Interesting. I would think that the tea party would value free speech. The teacher was on his own time. Yet the tea party wants vengeance. The local school board wisely will take no action against the teacher.
I thought the tea party folks were rude and and strident. I found it especially offensive that the teacher was told not to teach liberal ideas. The kids were brought there as children. The Dream Act is for children who have been schooled in the United States and who are good students. It is simply an investment in America. We need good students to fill our work force.
Those kids are here. We can turn them in to productive students or we can send the message that they are trash and should be gang members. Those tea party folks sent the trash message. I support the government teacher 100%. He showed self control. Nazi was mild compared to what he was thinking.
Seriously, should Mr. Govt. Teacher even be teaching if he thinks all his students should be deported? NO.
Fox News is giving its usual propaganda statement. 🙄
Here is how the scenario might work down the line. Some politician will put the squeeze on the school board to punish Bryant. They will gave and find fault with his style or lesson. Teaching is an art, after all, not a science. They will find a way to mete out some hurt. I would bet money, however, that it isn’t the end.
Not a supporter of Newt either.
I seem to recall that, not too long ago, there was a discussion on this blog about the use of words like “Nazi.” In fact, if I am recalling correctly, that word and a couple of allied words were put into automatic moderation when they appeared in a post. I thought at the time that it was a capital idea. Now do I get a sense that the teacher can be excused because he was provoked by the opinions of the other guy? Sorry, but in my book one of the most important things teachers can impart to students is learning how to respond without jumping into the same mudhole. Not always possible but it should be a primary goal. We all forego that rule, and we are in for a very rough ride.
As for the “Dream Act” — I stated some time ago on this blog that the Wolverines were both swinging in that direction because of our own balancing of the positives and the negatives. I just noticed that, in Texas, the local “Dream Act ” concerning in-state tuition supported by Rick Perry and a big majority in the legislature has already sent over 27,000 young Hispanics into the Texas university/college system. That is not exactly a small figure as investment in human beings goes.
However, you do have a continuing problem with this thing; and that problem could have been reflected in the words of that guy to whom the teacher was talking. Twice today, as the Neighborhood Watch, I had run-ins with youngish Hispanics, one a resident of our community and the others door-to-door solicitors from outside. In one case HOA rules were being broken flagarantly despite multiple HOA and police warnings about endangering homes and vehicles aimed at an adult immigrant who has for a long time seemed to think that none of the rules apply to him. The other involved solicitors who ignored No Solicitation signs for a private development and then refused to produce on demand their Sheriff’s Office solicitation identity cards, which is a firm and enforced law in this county with established response procedures for citizens who encounter violators. In both cases I got nothing but a mocking ration of shit from these young Hispanics, to the point in which one case has already been filed with the HOA Board and the other with the Sheriff’s Office. These young people keep this stuff up, and you are going to find a lot more people like that guy facing the teacher. If you can get Wolverine made as Hell, you had better worry mucho about those citizens with less multi-cultural experience and no tolerance at all.
Wolverine, I have already addressed that issue. I haven’t changed my mind on Nazi. Its right up there with racist. I don’t want them used on this blog at people. However, I am not out there trying to make it a universal law….just a moonhowlings standard. I wouldn’t let Bryant use it here either. However, he is a free agent and may go elsewhere and use it at will. It is none of my business and certainly beyond my control.
Unfortunately, people use that term when their language skills go south on them.
I expect young people who excell in the classroom are less likely to be there giving Wolverine a ration of shit. I expect they are inside studying How sad that people would judge people like that. Do we judge black and white people like that? I don’t see some thug and assume the rest of his race (whatever that is) is like him.
The more kids who will buy into strong academics and moving on to higher education, the less of that nonsense we will have.
I guess those kids at the town hall meeting saw the potential for something to be taken away from them. The ability to go to college is certainly hope for many kids, regardless of enthnicty or race.
@Kelly, I had to come back to this. I am so GD tired of hearing that people ‘pay teachers’ salaries.’ That is just condescending to the max. Anyone who works for the govt or a govt contractor, well, I probably techn ically pay their salary. So what. Its no longer yours once the govt has it. I haven’t noticed anyone saying that they pay the heart surgeon’s salary at UVA or MCV, I wonder why that is? hmmmmmmmmmmm
It is just a away to bully public employees.
