GOP endorsed school board candidates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The posters on here are not doing the R candidates any favors with moderates.

Yelling facists and slurs towards adult parents presenting factual information is not representing the left very well.

You don't have too much to worry about - I am likely voting Tisler, Davis, Moon, and McDaniel - but I'll be surprised if any non-dems win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not give a flying rat's a$$ what you as an individual think is "porn." And FTR, no I do not consider the books here discussed "porn." But it doesn't matter what I think, either, as it concerns your kids.

You decided for YOUR kid. I will decide for mine. You have zero right to restrict my kid's access to the full range of publications in a library. You want to "forbid" your own kids, have at it. If you want to have a "consent form" for you to opt your kid out of having access to it or checking it out, knock yourself out. But make no mistake, you are a fascist a--hole if you are trying to dictate that for other people.

The thing I find funny, aside from the attempts at fascist control of what other people read, is A) by HS, most kids have already seen ACTUAL porn or near porn and know WAY more than you think they do. It's adorable some of you think otherwise. So, you've already failed.
B) Almost every HS kid has a computer and/or phone. So, I cannot take your outrage seriously, when your kid has access to the "dark" sites, porn, and more on a daily basis. So, worry about yourself and what you can control. But it will never be me and my kid.

Any school board member who is remotely in favor of catering to fascists, and banning books, undercutting the expertise of librarians, will not only not have my vote. But I will work to make sure they never see the light of a Board Member's office.

You’re nuts.

Reasonable people can believe in the notion of “community standards” when it comes to books in school libraries without being fascist.

You put on a big show of bring a libertarian when it comes to library books but you’re no doubt highly extremely censorial when it comes to other forms of speech you consider inappropriate. The bottom line is your ilk throws a total fit whenever they don’t get their way because you’re so used to having total control over the public schools. Time for that to change.

Well said and I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want to vote for candidates who are willing to restrain schools from sabotaging the trust and relationship between children and parents.

https://www.newsweek.com/school-apologizes-display-showing-books-adults-dont-want-you-read-1679670

This is a huge problem and it goes way beyond books. A parent wants their child’s 504 or IEP plan implemented? They just lie or create distrust between the student and parent and act like the parent is being overly dramatic for simply asking basic things to be done. Many parents are even simply having problems with the county’s optional formative work which is needed for 99 percent of students to get through classes and why teachers assign them. If it wasn’t needed, why assign it? Todays school policies just simply do not make sense for parents and students. And they don’t seem to make educators happier either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not give a flying rat's a$$ what you as an individual think is "porn." And FTR, no I do not consider the books here discussed "porn." But it doesn't matter what I think, either, as it concerns your kids.

You decided for YOUR kid. I will decide for mine. You have zero right to restrict my kid's access to the full range of publications in a library. You want to "forbid" your own kids, have at it. If you want to have a "consent form" for you to opt your kid out of having access to it or checking it out, knock yourself out. But make no mistake, you are a fascist a--hole if you are trying to dictate that for other people.

The thing I find funny, aside from the attempts at fascist control of what other people read, is A) by HS, most kids have already seen ACTUAL porn or near porn and know WAY more than you think they do. It's adorable some of you think otherwise. So, you've already failed.
B) Almost every HS kid has a computer and/or phone. So, I cannot take your outrage seriously, when your kid has access to the "dark" sites, porn, and more on a daily basis. So, worry about yourself and what you can control. But it will never be me and my kid.

Any school board member who is remotely in favor of catering to fascists, and banning books, undercutting the expertise of librarians, will not only not have my vote. But I will work to make sure they never see the light of a Board Member's office.

You’re nuts.

Reasonable people can believe in the notion of “community standards” when it comes to books in school libraries without being fascist.

You put on a big show of bring a libertarian when it comes to library books but you’re no doubt highly extremely censorial when it comes to other forms of speech you consider inappropriate. The bottom line is your ilk throws a total fit whenever they don’t get their way because you’re so used to having total control over the public schools. Time for that to change.

Well said and I agree.

