Jump to content

"You got what you deserved"


Guest Paul

Recommended Posts

Guest Melanie
So what you are really saying it that your son, Matthew LaClair did it for the money. Justice? I dont think so.  Or else how would he have received all these things ?

If this topic was so important to you then, I think you would have made it a point to be there instead of writing about it a year later here.

Think about it.

Someone like this will never understand a person like Matthew LaClair. This person obviously can't string together a coherent series of thoughts and is just reacting against something he doesn't like. He's probably a member of the teacher's church, or at the very least has a very conservative approach to things and reacts to anything that upsets his little apple cart.

Why do I say he can't think coherently? Look what he's saying. Matthew couldn't have predicted this would generate all this publicity. For that to happen, a lot of adults had to act very foolishly. First the teacher, then the administration, then their attorney, then the board of education had to do things that were so stupid that they wound up on blogs and editorial pages for how stupid they were. Had any of them had any sense, this would have been addressed without all the fuss.

Instead, Matthew put himself on the line, took the risks, took the heat and won the day. He won the day because most people understand and appreciate what he did and the courage it took to do it. "Guest" doesn't understand it, so therefore Matthew was just in it for the money. That argument is like saying that our soldiers go off to war hoping to get their arms and legs blown off so they can collect the veterans' benefits. It's a dumb argument from someone who is obviously on the losing side of a battle that is over. But as always, people who are never wrong and live in a world of black-and-white only can't let it go, and so we're going to keep hearing about it for a very long time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Guest
Someone like this will never understand a person like Matthew LaClair. This person obviously can't string together a coherent series of thoughts and is just reacting against something he doesn't like. He's probably a member of the teacher's church, or at the very least has a very conservative approach to things and reacts to anything that upsets his little apple cart.

Why do I say he can't think coherently? Look what he's saying. Matthew couldn't have predicted this would generate all this publicity. For that to happen, a lot of adults had to act very foolishly. First the teacher, then the administration, then their attorney, then the board of education had to do things that were so stupid that they wound up on blogs and editorial pages for how stupid they were. Had any of them had any sense, this would have been addressed without all the fuss.

Instead, Matthew put himself on the line, took the risks, took the heat and won the day. He won the day because most people understand and appreciate what he did and the courage it took to do it. "Guest" doesn't understand it, so therefore Matthew was just in it for the money. That argument is like saying that our soldiers go off to war hoping to get their arms and legs blown off so they can collect the veterans' benefits. It's a dumb argument from someone who is obviously on the losing side of a battle that is over. But as always, people who are never wrong and live in a world of black-and-white only can't let it go, and so we're going to keep hearing about it for a very long time.

Yes I can understand a person like Matthew LaClair having been around him. Sure you will hear about it for a very long time, or at least until he graduates. Then the celebration will begin. Your argument is assuming that Matthew had no insight on this matter. He did in the fact that legal council came in the form of his father way before this ever took off. And it was the relentless pursuit of that individual going after this teacher that won Matthew his fame and glory, if you can call it that. The people that lose in the are the people of this town, whom I am proud to be a member. Also someone close to all his antics through his junior and high school years doesn't make him a hero. There are plenty to people who are better individuals that could be called that name. Not having seen your name until recently, I would think that you are not close enough to the real issues here. To think that this was not well planned and not taking the course that most normal parents would have taken, leads one to believe that there was council in this way before it became a media circus. This was well known about this teacher when his sister was in the school. It was just getting close enough and probing enough to get the answers on those infamous tapes. Who tapes high school lectures anyway? And answer this who put all this information out there on the blogs. It was the LaClairs themselves.

