Brenda Diaz

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with Brenda is that you can't really trust that she's not just saying what she thinks she needs to say to get elected and will then do a hard-right pivot once she's on the board.

You're right that many of statements and criticisms of MCPS are reasonable and sound. The problem is whether she's genuine in actually wanting to solve problems or is it her goal to just stir up trouble and get a seat on the board to make it more conservative.

+1
She clearly has a partisan right-wing agenda. I may agree with some things she says but I think she will do more harm than good. Maybe I am being naive or too optimistic but I don't think she will be able to further her right wing agenda much as a BOE member, but I think she will be a harmful distraction and will serve as a straw man for TT.

I agree with this assessment. She is too right wing to bring any of her ideas to fruition in Moco and will only further divide the board, leading to more inaction than already occurs.

So you are saying that the board will be most effective if all board members think the same.

Not at all. But board members can't be an island since you need at least 5 votes to get anything done. So she will be unsuccessful if she is unable to build a coalition and consensus around her viewpoints and ideas.

We've seen that play out with current BOE member Rita Montoya. And interestingly, Montoya is the only BOE member I could see collaborating with Diaz at all.

We already have a rubber stamp BOE. I'm good if Brenda can at least probe and raise issues before the BOE continues to rubber stamp.

Notice that not much will change since only 2 real seats are up for election. So we're still stuck with this current BOE. But I'm willing to set up the BOE with a renegade so that maybe there is a chance in another 2 years that the BOE could stop being a rubber stamp.

Part of me wants to see Diaz and Taylor go at each other, but we already have enough problems with the BOE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if there are other forums where ex-coworkers of her have replied but I remember hearing that she constantly showed up late to Gaithersburg HS and other teachers had to cover her classes.

The SMOB didn't show up much this year. Is she MAGA too?

Grace Rivera-Oven dropped in when she felt like it before she was president.

The SMOB this year was disappointing in a number of ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have seen lots of online commentary on her being crazy and MAGA during the pandemic. I did not have kids in schools then so don't know all the background. But her responses on the various candidate questionnaires I have seen for this election all seem reasonable, relatively measured, and most importantly (to me) much more specific on actual changes that would increase the rigor and accountability of MCPS. She also cites evidence more than the other candidates. I disagree with her on Mahmoud vs. Taylor but even her responses on that topic don't seem particularly extreme.

I really don't like the idea of voting for a MAGA candidate but also feel like ultimately I should be voting based on the candidates' stated views, and hers seem pretty good and at least very clear whereas all the other candidates seem to respond entirely in vague platitudes, which makes me think they'll just roll with whatever the superintendent and MCEA want rather than providing actual oversight and differing views. What am I missing?

She has toned down her rhetoric since her last run for the BOE. You should know that she was fired from MCPS for refusing to adhere to vaccination requirements for CoVid. She refused to wear a mask. And rather than do these things, she simply did not show up to teach, leaving administrators scrambling to cover her classes.

If you think this behavior is well-reasoned, by all means, vote for her.

What I'm hearing is that, if COVID happened again, she'd keep schools open. Sounds like the best candidate for the job by far.

[Anonymous]

We need BOE candidates who are extremely progressive.

We also want taxes to be as high as possible.

Anyone not meeting these qualifications should not be elected

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if there are other forums where ex-coworkers of her have replied but I remember hearing that she constantly showed up late to Gaithersburg HS and other teachers had to cover her classes.

The SMOB didn't show up much this year. Is she MAGA too?

Grace Rivera-Oven dropped in when she felt like it before she was president.

The SMOB this year was disappointing in a number of ways.

Not nearly as good as the past couple of years. I think the main thing learned was that when you are a lame duck you get asked to be the one to motion for anything they want that might have a modicum of controversy so that those who would be running for something don't have to be the ones saying the words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with Brenda is that you can't really trust that she's not just saying what she thinks she needs to say to get elected and will then do a hard-right pivot once she's on the board.

You're right that many of statements and criticisms of MCPS are reasonable and sound. The problem is whether she's genuine in actually wanting to solve problems or is it her goal to just stir up trouble and get a seat on the board to make it more conservative.

