[Vision2020] Re: Swan Song

[Ed]

This in an inferior reproduction of the email just sent that was 
unfortunately lost in cyberspace.

Andreas wrote: "Ed doesn't even feel he has the ethical responsibility to 
release those records, and -- as long as he doesn't -- he's a rank coward 
and a litigious ideological bully. So, I'm calling you out, Ed. Put up or 
shut up, now that your fifteen minutes of fame are over. Release your 
records or go home."

Are you guys a bunch of idiots?

Well, ACS, call me as you will. If you're truly serious, have your buddy, 
Joan, Google me up, I'm listed, come on over and we'll see who the coward 
is.

Concerning my 15 minutes of fame. I never wanted or sought fame, I simply 
wanted justice. For those otherwise intelligent people on this list serve: 
who was it that introduced my issue concerning WSU on this forum? Was it me? 
Okay. Did I seek fame or shop/promote my case? That allegation is ludicrous.

Further, if it was fame I sought, I would have done all of the radio 
interviews requested: I turned down some huge names. Additionally, I only 
accepted about 5% of the invitations for any interview whatsoever. If fame 
was my driving force, I would have accepted pro bono invitations to sue. The 
only organization I shopped was FIRE; guilty as charged. I will admit that a 
lady friend and I visited some blogs (both right and left-wing) - and 
replied to some heated posts; that's it, no promotions. My only actions were 
reactions.

As far as releasing my records to a pack of hungry wolves (no pun intended 
Jackie); are you crazy? Both FIRE and WSU have access to them. If they weren't 
proof that my civil rights/liberties had been infringed upon, WSU would 
never have backed down-and they did it in record time.

I will admit that, however, these records reveal WSU faculty and their 
concerns about my alleged racist, sexist, and homophobic tendencies, and 
that these views could spill over into a classroom of children.  But, not 
conceding this is the case, possessing an opinion is my right as a citizen 
(right, Sunil?). Would I take these hot-button political views and throw 
them at impressionable children? Heck no. Are you crazy? As a caveat, the 
racist and sexist allegations are 100% off base (using the word "colored" 
was to get you folks worked up); the homophobic allegation, although I 
disagree with the oxymoronic term, is 99% false. But, I won't go into my 
views about that sort of deviance now.

Fact is, my practicum experience saw me in a classroom that was 
overwhelmingly minority (85%). And, the parents of these children run the 
gamut from single, married, a variety of religions, and many other diverse 
categories. The evaluation of my teaching experience was superior to 
outstanding; in the area of diversity and multicultural techniques, 
considerations, I received an outstanding. But, why wouldn't I? I excel at 
everything I attempt--nearly. To excel at what you love is icing on the 
cake. Children are innocent. They deserve an equal and equitable education, 
despite what I, or anyone, might think about their diverse status. 
Introducing controversial political topics into a classroom is simply bad 
teaching. But, worse, it's not fair to the children. Just recently, they 
invited me back into their classroom, threw a party for me, they each gave 
me a handmade caricature of themselves, and they each read letter of 
thanks/appreciation to me for being in their class, giving of my time, and 
teaching them what I knew. This, my lads, is part of the reason I want to 
teach. This was a rewarding an emotional experience for all involved.

Admittedly, my views are traditional and very conservative.this I freely and 
proudly admit.

When the dust had settled, if WSU was right (thus, making me wrong), why 
would they change the dispositions evaluation form--into something 
constitutional? This new form can be viewed on line; the old one cannot. 
Expecting me to endorse social justice and other leftist ideology, as a 
prerequisite for gradation, is ludicrous and unconstitutional. The issue was 
free speech, no more, no less.

Are any of you here without sin? Hmmmm? Okay. Did I, by some stretch of an 
imagination, deceive as to my true identity on the Internet? Perhaps? Have 
any of you ever deceived? Taro? Or is it Melynda via a remailer in Japan? 
Anyway, I couldn't care less. I repent on a regular basis-just in case. 
However, being a member/believer of a holiness church (and not a 5-point 
Calvinist), I strive for righteousness in everything I do, say, or think.

The very nature of this group lends to temptation and a strain on my 
faith-and that, folks, is worth nothing in this world.

I have many ties to your community. And I hope that this group, wreaking of 
a liberal/secular-progressive mindset, has no bearing on the vision or 
future of Moscow. You are a minority and I have faith that logic and sanity 
will prevail.

Again, my original post was lost in cyberspace; and defending something that 
shouldn't require a defense is a waste of time-so, needless to say, and I 
apologize, this is slightly unorganized. I had also prepared a rebuttal to 
Joan's filthy, libelous, Ratherish attack, but posted it to my blog 
instead-where readers of her filth will see it if they choose to click her 
links. I will discuss her illegal activity with her editors at a later time.

So, this is it. I am unsubscribing for the final time. The nature if this 
forum is not worth my time or energy. But, faith is not lost, as posts 
exhibiting commonsense and objective rationale, in addition to those by Tony 
and Dick, have surfaced lately.

Peace in Christ,

--Ed 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060521/424e6ab2/attachment.htm