| Author | Post |
|---|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20th, 2007 03:15 pm |
|
| gadfly....did you ever think there was a good reason for most of those votes being 4-1. That 1 you speak of never could wrap her mind around an idea enough to vote accordingly. She ALWAYS asks (well not always, not about the removal of parental permission....she did THAT with no information whatsoever) for more info because she can't research anything herself. Typical of a closer. The other four board members would do their homework and information gathering BEFORE the meeting and the vote. Now you say you are happy to have two more board members like DD....are you kidding me?....that was the worst that could happen, and now we are witnessing it. KK thinks nothing of demanding agenda items, just to then table them, what a waste of time, especially for the people that went to the meeting to address those items. She has done that before with the lunch policy and protest items, I truly believe she does it out of the spite she has for us. I haven't heard of any other reason. Joe Bernier
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20th, 2007 02:47 pm |
|
| Diane was always a blip because the votes were always 4 to 1. Evidently, the voters decided to change the makeup of the board so that Diane's votes carried some weight.
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20th, 2007 03:14 am |
|
gadfly wrote: integrityforPUSD wrote: Diane Douglas, Kathy Knecht and Rick Murphy are going to an extreme the other way, and by doing so they are hurting the district more than Pat Galbraith and Debra Raeder.
I think Diane Douglas must be doing something right because this fringe group detests her so much.
I realize that you believe this is a fringe group of people but it really isn't. There are a lot of people that do not support this change in policy. And there are even more people that do not support the three newest board members.
Before Rick Murphy and Kathy Knecht took their seats as Governing Board Members, Diane Douglas was just a blip in the board meetings. She didn't have any special persuasive powers with the other board members. She still doesn't have that power, she only has a political faction that is supporting her...right now. In truth, currently all of the governing board members as individuals are unremarkable.
Last edited on Tue Nov 20th, 2007 04:10 am by integrityforPUSD
|
prisoner
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 19th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20th, 2007 02:30 am |
|
Gadfly, us "kiddies" are not disrespecting the democratic system. The democratic system is disrespecting us...the ones that they want to CONTROL. That is the only reason for closing the campuses...control. IF they were to be respecting us, they would be listening to us.
I'm pretty sure you have seen the number of people standing up week after week at board meetings stating their opinion about this issue, and you said you're getting annoyed of it correct? Well guess what...the ones that speak up there in front of the board and the community are annoyed of not being recognized as concerned Peoria citizens, but instead they are being recognized as "kiddies", "radicals", and "bullies"? Gadfly, I want to let you know that they are definately not kiddies, but mature high school and junior high students that have the guts to get in front of a crowd and important board members to state their opinion about something that is strongly affecting them. A radical is a person who favors rapid and sweeping changes in laws and methods of government. These students and adults that get up there every meeting are the ones that favor rapid and sweeping changes in ridiculously unreasonable laws that violate an even BIGGER "law" or method of government...The Constitution. And how dare you call that bullying?
You need to take a look at all the positive and great things in this community. Look at how far these EXCELLING students have come...and now look at how much farther they are going to go with their wisdom and passion! There are very few students that are that active in their community. Well...to sum this up, the board members (Kathy Knecht, Rick Murphy, and Diane Douglas), and all you "closers" out there are the ones that are disrespecting us...
Last edited on Tue Nov 20th, 2007 02:32 am by prisoner
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20th, 2007 02:07 am |
|
| Joe - if they can't and don't enforce the policy, then this BS with the speeches, etc. is now going to go away, is this correct?
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20th, 2007 01:18 am |
|
| Peoria Dad - Always look forward to your extremely inciteful and thought provoking comments. Last edited on Tue Nov 20th, 2007 07:34 am by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20th, 2007 12:26 am |
|
| gadfly....you are incorrect about one thing. Civic lesson for you. The board is NOT charged with creating policy that governs the students free time. The board...even though elected...has no business creating policies that supersede the parents responsibility and control of their own student. That is what is at the root of this debate. If your reasoning was true, city councils could decide that no one leaves their place of work at lunch. If your reasoning were true, the board could decide that the parents themselves could never pick up their kids at anytime (that is what they tried to do initially) If your reasoning were true the board could decide to keep the kids 24-7. The board is to make educational policy only....they have overstepped their bounds on this issue. The board cannot enforce this policy....they can only hope people will (blindly) follow it. Joe Bernier
|
Peoria Dad
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 126 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20th, 2007 12:18 am |
|
Diane Douglas is a political hack for the radical right wing of the Republican party. Nothing more, nothing less.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 11:12 pm |
|
integrityforPUSD wrote: Diane Douglas, Kathy Knecht and Rick Murphy are going to an extreme the other way, and by doing so they are hurting the district more than Pat Galbraith and Debra Raeder.