The one thing that I do agree with you on this was that if anyone did have any sense, in this case they did not, this would have been addressed without all the fuss. It wasn't handled that way but not by the choice of the school system but the LaClair family.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Melanie
Once AGAIN.................    poor Matthew really felt threatened, i'm sure.  Poor Matthew was fearful that his mind would be corrupted.  It was beyond his control to stop the horror.  Matthew, determined and resolved, stood steadfast and faced the Unconstitutional Red Menace otherwise known as, "Proselytizing Paszkiewicz" and single handily neutralized the threat. KHS is safe once more for open forum discussion - bring your ideas, opinions and beliefs on down.  Let's talk - shall we?

Your biases are transparent. "Poor Matthew" or not isn't the issue. You don't see the Constitutional issue because you don't want to see it. The people who understand the Constitution do see it, and that includes people from the religious right who would normally side with the teacher on issues like this. It's bigger than Matthew, which was Matthew's point all along. You don't want to hear it, so you don't.

By the way, Paszkiewicz is hardly a Red Menace. But he is a menace to equal treatment for people of all religions and to science education at Kearny High. He's a buffoon, a laughingstock all over the world. His own words made him that way, not Matthew.

Link to post
Share on other sites
To be accurate, I don’t agree with your methods and I doubt that we need Matt to save The Constitution for us.

Fact: Matthew was the only person who pointed out the unconstitutional actions going on in that classroom. Therefore, if he hadn't, no one would have. So, at least in this case, he was needed. I wish he wasn't so needed, but he was, because no other student in that class understood what was going on and/or cared enough about the foundation of this country to do anything about it.

You found an issue that was easily used to polarize people, big deal.  You say that Matthew wasn’t being self-serving yet in the same breath you’re bragging about all of the offers and support.

So one is self-serving if they're proud for getting recognition for doing something admirable?

Most of your supporters don’t know Matt’s history and therefore could not know Matt’s motives.

The true reason you didn’t push a meeting with the administrators is because it would have been resolved there.

So the supporters "could not know" Matthew's motives, and yet here you are making assertions about Paul's, with no basis whatsoever? ^_^

None of us would know about it and no one would be talking about it.  There wouldn’t be any offers from companies or colleges or need of support from the ACLU. You wouldn’t have been able to strong arm the BOE into declaring Matt a hero.

How do you know?

How do you know what I wish for? I certainly don’t look to drag other people down to further my own ideals.

Um, if one's own words, when made public, 'drag one down,' then it's really hard to blame the person who made them public for that; at least, in good conscience. They're his words, not Paul's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't for a moment believe that you have any idea whether Paul made any phone calls, any more than you knew whether he had made any other attemp to meet with the administrators when you said this:

"Paul you never attempted to meet with Somma or any administrators. You then sent your son into a meeting with the administrators and claimed they would not allow you to be present."

And this:

"No. Read the post again. Paul never attempted to meet with the administartors."

Those are your words, are they not? Either that or we have multiple "Guests" posting with a truly remarkable continuity and consistency of style.

Tell me, Guest, do you make a habit of accusing people of things that you just make up? Things that you merely want them to be guilty of, but have no indication that they actually are? Is that honest? Is that honorable?

If it had turned out that he had made four phone calls instead of four letters, would you have then criticized him for not sending letters? If he had done both, would you have complained that he didn't just drop in at their offices unannounced, or stalk them while they did their grocery shopping?

So, is it true that "A simple phone call would have gotten you an appointment to see Mr. Somma and anyone else you cared to discuss the situation with."? I have no way to know. And I strongly suspect that you don't know either, just like the other wishes that you've asserted as if they were known facts. But even if true, it does not change that your original accusation was false. Even one letter qualifies as an attempt. And four should be enough to meet any sane person's definition of "due diligence".

How do you justify making such malicious and obviously fabricated accusations? Do you think it's ok because you judge Paul to be a bad person? Would it not be just as much of a lie even if he was the scumbag that you wish to paint him as? Are you so full of hate and devoid of integrity that you can't bring yourself to make an apology, or even just a bland retraction, now that you can clearly see that you've made a false accusation?

