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

"Roger McDodger" wrote in message
...
"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.


Thank you for giving the idiot point of view.

"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.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


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

That would be a test of her integrity.


I agree with your point about what you call her lack of integrity.
I would call it disenginuity. However, there is no cause to remove
a picture of the President of the US from a classroom, even if
only put up a month before an election.

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 20:59:07 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

In other words, Bush has caused such offence to the populace, even his
image is insulting to people.
Thank you for giving the idiot point of view.

Do you mean to say that people on your intellectual plain can see that
the parents WEREN'T offended by the image of Bush? I fail to see that,
like everyone else in this thread. Do explain how you know more than
us.

--
pete [at] ¦ W H E N B A C K E D I N T O A C O R N E R . . .
horseshoe ¦ "such a waste of space, such a small turd hanging on tightly to
[hyphen] ¦ the arsehole of humanity, that he just isn't worth spending any
inn [dot] ¦ time on." - Copyright infringer Nick Humphries talking about me.
co [dot] uk¦ (No, I'm not pro-RIAA - only a cretin would believe that!)

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.


There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.

"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.

On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:00:34 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.
There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.

Yes, I think every classroom should not only have a picture of the
highly respected, intelligent and articulate George W Bush, it should
also be accompanied with this non-partisan caption...

"VOTE BUSH IN 2004!
Yes, over 4,000 of our soldiers are dead.
Yes, our national debt has skyrocketed.
Yes, Osama Bin Laden is still not captured.
But gay people can't marry, isn't that good news?"

--
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 Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:00:34 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.
There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.

Yes, I think every classroom should not only have a picture of the
highly respected, intelligent and articulate George W Bush, it should
also be accompanied with this non-partisan caption...

"VOTE BUSH IN 2004!
Yes, over 4,000 of our soldiers are dead.
Yes, our national debt has skyrocketed.
Yes, Osama Bin Laden is still not captured.
But gay people can't marry, isn't that good news?"


no, it can have a picture of the sitting president, or a former president.
Yours can have Herbert Hoover or U.S. Grant

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 08:41:12 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.
There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.
Yes, I think every classroom should not only have a picture of the
highly respected, intelligent and articulate George W Bush, it should
also be accompanied with this non-partisan caption...
"VOTE BUSH IN 2004!
Yes, over 4,000 of our soldiers are dead.
Yes, our national debt has skyrocketed.
Yes, Osama Bin Laden is still not captured.
But gay people can't marry, isn't that good news?"
no, it can have a picture of the sitting president, or a former president.
Yours can have Herbert Hoover or U.S. Grant

Nixon's my favourite. I think school children should all be reminded
of Richard Nixon's party and what they got up to.

--
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

"Roger McDodger" wrote in message
...
"Clyde Slick" emitted :

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.

There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.

Furthermore, there should be no objection to billboards depicting the
president. Like, this sort of thing.. http://tinyurl.com/5fpon


--
Lovely picture, which room in your house was it taken in?

"Peter Thomas" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 20:59:07 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

In other words, Bush has caused such offence to the populace, even his
image is insulting to people.
Thank you for giving the idiot point of view.

Do you mean to say that people on your intellectual plain can see that
the parents WEREN'T offended by the image of Bush?

Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president. They
usually also had pictures of Washington and Lincoln.

I fail to see that,
like everyone else in this thread. Do explain how you know more than
us.

It's part of the education process, don't schools in Britain have pictures
of the Queen and/or the PM?
--
pete [at] ¦ W H E N B A C K E D I N T O A C O R N E R . . .
horseshoe ¦ "such a waste of space, such a small turd hanging on tightly
to
[hyphen] ¦ the arsehole of humanity, that he just isn't worth spending
any
inn [dot] ¦ time on." - Copyright infringer Nick Humphries talking about
me.
co [dot] uk¦ (No, I'm not pro-RIAA - only a cretin would believe that!)

"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/

Roger McDodger wrote:
"Clyde Slick" emitted :


How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.

There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.


Furthermore, there should be no objection to billboards depicting the
president. Like, this sort of thing.. http://tinyurl.com/5fpon

Or these ones :
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/wwii/europe/...ctrinement.htm

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 17:07:41 +0100, Roger McDodger
wrote:

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.
There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.
Furthermore, there should be no objection to billboards depicting the
president. Like, this sort of thing.. http://tinyurl.com/5fpon
Lovely picture, which room in your house was it taken in?
It's not even an indoor shot. If you're going to try to make a joke,
try to at least make some sort of vague sense.