I think Diane Douglas must be doing something right because this fringe group detests her so much.Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 11:15 pm by gadfly
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 10:56 pm |
|
Let me give you a civic lesson, kiddie. In America, we decide who is going to represent us on the board by elections. During a campaign, the candidates state their positions on issues. During this particular campaign, both candidates who won stated they were in favor of completely closing the campuses. Since they received more votes, they are now our representatives on the board. There are only 5 members of the board who get to vote on any particular issue. I don't get to vote, your parents don't get to vote, only these five. As the board makeup is right now, more members are choosing to close the campuses than leaving them open. Therefore, they can do this.
The Radicals, as it sounds like you are one, have decided you now do not like the policy that the duly elected decided to implement. So, instead of waiting until the next board election to change the makeup of the board, you are acting like a bunch of spoiled children who want their candy now!! If you are one of the kids that is giving speeches week after week at the board meetings, I must say I initially respected your guts to be up there and give your position on the issue in front of the board. Once is fine, but to get up week after week after week is just plain annoying and redundant and a complete waste of everybody's time. What is the point of doing this other than trying to bully the board in getting what you want? It is now a complete farce.
Have you looked up radical? A synonym would be extreme - a group associated with views, practices, and policies of extreme. Is it extreme to basically throw these temper tantrums until you get your way and not respect the system of voting? Absolutely....
And why is this disrespecting the students - because there is group of you that feel you should be allowed to leave for lunch even though the electorate voted the members in that said you couldn't? I think a much better question would be - is your group disrespecting the democratic system? Again, absolutely you are...
Last edited on Tue Nov 20th, 2007 02:09 am by gadfly
|
onefedupkiddie
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 30th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 67 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 10:07 pm |
|
Oh yes, we're radicals, we're bullies. Are you serious? Really?
As the community was becoming more and more aware of this whole situation, they all chose a side. Rick, Gadfly, it wasn't yours. Now all you're trying to do is call us names and use slanderous tactics that are nothing short of childish. You are the ones trying to say that you are a better parent than my parents because they would let me go off campus, and if that's not bullying, I don't know what is. This is sick, and I would like a little bit of respect instead of flat out rudeness. It's absolutely appalling.
Explain how we are "radical". Because we aren't sitting back like Kevin Bacon in Animal House and saying "Thank you sir, may I have another?" If you say that Joe's kids are going to hate him for this one day, you are clearly seeing things wrong, considering how you and those mudslinging along side you's actions are showing a complete disrespect for the students. You should be ashamed.
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 08:27 pm |
|
Any extreme amount of thinking and acting isn't good. The district hasn't been all bad there just needs to be more balance. Diane Douglas, Kathy Knecht and Rick Murphy are going to an extreme the other way, and by doing so they are hurting the district more than Pat Galbraith and Debra Raeder.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 06:37 pm |
|
| My opinion is that Raeder and Galbraith would actually be more apt to support the incompetents because they are all part of the Peoria "family" and what we've done in the past is so wonderful. I hate that when they start throwing that term around.
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 06:28 pm |
|
| I think in the long haul Diane Douglas is hurting the district, and she the would typically support the type of work/teachers that gave your daughter the class work you described. Any idiot could come in and shake up the status quo, but that doesn't make them effective, or useful.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 06:02 pm |
|
| I'm actually not kidding about Diane. I don't know Diane, she wouldn't know me from a hole in the ground, but I think she is good for the district because she has shaken up the status quo. It needed to be shaken up and a few cages rattled.
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 05:41 pm |
|
gadfly wrote: I really disagree with you about Diane Douglas. The thing that's really good about her is she is not afraid to ask questions if she doesn't know something. My way of thinking is that board members are not supposed to be the experts on every issue that comes their way. They are supposed to be the check and balance of an administration of the school district that are the experts and to be our watchdog of people like me who don't have the time to keep up on every single issue that comes along.
The real problem I see with Debra Raeder is she has been there so long, she is so defensive about anything said that might be negative on how things are done in the past and is very inflexible about looking at changing what has been decided in the past. I do get very frustrated with her, yes. This lunch thing is what puts me over the edge and makes me start blogging again.
Oh my goodness, you must be kidding about Diane Douglas! She questions way too much, she doesn't have a clue about what she is even questioning and that is why she questions so much. True, they can't be experts at everything but they can certainly do their homework before they come to the board meetings. And it is obvious that they do not do their homework. They do not study an issue and from what I am hearing they do not go to many of the committee meetings that they could be going to. These committee meetings would help her to understand many of the items that are brought before them. Even as recent as the issue regarding Old Main, it isn't as if Old Main hasn't been around for a long time. Or, the medical insurance issue, in this case she really didn't have a clue how the employee's pay their share of family costs. Yes, she asks questions, because she is clueless! (She doesn't know a lot!)
