New York Post ^ | 10/02/04 | DAVID ANDREATTA

Posted on 10/02/2004 1:06:56 AM PDT by kattracks



October 2, 2004 -- A New Jersey public-school teacher claims she was
bushwhacked by her principal yesterday when he ordered her to "get out" of
the building after she refused to remove a photo of President Bush and the
first lady from her classroom.
The White House-issued photo of the Bushes was pinned to a bulletin board
that held portraits of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and a copy of
the Constitution.

"I wouldn't touch politics in my classroom with a 10-foot pole, but [the
principal] felt I was making a political statement," said Shiba Pillai-Diaz,
33, a seventh- and eighth-grade English teacher at Crossroads South
Elementary School in Monmouth Junction.

"It was meant to be a picture of the current president, nothing partisan
about it," said Pillai-Diaz, a Republican mother of one who volunteered at
the party's convention in Madison Square Garden. The controversy erupted
Thursday night when a handful of parents objected to the photo during a
back-to-school parent-teacher conference. Pillai-Diaz said three parents
demanded the photo be removed - or complemented with a picture of Sen. John
Kerry.

[snip]

Pillai-Diaz said McCartney warned her against telling her story to the
press, saying "it will be beyond [his] ability to help" her if she did. She
told The Post she was not sure if she would return to school Monday.




(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...

The former milkman said:


"Michael McKelvy" emitted :

New York Post ^ | 10/02/04 | DAVID ANDREATTA

Posted on 10/02/2004 1:06:56 AM PDT by kattracks



October 2, 2004 -- A New Jersey public-school teacher claims she was
bushwhacked by her principal yesterday when he ordered her to "get out" of
the building after she refused to remove a photo of President Bush and the
first lady from her classroom.
The White House-issued photo of the Bushes was pinned to a bulletin board
that held portraits of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and a copy of
the Constitution.

"I wouldn't touch politics in my classroom with a 10-foot pole, but [the
principal] felt I was making a political statement," said Shiba Pillai-Diaz,

33, a seventh- and eighth-grade English teacher at Crossroads South
Elementary School in Monmouth Junction.

"It was meant to be a picture of the current president, nothing partisan
about it," said Pillai-Diaz, a Republican mother of one who volunteered at
the party's convention in Madison Square Garden. The controversy erupted
Thursday night when a handful of parents objected to the photo during a
back-to-school parent-teacher conference.

In other words, Bush has caused such offence to the populace, even his
image is insulting to people.


--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t







The teacher is also being disingenuous. Teachers who volunteered for the
Republican party's convention are definitely partisan. The average person is
*not* a volunteer for either party's convention. The objecting parents were
correct.

Anybody want to bet that this same fraudulently self-described "non-partisan"
teacher, did NOT have any photos posted during the Clinton presidency?




Bruce J. Richman

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...
The former milkman said:


"Michael McKelvy" emitted :

New York Post ^ | 10/02/04 | DAVID ANDREATTA

Posted on 10/02/2004 1:06:56 AM PDT by kattracks



October 2, 2004 -- A New Jersey public-school teacher claims she was
bushwhacked by her principal yesterday when he ordered her to "get out"
of
the building after she refused to remove a photo of President Bush and
the
first lady from her classroom.
The White House-issued photo of the Bushes was pinned to a bulletin
board
that held portraits of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and a copy of
the Constitution.

"I wouldn't touch politics in my classroom with a 10-foot pole, but
[the
principal] felt I was making a political statement," said Shiba
Pillai-Diaz,

33, a seventh- and eighth-grade English teacher at Crossroads South
Elementary School in Monmouth Junction.

"It was meant to be a picture of the current president, nothing
partisan
about it," said Pillai-Diaz, a Republican mother of one who volunteered
at
the party's convention in Madison Square Garden. The controversy erupted
Thursday night when a handful of parents objected to the photo during a
back-to-school parent-teacher conference.

In other words, Bush has caused such offence to the populace, even his
image is insulting to people.


--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t







The teacher is also being disingenuous. Teachers who volunteered for the
Republican party's convention are definitely partisan. The average person
is
*not* a volunteer for either party's convention. The objecting parents
were
correct.


