Surprised this hasn't surfaced yet --

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_3560566

Wow....listen to the tape. Glad to hear the kid challenge the teacher during his rant.

A high school teacher blowing his lid = an indictment against liberals in academia. Right.

Wehre does John "crushing baby testicles is the American way" Yoo work again?

Amusingly one of my business partners has a wife teaching at that same school. She is pretty liberal, but even she thinks this guy is off his rocker.

Luckily, this guy is not representative of most teachers. I would agree, however, that academia is a major bastion of the left. I know the vast majority of my teachers were fairly left of center in both high school and especially college.

A high school teacher blowing his lid = an indictment against liberals in academia. Right.

Wehre does John "crushing baby testicles is the American way" Yoo work again?

Apperrantly you think it's ok for a teacher to preach to a captive audience on topics that have nothing to do with the class. Once side rants left or right are not for public education.

n the 20-minute recording, made on an MP3 player, teacher Jay Bennish described capitalism as a system "at odds with human rights." He also said there were "eerie similarities" between what Bush said during his Jan. 28 State of the Union address and "things that Adolf Hitler used to say."


Guess the teacher lost his argument before it began.

Damn hippies.

Aren't most educators liberal? Is this really a surprise?

IMO,
If your students know your political affiliations, chances are you suck as a teacher.

Although I know some pretty outwardly conservative and liberal teachers who are awesome... but they are the exception rather than the rule.

The teacher on that tape is an assclown. Sounded like he was having an nervous breakdown. Engaging in debate is one thing, melting down like a madman is another.

IMO,
If your students know your political affiliations, chances are you suck as a teacher.

Although I know some pretty outwardly conservative and liberal teachers who are awesome... but they are the exception rather than the rule.

The teacher on that tape is an assclown. Sounded like he was having an nervous breakdown. Engaging in debate is one thing, melting down like a madman is another.

I agree, and if the teacher woulda been spouting anti-Clinton rhetoric, I would say the same thing.
Politics has nothing to do with geography, unless you are talking about border disputes. This guy needs to take his prozac and lie down for a little while.
:D

Apperrantly you think it's ok for a teacher to preach to a captive audience on topics that have nothing to do with the class. Once side rants left or right are not for public education.
Apparently -- actually, clearly -- you are a dithering idiot with a reading comprehension problem. I never said or even intimated that it was okay. It's not.

Sounds like he's venting. He's got his views, and his country's foreign and domestic policies doesn't reflect them.
Sort of a no-brainer that he'll explode sooner or later. Everyone does. I have.
To call him a "liberal" is an insult to liberals, however. He's a pacifistical well-wishing communist. He's a hippie.

Though I wouldn't shed a single tear if every last tobacco plant was burned to the ground.

Politics has nothing to do with geography, unless you are talking about border disputes.

Actually Politics has a lot to do with Geography...not just border diputes. Geography includes the study of many systems that make up a country, including it's political system. Granted most of what this teacher was talking about about has very limited geographical ties....though his stuff about Isreal's creation does have ties to Geography.

This is really cut and dry. He has a right to his political views, he has a right to express them....those rights stop when he enters the school classroom. Even if it was a debate class, he doesn't have a right to force those kids to sit and listen to his personal opinions on the world...he's there to facilitate learning. If he want s to divide the class into two and have them argue different sides of an issue like this, fine....but he shouldn't weigh in on the argument (though once again, this really doesn't belong in a Geography class).

That being said, this isn't an indictment of public education or educators like the Neo-cons would like it to be. The district has policies around this sort of thing and he clearly violated them. The only question is, what punishment fits the crime...and that really depends on whether this was an isolated incident (which I understand it was not) and whether he did in fact come down harder on kids with differing views (which has also been alledged).

This is one individual that even most liberals would shun from supporting. Much like moderate republicans cringing each time Pat Robertson opens his gob.

He should be fired, but I agree Ailwon it's not indicitive of the entire system. I imagine there will be sessions with the educators in that arear reminding them of their boundries.

Fandros

I doubt he gets fired. The ACLU is riding to his rescue.

I doubt he gets fired. The ACLU is riding to his rescue.

Well at least he's an American. They have a nasty habit of trying to help people that are not Americans most of the time.
:eek:

I doubt he gets fired. The ACLU is riding to his rescue.

Actually, unless the district finds gross mis-conduct, i.e. harrassment, changing grades based on kids politcal views, etc. they won't be able to fire him, even if they wanted to. I don't have the policy in front of me but I'm sure it has clear penalties if he is indeed found to be in violation.