I happen to agree with you regarding Debra Raeder, in the sense that I think she has been in office for too long. She has been too complacent in some areas, and takes too much interest in areas regarding her pet projects. I also believe she, along with every board member, is way too weak in the area of innovative ideas.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 05:11 pm |
|
I really disagree with you about Diane Douglas. The thing that's really good about her is she is not afraid to ask questions if she doesn't know something. My way of thinking is that board members are not supposed to be the experts on every issue that comes their way. They are supposed to be the check and balance of an administration of the school district that are the experts and to be our watchdog of people like me who don't have the time to keep up on every single issue that comes along.
The real problem I see with Debra Raeder is she has been there so long, she is so defensive about anything said that might be negative on how things are done in the past and is very inflexible about looking at changing what has been decided in the past. I do get very frustrated with her, yes, and Debra and I have exchanged some contentious emails about her views. I really hope she has moved on to bigger and better things and will decide not to run again. It would be a very good thing for the district. I don't think it's healthy for the district for anyone to be there that long.
This lunch thing is what puts me over the edge and makes me start blogging again, though.
Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 05:36 pm by gadfly
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 04:58 pm |
|
gadfly wrote: integrityforPUSD wrote: gadfly wrote: Joewrites4rights wrote:
Gadfly, the lunch issue must be a very important issue to you, since you are spending so much time addressing this issue.
Excellent point Integrity. As you know, I have tried to quit this blogging cold turkey for a while, but it's kind of like smoking, it's really a hard habit to break. I think I just get so annoyed that I can't even pick a local newspaper or watch a school board meeting without having this silly issue in my face. It's kind of like a smoker who is trying to quit, but goes into that smoky bar and has a drink and starts smoking again. I am addressing this valid point you have made, however, and it's time to get a life again. I can't believe the lunch issue is all that bothers you when you watch the board meetings. For me just watching Diane Douglas struggle with every issue, and just her attempting to think, is hard for me to watch. The same with Kathy Knecht they both struggle with the thought process.
Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 04:59 pm by integrityforPUSD
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 04:41 pm |
|
integrityforPUSD wrote: gadfly wrote: Joewrites4rights wrote:
Gadfly, the lunch issue must be a very important issue to you, since you are spending so much time addressing this issue.
Excellent point Integrity. As you know, I have tried to quit this blogging cold turkey for a while, but it's kind of like smoking, it's really a hard habit to break. I think I just get so annoyed that I can't even pick a local newspaper or watch a school board meeting without having this silly issue in my face. It's kind of like a smoker who is trying to quit, but goes into that smoky bar and has a drink and starts smoking again. I am addressing this valid point you have made, however, and it's time to get a life again.
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 04:31 pm |
|
gadfly wrote: Joewrites4rights wrote:
It sure would be nice if some of the closers cared enough about the conditions of lunch to address the board....but they don't.....they never have cared about the students.....just only about getting THEIR way. One of them even stated that the students shouldn't even have a lunch....they should be happy just eating at their desks. Yeah....I'm going to sit back and let that happen? If the next board decides to do that....and we do things your way....we would all just go with it? You guys go ahead and follow the blind bureaucrats....They have proven that they don't care about what the students high school experience is like. They have proven that here in these blogs and posts time and time again. If they did care about the students and parents as the individuals they are....none of what we do would bother them. Joe Bernier
Joe - The whole thing is, if I may speak for a lot of people, the "closers" don't care that much about lunch. Unless they're feeding my kids Alpo laced with poison, my kids are probably going to live through the lunch experience. I find it laughable that one of the points you all make is look at how many pro-lunch people are speakers at the board meetings as compared to anti-lunch speakers. With the possible exception of gadfly, who spends entirely too much time blogging about such a silly issue, I would hazard to guess more people than not have more important and pressing things going on in their lives than to come and talk about lunches at the high schools and the fact that my kid is waiting for ten minutes and it really should be reduced to five.
