.jpg)
You'll see an uproar today and tomorrow over the Supreme Court decision today that "restricted the ability of public school districts to use race in assigning students to schools." No one out there will have time to read and understand what the heck is going on so let me, humbly, try to explain.
Here is what the case would look like if it originated in Wise County (and I'm not doing schtick here, I'm being serious for once):
Decatur has two elementary schools: Carson and Rann. For each entering first grade class, students (through their parents) are allowed to choose which school they want to attend. If one school is more popular, a decision needs to be made as to which students get their wish and which ones don't. The Decatur ISD School Board decides to create a tie-breaker system to make that decision. The first "tie-breaker" is whether the incoming student has a brother or sister at that school. If so, he's in. Next, the student's race is considered. Here's where things get interesting. Let's say that the Decatur population as a whole is 70% white and 30% non-white. The school board has decided that it would be wise to make sure that both Rann and Carson have that same racial makeup. So if Carson had become 80% white (i.e. "too white") then the non-white soon-to-be First Grade students who had selected Carson as their first choice would get preference. In the Supreme Court case decided today, one of the parents of a white kid who wanted to get into Carson, but was denied because non-whites were given preference, sued.
He won. The majority ruled that consideration of race in the application process was unconstitutional.
That decision is a direct result of the Bush Administration. Had a Democrat been in office Alito and Roberts would have been replaced with more liberal justices. Somehow, the Constitution is read differently based upon who is President. Isn't that weird?
You can read all of it yourself here.
67 comments:
THANK YOU! I was trying to figure it all out. Here we go again.
We are stuck with these wing-nut judges for a loooong time.
So Barry endorses racial discrimination. We sure have come far since the 60's, haven't we?
So does this mean that the constitution is color blind?
What's weird is that we allow nine lawyers to wield so much power.
Interesting how Barry can know how those not-named imaginary justices would have voted.
The liberal weenies at the New York Post have the story headline of "Resegregation". They are shocked that the court has overturned Brown v. Board of Education. I wonder if these limp wristed liberal elitists send their kids to public schools or to uppity private schools?
8:30 Republicans, not Barry, endorse racial discrimination,sir.
Are you saying that you agree that race should be a factor in getting into the school of your choice? What if it was your child who wanted into the best school, but the slot was given to a student of a different race, would you think it was fair then? Why not just draw names out of a hat to see who fills the slot and leave the race out of it.
9:22 You are wrong, liberal sir. What nonsense. Let's see. Brown basically said you could not assign students to schools based on race. Today the court said that you cannot assign students to schools based on race. So what was bad is now good, assigning students based on their race, in the minds of liberals.
9:18 - there aren't any "liberal weenies" at the New York Post; that paper is known to have a conservative slant. I would think you would know that.
It's owned by Rupert Murdoch, the guy who owns FOX, & is trying to buy the Wall Street Journal. If he can own enough media, he believes he can stamp out the so-called liberal media bias. Won't that be grand? (shaking my head in disgust)
Who cares if INDEPENDENT study after study shows that there is no liberal bias in the mainstream media; instead those studies found there is a bias across the board for sensationalism. Hence, Paris.
BTW, the point of the original Brown case was to have white kids & black kids sitting side by side in the same schools. That was the same point of the rule that this Supreme Court just struck down, which will have the effect of our schools continuing to get more & more racially segregated. How can you think that is a good thing? Do you not realize the problems segregation leads to?
Please, God do not let Dubya appoint another Supreme Court justice!! Amen.
10:21, Have you ever heard of Lexus-Nexus or Google. It would be to your benefit to use these valuable tools. NYT is not owned by Murdoch. Now go sip your Rosie O'Donnell kool aid and save space on this blog for intellectual conversations. Goodbye.
10:58 - Before you slam someone, be sure you read their words correctly. 9:21 didn't say NYT; he said New York POST, which IS owned by Murdoch.
You were wanting me to sip Rosie O'Donnel kool-aid & save space on this blog for intellectual conversation?
Conversation such as your own?
Aren't you embarrassed?
Goodbye yourself.
10:58 -
PS - Don't you hate it when you make such a stupid mistake in such a public forum?
Nothing you can do about it now....I just really hate that for you, because you seem like such a kind person. LMAO!!!!
Thanks for giving me such a big laugh right before I go to sleep.
OH! I just thought of something - Tomorrow I get to show this to my friends. Fun, fun, fun!
I COMPLETELY agree with THIS Supreme Court decision. To DENY a child access/admission to a school based upon their ethnicity is racial profiling as well as racial segregation. People are no longer poor because of their ethnicity. For the most part people who are poor are such due to their CHOICES. If parents of ANY ethnicity desire for their children to go to schools in middle to upper middle class neighbourhoods then those parents should have done what it takes to LIVE in those types of neighbourhoods. What people tend to forget is the mere fact there are MORE impoverished whites means there are MORE white children attending schools in neighbourhoods WELL below middle class than are minority children.