Funny thing is the number of emails the district is getting of people thinking they can influence the decision, i.e people sending stuff in to fire him. They have to apply their policy, end of discussion.

Though a lot contained in his rant has geographic application, expressing his opinions in this way without giving opposing viewpoints should not be allowed. He should be reprimanded and required to change this aspect of his teaching style.

Though I wouldn't shed a single tear if every last tobacco plant was burned to the ground.

Celebrated my ten year anniversary of quitting tobacco in mid-January, so I will gladly toss some gas on those flames Kiv.

And thanks for posting, I was missing Lohan's boobs. :eek:

Well at least he's an American. They have a nasty habit of trying to help people that are not Americans most of the time.
:eek:

Because non-Americans should be eaten for dinner. That would teach'm.

They had this prick on the Today show this morning (it comes on after my local news channel) luckily I flicked it off before I could even hear him say anything.

Because non-Americans should be eaten for dinner. That would teach'm.

The ALCU stands for the AMERICAN Civil Liberties Union.
This means they are a union ensuring that the civil liberties of AMERICANS are not infringed upon.
If they wanted to enforce civil liberties for everyone on the planet, they should call themselves the HCLU: Human Civil Liberties Union.
Otherwise they should keep thier noses inside the US.

this is somewhat off topic, but shouldn't everyone from the western hemisphere be labled as "americans?" Being that we are all from either north or south america. Europeans are europeans no matter what country they are from.

edited to correct a typo

Well... this is the United States of America.... and calling us Americans is a lot easier than trying to call us Unitians... USians.... Ustatesians.... well, you see what I mean.

How about 'Mericans?

yes, of america. there are many other countries in the americans. My point still stands. Europeans are all europeans, why isn't everyone from north and south america considered "americans." That doesn't mean i'm saying we aren't americans, but i think it's a bit short sighted and egotistical for us to feel we are the only americans. Do I have a solution to propose? no.

Of course someone here is going to try and slant what I'm saying here as anti USA, which it's not. It's something I've wanted to discuss for years and just really haven't. I'm not being anti my country by asking the question, I just don't understand why people from the US categorize themselves as American's but have to label other groups. Indians are Native Americans, not simply americans (why, I REALLY don't know this one.) People from Central America are Latin Americans. Blacks are African Americans. Why must we put the labels upon everyone unless they are White and from the US?

Because it Pigeonholes people. If you can label it, then you can put a similar set of Characteristics to it, i.e. African-Americans will have names like Shaniqua and Leroy, Latin Americans will have names like Rosilita and Juan.
This was the "political correctness" movement of the 90's, where calling someone "Black" or "Latino" was considered "insensitive". Spmeone came up with these hyphenated labels to make people feel good about thier heritage, but what it really does is seperate us.
We are all Americans here in the U.S. Or United States Citizens, if you will. This means we have a heritage that superceedes anything a hyphenated label can put on us.

Besides, outside the US they call us "Norte Americanos" (or "Gringos").

Sorry, I'm bored beyond belief today.

I just don't understand why people from the US categorize themselves as American's but have to label other groups. Indians are Native Americans, not simply americans

This has nothing to do wiht America or political correctness. It's social behavior. People everywhere want to belong to groups, and therefore define who is in the group and who's outside the group or different.

So why not call meople Indians or Latinos or Blacks?
Isn't this just a name for the groups?
Why all the hyphenation?

This may not be news to anyone, but recently (I think the past month or so) it was discovered that there was a skinhead teaching theoretical physics at U of Deleware. (i.e. it just came out that he was one.) I find it interesting that this guy was not able to keep a lid on his beliefs the way he should have been doing so, yet a skinhead who's extremely white supremacist and believes everyone else is sub-human is able to keep it under?

Apparently they haven't taken any sort of action against the guy since it has not (this is a bit questionable to be sure since I think its a matter of opinion) really effected his teaching.

I think what it boils down to is that its not a matter of his political orientation, more a matter of how much he allows his views to tinge his teaching style. Now granted, theoretical physics does not really allow for political views to seep through but people like the guy on that tape would find a way to do so anyway regardless of what they're teaching. One of the teachers I used to know would always be slipping in his political views, and he was a calculus teacher, which has absolutely nothing to do with politics as far as I can tell, yet he still did.

