Our recommendation: Springboro voters...

Our recommendation: Springboro voters should say 'yes' the first time to school levies

There are 31948 comments on the Dayton Daily News story from Feb 5, 2008, titled Our recommendation: Springboro voters should say 'yes' the first time to school levies. In it, Dayton Daily News reports that:

Recommended local sites More... UD sports info, pictures and discussions Are you a UD sports fan? Whether you like basketball, volleyball, soccer, men's or women's teams -- Doesn't matter -- this site is for ... via Dayton Daily News

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Dayton Daily News.

Great News

Cincinnati, OH

#25417 Jun 27, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Should never be forever disregarded...however, should not be running around the district saying they are fiscal responsible. Circumstances happen, yes, unfortunate ones as well....but words have consequences......
Indeed, words have consequences!

In 2008, when former school superintendent, Mr. Baker, told the 2008 board members (Don Miller, Mike Kruse, William Thomsen,
Craig Colston, Diane Trifaro) that in addition to the school renewal levy, NEW TAXES were being demanded, or there would be consequences, holding parents hostage over things like busing and activity fees, inquiring minds starting asking questions, refusing to accept Mr. Baker's one-sided opinion of his false budget crisis, and just said NO to increased taxes, and yes to renewal levy with no new taxes. But, instead of respecting the will of the people who voted for responsible spending for education, while living within our means, our former superintendents, Mr. Baker and Mr. Lolli, continued bullying and badgering and emotionally blackmailing Springboro taxpayers for completed unnecessary increased school taxes to meet the teachers union's demands for more money.
Thank goodness Springboro parents, Mrs. Kohls, Mr. Rigano, and Mr. Petroni who "went running around the district" volunteering their time and expertise, educating their Springboro neighbors that there are TWO sides to every school levy request; and voters deserve to hear both sides: Fiscal responsibility VS Tax and Spend. Informed voters chose to believe the words of fiscal responsible education; And the consequences of those words resulted in the rejection of tax and spend words.
Actions speak louder than words; so Springboro taxpayers took action at the polls, repeating FIVE times the words NO NEW TAXES.
Words have consequences; It has now taken Springboro voters five failed levies and two school board elections to change the old OSBA indoctrination of tax and spend school district leaders to our new reform minded philosophy of fiscal responsibility.
Thank goodness we still have Springboro parents, Mrs. Kohls, Mr. Petroni, and Mr. Rigano (who are now BOE representatives) still out there running around, and investing hours of volunteer time in board committee meetings, Educating Springboro that children
first budgeting works.
Words have consequences! Action speaks louder than words!
Kelly Kohls is committed to ensuring that the children of the Springboro community receive an excellent education while keeping the costs of that education affordable, by carefully adhering to responsible spending!
Have you heard the great news?
It's Unanimous! School Board Adopts Children's First Budget!
Check out this website to learn why a Children's First Budget makes sense for teachers........
Please send this great news to everyone who cares about our school children and our community!
http://educatespringboro.wordpress.com/2013/0...
Really

Dayton, OH

#25418 Jun 27, 2013
Just Saulsome wrote:
<quoted text>
...
Springboro citizens, including our school students, are certainly educated enough to hear our founding fathers' "nod to God" as expressed in "The Constitution of the United States" .... its only keeper, the people.- George Washington, first President of our Great Nation!
...
So, why not lighthen up that burden of protecting our constitution
from being violated by those who are paying the fee required to attend the class.. with our hard earned money inscribed "in God we trust."
First, it is "In God We Trust" (all words capitalized, not just the "g" word).
Second, you of course realize that "In God We Trust" wasn't on our money until 1957?
It was made the US motto in 1956 replacing the unofficial motto: "E pluribus unum" or "Out of Many, One".
As far as God in the constitution consider the following taken from " http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html&q... ;
"It has often been seen on the Internet that to find God in the Constitution, all one has to do is read it, and see how often the Framers used the words "God," or "Creator," "Jesus," or "Lord." Except for one notable instance, however, none of these words ever appears in the Constitution, neither the original nor in any of the Amendments. The notable exception is found in the Signatory section, where the date is written thusly: "Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven". The use of the word "Lord" here is not a religious reference, however. This was a common way of expressing the date, in both religious and secular contexts. This lack of any these words does not mean that the Framers were not spiritual people, any more than the use of the word Lord means that they were. What this lack of these words is expositive of is not a love for or disdain for religion, but the feeling that the new government should not involve itself in matters of religion. In fact, the original Constitution bars any religious test to hold any federal office in the United States."
Don't forget the president who considered it "sacrilegious to put the name of God on money" was none other than Theodore Roosevelt (R).
Our founders knew what they were doing when they wrote the documents forming our country. Nothing should be "implied" just take the words as they were written and agreed to. They took great care in what was and was not included. To try and "fill in the blanks" or "find out what they mean" is an insult to our founding fathers.
I find it curious how some people take a 2,000 year old document, written in a different language, in a different country as literal gospel but say a document written 200 years ago in English in this country is up for interpretation.
Really??
parent