Gadfly, the lunch issue must be a very important issue to you, since you are spending so much time addressing this issue.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 04:24 pm |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote:
It sure would be nice if some of the closers cared enough about the conditions of lunch to address the board....but they don't.....they never have cared about the students.....just only about getting THEIR way. One of them even stated that the students shouldn't even have a lunch....they should be happy just eating at their desks. Yeah....I'm going to sit back and let that happen? If the next board decides to do that....and we do things your way....we would all just go with it? You guys go ahead and follow the blind bureaucrats....They have proven that they don't care about what the students high school experience is like. They have proven that here in these blogs and posts time and time again. If they did care about the students and parents as the individuals they are....none of what we do would bother them. Joe Bernier
Joe - The whole thing is, if I may speak for a lot of people, the "closers" don't care that much about lunch. Unless they're feeding my kids Alpo laced with poison, my kids are probably going to live through the lunch experience. I find it laughable that one of the points you all make is look at how many pro-lunch people are speakers at the board meetings as compared to anti-lunch speakers. With the possible exception of gadfly, who spends entirely too much time blogging about such a silly issue, I would hazard to guess more people than not have more important and pressing things going on in their lives than to come and talk about lunches at the high schools and the fact that my kid is waiting for ten minutes and it really should be reduced to five.
Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 04:28 pm by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 03:03 pm |
|
gadfly....this ain't fame. Sorry that you think it is. (and read the previous posts for answers to your questions) I'm still patiently waiting for you to answer my questions. But I seriously doubt you have any intention of having a dialogue about this. You seem only interested in a monologue. And it's not "my way or your way"...ask yourself....WHO is FORCING THEIR WAYS onto the people? ANSWER....the "closers". I'm not trying to force my way onto anybody......I believe we ALL should have OUR OWN WAY. Freedom of choice.....I know you don't like freedom.....too bad.
HD...the world is different only because we have let things like this go unchecked. What I still don't understand is why we all can't each have our individual choice on this matter. Your opinions are no more right for me as mine are right for you. We are both right....for ourselves. Two rights don't make a wrong.
dadof3....I'm not backed into a corner and I have done what I said I would do....no one has stopped me from signing out my daughter the way I said I would. And I am trying to get the board to give the district the resources to provide a better lunch....I said it again in my address to the last week. And AGAIN.....it fell on deaf ears. So....our kids are not going to attend the "mandatory lunch". Our choice....We didn't give it up. The board can try to take it all they want....we don't have to give it.
It sure would be nice if some of the closers cared enough about the conditions of lunch to address the board....but they don't.....they never have cared about the students.....just only about getting THEIR way. One of them even stated that the students shouldn't even have a lunch....they should be happy just eating at their desks. Yeah....I'm going to sit back and let that happen? If the next board decides to do that....and we do things your way....we would all just go with it? You guys go ahead and follow the blind bureaucrats....They have proven that they don't care about what the students high school experience is like. They have proven that here in these blogs and posts time and time again. If they did care about the students and parents as the individuals they are....none of what we do would bother them. Joe Bernier
Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 03:09 pm by Joewrites4rights
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 01:54 pm |
|
| I think there is much to the statement that someone is enjoying his fifteen minutes of fame.
|
dadof3
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 139 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 01:27 pm |
|
| Gadfly, I agree with you. How many times has Joe said (paraphrase, but you get the point) they can't stop us, hear the rumble-that's us, they can't incarcerate my child, who can stop us-nobody, it's not enforceable, try to stop us-you can't no one can, etc. Joe, you've been asked several times to either put up or shut up or something along those lines. I've come to believe that you don't want to though, because then you run the (huge) risk of being proven a Don Quixote. You've backed yourself into a corner, but a lot of us would at least give you back a little bit of the respect and recognition you apparently so desperately crave if you'd turn your energies towards making lunch on campus more palatable if you honestly think it's such a life-altering horrible experience.
|
HD
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 12:57 pm |
|
Mr. Bernier,
As a responsible adult and parent, I would think you would see the value of wisdom and common sense. The world we live in today is much different than when you grew up.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 04:56 am |
|
I will certainly agree you've done some very creative writing in these blogs - not credible, but creative and entertaining. Of course, the clowns at the circus are creative and entertaining also and are really not someone to be taken seriously.
You made the statement something to the effect "no one can stop us now". We've heard this statement from you for about five months. Let's do whatever you're going to do, please, and let's quit talking about it. I've made it very clear that my stance on these lunches is I couldn't care less about it. You keep asking where is your case law, case law for what??? I never made any of the ridiculous statements you did. I think my stance has been consistent. This is stupid, what you Radicals are doing is stupid, quit wasting everybody's time, and push the issue in the next election when you're supposed to. If Kathy Knecht resigned tomorrow and you guys received your precious lunches back, I would almost be happy about it because hopefully you all would go away. I think I may speak for a lot people in this community in that we are just plain tired of you all. It is such a ridiculous issue to be spending so much time and effort on. You all keep stating this wave of support you have, well I'm not sure you do. You do have some very vocal wackos out there (yes I am name calling, it fits), but I would guess this is all going to be detrimental to any candidate who lines up with you wackos in the next election. I am not so sure that I would say "THAT's A FACT!!!!", but I will be most interested to see how this all shakes out.