FINALLY, people are realizing group B cannot be granted an UNEARNED advantage/privilege without discriminating against group A and/or group C.
Uh-oh 10:58pm........how's the crow taste? The NYT and the NY Post are entirely different newspapers and the Post is indeed owned by Murdoch. Feeling a little less smug are we?
Hello 10:58 Reading comprehension deficit? You must be the same one who is having so much trouble keeping up with mzchief in the gay thread.
From 10:21's post:"9:18 - there aren't any "liberal weenies" at the New York Post; that paper is known to have a conservative slant. I would think you would know that.
It's owned by Rupert Murdoch..."
Try using those same Internet search tools you suggested to 10:21 and you will see that Rupert Murdoch purchased the New York Post in 1977.
Also try doing a little independent research regarding who owns the media and you will see that it is owned by 5 mega corporations who donate almost exclusively to Republicans. Since Republican rule always favors business over individuals, and this administration does so to the 10th power, that makes it most likely that our media has a conservative bias.
A little more research with a few spreadsheets will reveal that the majority of the guests on political talk shows are Republican.
The fringe element who comment on this blog about the liberal media and liberal weenies are...well, just that: fringe.
NOTE: Very recently media contributions to Democrats have increased. I'm sure that they, like everyone else, can see the handwriting on the wall and they want to attempt to purchase influence and protection from the party that will next be in the White House.
Hey 10:58 - It looks like you need to follow your own advice & go google youself!
Goodbye.
BTW, Barry, good post!
The Brown case overturned the separate but equal doctrine, saying that separate could never be equal.
With this decision, the children in school continue to get more and more separate. White kids here, black kids there. Very sad.
Interesting comments about Roberts saying their ruling was only furthering the Brown case -
"Writing for the other four justices in the majority, Chief Justice Roberts took a harder line. In an unusual effort to cement his interpretation of Brown, he quoted from the transcript of the 1952 argument in the case.
“We have one fundamental contention,” a lawyer for the schoolchildren, Robert L. Carter, had told the court more than a half-century ago. “No state has any authority under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to use race as a factor in affording educational opportunities among its citizens.”
Chief Justice Roberts added yesterday, “There is no ambiguity in that statement.”
But the man who made that statement, now a 90-year-old senior federal judge in Manhattan, disputed the chief justice’s characterization in an interview yesterday.
“All that race was used for at that point in time was to deny equal opportunity to black people,” Judge Carter said of the 1950s. “It’s to stand that argument on its head to use race the way they use is now.”
Jack Greenberg, who worked on the Brown case for the plaintiffs and is now a law professor at Columbia, called the chief justice’s interpretation “preposterous.”
“The plaintiffs in Brown were concerned with the marginalization and subjugation of black people,” Professor Greenberg said. “They said you can’t consider race, but that’s how race was being used.”
William T. Coleman Jr., another lawyer who worked on Brown, said, “The majority opinion is 100 percent wrong.”
“It’s dirty pool,” said Mr. Coleman, a Washington lawyer who served as secretary of transportation in the Ford administration, “to say that the people Brown was supposed to protect are the people it’s now not going to protect.”
Funny how Judge Carter's comments seem to imply that using race as a factor is wrong when it's impact is negative on the black people; but okay when it's negative for the whites. I guess that's the same rationale for the fact that no one notices when a white man is put to death for killing a black man; but a black man condemned for killing a white man causes entire cities to erupt in violence and outrage. By the same token, a young white man from a middle-class family can expect no real help financially with college expenses; but a young black man has a multitude of scholarships available to assist him.
For Martin Luther King's dream of equality to ever come true, things have to be equal for everyone - no favoritism either way.
Did all you weenies have fun pig piling? I did mean NYT and I admit my mistake unlike libs, now see if you can dispute the facts.
Isn't there a public interest in trying to keep its schools closer to a reflection of the diversity of its community? Isn't it improper to create a system that pushes us closer to separate, but equal? Shouldn't the determination of race as "a factor" in determining who attends a school be held to strict scrutiny...but not be struck down completely?
I disagree with the Opinion of the Court, but I don't think this case will even be in the same ballpark when considered with the effect of Brown. It seems to me a small push of the line of what is currently legal in utilizing race as affirmative action towards the right. To some extent, this is the same argument that was used to defeat the various law schools that attempted to obtain diversity by including race as "a factor" in admissions.
Ah, wordkyle, how hypocritical that you now question the Constitution, when you regularly laud it (or at least your interpretatino of it) over our heads to support your point (or at least claim your conclusion).
What is alarming to me is that many folks who read this blog will be swayed to think this decision is about racial discrimination and politics simply because the author of this blog is a lawyer with a liberal agenda! They will also be led to believe this decision is wrong because it is being perceived as a conservative decision. Anyone that considers themself a liberal will immediatly agree with the opinions of the blog owner without a further thought....that is dangerous and sad for our country. I urge everyone to step outside your party affiliation for one minute and really look at this decision for what it is and who it will benefit; resist the urge thrust upon you to stereotype along party lines! This decision is based upon fairness and will most likely help minorities, which we should all support despite what political affiliation that we have.