Cleveland, OH

#25419 Jun 27, 2013
The Next Day wrote:
First, I am a conservative and a Christian and don't particularly like unions though recognize they have a role in our society (perhaps with increased right to work laws, merit based pay, etc.). My guess, I am not that much different than many others in our area. But I have major problems with what 4/5's of the BOE is doing.
What about "separation of church and state" don't 4/5's of the BOE understand? Besides arguably being in violation of the BOE bylaw mentioned above, they are in violation of court-set precedents regarding this topic, they're only presenting their view of the constitution (why isn't there someone presenting the counter perspective that God didn't create or literally guide creation of the U.S. Constitution?), and in effect, are saying that the U.S. was only established for Christians. Remember, many of the Founding Fathers were not devout Christians. Some were, some weren't, some believed in a god but that man was in charge of his own fate - not given a defined fate by God, some believed in a hybrid of natural law and Christianity, etc. President Adams was even quoted as saying the U.S. was not founded on C
Also, what does this all mean for our neighbors and friends in Springboro who are not Christians? If you were them, wouldn't you feel less welcomed by what 4/5's of the BOE is trying to push?
I don't disagree with many of your comments. But as far as your belief that 4/5 of our board is "pushing their political belief system on our kids", why not apply this same standard to Springboro teachers? With full union support, Boro teachers go about liberalizing the minds of each and every one of Springboro's schoolchildren each and every school day of the year.

I have voted for and have supported Kelly, Jim and David on virtually every issue, especially their current position with the teachers, Maney, and the OEA.

By insisting the teachings of the Founding Fathers be brought into Springboro Schools, I believe Jim Rigano has his heart in the right place. I can state with 100% certainly that Jim Rigano has a solid understanding that the lion's share of this nation's original Founding Fathers came to these shores in order to escape either religious or political persecution in their respective Motherland.

Heated tooth-and-nail debates among our Founding Fathers were begun primarily by Thomas Jefferson, who could be looked upon as the first Ross Perot. These debates brought us the First Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees among other things freedom of the press, freedom of speech and FREEDOM TO PRACTICE THE RELIGION OF ONE'S CHOICE.

What Jim Rigano is trying to do is not in any way a violation of our respective First Amendment rights as outlined in the Bill of Rights. Jim Rigano isn't for the implementation of a social studies curriculum in violation of the separation of church and state.(I believe very strongly that in all public institutions there must be a VERY clear separation between church and state.)
Jim Rigano has a wonderful intention.

Jim Rigano is all about the updating of Springboro's social studies curriculum not to emphasize "religion of the Founding Fathers", but rather to highlight / illustrate how and why Jefferson and the rest of our Founding Fathers debated (D-E-B-A-T-E-D) about freedom of religion, freedom of the press, among many other very important, heated issues they were forced to make decisions on. Each one of the debates and votes of our Founding Fathers had a unique place in moulding the future of the United States of America. Every citizen American citizen, whether they're native-born, or not, should have a solid understanding W-H-Y they have the right to freedom of religion, etc. In a nutshell, I believe this is exactly what Jim Rigano is trying to accomplish. And I fully support him in doing so.
sheep