If you would get your way, I would be disgusted only that a bunch of bullies did it through intimidation. They couldn't do it through the voting system, so they made a whole farce of the system and essentially held their collective breath like a spoiled child.
Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 12:52 pm by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 04:05 am |
|
gadfly....I dropped English teachers like you before. They always thought they were self righteous and beyond reproach just like you. And they loved berating students....just like you. They never liked my direct in your face style of writing either. Even when I backed it up. Like I have here in this forum. BTW...where is your thesis and research to back up your statements? Oh....I forgot...you self appointed yourself as the teacher...you don't have to show your work. Well....a good teacher leads by example.....so show me your thesis and research teacher!!!!
The English teachers that liked me (and the feeling was mutual) were the creative thinking type. You wouldn't have liked them either. BTW....I was never late back to class when I left for lunch. And I started leaving when I was a freshman. It's called responsibility and time management. I even had a full-time job all the way through high school. Paid taxes and everything. Just like a lot of these great students of this district do. To think that "kiddies" are capable of all that. That must really bother an English teacher like you.
For you I will state it again...plain and simple.....the fourteenth amendment grants liberties....this policy takes liberties....from both the students and the parents. The constitution applies towards every situation in life. You will not find the words "closed campus" in the constitution, nor will you find the words "walking down the street", or "talking on the phone" or "driving down the road" or "eating a sandwich" or "having lunch at home" etc. Nope....you just need to somehow understand that the constitution grants all of us the liberty to do any of those things whenever we want to. I think somewhere it also states these rights are inalienable. School policy can limit those things if they deter from the educational process. Like the first amendment doesn't protect someones right to free speech if they are being disruptive in class. But lunch has nothing to do with the educational process. Sorry, I don't have any case law to back me up on that one. But I'm sure you can agree with me on that. Well I'm not really sure.....but if you disagree with me and you think lunch DOES have something to do with the educational process....I've got to hear it. Joe Bernier
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 03:33 am |
|
| Okay Apache Mom, who is this drummom really? Conspiracies abound from the Radicals, don't they....And drummom (if that's really who you are), you appear to be a rookie at this blogging thing. Let me give you give a little free advice and you don't even need to thank me. If you are going to point out someone's typos, make sure you don't have any of your own. Dont is not a word. Also, it's accepted practice to put periods at the end of a sentence. Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 03:44 am by gadfly
|
drummom
Member
| Joined: | Sun Nov 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 6 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 03:29 am |
|
NEVER IN ALL MY YEARS OF TEACHER HAVE I COME ACROSS SUCH AN ABSURD STATEMENT,
Please tell me you really are not a teacher, because if this is what you are teaching, I want to make sure my kids dont ever have you
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 03:08 am |
|
| I wondered how anyone could be so in love with lunch - now I understand Joe a little better....
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 03:06 am |
|
GOOD AFTERNOON CLASS. AS YOUR 10TH GRADE ENGLISH TEACHER, I FEEL IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO PROPERLY RESEARCH, WRITE, AND DOCUMENT A RESEARCH PAPER. THERE ARE MANY TIMES YOU WILL ENCOUNTER REAL WORLD EXPERIENCES WHERE YOU WILL BE ASKED TO BACK UP WHAT YOU SAY. WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT SOME VERY WELL WRITTEN PAPERS TODAY AND SOME VERY POORLY WRITTEN ONES. ONE IN PARTICULAR IN THIS LATTER CATEGORY WAS WRITTEN BY LITTLE JOEY BERNEIR. IS JOEY HERE TODAY? HE STILL HASN'T RETURNED FROM LUNCH? JOEY SURE ENJOYS HIS LUNCH, DOESN'T HE? IT'S ALMOST AS IF NOTHING ELSE MATTERS IN HIS LIFE.
AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED, A RESEARCH PAPER BEGINS WITH A THESIS STATEMENT.
A thesis (from Greek θέσις position) is an intellectual proposition. A thesis statement is the statement that begins a formal essay or argument, or that describes the central argument of an academic paper or proposition.
ONCE YOU HAVE YOUR INTELLECTUAL PROPOSITION ,OR YOUR THESIS, IT IS THEN UP TO YOU TO RESEARCH YOUR TOPIC AND DOCUMENT YOUR SOURCES. YOUR RESEARCH IS WHAT TRANSFORMS YOUR THEORY TO FACT, FROM JUST YOUR OPINION TO AN ACCEPTED FACT TO THE READER.