Correct about what? That if you have a picture of the current President
along with all the past Presidents, that you must also have a picture of the
person running against him?

Anybody want to bet that this same fraudulently self-described
"non-partisan"
teacher, did NOT have any photos posted during the Clinton presidency?




See above idiot boy.

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in
ink.net:

Pillai-Diaz said McCartney warned her against telling her story to
the
press, saying "it will be beyond [his] ability to help" her if she
did. She told The Post she was not sure if she would return to school
Monday

Did you read this???

http://www.sbschools.org/boe/announcements.php

--
Lucas Tam )
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

"Lucas Tam" wrote in message
.. .
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in
ink.net:

Pillai-Diaz said McCartney warned her against telling her story to
the
press, saying "it will be beyond [his] ability to help" her if she
did. She told The Post she was not sure if she would return to school
Monday

Did you read this???

http://www.sbschools.org/boe/announcements.php

--
Ok, she's a nut case, and the BOE has no objection to a picure of President
Bush in the classroom.

"Lucas Tam" wrote in message
.. .
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in
ink.net:

Pillai-Diaz said McCartney warned her against telling her story to
the
press, saying "it will be beyond [his] ability to help" her if she
did. She told The Post she was not sure if she would return to school
Monday

Did you read this???

http://www.sbschools.org/boe/announcements.php


Yes I did, but it is in direct contradiction with her story, so I don't know
whom to believe just yet. She claims that she never discussed politics with
students and the picture was with other presidents and that there was no
endorsement, just a picture.


--
Lucas Tam )
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 15:49:02 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

Pillai-Diaz said McCartney warned her against telling her story to
the
press, saying "it will be beyond [his] ability to help" her if she
did. She told The Post she was not sure if she would return to school
Monday
Did you read this???
http://www.sbschools.org/boe/announcements.php
Yes I did, but it is in direct contradiction with her story, so I don't know
whom to believe just yet.

Er, the bit about the principal not being able to fire her even if he
wanted to, did you read that bit? It's a slight CLUE about who is
telling the truth and who isn't.

I mean, as if "Republican supporter" wasn't a big enough CLUE to point
out that someone favours misleading, inaccurate campaigns.

She claims that she never discussed politics with
students and the picture was with other presidents and that there was no
endorsement, just a picture.

Great, she will have sued the school for libel then, won't she? Won't
she?

Er...

--
pete [at] ¦ "I was so upset
horseshoe ¦ that I cried
[hyphen] ¦ all the way to
inn [dot] ¦ the chip-shop"
co [dot] uk¦ - Jilted John

"Peter Thomas" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 15:49:02 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

Pillai-Diaz said McCartney warned her against telling her story to
the
press, saying "it will be beyond [his] ability to help" her if she
did. She told The Post she was not sure if she would return to school
Monday
Did you read this???
http://www.sbschools.org/boe/announcements.php
Yes I did, but it is in direct contradiction with her story, so I don't
know
whom to believe just yet.

Er, the bit about the principal not being able to fire her even if he
wanted to, did you read that bit? It's a slight CLUE about who is
telling the truth and who isn't.

I mean, as if "Republican supporter" wasn't a big enough CLUE to point
out that someone favours misleading, inaccurate campaigns.

You inference that the Kerry campaign is somehow not misleading doesn't pass
the smell test.

She claims that she never discussed politics with
students and the picture was with other presidents and that there was no
endorsement, just a picture.

Great, she will have sued the school for libel then, won't she? Won't
she?

Er...

A little early to tell.

--
pete [at] ¦ "I was so upset
horseshoe ¦ that I cried
[hyphen] ¦ all the way to
inn [dot] ¦ the chip-shop"
co [dot] uk¦ - Jilted John

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 19:50:02 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

I mean, as if "Republican supporter" wasn't a big enough CLUE to point
out that someone favours misleading, inaccurate campaigns.
You inference that the Kerry campaign is somehow not misleading doesn't pass
the smell test.

How many lies told by John Kerry have caused soldiers and civilians to
die, exactly?

I didn't infer the Kerry campaign is "somehow not misleading". What on
earth makes you think I'm a Democrat supporter?

She claims that she never discussed politics with
students and the picture was with other presidents and that there was no
endorsement, just a picture.
Great, she will have sued the school for libel then, won't she? Won't
she?
Er...
A little early to tell.