Yes, he should make jokes such as this one made by your good self:

[begin]
From: Roger McDodger
Newsgroups: alt.music.prodigy-the
Subject: OT: ATTN Peter Thomas..
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 03:10:20 +0100

"Resturant"
"vegtables"
"classis"

What kind of emporium is this???
[end]


Ha ha ha ha!!! Hilarious, isn't it? We all get it, don't we?

--
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 15:46:48 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

In other words, Bush has caused such offence to the populace, even his
image is insulting to people.
Thank you for giving the idiot point of view.
Do you mean to say that people on your intellectual plain can see that
the parents WEREN'T offended by the image of Bush?
Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.

Using this information, this proves you didn't go to school until the
year 2000 at the very earliest.

They usually also had pictures of Washington and Lincoln.

No Nixon? For shame!

I fail to see that,
like everyone else in this thread. Do explain how you know more than
us.
It's part of the education process, don't schools in Britain have pictures
of the Queen and/or the PM?

LMAO! Since when?

Ahem... I suppose they could do, to help kids on their firing
practice. The school cleaners wouldn't be too happy.

I have never heard of any school in the UK displaying pictures of the
Queen and/or Prime Minister (unless it was temporarily for educational
purposes - ie: This unelected woman spends millions of taxpayers'
money, and this man lied the British public about weapons of mass
destruction).

Oh hang on, plucking at straws here, there was a case in a fictional
humour novel, where a right-wing crackpot (is there any other kind?)
of a headmaster (principal in yank-speak) hung a photo of Margaret
Thatcher in the corridor, only for someone to daub on a Hitler
moustache and the words "3 million out of work".

--
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 17:15:25 +0100, Roger McDodger
wrote:

Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.
Why?

Yes, why do American classrooms have photos of Al Gore?

I fail to see that,
like everyone else in this thread. Do explain how you know more than
us.
It's part of the education process,
"To imbue with a partisan or ideological point of view"
Just how education is "a picture" of the current president? Don't you
think kids see enough pictures of Their Leader in newspapers, on TV,
in educational materials etc?

If we're on about that Bush dude who has taken office in highly
dubious circumstances, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he had a big
photo of himself in his room, with the caption "George W Bush"
underneath. Y'know, he's um, not very bright... (pope... catholic...
bears... in woods)

don't schools in Britain have pictures of the Queen and/or the PM?
Maybe in a book or as part of an exercise or something. We don't have
them plastered all over the walls, and we don't worship them.

Not yet, anyway, but the plans for Blair Youth are coming along fine.

--
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 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

"Roger McDodger" wrote in message
...
"Michael McKelvy" emitted :

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.

There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.

Furthermore, there should be no objection to billboards depicting the
president. Like, this sort of thing.. http://tinyurl.com/5fpon

Lovely picture, which room in your house was it taken in?

It's not even an indoor shot. If you're going to try to make a joke,
try to at least make some sort of vague sense.


--
Sorry if it went over your head.

"Roger McDodger" wrote in message
news
"Michael McKelvy" emitted :

Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.

Why?

I fail to see that,
like everyone else in this thread. Do explain how you know more than
us.

It's part of the education process,

"To imbue with a partisan or ideological point of view"

Just how education is "a picture" of the current president? Don't you
think kids see enough pictures of Their Leader in newspapers, on TV,
in educational materials etc?

How may elementary school kids read newpapers or watch the news?



don't schools in Britain have pictures of the Queen and/or the PM?

Maybe in a book or as part of an exercise or something. We don't have
them plastered all over the walls, and we don't worship them.


We don't worship them either, but we do respect the office.

We don't plaster them all over the walls. a single 8x10 is the usual case.

"Peter Thomas" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 17:15:25 +0100, Roger McDodger
wrote:

Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.
Why?

Yes, why do American classrooms have photos of Al Gore?

I don't know that they do. Perhaps when he was Vice President.

I fail to see that,
like everyone else in this thread. Do explain how you know more than
us.
It's part of the education process,
"To imbue with a partisan or ideological point of view"
Just how education is "a picture" of the current president? Don't you
think kids see enough pictures of Their Leader in newspapers, on TV,
in educational materials etc?