If he had been saying that in the proper situation (debate of one view point vs. another) and toning it down just a tiny bit (that Hitler reference was over the top, Bush hasn't ordered the systematic extermination of an entire people) it could work. As it stands though he was preaching to an audience as opposed to presenting one side of an arguement, which was out of line and unacceptable.

I only caught a snippet on my ride in this morning. But it if I heard correctly then the kid who turned the Colorado teacher in is experiencing some backlash in his community? Like to the point of having to move? Did anyone catch that or was I just dreaming?

I'm beginning to think there might be more to this story.

EDIT: nm I found it here (http://www.newshounds.us/2006/03/09/fox_hunts_down_jay_bennish_in_an_airport_since_he_ wont_appear_in_the_studio.php)

The teacher is on paid leave and his father reports receiving death threats (http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/03/09/teacher.bush.ap/index.html).

I was curious about the skinhead professor. A little information on him is here (http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/02/27/delaware). The university's decision is correct, however odious he may be (the professor's denials of his skinhead leanings aren't compelling).

that Hitler reference was over the top, Bush hasn't ordered the systematic extermination of an entire people

He said the tone and some of the content of Bush's speech sounded like Hitler...

"On the recording, Bennish is heard telling the students that some of Bush's speech "sounds a lot like the things that Adolf Hitler used to say. We're the only ones who are right, everyone else is backwards and our job is to conquer the world and make sure that they all live just like we want them to."

Later in the recording, Bennish said he was not claiming Bush and Hitler were the same, "but there are some eerie similarities to the tones that they use."

Don't blow things out of proportion and put words in his mouth. This is exactly why he's getting ridiculous death threats and such. BTW, I know for a fact that he's getting more email in support than he is people condemming him.

I still think he should be reprimanded and asked to adjust his teaching style to fit within district policies...and that is it.

But let's Crucify the Skinhead, because all Skinheads are evil.
Even though his teaching has never crossed the line, he's wrong because he believes he is superior by virtue of his race.
If his name was Muhommed Al-Shiar, or Malcom XIIX would he recieve the same scrutiny if his private lifestyle held the belief thet he was superior due to his Heritage or Religion?

If his name was Muhommed Al-Shiar, or Malcom XIIX would he recieve the same scrutiny if his private lifestyle held the belief thet he was superior due to his Heritage or Religion?

Trying to figure out your point here...but IMO he shouldn't get more scrutiny no metter what his name is or private lifestyle...as long as he is following University rules and policies. In reality, I'b bet he does get more scrutiny. I'd bet a little more attention is paid to what he is doing in class.

My point is, if you think you are in a private group that holds the belief that you are superior because you are white, you are "looked into".
If you hold the same beliefs but you are brown skinned, it is "overlooked".

EXACTLY. I mean, man, if we find some freaking white people who think they're better than us because of their religious beliefs, we should SHIP 115K TROOPS TO THEIR COUNTRY AND GO TO WAR WITH THEM. YEAH!!!!!

The brown people who are like that, who freaking cares.

EXACTLY. I mean, man, if we find some freaking white people who think they're better than us because of their religious beliefs, we should SHIP 115K TROOPS TO THEIR COUNTRY AND GO TO WAR WITH THEM. YEAH!!!!!

The brown people who are like that, who freaking cares.

What is in that pipe you smoke?

This is pointless, I know, but I'm going to try for an intelligent response from Sixee.

My point is, if you think you are in a private group that holds the belief that you are superior because you are white, you are "looked into".
If you hold the same beliefs but you are brown skinned, it is "overlooked".

I could be cool and say, "What's in that pipe you smoke". But I'm not cool. So, I would point out that these days people named Muhommed Al-Shiar are being "looked into" even when they don't believe they are innately superior. In the past, people named Martin Luther have been "looked into" for believing they were innately equal. Your entire "point" is completely devoid of fact.

Please continue to defend racists and reveal your true nature. I will exercise my free speech and tell you how fucking retarded you are.

Fil

My true nature is I was married to a black woman for 13 years. I have a biracial son? How does that make me a racist?
I don't think people wanting to be treated equal is a crime. But what we have these days is the reverse of that. Minorities now want to have special treatment. I mean what else are quotas, but a mandate that you must have this many of a race or gender, rather than people that are qualified to do the job?
I think all job applications should abolish race and names, be replaced with numbers. Have the Interviews done blind, with voice distortion. Everyone gets a fair shake, with no prejudice.
Ahh, but I can make a point without reorting to cursing. And when you cuss, you reveal that your arguement is so weak, all you have left is shock.

