Perhaps Amherst Region High School Principal Mark Jackson needs to take a refresher Civics course specifically relating to the most bedrock of sacred American values, the First Amendment.
And perhaps a basic psychology class as well because the best way to get teenagers to do something you don't want them to do is to directly forbid them to do it.
In his letter to the community Jackson clearly states in writing "These two chants are prohibited": "warm up the bus" and "if you’re winning, clap your hands." So long as the kids are not chanting "fire" in a movie theater, that's a clear violation of the First Amendment.
What is a worse example to set: kids being kids at a school sponsored sports event or a school system trampling their First Amendment rights?
Maybe somebody should ask the ACLU.
No right to tell me what I ca or cannot say, cheer, or shout. Look, Mr. Jackson, if I hate your edict, I should be free to say so. Or anything else. There are consequences for hollering 'fire' in a crowded theater, but i'm still at liberty to say it.
ReplyDeleteIt's so embarrassing to live in Amherst!
ReplyDeleteWhy, then, do you do it, girl?
DeleteI predict the fans will start yelling "Censorship is Lousy!" and "Jackson is lousy!"
ReplyDeleteJackson contradicts himself. He says, "A fan cheers for his or her teams, not against the other team. Whether our teams do well or poorly, the focus is on supporting them. How the other team fares is besides the point." He then bans, "if you're winning, clap your hands." Are they going to print a list of acceptable speech and hand it out to both sides at all games?
ReplyDeleteThere has been a code of conduct for players and spectators for years. It is the same at all of the schools. If people were violating it they should have dealt with it at the game. Over the years I have heard bad behavior from nearly every school and in every sport, including Holyoke. What's even worse is the on the field/court comments made between players. Parents would be shocked by the filth tossed around.
This is just another meaningless knee jerk reaction by admin to cover their asses and appear to be taking action.
There's beeen a ban on free speech in the Amherst Schools ever since dear leader Maria decreed it so!
ReplyDeleteI forgot, what was your stance on the Vagina Monologues? We you for or against that being performed at the school?
ReplyDeleteI was for one of the great high points of American Musical Theater, West Side Story. Sorry but I don't think VM rises to that level.
DeleteObviously you didn't forget. My stance was underage kids should not be using the C-word in public. Or the N-word for that matter.
ReplyDeleteShouldn't, yes. Prohibited? No.
DeleteSticks and stones. I would expect no less from a CAN.
ReplyDeletePublic school students do not lose their constitutional rights when they walk through the schoolhouse doors. The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that “students in school as well as out of school are ‘persons’ under our Constitution.”
ReplyDeleteBut public school students do not possess unlimited First Amendment rights. Two legal principles limit their rights. First, as the Supreme Court has said, minors do not possess the same level of constitutional rights as adults. Second, the government generally has greater power to dictate policy when it acts in certain capacities, such as educator, employer or jailer. For instance, a school principal can restrict a student from cursing a teacher in class or in the hallway. However, the principal would have limited, if any, authority to punish a student for criticizing a school official off-campus.
The Supreme Court established a protective standard for student expression in Tinker (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District) which says that school officials cannot censor student expression unless they can reasonably forecast that the expression will cause a substantial disruption of school activities or will invade the rights others.
Though public school students possess the right to free speech, they are not free to express themselves in an unlimited form or fashion. In 1986, the Supreme Court ruled in Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser that school officials did not violate the First Amendment rights of a student suspended for giving a vulgar and lewd speech before the student assembly.
In Fraser, the high court wrote that “the freedom to advocate unpopular and controversial views in schools and classrooms must be balanced against society’s countervailing interest in teaching students the boundaries of socially appropriate behavior.”
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/k-12-public-school-student-expression-overview
Wow, do you have any idea what Mr. Jackson is trying to troubleshoot with his rules about fan behavior? Or are you only interested in bashing the local schools no matter what? Maybe the adults in the community should tell the kids, go ahead and scream whatever distasteful, mean-spirited slurs you want because who cares about other communities? Maybe the adults in the community have already shown our children that bashing others is ok because it's fun to watch them squirm, like bullies do when they put their boots on victims throats. Is that what we should our children?
ReplyDeleteIt amazes me how much Larry Kelley hates his own town, the schools in it and the programs that try to make community members' lives more enjoyable. How does it feel to live with that much hate running through your veins daily? My god, man, don't you care at all about the people trying to guide children?