+1
She clearly has a partisan right-wing agenda. I may agree with some things she says but I think she will do more harm than good. Maybe I am being naive or too optimistic but I don't think she will be able to further her right wing agenda much as a BOE member, but I think she will be a harmful distraction and will serve as a straw man for TT.

I agree with this assessment. She is too right wing to bring any of her ideas to fruition in Moco and will only further divide the board, leading to more inaction than already occurs.

So you are saying that the board will be most effective if all board members think the same.

Not at all. But board members can't be an island since you need at least 5 votes to get anything done. So she will be unsuccessful if she is unable to build a coalition and consensus around her viewpoints and ideas.

We've seen that play out with current BOE member Rita Montoya. And interestingly, Montoya is the only BOE member I could see collaborating with Diaz at all.

We already have a rubber stamp BOE. I'm good if Brenda can at least probe and raise issues before the BOE continues to rubber stamp.

Notice that not much will change since only 2 real seats are up for election. So we're still stuck with this current BOE. But I'm willing to set up the BOE with a renegade so that maybe there is a chance in another 2 years that the BOE could stop being a rubber stamp.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have seen lots of online commentary on her being crazy and MAGA during the pandemic. I did not have kids in schools then so don't know all the background. But her responses on the various candidate questionnaires I have seen for this election all seem reasonable, relatively measured, and most importantly (to me) much more specific on actual changes that would increase the rigor and accountability of MCPS. She also cites evidence more than the other candidates. I disagree with her on Mahmoud vs. Taylor but even her responses on that topic don't seem particularly extreme.

I really don't like the idea of voting for a MAGA candidate but also feel like ultimately I should be voting based on the candidates' stated views, and hers seem pretty good and at least very clear whereas all the other candidates seem to respond entirely in vague platitudes, which makes me think they'll just roll with whatever the superintendent and MCEA want rather than providing actual oversight and differing views. What am I missing?

She has toned down her rhetoric since her last run for the BOE. You should know that she was fired from MCPS for refusing to adhere to vaccination requirements for CoVid. She refused to wear a mask. And rather than do these things, she simply did not show up to teach, leaving administrators scrambling to cover her classes.

If you think this behavior is well-reasoned, by all means, vote for her.

What I'm hearing is that, if COVID happened again, she'd keep schools open. Sounds like the best candidate for the job by far.

You seem to forget how deadly COVID was at the beginning, with no vaccine. Good thing your children, if you have any, are healthy. Any child with a compromised immune system would be in danger during an uncontrolled pandemic. But hey, good luck with your MAHA thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have seen lots of online commentary on her being crazy and MAGA during the pandemic. I did not have kids in schools then so don't know all the background. But her responses on the various candidate questionnaires I have seen for this election all seem reasonable, relatively measured, and most importantly (to me) much more specific on actual changes that would increase the rigor and accountability of MCPS. She also cites evidence more than the other candidates. I disagree with her on Mahmoud vs. Taylor but even her responses on that topic don't seem particularly extreme.

I really don't like the idea of voting for a MAGA candidate but also feel like ultimately I should be voting based on the candidates' stated views, and hers seem pretty good and at least very clear whereas all the other candidates seem to respond entirely in vague platitudes, which makes me think they'll just roll with whatever the superintendent and MCEA want rather than providing actual oversight and differing views. What am I missing?

She has toned down her rhetoric since her last run for the BOE. You should know that she was fired from MCPS for refusing to adhere to vaccination requirements for CoVid. She refused to wear a mask. And rather than do these things, she simply did not show up to teach, leaving administrators scrambling to cover her classes.

If you think this behavior is well-reasoned, by all means, vote for her.

What I'm hearing is that, if COVID happened again, she'd keep schools open. Sounds like the best candidate for the job by far.

You seem to forget how deadly COVID was at the beginning, with no vaccine. Good thing your children, if you have any, are healthy. Any child with a compromised immune system would be in danger during an uncontrolled pandemic. But hey, good luck with your MAHA thinking.

There is no hell hot enough for the people who ruined so many children's lives with this nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if there are other forums where ex-coworkers of her have replied but I remember hearing that she constantly showed up late to Gaithersburg HS and other teachers had to cover her classes.

The SMOB didn't show up much this year. Is she MAGA too?

Grace Rivera-Oven dropped in when she felt like it before she was president.