He (Bryant) is young. He will learn to tell off A-holes far better than that if he sticks in the game long enough.
Unfortunately, Moon, most people in my experience do not look at the big picture when faced with difficult and anger-provoking incidents in their personal lives. Those Hispanic youths in the first incident kicked a soccer ball and bent the antenna on the vehicle of a neighbor who is a minority himself. He was not a happy camper, and he wasn’t seeing the big picture for one minute — which is one reason why Neighborhood Watch intervened in this thing. Another was a young couple who had just moved in, with the lady expecting her first child any minute. The soccer balls kept bouncing off their front wall and window screens, and they were at a loss about what to do, virtually ready to call the police in panic until Mrs. Wolverine shamed the kids — middle-schoolers in this instance — into leaving — temporarily.
As far as the Dream Act goes, the principle sounds fine to many people; but each little personal clash starts to undermine the larger support. It’s sad. I just wish the leadership in the Hispanic immigrant community would focus heavily on that potential negative. But, au contraire, with some of the unilateral moves Obama has made in this immigration matter and given the obvious pandering for Hispanic votes, I am sensing an upsurge in the arrogance and a growing defiance, all of which does not bode well for a desired outcome. After more than two years of getting this community to a stage of peaceful cooperation and coexistence, we are seeing another rise of the scofflaws, who are ignoring the first and even second warnings. That is not good.
Wolverine’s experiences are what most anti-illegal immigrant supporters were referring to back in 2007, but somehow many people failed to see the obvious signs of a degrading community being brought about by more and more of the same bad behavior.
Wolverine and Second Alamo, why mention the ethnicity of those involved? Why not just state the problems? I’ve seen similar problems in neighborhoods where I’ve lived. I moved out of one neighborhood because of the problems. Clue – the culprits were all white. Should I assume all white kiddos are bad and therefore all whites are undeserving and drag down “community standards”?
Excuse me, but I didn’t mention any ethnicity. You see, you yourself know that illegal immigrants and Hispanic are one and the same just like Xerox and copy machine. That argument is so tired. Change the discussion to shield the facts. Fact is that more and more Hispanics were moving in by the hundreds bringing in more and more bad individuals. Take a look at the BOCS meeting in 2007 compared to 2008 then you’ll realize what it was like. We didn’t have a huge influx of poor whites, or it would have been the same problem just different ethnicity. Not my problem.
Censored,
You are talking in a vaccum. People, throughout history, look to blame “others”. I had community issues, you didn’t see me crying about their ethnicity. I just tried to deal with the problems at hand, neighbor by neighbor.
Where, WHERE is the outrage over calling children criminals by SA and Wolverine? Where is the outrage over suggesting you round up children at school and turn them over to police. In what world is that EVER acceptable?
I have called children criminals if they were commiting criminal acts. However, Rodriguez was calling them criminals generically. That was offensive.
Kids brought here by parents are not considered criminals. They have no control of their destiny. Good for those who study hard, learn Enlgish and do the very best that they can do. Too many American kids don’t take advantage of the education that is offered to them for free.
@Second Alamo
Second Alamo, surely you don’t think I missed the signs of a declining neighborhood. I live fairly close to ground zero and had overcrowding, car issues and other indicators going on very close to my home.
What does that have to do with the Dream Act? Based on all the complaining I heard back in 2007, the issue was that the immigrants weren’t Americanized enough. They didn’t go by our customs and they didn’t speak English.
The Dream Act seems like it fixes all the things people bitched about.
@Morris Davis
“Calling a TP leader who is not a public official a Nazi at a public forum is perhaps rude, but it’s not actionable.”
It is when he is “accompanied” by students. He is therefore operating in a quasi-official capacity, regardless of his being “off-the-clock”. Don’t think so? Let a teacher have a sexual relationship with a Highschool Senior who is 18. Doesn’t matter whether or not the relationship off-school grounds, and not on school time. It doesn’t even matter if the 18 year-old isn’t a student in one of the teacher’s classes. Not only will this teacher be administratively sanctioned. The teacher could even be prosecuted.
Which is why I say he excercised poor judgement, and lacked presence of mind. He knew there were students present. He didn’t stop to think what consequences could arise, should he lose his temper. He chose to engage in the debate, and let his temper get the best of him. That is why I say the TEA Party guy had nothing to lose by baiting the teacher. He comes of looking like a jerk to some, a hero to others. The teacher placed himself in some jeprody, should certain people decide to push the issue.