My belief system favors what most would call liberal, but I still have common-sense and know how to smell a rat when one is right underneath my nose. If this decision was rendered by a so-called liberal court then it would be praised by all the current naysayers!
The liberal view on this is that a white person won a supreme court decision that involved race...so therefore racial cival rights have been diminished. This reminds me of the old addage "You can't see the forest for the trees"! This decision goes much deeper than just white vs. non-white, and it simply addresses fairness!
10:06 -Quoting you: "I did mean NYT and I admit my mistake unlike libs"
Was that where you admitted making a mistake? it didn't sound much like someone admitting a mistake. And within that weak admittance you just had to throw in another insult to "libs" again saying they don't admit mistakes. You are just as wrong about that as you were the other things- I have made & do admit my mistakes - many times. The difference between me & you is that I would have also apologized to the poster you so wrongly slammed for not being informed when it was you, in fact, that was wrong.
I disagree devil, and you cannot talk me out of my opinion, although thanks for taking the time to try. The whole point of the Brown case was to have white kids & black kids sharing the same schools, because when they don't, the predominantly white schools are always better than the predominantly black schools - better facilities, better technology, better teachers, etc. De-facto segregation has occurred because those that can afford the nicer neighborhoods get the nicer schools. A good education is the way out of poverty; a good education is the great equalizer. What is wrong with school districts trying to let minorities get to attend the favored schools? The school districts in this recent Supreme Court case were just trying to have schools with kids from all backgrounds of the community - diversity if you will. Now I know a lot you don't see the value in diversity - I certainly do. As long as we disagree on that issue, we will also disagree on how to solve the problem; in fact I guess some of you don't even see segregation as a problem. I do. We are becoming more separate, less equal. And I am talking about equality of opportunity - & kids that miss out on quality education in their young years, stay behind. There are a few exceptions, but that is the rule.
10:49 A rising tide will lift all boats. : )
It is so easy to brandish around the “people can make choices and do whatever it takes to live in the better neighborhoods…”line but it’s simply not that easy. People who have led privileged lives can't see how privileged their lives have been and so interpret the differences in very unrealistic ways. But by being so privileged, they don't have the experiences to show them how wrong they are. I’m not necessarily talking about the privileges that money brings although children who come from higher income families certainly have more opportunities including better nutrition and intellectual enrichment.
What will be the incentive to raise the educational standards in the urban schools now? It is neither ethical nor moral for a society to insist that children suffer for the choices of the parents and their parents and their parents…and so on for many generations.
Fair? Devil, you, a mythical creature, what would you know of fairness?
In addtition to my last post I would also like to point out that this supreme court decision will not affect future cases of racial discrimination where it can be clearly proven that an individual was denied an opportunity based on race. I agree that diversity is important and feel that places of education should embrace diversity, those that do not will suffer along with their students. The answer is in education; If we can raise the level of education across the board, and eliminate the bad school systems, administrators, etc. then this will not be an issue.
If a school system blatantly uses this ruling to create segregation then they will be subject to the same court proceedings that this case went through! However, I fail to see how this opens the door for segregation!
I liken the policy of using race to determine which student goes to what school to Affirmitive Action. Affirmitive Action like Labor Unions had there time and place, but that time is no more. These types of policies only serve to socialize our political system, thus leaving us with less freedoms in the end!
Devil,
What is FAIR about some children being born into privileged households & other children being born into impoverished, drug-infested, neighborhoods????
These 2 extremes (one child is lucky, another isn't) are what schools try to address. If we disperse the children among the community, black & white, rich & poor, I believe all children benefit from learning with, understanding and befriending kids from all walks of life. In many cities, this is not what is happening & schools are just trying to get to remedy that.
Devil: You said: "If a school system blatantly uses this ruling to create segregation then they will be subject to the same court proceedings that this case went through!"
Do you mean the same court system made up of a bunch of wealthy, old, white men with one black man who is pretending to be white? Because that's where it would likely end up.
Affirmative action needs to start at birth.
WHO ever said life is FAIR? Life is VERY unfair. However, it is UNCONSCIONABLE for a NATION to INSTITUTIONALIZE unfairness within their laws in an ATTEMPT to mitigate the unfairness of LIFE.
Following the logic of those whining about "unfairness"; NO ONE should be permitted to drive a luxury auto when there are people who cannot afford anything other than a trashed out Ford Fiesta. No one should be permitted an organ transplant when there are not enough organs available for EVERYONE who NEEDS an organ.
LIFE IS INHERENTLY UNFAIR so suck it up and do the best YOU can to make it MORE FAIR for YOU but do NOT delude yourself into believing that by making UNFAIR for someone else YOU are creating a FAIR world.
mzchief: I was not singling you out with my comment and your early life certainly sounds like it was horrific. What your father did was beyond cruelty. You have done an exceptional job of rising above it and I applaud you!