The SMOB this year was disappointing in a number of ways.

Not nearly as good as the past couple of years. I think the main thing learned was that when you are a lame duck you get asked to be the one to motion for anything they want that might have a modicum of controversy so that those who would be running for something don't have to be the ones saying the words.

She was steamrolled regularly in BOE meetings. It was sad.

Sammy and Praneel really put up a good fight while they were on the board and had some of the most insightful and biting comments during discussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with Brenda is that you can't really trust that she's not just saying what she thinks she needs to say to get elected and will then do a hard-right pivot once she's on the board.

You're right that many of statements and criticisms of MCPS are reasonable and sound. The problem is whether she's genuine in actually wanting to solve problems or is it her goal to just stir up trouble and get a seat on the board to make it more conservative.

+1
She clearly has a partisan right-wing agenda. I may agree with some things she says but I think she will do more harm than good. Maybe I am being naive or too optimistic but I don't think she will be able to further her right wing agenda much as a BOE member, but I think she will be a harmful distraction and will serve as a straw man for TT.

I agree with this assessment. She is too right wing to bring any of her ideas to fruition in Moco and will only further divide the board, leading to more inaction than already occurs.

So you are saying that the board will be most effective if all board members think the same.

Not at all. But board members can't be an island since you need at least 5 votes to get anything done. So she will be unsuccessful if she is unable to build a coalition and consensus around her viewpoints and ideas.

We've seen that play out with current BOE member Rita Montoya. And interestingly, Montoya is the only BOE member I could see collaborating with Diaz at all.

We already have a rubber stamp BOE. I'm good if Brenda can at least probe and raise issues before the BOE continues to rubber stamp.

Notice that not much will change since only 2 real seats are up for election. So we're still stuck with this current BOE. But I'm willing to set up the BOE with a renegade so that maybe there is a chance in another 2 years that the BOE could stop being a rubber stamp.

Definitely don't want the rubber stamp BOE. However, thinking that throwing a wrench in the system, change just for change sake, is how we got Trump. We need a Mamdabi, not a robert F Kennedy Jr

Not voting for Diaz

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with Brenda is that you can't really trust that she's not just saying what she thinks she needs to say to get elected and will then do a hard-right pivot once she's on the board.

You're right that many of statements and criticisms of MCPS are reasonable and sound. The problem is whether she's genuine in actually wanting to solve problems or is it her goal to just stir up trouble and get a seat on the board to make it more conservative.

+1
She clearly has a partisan right-wing agenda. I may agree with some things she says but I think she will do more harm than good. Maybe I am being naive or too optimistic but I don't think she will be able to further her right wing agenda much as a BOE member, but I think she will be a harmful distraction and will serve as a straw man for TT.

I agree with this assessment. She is too right wing to bring any of her ideas to fruition in Moco and will only further divide the board, leading to more inaction than already occurs.

So you are saying that the board will be most effective if all board members think the same.

Not at all. But board members can't be an island since you need at least 5 votes to get anything done. So she will be unsuccessful if she is unable to build a coalition and consensus around her viewpoints and ideas.

We've seen that play out with current BOE member Rita Montoya. And interestingly, Montoya is the only BOE member I could see collaborating with Diaz at all.

We already have a rubber stamp BOE. I'm good if Brenda can at least probe and raise issues before the BOE continues to rubber stamp.

Notice that not much will change since only 2 real seats are up for election. So we're still stuck with this current BOE. But I'm willing to set up the BOE with a renegade so that maybe there is a chance in another 2 years that the BOE could stop being a rubber stamp.

Definitely don't want the rubber stamp BOE. However, thinking that throwing a wrench in the system, change just for change sake, is how we got Trump. We need a Mamdabi, not a robert F Kennedy Jr

Not voting for Diaz

Not good analogies. One of seven is far different from one of one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have seen lots of online commentary on her being crazy and MAGA during the pandemic. I did not have kids in schools then so don't know all the background. But her responses on the various candidate questionnaires I have seen for this election all seem reasonable, relatively measured, and most importantly (to me) much more specific on actual changes that would increase the rigor and accountability of MCPS. She also cites evidence more than the other candidates. I disagree with her on Mahmoud vs. Taylor but even her responses on that topic don't seem particularly extreme.