Springboro, OH

#25420 Jun 27, 2013
questions more questions wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you the one who keeps posting about the bankruptcy under a different screen name ? I still notice that nothing was actually answered in my response. Except for the question I asked about disregarding those who have filed bankruptcy or who have had businesses fail.
You agree unfortunate circumstances can happen, sometimes beyond the control of the individual. If we were all so smart and could have predicted the banking and housing collapse we would not be here on Topix or even living in Springboro (at least I wouldn't).Why? If we were so smart and did predict the collapse we would have begged and borrowed and then invested heavily in shorting the markets prior to the collapse and ended up rich beyond our wildest dreams. Yet here were are.
I agree words do have consequences,However I trust in subsequent actions to the utterances of the words more. Words matter but actions matter so much more. If someone campaigns that they will be fiscally responsible in the job , is elected and spends taxpayers money irresponsibly then we have a problem, their actions did not match up with their words. On the other hand if they run for office as being fiscally responsible and their actions in office show they are fiscally responsible, where is the disconnect you claim about words?
So actions matter more than words. The only question that needs to be answered is was the person in office true to their word of being fiscally responsible while executing the duties of the office.After all, she was elected to the school board not your home finance person.
So the actions matched up with the words as far as the elected position is concerned.
The rest is just standard operating procedure fodder from someone with a political agenda of whats commonly referred to as politics through personal destruction. Because there has been 3 years in office served since the bankruptcy and since there is no evidence of being fiscally irresponsible in office you attack the personal life from three years ago.
Being "fiscally responsible" is in the eye of the beholder. If you are fiscally responsible while destroying the civic pride and basic fabric of the community, then I'll take the alternative any day.
sheep

Springboro, OH

#25421 Jun 27, 2013
parent wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't disagree with many of your comments. But as far as your belief that 4/5 of our board is "pushing their political belief system on our kids", why not apply this same standard to Springboro teachers? With full union support, Boro teachers go about liberalizing the minds of each and every one of Springboro's schoolchildren each and every school day of the year.
I have voted for and have supported Kelly, Jim and David on virtually every issue, especially their current position with the teachers, Maney, and the OEA.
By insisting the teachings of the Founding Fathers be brought into Springboro Schools, I believe Jim Rigano has his heart in the right place. I can state with 100% certainly that Jim Rigano has a solid understanding that the lion's share of this nation's original Founding Fathers came to these shores in order to escape either religious or political persecution in their respective Motherland.
Heated tooth-and-nail debates among our Founding Fathers were begun primarily by Thomas Jefferson, who could be looked upon as the first Ross Perot. These debates brought us the First Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees among other things freedom of the press, freedom of speech and FREEDOM TO PRACTICE THE RELIGION OF ONE'S CHOICE.
What Jim Rigano is trying to do is not in any way a violation of our respective First Amendment rights as outlined in the Bill of Rights. Jim Rigano isn't for the implementation of a social studies curriculum in violation of the separation of church and state.(I believe very strongly that in all public institutions there must be a VERY clear separation between church and state.)
Jim Rigano has a wonderful intention.
Jim Rigano is all about the updating of Springboro's social studies curriculum not to emphasize "religion of the Founding Fathers", but rather to highlight / illustrate how and why Jefferson and the rest of our Founding Fathers debated (D-E-B-A-T-E-D) about freedom of religion, freedom of the press, among many other very important, heated issues they were forced to make decisions on. Each one of the debates and votes of our Founding Fathers had a unique place in moulding the future of the United States of America. Every citizen American citizen, whether they're native-born, or not, should have a solid understanding W-H-Y they have the right to freedom of religion, etc. In a nutshell, I believe this is exactly what Jim Rigano is trying to accomplish. And I fully support him in doing so.
How do you explain the two groups that the BOE are bringing in to "educate us" and our children about the Constitution then? They are religious based organizations. One of them, The National Center for Constitutional Studies (NCCS) is a conservative, religious-themed constitutionalist organization, founded by Latter-Day Saint political writer Cleon Skousen......
Get Real

Cincinnati, OH

#25422 Jun 27, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Being "fiscally responsible" is in the eye of the beholder. If you are fiscally responsible while destroying the civic pride and basic fabric of the community, then I'll take the alternative any day.
...you silly sheep! there you go again! trying to "bully the wool" over the eyes of the beholder....

Don't you know that responsible spenders are educated enough to know that being "fiscally responsible" is the dollar in the smart voters wallet, instead of in the local government's big Tax and Spend agenda. Just Say No to Increased Fire Levy Taxes!
Get Real

Cincinnati, OH

#25423 Jun 27, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you explain the two groups that the BOE are bringing in to "educate us" and our children about the Constitution then? They are religious based organizations. One of them, The National Center for Constitutional Studies (NCCS) is a conservative, religious-themed constitutionalist organization, founded by Latter-Day Saint political writer Cleon Skousen......
No explanation of our first amendment constitutional rights is necessary! Free speech explains itself as "free!"
That means freedom of speech for American citizens of all religious (or no religious) backgrounds. So, what's your
problem with Latter Day Saints?

