|
|
Post by bob on Jan 11, 2007 13:30:23 GMT -6
Wow, that is pretty interesting.
Why would he change his mind and so drastically to the other side?
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 11, 2007 13:37:31 GMT -6
The term closest to this is: contrarian
There's also a personality type that's not happy unless they're b!tching about something. Usually it's a deflection technique so they don't have to see their own faults and shortcomings.
Worse still is the personality type: "Let's you and him fight"
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jan 11, 2007 13:38:49 GMT -6
So please remove the martyr shield. btw - would you call your comments about snakey goings on by SB members as personal attacks, or is that OK ? I'm no martyr just don't want anyone on this board to make assumptions about me or what I do. I'm trying real hard not to make any assumptions about you right now. But if I do, I won't voice them here. I'd hate for you to feel attacked. Sorry you misunderstood my snake comment. It was not an attack on the school board, just HC. I don't think it is appropriate to attack volunteers. Since he presumably is not here to defend himself I suppose I shouldn't call 'em like I see 'em. His actions speak for themselves. So I will no longer apply any adjectives that I deem appropriate to them. Happy now? yes, you can't just have it both ways, rip some people then cry foul when someone else states a fact. I really don't care how you judge me, only you can decide on that, if you have been closely involved in this for any period of time you would likely know who I was....that is why I am skeptical, but I'll take your word for it. And I do not consider saying that there are facts you would absolutely know if you were as close to all this as you say you are...they are not secrets. So either you are not telling what you know to rile people up ( and I hope that is not the case)- or you are not as close to the whole referndum work as you claim to be, it has to be one or the other. That is not a personal attack, just a factual observation. I am glad you were not attacking the board, because likely none of us are fans of every member of the SB, but you have to respect the time and effort they all put into this....it is overwhelming on top of everyday life. |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jan 11, 2007 13:40:18 GMT -6
Yes-it was HC
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jan 11, 2007 13:43:04 GMT -6
on the freshman centers vs the 3rd high school at the time, that absolutely was a mistake.... I was vocal against those at the time, but for other reasons than attendance and $ also, as I attended a freshman center in high school and hated the separation.... |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jan 11, 2007 13:43:32 GMT -6
Doctor-I do agree that they put an enormous amount of time into this however, it was their choice to run for the SB not ours. Most of them knew what they were getting themselves into-especially JC.
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jan 11, 2007 13:50:17 GMT -6
At that time, you have to remember they were also going for an increase in the education fund (teachers salaries). To put both a third high school & teacher salaries on the ballot would have been to much and they felt it was doomed not to pass. So instead, the went and explored other districts which had freshmen centers (I want to say Colorado - but don't hold me to that). Anyway, there were several people from our district who went on this trip.
They came back and basically it was decided not to do the 3rd HS. Howie would get pretty angry & frustrated if anyone brought this up.
Bob Biedron & Pam Seubold were the ones to run the campaign for the freshman centers.
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jan 11, 2007 13:55:05 GMT -6
I will never forget this because it was all or nothing. You either voted for teacher salaries & freshamn campus or not. They may have been seperate issues on the ballot, but it was stated that if they did not get the teacher salaries passed they would not build the freshman centers - which would lead to over crowding.
We have talked about this before. Sorry to bring it up again.
|
|
|
|
Post by cantretirehere on Jan 11, 2007 13:55:21 GMT -6
yes, you can't just have it both ways, rip some people then cry foul when someone else states a fact. Any of your so called 'facts' about me are really suppositions. I don't care "who" your are. I AM sure you are someone who thinks they are way more important than they really are. You tell us all the time. I'm not so capable of riling people up - If I WAS, the referendum wouldn't have passed!  We can agree on this |
|
|
|
Post by d204taxpayer on Jan 11, 2007 14:01:51 GMT -6
Wow, that is pretty interesting. Why would he change his mind and so drastically to the other side? He's a lawyer trained to make opinions and judgments on facts. Quite possibly he's seen a change in the facts thereby forcing him to change his position on the issue. We're all entitled to base opinions and judgments upon review of facts and information and if pertinent facts arise at some point to alter that original position, it is only prudent and natural to have a change of heart. IMHO, in general good solid opinions and judgments are made when founded upon a substantive basis using reliable, trustworthy, unbiased opinion and facts backed by supportable documentation rather than those made upon rhetoric, propaganda, and questionable representations and data. This is where credibility becomes a big issue. It is wise to also consider historical practices as well at this point to determine credibility. One is either credible or not--you can't be both. If there is any bit of truth delivered with along with any discrepancies or breach in the same breath or story or flaws and alterations in your information, all credibility is lost. |
|
|
|
Post by cantretirehere on Jan 11, 2007 14:04:29 GMT -6
So Ari was for the third HS before he was against it. yes Wow, that is pretty interesting. Why would he change his mind and so drastically to the other side? How about: So HC was against it before he was for it? Yes Why would he change his mind....to the other side? |
|
|
|
Post by d204taxpayer on Jan 11, 2007 14:04:34 GMT -6
At that time, you have to remember they were also going for an increase in the education fund (teachers salaries). To put both a third high school & teacher salaries on the ballot would have been to much and they felt it was doomed not to pass. So instead, the went and explored other districts which had freshmen centers (I want to say Colorado - but don't hold me to that). Anyway, there were several people from our district who went on this trip. They came back and basically it was decided not to do the 3rd HS. Howie would get pretty angry & frustrated if anyone brought this up. Bob Biedron & Pam Seubold were the ones to run the campaign for the freshman centers. I read somewhere Bob Biedron was also instrumental and heavily congratulated for his involvement in the passage of the 2006 referendum too. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Jan 11, 2007 14:07:47 GMT -6
Oh my God! Somehow Ari and HC switched bodies. It's like Freaky Friday! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jan 11, 2007 14:23:22 GMT -6
Yep-Howie was against a 3rd HS. Anyone who was involved with PTA during that time will agree.
|
|
|
|
Post by 204parent on Jan 11, 2007 14:25:05 GMT -6
Wow, that is pretty interesting. Why would he change his mind and so drastically to the other side? How about: So HC was against it before he was for it? Yes Why would he change his mind....to the other side? I think it comes down to the bubble theory. AR thought there would be a bubble, and HC did not. |
|