I really don't like the idea of voting for a MAGA candidate but also feel like ultimately I should be voting based on the candidates' stated views, and hers seem pretty good and at least very clear whereas all the other candidates seem to respond entirely in vague platitudes, which makes me think they'll just roll with whatever the superintendent and MCEA want rather than providing actual oversight and differing views. What am I missing?

She has toned down her rhetoric since her last run for the BOE. You should know that she was fired from MCPS for refusing to adhere to vaccination requirements for CoVid. She refused to wear a mask. And rather than do these things, she simply did not show up to teach, leaving administrators scrambling to cover her classes.

If you think this behavior is well-reasoned, by all means, vote for her.

What I'm hearing is that, if COVID happened again, she'd keep schools open. Sounds like the best candidate for the job by far.

You seem to forget how deadly COVID was at the beginning, with no vaccine. Good thing your children, if you have any, are healthy. Any child with a compromised immune system would be in danger during an uncontrolled pandemic. But hey, good luck with your MAHA thinking.

+1 Also note that masking was meant to get kids back into school as soon as possible, and while vaccines for under-12s were still not available.

I think folks with older kids, or without kids, forget the big gap between adult (and particularly essential worker) vaccination and kids being able to get vaccinated. During that time, it made sense to have kids and teachers mask up.

Diaz not only refused, but just stopped coming to work over it. So, you have kids who have not been in the classroom in months, and then they don't have a teacher becasue this one woman thinks the rules don't apply to her.

If you are a person who thinks remote school was such a travesty, you should be incandescent that Diaz refused the one measure that was helping to get kids back into the classroom, and that she left her students without a teacher at a vulnerable point in their education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have seen lots of online commentary on her being crazy and MAGA during the pandemic. I did not have kids in schools then so don't know all the background. But her responses on the various candidate questionnaires I have seen for this election all seem reasonable, relatively measured, and most importantly (to me) much more specific on actual changes that would increase the rigor and accountability of MCPS. She also cites evidence more than the other candidates. I disagree with her on Mahmoud vs. Taylor but even her responses on that topic don't seem particularly extreme.

I really don't like the idea of voting for a MAGA candidate but also feel like ultimately I should be voting based on the candidates' stated views, and hers seem pretty good and at least very clear whereas all the other candidates seem to respond entirely in vague platitudes, which makes me think they'll just roll with whatever the superintendent and MCEA want rather than providing actual oversight and differing views. What am I missing?

She has toned down her rhetoric since her last run for the BOE. You should know that she was fired from MCPS for refusing to adhere to vaccination requirements for CoVid. She refused to wear a mask. And rather than do these things, she simply did not show up to teach, leaving administrators scrambling to cover her classes.

If you think this behavior is well-reasoned, by all means, vote for her.

What I'm hearing is that, if COVID happened again, she'd keep schools open. Sounds like the best candidate for the job by far.

You seem to forget how deadly COVID was at the beginning, with no vaccine. Good thing your children, if you have any, are healthy. Any child with a compromised immune system would be in danger during an uncontrolled pandemic. But hey, good luck with your MAHA thinking.

+1 Also note that masking was meant to get kids back into school as soon as possible, and while vaccines for under-12s were still not available.

I think folks with older kids, or without kids, forget the big gap between adult (and particularly essential worker) vaccination and kids being able to get vaccinated. During that time, it made sense to have kids and teachers mask up.

Diaz not only refused, but just stopped coming to work over it. So, you have kids who have not been in the classroom in months, and then they don't have a teacher becasue this one woman thinks the rules don't apply to her.

If you are a person who thinks remote school was such a travesty, you should be incandescent that Diaz refused the one measure that was helping to get kids back into the classroom, and that she left her students without a teacher at a vulnerable point in their education.

I think the restrictions and school closures made sense for spring through summer of 2020. But by fall of 2020, it was clear that kids likely weren't at much risk from COVID and likely would have benefitted from schools reopening at that point.

MCPS didn't, however, because of strong opposition from MCEA. And MCPS had one of the most extended closures of the districts in our area.