If we're on about that Bush dude who has taken office in highly
dubious circumstances,

Yes, indeed the Democrat tried their hardest to make it seem that way.
While the truth is they were trying to steal teh election because they
didn't like the outcome.


don't schools in Britain have pictures of the Queen and/or the PM?
Maybe in a book or as part of an exercise or something. We don't have
them plastered all over the walls, and we don't worship them.

Not yet, anyway, but the plans for Blair Youth are coming along fine.

--
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 19:42:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.
Why?
Yes, why do American classrooms have photos of Al Gore?
I don't know that they do.

But you said "Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the
current president".

If we're on about that Bush dude who has taken office in highly
dubious circumstances,
Yes, indeed the Democrat tried their hardest to make it seem that way.
While the truth is they were trying to steal teh election because they
didn't like the outcome.

Ah, so the Florida roadblocks set up to stop black people voting must
have been a figment of the imagination of my friend's mum - who lives
in Florida.

--
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

Peter Thomas wrote:


On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 19:42:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.
Why?
Yes, why do American classrooms have photos of Al Gore?
I don't know that they do.

But you said "Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the
current president".

If we're on about that Bush dude who has taken office in highly
dubious circumstances,
Yes, indeed the Democrat tried their hardest to make it seem that way.
While the truth is they were trying to steal teh election because they
didn't like the outcome.

Ah, so the Florida roadblocks set up to stop black people voting must
have been a figment of the imagination of my friend's mum - who lives
in Florida.

--
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







What you've just heard is the standard right-wing neoconservative bull**** that
is recited whenever this issue comes up. It has been well documented that many
blacks were either intimidated or outright turned away from voting booths by
State troopers for various reasons. It's also a well known fact that most
African Amercians tend to vote for Democratic canddiates.

Concerning the current elections, the president's borther, Jeb, and the
Republican Secretary of State in Florida have been up to their old tricks, it
would appear. Jeb has tried to drag his feet on not letting felons that have
served their time in prison be reinstated on the voting rolls, as is their
right. Guess what? A large majority of these felons just happen to be African
Americans and African Americans generally son't vote for Republican candidates.
And as another questionable tactic, the Republican Secretary of State appears
to be trying to disqualify voters in several predominantly Democratic counties,
such as Broward (Ft. Lauderdale area) for the following petty technicality -
not checking off a box on the voter registration form in which the registrant
affirms he is a citizen of the USA. This would not be a problem, except, as
has been widely reported in local newspapers, many of the se registrants have
SIGNED THE REGISTRATION FORM IN WHICH THEY SWEAR THAT THEY ARE CITIZENS OF THE
USA. Therefore, trying to use the fact that they overlooked checking a box off
in whch the same information is required is obviously just another attempt to
decrease voter registration, especially in counties such as Broward which have
in past elections voted in significant majorities for the Democratic
candidates.

As John Kerry & John Eedwards said in their recent debates, "More of the same"
is what can be expected from the Republicans, it would appear.


Bruce J. Richman

Bruce J. Richman wrote:
Peter Thomas wrote:



On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 19:42:57 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.

Why?

Yes, why do American classrooms have photos of Al Gore?

I don't know that they do.

But you said "Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the
current president".


If we're on about that Bush dude who has taken office in highly
dubious circumstances,

Yes, indeed the Democrat tried their hardest to make it seem that way.
While the truth is they were trying to steal teh election because they
didn't like the outcome.

Ah, so the Florida roadblocks set up to stop black people voting must
have been a figment of the imagination of my friend's mum - who lives
in Florida.

--
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








What you've just heard is the standard right-wing neoconservative bull**** that
is recited whenever this issue comes up. It has been well documented that many
blacks were either intimidated or outright turned away from voting booths by
State troopers for various reasons. It's also a well known fact that most
African Amercians tend to vote for Democratic canddiates.

