LaClair in News Again

[Guest Guest]

The article is actually complimentary. Where does it say he is a troublemaker?

The student provocateur

Posted by Star-Ledger editorial board April 11, 2008 10:30PM

Matthew LaClair is a high school troublemaker. This is a good thing.

LaClair, a student in Kearny, champions positions that upset many in his school and community. He first came to public attention two years ago when his complaints got a popular teacher disciplined for preaching religion when the educator should have been discussing history.

Now LaClair has forced publisher Houghton Mifflin to consider revising a textbook on government because of passages on topics such as school prayer and global warming that appear biased or just outright factually wrong. LaClair's effort has received backing from no less than James Hansen, the greenhouse gas expert and director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Agree or disagree with LaClair's "liberal" leanings, his willingness to shake things up is admirable. Challenging questionable actions or positions, aiming to fix things that seem incorrect or wrong, is upsetting to the status quo. But it is what democracy, with a small "d," is all about.

And it is a worthy, practical lesson in history and government.

The point is, don't take everything at face value. Read, think and evaluate - which you did.

[Guest Guest]

OK - THANK YOU !

Oops! Sorry! I was playing with the font. I didn't mean to yell.

[Guest Guest]

Matthew has been on several live radio shows with this story the past few days. This evening at 8:20 p.m., he was on conservative talk-show host Lars Larson's radio show nationwide. Matt was very impressive.

Here's a partial transcript from the Lars Larson show, April 10, 2008. This is from the call-in segment after Matthew's appearance.

"Tommy (guest): It was truly, truly gratifying to hear a young man like him be able to articulate himself so well, to be able to have a discussion, whether he agreed with you or not, in a very mature-like manner, a very well-informed manner, could back up what he was saying . . . To hear that from a high school student-age individual is I think a phenomenal thing.

"Lars Larson: I was very impressed by him, as well, Tommy, and that’s why one of the reasons that we’ll probably invite him back when the opportunity you know presents itself, to say, hey, let’s get the young man back on, Mr. LaClair, and see what he has to say about this. You’re right, he was very impressive."

Lars Larson is far right. http://www.larslarson.com/

How do you wingnuts explain this?

[Bryan]

Bryan: Stop watching Fox Noise and reading WorldNutDaily. What news reports say he was exaggerating?

Billydee4, stop looking for black helicopters where there are none.

The information in the reporting (in the form of quotations from young LaClair) indicate the exaggeration. It was not given as the observation or opinion of the reporter. You can shut off the radar system and go to sleep without worrying.

[Guest 2smart4u]

http://www.njhn.org/genequeval_photos.html

That's the real Queval. I referred to the name given to one of Paul's multiple personalities.

[Guest Puppet to the pulpet]

Matthew has been on several live radio shows with this story the past few days. This evening at 8:20 p.m., he was on conservative talk-show host Lars Larson's radio show nationwide. Matt was very impressive.

This is from the April 10 New York Times:

18.April 10th,

2008

1:06 pm I’m Matt’s dad. I want to thank Mr. Revkin for picking this up. It’s an important story because a widely used text was misused for political purposes.

To understand the issue, you must read the section of the text on global warming. The authors set the tone by stating that not all environmental issues are equally worthy of support, take the case of global warming.

Our problem with the text is not merely that it is one-sided, which it is, but that it is dismissive of most of the world’s scientific community. The authors call scientists who acknowledge global warming “activist scientists,” which is a cheap shot, and certainly dismissive. They argue, with virtually no support, that politics drive the environmental movement, but fail to mention how the oil companies, the timber industry and other interests drive these politics from the opposite side. If the authors had acknowledged that numerous international organizations agree, as bodies, that global warming is a major, human-caused problem, but that there are dissenters, that would have been acceptable.

However, that is not what they did. The authors wrote this section of the text to support a political agenda, and in so doing they turned it into a tool of indoctrination.

While not Mr. Revkin’s main interest, the section on school prayer is even less defensible. The authors state in three separate places that the Supreme Court will not allow students to pray in school. That statement is false and utterly indefensible. The Supreme Court has never said that or anything close to that.

The irony is that if George Bush’s former head of the faith-based initiative wants to make the public schools more friendly to student prayer, he may have shot himself in the foot. If students take his text seriously, some may decide not to pray because these authors wrote that they are not allowed.

Most of the text is fine, as several writers here have observed. However, one gets the sense that these authors lost sight of their purposes, in more ways than one. That is why we believe this subject merits attention, and why I thank Mr. Revkin for picking this up.