In fact, I made several phone calls to the Board's attorney, in addition to the four letters I wrote up the chain of command. The people who are still whining about this don't care about the facts. Their religion teaches them it's all about what they believe, and for them that's the end of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Paul @ Jul 17 2007, 03:55 PM)

On the contrary, most people do get it. You don't. What makes you think that you speak for the entire planet?

We can ask you the same question.  Actually, you have been asked this a number of times.  You and Matt just refuse to answer.

The difference is that I listen and you don't. You've been told repeatedly what the point was, but you don't want to hear it. This is characteristic of religious fundamentalists. You don't think. You refuse to think. You make up your mind and that's the end of it, and then you have the nerve to say it's all ordained by God. I'm sick of it, and I'm not alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
To be accurate, I don’t agree with your methods and I doubt that we need Matt to save The Constitution for us.  You found an issue that was easily used to polarize people, big deal.  You say that Matthew wasn’t being self-serving yet in the same breath you’re bragging about all of the offers and support.  Most of your supporters don’t know Matt’s history and therefore could not know Matt’s motives.

The true reason you didn’t push a meeting with the administrators is because it would have been resolved there.  None of us would know about it and no one would be talking about it.  There wouldn’t be any offers from companies or colleges or need of support from the ACLU. You wouldn’t have been able to strong arm the BOE into declaring Matt a hero. 

How do you know what I wish for? I certainly don’t look to drag other people down to further my own ideals.  Whining? It’s time for you to take a look in the mirror.  What you don’t like is being in the minority. 

Why do you need names.  Are you compiling a lawsuit list?

No, I'm not compiling a list for a lawsuit. So have the integrity to state your name. Then, if you're capable of it, which I doubt, we can have a rational and intelligent discussion and maybe calm this situation down. But not one of you from what you laughingly call a "church" has had the guts or the integrity to do that.

I don't know who you are, but I know you're not a nice person. You don't know a single thing about Matt's motives. You don't understand them. You don't value dissent and you can't distinguish between an honest difference of opinion and a bad motive. You don't have an open mind. You're bigoted against lawyers. And you refuse to see that you are the one who is polarizing people. This community doesn't need snot-nosed remarks about a seventeen-year-old kid "saving the Constitution." He stood up for it, as any citizen should. You can't tell the difference because all you want to do is villainize him. You're not going to save the Constitution because you obviously don't care about it; or maybe you care about it as long as it suits your purposes. You don't care about the truth. All you care about is your little world and your little opinion. Matt upset your little world, and for you that is the unforgivable sin among sins.

People like you are destroying this country. I'm dead serious about that. You watch Fox and think you're seeing news. You don't begin to understand how difficult the global economy makes it for us to maintain any semblance of democracy at all. You haven't begun to think how we're going to transform the energy component of our economy away from fossil fuels with a minimum of disruption. You haven't begun to consider how we're going to feed ten billion people a generation or two from now when we can't even feed seven billion. You haven't begun to think how we're going to organize a world, let alone a country, so that it can survive long-term. All you give a damn about is that no one disrupts your little world today. You think if you stand every morning and salute the flag, that makes you a patriot. No it doesn't. All it does is keep you insulated in your little cocoon so you don't really have to look at what's happening in the world.

Matt challenged your little world and even if for only a moment challenged you to think for once in your life. And since that's the last thing you're ever going to do, you say nasty and rotten things about him that aren't true. I live with him, so I'm the one who knows. I wouldn't care if that was the only issue, but you get to vote just like I do, and you're not capable of thinking about issues that really matter to our country. So we face the possibility that people like you might stick us with another jackass like the one we have now, on some new false pretense like WMDs that don't exist and terror threats that are real but aren't in the places where the administration says they are. And you sit there in front of your TV and watch babbling idiots sell you phony news as though it was the truth. You don't have the brains to tell the difference or the integrity to be responsible for what you write.