The two groups are not coming in for the "establishment of religion" in the school building; and only those who choose to purchase the materials and attend the study will be "educated." Isn't this just exercising our first amendment constitutional "right of the people to peaceably assemble?"
Do you have a problem with these "two groups" (with whom you seem to disagree) having the right to come into the high school building to lead a study that is not approved by the narrow-minded social studies teacher Gail Dauber? Mrs. Dauber is employed in our taxpayer-funded high school building; but Mrs. Dauber doesn't OWN the high school building; and neither does she own the minds of Springboro citizens (including our school students and boro alumni).
So what disagreement do you have with our great freedoms enjoyed in this great nation by ALL American citizens, regardless of religious or non religious convictions?
Just Saulsome

Cincinnati, OH

#25424 Jun 27, 2013
Really wrote:
<quoted text>
First, it is "In God We Trust" (all words capitalized, not just the "g" word).
Second, you of course realize that "In God We Trust" wasn't on our money until 1957?
It was made the US motto in 1956 replacing the unofficial motto: "E pluribus unum" or "Out of Many, One".
As far as God in the constitution consider the following taken from " http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html&q... ;
"It has often been seen on the Internet that to find God in the Constitution, all one has to do is read it, and see how often the Framers used the words "God," or "Creator," "Jesus," or "Lord." Except for one notable instance, however, none of these words ever appears in the Constitution, neither the original nor in any of the Amendments. The notable exception is found in the Signatory section, where the date is written thusly: "Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven". The use of the word "Lord" here is not a religious reference, however. This was a common way of expressing the date, in both religious and secular contexts. This lack of any these words does not mean that the Framers were not spiritual people, any more than the use of the word Lord means that they were. What this lack of these words is expositive of is not a love for or disdain for religion, but the feeling that the new government should not involve itself in matters of religion. In fact, the original Constitution bars any religious test to hold any federal office in the United States."
Don't forget the president who considered it "sacrilegious to put the name of God on money" was none other than Theodore Roosevelt (R).
Our founders knew what they were doing when they wrote the documents forming our country. Nothing should be "implied" just take the words as they were written and agreed to. They took great care in what was and was not included. To try and "fill in the blanks" or "find out what they mean" is an insult to our founding fathers.
I find it curious how some people take a 2,000 year old document, written in a different language, in a different country as literal gospel but say a document written 200 years ago in English in this country is up for interpretation.
Really??
Oh Yes, Really! You Are The Most Wonderful Awesome Saulsome Of Them All With All Wonderful You Words Beginning With Capital Letters!

(Do You Feel Exalted Now?)
sheep

Springboro, OH

#25425 Jun 27, 2013
Get Real wrote:
<quoted text>
No explanation of our first amendment constitutional rights is necessary! Free speech explains itself as "free!"
That means freedom of speech for American citizens of all religious (or no religious) backgrounds. So, what's your
problem with Latter Day Saints?
The two groups are not coming in for the "establishment of religion" in the school building; and only those who choose to purchase the materials and attend the study will be "educated." Isn't this just exercising our first amendment constitutional "right of the people to peaceably assemble?"
Do you have a problem with these "two groups" (with whom you seem to disagree) having the right to come into the high school building to lead a study that is not approved by the narrow-minded social studies teacher Gail Dauber? Mrs. Dauber is employed in our taxpayer-funded high school building; but Mrs. Dauber doesn't OWN the high school building; and neither does she own the minds of Springboro citizens (including our school students and boro alumni).
So what disagreement do you have with our great freedoms enjoyed in this great nation by ALL American citizens, regardless of religious or non religious convictions?
Again, no one reads on this blog!! Just go off on these tangents like a bunch of crazy people.... Don't really have a problem at all with these groups coming in, as long as the "other side" is allowed to come in as well. We are trying to educate critical thinkers, right? How can you do that when only one side is presented???????
Just Saulsome

Cincinnati, OH

#25426 Jun 27, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, no one reads on this blog!! Just go off on these tangents like a bunch of crazy people.... Don't really have a problem at all with these groups coming in, as long as the "other side" is allowed to come in as well. We are trying to educate critical thinkers, right? How can you do that when only one side is presented???????
You silly sheep! The one-sided other side occupies Springboro High School's Social Studies Department! And where's the rule that says "the other side" can't enroll in the class, pay their fees, and get on with their "critical thinking....right???????

