Is a Paterson School Teacher What the Kearny Board of Education Needs?

[Guest Guest]

I'm amazed. You attack the person who's asking legitimate questions of a candidate for PUBLIC office. You try to put the legitimate questioner on the defensive by suggesting (or is it "insinuating" to use your word?) that she is distorting facts. You come up with a series of questions that you expect the poster, a PRIVATE citizen, to answer before Ms. Davidson answers the legitimate questions originally posed to her as a candidate for public office.

For the record, yet one more time, there are reported news stories in which Ms. Davidson is quoted as a participant in labor actions against the Paterson Board of Education. There were pickets of the Board of Education and at least one reported attempt by the teachers' union in Paterson to engage in a classroom slow down to gain negotiating leverage in their contract talks. That's the equivalent of using school children as ammunition. In a news story that criticized the teachers' union for calling for that action, Ms. Davidson posted a comment, using her name, that the reporter is "really ignorant".

I want answers to my legitimate questions. In my opinion, you're doing your best to divert attention from a real issue which is what do the candidates for the Kearny Board of Education, a public office, stand for regarding the expired Kearny teachers' contract. That's the biggest cost item in the Kearny school district budget and 45% of my property tax bill goes to the school district.

You're ridiculous. You're not even trying to address the fallacies in what you're saying. Those fallacies create holes in your argument big enough to drive a truck through them. You are participating in this "discussion," if you call it that. Mercedes Davidson is not. Ask her your questions. Then, if you don't get an answer, you can more appropriately criticize her. But your persistence in attacking her for supposedly not answering questions she has not yet been asked, so far is we know, only reflects your own blistering stubbornness. Spin your alternative-reality version of the "facts" as many times as you want to, the fact still remains that until Ms. Davidson is asked those questions, she cannot properly be criticized for not answering them.

[Guest Guest]

I'm amazed. You attack the person who's asking legitimate questions of a candidate for PUBLIC office. You try to put the legitimate questioner on the defensive by suggesting (or is it "insinuating" to use your word?) that she is distorting facts. You come up with a series of questions that you expect the poster, a PRIVATE citizen, to answer before Ms. Davidson answers the legitimate questions originally posed to her as a candidate for public office.

For the record, yet one more time, there are reported news stories in which Ms. Davidson is quoted as a participant in labor actions against the Paterson Board of Education. There were pickets of the Board of Education and at least one reported attempt by the teachers' union in Paterson to engage in a classroom slow down to gain negotiating leverage in their contract talks. That's the equivalent of using school children as ammunition. In a news story that criticized the teachers' union for calling for that action, Ms. Davidson posted a comment, using her name, that the reporter is "really ignorant".

I want answers to my legitimate questions. In my opinion, you're doing your best to divert attention from a real issue which is what do the candidates for the Kearny Board of Education, a public office, stand for regarding the expired Kearny teachers' contract. That's the biggest cost item in the Kearny school district budget and 45% of my property tax bill goes to the school district.

So she used Paterson's students as ammunition?

Oh no, you're not insinuating anything. Not at all.

By the way, the reason you won't answer the questions is that you haven't thought this through objectively. You're an authoritarian who thinks he/she is always right. So answering questions is something that other people have to do, even when you're the one making accusations that are not supported by the "news stories" you reference. That is a substantive critique of your argument. Instead of addressing it, you whine that you're a private citizen who has no responsibility to back up what you say. I think you do.

[Guest Just Askin']

800 hits doesn't mean anything. It just means that the 20 or so people who are really active on this blog have no lives, right Bobby and Joann? Just sayin'.

Hey Multiplicity,

For real, you want us to believe it's only 20 persons and you're not worried?? Ha!

1,400 hits in just one month and a "hot" label means way more than 20 people.

But then again maybe you also believe Facebook is not real and its market capitalization of $198 billion make believe? Or you believe print newspapers are a growth industry? Or you believe Twitter is for the birds?

You know, Just askin'

[Guest Fact Checker]

So she used Paterson's students as ammunition?

Oh no, you're not insinuating anything. Not at all.

By the way, the reason you won't answer the questions is that you haven't thought this through objectively. You're an authoritarian who thinks he/she is always right. So answering questions is something that other people have to do, even when you're the one making accusations that are not supported by the "news stories" you reference. That is a substantive critique of your argument. Instead of addressing it, you whine that you're a private citizen who has no responsibility to back up what you say. I think you do.

Yes, it was Ms Davidson's union which sought to use children as ammunition in the Paterson teachers' contract talks. Fact is fact, not an insinuation. She is a member of the group who sought to do that. If she spoke or voted against it, she should let us know.

BTW, you're back to bullying by calling me "authoritarian" and saying I "whine". I thought we were making progress.