The autopsy on COVID and school closures is clear that closing for as long as we did caused more harm for children than good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have seen lots of online commentary on her being crazy and MAGA during the pandemic. I did not have kids in schools then so don't know all the background. But her responses on the various candidate questionnaires I have seen for this election all seem reasonable, relatively measured, and most importantly (to me) much more specific on actual changes that would increase the rigor and accountability of MCPS. She also cites evidence more than the other candidates. I disagree with her on Mahmoud vs. Taylor but even her responses on that topic don't seem particularly extreme.

I really don't like the idea of voting for a MAGA candidate but also feel like ultimately I should be voting based on the candidates' stated views, and hers seem pretty good and at least very clear whereas all the other candidates seem to respond entirely in vague platitudes, which makes me think they'll just roll with whatever the superintendent and MCEA want rather than providing actual oversight and differing views. What am I missing?

She has toned down her rhetoric since her last run for the BOE. You should know that she was fired from MCPS for refusing to adhere to vaccination requirements for CoVid. She refused to wear a mask. And rather than do these things, she simply did not show up to teach, leaving administrators scrambling to cover her classes.

If you think this behavior is well-reasoned, by all means, vote for her.

What I'm hearing is that, if COVID happened again, she'd keep schools open. Sounds like the best candidate for the job by far.

You seem to forget how deadly COVID was at the beginning, with no vaccine. Good thing your children, if you have any, are healthy. Any child with a compromised immune system would be in danger during an uncontrolled pandemic. But hey, good luck with your MAHA thinking.

+1 Also note that masking was meant to get kids back into school as soon as possible, and while vaccines for under-12s were still not available.

I think folks with older kids, or without kids, forget the big gap between adult (and particularly essential worker) vaccination and kids being able to get vaccinated. During that time, it made sense to have kids and teachers mask up.

Diaz not only refused, but just stopped coming to work over it. So, you have kids who have not been in the classroom in months, and then they don't have a teacher because this one woman thinks the rules don't apply to her.

If you are a person who thinks remote school was such a travesty, you should be incandescent that Diaz refused the one measure that was helping to get kids back into the classroom, and that she left her students without a teacher at a vulnerable point in their education.

Well said. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have seen lots of online commentary on her being crazy and MAGA during the pandemic. I did not have kids in schools then so don't know all the background. But her responses on the various candidate questionnaires I have seen for this election all seem reasonable, relatively measured, and most importantly (to me) much more specific on actual changes that would increase the rigor and accountability of MCPS. She also cites evidence more than the other candidates. I disagree with her on Mahmoud vs. Taylor but even her responses on that topic don't seem particularly extreme.

I really don't like the idea of voting for a MAGA candidate but also feel like ultimately I should be voting based on the candidates' stated views, and hers seem pretty good and at least very clear whereas all the other candidates seem to respond entirely in vague platitudes, which makes me think they'll just roll with whatever the superintendent and MCEA want rather than providing actual oversight and differing views. What am I missing?

She has toned down her rhetoric since her last run for the BOE. You should know that she was fired from MCPS for refusing to adhere to vaccination requirements for CoVid. She refused to wear a mask. And rather than do these things, she simply did not show up to teach, leaving administrators scrambling to cover her classes.

If you think this behavior is well-reasoned, by all means, vote for her.

What I'm hearing is that, if COVID happened again, she'd keep schools open. Sounds like the best candidate for the job by far.

You seem to forget how deadly COVID was at the beginning, with no vaccine. Good thing your children, if you have any, are healthy. Any child with a compromised immune system would be in danger during an uncontrolled pandemic. But hey, good luck with your MAHA thinking.

+1 Also note that masking was meant to get kids back into school as soon as possible, and while vaccines for under-12s were still not available.

I think folks with older kids, or without kids, forget the big gap between adult (and particularly essential worker) vaccination and kids being able to get vaccinated. During that time, it made sense to have kids and teachers mask up.

Diaz not only refused, but just stopped coming to work over it. So, you have kids who have not been in the classroom in months, and then they don't have a teacher becasue this one woman thinks the rules don't apply to her.

If you are a person who thinks remote school was such a travesty, you should be incandescent that Diaz refused the one measure that was helping to get kids back into the classroom, and that she left her students without a teacher at a vulnerable point in their education.

You’re still defending what was masking theater. Sure, the kids were in masks and were in school, but the mask was pointless because they weren’t worn properly and were the wrong kind.