We don’t know any circumstances about how the teacher and the students got to the town hall meeting. We don’t know who planned to do what. It is fairly common for students and teachers to end up at the same place in a community. That should not not strip a teacher of first amendment rights.
Comparing anything to a teacher/student sexual relationship just won’t fly. That is a unique situation, unlike any other. It most cases that would be illegal. I say most cases because a teacher at say Stonewall Jackson could have a relationship with an 18 year old in another district like City of Manassas outside of any job requirements, and be perfectly ok as far as the law goes. Most school jurisdictions have rules about dating students–strong ones but that would pertain to students within that district.
No, the TP person had nothing to lose. They goaded. As for letting his temper getting the best of him, I disagree. I think he was blind-sided by the statements and he held back what he really wanted to say. Nazi was probably an improvement over what was going on inside his mind.
On the other hand, there is no law against calling someone a Nazi. The best away to avoid being called one is to not act like one. Thug man was giving it his best shot. Only recently has it become quirksome to call someone a nazi. Not sure how that came about even.
But Moe is right, it was not an actionable offense as far as job loss.
I am trying to move on to Banana Man, however. The fact that Banana Man had to miss 5 days of school is unacceptable.
@Second Alamo
So it really is about Hispanics. At least you are honest.
As for the poor whites, they were already here. Prince William County and surrounding area has never had a shortage.
@Steve Thomas
In answer to your question, “don’t think so?,” my answer is no, I don’t.
The Texas legislature enacted a code of conduct for educators. It has a standard prohibiting the sexual relationship you described (copied below). There is no standard related to educators expressing public opinions in a public forum. I agree it was poor judgment, but it is not actionable (at least it’s not in this country).
Standard 3.6. The educator shall not solicit or engage in sexual conduct or a romantic relationship with a student or minor.
My point was a teacher can be held to a different standard of conduct whether in an official or quasi-offical capacity. My example of the relationship is to point out that there is a different standard of conduct that the average joe or jane isn’t held to. A specific law only determines that which is actionable under the law. There is also a standard of conduct as a condition of employment. He could have very well violated this standard by losing it in public, with students present. BS? perhaps, but teachers and other public employees get jammed for BS all the time.
And he clearly identified himself as a teacher, and acknowledged the presence of the students there. Afterwards, he went and stood with them. Looked like he was acting in an official capacity to me.
@Steve Thomas
Good luck selling that argument. You find a case that validates your claim and I’ll pay your tab at the next Moonhowlings gathering.
There was a case in Massachussetts in which a teacher was forced to resign over derogatory comments about students and parents on Facebook. Here is the link to the article http://www.thebostonchannel.com/r/24670937/detail.html
@Kelly, that is a very controversial story for sure and was more closely linked to job because that is what she was talking about–the kids she was teaching. I also don’t think she should have been fired. Calling kids germ bags in context is funny. Anyone who has ever been around kids knows how true that statement is. The parents probably are arrogant and snobby. Unless she called one out by name, oh well….oooops. I expect if she took the school system to court, she would be reinstated. Germ bag? Oh please. The town needs to get over it. I guess the blonde woman was one of those humorless people the teacher was tallking about–arrogant and snobby who thought their little Susie would never carry germs.
There may be more to the story but if arrogant, snobby and germ bags are all there is to it, then that lady has a law suit. Was she forced to resign or was she fired? Maybe she just wanted out. Who knows.
Elena and Censored — The situations to which I am referring in the present circumstances involve Hispanic kids and Hispanic immigrant parents. Those are the facts of the case, and I am not going to avoid stating those facts to satisfy anyone’s sensibilities on the overall immigration issue. If this involved Blacks, I would be just as angry. If this involved Whites, I would be just as angry. If this involved Orientals or Arabs, I would be just as angry. But this one involves Hispanics. I’ll fight this thing through Neighborhood Watch, the HOA, and local law enforcement just like I fought the last battle against the Hispanic gangs which tried to take over this place — that’s right, Hispanic, not Irish or Vietnamese or Pakistani or anything else.
