Anyone know about Laura Jane Cohen? (Springfield district candidate)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing this new policy does is to put dispensing machines in the bathrooms that are checked and restocked regularly. These items are already freely available in clinics.

Problems I see with this:

Young children will play with the dispensers and supplies will quickly disappear.
We will be supplying the moms, too.
Items will disappear with afterschool outsiders--high schools frequently have adult classes at night, sports activities, etc.

Our School Board never considers unintended consequences.

But isn't just making them available? Most dispensers I've ever seem require coins. I doubt young kids would waste money on a dispenser that didn't have candy or toys if they even had money in there pockets. So just charge a break even fee and you eliminate providing them free to everyone (if that bothers you).

And for the other post, unlike waiting until you get home to shave your peach fuzz, you really can't stop your body from bleeding at school.

First, they do not have to wait until they get home. The supplies are readily available in the clinic. They could also be available in the office.

That was her point. These supplies are already available. There were no details about how they were going to stock the bathrooms except that they figured the cost for the custodians to stock them and clean up the trash cans, too. (Like they are not already disposing of the trash from girls who dispose of the items currently.)

No one had any real plan or information. And, no, it won't require coins. They will be free. It was uncertain how they would run this program. I suspect that the non-profit that gave money to some SB members will get some kind of contract to run this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing this new policy does is to put dispensing machines in the bathrooms that are checked and restocked regularly. These items are already freely available in clinics.

Problems I see with this:

Young children will play with the dispensers and supplies will quickly disappear.
We will be supplying the moms, too.
Items will disappear with afterschool outsiders--high schools frequently have adult classes at night, sports activities, etc.

Our School Board never considers unintended consequences.

But isn't just making them available? Most dispensers I've ever seem require coins. I doubt young kids would waste money on a dispenser that didn't have candy or toys if they even had money in there pockets. So just charge a break even fee and you eliminate providing them free to everyone (if that bothers you).

And for the other post, unlike waiting until you get home to shave your peach fuzz, you really can't stop your body from bleeding at school.

First, they do not have to wait until they get home. The supplies are readily available in the clinic. They could also be available in the office.

That was her point. These supplies are already available. There were no details about how they were going to stock the bathrooms except that they figured the cost for the custodians to stock them and clean up the trash cans, too. (Like they are not already disposing of the trash from girls who dispose of the items currently.)

No one had any real plan or information. And, no, it won't require coins. They will be free. It was uncertain how they would run this program. I suspect that the non-profit that gave money to some SB members will get some kind of contract to run this.

Management and accounting are for peons. And the other School Board members remind Schultz of that every time she challenges their proposals or asks for more information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why, because she posts about guns and bullets? That makes her not a coward?
I stand by my statement. Not casting a vote IS cowardly and leaves springfield without a voice.

She isn't he only one who speaks out when the rest of the members want to enact some off the wall liberal scheme. She is keeping our schools sane.

so, she raises concerns during discussion and then refuses to vote? How is this the adult thing to do?

Just cast your vote in the end against it.

She is smart enough to know how Blue Virginia and the liberal troll farm would spin “no” votes in situations where she felt not enough information had been obtained or shared with the public.

So, what you’re saying is she’s afraid of being cast as a dissenter and lose moderate voters?

I’m sorry, that is some cowardly inside baseball bull

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why, because she posts about guns and bullets? That makes her not a coward?
I stand by my statement. Not casting a vote IS cowardly and leaves springfield without a voice.

She isn't he only one who speaks out when the rest of the members want to enact some off the wall liberal scheme. She is keeping our schools sane.

so, she raises concerns during discussion and then refuses to vote? How is this the adult thing to do?

Just cast your vote in the end against it.

She is smart enough to know how Blue Virginia and the liberal troll farm would spin “no” votes in situations where she felt not enough information had been obtained or shared with the public.

So, what you’re saying is she’s afraid of being cast as a dissenter and lose moderate voters?

I’m sorry, that is some cowardly inside baseball bull

No, the cowards on the School Board are the phony SJWs who want to pay independent consultants to make decisions they are too timid to make. All Democrats.

[Anonymous]

It’s insulting to assume that poorer parents cannot take care of their children. This idea is a waste of money. Find a real need? Then tax payers might provide. This is insane! Like young girls in certain schools have a surprise period that often?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why, because she posts about guns and bullets? That makes her not a coward?
I stand by my statement. Not casting a vote IS cowardly and leaves springfield without a voice.

She isn't he only one who speaks out when the rest of the members want to enact some off the wall liberal scheme. She is keeping our schools sane.

so, she raises concerns during discussion and then refuses to vote? How is this the adult thing to do?

Just cast your vote in the end against it.

She is smart enough to know how Blue Virginia and the liberal troll farm would spin “no” votes in situations where she felt not enough information had been obtained or shared with the public.

So, what you’re saying is she’s afraid of being cast as a dissenter and lose moderate voters?

I’m sorry, that is some cowardly inside baseball bull

She voted "no" on the femine products in elementary bathrooms because she said the products were already available in the clinic and, from the discussion, she had issues with placing them in the bathrooms--especially elementary school bathrooms, Her problem, I think, with the others was the monitoring of the items.

She abstained on the vote on afterschool buses because she felt that there was not enough information. She said she was not necessarily against it but that thy needed more information.

But, they spend a half million dollars without any forethought or study. No problem.

[Anonymous]

Isn't she a tranny from a punk band?

[Anonymous]

Schultz has a good nose for sniffing out when the liberal Democrats are just randomly spending more money on pet projects at lower-income schools to virtue signal.

I can't imagine what they'd start doing if she wasn't there to call them out publicly on their nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Do you know what Schultz was doing during a meeting not too long ago?

Hanging with the Family Research Council

Who has been classified as a hate group for their anti-gay propaganda

[Anonymous]

So typical - the top priority for the Democrats is how aligned they are with the NAACP and Fairfax Pride agendas.

Would it really be too much to ask if they could just focus on meeting the educational needs of kids, without turning everything into a social justice litmus test?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Schultz has a good nose for sniffing out when the liberal Democrats are just randomly spending more money on pet projects at lower-income schools to virtue signal.

I can't imagine what they'd start doing if she wasn't there to call them out publicly on their nonsense.

You are so right. I can’t imagine either!

[Anonymous]

I really do think Laura Jane Cohen could be a great PTA president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So typical - the top priority for the Democrats is how aligned they are with the NAACP and Fairfax Pride agendas.

Would it really be too much to ask if they could just focus on meeting the educational needs of kids, without turning everything into a social justice litmus test?

Why does it have to be either/or? Why can’t the SB do both?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So typical - the top priority for the Democrats is how aligned they are with the NAACP and Fairfax Pride agendas.

Would it really be too much to ask if they could just focus on meeting the educational needs of kids, without turning everything into a social justice litmus test?

Why does it have to be either/or? Why can’t the SB do both?

Good question - maybe you can ask the current Democrats on the SB why they haven’t managed to pull this off.

[Anonymous]

Can’t the Board stick to relevant educational policy? It’s not that hard. This other stuff just gets in the way.