Well, she'd have at least had a go back in the papers about the
school's response, wouldn't she? Wouldn't she?
Er...

--
pete [at] ¦ "I was so upset
horseshoe ¦ that I cried
[hyphen] ¦ all the way to
inn [dot] ¦ the chip-shop"
co [dot] uk¦ - Jilted John

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Lucas Tam" wrote in message
.. .
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in
ink.net:

Pillai-Diaz said McCartney warned her against telling her story to
the
press, saying "it will be beyond [his] ability to help" her if she
did. She told The Post she was not sure if she would return to school
Monday

Did you read this???

http://www.sbschools.org/boe/announcements.php


Yes I did, but it is in direct contradiction with her story, so I don't
know whom to believe just yet. She claims that she never discussed
politics with students and the picture was with other presidents and that
there was no endorsement, just a picture.


The statement of the Superintendent seems rational, detailed and believable,
and
not the words of someone spewing the pc and Democratic talking points.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Lucas Tam" wrote in message
.. .
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in
ink.net:

Pillai-Diaz said McCartney warned her against telling her story to
the
press, saying "it will be beyond [his] ability to help" her if she
did. She told The Post she was not sure if she would return to school
Monday

Did you read this???

http://www.sbschools.org/boe/announcements.php


Yes I did, but it is in direct contradiction with her story, so I don't
know whom to believe just yet. She claims that she never discussed
politics with students and the picture was with other presidents and that
there was no endorsement, just a picture.


The statement of the Superintendent seems rational, detailed and
believable, and
not the words of someone spewing the pc and Democratic talking points.
She seemed fairly sane when she was interviewed on O' Reilly.

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 06:24:06 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

The statement of the Superintendent seems rational, detailed and
believable, and
not the words of someone spewing the pc and Democratic talking points.
She seemed fairly sane when she was interviewed on O' Reilly.

Someone goes into the Unfair and Balanced Towards The Right studios
and you think they're sane?

--
pete [at] ¦ "I was so upset
horseshoe ¦ that I cried
[hyphen] ¦ all the way to
inn [dot] ¦ the chip-shop"
co [dot] uk¦ - Jilted John

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 18:26:00 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:

Yes I did, but it is in direct contradiction with her story, so I don't
know whom to believe just yet. She claims that she never discussed
politics with students and the picture was with other presidents and that
there was no endorsement, just a picture.
The statement of the Superintendent seems rational, detailed and believable,
and
not the words of someone spewing the pc and Democratic talking points.

And totally against the pro-Republican nutcase.

--
pete [at] ¦ "I was so upset
horseshoe ¦ that I cried
[hyphen] ¦ all the way to
inn [dot] ¦ the chip-shop"
co [dot] uk¦ - Jilted John

"Peter Thomas" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 18:26:00 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:

Yes I did, but it is in direct contradiction with her story, so I don't
know whom to believe just yet. She claims that she never discussed
politics with students and the picture was with other presidents and
that
there was no endorsement, just a picture.
The statement of the Superintendent seems rational, detailed and
believable,
and
not the words of someone spewing the pc and Democratic talking points.

And totally against the pro-Republican nutcase.


Naturally, to be pro-Republican makes one a nutcase.

--
pete [at] ¦ "I was so upset
horseshoe ¦ that I cried
[hyphen] ¦ all the way to
inn [dot] ¦ the chip-shop"
co [dot] uk¦ - Jilted John

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:31:50 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

Being possible doesn't make it a bad hypothesis.

Being impossible to disprove makes it a bad hypothesis. Ask Arny, or
Norm, or Tom, or Stewart, or Gene, or any of the other people whom you
normally trust when it comes to formulating a hypothesis. If it can't
be proven to be false, it doesn't give any explanatory power.

This is why you will always be able to hang on to this theory. It is
impossible to disprove, and deserves no more credence than the theory
that the weapons were taken away by space aliens.

"jak163" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:31:50 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


Have you read the minority opinion from the Florida Civil rights
investigation yet?

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:56:25 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"jak163" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:31:50 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


Have you read the minority opinion from the Florida Civil rights
investigation yet?

No I haven't, and I don't intend to, unless you can make some
compelling argument against the official report.