Now, a point I am trying to make is that the Wolverines think the Dream Act is something which is viable and can eventually be done to the profit of the country so long as other intelligent measures are taken to get control of our overall immigration system. This will get us flak in some conservative and Tea Party circles, but you have to realize that the Tea Party is not made up of programmed robots just because the opposition tries to make you think it is. Some things we buy in common, and some things we do not.
But a real problem of the moment is convincing a much wider group of people that the Dream Act is doable and worth it. This is especially critical in areas which are different from Texas, where there has been an almost total history of a mixing of Anglo and Hispanic cultures. Each time a neighborhood like ours (35% Hispanic of relatively recent arrival) winds up in a situation where the Hispanic kids are acting up and the Hispanic parents do not step in and discipline and control their own children, we lose more votes, one by one, from those who might otherwise, in a situation of neighborhood inter-ethnic peace and cooperation, be swung in the direction of something like the Dream Act. Instead, we swing them to a path of specifically directed anger, and we wind up with a divide. Right now, I have about eight non-Hispanic people in one block whose anger is focused on those Hispanic kids and who are expecting Wolverine to put a stop to the thing. And Wolverine has started getting those rations of shit from some of the Hispanics, even after years of watching the streets so their own kids did not fall prey to street crime and trolling pedophiles. I would tell our Hispanic residents that there comes a time when you have to start pointing fingers at your own side in recognition that you, too, are doing things which help only to screw up the good.
Wolverine, you make some very good points. One of the problems in any neighborhood is if both parents are working, the school-age kids have the run of the place unsupervised. That crosses all enthicities. However, it is easy to start directing anger at whatever group is being the pain in the tail to you.
One of the things I noticed along the way over here in PWC is that culturally speaking, many hispanic moms have a very laissez-faire attitude about child raising. The little kids will run all over the place in stores or at places to eat. The older kids know that this is unacceptable in this culture and will rein in the little ones. I have watched it over and over again and I have had older kids/teenagers just say flat out that Mom doesn’t control the kids and so they do it. It is very much a sign that the older kids are aware of cultural differences and that they are melting into that great melting pot.
With this in mind, are there older kids around or sitting inside that you can talk with? They might be the answer to your problem. I have found them to be very receptive to making the younger kids do right. If it is older kids, is there a community officer assigned to your neighborhood? If there isn’t, that might be something to approach local law enforcement about. Usually kids love their community officer. They love school officers also. Too bad PWC had to pull theirs because of funding. What a stupid loss.
Anyone can have their kids misbehave while they aren’t watching or at work. That doesn’t always stop when they turn 18 either.
@Kelly3406
Kelly – The key distinctions are the Facebooking teacher made derogatory remarks about her employer and her students, and she chose to quit her job.
@Steve, in Virginia, your private employer can fire you because they don’t like your necktie or your bumper sticker. There really is no due process. Private employers really do own all the power unless the firing deals with the race, religion, gender or age and age is damn hard to prove. Jobs in the public sector are slightly different. They require due process and that due process has to do with job performance, not neckties and bumper stickers. You can be sanctioned but I have never known of any teacher to lose a job over something like that (calling someone a NAZI) Most groups would stay away from a situation like that. It was very public. Can they fire him? Sure. And he can sue the pants off of the school system. You can fire anyone. The hard part is making it stick. That’s the reason most public sector employers make darn sure they dot all their i’s and cross all their t’s before firing. It becomes very costly to do otherwise.
I know of all sorts of people who have said things to people running for office or who have been elected to an office. That doesn’t take away your free speech. You are far better off working in the public sector than the private sector. Exceptions would be Federal govt and military where you aren’t supposed to be in politics. I never learned those rules because they didn’t pertain to me.
@Morris Davis
Typical lawyer speak. She was forced to resign (did not CHOOSE) for expressing her opinion.
I think you need to pick up that tab for Steve Thomas.
Kelly, I don’t think anyone can force you to quit your job. What usually happens is you are made an offer you can’t refuse. They probably let her go without prejudice if she went peaceably into the night. If she had stayed, they would have fired her and she would have gone to court if she wanted her job back, had she not resigned, she also would have had the ‘with prejudice’ attached to her references.
She was a science teacher. She probably could write her own ticket for jobs unless of course, she had a ‘with cause’ or ‘with prejudice’ attached to her reference file.