However
You are incredibly smart.
You are stunningly beautiful.
You are white.
I understand that people have no control over those factors but those are factors that do weigh heavily in the success of many people. Also you are brave. Some people find bravery more difficult.
I will freely admit that I have gotten my foot in the door because of my looks more often than not. The fact that I rarely stayed at the entry level was due to my efforts more than my looks. Still, the fact that I was given a chance because I was white, blond, tall, thin and matched society's measurements for beauty cannot be completely discounted. A black or Hispanic woman who was equal to me in all other ways might not get the same opportunity.
Of course my children have suffered because of my choices but they have not suffered nearly as much as children who are malnourished, beaten or never exposed to different lifestyles and possibilities. I saw a whole new world when I volunteered for CPS in Fort Worth.
"Consequences felt by the individual and those they love is the ENTIRE point for making RESPONSIBLE choices."
I agree. But a child is still not the one making the choice and some parents have almost no sense of responsibility. There are some consequences that are felt as a result of another's choice that are more difficult to recover from than others.
No, mzchief, life can never be fair but we should all try to make unfair a little less harsh for everyone. That's my opinion anyway.
well said, txsharon.
And mzchief, when I say fairness, I am only speaking of fairness of opportunity. The school a child attends is HUGE in giving him either a boost up on life's challenges & opportunities, OR it is not. Unfortunately, far too many schools that are not that are the inner-city schools where they are largely populated by minorities & poor kids.
Txsharon....No, I mean that justice will hopefully prevail, as it did in the case in point. You are assuming that because these men are wealthy, old, and mostly white that they are incapable of making a just decision involving race. These men are also highly educated, and hopefully understand that all men were created equal.
You are so far gone in your beliefs as a liberal that you cannot even entertain an idea that you feel, or has been characterized as moderate or conservative. I understand the need to defend your beliefs, but not to the point where you become narrow-minded. I understand the current administration has further polarized this country, but I still keep an open mind and try to analyze policies or decisions before I condemn/approve them. I do not believe that everthing the conservatives are doing is wrong, just as I believe the same of the liberals
Mzchief, I'm usually on-board with most of your comments, but I think you're off with your slam of txsharon.
More power to you for your "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" story, but that is not possible for everyone. You have more than once informed us of your intelligence. Perhaps you forget that all children do not have that advantage.
Many children are in such a complete hole because of their situation that they cannot possibly hope to climb out without significant help. This should not be thought of as minimizing your work and success, but as an understanding that although you faced difficulties, you had some tools that others do not have.
To whom much is given, much is expected. I don't think that txsharon is wrong to suggest that some children might not succeed in a difficult setting without assistance and support. The fact that SOME children can does not mean that ALL children can.
Do not diminish your own accomplishments by believing that anyone can overcome what you overcame. It's simply not the case.
Our society cannot sit back and point to the millions of children failing to obtain an education and say to them, "well, you had your chance and if you didn't learn, that's just too bad." That is a recipe for failure.
To 4:20...
WOW!
You JUST stated it is BETTER for a child of SUCCESSFUL middle class parents who made the APPROPRIATE CHOICES to provide THEIR child a middle class lifestyle attend a craptastic school because there are children of minorities and parents who did NOT make responsible CHOICES who attend craptastic schools.
YOU have just declared it FAIR to be a SOCIOECONOMIC BIGOT so long as the people who are being discriminated against are white and middle/upper class.
AGAIN, WOW!
To 4:33...
As I have stated MORE than once on this blog. It is UNCONSCIONABLE for a NATION to ATTEMPT to mitigate the UNFAIRNESS of LIFE for any one person or group by creating LAWS that DIMINISH the OPPORTUNITIES for success or the RIGHTS of ANY other citizen.
ANY law that DENIES a child the right to go to the school in their neighbourhood because of that child's colour in order to GRANT a child of ANY other colour or lower socioeconomic status admission to the school is UNJUST and INSTITUTIONALIZED DISCRIMINATION.
TRY to read the above statement WITHOUT thinking it is a white upper/middle class child getting bumped and think of it is a minority child getting bumped so a white impoverished child can go to the upper/middle class school.
Protection under the law should NEVER be based upon ethnicity or socioeconomic status.
BRAVO to the U.S. Supreme Court for getting it RIGHT this time.
mzchief 4:59 - I guess I am just not as smart as you because I have no idea what you are talking about when you are talking about what I just said. (I'm so confused.......)
But I do get from your tone that I have highly offended your sense of fairness. Your opinions come from your experiences, & my opinions come from my experiences, which unlike you, I do not wish to share here. From what you have shared, you are a very impressive, self-made woman.
But please, do not be so quick to judge people whose experiences do not mirror your own, & therefore have a different perspective.
One more thing, mzchief, - the word "craptastic" - is that a good thing or a bad thing? crap sounds bad; tastic sounds good.