That's my opinion, based on what you've written. If you don't like it, that's too bad. That's what I believe, and I have as much right to be firm in my opinion as you do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I can understand a person like Matthew LaClair having been around him.  Sure you will hear about it for a very long time, or at least until he graduates.  Then the celebration will begin.  Your argument is assuming that Matthew had no insight on this matter. He did in the fact that legal council came in the form of his father way before this ever took off.  And it was the relentless pursuit of that individual going after this teacher that won Matthew his fame and glory, if you can call it that. The people that lose in the are the people of this town, whom I am proud to be a member. Also someone close to all his antics through his junior and high school years doesn't make him a hero. There are plenty to people who are better individuals that could be called that name.  Not having seen your name until recently, I would think that you are not close enough to the real issues here. To think that this was not well planned and not taking the course that most normal parents would have taken, leads one to believe that there was council in this way before it became a media circus.  This was well known about this teacher when his sister was in the school. It was just getting close enough and probing enough to get the answers on those infamous tapes.  Who tapes high school lectures anyway?  And answer this who put all this information out there on the blogs. It was the LaClairs themselves.

The one thing that I do agree with you on this was that if anyone did have any sense, in this case they did not, this would have been addressed without all the fuss. It wasn't handled that way but not by the choice of the school system but the LaClair family.

After all this, I just want you to answer one question.

If it's "not by the choice of the school system but the LaClair family" that things 'exploded' the way they did, tell me: why didn't the administration take proper action following Matthew's meeting with Paszkiewicz, Somma, etc.? Why did they do nothing as a result of this meeting, where they were each handed hard evidence of Paszkiewicz's actions in that classroom? There was their chance to take care of the issue on the spot, and that meeting occurred long before the media became privy to the events in question. So, why was nothing done at that time by 'the school system?'

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest me again
Fact: Matthew was the only person who pointed out the unconstitutional actions going on in that classroom. Therefore, if he hadn't, no one would have. So, at least in this case, he was needed. I wish he wasn't so needed, but he was, because no other student in that class understood what was going on and/or cared enough about the foundation of this country to do anything about it.

So one is self-serving if they're proud for getting recognition for doing something admirable?

So the supporters "could not know" Matthew's motives, and yet here you are making assertions about Paul's, with no basis whatsoever? ^_^

How do you know?

Um, if one's own words, when made public, 'drag one down,' then it's really hard to blame the person who made them public for that; at least, in good conscience. They're his words, not Paul's.

there goes Paulie's wife talking s**t again

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Robert
Your biases are transparent. "Poor Matthew" or not isn't the issue. You don't see the Constitutional issue because you don't want to see it. The people who understand the Constitution do see it, and that includes people from the religious right who would normally side with the teacher on issues like this. It's bigger than Matthew, which was Matthew's point all along. You don't want to hear it, so you don't.

By the way, Paszkiewicz is hardly a Red Menace. But he is a menace to equal treatment for people of all religions and to science education at Kearny High. He's a buffoon, a laughingstock all over the world. His own words made him that way, not Matthew.

"Your biases are transparent."

Are they Melanie?

Paszkiewicz is just a blip on the radar screen. Matthew is too. Get over and off it.

Melanie, will you save my Constitution for me?

I understand the Constitution just fine even though I be of limited education, boo hoo. Get off your horse.

You don't like the "religious right", you do, when they side with you? Who are they?

Paszkiewicz?

Formal religion?

Religion?

God?

Baseball? Hot dogs? Apple pie? Chevrolet? (How unconstitutionally un - American. It's in there, somewhere. I know it is. ......or is it Cherry pie? Peach? Mashed potatoes, gravy, cranberry sauce!)

Who said I take up the cause for any of the above? The Constitution says I don't have to, but I can.

"a menace to equal treatment for people of all religions and to science education at Kearny High"
(Hey I'm feeling like the Strife-meister...........)