@Kelly3406
The headline on the most trusted name in news reads “Mass. Teacher Quits After Saying Parents Are ‘Snobby’ on Facebook” http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/20/mass-teacher-quits-saying-parents-snobby-facebook/#ixzz1ZD23Jslw Someone who quits her job has no case. The Supreme Court’s decision in Pickering v. Board of Education is the applicable legal standard.
This article says the superintendent who was on vacation asked for her resignation. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/facebook-firing-teacher-loses-job-commenting-students-parents/t/story?id=11437248
There is also a tidbit in the WashingtonPost at the end of the article the representative of the NEA said that the Supreme Court recently ruled that teachers can be fired if their free speech affects the workplaces function and mission. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/27/AR2008042702213.html
Your serve ….
Elena, now come on, where oh WHERE did I make the statement you mentioned, and I quote: “Where, WHERE is the outrage over calling children criminals by SA and Wolverine?”
If you are making the leap from Hispanic to criminal, then that is your mind at work for I do not see it written in any of my posts.
@Kelly3406
Joining the match here. First off, most teachers’ contracts have a moral terpetude (sp) clause in them. That frees up a school system to nail employees over raunchy stuff. Let me clear things up right now, anyone in the classroom needs to not have that kind of stuff anywhere near facebook. That includes dirty jokes on ones work account.
The NEA guy is right. More and more jurisdictions will start including rules on social networking in the general contract. Once its there, obey.
Now, interestingly enough, those articles for the most part were not about permanent employees. Guess who is holding all the aces? The potential employer. Those young women can be dropped like hot potatoes without any warning or explanation. Additionally, the chances of any of them getting a permanent position is now zilch.
There is a huge difference in the protections held by people under contract and those who are temporary teachers.
As for harming the school’s position, that makes perfect sense to me. That is also a huge gray area. Someone dressed like a hooker on their facebook page complete with bare personal parts exposed…probably won’t be around much longer. Remember the part I said in another post about them getting you on something else? It can and does happen.
Now…back to Jonathan Bryant. He didn’t harm his school by calling thugman a nazi. In fact, a strong argument can be made that he was all about rule of law and about protecting his students in the face of a verbal assault by a couple of dirt bags.
To compare what he said to exposing yourself on your facebook page, not even close.
No one defending him thinks he made the wisest of choices calling someone a NAZI. It just isn’t an actionable offense. Butt naked pictures on facebook? Very much actionable.
And while you ponder the difference, you are aware that kids can be suspended for their actions of facebook and other social media? Mention bombing a school or bully someone….the hounds of hell will swoop down on that kid and it sticks.
Moral turpitude- see definition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_turpitude
It is old, outdated, and in most teaching contracts.
And I misspelled it big time.
@Second Alamo
SA, the kids were in general called criminals. She didn’t say YOU called them criminals. She wanted to know where your outrage was.
You’re right, a school is NO place for morals! (sarcasm don’t you know)
@Moon-howler
You are missing the point. The broader question is ‘do teachers have the same right to free speech that everyone else does, or does their unique position require them to uphold a higher standard’? If the NEA guy is correct, the right to free speech for teachers is limited to that which does not impair learning in the school district. This would seem to imply that teachers have a unique responsibility to the community to avoid saying or doing things publicly that would adversely impact the effectiveness of themselves or other teachers in the classroom.
Kelly, you are lecturing ME about teaching? [raising an eyebrow] Ok.
In the first place, you are putting words in my mouth. There are many issues on the table. Calling some political group NAZIs and general public behavior of young 20 something teachers who want to run wild on facebook. There is no comparison. The later falls under code of conduct and expectations of a school division. That article was written in 2008. In terms of social media, the artical was ancient. I expect many jurisdictions have added policy to their rules and regs that deal with social media like facebook. FB was an infant 3 years ago.
I think you are reading way too much in to what the NEA rep is saying. He is advising the young folks that they are no longer living on campus and that their words and deeds will have consequences now they are playing in the adult world.
Specifically, from the WaPo:
I would listen to Moe on this issue since he has some real personal experience with free speech issues as well as his lawyer street cred.
Those NEA remarks really are about impropriety with personal conduct. Let go back to Jonathan Bryant and the tea party people. They are pissed because they got called Nazis. He is pissed because they advocated rounding up students without documentation and deporting them and suggested that they were criminals. Pissed, meet pissed. Where has the workplace been harmed? What I see are some pissed off tea party people. So what. That does not harm the school. What harms the school is pretty much what THEY said if it came to pass.