Just wondering....
Racism will continue to exist as long as people are classified according to race. Sorry Jesse, Al, MLK Jr., and Barry.
I the real issue here is do you have to bus kids to a different neighborhood so everyone gets a good education? NO!
In the past some schools didn't have as much money because of the economic situation of that area, Texas has fixed that with the Robin Hood plan. Every child has the same chance of getting a good education in this state. The problem is the parents.
You have women (white & black) out there having kids because they are stupid or need more welfare babies. They then expect the state to raise these kids.
Mzchief: Your intelligence is enhanced by your hard work but your ability to use the opportunities you had to enhance your intelligence is genetic.
Your beauty is enhance by your efforts to keep your body in excellent shape but your hair, eyes, lips, etc. are genetic and something beyond your control.
Your parents seem to have been more childish than their children and they were quite cruel but, from the quote you left on my blog, your grandmother was an amazing woman. (I love that quote, btw, and I have heard you use it more than once on this blog. I think I shall steal it ; ) and give your grandmother credit.)
I think, when you suggest that anyone can accomplish what you have given the same set of circumstances, you are discounting what a herculean feat you have achieved in overcoming the profound adversity in your young life. Most people wouldn't even know where to start much less have the courage to face the fear of being completely alone at such a young age and chose bravery over that fear. I know something about the courage it takes to face life when you are completely alone but I'm facing that as an adult not a teenager.
I completely agree with what you said here:
"It is NOT the RESPONSIBILTY of the Government/PEOPLE of the United States to mitigate the bad/poor CHOICES made by the citizens of the United States. It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the Government to maintain the POSSIBILTY for ANYONE who makes the CHOICE to succeed to succeed."
The Government should be responsible for providing the equal opportunity to all and for those who are deprived the opportunity due to the poor choices of others the Government should give an extra measure of opportunity.
Until we have NO "craptastic" schools in the U.S. we aren't providing the opportunity to all and we must keep trying.
That's my opinion which is based on my core beliefs.
I have enjoyed this conversation with you.
Ok, OK, OK, We get it. Mzchief is fortunate and TxSheehan is self absorbed. We get the point.
Mzchief, you must have some kind of alcohol problem yourself. Or else you just enjoy making up bullshit! I recall about 6 or so months ago you were blabbering about how WONDERFUL your DEAR PARENTS were! You listed what DEAR DADDY did in his service for our country! NOW you BLAST them? If ANYONE has a memory on this blog, they should remember this all as well! I do so well because it was YOU who called my parents WOLVES!! DO YOU RECALL THAT???? I sure as hell do! GET YOUR LYING stories STRAIGHT!!! You have lost all credibility with your posts here! AnonyNOTHING has spoken!
To anonyNOTHING 8:49...
Perhaps you would be well served to locate those comments and reread the things I have written about my father since you either LACK the ability to comprehend the written word or you have a FAULTY memory . In my prior comments I have ONLY indicated that my father was a college graduate and a HIGHLY decorated and respected brigadier general in the U.S. Army who served one tour in Korea during the Korean conflict and two tours in Vietnam in 1965 and 1968. There is such a thing as a FUNCTIONAL alcoholic and that was my father. He was able to be horribly cruel when drunk but was also quite capable of being an excellent provider WHEN he was NOT drunk. As would any child with a soul, I mourned the passing of my PARENTS. As I have indicated MORE than once, no side and no person is either ALL GOOD or ALL BAD and that was the case with my father. As for my mother, she was as much of a victim of my father's alcoholism as were her children.
In light of your post at 8:49 I maintain the ACCURACY of my prior assertion; that YOU must have indeed been raised by WOLVES. Decent people make bloody certain they have their facts straight PRIOR to questioning the HONESTY of the comments made by another person. Since you are clearly devoid of integrity allow me to make certain YOU know that YOU are LOWBROW SCUM for having FALSELY accused someone of LYING.
GOTCHA, Mzchief! And your calling ME a liar doesn't cut it. It is YOU who lies....and this is NOT the first time you have been caught. You obviously live in your own demented world, one where reality is what you imagine it to be. I learned long ago that YOU were a lowlife jealous snobbish prude when you called MY parents, whom you have NEVER met nor heard of, wolves! That put you on the level of the bullies that attack one's family members because you can't fight with the one in front of you. Your attacking my parents makes YOU deplorable!! You say your father is a DRUNKEN LOSER only when he WANTED to be? DRUNKS are losers all the time! Your comments that he was a brigadier general AND a drunk makes him that much worse! He was/is a discredit to the service! I will waste no more time with the likes of you! You become more and more transparent to those who pay attention to your bs. You trip yourself more often.... maybe that is because you stay drunk more often. YOU are a LOSER who pathetically TRIES to be a somebody. Say what you wish back to me.....it means nothing. You mean nothing... at all!!!
To anonyNOTHING 5:41...