The issue of 'community standards' vs 'national standards' is why the material that depicts child pornography and pederasty is allowed in school libraries. The materials have to fail the 'Miller' test where the work, as a whole, as to be obscene. So if the work contains any material that is not obscene, it passes and doesn't violate state and federal obscenity laws. This is why a work, such as Lawn Boy, that flashes back to the sexual experiences of two ten-year-old boys (adult voyeurism) would pass, and another such as Gender Queer that romanticizes sex between men and boys pass. It's a shame that our school board punts to the hand-selected committee of activists to determine what is allowed instead of passing a policy that prohibits child pornography and pederasty in school libraries, in this case, materials that are available in secondary school libraries and are accessible to children as young as 11.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The posters on here are not doing the R candidates any favors with moderates.

Yelling facists and slurs towards adult parents presenting factual information is not representing the left very well.

You don't have too much to worry about - I am likely voting Tisler, Davis, Moon, and McDaniel - but I'll be surprised if any non-dems win.

Yeah, none will win because of their narrow focus on cultural issues. There was an opportunity for a moderate or two to break through this year becUse of widespread dissatisfaction but they didn’t offer the right candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not give a flying rat's a$$ what you as an individual think is "porn." And FTR, no I do not consider the books here discussed "porn." But it doesn't matter what I think, either, as it concerns your kids.

You decided for YOUR kid. I will decide for mine. You have zero right to restrict my kid's access to the full range of publications in a library. You want to "forbid" your own kids, have at it. If you want to have a "consent form" for you to opt your kid out of having access to it or checking it out, knock yourself out. But make no mistake, you are a fascist a--hole if you are trying to dictate that for other people.

The thing I find funny, aside from the attempts at fascist control of what other people read, is A) by HS, most kids have already seen ACTUAL porn or near porn and know WAY more than you think they do. It's adorable some of you think otherwise. So, you've already failed.
B) Almost every HS kid has a computer and/or phone. So, I cannot take your outrage seriously, when your kid has access to the "dark" sites, porn, and more on a daily basis. So, worry about yourself and what you can control. But it will never be me and my kid.

Any school board member who is remotely in favor of catering to fascists, and banning books, undercutting the expertise of librarians, will not only not have my vote. But I will work to make sure they never see the light of a Board Member's office.

You’re nuts.

Reasonable people can believe in the notion of “community standards” when it comes to books in school libraries without being fascist.

You put on a big show of bring a libertarian when it comes to library books but you’re no doubt highly extremely censorial when it comes to other forms of speech you consider inappropriate. The bottom line is your ilk throws a total fit whenever they don’t get their way because you’re so used to having total control over the public schools. Time for that to change.

Well said and I agree.

The issue of 'community standards' vs 'national standards' is why the material that depicts child pornography and pederasty is allowed in school libraries. The materials have to fail the 'Miller' test where the work, as a whole, as to be obscene. So if the work contains any material that is not obscene, it passes and doesn't violate state and federal obscenity laws. This is why a work, such as Lawn Boy, that flashes back to the sexual experiences of two ten-year-old boys (adult voyeurism) would pass, and another such as Gender Queer that romanticizes sex between men and boys pass. It's a shame that our school board punts to the hand-selected committee of activists to determine what is allowed instead of passing a policy that prohibits child pornography and pederasty in school libraries, in this case, materials that are available in secondary school libraries and are accessible to children as young as 11.

I don’t think so. Forever by Judy Blume was not allowed in the schools I remember back in the day. It wasn’t obscene overall. Maybe for a public library this Miller test matters but schools are different. They are smaller and specifically for one age set of kids and to be used in conjunction with education. So the books should all help with educational goals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not give a flying rat's a$$ what you as an individual think is "porn." And FTR, no I do not consider the books here discussed "porn." But it doesn't matter what I think, either, as it concerns your kids.

You decided for YOUR kid. I will decide for mine. You have zero right to restrict my kid's access to the full range of publications in a library. You want to "forbid" your own kids, have at it. If you want to have a "consent form" for you to opt your kid out of having access to it or checking it out, knock yourself out. But make no mistake, you are a fascist a--hole if you are trying to dictate that for other people.

The thing I find funny, aside from the attempts at fascist control of what other people read, is A) by HS, most kids have already seen ACTUAL porn or near porn and know WAY more than you think they do. It's adorable some of you think otherwise. So, you've already failed.
B) Almost every HS kid has a computer and/or phone. So, I cannot take your outrage seriously, when your kid has access to the "dark" sites, porn, and more on a daily basis. So, worry about yourself and what you can control. But it will never be me and my kid.

Any school board member who is remotely in favor of catering to fascists, and banning books, undercutting the expertise of librarians, will not only not have my vote. But I will work to make sure they never see the light of a Board Member's office.