OK, you got me there. ^_^

Maybe if Matthew pulled a half baked Woodward and Bernstein out of his ... hat, on this guy. Showing a bias toward students who are non-believers, religiously challenged - just different than himself by giving them inadequate grades, or perhaps constantly debasing their efforts to achieve in his class. Evidence of a little cut/paste from the book of Genesis in that section of Science 101 right about where everybody starts to stand upright and order those White Chocolate Mocha Frappuccinos ..... oh wait wrong group of "monkeys", sorry.

Maybe then... maybe, I would see, hear and feel the issue that threatens our very way of life. But just recording a guy secretly while he talks of his religion and his beliefs during a back and forth - question and answer - what do you think discussion.....? Just comes across as lame. Hardly the stuff of heroes.

Hey I always believed dinosaurs could fly and look what science tells us recently.

What they left out (conspiracy theory working here), was that they learned how to fly by being stuck for so long on that boat. It was survival of the flight-est.

Peace out Melanie...........

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Melanie
Yes I can understand a person like Matthew LaClair having been around him.  Sure you will hear about it for a very long time, or at least until he graduates.  Then the celebration will begin.  Your argument is assuming that Matthew had no insight on this matter. He did in the fact that legal council came in the form of his father way before this ever took off.  And it was the relentless pursuit of that individual going after this teacher that won Matthew his fame and glory, if you can call it that. The people that lose in the are the people of this town, whom I am proud to be a member. Also someone close to all his antics through his junior and high school years doesn't make him a hero. There are plenty to people who are better individuals that could be called that name.  Not having seen your name until recently, I would think that you are not close enough to the real issues here. To think that this was not well planned and not taking the course that most normal parents would have taken, leads one to believe that there was council in this way before it became a media circus.  This was well known about this teacher when his sister was in the school. It was just getting close enough and probing enough to get the answers on those infamous tapes.  Who tapes high school lectures anyway?  And answer this who put all this information out there on the blogs. It was the LaClairs themselves.

The one thing that I do agree with you on this was that if anyone did have any sense, in this case they did not, this would have been addressed without all the fuss. It wasn't handled that way but not by the choice of the school system but the LaClair family.

You can say that all you like, but it's not true. The family did not pursue the teacher. They pursued corrections of his improper remarks, and that is what they finally achieved. It is not their fault that the BoE had to be dragged kicking and screaming to do it. And even if the family had planned it, which there is no evidence that they did, that wouldn't change the impropriety of the teacher's comments by one iota.

As for me, you don't know how long I've been posting here. I've been posting here as "Guest" for months, just like you just did. Of course, now that I've taken on a name, at least for a while, you religious nutcakes think you've got it all figured out. "I must not know anything about it." Every time someone disagrees with you, you always invent an explanation. Your religion teaches you to do that. If you believe it, it's true. It's true because you want it to be. And if you don't want to believe it, then it isn't true. And before you know it, you've made your opinion the central force in the whole universe, and you don't even realize you've done it. You have no idea how easy you are to manipulate or how dangerous that makes you to our community, our country and the world. And I mean that very sincerely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
I don't for a moment believe that you have any idea whether Paul made any phone calls, any more than you knew whether he had made any other attemp to meet with the administrators when you said this:

"Paul you never attempted to meet with Somma or any administrators. You then sent your son into a meeting with the administrators and claimed they would not allow you to be present."

And this:

"No. Read the post again. Paul never attempted to meet with the administartors."

Those are your words, are they not? Either that or we have multiple "Guests" posting with a truly remarkable continuity and consistency of style.

Tell me, Guest, do you make a habit of accusing people of things that you just make up? Things that you merely want them to be guilty of, but have no indication that they actually are? Is that honest? Is that honorable?

If it had turned out that he had made four phone calls instead of four letters, would you have then criticized him for not sending letters? If he had done both, would you have complained that he didn't just drop in at their offices unannounced, or stalk them while they did their grocery shopping?