JOEY TURNED IN A MOST INTERESTING PAPER. JOEY'S THESIS STATEMENT WAS "CLOSING LUNCH CAMPUSES IS A DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE 14 TH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION". FRANKLY, I WAS NOT SURPRISED THAT JOEY PICKED THIS FOR HIS THESIS. HOWEVER, I WAS TAKEN ABACK BY JOEY'S PAPER IN THAT HE DID NO ABSOLUTELY NO RESEARCH AND HAD NO BIBLIOGRPAPHY OR FOOTNOTES. WHEN I ASKED JOEY ABOUT IT, HE INDICATED TO ME, ' UNTIL YOU CAN PROVIDE TO ME THAT IT IS NOT A DIRECT VIOLATION, THEN IT'S FACT!!!!"
NEVER IN ALL MY YEARS OF TEACHING HAVE I COME ACROSS SUCH AN ABSURD STATEMENT, EVEN FOR A SOPHOMORE IN HIGH SCHOOL. I INDICATED TO JOEY IF HE CONTINUED THIS PRACTICE IN THE REAL WORLD, HIS CREDIBILITY WOULD SOON BE REDUCED TO ZERO AND MOST ANYTHING HE SAID WILL BE LAMPOONED. NOT ONLY DID JOEY RECEIVE AN "F" FOR HIS EFFORTS, BUT HE WILL BE SPENDING LUNCH WITH ME AND WILL BE NOT ALLOWED TO EAT LUNCH ANYWHERE BUT THIS ROOM WHILE HE LEARNS HOW TO RESEARCH AND DOCUMENT HIS PAPERS.
Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 03:30 am by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 01:36 am |
|
| rdg...I have proven my point. I have presented the hard evidence to the board. I get it....they don't listen. What nobody brings up is the fact that I showed the district that their original policy (in MAY) was way out of line and too restrictive for even the closers. Remember....even the parents couldn't pick their own kids up....and the limited appointments had to be verified beforehand. We got that changed....but the closers won't ever admit it. They will NEVER admit I was right about that. They totally disrespect the students and the parents of this district. I'm glad you are getting your way. I'm all for everyone getting "their way". Why your way needs to become our way is beyond me. You wouldn't like it if we were able to force your kids OFF campus everyday for lunch. You would want your right to choose then, wouldn't you? BTW....I'm not the one renaming these blogs. Joe Bernier
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 134 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 01:08 am |
|
Joe...the burden of proof lies in your corner, not mine. I am not fighting this and I happen to agree with the PUSD on this matter. Like I've stated before, all this hot air, raised blood pressure and the name calling for a 40 minute lunch break! No offense, but couldn't this time and energy be spent on more productive issues that plague this land?
Just remember, if you go before any board and start citing 14th Amendment and Constitutional issues you had better be prepared to present facts and solid proof and not rely on heavily opinionated blogs.
How many more names will be given to this topic just so you can plead your case?....We get it Joe, you oppose this new policy!
Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 01:09 am by rdg7359
|
Peoria Dad
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 126 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 19th, 2007 12:20 am |
|
This is just to piss off RDG and dadof3 -- both Frank Rohrig and Michael Erickson have posted today, and you probably won't like it:
http://nohoneymoon.blogspot.com
http://eyeonpusd.blogspot.com
I bet Apache Mom would be proud of me.
Last edited on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 12:20 am by Peoria Dad
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 11:41 pm |
|
dadof3....I answered a question....I never claimed to have "closed campus" case law. Three months ago someone asked the same thing....and I answered the same way. If you want to make it clear....remember....the closers have no case law either!! About ANY of their points. And, like I have pointed out before....we have plenty of case law that disputes all of the closer's reasoning. We have case law that states students and parents do have rights....this includes the right to leave the campus at lunch time with the parents permission, I can't find anything to the contrary. We have case law that states it is the parents that retain responsibility for their students actions.
Like I have said before....who can stop us? Nobody! We didn't give permission to the district to lock up our kids at lunch. I don't need the districts permission to have my kids come home for lunch. I've tried to explain this to the board, but they don't listen. I find it very interesting that this bothers the closers so much. They got their way....the policy is in place....they just can't handle us not following it, and it bothers them that it's not enforceable!! Joe Bernier
|
dadof3
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 139 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 09:19 pm |
|
| Finally, an admission, you have no case law Joe. Because there isn't any. If you want to make case law, please do us all a huge favor and hire a lawyer and get it over with one way or the other.
