Absolutely everything she said in her response was true. And anyone with basic historical knowledge knew that. Also, in her original comment she never says America is evil. She talks about evils of humans and also references the Holocaust. You guys are really stretching |
If that’s your criteria, don’t vote Republican. That party is loaded with people making spectacles of themselves. They also don’t really have very many policies and the ones they do have suck the root. |
You are describing the current School Board to a T. All spectacle, no substance. Time for a change. |
The irony is that one of the local Republicans basically told Omeish after the fact what she could have said, instead of what she originally said, if she was trying to make any sense and she essentially adopted his wording. It’s a sad state of affairs when a Democrat on the SB needs a Republican spin doctor to rescue her from her own word salad. |
Oh, please tell us which countries have "done more good" in the world, and where people enjoy more personal freedom. I might want to move there...
|
That's your defense of her? That a Republican told her that? This is not a partisan issue. The issue is--what was her point? Seems to me it was to attack the US. Her "correction" did not help. The fact about Iwo Jima is that it was an awful battle. In hindsight, it was, perhaps, unnecessary. I think it doubtful that any leaders would have chosen to fight that battle had they not believed it necessary at the time. Generals do not like to lose their soldiers or Marines. Admirals don't want to lose their sailors. The internment of the Japanese here was wrong. That has been acknowledged, and I don't think anyone is trying to excuse that. Why she could not have leff it at that, is a puzzlement. Her past statements lead one to think that she is not fond of the United States. She is in law school. I hope she does not aspire to be a trial lawyer. I cannot imagine that juries or judges would respond well to her arguments. |
Read more carefully. It was not a "defense." It was an illustration of how she frequently ends up scrambling to explain away her ill-advised remarks. Given how long SB meetings tend to be, members should err on the side of saying less, not more, when they aren't sure what they're talking about. |
| She is not bright. |
|
This story is now hitting the front page of MSN.com
You may be fine with Omeish's crazy views. Looks like most people are not OK with her. |
Over the years I have gone from being a Democrat to an independent. Smart people realize that crazy right-wing people drumming up a war over CRT and transgender bathrooms are really no different from Omeish. They are extremists that divide and prevent progress. School boards really need to focus on other issues. |
I totally agree. But, part of the problem is that the current Board has brought out the extreme on the right because of their focus on "equity" and "gender." And, go back and look at the meetings when they were renaming schools. Not saying some did not need to be renamed, but lots of kids would have been much better served by focus on reading instruction and math. |
Are you asserting the first priority of the school board should seriously be: - academics? |
No, she seems to be asserting that the school board can't walk and chew gum at the same time. It's not a false dichotomy. It's not either do this or do that they can and have done both |
No, I meant their focus is in the wrong place. It should be on academics. Sure, they should be able to walk and chew gum, but you don't paint the house while it's burning down. What they need to focus on is to be sure that the students learn to "walk and chew gum." They have totally lost the purpose of schools to educate. |
Do you not remember when they were keeping kids out of schools while they were working on name changes and TJ? Perhaps having more of a focus on education rather than pet projects would have been wise. Now they have a lawsuit in their hands. Any other ‘normal’ employees that f’ed up so immensely would be fired. |