Did you read the Banana Man story? What do you think would have happened if the school system had gone after Bryant for defending the students? It was a bad choice of words from an argument point of view and it was stupid for thugman to get all loud and threatening over the students. He lost the war there. That’s just how it works.
Perhaps the tea party people should consider speaking about the students the way they did and perhaps they should issue an apology that retracts calling kids criminals just because they were brought here by their parents and for suggesting that thugman would round them all up from school and deport them.
I know, that won’t happen.
We are against it because, as written, it is a bad bill that rewards illegal immigrants, is unenforceable or verifiable. Want to allow illegal immigrants to attend college….let them. Nothing stops them. THAT would be against federal law, apparently.
@Cargo
What specifically, as written, do you feel is bad legislation?
What is it that you need to verify? I don’t understand your last sentence. If a student is denied admission because of status, that pretty much prevents them from going to college.
http://blog.al.com/breaking/2011/09/federal_judge_throws_out_xxxx.html
A Birmingham federal judge today upheld most sections of Alabama’s tough new immigration law.
Blackburn upheld a provision of the state law related to police stops and detentions of people suspected of being in the country illegally.
She also upheld sections requiring schools to check the citizenship status of children and sections that would nullify contracts knowingly entered into with unauthorized aliens.
@Kelly3406
As I have said repeatedly, I don’t agree with Mr. Bryant calling Mr. Rodriguez a Nazi, but that doesn’t strip him of constitutional protection. A statement made to a public figure in a public forum held to discuss immigration, a matter of immense public concern, is not in the same league as teachers posting their personal junk on social media sites like Facebook.
In Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (1983), the Supreme Court said:
The First Amendment “was fashioned to assure unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people.” Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 484 (1957); New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 269 (1964). “[S]peech concerning public affairs is more than self-expression; it is the essence of self-government.” Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64, 74-75 (1964). Accordingly, the Court has frequently reaffirmed that speech on public issues occupies the “‘highest rung of the heirarchy of First Amendment values,'” and is entitled to special protection. NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 913 (1982); Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455, 467 (1980).
In Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968), the Court specifically addressed First Amendment rights as they apply to teachers: “To the extent that the Illinois Supreme Court’s opinion may be read to suggest that teachers may constitutionally be compelled to relinquish the First Amendment rights they would otherwise enjoy as citizens to comment on matters of public interest in connection with the operation of the public schools in which they work, it proceeds on a premise that has been unequivocally rejected in numerous prior decisions of this Court.”
Moe, thank you for your expertise here. This entire thread has been very troubling to me on so many levels. The idea that a teacher could be stripped of his first amendment rights on matters of government–on how our country will be run is very disturbing. Equally disturbing is WHO he was expected to cow-tow to. The people on that panel are of no more importance than anyone else.
One line really resonates with me: “[S]peech concerning public affairs is more than self-expression; it is the essence of self-government.” Teachers cannot be kicked away from the table.
Readers have to remember than across this nation, many teachers live and work in areas where their lives are a very small gold fish bowl. Many teachers work in small towns and hamlets. If they are going to speak out about how the country is to be run, there will be students and parents there. To expect otherwise silences the teacher. That is unacceptable.
I tend to agree with Moe on this. (What was that?!!! Another earthquake?!!!) In my opinion, the teacher in this case, whatever his personal motives and feelings, did wrong and did so in front of his own students. As a person of education, he should have been able to find a way to express disagreement without the use of such an extreme label. However, I do not think that this one incident rises to the level of a call for some kind of career punishment. I would hope, however, that his principal takes him aside privately and makes it clear to him that the use of such extreme labels does not reflect well on the school itself, which must answer to the public at large for its performance, and is not something which students should have as an example from their own teachers. That does not mean that the “school” itself disagrees with his views on the issue per se — just his method of expression, which has raised an unnecessary and unhelpful controversy.
Wolverine, Where is it written that teachers cannot participate in the political process? Many teachers have lost their lives over the years in repressive countries for having the courage to stand up for civil and human rights.
Where is your outrage over what Rodriguez and thugman said in front of those students. One said he would round them up and deport them and the other called them criminals. I find those comments to be unacceptable. Those people were just John Q. Citizen like Bryant. No more or less important.