If you had the first clue about Mr. Jackson, you'd know what a fine leader he is. He is trying to steer kids away from a mean, bully-like condescending approach to life. Only in the republic of Amherst would a bully like Larry Kelley step in to this situation and try to say the adults are wrong. Bullies are unintelligent, mean-spirited cowards with a lot of fear.
What are you afraid of Larry? Oh, I know you'll call me out to meet you in the center of town at high noon so you can kick my ass, but that won't change you. You'll still be the cowardly man who hates his town.
Go ahead and call CNN and tell them you have a big story to tell about this corrupt little town that is trying to teach their kids to respect people during sporting events. Gee that is big news because we all want our children to grow up to be just as mean and derogatory as Donald Trump. We want our kids to hate with vengeance. Hey, here's an idea: let's bring in Kelley to teach these kids some really hateful cheers, which is what Mr. Jackson is trying to stop. Kelley is a hater and he probably knows some real good slurs we can use in poor communities like Holyoke. Because what is important is that everyone have the right to hate and exercises that right at nice family events, like a high school soccer game.
ReplyDeleteCome on Kelley, lead the town in learning how to hate as much as you do. We want our children to walk through life as miserable as you. You can do it. Sure kid, come on, get with the program and hate your opponent.
Anyone who disagrees with you or your fellow socialists must be a hater, right?
DeleteSorry, Larry, but this is clearly regulatable speech. In fact, on the college level the NCAA has a code of good sportsmanship that states that you will be escorted off the premises for offensive speech. Go to any Amherst College basketball game and you will hear them announce it before each game.
ReplyDeleteAs always - the domineering political fashion clique of the day- calls all the shot's on what's ARHS " P.C." etiquette - who are we to disagree - that a " faux Indian" is "gifted" yadda yadda...$&@?!!
ReplyDeleteThis is what real speech-chilling looks like: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/29183/
ReplyDeleteLarry, the Supreme Court, rather than you are I, is the ultimate arbiter on what is constitutional. Unfortunately, they already ruled against student speech in the famous "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case.
ReplyDelete<The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against an Alaska high school student suspended in 2002 for unfurling a 14-foot banner bearing the words "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" during a parade in support of the Winter Olympic Games. In its first major decision on student free-speech rights in two decades, the court determined that the student's rights had not been violated.
According to The Associated Press, the court's conservative majority found that Juneau, Alaska, high school principal Deborah Morse did not, in fact, violate student Joseph Frederick's constitutional rights when she confiscated the banner and later decided to suspend him. The decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, means that students could face future limits on their rights to free speech.
Jawdropping.
ReplyDeleteProbably the most stupid thing I've ever seen a Principal do, and that includes Joe Sullivan's pregnancy comments at Gloucester HS a decade ago, which made national news.
Who the hell does Herr Jackson think he is?!?
"Warm up the bus" is verboten?!? How does he plan to enforce that? The first time he tries to suspend someone for saying it, DESE is going to step in -- if they don't when he posts the rule with them (a copy of all school rules must be on file with DESE).
What's he going to do when EVERYONE starts chanting it, or something worse, e.g. "Dicks Out For Harumbe"? Has the little fascist even thought that far ahead? (I doubt it.)
And much like Bush 41 & Flagburning, the 95% of the student body who'd never thought of shouting racial slurs are now encouraged to do so. They won't do it because they are racists, they'll do it because they aren't supposed to.
This is viewpoint discrimination, pure & simple, and SCOTUS consistently rules that unConstitutional. It's also unenforceable.
All the students have to do is start cheering for the other team. I'd encourage them to do that out of spite and there is nothing Herr Jackson can even say about that.
It's one thing to encourage good sportsmanship and the rest, but this is asinine, the most asinine thing I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot.
Does not matter. Since it is illegal and teaches nothing to restrict such speech, you can just ignore this lousy fool. You don't even have to debate it, it has been settled.
ReplyDeleteIt is a competition, thus folks on the other team do suck, as a team and as individuals. This is fundamental human group dynamics. PC BS does not change this. The idea is you try to beat their asses and then pretend to respect them at the end of the game. This has worked for some time. This is the same reason that those that support Hillary in the media do so by trashing the opposition. This is a particularly Amherst thing to do.
If the kids on the other team felt bad or distracted after stuff was said, that is a confirmation that what was said was highly effective and SHOULD be repeated in the future. It is called psyching them out, quite American. Even better, if Amherst is both know to be skilled at playing and psyching out the other team, they are likely to become feared in competition before it begins. That is the exponential psych out, kind of like discouraging folks from opening businesses by having endless regulations, but it is also hard to succeed in business. Total exponential phych out because the government wants bigger businesses to replace smaller ones and stop people from starting small ones, as they are harder to control and tax.