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 08:55 pm |
|
| rdg....I can't find any case law pertaining to the unconstitutionality of "closed campus" just as you can't find any case law showing that is IS constitutional. Probably for two reasons....this is a relatively new idea sweeping across the land and no district has yet to strip away parental permission, like PUSD has. Most all of the other districts I have research have policies in place like we had last year. That is the way "most" districts are doing it. The others are open or open with contingencies, like good behavior, grades, and attendance. Sound familiar? When the closers state that one of their reasons for closed campuses is because other districts are doing it....then let's DO IT the way they are doing it....WITH parental permission. That's the point I am debating about when the closers state that as a reason. Fact is the closers want to do it THEIR way....which is a totally self serving and controlling (new) way. Other districts have also made MANY changes to the campus structure and lunchtime experience for the students. The closers don't even care to improve the student experience at all. All of the districts I have researched have some form of parental permission to allow the student to come home (or go somewhere else) for lunch with the parents permission. So we are on new ground here. That's why I keep bringing up the 14th amendment that protects every one's liberties, regardless of what the the context is in. If you (or any of the closers) disagree with me so much....then why can't you (or any of the closers) show me some case law that proves any of the validity of your points? Joe Bernier
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 134 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 07:52 pm |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: I HAVE bought up case law....many times. When the closers brought up the argument that students don't have any rights (without case law)....I brought forth case to the contrary that stated "students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate". I brought up many others....like other school policies that have violated the constitution....i.e. dress codes against wearing shirts with sports teams on them, dress codes with strict haircut (style) guidelines, policies like that, that have NOTHING to do with education, have been found to be too controlling and unconstitutional.
Joe, please enlighten all of us with the links to your case law examples as it pertains to a school boards desison to enforce a policy to close campuses and a direct violation of a student's/child's Constitutional Rights and their 14th Amendment being violated. Provide us with this proof so we can read the entire posting and not just take it out of context. So please enlighten all of us "closers" with hard detailed case law proof. Please do not send me the link to the "eyes on Peoria" blog or any other blog, as that is not case law proof.
Thank you in advance
Last edited on Sun Nov 18th, 2007 08:27 pm by rdg7359
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 04:23 pm |
|
dadof3...I have reviewed my past posts and I can't find anywhere that I call the other people names. The term closer was not coined by me. I heard it for the first time at the committee meetings. I was called an "opener" by the "closers". I don't know if they attempted to make it derogatory or not....I did not take it as that. And I don't say "closer" derogatorily....I state it as the definition of a group of people who feel that the campuses must be closed despite the rights of others. If those "closers" feel that the term is derogatory....then they must have a guilty conscience about why and how they feel the way they do. Call me an opener all you want, I won't take any offence to it. You're right about me calling the board those names....but they are not part of this dialogue. And I'm not calling them clowns, or referring them to circus acts. I'm stating and naming their actions. They are being tyrants, attempting control for the sake of control. It was Knecht that tried to control (behind the scenes) the action of a student speaking up for herself. And in true cowardly fashion, hiding behind the cloak of the district. She could of easily and maturely clicked "reply" and addressed her "concerns" with Cheyenne. But NO, she wanted to take the low road. And she was truly shocked when she got caught. It was these same three board members that were mad at the district because the district allowed (fact is they couldn't stop it anyway) the students to express their first amendment rights by protesting in May. Knecht herself asked "why couldn't we control the students". I call them hypocritical.....because they are. They ask for parental and committee input....then totally ignore it and "claim" they are voting their conscience. If they are going to do that anyway....why waste the public's time? They say they want public and parental input, then they complain when they get it. DD always asks for more information, but made this policy decision WITHOUT any information. Hypocritical.....yes.
I have not called any poster or blogger a name...(except "closer") yet I have been called many. I'm really not offended by it, like I've said before....I've been called a lot worse by better people. I just like to point out that the closers should have a better argument than name calling. Joe Bernier
|
dadof3
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 139 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 03:35 pm |
|
STILL on this topic? Joe, as a somewhat outside observer, I have seen the name-calling go both ways, but mostly from your side. In fact, wasn't it you who coined the term "closers" that gets used in a derogatory fashion over and over? And in your post below you call the board members "needless and hypocritacle tyrants" then your next sentence says: A bully calls other people names an tries to push them around when they don't get their way.
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 03:12 pm |
|
rdg....I have never resorted to name calling and the berating of other people just because they don't agree with me. In fact....I have embraced and respected those who wish to keep their own kids on campus at lunch. Just as they respect that we should retain the right to choose to have our kids leave the campus at lunch.
I HAVE bought up case law....many times. When the closers brought up the argument that students don't have any rights (without case law)....I brought forth case to the contrary that stated "students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate". I brought up many others....like other school policies that have violated the constitution....i.e. dress codes against wearing shirts with sports teams on them, dress codes with strict haircut (style) guidelines, policies like that, that have NOTHING to do with education, have been found to be too controlling and unconstitutional.