You truly are daft aren't you! I did NOT call you a "liar". I did call you LOWBROW SCUM and indicated you are STUPID, possibly ILLITERATE as well as DEVOID OF INTEGRITY. You are the one who, WITHOUT evidence, ERRONEOUSLY called me a "liar". I was raised by people with enough class and dignity that they taught me it was uncouth to call ANYONE a LIAR even if they were lying. Clearly, YOU were RAISED by wolves.
Using your definition of what constitutes a bully; YOU having declared that my father was a "drunken loser" and "discredit to the service" because he was an alcoholic makes YOU a BULLY however, I think it makes you a small-minded CRETIN. As for YOUR bogus accusation that I EVER called your parents names; you are GROSSLY MISTAKEN. I said and MAINTAIN that your behaviour indicates you MUST have been RAISED by wolves. As for YOUR parentage; who knows WHAT those people were like but God help them if they have to deal with YOUR deranged tirades as well as YOUR limited intellect.
Based upon how you have buggered up comprehending the content of my comment to you at 12:03 there is NO doubt your allegation that I have not been truthful is based upon YOU either FABRICATING something you BELIEVE I SUPPOSEDLY wrote or you ARE as illiterate as you APPEAR. For YOUR information, I have NEVER during the ENTIRE course of my life referenced my father as "daddy" and most certainly NEVER referenced him as "dear daddy". My brother and I called him, "Father", "Papa" or "Sir" as in "yes, Sir", "no Sir" or "I beg your pardon, Sir" but NEVER Dad or Daddy.
Incidentally, YOU are the one who APPEARS to be "jealous" as well as "demented". More than likely YOU are the warped individual who CONTINUALLY has difficulty keeping up with the commentary on The Blog and whom I CONSTANTLY bitch slap and PROVE you to be a PETTY FOOL when you cannot resist your IMPULSE to ATTEMPT to verbally berate me for a comment I have posted. This is yet AGAIN, you acting out and displaying your intellectual and character shortcomings.
As for having been "caught" at doing ANYTHING; again, just because YOU say so does NOT mean it is true. If I have posted the comments YOU claim I have posted, then PROVE IT, search The Blog to PROVE your FALSE claim. UNTIL you post a comment to substantiate your BOGUS allegation you are NOTHING but a ranting loon. ANYONE who buys into your HARANGE without you presenting evidence is NO better than YOU. Since YOU have PROVED yourself to be LOWBROW SCUM I would like to believe MOST people are ABOVE falling into lockstep with the likes of YOU.
YOU truly need to GET OVER ME BEING ME and get on with you being you...Oh wait...It SUCKS to be YOU so you have no option but to ATTEMPT to tear down people who are CLEARLY superior in EVERY way to YOU.
Yep! You can bet your last dime I KNOW I am BETTER than YOU and those of your ilk. If that makes me "snobbish" so be it. While you are at it, put snide, arrogant, fire breathing, baby eating, smug, know-it-all bitch on the list.
If what I say to you TRULY means NOTHING then there is NO reason for you to respond to THIS comment with ANYTHING but the comments you CLAIM I have posted that will substantiate your BOGUS allegation against me.
Lads and Lasses, what do you bet anonyNOTHING 5:41 responds but NOT with EVIDENCE?
EVERY village has an IDIOT and anonyNOTHING 5:41 is The Blog's.
*SMuG GRiN*
Ho hum... ho hum..... and I rest my case. The above being the true ramblings of a drunken bum!
"Baby eating!" Anyone who attaches THAT adjective to their own self is TRULY deranged (Silence of the Lambs)! I guess your new nick could be HANNIBAL! huh? Seems you are more and more like "dear ol daddy" everyday! Stay away from the sauce Mzchief, it brings out your true colors and we all know how you enjoy your facade as a "somebody." Maybe you need to look up the definition for "illiterate"....... you don't seem to know it. Go ahead... respond again with your psycho babble and your attempts at what you call "bitch slapping!" You belong in a mental ward! Just please make it one that's out of Texas! I....REST MY CASE...and leave it up to the readers of this blog to determine your untruthfulness because I realize most all of them have memories that go back longer than a few days... unlike yours seems to. Of course, that's what sauce does for ones memory! DELUSIONAL BITCH!
7:48 Mzchief does not sound drunk but you sure do. You sound pretty damned jealous. Mzchief has always posted factual comments usually backed up by links so there is no reason to believe she has lied about anything. She nailed you on so many points you should be embarrassed but you're too much of a dipshit to figure it out. She's right, you should find the comments you say discredit her and post the link otherwise you should shut your trap.
I think Mzchief is the one who showed you up for being a jealous dumbass.
Korea veteran to Mzchief - Dear daughter of the lofty (heroic?) brigadier and self-proclaimed marvel who has been everywhere and seen everything. Let me tell you that you haven't been to the battlefield and you haven't served under a deranged, drunken senior commander.