Concerning the current elections, the president's borther, Jeb, and the
Republican Secretary of State in Florida have been up to their old tricks, it
would appear. Jeb has tried to drag his feet on not letting felons that have
served their time in prison be reinstated on the voting rolls, as is their
right. Guess what? A large majority of these felons just happen to be African
Americans and African Americans generally son't vote for Republican candidates.
And as another questionable tactic, the Republican Secretary of State appears
to be trying to disqualify voters in several predominantly Democratic counties,
such as Broward (Ft. Lauderdale area) for the following petty technicality -
not checking off a box on the voter registration form in which the registrant
affirms he is a citizen of the USA. This would not be a problem, except, as
has been widely reported in local newspapers, many of the se registrants have
SIGNED THE REGISTRATION FORM IN WHICH THEY SWEAR THAT THEY ARE CITIZENS OF THE
USA. Therefore, trying to use the fact that they overlooked checking a box off
in whch the same information is required is obviously just another attempt to
decrease voter registration, especially in counties such as Broward which have
in past elections voted in significant majorities for the Democratic
candidates.

As John Kerry & John Eedwards said in their recent debates, "More of the same"
is what can be expected from the Republicans, it would appear.


Bruce J. Richman

Be careful to Bruce J. Richman, he is an authentic schizophrenic.

As far as the subject concern US internal policy he looks like a
debonair democrat.
Once I have try to discuss with him of the situation in Israel and
Palestine and suddenly the kind oldster metamorphosed himself in
pitiless and sanguinary Zealot. Strange experience... :-(

"Peter Thomas" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 08:41:12 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.
There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.
Yes, I think every classroom should not only have a picture of the
highly respected, intelligent and articulate George W Bush, it should
also be accompanied with this non-partisan caption...
"VOTE BUSH IN 2004!
Yes, over 4,000 of our soldiers are dead.
Yes, our national debt has skyrocketed.
Yes, Osama Bin Laden is still not captured.
But gay people can't marry, isn't that good news?"
no, it can have a picture of the sitting president, or a former president.
Yours can have Herbert Hoover or U.S. Grant

Nixon's my favourite. I think school children should all be reminded
of Richard Nixon's party and what they got up to.


The problem with Nixon's shenanigans is that he had his
own personal reelection organization, CREEP, and they pretty
much usurped the party and ran the campaign themselves.
Almost all of the perps were CREEP guys, very few
were the usual party apparaticks

"Roger McDodger" wrote in message
...
"Clyde Slick" emitted :

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.

There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.

Furthermore, there should be no objection to billboards depicting the
president. Like, this sort of thing.. http://tinyurl.com/5fpon



Can you find any billboards of his opponents?

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

"Roger McDodger" wrote in message
...
"Clyde Slick" emitted :

How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.

There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.

Furthermore, there should be no objection to billboards depicting the
president. Like, this sort of thing.. http://tinyurl.com/5fpon


--
Lovely picture, which room in your house was it taken in?


And it looks ,ore like a postage stam[p than a billboard.

"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.

"Roger McDodger" wrote in message
news
"Michael McKelvy" emitted :

Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.

Why?

I fail to see that,
like everyone else in this thread. Do explain how you know more than
us.

It's part of the education process,

"To imbue with a partisan or ideological point of view"

Just how education is "a picture" of the current president? Don't you
think kids see enough pictures of Their Leader in newspapers, on TV,
in educational materials etc?

don't schools in Britain have pictures of the Queen and/or the PM?

Maybe in a book or as part of an exercise or something. We don't have
them plastered all over the walls, and we don't worship them.


Would you sat the same about a picture of Clinton in each classroom, as
far as when he was President? Are you arguing against Bush, or against the
issue
of a Presidential picture in the classroom?

"Lionel" wrote in message
...
Roger McDodger wrote:
"Clyde Slick" emitted :


How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.

There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.


Furthermore, there should be no objection to billboards depicting the
president. Like, this sort of thing.. http://tinyurl.com/5fpon

Or these ones :
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/wwii/europe/...ctrinement.htm

Which one of those pictures is of a US President?
Of course, in France one would expect this:

http://www.dwtoons.com/Top%20Secret%20New/Ostrich.htm

"Peter Thomas" wrote in message
...
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?


The oines he told in1971, about knowledge of American atrrocities in Viet
Nam,
had a terrible effect upon POW's who had to listen to the tapes of these
statements
plyed by their North Vietnames captors. So yes, Kohn Kerry's lies DID cause
soldiers to die.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...