So, is it true that "A simple phone call would have gotten you an appointment to see Mr. Somma and anyone else you cared to discuss the situation with."? I have no way to know. And I strongly suspect that you don't know either, just like the other wishes that you've asserted as if they were known facts. But even if true, it does not change that your original accusation was false. Even one letter qualifies as an attempt. And four should be enough to meet any sane person's definition of "due diligence".

How do you justify making such malicious and obviously fabricated accusations? Do you think it's ok because you judge Paul to be a bad person? Would it not be just as much of a lie even if he was the scumbag that you wish to paint him as? Are you so full of hate and devoid of integrity that you can't bring yourself to make an apology, or even just a bland retraction, now that you can clearly see that you've made a false accusation?

What makes you so sure that Paul is telling the truth?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
Uh, his support may have been relatively minor in Kearny, but practically everywhere else, Matthew has gotten a hell of a lot more glowing praise than denigration. And we all 'get it.' :lol:

So you say there's absolutely nothing wrong with what Paszkiewicz did? You truly and sincerely believe that Matthew's actions were "just a ploy," that they had no merit whatsoever? If so, I truly pity you for your ignorance of the founding principles of the country in which you live.

So you throw my comments out, but not those of the people making the baseless accusations, who also weren't there?

Who else do you expect to expose lies like the allegation that Paul's daughter had class with Paszkiewicz (and then when Paul pointed out it was a lie, they tried it again, except this time alleging that she 'merely' had study hall with him)?

You got that right. It's truly shameful that Matthew rose alone against Paszkiewicz. Why aren't any of these other kids learning these basic principles of the Constitution that were being very obviously violated? Or, if they knew, why weren't they being taught by their parents to not be afraid to stand up to an authority figure who you know is in the wrong?

What makes you think Paul's ideas and values, which he's talking about here, aren't being taught "at home?"

He received support from people outside of Kearny because those people were not aware of Matt's ongoing antics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
He received support from people outside of Kearny because those people were not aware of Matt's ongoing antics.

Proving yet again that you don't have a brain in your head, or anywhere else for that matter. It doesn't matter what Matt did some other time. He caught a fundie nutjob in the act. Period.

It's not about Matt. It's about what's appropriate in a public school and what isn't. Matt was the only one willing to carry that ball. Any other kid doing the same thing would have received the same support.

And give me a freaking break. Dinosaurs on Noah's ark?! How thick can one persons' head be?

Link to post
Share on other sites
What makes you so sure that Paul is telling the truth?

It doesn't matter. The burden of proving an accusation falls to the accuser, not the accused. Guest offered no supporting evidence whatsoever. No witness accounts. No explanation of how he/she might have known this. Nothing. Just a bare assertion. And when Guest's first accusation missed the mark, he just aimed at a different spot and fired again.

Why would Guest have done that, other than if he himself accepted Paul's refutation as credible? If Guest had anything to support his claim, he could have trotted it out, and not only vindicated his accusation, but could have caught Paul in a lie as well. But that didn't happen, did it? When has that ever happened?

Link to post
Share on other sites
What makes you so sure that Paul is telling the truth?

What makes you so sure he isn't? Is your default judgment to assume someone is a liar?

Paszkiewicz's supporters have been caught in tons of lies about this whole situation. On the other hand, the worst "lie" one can attribute to Paul is semantic niggling about the word "dress," which isn't even in the same ballpark.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He received support from people outside of Kearny because those people were not aware of Matt's ongoing antics.

Yeah, right. Even if Matthew was a convicted criminal before this happened, guess what? Here he is in the right, regardless of his previous actions.

Look at how shallow your post is. You don't like Matthew's previous 'antics,' so you assume that, like you (apparently), everyone else will fail to recognize the good he did in that classroom because of that other stuff which is completely irrelevant.

Every attempt at making excuses shows more desperation and louder scraping at that barrel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Melanie
Are they Melanie?