I was married to a black woman for 13 years.


And, let me guess.....she left you after tiring of your ignorance, knowing it was futile to continue trying to educate you to reality.

Seriously, reading some of these posts I wonder if you are even allowed out of the house without a helmet and elbow and knee pads. And I honestly don't know how we ever got to this point when the thread was about Ann (I'm so pale I get sunburn grabbing a beer from the fridge) Coulter's silly commentary on the Oscars.

And, speaking of movies, I watched "The Commitments" again last night, and I was pleasantly surprised to find it even more of a fun couple hours now then when it first came out. And tying it into the last few posts, it cracked me up even more this time when Jimmy was telling the band members about soul music, and that the Irish were the blacks of Europe, and Dubliners were the blacks of Ireland, and Northern Dublin was the blacks of Dublin, so they should say it loud "I'm Black and I'm Proud".

I guess it is all a matter of perspective.

Edit: and I got so confused by these posts I posted about movies in the wrong thread, LOL. Oh well, Liberals in Acadamia and Hollywood are not that far apart according to some.

My true nature is I was married to a black woman for 13 years. I have a biracial son? How does that make me a racist?

It doesn't make you a racist...but it also doesnt mean your not a racist.

I don't know who or what you were married to...it really doesnt matter.

Saying because "I was married to a black woman for 13 years" means I cant possibly be a racist doesn't hold any weight.

What matters here, in regards to your posts, is that you seem to have some strong opinions that paint blacks generally in a negative light. People notice things like that.

Well, the shock worked. I got a semi-intelligent response from Sixee, other than the "I was married to a black woman" part. If you didn't notice the sign on the door, welcome to the internet. I have no idea to whom or if you have ever been married. All I have to judge by is the fact that a skinhead was mentioned and, while his beliefs were shunned, everyone, including his employer, said he had the right to believe that as long as it didn't effect his teaching. Then Sixee comes riding in to tell us we are all wrong to shun his beliefs.

What conclusion did you expect?

Fil

How about you defend yourself if you feel so inclined to announce your sexual preferences. I don't know it could be just me but I am going to take a gamble and say..you're attention whore and bring it apon yourself at an obvious young age.

LOL, nope. I have opinions, and although some people may think they stink, they are mine, and I will voice them.
I must have misunderstood the message in the earlier posts.
I was inder the assumption that the majority of the people on here seemed to be appalled that someone like a skinhead could hold certain beliefs, and yet not allow them to cloud thier judgement.
If I was wrong in this assumption, then I apologize.

Heres what a conservative professor thinks about Bush:



He's a right-wing ideologue, not a true conservative

By Jeffrey Hart, JEFFREY HART is a professor of English (emeritus) at Dartmouth College, a former speechwriter for presidents Reagan and Nixon and, most recently, the author of "The Making of the American Conservative

March 12, 2006



WILLIAM F. Buckley Jr. has defined conservatism as "the politics of reality." Ideology is the enemy of conservatism because it edits, omits or ignores reality. George W. Bush is an ideologue.



Iraq is commonly said to be the centerpiece of Bush's presidency. The United States invaded Iraq because Saddam Hussein supposedly possessed weapons of mass destruction. But nearly three years after the invasion, no such weapons have been found. And evidence is mounting that the intelligence used to bolster the claims for Iraq's WMD was cherry-picked, politically pressured and, to use intelligence expert Thomas Powers' word, "fabricated."



Perhaps the real reason for the Iraq invasion, sold to Congress along with WMD, was a Wilsonian goal of making the world — or at least the Middle East — "safe for democracy." Bush hinted as much in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington a month before the invasion. "Human cultures can be vastly different," he said. "Yet the human heart desires the same good things, everywhere on Earth."

An astounding statement. Flatly untrue. Refuted by history and experience. Did Mohamed Atta desire the same good things as his hostage passengers when he piloted his hijacked jetliner into one of the World Trade Center towers? Do Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds desire the same things today in Iraq?

Iraq is not going to be a beacon of democracy in the Middle East but, assuming a civil war is avoided, probably a Shiite-dominated theocracy leaning toward Iran. For this, the bill will be half a trillion dollars and tens of thousands dead and wounded.



Ideology.



As Buckley wrote in two recent columns, our Iraq policy "didn't work." The Bush centerpiece has been an astonishing flop.