Have you read the report, or did you go straight to the minority
opinion and decide it was better because it didn't contradict your
preexisting views?

"jak163" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:56:25 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"jak163" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:31:50 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


Have you read the minority opinion from the Florida Civil rights
investigation yet?

No I haven't, and I don't intend to, unless you can make some
compelling argument against the official report.

Nice to know how fair minded you are.
I hope you never get jury duty.

If you read the minority report you will know why I put no stock in the
majority report, essentially the majority report is like a Michael Moore
movie, fiction, half truths, and bull****.

Have you read the report, or did you go straight to the minority
opinion and decide it was better because it didn't contradict your
preexisting views?

I read the majority report first. It was already known that private
investigations by major newspapers including the NY Times had failed to turn
up any evidence of the allegations made by the Gore people just gave more
credence to the minority report, plus I learned that the people who wrote
the minority report had no real interest in anything more than making Bush
look bad.

The bottom line is, nobody who voted properly was disenfranchised, if you
voted incorrectly, your vote was thrown out. It is very plain to see that
the spoiled votes, those that had to many punches or none at all were most
likely to turn up in areas where people were the least educated and had the
least amount of experience voting, irrespective of race.

"The only real problem was with the purges of convicted felons and the net
result was that more convicted felons got to vote. This had nothing to do
with a Dem vs. GOP issue, it had to do with a previous local election.

The Majority Report implies that this was no innocent mistake, but another
effort to suppress the black vote. The sole piece of supporting evidence it
cites a table with data on Miami-Dade County. Blacks were racially targeted,
according to the report, because they account for almost two thirds of the
names of the felon list but were less than one-seventh of Florida's
population.

This might seem a striking disparity. But it ignores the sad fact that
African Americans are greatly over-represented in the population of persons
committing felonies-in Florida and in the United States as a whole. The
Majority Report never bothers to ask what the proportion is. Without
demonstrating that less than two-thirds of the previously convicted felons
living in Miami-Dade County were African American, the racial disproportion
on the felon list is completely meaningless.

It is not only meaningless but irrelevant. The vast majority of the people
on the felons' list were properly listed. It was illegal for them to vote
according to Florida law. The Commission may not like that law, but it is
not its business to opine on the matter.

The only possible civil rights violation here is the allegation that
disproportionately large numbers of African Americans were put on the felon
list falsely. Had the Commission bothered to examine its own data supplied
in the report, it would have found that the truth was just the opposite of
what it claims."

It's a simple matter of fairness to find out the other side of the story,
and get an idea of who's telling the truth.

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 06:02:29 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

The Majority Report implies that this was no innocent mistake, but another
effort to suppress the black vote. The sole piece of supporting evidence it
cites a table with data on Miami-Dade County. Blacks were racially targeted,
according to the report, because they account for almost two thirds of the
names of the felon list but were less than one-seventh of Florida's
population.

This might seem a striking disparity. But it ignores the sad fact that
African Americans are greatly over-represented in the population of persons
committing felonies-in Florida and in the United States as a whole. The
Majority Report never bothers to ask what the proportion is.

I am familiar with this claim. Note that they don't explain whether
blacks indeed accounted for 2/3 of convicted felons in Florida. Why
don't you find out if that's true and let us know?

At any rate, this disparity is troublesome simply because it results
in such widespread disenfranchisement of African Americans. That it
is not of concern to Thernstrom and Redenbaugh is indeed telling.

I would also note that your characterization of the Commission as
partisan is faulty. It consists of eight commissioners with four
appointed by the President and four by Congress. No more than four
can be from the same political party.

Since you have read it, why dont you explain a little more about your
specific objections to the majority report?

"jak163" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:56:25 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"jak163" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:31:50 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


Have you read the minority opinion from the Florida Civil rights
investigation yet?

No I haven't, and I don't intend to, unless you can make some
compelling argument against the official report.

Have you read the report, or did you go straight to the minority
opinion and decide it was better because it didn't contradict your
preexisting views?


The real ****er about the minority report is that if JUST ONE OF THE THINGS
THEY STATE IS THE UNVARNISHED TRUTH, THEN THE WHOLE MAJORITY REPORT IS
TRASH.