I thought this blog comments section discussion deserved a bit more prominence, so I’m posting it here. Apparently unhappy with some of my statements on Left, Right and You, former Elgin city council candidate and local Tea Partier Julie Schmidt wrote this:
“Indoctrinating: to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., especially to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.”
1. If facts are edited from any historical information or if only one perspective is offered, could that be considered a “biased belief or point of view?”
2. Does the word “indoctrination” scare people? If so, why?
3. Are school board members not allowed to use certain words? If so, which ones should be censored? (i.e. the “N” word is rather obvious)
From the StudySync curriculum quoted in the Examiner:
“On an assignment for Rudolfo Anaya’s poem ‘Elegy on the Death of Cesar Chavez’ it asks students to ‘support the evidence that Chavez was a protector of human rights.’ Chavez was a union organizer for migrant workers who was on the political left, and his mantra ‘Si se puede’ was adapted to ‘yes, we can’ for President Barrack Obama’s campaign slogan.”
4. Where is the word “Communist” in this quote?
5. Is it true that Chavez was on the political “left”?
6. Is it true that Obama’s campaign slogan was “Yes, we can”?
Examiner: “However, by simply copying the redacted portions from the PDF file and pasting to a Word document that login info appeared, and after just a little review of the resources Ward’s concerns appear to have validation.”
1. Who obtained the links and passwords?
2. Did anyone at LRY read the article?
3. Why do radio show hosts, one being a former reporter, continue to impugn one or more school board member without evidence?
4. How does a former reporter, not editor, know what an editor will do (i.e. NYT revealing national security information that actually does threaten real lives)?
General Test Questions:
1. When and how does “history” evolve?
2. Will 2+2 always equal 4?
3. If elected officials conduct a public town hall to make themselves available to their constituency, shouldn’t they be praised for it?
It’s good that we’re doing it this way, because it’s the only way I’d get a word in edgewise.
But before I get to the questions specifically directed to me, for anyone of any ilk, insipid Tea Partier or otherwise, to claim that Cesar Chavez was anything but a protector of basic human rights belies a level of partisanship and ignorance that’s simply beyond the pale. Agribusinesses at the time devoted a lot of cash to making him go away.
As far as your actual question, for most folks, in certain circumstances, the words “left” and “communist” are interchangeable. The fact that Ms. Ward didn’t actually use that word is immaterial. As you may have noted, the fine folks at Fox News use hyperbole all the time so it would be disingenuous to complain about it when I do.
And to tie Chavez back to Barack Obama just makes the right look petty and stupid – not that it takes all that much to begin with. Now, on to the directed questions:
1. I certainly have no proof, but I personally believe Ms. Ward provided the passwords to the Examiner.
2. Yes! I did read the article, and as a 25+ year database/IT guy, the Examiner’s PDF to word cut-and-paste magically appearing passwords explanation is pure, unadulterated bull bleep. No one at the Examiner is that smart and that ain’t how it works.
3. It should be “former opinion columnist.” Though I have been known to do some digging when necessary. And it’s not only this radio show host, but the other one too! We have both taken the dynamic duo to task for taking the kids out of the equation and pressing an agenda solely for the purpose of their own political self-aggrandizement.
Perhaps, Ms. Schmidt, you weren’t listening when we took Tracy Ellis to task for her attempt to beat Ms. Ward in the race to the U46 School Board bottom. During that same show we praised Phil Costello for appearing to understand there’s at least a year-long school board learning curve.
The “impugning” of which you speak generally goes to their character or complete lack of it. To wit, how many times have we invited them on the show? Ah! But even they know they’re wrong so they’re far too chicken bleep to come on. They know their “ideology” can’t stand up to scrutiny.
And by the way! There’s plenty of evidence! Given how dangerous folks like Ms. Ward and Mr. Holt can be, I’m not nearly ready to move on yet either.
4. Again, it’s former opinion columnist. And I know none of the real local editors would’ve released those passwords because I’ve worked with most of them. None of my former editors would’ve released them either. I know this is difficult for you to understand, but those passwords were there for a reason – the curriculum was not yet under contract.
The real solace here is that the Examiner has only about four readers and none of ‘em know how to use a computer.
And to compare that kind of password passing out pouting to the Snowden revelations regarding an entirely ILLEGAL NSA program shows just how fascinating you and your group really are. Sorry, but the fact that you don’t like this potential curriculum is utterly immaterial to the debate.
As for the town hall meeting. Not only was it not a town hall meeting, but, as I said on the show, Ms. Ward and Mr. Holt don’t seem to realize they’ve already been elected. It’s like a bad Seinfeld episode. That meeting’s sole purpose was to promote a specific agenda, and when it didn’t go their way, Holt and Ward shut it down posthaste. So I firmly believe that praise is unnecessary.
Lastly, Ms. Schmidt, This isn’t about one viewpoint versus another or you’d either call in or come on the show (we will most certainly be discussing this on Thursday). No! It’s about you and your group’s continual failure to gain any traction and the death throes of the Tea Party movement.
As the past few weeks have clearly shown, the ultra-conservative folks whose idea of governing is to regularly throw temper tantrums are losing. And the reason they’re losing is their ideology is one of fear, pettiness, bigotry, control, domination and power. It has absolutely nothing to do with improving the human condition.
Just as it has always been with previous untenable historic political tangents, this one will also be relegated to history’s dustbin. I know that prospect terrifies you, but despite your best efforts to the contrary, that doesn’t make it my problem.
I hope this answers all your questions.