When I was on the line in Korea, there was a NCO in my outfit who fell under the spell of alcohol and was found to be drunk on duty. He was given a Summary Court's Marshall, had his rank taken away, served a sentence of 90 days in the stockade and was dishonorably thrown out of the Army. As a drunk noncom, his decisions could have jeopardized no less than a dozen men.
In the same organization, our batallion commander, a Lt. Colonel, never drew a sober breath in 13 months. His drunken and often outrageous decisions had a direct effect on the lives of hundreds of men and the unit's mission. Often his orders were covered or counter-manded by his staff...at the peril of disobedience or mutiny. He completed his tour in Korea and probably went on to serve in Viet Nam...maybe even to become a brigadier.
If equitable and just treatment was the rule, he should have been arrested, tried, jailed and thrown out of the service just like the ill-fated noncom, and his sentence should have been more severe. But, as we all know, some people are more equal than others.
Your father, the wonderful brigadier should have met the same fate. As a senior commander, his decisions had a major effect on the lives of his subordinates that was far greater than just being an abusive father or a threat to others when he was drunk and driving. Hero? Not a chance! I know real heros and they were not drunks and junkies.
In your last post, you seem to be attempting to name your replacement as village idiot. Nice try but no cigar! And, BTW, I recall the time months ago when you did initiate an unwarranted argument here by telling a member that her parents were "wolves"
Netting it out ... you remain the village idiot and are a feeble and artless LIAR!
Wow - amazing how you folks stray off the target and just bash each other.
On the original subject:
1. Kids of different backgrounds (be they race or socio-economic level) may attend a class together, but it doesn't mean they'll be friends. Their free time is going to be spent with children who are similar, because that's the most comfortable.
2. The #1 rule to teach your kids: Life isn't fair. There always have been and always will be those with wealth and those living in poverty. Every century. Every country. Communism tried to change that, but it didn't work. This is a fact of life that will never change.
3. 10:05- those suffering because of their parents' choices should be given an EXTRA MEASURE OF OPPORTUNITY? Why, then, should any of us try? Just wait, and let the government make things right for your kids. And who gets to decide who deserves that extra measure?
8:47, you are one of those people who just can't see the forest for the trees!
8:51 Bitter, much? Sounds like you're just as full of shit as the other Mzchief hater. You don't know if her dad was drunk all the time or just one of those people who got drunk when they got home. My mom and dad were weeknight and weekend drunks but never were drunk during the day or at their jobs so nobody but us kids knew the were drunks at home.
If Mzchief is such a liar find the comments and prove you're not as big a sack of shit as the other dumbass Mzchief hater. It looks like you're next in line for the village idiot job.
"In light of your post at 8:49 I maintain the ACCURACY of my prior assertion; that YOU must have indeed been raised by WOLVES."
Can you people read that she just admitted calling my parents wolves?
"As for YOUR bogus accusation that I EVER called your parents names; you are GROSSLY MISTAKEN. I said and MAINTAIN that your behaviour indicates you MUST have been RAISED by wolves. As for YOUR parentage; who knows WHAT those people were like but God help them if they have to deal with YOUR deranged tirades as well as YOUR limited intellect."
then decides to say she didn't
Let me say folks... I do not intend to waste my time looking through thousands of posts to find what you say you must see before you believe. I know what she said, and so do others. Find the posts yourselves!
Mzchief, I know you have a difficult time putting two and two together, but let me help you.
One... you say I was raised by wolves.
Two... My parents raised me.
Conclusion: You just called my parents wolves!
Now I know you meant that in a very negative connotation. However, my folks were very nurturing, protective when they needed to be and assertive and aggressive only when provoked. In that sense, maybe they were LIKE wolves. I thank them for that.
My parents were not drunks nor did they partake of "drink." They were solid citizens who have given generously to the community. My father is a WWII vet who was a doctor in a 3000 bed hospital (stateside) and was more honorable in his service than you father ever thought about trying to be either in his service or his life. This conclusion I draw from your OWN comments about him. You have NO RIGHT to attack anyone whom you do not know!! That you DO that, makes you a loser if nothing else does.
Those of you on Mzchief's bandwagon, enjoy the ride! If you can't SEE plain and clear the flipflop in her assertions, then sorry for you.
I see you clearly for what you are, Mzchief. You may call me whatever you wish, it only confirms YOUR OWN nature...one you describe as a "baby eater." NUFF SAID!!
*OTFLOLHysterically*
Lads and Lasses I told you the village idiot would RESPOND and do so WITHOUT evidence to substantiate their ERRONEOUS claim.
To anonyNOTHING 8:51...
YOUR experience was NOT with my father thus your BOGUS SUPOSITION regarding my father CLEARLY supports my declaration that LOWBROW SCUM would side with THE village idiot.
To The Village IDIOT...
Ahem! You are TRULY STOOOOPIIID! It is COMMON KNOWLEDGE that the phrases "Were you raised by wolves?" and "You must have been raised by wolves." are pejorative expressions with no meaning other than to deride the person at whom the comment is directed. (Get your 8-year-old neighbour to help you with the big words.) Those expressions are much like accusing someone of having "Just fallen off of the turnip truck."