And as another questionable tactic, the Republican Secretary of State
appears
to be trying to disqualify voters in several predominantly Democratic
counties,
such as Broward (Ft. Lauderdale area) for the following petty
technicality -
not checking off a box on the voter registration form in which the
registrant
affirms he is a citizen of the USA. This would not be a problem, except,
as
has been widely reported in local newspapers, many of the se registrants
have
SIGNED THE REGISTRATION FORM IN WHICH THEY SWEAR THAT THEY ARE CITIZENS OF
THE
USA. Therefore, trying to use the fact that they overlooked checking a
box off
in whch the same information is required is obviously just another attempt
to
decrease voter registration, especially in counties such as Broward which
have
in past elections voted in significant majorities for the Democratic
candidates.

Sorry Bruce, you are having a major loss of common sensehere

You seem to be saying that African Americans are particularly inept at
checkin off boxes, compared to other people, and yet, they suddenly
become competent when they read the affidavit at the bottom of the form.

You are saying that those (apparantly mostly African Americans)
who are too inept to read the information on the registration form regarding
checking off the box, somehow happen to know exactly what they are doing
when they sign and swear teh affidavit that they are citizens!!!





As John Kerry & John Eedwards said in their recent debates, "More of the
same"
is what can be expected from the Republicans, it would appear.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Roger McDodger said:

http://www.sbschools.org/boe/announcements.php
...
The South Brunswick School community is enormously respectful of the
Office of the President of the United States, President Bush and the
democratic process for choosing our President. Anyone trying to
suggest the contrary has the worst of intentions. Under other
circumstances, the display of a picture of the President would have
been viewed as completely appropriate and uncontroversial. It is
important to note that pictures of President Bush are openly displayed
in all of the South Brunswick Schools. The teacher's own actions here,
however, took it out of the realm of education and made the
presentation appear partisan to many of our students and parents.
Under these circumstances, our actions in directing the removal of the
display were singularly appropriate.


Thanks to PD for posting the text.



yeah, when I first read that last night, I agreed that the Superintendent
was reasonable, and that the issues were a lot more than
just a Baush picture hanging on the wall.
I recollect that I called the teacher a nut case.

Art wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...


And as another questionable tactic, the Republican Secretary of State
appears
to be trying to disqualify voters in several predominantly Democratic
counties,
such as Broward (Ft. Lauderdale area) for the following petty
technicality -
not checking off a box on the voter registration form in which the
registrant
affirms he is a citizen of the USA. This would not be a problem, except,
as
has been widely reported in local newspapers, many of the se registrants
have
SIGNED THE REGISTRATION FORM IN WHICH THEY SWEAR THAT THEY ARE CITIZENS OF
THE
USA. Therefore, trying to use the fact that they overlooked checking a
box off
in whch the same information is required is obviously just another attempt
to
decrease voter registration, especially in counties such as Broward which
have
in past elections voted in significant majorities for the Democratic
candidates.

Sorry Bruce, you are having a major loss of common sensehere


Sorry Art, but you've committed a serious error in assuming facts not in
evidence. Your premise is seriously flawed, since nothing in what you're
responding too re. voter registrations (as described above) ha anything to do
with African Americans per se. Since none of this has anything to do with
African Americans per se -]i.e. the Florida Secretary of State's efforts to
disqualify voters who failed to check off a box on the registration form, your
comments are not relevant in this case.

What you've done is apparently confuse my comments about Governor Jeb Bush
trying to delay and/or block the restoration of voting rights to felons that
have completed their jail sentences and are now free. That population is
predominantly African-American, but this has nothing to do with the other
scenario re. voting registration forms.



You seem to be saying that African Americans are particularly inept at
checkin off boxes, compared to other people, and yet, they suddenly
become competent when they read the affidavit at the bottom of the form.


You've misread what I've written and somehow managed to confuse the
African-American population of ex-felons (which Gov. Bush has tried to block
from getting their voting rights restored) - with the voting registration form
fiasco concerning the Secretary of State - which deals to some extent with
counties such as Broward which are heavily democratic.

It just so happens that the only thing that the 2 populations have in common -
i.e. African-American ex-felons and voters blocked from registering in certain
counties because of minor registration forms mistakes (later corrected via
sworn signature) - is that both populations tend to vote Democratic.

Read what I said about the registration forms and the Secretary of State again.
Where is there any mention of African Americans? Answer - there isn't.



You are saying that those (apparantly mostly African Americans)
who are too inept to read the information on the registration form regarding
checking off the box, somehow happen to know exactly what they are doing
when they sign and swear teh affidavit that they are citizens!!!



