Grading Texas

The issue of not standing for the Pledge of Allegiance as a form of political protest provokes a lot of controversy. Many Americans, including many veterans, are offended, and that is understandable. The president can tweet his outrage, but educators must follow the law. And the law gives every American, including students as well as NFL players, the right not to stand for the pledge.

If students want to sit quietly during the pledge or kneel on the sidelines of the football field while the national anthem is being played, teachers and coaches should leave them alone. And if their school administration has a policy that denies those rights, they should demand that their school board change it.

I bring up this issue for two reasons. First, it is wrong for schools to deny the constitutional rights of any student. And, secondly, if they do they may very well find themselves wasting taxpayer dollars defending against lawsuits they never should have invited and will eventually lose. See the story linked at the end of this post.

The U.S. Supreme Court in a case from West Virginia ruled more than 70 years ago – in the middle of World War II — that requiring students in public schools to salute the flag or recite the pledge was a violation of their First Amendment rights.

American soldiers were dying then to defend those First Amendment rights, and many more have died since. Many Americans, especially veterans and their families, understandly are upset or enraged by what they see as disrespect for the flag. But the rights that veterans served and died to defend included the right of all Americans to peacefully protest by taking a classroom seat during the pledge or a knee during the anthem.

I always recite the pledge and stand for the anthem. But I am a white male who hasn’t experienced a history of the prejudicial behavior that some flag protesters, their families, friends or communities have experienced or may still be living through.

You don’t have to agree with the flag protesters, but as long as they are acting peacefully, respect their right to do so and leave them alone.

2 Texas students sue schools to freely protest the pledge

Private donors at the University of North Texas had every right to recruit Donald Trump Jr. to deliver a speech this week to raise money for university scholarships. They had every right to pay the president’s son $100,000 for his time, even though that probably is a lot more than most students will realize from any scholarship.

The audience also had every right to listen to the confused rhetoric that Trump Jr. dumped on them. If they believed him, which many apparently did, that’s a shame. But free speech carries with it the right to be underinformed, misinformed and noninformed, and Trump Jr. carried on the family tradition.

Here are some excerpts as reported in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram story linked below.

Trump Jr. accused some universities of becoming “captive to political hatreds” and said they had turned “traditional values” into “hate speech.” In the view of some campus leaders, he said: “Hate speech is anything that says America is a good country and our founders were great people, that we need borders. Hate speech is anything faithful to the moral teaching of the Bible.”

He said not a word – if so, it wasn’t reported – about the real hate speech spewed by white supremacists and neo-Nazis at the deadly white supremacy march in Charlottesville, Va., or his father’s attempt to equate their hatred with the actions of peaceful civil rights counter-demonstrators. He said not a word about how white supremacists have been emboldened by his father’s rise to the White House.

And he said not a word about the juvenile-style of hate-mongering that his father regularly tweets at the slightest provocation or perceived insult to the thin presidential skin.

Trump Jr. described himself and his father as “nationalists,” while claiming that many people are confused at the meaning of American nationalism. Discrimination on the basis of race, gender or class, he said, is “contrary to the ideas of nationalism.”

He apparently said nothing though about discrimination on the basis of religion, which, in Trump’s “nationalistic” view, must justify the ban on immigrants from many Muslim-majority countries.

Trump Jr. said when all countries are governed by nationalist principles, “they’ll act in the best interest of their people. That means they are less likely to engage in foreign wars.”

I guess he forgot about the nationalist extremists who started World Wars I and II. Like it or not, we live in a world of international relationships that can’t be oversimplified by nationalistic rhetoric.

This, incidentally, is the same Trump son who eagerly attended a meeting during the presidential campaign with a Russian lawyer who promised “dirt” on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Not surprisingly, he didn’t address the pending investigations into whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian attempts to interfere in the U.S. election.

Trump Jr. scolds universities during UNT speech, a fundraiser for scholarships

Despite all his ill-informed hyperbole, President Trump’s knowledge about the lives and concerns of everyday Americans, including young school teachers and other college graduates, is hugely deficient. I don’t think he comprehends, for example, what it means to be saddled for years with student debt.

He never had any. So he apparently doesn’t care if millions of other Americans do. If the president did care, he and Betsy DeVos, his education secretary who is equally out of touch with the needs of the middle class, wouldn’t be trying to end a college loan forgiveness program that is a lifeline for more than 600,000 teachers, firefighters, law enforcement officers and other public-service employees.

The Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, created 10 years ago, forgives large portions of college loans for graduates who take public service jobs and make loan payments on time for a required number of years.

The National Education Association story linked below cites the example of Greg Cechak, a 31-year-old teacher in Pennsylvania who is married to another teacher and owes about $80,000 for his state university education. Under the program, Cechak will see much of his debt erased after making 10 years of monthly payments on time.

According to the article, the average student loan borrower in the U.S. has more than $30,000 in student debt after graduating from college. Some graduates with advanced degrees have more than $100,000.

This is a major challenge for teachers and other public employees on modest salaries who perform jobs that are essential to our country’s future. They deserve and have earned a break on their loan repayments, and that is why the loan program was created.

If the program is axed, many of these teachers fear they will be forced for economic reasons to leave the classroom, a consequence that apparently is of no concern to Trump and his anti-public education partner.

NEA has joined a bipartisan congressional effort to save the loan forgiveness program. This story includes a link on how to take action by contacting your own members of Congress.

http://educationvotes.nea.org/2017/10/04/public-service-loan-forgiveness-thrust-peril-trump-devos-budget/

Let us count the titles emanating from the West Wing: Tweeter-in-chief, bully-in-chief, liar-in-chief, pouter-in-chief, narcissist-in-chief, moron-in-chief. Outrageous and demeaning.

Commander-in-chief. Terrifying.

Role-model-in-chief? No way. And that is shameful.

There was a time when just about any school teacher would have been overjoyed at the prospect of the president of the United States – of either party — visiting his or her classroom or campus. Maybe not so much anymore.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/10/us/politics/trump-corker-feud-tweet-liddle-bob.html?emc=edit_th_20171011&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=72943954