Real quality players rise above. This is not about teaching kids stuff or being inclusive, it is about winning, let's be real. We don't hang banners in the gym of how honorable the players back in '78 were, we hang a banner if they win.
This from a guy that is paid by threats of violence and confiscation of the peoples' possessions in the community. There is no pay for this guy without violence and he is demanding people talk nice. Wow.
I don't see much of a first amendment issue. When you come to a sporting
ReplyDeleteevent on school grounds, you're a guest of the school and can be required to
follow behavior guidelines. A non-student could be asked to leave for violating
these, and a student could be subject to school discipline for violating school
rules.
Larry, you call it "kids being kids", but the school has an explicit responsibility to
encourage, and sometimes require, them to be better kids.
Now if the kids were using the game as an opportunity to civilly protest against
the cafeteria food, for example, that's a free speech issue...
Yankees suck. So do the Red Sox.
DeleteIn 1986, the Supreme Court ruled in Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser that school officials did not violate the First Amendment rights of a student suspended for giving a vulgar and lewd speech before the student assembly.
ReplyDeleteRight -- as long as their ban on vulgar & lewd speech, as long as they ban ALL vulgar & lewd speech. (THIS is the problem with The Vagina Monologues -- once you permit that kind of speech to advocate one viewpoint, you gotta permit it for all.
You can regulate speech in terms of time, place & manner -- but not message. Here is what Fraser said:
I know a man who is firm – he's firm in his pants, he's firm in his shirt, his character is firm – but most of all, his belief in you the students of Bethel, is firm. Jeff Kuhlman is a man who takes his point and pounds it in. If necessary, he'll take an issue and nail it to the wall. He doesn't attack things in spurts – he drives hard, pushing and pushing until finally – he succeeds. Jeff is a man who will go to the very end – even the climax, for each and every one of you. So please vote for Jeff Kuhlman, as he'll never come [long pause] between us and the best our school can be. He is firm enough to give it everything.
The issue wasn't the message of his speech ("Vote for Jeff Kuhlman") -- isn't that clear?
Herr Jackson could ban ALL cheering at games, what he cannot do is ban the intent of the cheer.
Amherst College is a PRIVATE college, the First Amendment doesn't apply.
One other thing -- banning the words "warm up the bus" is a policy decision, and that has to be made by the School Committee.
ReplyDeleteBut its alright if white SC members demean and threaten black SC members like they continuously do? Thanks LK for taking a stand for free speech and the golden rule. The white libs who hate the Constitution don't want to lose their privelege to be assholes...but the times they are a changing!
ReplyDeleteSorry, but the constitution doesn't give you the right to insult your teacher, call players names, or do a whole bunch of things. Call your principal a knucklehead and you'll find yourself suspended.
ReplyDeleteYes it does. What the constitution doesn't give is the layout of consequences for that speech.
DeletePeter -- worse happened at UMass.
ReplyDeleteEd, you don't even live here.
ReplyDeleteGive me what I want and I'll go away.
ReplyDeleteHerr Jackson is an embarrassment to the profession, has been one for years.
Just another lefty who thinks the answer lies in more and more government regulation.
DeleteBetter still, give ME what he wants and I'll go away.
DeleteThe really ironic point in all of this is that Jackson was given a technical a few years back while coaching a kids basketball game. By one of his own high school students, no less. What a hypocrit.
ReplyDelete"Freedom of speech" is such a reductionist argument for what Mr. Jackson did.
ReplyDeleteMaybe he's trying to raise a community of children that aren't privileged, ignorant, racist, fuckwits?
Freedom of speech? Give me a break.
Yeah, let them keep running around screaming racial epithets because it's protected by the first amendment. Let them learn that's okay, in school, where they're learning to be functioning adults.
Let's see how that flies when they use those language skills in the real world.
This isn't a freedom of speech issue - this is a "raise our future generation not be assholes" issue.
If you have a kid in that school system and you think racial slurs should be part of the curriculum, perhaps you should move your kid to another school district where that's okay.
Bravo, Mr. Jackson.
Pathetic journalism, Mr. Kelley.
I thought the parents did the raising?
DeleteI'll take the free speech argument any day. Twice on Sundays.
