monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

This is unconstitutional bullshit. I hope some overreaching zealot loses his job.

Perhaps you can explain how that is unconstitutional, and cite the portion of the constitution violated.

You prefer to push some lie about me not seeing a satirical picture clearly and asking you to clarify it. That's just who you are.

The teacher's union pushed through two-year tenure and practically unlimited days off. That means it takes an act of God to fire a bad or constantly absent teacher if they can just keep their job for a scant two years.

Teachers with only two years of teaching experience are practically unaccountable. Students are taught much more often by substitutes. The money to pay subs bankrupts the system. Some people believe tenure is at the root of the deplorable condition of America education.

Almost nobody should have tenure in my opinion, certainly not a two-year teacher. Everybody who performs a job should be accountable for the kind of job they do.

Reforms have been attempted. Certainly, a goddamn fair wage is vitally important. Two year tenure is wrecking education.

I was in California during the Prop 74 vote, taken in a room with other district teachers, told how I should vote, and given a form to sign about how I would vote, and told not to leave the room until I signed.

It was the most intimidating moment in my life. I've never had anyone stand me down about something I considered so sacred. My job was being threatened.

https://teachertenure.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=006636

Amen to that. Having worked in the education system here in Australia, I can tell you that the troublemakers end up being promoted to the top of the tree.

Of course, though I'd've though you'd have known something this basic.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/updates/schools-students-protesting-national-anthem

Pertinent excerpt:

Public schools can't discipline students for silent acts of political protest that don't disrupt the operations of a school, like kneeling for the anthem or refusing to say the Pledge of Allegiance, said LoMonte, of the Student Press Law Center. And educational leaders will miss out on learning opportunities if they first seek to end a protest rather than allowing students to learn from it, he said.

"The standard should never be: 'What's the worst thing we can do to kids and get away with it?'" LoMonte said in an interview. "The standard should be: 'What's the healthiest educational practice?' Schools talk such a great game about wanting to produce civically engaged students…This is something schools should be embracing as a teaching opportunity."

It's not just a good educational practice to allow silent, unobtrusive acts of student speech; it's also constitutionally mandated, LoMonte said.

While the U.S. Supreme Court has held that "the constitutional rights of students in public school are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings," legal precedents show there are limits on schools' ability to address speech with discipline.

In the 1943 case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a school would violate the free-speech rights of its students who were Jehovah's Witnesses if it forced them to say the Pledge of Allegiance.

"To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous instead of a compulsory routine is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds," Justice Robert Jackson wrote in his majority opinion.
-------------------------------
I hope there will be some lawsuits to bring the hammer down on these holier-than-thou behavior police.

I see that Oralloy is also claiming unconstitutional restraints without citing the relevant passage of the constitution. Just for grins, I advise Sofia-Lash-Goth and Oralloy to actually read the constitution, and then maybe they can get back to us with citations for these alleged constitutional violations.

As has been explained, the burden of guilt of the Nixon administration was largely for obstruction of justice. In the case of Iran-Contra, Ronnie Ray-gun sought to do an end run around the Boland amendment which prohibited the funding of the Nicaraguan Contras. Attached to defense appropriation bills, this series of amendments, entirely within the power of Congress, prohibited providing military assistance to the Contras. Ray-gun and his boys sought to funnel money from the sale of military materials to Iran, to the Contras.

The Valerie Plame affair is even simpler. Joe Wilson, with more than 20 years experience as a State Department diplomatic officer in Africa, was sent to investigate the "yellow cake" uranium rumor, first floated by Italian intelligence agents. Wilson, who has served in Niger, reported that the story was without foundation. With Baby Bush's eagerness to rush into an aggressive war in Iraq, his information was ignored, so he published a letter on the subject in The New York Times. Unable to get him, the vicious bastards in Baby Bush's administration went after his wife, Valerie Plame. It is against the law (and a salutary law it is) to reveal the name of any CIA officer, which is what I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby did, for which he was indicted, convicted and served time.

It's not a witch hunt if people are indicted and convicted.

It isn't a witch hunt to investigate alleged improprieties in the last election campaign. What makes that more hilarious is that the Republicans control Congress and so it's hilariously stupid to claim that the Democrats are conducting a witch hunt. If anyone connected with President Plump is found to have violated the law, is indicted and convicted, it won't be a witch hunt. It's hardly a witch hunt if an investigation was ordered by the "witches."

You jokers are truly laughable.

I do beg your pardon--I had thought that you were responding to Izzy's most recent post in saying that it was unconstitutional.

So, you see, I can admit when I'm wrong. I'd probably die of a coronary episode if I ever saw either you or your new boyfriend do the same.

Are you on drugs, Set?

The MSM has been on a witch hunt ever since their witch failed to win the election.

Plump is only there to demonstrate to the world just how corrupted the US election gig has become. We have established that both the DNC, and HRC, supported his candidacy. Take that on board, and move forward from there.

A pretty good, fact-rich discussion about teacher tenure and how it affects education and kids. The bad teachers eventually get shifted down to poor schools, so to me, it also becomes a civil rights issue.

https://dianerehm.org/shows/2014-06-17/debate-over-how-teacher-tenure-affects-quality-education

I wasn't ever a part of that conversation. Take your meds.