A major triumph of American conservatism since World War II has been general acceptance of free-market economics in political discourse. This economic system works. It produces goods and services efficiently.

Yet free-market economics pushed to exclude other worthy goals becomes an ideology.



Consider conservation. Since Republican Theodore Roosevelt created our national parks, every president has worked to protect them. Free-market ideologue Bush neglects them except as a playground for more snowmobiles. He wants to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He talks about fuel-efficient cars but does nothing to encourage their production.

Bush is a privatization ideologue. Not surprisingly, his scheme to privatize Social Security sank like a stone. Who wanted to attach the social safety net to stock in such companies as Enron and WorldCom? And Bush's Medicare prescription drug plan, another privatization scheme, has been a disaster.

As for me, I'm in favor of treating disease and avoiding unnecessary death.

Stem cell research promises to do that. But not long after his inauguration in 2001, Bush greatly hampered stem cell research by severely limiting federal support for it. Why?



Ideology.



Bush puts it this way: "It's wrong to destroy life in order to save life."

That works only if you think a dozen cells is the equivalent of an infant diagnosed with diabetes or an adult with Parkinson's disease. If you believe that, you will believe anything. In actuality, the supposed "culture of life" is a culture of disease and death.



Bush would like to abolish abortion. No one likes abortion. But a demand for it exists today that did not exist in 1950, let alone in 1920, when U.S. women got the vote. Today, look at a university campus. Half women. They are represented in all professions. They demand the right to decide if and when to have children. Criminalizing abortion would be folly, a disaster — and would fail, like that other prohibition. That's the actuality.



Bush is not a conservative. He has bushwhacked the term. He is a right-wing ideologue.

Well, that's kinda the definition of the schism in the Republican party new. Conservatives vs. idealogues.

But some of the article (or the part quoted) is wrong. His social security and medicare programs, for instance, are not part of his ideaology. They're a planned campain (from the brain of Karl Rove) to usurp the Dems usual campaign platform.

Just getting this thread back on topic....

Jay Bennish was re-instated with the mandate to make sure that Geo-political topics, like those discussed on the recording, are balanced when presented to students.

Here's the official release from the district:

http://www.ccsd.k12.co.us/dist_info/dist_news/bennish2.htm (http://www.ccsd.k12.co.us/dist_info/dist_news/bennish2.html)l

The district did the only thing it really could do in the matter.

Sean Allen will be no longer attending Overland High School due to feared reprisals from fellow students.

Seeing a split in both parties imho.

Those that continue to obstruct and polarize with those of a more moderate leanings.

Really setting up nicely for a McCain in 08!!

Fandros

Well, that's the problem when you decise to being something like this to light.
You are going to have 300 million different opinions on this, because that's how many people live in the US.
If he didn't want the fame, he shoulda kept his mp3 recorder off and wrote the teacher up as 1 of those loonies that tries to indoctrinate young people to the Liberal Mindset.

If he didn't want the fame, he shoulda kept his mp3 recorder off and wrote the teacher up as 1 of those loonies that tries to indoctrinate young people to the Liberal Mindset.

No, he should gone the proper route and reported this first to the principal, then to the District Leaderhip...and then, if he didn't get what he wanted (which he claims was simply a reprimand), then perhaps to the media. instead he went straight to the media, not realizing, of course, the frenzy it would eventually create.

It could have been worse though...it could have been a neo-con loonie trying to indoctrinate young people into the corn cob up the ass right wing mind set.
j/k. :)

Ail, I think you'll find that the "anything up the ass set" is more of a liberal swing than a neocon's ;P

Fandros

Ail, I think you'll find that the "anything up the ass set" is more of a liberal swing than a neocon's ;P

ROFL!!!

Ail, I think you'll find that the "anything up the ass set" is more of a liberal swing than a neocon's ;P

Fandros

Fair enough. But never on the first date.

LOL, you are right, he shoulda gone to the guy's supervisors, then gone to the media.
But would that have stopped the "death threats" to this student and his family?
I tend to think there is generally 1 or 2 people that wait to do this sort of thing, and it's reported as "death threats", making you think that a general condemnation of his actions by the community at large has taken place.
Sadly, it only takes 1 looney with a gun to make the threat come true.

But would that have stopped the "death threats" to this student and his family?

Umm...yes. It would have been handled by the district exactly the same way. Except the student and his family and Jay Bennish and his family would have been spared the death threats. Problem is, this family has maintained from the beginning that all they wanted was a reprimand. I don't buy it, if that's all they wanted they would have used the proper channels.