DeleteYou folks are disconnected from reality. Codes of conduct are not some new thing. They are not considered infringements on free speech rights. Hecklers, whether it is someone giving a speech, or at a sporting event, can be removed from the venue. In this case, the sporting event is being held for the benefit of the athletes. The school has the duty, and right, to control the atmosphere of the event.
ReplyDeleteYes. There are consequences. The speech, however remains free.
DeleteGreat to see this story covered. A minor skirmish in the never ending Amherst culture war.
ReplyDeleteI believe strongly that Jackson's prohibition is wrong, though no doubt he means well. I applaud him if his goal is really an attempt to reinstate what once was a bedrock of the American public education system, now all but banished: the teaching of virtues and building of character. Civics was also part of this - including respect for authority (elders, institutions, law enforcement). In the quaint old days, we used to call this sort of thing 'decency,' but the teaching of same fell out of favor and we have the coarseness that remains.
I hope Mark Jackson will continue to model leadership by counseling the students against coarseness, but it is not appropriate to prohibit speech in this case, nor is it appropriate for the School Committee to take up.
Go Hurricanes!
If they were chanting the C-word or N-word I would agree Mr. Jackson, although since he allowed the Vagina Monologues at ARHS maybe he wouldn't be so concerned.
ReplyDeleteBut for God's sake, "Warm up the bus"? Really?!
Oh so terrible. Warm up the bus. I need a safe space.
DeleteEd, you get what you deserve. Hence, you get nothing.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that this Ed person is obsessed with the schools in a town that aren't even in the same state that he lives in (Maine) is quite frankly disturbing. He appears to have serious mental health issues.
ReplyDeleteUh, principals are supposed to be positions of authority and are generally to be respected by students. He had to drive a hard line whether it was popular with the constitution-watchers or not.
ReplyDeleteIf he remained silent, what message was that showing his students and the community at large?
I promise you "Wow, Mr Jackson really protects and serves that constitution!" would not be out of the lips of the community, it would be "What kind of heathens are you raising in that school system, Mr. Jackson?"
Either way, he's burned at the stake, really.
How about this radical idea: find the kids yelling the slurs. Read them the riot act. Why do we all have to abide by this?9
DeletePrincipals are also not supposed to overreact. You know, show a little common sense.
ReplyDeleteSo Dan, please explain to me what is wrong with the phrase "Warm up the bus"? I mean maybe if they said "Warm Up The Back Of The Bus" that might be construed as racist, but good God (If I dare invoke a deity while in Amherst).
The founding fathers invoked a diety. Your rights are God-given. Many (especially here) think the government bestows these rights on us.
DeleteWhat I'm seeing is a man who is recently taking an adolescent approach to every authority figure in town, with the exception of the police and fire chiefs, an approach that is causing you to lose your mind. I would venture to say that the pre-blog Larry Kelley of decades ago, faithful to the Town first and not to how many eyeballs he could attract, would not have had a problem with what Mr. Jackson did here. But now you are desperate for click-bait.
ReplyDeleteRich Morse
Faithful to town first? What about God and country?
DeleteAs you well remember Mr. Morse I had serious problems with Jackson championing the Vagina Monologues at the High School where idiots cited the First Amendment as a good reason.
ReplyDeleteAnd obviously I still have your eyeballs.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you are not covering the newly revealed emails that show that the police did in fact advice Ms. Geryk to issue the stay-away order.
ReplyDeleteI feel bad for the lowly bus driver foreman that tells the crew in January to warm up the bus. My sense is there is a place at the bar next to the guy who said slave unit.
ReplyDeleteActually, I was talking to the bar owner...he is expanding and lengthening the bar. He heard the tightwad word police are far from done and he was concerned that he would not have enough room for all those rejected from socialist society to drink themselves silly before they drive home with little consequence.
There is another doctor in town opening up a skin thickening clinic, but he is concerned that locals may already be too far gone for tansplants. It is not Dr. Ed.
Actually Anon 10:29 they "reveal" no such thing.
ReplyDeleteDid the Gazette publish emails from either police department saying they advise Ms. Geryk to issue a stay away order? No, I thought not.
According to Mr. Jackson's "investigation" there were no slurs.
ReplyDeleteOh. I'm sure that was an unbiased and hard-hitting 'investigation.' Nothing to see here. Move along.
