RE: GW Wooldridge, "How can somebody be against an elective Mexican American study program and vote for an elective class on the Christian Bible mandate for every school system in the state." The class was not being taught as an elective, but as an accredited class in place of the requirement for classes on State and/or (US) Federal Government. It has been established that a great portion of the syllabus declared that, “the brown-man was/is being oppressed by (all) whites, that the legal system (and the enforcers of same) are tools and lackeys of the whites and that all the land (what is now pretty much all of the area west of the Mississippi and south of the Canadian border) is not part of the US, because it was stolen from the Hispanic claimants and demands return of same." TUSD would have made the classes electives but, the "oppressed" demanded that the classes be credited or nothing; they got their wish. The "Christian Bible mandate" is supposed to be elective class(es) on the Christian-Judea influences pertaining to the basic instruments, i.e. the constitution, laws, and the social practices, etc., of the collective peoples of the US (past and present). It would behoove the school board to check the syllabus in this instance also.
Re: “New York Times on AZ Redistricting: Voters "Should Score Ms. Mathis' Removal as a Deliberate Act of Political Intimidation"”
Has anyone noticed that one of the districts runs from the Utah/Arizona border to the Arizona/Mexico border yet you can't drive from one end to the other (more than 450 miles) within the district? In fact you can't do it without passing through at least two (2) other districts. Has anyone noticed that, all meetings of the board were, by directive, to be open; yet Ms. Mathis aranged that meetings were held behind closed doors? Has anyone noticed that, the firm chosen by Mathis (et al) to collect information/map out the redistricting, did not have the lowest bid for the job, did not follow state aproved guidelines, and is the same company which collected information and mapped out the campaign for Obama? This redistricting was to be a nonpartisan affair, Mathis chose to ignore the requirments of the task as given. Jan Brewer noticed. The New York Times may know as much about Gerrymandering as the Boston Times, but it is evident it doesn't know squat about Arizona, re, its views on SB 1070 and the whole set of border problems.
Tucson Weekly |
7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 |
(520) 797-4384 |
Powered by Foundation