“Nazi” isn’t a bad word. Frankly, if you start rounding up children and sending them out of the country, nazi Germany springs to mind and Stalin.
Actually I don’t disagree with you and we all long ago said we wish he had used other words. However, I stand behind him because I believe the rhetoric used towards the students was so extreme, it called for harsh rebuke.
ps I expect that he was spoken to by someone who had been around a little longer than he has. There is no point in bringing that kind of attention to youself, even thoug you can.
I just got horribly outraged at the idea that teachers had no free speech and that someone basically owned him.
Several things, Moon:
(1) Nowhere did I say that the teacher should not have been participating in the democratic process. I only suggested that he should be careful to govern his words. I say the same thing about bloggers — often. We get nowhere in anything like this with exchanges of insults except to up the antagonism. Please note in the first TV tape that the teacher expressed his regret to his school superiors and will not suffer any sort of punishment. Good. An end on it for me.
(2) I personally do not express rage because someone else wants me to. I express rage when I feel it is appropriate. I saw no reason for venting here just because someone else thought I should.
(3) Maybe my hearing is going, but I cannot find the actual word “criminal” on those tapes. What those guys said on the panel was a simple fact: if you are in this country illegally, then you are in an illegal status. That certainly applies to the kids who were brought here illegally by their parents. Even if those kids had no role in the illegal entry, they are still in an illegal status under the law. If they were born here to parents who are in an illegal status, that’s another question involving the ongoing debate over the meaning of the 14th Amendment. Are you and Elena trying to tell me that the former are NOT in an illegal status? Seems to me that the overarching problem we are all trying to solve is what to do about people in an illegal status.
(4) I think the” rage” here comes not from the illegal status statements but from the suggestion that such students ought to be deported along with their parents. Well, those guys gave that as their opinion. They have every right to give their opinions, and I do not see any reason for labeling them as “thugs” much less as Nazis. How can you be a thug or a Nazi if you are stating that you want a law enforced which was passed by democratic means by elected representatives in a democratic state? Say you think they are wrong in their sentiments. Fine. Call them “thugs.” How so? Technically speaking, they could call you guys “scofflaws,” couldn’t they?
The Tea Party guy was stating his personal “druthers.” Myself, I know few people who think that we will someday line up the box cars, figuratively speaking, and undertake a mass deportation. Geez, this is a country which still has guilt about the Trail of Tears, the WWII internment of Japanese citizens, and the shameful treatment of Blacks for 200 years. We have a Holocaust Museum on our sacred National Mall. In my opinion, our national psyche would suffer greatly, perhaps even fatally, with mass deportation. In my view, the only out is to secure the borders and tighten up our immigration process, including a well-managed and controlled guest worker system for those businesses which genuinely need it because of shortages of particular kinds of labor.
As for the rest of those in an illegal status? Well, maybe all of us are to blame for this thing because we as a people sat on our collective asses while our electeds failed to do the job. Our problem now. Looks like we are going to have to bite the bullet and try to meld what we already have into our American culture, with the full and critical participation of those who are now illegal immigrants. To me that is entirely doable at this stage, including the Dream Act, BUT only if we have no further waves of illegal immigrants to start up the cultural clashes all over again.
Wolverine, you did not say that. I said I had gotten terribly outraged…I should have said throughout the thread…you didn’t make me terribly outraged, in fact, I agreed in part with you.
Let me rephrase my question about your outrage…you apparently aren’t…does it bother you that thugman (he just looks like a thug and talks like a thug) says what he says, in that tone, in front of those kids? He did say if he could he would have those kids rounded up and deported. He was overly aggressive and confrontational at those kids.
George Rodriguez implied criminal (breaking the law) but you are right, he did not say the word ‘criminal.’ I was mistaken. I am not sure what constitutes more conservative ideas. Deport me please? Was the town hall meeting not about the Dream Act?
I don’t think Mr. R was a thug. I think as a tea party representative perhaps he should not have hung the liberal label on those kids. I do think Crist was Thugman. He practically spat out his words and punctuated his contempt with ‘in a NY minute.’
I don’t feel kids who are here without documentation are criminals just based on that fact. Actually, I don’t feel their parents are criminals either. I also think Thugman suggests that we abuse the 287g program. It really isn’t for rounding up students.