ReplyDeleteJust another attempt to create "Utopia." "Making mountains out of molehills." This is so incredibly STUPID, I can hardly believe what I am reading! Let's stay focused on the real problems the schools face, and there are many. Wasting time, energy and money, on writing and publishing such a letter to all parents, is ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteHow about a good old "heart to heart" talk with the players involved and their coach, expressing Jackson's concerns and suggesting the players may want to consider other actions and possibly do something else? Treat them fairly and honestly and the teenagers will respond, especially if they have respect for the person speaking to them.
Larry, comment 9:59 is a good and appropriate one! Thanks. Could not have said it better.
All I can say about this is..."Only in Amherst!"
Hey cub reporter,
ReplyDeleteGuess you missed the big story the gazette scooped you on that clarifies some of the disastrous parent behavior at Pelham school. Or maybe you are ignoring it since it doesn't help the narrative you would like to tell about the schools. And you call this journalism. Is propaganda journalism?
Right on, Dan Bilodeau!
ReplyDeleteAnd big difference Kelley between high school kids condescending in their cheers that go way beyond warm up the bus, and kids using the C word to take a stand for their own sexuality, to take ownership of that sexuality.
Not sure what you reference to the school encouraging the use of the N word is about, unless you want to ban the students from reading books that uses that word, which wouldn't surprise me.
The clarification is simply Ms Geryk's opinion. And these days she's not really considered a reliable, unbiased source.
ReplyDeleteRight but if it were an email going the other direction you'd be blasting the news complete with your opinion, unbiased as ever from your Trumpian universe perspective.
ReplyDeleteActually I have a Public Doc Request that is now overdue for a boatload of her emails.
ReplyDeleteSo you will soon see how I handle them from my call them as I see them universe.
Maria was wrong to issue a Stay Away Order with the repeated use of the phrase "until further notice" without presenting any further notice to Ms Hiza.
ReplyDeleteThe order was in place for a month before the public became aware of it.
Ms Hiza was quite patient while her daughter continued to be bullied in her classroom (as the school worked on communication with Mom instead of dealing with the problem???)
As in other bullying cases in Amherst- the Administration was more concerned with punishing the reporter instead of stopping the bullying.
Fixing the issue when Ms Hiza informed them of it would've avoided this entire incident.
STOP THE BULLYING should be the school's first priority!
Isn't this the same Mark Jackson who bullied his boss -- Catherine Sanderson?
ReplyDeleteOK, maybe that wasn't a physical assault, maybe it's OK for a man to advance aggressively toward a woman half his weight & intimidate her into silence, maybe it's OK to treat your boss (which SC members ARE) in such a disrespectful manner ----
---but children model adult behavior and perhaps Jackson ought to be modeling the behavior he wishes to see observed. I've heard all kinds of stories about Jackson's boorish & bullying behavior -- and the way he dealt with this incident is reflective of that.
What neither Jackson nor Geryk understand -- what neither is bright enough to understand -- is that power, authority (and respect) come from being something other than a fascist bully.
A competent principal would have responded to Holyoke's complaint by merely reminding everyone of the principles of good sportsmanship & civility -- and adding that he'd, personally, be attending the next game. His response to Holyoke ought to have included an invitation for the Holyoke HS Principal to sit next to him at all future games. That'd put an end to anything in a way that his fascist decree never could -- assuming that Herr Jackson himself was able to act in a civil manner.
In doing what he did, Jackson showed how weak he is, how little authority he possesses. It's the same cowardice that Geryk exhibited when called on the Hiza trespass -- heaven forbid that members of the community "petition for a redress of grievances", something we fought a war to have the right to do.
And yes, I am calling Mark Jackson a coward, he's afraid some 15-year-old may shout something that he isn't going to be able to deal with. What he doesn't understand is that the intrepid ARHS students are going to interpret his edict literally -- and cheer for the opposing team when they make a BAD play or error. That will put him into a truly impossible position because he didn't say they couldn't -- and can't.
Godwin's Law, at last.
ReplyDeleteYou would think by now Larry would have learned from Ed's example: Getting people's attention by making a fool of yourself is nothing to be proud of, regardless of why you want the attention.
ReplyDeleteWell I'm pretty sure I have your attention no matter what I do. (And about 3,500 other people per day)
ReplyDeleteI remember when the ARHS teachers union went on strike- they displayed pro- union agit-propaganda in the classroom - pins, etc... gave speeches- which is illegal - school minors are a " Captive Audience " ... ask town truant officer !!!!!