In light of the fact you call someone a "liar", are INCAPABLE of providing EVIDENCE to substantiate your BOGUS ALLEGATION and FREQUENTLY use poor grammar, punctuation and CONTINUALLY find it IMPOSSIBLE to follow the train of thought throughout the comments indicate YOU MUST HAVE BEEN RAISED BY WOLVES, parents who failed at providing you with the BASICS in decent behaviour and a decent education and/or you are too STOOOOPPPIIIIIDD to be educated. Regardless of which is the cause of you being you I am certainly GRATFUL for you being you and commenting on The Blog because EVERY village NEEDS and IDIOT and YOU are The Blog's.
*StillLOL@U*
I realize this is ALL well over your head but I am BEYOND caring whether YOU understand because you NEVER will. However, the people to whom I forward your comments get a REAL laugh out of your responses. You are a tool and being played, much like a cat toys with a ball of yarn.
Incidentally, I am NOT actually "fire breathing" or "baby eating" BOTH are fairly common expressions indicating someone is unrelenting and hardcore much like "He ate lead and shat gold." indicates someone is so good at what they do that their achievements are SUPERNATURAL.
THANK YOU FOR THE LAUGHS! I know I will AGAIN have the chance to be entertained by YOUR ignorance.
CHEERS!
To anonyNOTHING 8:51...
Just for the RECORD and to PROVE you are just as big an IDIOT as is The Village Idiot this link of 26 October 2006 DISPROVES your BOGUS ALLEGATION of "I recall the time months ago when you did initiate an unwarranted argument here by telling a member that her parents were "wolves"." Not only did I NOT "initiate and unwarranted argument" but I actually declared the person was "raised by a pack wolves" in my 7:08 comment. Not surprisingly it was done in a comment whereby I was chastising the person for UNCOUTH and UNCIVILIZED behaviour when they were calling names and making UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATIONS.
Incidentally, since I am able and WILLING to locate the comments on The Blog to support the things I claim, WHY are you two VILLAGE IDIOTS not WILLING to do the SAME? Perhaps, because what I say is ALWAYS the ABSOLUTE TRUTH. Hate me for it if you MUST but I NEVER blow smoke. Here is the other thing you dolts should learn; ALWAYS and I do bloody mean ALWAYS know your opponent or you will ALWAYS get your arse kicked. You are too STOOOPPPIIIDD to realize this but
YOU HAVE BEEN OWNED AND HAD YOUR ARSE HANDED TO YOU.
Ha Ha Ha!! Mzchief, it is YOU who are so very self-conscious that you find a very ridiculous argument saying you really didn't
"mean" what your words said! BS! Backtrack and backpeddle all you wish. And...by the way, YOUR GRAMMAR isn't perfect. Ever heard of typo's? You had a few in your posts!
God help you! You are so egotistical and arrogant! You use your "social outings" to build yourself a pedestal to perch on as you look down your nose at those less fortunate. You are most definitely a SNOB, and I mean that in a LITERAL sense, not in any type of figurative language.... you know....whatever kind you wish to randomly grab on to while you TRY to excuse your remarks!
Let me tell you....YOU are not more of a human being than anyone else. In fact, it is obvious you are not a self-made woman, but you have been spoiled by some inheritance, either passed to you by your folks or by some husband who "keeps" you! You are not worthy to stand in the footprints of the hardworking self-made people who have RESPECT for others because they have the God-given COMMON SENSE to behave as loving compassionate people. YOU are pathetic and your ramblings here simply show you to be a tantrum-throwing bitch when you are called on the carpet (idiom... you know what that is?) for your lack of human compassion! THANK GOD I am not anything like you!!! Thank GOD my friends are not like you! AND... it is YOUR postings here that bring great episodes of humor and laughter from those of us who SEE THROUGH all your BS!!! Yes, Mzchief, we are laughing AT you! You are laughable!! hahahaaa!!!
Mzchief: How dare you accuse someone of not being educated...without evidence to prove it! By your remarks, you have exposed yourself as someone deficit in any kind of decent social behavior ... probably because of a bad upbringing. It abundantly shows in all of your fruitless attempts to defend a MISS PIGGY (that is you) who displays a failed pretense of becomimg anything other than the arrogant, irrational bitch she really is!
Hey, Mzchief, stupid is spelled..
S T U P I D!! Got it, Stupid?
Mzchief rocks. I love watching her kick the shit out of you uneducated morons.
Let's see. Mzchief says she did not make the "wolves" remark about someone's parents and demands that person go back and prove that she did. Then mzchief herself goes back and provides the link back to those exact remarks, proving that she did indeed say them! Brilliant, mzchief, brilliant!
Mzchief got her "Little ARSE" handed to her in this one!
97009.....23609
61931.....51490
Post a Comment