Paszkiewicz is just a blip on the radar screen.  Matthew is too. Get over and off it.

  Melanie, will you save my Constitution for me?

I understand the Constitution just fine even though I be of limited education, boo hoo.  Get off your horse. 

You don't like the "religious right", you do, when they side with you?  Who are they?

Paszkiewicz?

Formal religion?

Religion?

God?

Baseball? Hot dogs? Apple pie? Chevrolet?  (How unconstitutionally un - American.  It's in there, somewhere. I know it is. ......or is it Cherry pie? Peach? Mashed potatoes, gravy, cranberry sauce!)

Who said I take up the cause for any of the above?  The Constitution says I don't have to, but I can. 

(Hey I'm feeling like the Strife-meister...........)

OK, you got me there.  :lol:

Maybe if Matthew pulled a half baked Woodward and Bernstein out of his ... hat, on this guy.  Showing a bias toward students who are non-believers, religiously challenged - just different than himself by giving them inadequate grades, or perhaps constantly debasing their efforts to achieve in his class.  Evidence of a little cut/paste from the book of Genesis in that section of Science 101 right about where everybody starts to stand upright and order those White Chocolate Mocha Frappuccinos ..... oh wait wrong group of "monkeys", sorry.

Maybe then... maybe, I would see, hear and feel the issue that threatens our very way of life.  But just recording a guy secretly while he talks of his religion and his beliefs during a back and forth - question and answer - what do you think discussion.....? Just comes across as lame.  Hardly the stuff of heroes.

Hey I always believed dinosaurs could fly and look what science tells us recently.

What they left out (conspiracy theory working here), was that they learned how to fly by being stuck for so long on that boat. It was survival of the flight-est.

Peace out Melanie...........

I appreciate the humor, Robert, but you're taking it too lightly in my opinion. Religious persecution is a very serious historical problem and it usually comes from the religious majority, which is what Paszkiewicz thinks he represents - he does profess Christianity. By the time we get to the point where teachers can alter students' grades and get away with it we're at the level of the American South in its worst anti-black phases. Do you really think we should wait until that point before speaking out?

So you peace out, too Robert. You can handle a few of us trying to stay vigilant about this while you sleep.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Melanie
What makes you so sure that Paul is telling the truth?

The usual custom among responsible and civil people is to believe people unless there's a reason not to. So far everything Paul has said has been borne out to be true, even when he was being attacked by people who didn't know that the meeting in Somma's office had been recorded. So between Paul and the disgruntled followers of a teacher who got his wrists slapped, Paul is the more credible by far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Melanie
He received support from people outside of Kearny because those people were not aware of Matt's ongoing antics.

You keep making the same assumptions. Just because you call them antics doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them. Does Matt have a disciplinary record? A criminal record? Has he ever been hauled down to juvenile court? Been suspended from school? Gotten drunk? Done drugs? Not that I know of.

You put a word on a kid and think you've said something, and you have - about yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
No, I'm not compiling a list for a lawsuit. So have the integrity to state your name. Then, if you're capable of it, which I doubt, we can have a rational and intelligent discussion and maybe calm this situation down. But not one of you from what you laughingly call a "church" has had the guts or the integrity to do that.

I don't know who you are, but I know you're not a nice person. You don't know a single thing about Matt's motives. You don't understand them. You don't value dissent and you can't distinguish between an honest difference of opinion and a bad motive. You don't have an open mind. You're bigoted against lawyers. And you refuse to see that you are the one who is polarizing people. This community doesn't need snot-nosed remarks about a seventeen-year-old kid "saving the Constitution." He stood up for it, as any citizen should. You can't tell the difference because all you want to do is villainize him. You're not going to save the Constitution because you obviously don't care about it; or maybe you care about it as long as it suits your purposes. You don't care about the truth. All you care about is your little world and your little opinion. Matt upset your little world, and for you that is the unforgivable sin among sins.