ReplyDeleteYes, you do -- as does Bill, when he crawls half-naked across the street, picking up litter. Or Ed, when he foams at the mouth regarding Maria Geryk, the woman love-hates so much he can't stop talking about her. Bravo.
ReplyDeleteOr Ed, when he foams at the mouth regarding Maria Geryk, the woman love-hates so much he can't stop talking about her.
ReplyDeleteROTF,L....
CAN 5:52, you forgot to gaslight.
Geryk & Jackson are such good examples of maladministration that I do love them, in a way -- In consistently doing the wrong thing, they illustrate what the right thing is.
Both are so much of an example of what NOT to do that they are invaluable -- kinda like Ann Coulter in a way.
Could the guilty parties simply be disciplined? Oh, I forgot... That's the D-word. Tsk. Tsk.
ReplyDeleteSo, the police recommending a stay away order is Geryk's opinion? Wouldn't it be very easy to ask the police about this? Did they or didn't they recommend a stay away order? How can it be someone's opinion that the police did or didn't do something? Why don't the Amherst Police make a statement about this to help clear the air.
ReplyDeleteOr is this when Larry turns his back on the Police because they don't agree with his biased perspective?
The only person saying the police recommended the stay away order is Maria Geryk.
ReplyDeleteWe discussed this previously...
ReplyDeletehttp://onlyintherepublicofamherst.blogspot.com/2016/06/school-stay-away-order-lifted.html
From Masslive (6/2/16):
"Pelham Police Chief Gary Thomann said police met with school officials but did not generate a written report. He said it was a school issue."
and the Select Board document posted on Larry's blog (link above) indicates that APD declared it a Pelham issue.
Peter -- Godwin's Law involves references to either Hitler and/or the German National Socialists.
ReplyDeleteFascism is a much broader adjective -- it's the exact opposite of the "small 'l'" "liberal" adjective."
Yes. There are consequences. The speech, however remains free.
ReplyDeleteBINGO!
This is PRIOR RESTRAINT which is inherently un-Constitutional unless it involves something like detailed instructions on how to build a nuke (i.e. National Security).
It's ABSOLUTELY un-Constitutional and always has been -- _Tinker_ & _Bong Hits 4 Jesus_ involved either stopping ongoing speech and/or punishing past speech. Prohibiting future speech is itself prohibited.
Codes of conduct don't prohibit speech. They just provide consequences for it. You can yell whatever you want. Just be prepared to be escorted off the premises after you yell it.
ReplyDeleteBingox2
DeleteAsk the police if they recommended a stay away order. How difficult is that for a full fledged journalist like yourself Mr. Kelley? Or is that water too deep for you?
ReplyDelete"Pelham Police Chief Gary Thomann said police met with school officials but did not generate a written report. He said it was a school issue."
ReplyDeleteThat just says they didn't generate as written report. That's different than they didn't recommend the superintendent give a stay-away order.
You're just grumpy because you got scooped.
This is only really an issue for the welfare recipients that have no choice but to send their kids to this school. This is a poor people problem.
ReplyDeleteUm. Ms. Hiza is a school choice parent. She is choosing to send her daughter to the school in Pelham.
DeleteMy thought is if she is so unhappy in Pelham she should choose another school.
CAN 11:32
ReplyDeleteIf the body of the story lived up to the banner, front page, above the fold, headline I would agree with you that I was scooped.
But since it does not, then I was not.
Um- Having property in Pelham and having grown up in the area- Ms Hiza has every right to choose Pelham Elementary for her daughter.
ReplyDeletePelham is reliant on school choice to help fill their classrooms and to keep the school in operation.
No one said she doesn't have a right to choose Pelham. She absolutely has that right. What I said is that if she is so unhappy at Pelham perhaps she should think about choosing a different school. Where she and her daughter will be happier. One without all those mean racist staff and administrators. And yes that last sentence needs the sarcasm font big time.
DeleteThe MIAA has very specific rules about taunting in their sportsmanship policy. Did you research that as part of your reporting, Larry? Mark's statement is completely consistent with MIAA policy. I've seen refs pause games when the fans do things like yelling "You suck." Your dispute is with the MIAA, not Mark Jackson.
ReplyDeleteMr. Jackson's letter reflects the MIAA's rules of good sportsmanship
ReplyDeleteMIAA rules prohibit the types of behavior that Mr. Jackson's letter describes.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like Ms. Hiza's attorneys are going to educate us about illegal discrimination. Stay tuned to hear about how Lord Jeff gets caught pulling the blanket over your eyes and heads!
ReplyDelete