Friday, October 8, 2021

R2 agenda: "Security at Public Meetings"

Here it comes, folks.

The National School Boards Association (NSBA) went trotting off the Joe Biden's territory with trembling shoulders, worried looks and tears in their eyes, and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland is flapping his arms now and getting ready to pounce on poor, old, defenseless parents because a few school boards and their members "feel" intimidated by the increasing numbers of concerned parents showing up at board meetings.

And well those parents should be showing up, with all the Marxist activities being jammed down the throats of the little kiddies in the seats in front of all those so-important teachers who are spouting Critical Race Theory and its components behind the closed doors of the schools. 

Look how quickly "Security at Public Meetings" is showing up on a school board agenda!

You think it's not here in Richland 2? You're hearing the buzzwords; right? Equity? Inclusion? Diversity? Black, instead of black. But you don't see White anywhere, do you? Of course not.

Why this blogpost?

On the October 12th Agenda for the R2 School Board's Executive (private, confidential, secret) Session is "Security at Public Meetings".

The only time security has ever been needed, in recent memory, was at a January school board meeting where a trustee was accosted in the lobby after a meeting. And then she got arrested, instead of the man who looked (on the video) like he was assaulting her with his cell phone jammed right in her face. The deputies arrested the wrong person. 

Did I speak too forcefully at the September 28th meeting? Was I too loud? Too pointed? Too direct? Keep in mind that what I was doing was reading an email from trustee-elect Teresa Holmes to me that she had sent on September 15 at 10:57PM.

Did I lose sleep and cry out that I felt intimidated by that email? Did I run off to the sheriff's department and file a harassment complaint against Teresa Holmes?

If you want to hear my words and tone, go to the video of the September 28th meeting. You'll find it at  Fast-forward to 1:30:36. I read verbatim what she sent me. This is what she emailed me:

"Gus, I have often tolerated you hateful remarks and email. However, this time you have gone too far.  I lost my husband Rev. Dr. Jacob A. Holmes Jr. 4 years ago which, I know you are fully aware of.  I will no longer tolerate nor concern myself with your continuous diatribe of falsehoods and insults.  After this message you are officially blocked from any further contact   with me.  Go spout your hate on those who care  about you and what your deceitful lying  mouth has to say.....Do not contact  me again or include me in your racist, hateful. lying  remarks or emails.  It is sad that someone of your advanced age is not concerned about your mortality and relationship with God.  I will pray that God will forgive your outright evilness and have mercy for your pitiful soul.  It has to be hard working on being so evil.  
Dr. Teresa Holmes 

Should the Richland 2 Board be proud of that email, sent by the person they improper elected as board chair on June 29, 2020? A person not even legitimately on the board, because she has never taken the oath of office legally. And, since not even a legitimate board member, she cannot serve as board chair. But there she is.

Will Holmes be sanctioned by the other board members? If a motion for that is made, it will fail. She should abstain from the vote, and then the vote will be 3-3, which is a failing vote. The vote ought to be 6-0, but there is no chance of that. Holmes is certain to get the protective votes of Manning, McKie and Caution-Parker.

If the Richland 2 Board starts crying "Wolf", parents had better be ready to stand up and face them down. Peaceably, of course. 

As I have told more than one deputy assigned to the Richland 2 Board meetings, if anyone attempts to harm a trustee, trustee-elect or any staff member, I'll be the first there to prevent it. 

Now, if their feelings get hurt, that's not from intimidation. They just need to spend a little more time at their therapist's office.


Created 10/8/2021. Saved.

Does a school board or District official intimidate members of the public when it tells them that a board member is intimidated by them? Is that a prelude to arrest?

What will most members of the public do? They'll hunker down. They'll pull their heads into their shells. They'll quiet down. They'll be afraid. They'll go away. They'll stop asking questions about racist programs in the schools. They'll stop asking about Critical Race Theory and gender-identity curricula and sex education in kindergarten. They'll stop emailing. They'll stop posting on Facebook. They'll stop writing blogposts.

On September 28 Supt. Davis told me that one board member had told him she felt intimidated by me.

I emailed him for more information about that, because I certainly have done nothing to cause that board member (or any board member) to feel intimidated by me.

His reply?

"Mr. Philpott, 

"Thank you for your email. I am not a liberty to share my personal conversation with you.  

"Warmest Regards,"

I'm planning the next steps now. "personal conversation"? He didn't have any problem addressing me in the R2i2 lobby, in front of another member of the public, a deputy and an R2 security office and "sharing his personal conversation" on September 28. He even mentioned the board member's name!

What is "personal" about a board member's complaint to him about intimidation? That's official business! That's not "personal" conversation.

And I say that complaint never happened. If it did, it was a false complaint. Are someone's feelings hurt by opposing viewpoints? That is not a cause of intimidation.

As I have found myself saying more often lately, "I was born at night, but not last night."

And what's with the "Warmest Regards"? It's just a meaningless boilerplate closing.