[Guest Guest]

Whether or not this actually happened in Paterson or not, the point that the majority of you condemning Ms. Davidson for her union's decision to work within their contract without providing additional UNPAID time to their job is that when there is no contract and no movement toward a contract that is often the only way to get the BOE to the table. You see, if all the well behaved teachers are showing up early as usual, doing extra UNPAID jobs, putting lots of extra hours without a contract behind them, what motive does the BOE have to get to the table. The longer they sit back and do nothing, money is saved by not paying raises to the teachers. Even though retro checks are issued, the money sits in a BOE account collecting interest while the contract is being settled; and the teachers don't get interest in their retro checks.

What the majority of Ms. Davidson's critics don't seem to be aware of is that the teachers are contract to work for X number of hours; in Kearny elementary teachers must check in by 8:35 (if they have pm help period) and their school day ends at 3:25 (pm help period.) The times shift slightly for am help period. There is no overtime for working beyond those hours and I don't think I know a single teacher who is able to limit themselves to those hours. Kearny teachers are not contracted to attend and are not paid to attend "PTA Meetings" "Back to School Nights" "Holiday Concerts" etc. Yet, they show up to support the school and the students.

When under negotiations, depending upon how things are going behind closed doors, we are directed by our union either to attend these activities or to boycott them. Most often we've been told to attend our own and requested to go and hand out flyers to people outside other school's events. This all depends upon whether the negotiations seems to moving along fairly in the eyes of our union leaders.

So if this was something that went on in Paterson, I'm not surprised and I hope it ended with a contract settlement in Paterson. Personally I hate these "job actions," I would prefer to do my job and then the things I enjoy that go along with it - PTA meetings, school dances, clubs, etc.

[Guest Guest]

Shes been whining for at least 30 years!

[Guest Land of the Free Resident]

Not as Anonymous as you think, as the Original owners of the board found out years ago, once the subpoenas started coming in.

The Board President made a similar statement at a Board of Education meeting. If your statement is intended to intimidate posters into silence, it won't work. My recommendation is that you sit in on the high school's American History class to learn about the role of anonymous political discourse throughout the history of our country from its founding to the present.

Both you and the Board President (or is it one and the same person?) only question the anonymity of this Board when it's critical of someone aligned with you or on an issue in which the Board is vulnerable. That selectivity is usually a sign of insecurity.

[Guest Guest]

The Board President made a similar statement at a Board of Education meeting. If your statement is intended to intimidate posters into silence, it won't work. My recommendation is that you sit in on the high school's American History class to learn about the role of anonymous political discourse throughout the history of our country from its founding to the present.

Both you and the Board President (or is it one and the same person?) only question the anonymity of this Board when it's critical of someone aligned with you or on an issue in which the Board is vulnerable. That selectivity is usually a sign of insecurity.

Nope, sorry I have no dog in this fight...other than amusement watching all of you "Good People" Gnawing on each other like Kilkenny cats..... Just pointing out that eventually, Someone ends up stepping over the line, and all it will take is the KOTW owner missing it, and next thing he's sitting there with a subpoena to turn over his hard drives.... Which is WHY he goes over every post and redacts as much as he does..because the previous owner of the board found out the hard way how much it can cost before everything was done.. Ask the owner of the Atlantic Highlands Herald down in Monmouth County how much fun that is.and THAT was a case of Literally nothing more than Political Harassment.....a lot of the assorted things tossed around here willy nilly would have any good civil Attorney worth his salt jumping up and down screaming PICK ME PICK ME PLEASE PICK ME!!!!!!!". . Just for the record though, and speaking again as merely an observer to this Political (Wannabe) Theater, "Anonymous Political Discord" stops right at the line where Libel, and Slander begin...and in today's world, unless you're some Script Kiddy, with lots of Proxies and cutouts..you really are NOT as Anonymous as you think you are. But PLEASE...Prove me wrong, and Libel away, the only cost to me is the popcorn and beer.

[Guest Legal Maven]

Nope, sorry I have no dog in this fight...other than amusement watching all of you "Good People" Gnawing on each other like Kilkenny cats..... Just pointing out that eventually, Someone ends up stepping over the line, and all it will take is the KOTW owner missing it, and next thing he's sitting there with a subpoena to turn over his hard drives.... Which is WHY he goes over every post and redacts as much as he does..because the previous owner of the board found out the hard way how much it can cost before everything was done.. Ask the owner of the Atlantic Highlands Herald down in Monmouth County how much fun that is.and THAT was a case of Literally nothing more than Political Harassment.....a lot of the assorted things tossed around here willy nilly would have any good civil Attorney worth his salt jumping up and down screaming PICK ME PICK ME PLEASE PICK ME!!!!!!!". . Just for the record though, and speaking again as merely an observer to this Political (Wannabe) Theater, "Anonymous Political Discord" stops right at the line where Libel, and Slander begin...and in today's world, unless you're some Script Kiddy, with lots of Proxies and cutouts..you really are NOT as Anonymous as you think you are. But PLEASE...Prove me wrong, and Libel away, the only cost to me is the popcorn and beer.