See my comments above. You've made a signficant, serious error in confounding
the 2 separate scenarios I described concerning possible elimination of voters
from the 2004 elections.







As John Kerry & John Eedwards said in their recent debates, "More of the
same"
is what can be expected from the Republicans, it would appear.













Bruce J. Richman

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...
Art wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...


And as another questionable tactic, the Republican Secretary of State
appears
to be trying to disqualify voters in several predominantly Democratic
counties,
such as Broward (Ft. Lauderdale area) for the following petty
technicality -
not checking off a box on the voter registration form in which the
registrant
affirms he is a citizen of the USA. This would not be a problem,
except,
as
has been widely reported in local newspapers, many of the se registrants
have
SIGNED THE REGISTRATION FORM IN WHICH THEY SWEAR THAT THEY ARE CITIZENS
OF
THE
USA. Therefore, trying to use the fact that they overlooked checking a
box off
in whch the same information is required is obviously just another
attempt
to
decrease voter registration, especially in counties such as Broward
which
have
in past elections voted in significant majorities for the Democratic
candidates.

Sorry Bruce, you are having a major loss of common sensehere


Sorry Art, but you've committed a serious error in assuming facts not in
evidence. Your premise is seriously flawed, since nothing in what you're
responding too re. voter registrations (as described above) ha anything to
do
with African Americans per se. Since none of this has anything to do with
African Americans per se -]i.e. the Florida Secretary of State's efforts
to
disqualify voters who failed to check off a box on the registration form,
your
comments are not relevant in this case.


The articles I read covering this are mentioning race,as are Democratic
operatives poinitng to the racial component.


So, lets put my comments to Broward Count residents. How come they are so
unaware ofthe check off box and so aware of the affidavit?

What you've done is apparently confuse my comments about Governor Jeb Bush
trying to delay and/or block the restoration of voting rights to felons
that
have completed their jail sentences and are now free. That population is
predominantly African-American, but this has nothing to do with the other
scenario re. voting registration forms.


ok, so how is it that are Broward residents are so unaeware of the
check off box, ahile being so astute about the affidavit?



You seem to be saying that African Americans are particularly inept at
checkin off boxes, compared to other people, and yet, they suddenly
become competent when they read the affidavit at the bottom of the form.


You've misread what I've written and somehow managed to confuse the
African-American population of ex-felons (which Gov. Bush has tried to
block
from getting their voting rights restored) - with the voting registration
form
fiasco concerning the Secretary of State - which deals to some extent with
counties such as Broward which are heavily democratic.


ok, answer the question about how Broward people can be so stupid
and yet be so astute at the same time.


It just so happens that the only thing that the 2 populations have in
common -
i.e. African-American ex-felons and voters blocked from registering in
certain
counties because of minor registration forms mistakes (later corrected via
sworn signature) - is that both populations tend to vote Democratic.

Read what I said about the registration forms and the Secretary of State
again.
Where is there any mention of African Americans? Answer - there isn't.



You are saying that those (apparantly mostly African Americans)
who are too inept to read the information on the registration form
regarding
checking off the box, somehow happen to know exactly what they are doing
when they sign and swear teh affidavit that they are citizens!!!



See my comments above. You've made a signficant, serious error in
confounding
the 2 separate scenarios I described concerning possible elimination of
voters
from the 2004 elections.

You still have to answer the thrust of the question.
You waxed poetic about their affirming their citizenship
in the affidavit, and that they ignored the same question which required
a check off in an answer box. You are making a false
assumption about whether or not they really understood, or even
read, the affidavit. their lackadaisical attention to the affidavit
is evidenced by their ignoring the check box.
the

Clyde Slick wrote:
"Lionel" wrote in message
...

Roger McDodger wrote:

"Clyde Slick" emitted :



How do you know there's no cause? There might well be good cause.

There is no cause to prohibit the display of a picture of any President
in a classroom.


Furthermore, there should be no objection to billboards depicting the
president. Like, this sort of thing.. http://tinyurl.com/5fpon

Or these ones :
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/wwii/europe/...ctrinement.htm


Which one of those pictures is of a US President?
Of course, in France one would expect this:

http://www.dwtoons.com/Top%20Secret%20New/Ostrich.htm

No date... but I drawn it has been drawn before Charles A. Duelfer's
report. :-)