questions Trump MUST be insane (TDS)
All Dems want open borders...oh, and we have open borders anytime a D is in the White House, and the borders are completely closed when a R is in the White House

Shall I continue?

Nuance is DEAD in this country. Everything is either black or white. Love or Hate. Rich or poor. Right or wrong. Native or foreign.
Big or small. Nazi or Marxist.

This is a country where wanting to own the libs so bad...that a sitting U.S. Senator would defend the use of a Nazi salute to confront a Jewish attorney general at a hearing.

Yes...and...not only nuance, but also reverse projection, up is down, fiction is truth...orwellian stuff.

I happen to think that's far more coming from the hard right, and very much on purpose, but it's not unknown from the left as well.

It's not dead, its just far easier to use a flame thrower...just look at Brooklyns memes, you know those far more hard right posters.

Hello future generations

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9gNG3-4LUVY

[MDlaxfan76]

Look, believe what you want.
From the other perspective- I covered Board of Ed meetings for many years for the WaPo in 5 districts including DC. The claims above about public comments being ignored, until someone makes a scene is very often true. More so than not.
I am not a proponent of threatening any public servants, but to label any of these actual parents (not people who are threatening) is just absurd and a heavy handed response trying to silence critics.
People used to get thrown out of BoE meetings all the time.
Admins had intentionally stupid public comment rules just for that purpose. I’ve Seen mics shut off at exactly 60 seconds, commenters get shouted down by board presidents when their time was up. Pretty classless stuff, because the school boards didn’t like dissent.
Overall I’ve never seen an industry based more on the “good idea fairy” instead of actual results. These school board administrators take their workshops in the summer and come back with an idea and changes to implement each year. When their ideas are turds, they don’t want to hear criticism because it makes them actually have to work. They take it too personal and want to shut down criticism. Very common.
More common than anyone here will ever admit, or know.

Interesting. I will say that after 10 years on a local BoE I never saw a person removed from a meeting. It is not in a large city and I stopped being a member prior to all this hub bub but we did have a few "controversial" issues, mostly around budget and cuts.

In NYS you are not guaranteed the right to speak at a BoE meeting. These are "open" meetings where the board conducts business in front of the public and does not have to allow public comment. If public comment is allowed it has to bet open to everyone and can not discriminate who can and can not speak. During most meetings, no one spoke a peep. If there was cause to think there were going to be some public comment then the president would read a list of rules that must be adhered to in order to speak, including but not limited to (I do not remember all) 1)a time limit 2)threatening or intimidating behavior not tolerated 3) no mention of students by name. 4) we would not comment on any staff issues 5) each person had to give their name and address prior to speaking.

For the most part people were passionate but respectful. I had no problem with hearing criticism. I had an issue when the criticism got personal to either a member or the superintendent. Luckily at the time this only happened in a very few instances. I do speak to friends still on the board and know that this is no longer the case and some people have gotten very personal with current members. Right on the edge of threats, which I know I would not have handled well......

I will also note that when, at least in NYS, the DoE gives "guidance" it really is not guidance in the sense that most people would expect. Their guidance tend to be rules and the disconnect happens when parents think that the district actually has a choice in the matter.

Thanks, an interesting perspective as well...and more akin to what I'd heard...from years past.

Somehow, we've gotten this notion that everyone has the right to scream and holler whenever they want to and any insistence on decorum and civility is an abridgment of 1st Amendment rights.

Much of this is indeed akin to the confrontation in restaurants etc of Trump Admin officials and other politicians that was happening, just on a much larger scale and way down into the lower levels of elected public service, grass roots...school BD's for god's sake!

Supported by many of the same people who were decrying the restaurant confrontations...hypocrites.

And that scale and grass roots level is very much on purpose, nationally coordinated, funded and fomented.

We're also seeing way more physical threats against these folks and their families than ever before, even for much higher elected officials. And these folks don't have security...

[kramerica.inc]

Look, believe what you want.
From the other perspective- I covered Board of Ed meetings for many years for the WaPo in 5 districts including DC. The claims above about public comments being ignored, until someone makes a scene is very often true. More so than not.
I am not a proponent of threatening any public servants, but to label any of these actual parents (not people who are threatening) is just absurd and a heavy handed response trying to silence critics.
People used to get thrown out of BoE meetings all the time.
Admins had intentionally stupid public comment rules just for that purpose. I’ve Seen mics shut off at exactly 60 seconds, commenters get shouted down by board presidents when their time was up. Pretty classless stuff, because the school boards didn’t like dissent.
Overall I’ve never seen an industry based more on the “good idea fairy” instead of actual results. These school board administrators take their workshops in the summer and come back with an idea and changes to implement each year. When their ideas are turds, they don’t want to hear criticism because it makes them actually have to work. They take it too personal and want to shut down criticism. Very common.
More common than anyone here will ever admit, or know.

Interesting. I will say that after 10 years on a local BoE I never saw a person removed from a meeting. It is not in a large city and I stopped being a member prior to all this hub bub but we did have a few "controversial" issues, mostly around budget and cuts.

In NYS you are not guaranteed the right to speak at a BoE meeting. These are "open" meetings where the board conducts business in front of the public and does not have to allow public comment. If public comment is allowed it has to bet open to everyone and can not discriminate who can and can not speak. During most meetings, no one spoke a peep. If there was cause to think there were going to be some public comment then the president would read a list of rules that must be adhered to in order to speak, including but not limited to (I do not remember all) 1)a time limit 2)threatening or intimidating behavior not tolerated 3) no mention of students by name. 4) we would not comment on any staff issues 5) each person had to give their name and address prior to speaking.

For the most part people were passionate but respectful. I had no problem with hearing criticism. I had an issue when the criticism got personal to either a member or the superintendent. Luckily at the time this only happened in a very few instances. I do speak to friends still on the board and know that this is no longer the case and some people have gotten very personal with current members. Right on the edge of threats, which I know I would not have handled well......

I will also note that when, at least in NYS, the DoE gives "guidance" it really is not guidance in the sense that most people would expect. Their guidance tend to be rules and the disconnect happens when parents think that the district actually has a choice in the matter.

Thanks, an interesting perspective as well...and more akin to what I'd heard...from years past.

Somehow, we've gotten this notion that everyone has the right to scream and holler whenever they want to and any insistence on decorum and civility is an abridgment of 1st Amendment rights.

Much of this is indeed akin to the confrontation in restaurants etc of Trump Admin officials and other politicians that was happening, just on a much larger scale and way down into the lower levels of elected public service, grass roots...school BD's for god's sake!

Supported by many of the same people who were decrying the restaurant confrontations...hypocrites.

And that scale and grass roots level is very much on purpose, nationally coordinated, funded and fomented.

We're also seeing way more physical threats against these folks and their families than ever before, even for much higher elected officials. And these folks don't have security...

Bart, it all starts with the top and the tone set by the superintendent. One county I covered was run very much like yours.

Superintendent was a smart person who wasn’t scared of ideas and discussion.

Another wanted things her way or the high way. Their board meetings were very different. Same demographics, same county makeup. Just a county apart.

It’s easy to say vote them out. But very often in the counties where I covered, the board was doing the bidding of the superintendent and school administrators. The board’s “say” was strictly for show and procedural.