You will have to ask our one-sided only, my way, no other way
expert, Gail Dauber. Mrs. Dauber is our Springboro High School Social Studies "head of the class bully."
As Springboro citizens have seen recently in public school board meetings, Mrs. Dauber does know how to "do it all her way" by presenting only one side to our students who then throw up in our faces the narrow minded one sided view of "God has no place in this country."
questions more questions

Dayton, OH

#25427 Jun 27, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Being "fiscally responsible" is in the eye of the beholder. If you are fiscally responsible while destroying the civic pride and basic fabric of the community, then I'll take the alternative any day.
Are you the same person who has posted many many times complaining about others deflecting and avoiding answering the actual questions that were asked? Yet here you are moving the goal posts once again to suit your need to avoid answering and continuing to engage in politics of destruction. I am still awaiting your response to the outrageous claims of the 900k pawned off on the taxpayers. You avoided all of that discussion and moved on to some comment about how words have meanings and a rant trying to claim a personal finance problem somehow interfered with your public responsibilities.
I took the time to answer you and surprise surprise surprise you want to now jump the rail to other issues such as destroying the civic pride and the basic fabric of the community.

My first reaction (after laughing very hard), was that I have seen your type of poster on every message board I have ever been on throughout the years. Some would justifiably call you a troll, others a paid or volunteer political operative with an axe to grind. Both would be correct.

The pattern is the same. 1.Make an outrageous claim or personal attack 2. get called on it. 3 move the goalposts to somewhere else after being called on your outrageous claims. 4 repeat.

Lets take your latest claim to the extreme. Somehow fiscal responsibility contrary to your earlier proclamation is not now nor was it ever your real concern. By your own admission now everything else you have posted was just garbage. Your real concern now is civic pride and the basic fabric of the community.

So a community that has voted down so many levies in the past is now having its civic pride and fabric destroyed by fiscal responsibility? Are you serious?

And you post you support the alternative. So do you support fiscal irresponsibility?

Rather than going through the ordeal of you moving the goalposts once again,(while entertaining for a short time period it does get tiresome) lets just put the cards on the table.

Why don't you at least be honest and state your real purpose? You as an individual or the group you are supporting/representing want a new board that will return to the days of old. Spending all of the money you can wring out of the taxpayers pockets and putting the same old guard back into positions. Sorry in the eyes of this beholder the old ways will not work in the new economy.So be honest about what your true objective is and admit you will twist, slam, slander, attack, duck,dodge, create mountains out of molehills, and do whatever it takes to obtain your goal.
questions more questions

Dayton, OH

#25428 Jun 27, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, no one reads on this blog!! Just go off on these tangents like a bunch of crazy people.... Don't really have a problem at all with these groups coming in, as long as the "other side" is allowed to come in as well. We are trying to educate critical thinkers, right? How can you do that when only one side is presented???????
Why are you posing if no one reads it?
if you want another group to come in with a purely secular take on the constitution fine. Rent the facilities and put on the seminar. Problem solved. Now if they deny you access to the facility then you have a legitimate concern. if they deny you admission there is a problem. molehills to mountains here we go again.
Boro Alumni

Tipp City, OH

#25429 Jun 27, 2013
Just Saulsome wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh Yes, Really! You Are The Most Wonderful Awesome Saulsome Of Them All With All Wonderful You Words Beginning With Capital Letters!
(Do You Feel Exalted Now?)
I come to you with facts, you come back with gibberish. The capital letters were put that way by our legislature. Ask them if they feel exalted.

Really??
parent

Cleveland, OH

#25430 Jun 27, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you explain the two groups that the BOE are bringing in to "educate us" and our children about the Constitution then? They are religious based organizations. One of them, The National Center for Constitutional Studies (NCCS) is a conservative, religious-themed constitutionalist organization, founded by Latter-Day Saint political writer Cleon Skousen......
This is a very good question.
In order to gain another perspective of this, let me ask a few probing questions.

What entity, using the most accurate historical curriculum, would be best qualified and equipped to train Springboro's social studies teachers how to teach our Founding Fathers' debates? Is there a way that Springboro teachers can instruct these Founding Father debates unbiasedly from their historical context, thus circumventing a certain amount of political / religious friction?