— Posted by Paul LaClair

As anyone with half a brain that reads Paul’s' post in the New York Times, this is just another one of father's rants being broadcasted out through the mouthpiece that we all know as Matthew LaClair. Since everyone knows of Mr. LaClairs occupation as a lawyer, comments such as "several writers here have observed" and "Our problem with the text". Indirectly he is still pursuing the religion in schools with just a slight twist. Nice try.

[Guest *billydee4*]

Billydee4, stop looking for black helicopters where there are none.

The information in the reporting (in the form of quotations from young LaClair) indicate the exaggeration. It was not given as the observation or opinion of the reporter. You can shut off the radar system and go to sleep without worrying.

Sorry for making a comment. I promised myself I would not get into discussions with you and your ilk.

[Guest Guest]

That's the real Queval. I referred to the name given to one of Paul's multiple personalities.

Feel free to contact Queval, and he'll be happy to tell you that yes, it's really him on the forum.

Idiot.

[Guest Less than Loud]

Oops! Sorry! I was playing with the font. I didn't mean to yell.

- s'right

[Guest Guest]

This is from the April 10 New York Times:

18.April 10th,

2008

1:06 pm I’m Matt’s dad. I want to thank Mr. Revkin for picking this up. It’s an important story because a widely used text was misused for political purposes.

To understand the issue, you must read the section of the text on global warming. The authors set the tone by stating that not all environmental issues are equally worthy of support, take the case of global warming.

Our problem with the text is not merely that it is one-sided, which it is, but that it is dismissive of most of the world’s scientific community. The authors call scientists who acknowledge global warming “activist scientists,” which is a cheap shot, and certainly dismissive. They argue, with virtually no support, that politics drive the environmental movement, but fail to mention how the oil companies, the timber industry and other interests drive these politics from the opposite side. If the authors had acknowledged that numerous international organizations agree, as bodies, that global warming is a major, human-caused problem, but that there are dissenters, that would have been acceptable.

However, that is not what they did. The authors wrote this section of the text to support a political agenda, and in so doing they turned it into a tool of indoctrination.

While not Mr. Revkin’s main interest, the section on school prayer is even less defensible. The authors state in three separate places that the Supreme Court will not allow students to pray in school. That statement is false and utterly indefensible. The Supreme Court has never said that or anything close to that.

The irony is that if George Bush’s former head of the faith-based initiative wants to make the public schools more friendly to student prayer, he may have shot himself in the foot. If students take his text seriously, some may decide not to pray because these authors wrote that they are not allowed.

Most of the text is fine, as several writers here have observed. However, one gets the sense that these authors lost sight of their purposes, in more ways than one. That is why we believe this subject merits attention, and why I thank Mr. Revkin for picking this up.

— Posted by Paul LaClair

As anyone with half a brain that reads Paul’s' post in the New York Times, this is just another one of father's rants being broadcasted out through the mouthpiece that we all know as Matthew LaClair. Since everyone knows of Mr. LaClairs occupation as a lawyer, comments such as "several writers here have observed" and "Our problem with the text". Indirectly he is still pursuing the religion in schools with just a slight twist. Nice try.

Nice try, I'll say. Matt makes national news criticizing a book. You try it.

If you don't like what dad says, then criticize it, but do it on the merits and with some intelligence. Of course he's still pursuing what he believes in. Why not?

[Bryan]

Nice try, I'll say. Matt makes national news criticizing a book. You try it.

Meh. Rigged game, that. Young LaClair already had a certain degree of celebrity along with a de facto PR department (Daddy and CFI). You think that CFI just whipped up their report on the textbook the same day that Matthew spoke up?

If you don't like what dad says, then criticize it, but do it on the merits and with some intelligence. Of course he's still pursuing what he believes in. Why not?

Agreed. Both have made plenty enough mistake(s) that personal attacks need not enter into the discussion. The elder's advocacy of that ludicrous targeted oil boycott was just one example. As for Matthew, the exaggerations in his letter to the school administrators serves as a handy example ("There are a number of terrible things he has said and done in this high school").

[Guest Paul]

A quick question after reading the article - it seems the "global warming issue" was addressed in a new edition of the book even prior to Matthew's complaints. Any idea as to why the newer edition is not in the classroom, i.e., was it unavailable or is it a budget thing (remember kiddies, new books cost money).

I think it's odd that these are college textbooks. Maybe times have changed, but most of the books I had to read in college slanted much more to the left. Also, even though they're referred to as "college" textbooks - do we know where else these text are used outside of Kearny (if anywhere)? I would be interested to know which "colleges" are actually using the text.

Anyway, thanks to Matthew for raising the issue. Let the debate begin.