When the closers ( again without case law to back THEM up) stated that the school are responsible for the students actions while off campus, AND that the district will be held liable for an accident if it happened at lunch.....I brought up case law to the contrary. In 2005 the Tolleson district was UNSUCCESSFULLY sued over a lunchtime accident. The judge found that it is the student and his parents that retain the responsibility over deciding what is right and wrong. And is will continue to be the parents and student who remain responsible for all of their actions, including driving, while off campus. Regardless of what time of day it is. This was even appealed by the plaintiffs....and the appellate court agreed with this.
If YOU are so stuck on case law....WHERE IS YOUR CASE LAW that backs up what you and the closers are stating????
I can't believe you are calling me a bully....who exactly is getting pushed around here? The closers (and three on the board) are the ones "bullying" the other parents in the district. The closers are attempting unjustified despotic and tyrannical control of others....NOT ME!!! I am for choice and freedoms....that is opposite of what a bully is. I'm not pushing anyone around that hasn't pushed us first. That's called sticking up for yourself!!! The three board members want to move on AFTER they ran up and sucker punched the parents in this district. That's the first step in becoming a bully....if we let them get away with that, then we are condoning that behavior and creating the bully. We, instead, will hold them accountable, all the while showing the public (through their actions) what needless and hypocritacle tyrants they are.
A bully calls other people names an tries to push them around when they don't get their way. Sound familiar....that's what all of the closers are doing. You need to ask yourself WHY does us sticking up for ourselves bother YOU so much? Joe Bernier
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 134 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 01:16 pm |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: rgd....typical of all the other closers....you can't think of anything constructive to debate....your opinions have been proven to be biased and totally self serving. ..... So since you have run out of anything else to argue, you resort to name calling and finger pointing....how does that prove your point? It doesn't....but it does prove mine....the closers have nothing to back up their side of this....no enforcement, no truth....nothing!!! Joe Bernier
Well isn't this the pot calling the kettle black? I challenge you and the two other people that are in support of your twisted views of reality to go back through the endless redundant ramblings on this subject and see just who leads the way in finger pointing and name calling.
Face it Joe, you are a bully that when you do not get your way or you do not get other people to see your point of view, you are the first to resort to child like actions. You throw situations and scenarios out there to see what will get the biggest reactions. Such as the 14th Amendment, Kidnapping, Columbine, State Statutes and finally the Constitution. Face it, these are your opinions and nothing else. You have been asked by not only me but by others to state and prove case law examples and you have not done that. You and the other two people on your side keep throwing out links to a blog and that is the best you have. Blogs, are mostly based on one person's opinion and rarely based on fact or law and I believe will not stand up in any court of law.
You haven't mentioned how the latest school shooting in Europe could have been prevented by not having a closed campus. Why not mention that Joe, you try and tie everything else in as examples.
Your children are going to be in for a rude awakening when they join the workforce and get a dose of reality in the world. Keep up the good work Joe, your children will hate you later for it.
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 353 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 12:02 pm |
|
| You seem to be very offensive, Joe Last edited on Sun Nov 18th, 2007 12:05 pm by AREYOUKIDDING ME
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 353 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 11:58 am |
|
| You seem to be very defensive, Joe Last edited on Sun Nov 18th, 2007 12:05 pm by AREYOUKIDDING ME
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 02:59 am |
|
| gadfly...that's all you got? Like rdg....all you can muster is name calling. You closers always resort to name calling when someone disagrees with you and proves you to be incapable of intelligent thought and dialogue. Keep it up, as you continue to show everyone why ANY idea from a closer has malice and spite behind it.....nothing else. Joe Bernier
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 02:36 am |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: NOW we will DEMAND that respect.....try to stop us.....you can't, no one can. Joe Bernier
It's sounds like a coup d'état right here in Peoria, Arizona. Are the clowns done now and it's time to send in the lions and tigers?
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18th, 2007 02:05 am |
|
integrityforPUSD wrote: gadfly wrote:
When is the circus going to leave town?
How about we start with your leaving first?
Last edited on Sun Nov 18th, 2007 02:08 am by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 17th, 2007 11:22 pm |
|
| rgd....typical of all the other closers....you can't think of anything constructive to debate....your opinions have been proven to be biased and totally self serving. You avoid answering the questions asked of you....even when we have answered everyone of yours. You have been shown to believe in the double-standard hypocrisy that the three board members spew so often. So since you have run out of anything else to argue, you resort to name calling and finger pointing....how does that prove your point? It doesn't....but it does prove mine....the closers have nothing to back up their side of this....no enforcement, no truth....nothing!!! Joe Bernier
|
activepeorian
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 15th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 214 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 17th, 2007 08:30 pm |
|