What would a Springboro social studies teacher do these days if any given student were to raise their hand and want to discuss First Amendments rights including Freedom of Religion? If your logic were to hold true, students wouldn't even be allowed to bring up the subject of religion in a public school. So, do you believe questions such as this would actually be censored by any of our social studies teachers?
Truth Be Told

Cincinnati, OH

#25431 Jun 27, 2013
questions more questions wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you posing if no one reads it?
if you want another group to come in with a purely secular take on the constitution fine. Rent the facilities and put on the seminar. Problem solved. Now if they deny you access to the facility then you have a legitimate concern. if they deny you admission there is a problem. molehills to mountains here we go again.
The truth has finally been revealed!
All this pious blabbering about separation between church and state being made by the opposition to the Constitution study is all about the money! It appears that some of our school comunity members feel that there should only be a SHS Union Teacher in the classromm of the community-wide study; so that the SHS Union Teacher from the Social Studies department, could be paid the salary for teaching summer school. And that's what all the fuss is about.
Rigano

Englewood, OH

#25432 Jun 27, 2013
Is it just me, or does Jim Rigano seem more and more like a giant douchebag everytime he opens his mouth for the evening news...
questions more questions

Dayton, OH

#25433 Jun 27, 2013
Truth Be Told wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth has finally been revealed!
All this pious blabbering about separation between church and state being made by the opposition to the Constitution study is all about the money! It appears that some of our school comunity members feel that there should only be a SHS Union Teacher in the classromm of the community-wide study; so that the SHS Union Teacher from the Social Studies department, could be paid the salary for teaching summer school. And that's what all the fuss is about.
hmm is this a different tactic or has someone gone completely off the reservation tonight?
surely you did not draw any of those conclusions from my post. In fact I never addressed any of the items you brought up. All I did was tell the whiners that if they want a different view on the constitution taught then they should rent the building and put on their own seminar. I never once ventured into the realm of first amendment or the misinterpretation of the separation of church and state that quite frankly is misunderstood quite often. Not once did I mention paying a teacher.
So I must ask where did your post come from? Remember you actually quoted my post which was:

"Why are you posing (should have been posting) if no one reads it? if you want another group to come in with a purely secular take on the constitution fine. Rent the facilities and put on the seminar. Problem solved. Now if they deny you access to the facility then you have a legitimate concern. if they deny you admission there is a problem. molehills to mountains here we go again. "

Or did you not realize you could reply without quoting someones post.Just wondering.
Great Pride

Charlotte, NC

#25434 Jun 28, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Being "fiscally responsible" is in the eye of the beholder. If you are fiscally responsible while destroying the civic pride and basic fabric of the community, then I'll take the alternative any day.
I take great pride in the fact that 80% of our kids in the 7th and 8th grade can't pass a basic Ohio Achievement Assesent test, 80% of our kids getting D's and F's is a cause for celebration of the effectiveness of our school system.
Sheep are scared

Harrison, TN

#25435 Jun 28, 2013
sheep wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you explain the two groups that the BOE are bringing in to "educate us" and our children about the Constitution then? They are religious based organizations. One of them, The National Center for Constitutional Studies (NCCS) is a conservative, religious-themed constitutionalist organization, founded by Latter-Day Saint political writer Cleon Skousen......
Sheep get scared might easy, provide them with a different perspective and watch their heads spin.
Just Watching

Harrison, TN

#25436 Jun 28, 2013
2000 plus kids are not getting the education the taxpayers are currently funding.

Too many teachers are spending time abrogating their teaching responsibilities for more trendy modes of education.

If the children can learn watching videos presented by a teacher why do we need a high paid teacher in the classroom?

If group worksheets can help our children teach themselves why do we need a high paid teacher in the classroom?

If Hollywood movies that require 3 class periods can replace actual teacher instruction, why do we need high paid teachers in the classroom?

If we can go five years in the junior high with 80% of the kids failing the OAA basic math tests, how much worse would a certified temporary teacher be?

If we are really concerned about the children first, why did a junior high principal with 80% of her students failing basic math on the OAA tests for five years think reducing actual teacher instruction by 18 days per school year would help?( it didn't 80% still got a D or F on the OAA test)

2000 plus children are not getting the education the taxpayers are currently funding, why would anyone think paying more to the same people increase our children's learning

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Springboro Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Baby bump on gabrielle enright 2 hr Waynedale 3
DENNIS GANNON "VOTE NO ON LEVIES" -- Fairborn s... (Mar '11) 2 hr Waynedale 7
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 19 hr Big city 20,609
To raise Abortion Nut awareness... Fri Literature Lover 1
Mart Crowe (May '12) Fri Lesson learned 72
Cop thinks... Fri Fan of Leon The Man 3
Oakwood Swimmer Brock Turner (May '15) Fri I h8 rapists 11

Springboro Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Springboro Mortgages