People like you are destroying this country. I'm dead serious about that. You watch Fox and think you're seeing news. You don't begin to understand how difficult the global economy makes it for us to maintain any semblance of democracy at all. You haven't begun to think how we're going to transform the energy component of our economy away from fossil fuels with a minimum of disruption. You haven't begun to consider how we're going to feed ten billion people a generation or two from now when we can't even feed seven billion. You haven't begun to think how we're going to organize a world, let alone a country, so that it can survive long-term. All you give a damn about is that no one disrupts your little world today. You think if you stand every morning and salute the flag, that makes you a patriot. No it doesn't. All it does is keep you insulated in your little cocoon so you don't really have to look at what's happening in the world.

Matt challenged your little world and even if for only a moment challenged you to think for once in your life. And since that's the last thing you're ever going to do, you say nasty and rotten things about him that aren't true. I live with him, so I'm the one who knows. I wouldn't care if that was the only issue, but you get to vote just like I do, and you're not capable of thinking about issues that really matter to our country. So we face the possibility that people like you might stick us with another jackass like the one we have now, on some new false pretense like WMDs that don't exist and terror threats that are real but aren't in the places where the administration says they are. And you sit there in front of your TV and watch babbling idiots sell you phony news as though it was the truth. You don't have the brains to tell the difference or the integrity to be responsible for what you write.

That's my opinion, based on what you've written. If you don't like it, that's too bad. That's what I believe, and I have as much right to be firm in my opinion as you do.

Matt did nothing of importance. People can judge his motives by his previous actions. You don't like it but that's the way it is. This isn't a courtroom where you can order us not to consider evidence. Have you ever stopped to read the minutes of a BOE meeting. Do you even realize the problems that they're dealing with. Take a look at some of the discipline issues. They've got kids on suspension for the entire school year, only allowing them back after psychological exams are performed and anger management classes are completed and you're worried about some silly Noah's Ark statements.

You're the one that is only worried about your little world and you can't even see that. You don't know anything about me but you label me as part of some church. You claim to be so tolerent but you hate the people you label as "fundies". From the looks of it you're about as fundementalist as it gets when it comes to your own beliefs.

Tell us Paul, what do you consider real news? Aren't they all reading off of teleprompters? Giving one slant or another to some story. What makes you think the version your watching or reading is any better or more accurate.

What does my name or screen name have to do with anything? Do you think that because you post your name that your opinion is more valid? I've had plenty of chances to see how the school system works. I've never seen a parent kept out of a meeting that their minor child was in. Your claim doesn't make common sense. And if it doesn't make sense there is probably something you're not telling us.

You say the current administration is completely inept, but you give us no alternatives. Who do you want in there, Gore, Kerry? You want to fight a war on terror but you don't want to fight it in Iraq or Afghanistan. So tell us where would you like it to be fought?

I think saluting the flag and saying the pledge once in awhile is a nice way to express your gratitude for being lucky enough to live in this country. It shows respect for a concept that many people put their lives on the line for. I may not be Thomas Jefferson or Matt LaClair, but that's what I can do at that moment.

So specifically what are you doing to save us from all of those nasty things that you mentioned?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
After all this, I just want you to answer one question.

If it's "not by the choice of the school system but the LaClair family" that things 'exploded' the way they did, tell me: why didn't the administration take proper action following Matthew's meeting with Paszkiewicz, Somma, etc.? Why did they do nothing as a result of this meeting, where they were each handed hard evidence of Paszkiewicz's actions in that classroom? There was their chance to take care of the issue on the spot, and that meeting occurred long before the media became privy to the events in question. So, why was nothing done at that time by 'the school system?'

Because Paul, as Matthew's parent and legal guardian, didn't attend the meeting. Mr. Somma didn't take the situation as seriously as he should have. That's been the point all along. Mistakes were made but they didn't rise to the level that Paul and Matt, for their purposes, wanted them to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...