You’re nuts.

Reasonable people can believe in the notion of “community standards” when it comes to books in school libraries without being fascist.

You put on a big show of bring a libertarian when it comes to library books but you’re no doubt highly extremely censorial when it comes to other forms of speech you consider inappropriate. The bottom line is your ilk throws a total fit whenever they don’t get their way because you’re so used to having total control over the public schools. Time for that to change.

Well said and I agree.

The issue of 'community standards' vs 'national standards' is why the material that depicts child pornography and pederasty is allowed in school libraries. The materials have to fail the 'Miller' test where the work, as a whole, as to be obscene. So if the work contains any material that is not obscene, it passes and doesn't violate state and federal obscenity laws. This is why a work, such as Lawn Boy, that flashes back to the sexual experiences of two ten-year-old boys (adult voyeurism) would pass, and another such as Gender Queer that romanticizes sex between men and boys pass. It's a shame that our school board punts to the hand-selected committee of activists to determine what is allowed instead of passing a policy that prohibits child pornography and pederasty in school libraries, in this case, materials that are available in secondary school libraries and are accessible to children as young as 11.

It is not porn no matter how many times you say it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The posters on here are not doing the R candidates any favors with moderates.

So the people who don't want depictions of simulated fellatio are the problem? I think you have this backwards. I think most moderates would lean towards the conservative side on this. Let the parents who want their children to see this material seek it out, not provide it in school libraries.

The posters who are lying are the problem.

A photo of a book is a fact not a lie.

People have repeatedly been pushing Republican lies throughout this entire thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The posters on here are not doing the R candidates any favors with moderates.

Yelling facists and slurs towards adult parents presenting factual information is not representing the left very well.

You don't have too much to worry about - I am likely voting Tisler, Davis, Moon, and McDaniel - but I'll be surprised if any non-dems win.

Yeah, none will win because of their narrow focus on cultural issues. There was an opportunity for a moderate or two to break through this year becUse of widespread dissatisfaction but they didn’t offer the right candidates.

You have a weird perspective where focusing on education (academic rigor, remediation, teacher salaries and job satisfaction, and decent facilities) is a “cultural issue” and focusing on “equal outcomes for all” and boys in girls’ bathrooms is deemed the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The posters on here are not doing the R candidates any favors with moderates.

Yelling facists and slurs towards adult parents presenting factual information is not representing the left very well.

You don't have too much to worry about - I am likely voting Tisler, Davis, Moon, and McDaniel - but I'll be surprised if any non-dems win.

Yeah, none will win because of their narrow focus on cultural issues. There was an opportunity for a moderate or two to break through this year becUse of widespread dissatisfaction but they didn’t offer the right candidates.

You have a weird perspective where focusing on education (academic rigor, remediation, teacher salaries and job satisfaction, and decent facilities) is a “cultural issue” and focusing on “equal outcomes for all” and boys in girls’ bathrooms is deemed the norm.

A narrow focus on bigotry is always a deal breaker for most people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not give a flying rat's a$$ what you as an individual think is "porn." And FTR, no I do not consider the books here discussed "porn." But it doesn't matter what I think, either, as it concerns your kids.

You decided for YOUR kid. I will decide for mine. You have zero right to restrict my kid's access to the full range of publications in a library. You want to "forbid" your own kids, have at it. If you want to have a "consent form" for you to opt your kid out of having access to it or checking it out, knock yourself out. But make no mistake, you are a fascist a--hole if you are trying to dictate that for other people.

The thing I find funny, aside from the attempts at fascist control of what other people read, is A) by HS, most kids have already seen ACTUAL porn or near porn and know WAY more than you think they do. It's adorable some of you think otherwise. So, you've already failed.
B) Almost every HS kid has a computer and/or phone. So, I cannot take your outrage seriously, when your kid has access to the "dark" sites, porn, and more on a daily basis. So, worry about yourself and what you can control. But it will never be me and my kid.

Any school board member who is remotely in favor of catering to fascists, and banning books, undercutting the expertise of librarians, will not only not have my vote. But I will work to make sure they never see the light of a Board Member's office.

You’re nuts.

Reasonable people can believe in the notion of “community standards” when it comes to books in school libraries without being fascist.