We've been trying to find out when the eleventh edition came out. It's still not available on Amazon.com. The only place we can find it being available is on Houghton-Mifflin's own site. We don't know when they made it available.

[Bryan]

We've been trying to find out when the eleventh edition came out.

You're helping Matthew with his research?

It's still not available on Amazon.com. The only place we can find it being available is on Houghton-Mifflin's own site. We don't know when they made it available.

Matthew will probably have that figured out later this week.

[Guest Guest]

Kearny student sees bias in high school textbook

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...,0,247646.story

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...0,5311132.story

Wilson's response is very defensive, not to mention much of it isn't true. The CFI report quotes the text verbatim.

[Guest *dgas*]

Kearny student sees bias in high school textbook

I don't think that it is any of his business. Maybe he shhould run for the Board of Ed although I would like to see the example he sets when he refuses to stand for the flag salute........................He will never have the respect of any American till he does

[Guest Guest]

I don't think that it is any of his business. Maybe he shhould run for the Board of Ed although I would like to see the example he sets when he refuses to stand for the flag salute........................He will never have the respect of any American till he does

Oh, but he does. In the eyes of thinking Americans, he is a hero.

I don't see how you can claim to stand for American values when you insist that the quality of education is none of his business.

[Guest Guest]

I don't think that it is any of his business.

It is the business of any good American to say something when they see something wrong, especially when it's affecting our children.

Maybe he shhould run for the Board of Ed although I would like to see the example he sets when he refuses to stand for the flag salute........................He will never have the respect of any American till he does

In case you haven't noticed, Matthew has won worldwide acclaim and respect--it's only a bunch of fools in Kearny who have been defending Mr. P. despite all the wrong he's done that don't respect him. Outside of the town, you're hard-pressed to find someone who's written something negative about his actions in exposing his preacher teacher.

[Guest GUEST]

It is the business of any good American to say something when they see something wrong, especially when it's affecting our children.

In case you haven't noticed, Matthew has won worldwide acclaim and respect--it's only a bunch of fools in Kearny who have been defending Mr. P. despite all the wrong he's done that don't respect him. Outside of the town, you're hard-pressed to find someone who's written something negative about his actions in exposing his preacher teacher.

I'm sure Matthew is very popular in places like Iran, Syria and North Korea, they wouldn't stand for our

pledge of allegiance either.

[Guest Guest]

I'm sure Matthew is very popular in places like Iran, Syria and North Korea, they wouldn't stand for our

pledge of allegiance either.

You have it completely wrong. Places like that would put Matthew in prison or kill him. The question for you is, do you want to be like them?

[Guest Guest]

I'm sure Matthew is very popular in places like Iran, Syria and North Korea, they wouldn't stand for our

pledge of allegiance either.

I'm sure you're an idiot. It's like saying "I'm sure Leonardo Da Vinci would be popular with Hitler, he painted too."

Simpleton.

[Bryan]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...,0,247646.story

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...0,5311132.story

Wilson's response is very defensive, not to mention much of it isn't true. The CFI report quotes the text verbatim.

The CFI report quotes very little of the text, often employing ellipses. Which parts of Wilson's response are not true, LaGuest?

[Guest Guest]

The CFI report quotes very little of the text, often employing ellipses. Which parts of Wilson's response are not true, LaGuest?

For one thing, Wilson falsely suggests that the only problematic statement about school prayer has been removed. He won't even admit that it's false, which it is. If you read the CFI report, there are two others.

CFI did make a mistake, though. There is actually a fourth false statement on school prayer. If you look at page 86 of the textbook, which everyone in Matthew's class is using, you will see the following statement: "The Supreme Court has ruled that children cannot pray in public schools." How do you defend that?

[Guest Guest]

Yeah, this generation is doing a terific job of tearing down everything that is morally responsible. The kids at KHS can't walk the halls without bad language, filthy language, hanging all over each other while they are half dressed. Not the time or the place kids. A lot of students don't even no how to interact with people, say a simple hello. They are that shallow. This generation better get their act together or when they graduate they will be fired for inappropriate behavior in the work place.

[Guest Guest]

The kids at KHS can't walk the halls without bad language, filthy language,

Wow, bad AND filthy language?

Humans and women?

Insects and ants?

Food and cheese?

Just poking fun.

[Guest Bob]

This is hilarious. I wonder if young LaClair will be able to detect the bias in his college textbooks.

I doubt it. For the most part that bias will agree with his own knowledge and as such will be fine.

He's giving a civics lesson in whining.

Bryan is giving a lesson about hypocrisy, whining about perceived whiners over a topic he agrees might actually have merit.

Bryan is just about silly enough to fill in for Carlton Tucker or Glen Beck.