Both sides have recieved death threats btw.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060315/ap_on_fe_st/teacher_fired;_ylt=Alqy89r4J2avYOR7rzjzTDDtiBIF;_y lu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--

Sometimes you just need perspective...

Umm...yes. It would have been handled by the district exactly the same way. Except the student and his family and Jay Bennish and his family would have been spared the death threats. Problem is, this family has maintained from the beginning that all they wanted was a reprimand. I don't buy it, if that's all they wanted they would have used the proper channels.

Both sides have recieved death threats btw.

An effort was made to follow a chain of command. But past complaints about this teacher, and there was more then this one, fell of deaf ears. The other people were told that nothing would be done about it and to basically go away. The Allen's felt this was their only recourse. Bravo to them for sticking the districts feet to the fire. They got what they wanted. For Bennish to recieve a slap on the wrist.

An effort was made to follow a chain of command. But past complaints about this teacher, and there was more then this one, fell of deaf ears. The other people were told that nothing would be done about it and to basically go away.

Not sure where you get your info, but he was never complained about to the current Principal or the district leadership from what I am told. there is some question about the previous principal, who left last year, who was less than good, IMO.

The Allen's felt this was their only recourse. Bravo to them for sticking the districts feet to the fire.

I don't buy that story...when they gave this recording to the media, they hadn't given the principal and cetainly not district leadership the chance to respond. I do give them kudos for bringing this to light....Bennish needs to be a facilitator not an indoctrinator.

They got what they wanted. For Bennish to recieve a slap on the wrist.

My only complaint would be the hush, hush way it was done. I didn't get the feeling Bennish didn't fully get the message that this type of preaching is unacceptable.

They also Could have released it anonomously to the press, although I tend to view that sort of source to be dubious at best. I'm sure I'm not alone in that. As for the slap on the wrist, I'm not sure that was enough, although death threats are a bit extreme.
Maybe he should have had to attend some "sensitivity" training, regarding respecting other's views, regardless of what they are. I wouldn't have had an issue with what he was doing, had he also included some of the right wing whacky ideas in his diatrabe.
I do applaud him for trying to make the students think, and apparently 1 of them did. Just not in the way he wanted. ;)

and apparently 1 of them did. Just not in the way he wanted. ;)

ROFL, nice!!

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/walterwilliams/2006/03/15/189666.html

A good read on the subject.

Dr. Moses did make a mealy-mouthed statement that the teacher's "practice and deportment need growth and refinement."

Whatever...the district had little choice in it's actions. #1 - No previous complaints had been lodged with the district. #2 Violation of the policy in question, does not constitute grounds for dismissal. #3 How prudent would Mr. Moses had been if he had fired Bennish then used millions of dollars allocated to teach kids to defend the district from the ALCU lawsuits?


It's academic and intellectual dishonesty when a teacher, who is supposed to be teaching geography, uses his classroom to indoctrinate relatively uninformed teenagers. Recording the teacher's comments broke neither school policy nor Colorado law. But more importantly, I believe that what teachers say in class should be subject to parental and public scrutiny.

I whole heartedly agree.

it's an attack on family values and traditional standards of decency.

here's where he loses credibility in my book.

Today's microtechnology, might be just what the doctor ordered to put a stop to teachers using their position to indoctrinate our youth.

Agreed...but it's not a fricken conspiracy like he contends. In this case the district wasn't given the chance to respond without the media and ALCU screwing things up.

Preaching instead of teaching might go a long way toward explaining why in civics, math, reading, writing and geography,

Here's where his ignorance begins to shine through....The general decline is a decline in parenting skills and general social/moral decay as well as this societies disgust and lack of respect for the teaching profession. Are there bad teachers, emphataically YES...but you get what you pay for.

Overland High School is a high performing school in one of the most acemdemically sound districts in the state....yeah, preaching is the problem with the public schools. :rolleyes:

Started out as a good read...ended up a right-wing load of non-sense.

I agree that Parents are partly to blame. Not too many are involved with what goes on at the schools.
But how often does this sort of thing go on, where there is no recording of it?
How often do teachers use thier position of authority over children to get what they want? Just recently I saw stories of 2 teachers that had inappropriate contact with their underage students.
I'm sure there are a majority of teachers in the country that are very good at what they do. But that's not a news story and it doesn't create controversy.
I'm sure in a year, all of the excitement on American Idol will wipe any trace of this from the public mind.