Anonymity on the internet is a protected First Amendment right. To pierce anonymity, you need to show a judge that a violation of law was committed, with clear evidence, and that the right to identify the speaker outweighs the First Amendment right of anonymous speech.

Don't see how any of the above is a violation. As a candidate for public office, you become a public figure that limits any claim to libel. Which of the statements above "crossed the line" into illegal conduct? As far as I can see, none.

This kind of threat to shut down discussion is exactly why the First Amendment protects anonymous speech.

Both James Madison and Alexander Hamilton regularly used anonymous speech. I agree with Land of the Free, both you and the Board President should sit in on the high school American History class.

[Guest What's going on?]

Looks like the Davidson camp's strategy is "Ignore, stop posting, and this will go away".

I guess the new strategy is an improvement over beating up on the persons posting critical questions.

[Guest Guest]

Looks like the Davidson camp's strategy is "Ignore, stop posting, and this will go away".

I guess the new strategy is an improvement over beating up on the persons posting critical questions.

First, I'm not in the Davidson or any other camp but I posted several times because you or someone was making claims that the evidence does not support.

Second, the problem is not with the questions. It's with the insinuations and innuendos, which the evidence does not support. Since none of her attackers has said anything new since the opening post or shortly thereafter, or backed up anything they said there, there was no need to respond further.

Does anyone know when and where the candidate forum is? I think they should have more than one.

[Guest Fact Check]

First, I'm not in the Davidson or any other camp but I posted several times because you or someone was making claims that the evidence does not support.

Second, the problem is not with the questions. It's with the insinuations and innuendos, which the evidence does not support. Since none of her attackers has said anything new since the opening post or shortly thereafter, or backed up anything they said there, there was no need to respond further.

Does anyone know when and where the candidate forum is? I think they should have more than one.

It's not an insinuation or innuendo, although you want to label it that so you can dismiss the questions and not have Ms. Davidson them.

The following is fact, not innuendo:

Ms. Davidson is a member of a group of teachers that sought to use school children as ammunition in that group's negotiation of its labor contract.

You also say you're not a supporter of Davidson but that's just another way to defend her while trying to hide your obvious bias for her.

See you at the candidates' forum.

[Guest Guest]

It's not an insinuation or innuendo, although you want to label it that so you can dismiss the questions and not have Ms. Davidson them.

The following is fact, not innuendo:

Ms. Davidson is a member of a group of teachers that sought to use school children as ammunition in that group's negotiation of its labor contract.

You also say you're not a supporter of Davidson but that's just another way to defend her while trying to hide your obvious bias for her.

See you at the candidates' forum.

If you're serious about this post, then you don't understand what insinuation and innuendo are. Here's your statement: "Ms. Davidson is a member of a group of teachers that sought to use school children as ammunition in that group's negotiation of its labor contract."

The statement is hyperbole, overblown rhetoric: using "children as ammunition," come on. Aside from that, the insinuation and innuendo is to the effect that Davidson is personally responsible for what the Paterson teacher's union did. And you don't even know what they did. You took one statement completely out of context of what actually occurred.

And obviously, reason is not your strong suit. I've told you over and over, the question about what role she played in the Paterson labor dispute is a fair one. Ask her. No one here has suggested the question should be dismissed, or that the candidate should not answer it. You keep twisting things to such an extent that your claim bears no relation to the facts.

I am neither a Davidson supporter, nor a detractor. I just know an unreasoning hothead when I see one. You're being unfair, making accusations that the known facts do not support.

However, I do know about the damage the Five Stooges did to our school district. Your overblown rhetoric sounds very much like them.

[Guest Fact Check]

1. Definition of hyperbole: language that describes something as better or worse than it is. I exposed the facts only, which facts led to bullying attacks and being called "slime".

2. Definition of innuendo: a statement which indirectly suggests that someone has done something improper. I made the statements directly.

3. Definition of rhetoric: language that is intended to influence people. You got me, I used rhetoric.

Back to the question at hand. Using children as ammunition in contract negotiations is reprehensible. (That's my I opinion, but if you wish, you can call it rhetorical.) Ms. Davidson is a member of that teachers' union and she participated in pickets against her employer/Board of Education.

Since you're not good on the definitions of hyperbole and innuendo, am I right to assume you're a math teacher?

[Guest Paterson Teacher]

You consistently refer to a "teacher slowdown". In fact there was no SLOWDOWN. We were not advised NOT to do for our students. No respectable teacher would risk their students in that manner. We were asked to work within contractual times. Please get your facts straight. By the way, how did this post work out for you?