You put on a big show of bring a libertarian when it comes to library books but you’re no doubt highly extremely censorial when it comes to other forms of speech you consider inappropriate. The bottom line is your ilk throws a total fit whenever they don’t get their way because you’re so used to having total control over the public schools. Time for that to change.

Well said and I agree.

The issue of 'community standards' vs 'national standards' is why the material that depicts child pornography and pederasty is allowed in school libraries. The materials have to fail the 'Miller' test where the work, as a whole, as to be obscene. So if the work contains any material that is not obscene, it passes and doesn't violate state and federal obscenity laws. This is why a work, such as Lawn Boy, that flashes back to the sexual experiences of two ten-year-old boys (adult voyeurism) would pass, and another such as Gender Queer that romanticizes sex between men and boys pass. It's a shame that our school board punts to the hand-selected committee of activists to determine what is allowed instead of passing a policy that prohibits child pornography and pederasty in school libraries, in this case, materials that are available in secondary school libraries and are accessible to children as young as 11.

It is not porn no matter how many times you say it.

The materials meet the definition of pornography and they are designed to stimulate the readers' genitals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The posters on here are not doing the R candidates any favors with moderates.

Yelling facists and slurs towards adult parents presenting factual information is not representing the left very well.

You don't have too much to worry about - I am likely voting Tisler, Davis, Moon, and McDaniel - but I'll be surprised if any non-dems win.

Yeah, none will win because of their narrow focus on cultural issues. There was an opportunity for a moderate or two to break through this year becUse of widespread dissatisfaction but they didn’t offer the right candidates.

Tisler is focused on academic achievement and special education issues.

She is a former educator snd would be a tremendous asset to the school board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not give a flying rat's a$$ what you as an individual think is "porn." And FTR, no I do not consider the books here discussed "porn." But it doesn't matter what I think, either, as it concerns your kids.

You decided for YOUR kid. I will decide for mine. You have zero right to restrict my kid's access to the full range of publications in a library. You want to "forbid" your own kids, have at it. If you want to have a "consent form" for you to opt your kid out of having access to it or checking it out, knock yourself out. But make no mistake, you are a fascist a--hole if you are trying to dictate that for other people.

The thing I find funny, aside from the attempts at fascist control of what other people read, is A) by HS, most kids have already seen ACTUAL porn or near porn and know WAY more than you think they do. It's adorable some of you think otherwise. So, you've already failed.
B) Almost every HS kid has a computer and/or phone. So, I cannot take your outrage seriously, when your kid has access to the "dark" sites, porn, and more on a daily basis. So, worry about yourself and what you can control. But it will never be me and my kid.

Any school board member who is remotely in favor of catering to fascists, and banning books, undercutting the expertise of librarians, will not only not have my vote. But I will work to make sure they never see the light of a Board Member's office.

You’re nuts.

Reasonable people can believe in the notion of “community standards” when it comes to books in school libraries without being fascist.

You put on a big show of bring a libertarian when it comes to library books but you’re no doubt highly extremely censorial when it comes to other forms of speech you consider inappropriate. The bottom line is your ilk throws a total fit whenever they don’t get their way because you’re so used to having total control over the public schools. Time for that to change.

Well said and I agree.

The issue of 'community standards' vs 'national standards' is why the material that depicts child pornography and pederasty is allowed in school libraries. The materials have to fail the 'Miller' test where the work, as a whole, as to be obscene. So if the work contains any material that is not obscene, it passes and doesn't violate state and federal obscenity laws. This is why a work, such as Lawn Boy, that flashes back to the sexual experiences of two ten-year-old boys (adult voyeurism) would pass, and another such as Gender Queer that romanticizes sex between men and boys pass. It's a shame that our school board punts to the hand-selected committee of activists to determine what is allowed instead of passing a policy that prohibits child pornography and pederasty in school libraries, in this case, materials that are available in secondary school libraries and are accessible to children as young as 11.

It is not porn no matter how many times you say it.

It is clearly porn. Only a far left extreme activist without children of their own would think otherwise.

[Anonymous]

How did we get to this point where childless political activists, many not even from Virginia, have managed to define porn, sexual topics and cultural indoctrination as the necessary focus of our schools, and family/parental involvement, focus on academics, raising achievement in things like literacy &math, and improved special ed services as "bigotry" "extreme" and "cultural issues"???

[Anonymous]

NP. Who is a good "at large" candidate to vote for if you want someone who is moderate?