I'm not lying, whether or not you could make out the picture is moot, although your claim is highly suspect. You asked for clarification over whether or not Stalin was controlled by Jews.

You would not be allowed in a school over here.

A couple of notes on Nixon's administration and the Scooter Libby conviction.

John Mitchell, Nixon's first Attorney General, set up CREEP (the Committee to Re-Elect the President). Before he was convicted of obstruction of justice (among other charges and specifications) he authorized the break-in of the DNC offices in the Watergate Hotel. It is interesting in the context of this thread that CREEP's first target was Ed Muskie, who had beaten Nixon in 1971 polls of the "if the election were held today" variety. CREEP pulled out all the stops and among other things (such as circulating faked photos of Muskie wearing a brassiere) they planted a fake letter in the Manchester Union-Leader alleging that Muskie has maligned "Canucks," meaning French-Canadians (northern New England has a relatively large French-speaking population). Muskie faded from the Democratic primary after New Hampshire.

President Plump didn't invent fake news, he just bloviates about it more than anyone else.

In the Valerie Plame affair, Miss Miller, a reporter for The New York Times went to jail for refusing to reveal Libby's name. Miller served nearly her entire sentence before her new lawyer sprung her. Then her new lawyer revealed that Libby had given Miller a waiver to reveal his name, specifically naming her. With a lawyer like that, who needs enemies?

Oh what a tangled web we weave . . .

As you know, the propaganda picture was purportedly a Jew taking off a Stalin mask. I couldn't make out exactly what it was. I saw a Stalin face and what looked like something eating the Stalin face. On that night, like this one, I woke up in the middle of the night, started looking at at tiny lighted screen. I was joking a bit with someone else about what I was seeing.

Didn't get the mask aspect or the Jewish component. Period.

When you rudely explained what the picture depicted, I told you I'd never heard the racist theory that Jews were responsible for Stalin.

I don't feel badly at all that I managed to get to middle age having avoided one of a million anti-Semitic slurs.

You were just being an ass intentionally as you are now.

I'm glad you posted this.

Hope everyone has a look — I tried to put it up a few days ago but it was locked at the time.

Who Killed the ERA?

Here's one — long guns usually usually fire more powerful ammunition than hand guns and are often equipped with larger magazines. Adding a pistol grip makes the firearm easier to fire without taking the time to raise the stock to one's shoulder and take careful aim (as one would do with a hunting rifle). Since minimal care is given to see that firearms are only allowed to be purchased by mentally stable people who've had a modicum of training, designing, providing, and heavily advertising assault-styled weapons means that more powerful and easily misused weapons will be in the hands of more dangerous people. Like those cop-killing members of BLM you're always going on about. You know, those ones the NRA has armed.

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/

Pulling back the curtain on Russia Russia Russia.

Excerpt:

LAST FRIDAY, most major media outlets touted a major story about Russian attempts to hack into U.S. voting systems, based exclusively on claims made by the Department of Homeland Security. “Russians attempted to hack elections systems in 21 states in the run-up to last year’s presidential election, officials said Friday,” began the USA Today story, similar to how most other outlets presented this extraordinary claim.

This official story was explosive for obvious reasons, and predictably triggered instant decrees – that of course went viral – declaring that the legitimacy of the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election is now in doubt.

Virginia’s Democratic Congressman Don Beyer, referring to the 21 targeted states, announced that this shows “Russia tried to hack their election”:

MSNBC’s Paul Revere for all matters relating to the Kremlin take-over, Rachel Maddow, was indignant that this wasn’t told to us earlier and that we still aren’t getting all the details. “What we have now figured out,” Maddow gravely intoned as she showed the multi-colored maps she made, is that “Homeland Security knew at least by June that 21 states had been targeted by Russian hackers during the election. . .targeting their election infrastructure.”

Favorite part of the preceding Greenwald story:

They were one small step away from demanding that the election results be nullified, indulging the sentiment expressed by #Resistance icon Carl Reiner the other day: “Is there anything more exciting that [sic] the possibility of Trump’s election being invalidated & Hillary rightfully installed as our President?”

So what was wrong with this story? Just one small thing: it was false. The story began to fall apart yesterday when Associated Press reported that Wisconsin – one of the states included in the original report that, for obvious reasons, caused the most excitement – did not, in fact, have its election systems targeted by Russian hackers:

Yawn yawn yawn.

It's not difficult to find media accounts which can be used to back up or debunk breaking stories in the news. I'm content to wait until the investigations are completed rather than hanging on to every unsubstantiated or misrepresented story.

What I do believe is that Russia has worked to undermine the electoral integrity of many Western states, at an unprecedented level, and that this reflects Putin's intentions to weaken Western democracies by sowing distrust and confusion.

No, you stepped in on a conversation between Ossobucco and me to say you approved of the image because a "Jew" had Stalin under control, you only rowed back after it was pointed out that this was Nazi propaganda, and the "Jew" was a crude caricature complete with horns.

And even then you needed clarification over whether or not Jews did control the Soviet Union. Now you're looking stupid you're acting like your mentor and claiming 'fake news.'

I don't lie, because having to remember what you've lied about means you get caught out easily. And that's what's happened to you. You're so invested in the lie that you probably believe it yourself, just don't expect me to.

I'm content to wait for proof as well.

It is tiring for American news to be dominated by unsubstantiated claims at the expense of good reporting.